Western cultural adaptations

[Coyote]

I wonder if this quest for "true dhamma" is a western concern? I.e trying to separate the core teachings from the cultural baggage, rather than taking Buddhism as it has been handed down to us. Although I am aware there are many "eastern" teachers who had similar concerns, i.e ajahn Chah.

[Kare]

I wonder if this quest for "true dhamma" is a western concern? I.e trying to separate the core teachings from the cultural baggage, rather than taking Buddhism as it has been handed down to us. Although I am aware there are many "eastern" teachers who had similar concerns, i.e ajahn Chah.

It has been handed down to us in many different garbs. It would be rather confusing to try to accept them all - theravada, zen, vajrayana, nichiren, tendai, pure land ... just to mention some of them.

This means we have to apply some critical thinking.

[daverupa]

Here is a critique of some interpretations by Gombrich:

I would like to thank all of the cowardly editors who admitted that this was an important (even brilliant) contribution to the study of Buddhist Philosophy, but that they could not publish it because they live in fear of Richard Gombrich. Perhaps "thank" was not the right verb in that sentence.

http://a-bas-le-ciel.blogspot.co.uk/201 ... ticle.html

That author makes for some interesting reading.

[hermitwin]

On rebirth, the tendency to differentiate between rebirth and reincarnation.
To argue that reincarnation is not part of buddha’s teachings. Ie to reject the concept of past and future lives.

[hermitwin]

I will argue that there wont be a distinct western Buddhism. The main reason is the easy access to info via internet. Nobody can control the transmission of info . there may be a small group who follows people like Stephen Batchelor.
Famous monks eg Ajahn Sumedho, Ajahn Brahm, Mattieu Ricard subscribe to the “traditional “ Buddhism. If there is any western Buddhism, it will be a totally fragmented one without a unified philosophy. To put it simply, westerners cant agree what western Buddhism should be. I guess this is testament to the democratic nature of western communities.

[Kim OHara]

I will argue that there wont be a distinct western Buddhism. The main reason is the easy access to info via internet. Nobody can control the transmission of info . there may be a small group who follows people like Stephen Batchelor.
Famous monks eg Ajahn Sumedho, Ajahn Brahm, Mattieu Ricard subscribe to the “traditional “ Buddhism. If there is any western Buddhism, it will be a totally fragmented one without a unified philosophy. To put it simply, westerners cant agree what western Buddhism should be. I guess this is testament to the democratic nature of western communities.

I would tend to agree that in the long term there will be no such thing as "Western Buddhism" but give a different reason : that the internet, backed up by other media, is inevitably producing a single global culture, and that a global Buddhism (perhaps with regional "dialects") will be part of that culture - much as we already have a global movie culture and are quickly moving towards a globalised version of the English language, reversing the previous drift of "American English" away from "Standard English" and all the other colonial versions of the language.
In fact, you could see Buddhism that way: all the different Asian traditions drifted apart for centuries of poor communications between communities and only had to come to terms with it - and start reconciling - in the 1950s when easier travel and mass communication (and literacy) made the differences apparent to large numbers of people.


Kim

[appicchato]

To argue that reincarnation is not part of buddha’s teachings. Ie to reject the concept of past and future lives.

Hang on...not that he didn't, but I cannot recall (reading about) the Buddha ever speaking about reincarnation (except to possibly scuttle the notion)...(the idea (or reality) of) rebirth is not (the idea (or reality) of) reincarnation...(two different fish to fry)...although it doesn't discount the concept (or possibility) of past and future lives...

[Aloka]

On rebirth, the tendency to differentiate between rebirth and reincarnation.
To argue that reincarnation is not part of buddha’s teachings. Ie to reject the concept of past and future lives.

"Reincarnation" is a Tibetan belief as in a "reincarnate tulku"...someone believed to be a previous lama who died who has then been born again to take his place.

As far as I know, the Buddha only spoke about rebirth.


.

[hermitwin]

see what I mean.....

in the East, reincarnation = rebirth.

in the West, Buddha did not teach reincarnation. lol.

[hermitwin]

In most Asian languages, the word for rebirth and reincarnation
is the same.
This is something that many westerners are not aware of.

[Anagarika]

In most Asian languages, the word for rebirth and reincarnation
is the same.
This is something that many westerners are not aware of.

Interesting that in the primarily English speaking west that we do have different words, and as I understand, the Buddha taught rebirth without the metaphysical explanation, but did not teach reincarnation as has been defined above, for example, in the Tibetan tradition. If there is no differentiation in some Asian languages, this could lead to confusion among the laity as to Sutta rebirth.

[tiltbillings]

In most Asian languages, the word for rebirth and reincarnation
is the same.
This is something that many westerners are not aware of.

Actual examples, please.

[waterchan]

In most Asian languages, the word for rebirth and reincarnation
is the same.
This is something that many westerners are not aware of.

Actual examples, please.

ႈIn the Burmese language, this is the word for the process of transmigration from one being to another:

Untitled.png (4.09 KiB) Viewed 1822 times

and it literally means "person enters-occupies".

I don't think any other words exist. And if they do, there wouldn't be the kind of difference in meaning as between rebirth and reincarnation.

What's significant is that no one over there really uses this word when talking about rebirth/reincarnation in daily conversation. Instead, they would construct a sentence using a combination of the terms "this life", "next life", "birth", and "death". It's quite similar to how there is no mention of "rebirth" in the dependent origination model, just birth, death, and birth again.

I am inclined to think that the debate of "rebirth" vs "reincarnation" is an attempt to impose Western ideas upon Eastern philosophy. Can't we just say "birth-and-death" a la Nagasena instead?

[appicchato]

Can't we just say "birth-and-death" a la Nagasena instead?

Sure...that option is open to you, and everyone else...

[mikenz66]

we have Ven. Thanissaro for example, who has invested his life into an investigation of Dhamma, and I see no compelling reason to doubt his fundamental opinions as to Dhamma.

No way would I question Ven T's sincerity and devotion to the Dhamma, but he is wide open to serious doubt concerning some of his opinions about the Mahayana and some things Theravada, showing himself to be not without problems as a scholar.

Prof. Rita Gross, who is a Vajrayana practitioner, but writes very skillfully as a historian and anthropogist as to what is Buddhavacana, in her expert opinion, and what later developed as myth.

Myth. Myth is an interesting word that can be used in a positive as well as a negative sense. Interestingly, the Nikayas seem to have a fair amount of "myth' playing out in the suttas, as well. What is meant by myth here?

Coincidentally, I listened to a series of Prof Gross' talks over the weekend: http://audiodharma.org/series/253/talk/4577/
She certainly talks about "stories" and "myths" in a positive way. I find her expositions a refreshing change from the attitude that stories have to be literally true to be useful.


Mike