Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Seeker,
seeker242 wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:07 am Every teaching of dhamma, regardless of who it's from, can be characterized as "interfering in the affairs of sentient beings". That's the whole point of it to begin with.
Sure, but not every teaching of dhamma, regardless of who it's from, can be characterized as "forcefully interfering in the affairs of sentient beings, against their will". It is that form of imposition that this topic is addressing.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by SamKR »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:49 am
But what of Theravada Buddhism and what of the Buddha's teachings themselves? Is our religion guilty of the same hectoring and proselytization, or did the Buddha successfully tread a "middle way" between offering what he considered valuable, and forcing it upon others against their will?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
I have no in-depth expertise in Buddhism, but I have never encountered such forceful 'elitist interference' or any encouragement to do so in the Buddha's teachings. I always thought Buddhism (or, at least the early Buddhist teaching) encourages to teach whoever listens, but it does not encourage to make people listen and follow the teachings like some of the other religions appear to do.

But what Buddhist people personally prefer to do in their various situations is a different matter. I see in your signature this quote:
Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh
I partially disagree with this quote. I will definitely try to influence my children to adopt my views (such influence usually happens in most families anyways). Next to myself it's the children who I might be able to influence with my views and it does not count as 'elitist interference' or proselytization, in my opinion. If I don't influence then they will be influenced by someone else or something else which may not always be a positive one.
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by seeker242 »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:21 am Greetings Seeker,
seeker242 wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:07 am Every teaching of dhamma, regardless of who it's from, can be characterized as "interfering in the affairs of sentient beings". That's the whole point of it to begin with.
Sure, but not every teaching of dhamma, regardless of who it's from, can be characterized as "forcefully interfering in the affairs of sentient beings, against their will". It is that form of imposition that this topic is addressing.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Sure, but "forcefully interfering in the affairs of sentient beings, against their will doesn't accurately characterize Mahayana Buddhism's Bodhisattva Vow. The first line in your signature is evidence of that. Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh is a Mahayana Buddhist and has taken and keeps the Bodhisattva Vow.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
seeker242 wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:29 am Sure, but "forcefully interfering in the affairs of sentient beings, against their will doesn't accurately characterize Mahayana Buddhism's Bodhisattva Vow. The first line in your signature is evidence of that. Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh is a Mahayana Buddhist and has taken and keeps the Bodhisattva Vow.
Perhaps the good venerable has not discerned a conflict between his own self-styled vows of Engaged Buddhism, and the Bodhisattva Vows? Or maybe he adopts the "metaphorical" understanding of the Bodhisattva Vow, shared earlier by santa100...

Who knows, but there's no need to get too caught up in the illustration I gave... the real question is whether Theravāda does it or not?

:shrug:

The sutta extracts provided thus far suggest not, but the conversation is still young...

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by seeker242 »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:34 am Who knows, but there's no need to get too caught up in the illustration I gave...
It just came across with a "sectarian bashing" kind of tone, which is why I commented on it.
the real question is whether Theravāda does it or not.
I would say no, no Buddhist traditions do it. :smile: Individual people sure, but ignorant people don't always behave appropriately according to the tradition. But that's true of every tradition. :smile:
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by Sam Vara »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:05 am It's not simply about a willingness to help, but about what happens if someone does not want or see value in your so-called "help"?

What if, due to different world-views, philosophies, ideologies, preferences, life circumstances etc. that which you believe is "helpful", is not something that is actually considered helpful, desirable or beneficial to someone else who does not share your values?

What then? Do we respect their autonomy and leave them be, or do we refuse to take "no" for an answer?

What would the Buddha do?

:buddha1:

Metta,
Paul. :)
There are two points here. The first is what we would do. We are all, Buddhists or not, acting from a position of relative delusion, and I think an understanding of what the Buddha said about views entails our humility regarding what is best for others. I might have a very strong view that my advice or intervention is in the best interests of the person on the receiving end, but I should remain open to the possibility that I am wrong. For example, I have argued strongly with people who have wanted to commit suicide, but ultimately I remain open to the possibility that they were right. I just did the best I could from a position of imperfect knowledge. If the situation were ongoing and serious enough and there was a reasonable chance of success, I would persist with offering advice and intervening, being motivated by my view as to their interests, but knowing that I might be mistaken. (This raises the interesting question of which situations are worth intervening in. When asked, definitely. When unasked, it depends on the seriousness and irrevocability of the consequences, coupled with the possibility of success. I would intervene if I saw children in danger, but not waste time persuading smokers to give up their habit...)

With regard to what the Buddha would do, he is normally portrayed as answering questions, or teaching in circumstances where it can be inferred that people are tacitly requesting help. If they refuse it, there is this:
if a tamable person doesn't submit either to a mild training or to a harsh training or to a mild & harsh training, then the Tathagata doesn't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing. His knowledgeable fellows in the holy life don't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing. This is what it means to be totally destroyed in the Doctrine & Discipline, when the Tathagata doesn't regard one as being worth speaking to or admonishing, and one's knowledgeable fellows in the holy life don't regard one as being worth speaking to or admonishing.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

I'm wary about taking this model for myself or recommending it for others, because the Buddha goes into some detail about the mild training and the harsh training which he has already tried with such an individual. As a deluded being, my "skillful means" falls far short of that, so it might always be worth persisting in some circumstances. But I have heard a senior monk say that if people don't take his advice, then there comes a point when he simply allows them to go to the bad in their own way.

Generally, the Buddha is portrayed in the suttas as someone who does not intervene or advise unless asked to, who avoids the prophetic tone we get in Christianity:
But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
But there is this interesting passage:
on that occasion, a large number of boys on the road between Sāvatthī & Jeta's Grove were catching fish. Then early in the morning the Blessed One adjusted his under robe and — carrying his bowl & robes — went into Sāvatthī for alms. He saw the large number of boys on the road between Sāvatthī & Jeta's Grove catching little fish. Seeing them, he went up to them and, on arrival, said to them, "Boys, do you fear pain? Do you dislike pain?"

"Yes, lord, we fear pain. We dislike pain."

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:


If you fear pain,
if you dislike pain,
don't anywhere do an evil deed
in open or in secret.
If you're doing or will do
an evil deed,
you won't escape pain
catching up
as you run away.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Now, was he here using a situation to make a point to accompanying monks who by virtue of their going forth had requested a teaching on ethics? Or was he just dishing out a telling off to stop juvenile nastiness?

There is also a sutta where the Buddha says (of nihilists, I think) that it is good for them to be periodically challenged; which would appear to be an unsolicited intervention. I can't remember which one at the moment...
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by sentinel »

As everyone does , you will convince yourself of it first , you have to find your way through before we reach out and use it to convince others .

Buddha first task is achieving liberation which he did , then he went on and preached to the five ascetic . Considering this Buddha were forcing it on five ascetics not to mention later few thousand people . This kind of "helps" is to be considered Mahayana mind imo .
You always gain by giving
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by dharmacorps »

Thanks Retro for this discussion. I found your description of the Bodhisattva vow really accurate and put into words some feelings I have had about it which I couldn't quite explain. It was also very funny so thank you for the chuckle!

I think my main experience has been in relation to the dhamma that our ability to influence, advise, encourage or discourage others and effect the greater world is quite limited. It is not 0%, but it is limited, even very limited. And in select circumstances, there may be nothing we can do at all. This is another of those sort of difficult truths to accept especially in the modern world where we have sort of glorified these romantic notions of the power of the individual. To continue to try to "save everybody" a la the Bodhisattva vow, regardless of circumstance or the other party's interest, to me, is delusional and wrong headed and actually harmful. But on the other hand, if you try to use your discernment where you can to help where appropriate and timely, that makes tons more sense.

But also, if someone says you can't help others at all-- this is false. The Buddha would not have taught if he thought that.

:anjali:
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by cappuccino »

better to study this teaching for a single day

than living another hundred years - not studying this teaching
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by sentinel »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:49 am
I think here for starters about Mahayana Buddhism's "Bodhisattva Vow", whereby those who adopt this vow have effectively vowed to interfere in the affairs of all sentient beings, whether they assent to this interference or not, until all sentient beings have been liberated through Mahayana's understanding of enlightenment. Personally, I find such grandiose activity to be an evangelical, intrusive, presumptuous pomposity and I hereby politely request that anyone who was taken such a vow, please liberate me from the remit of it, as I would like to opt out of being the target of such controlling, authoritarian, elitist interference.





Metta,
Paul. :)


Could you elaborate how those people with bodhisattva vow interfere in the affairs of all sentient beings ? Isn't making a vow does not necessarily in reality interfering in the affairs ?

At least , I assume , you are not being interfere by them , or did they ? I have never encountered such a deal , yet .

If I remembered correctly , you said you are not interested in Mahayana teachings . I hope this is not offending .
You always gain by giving
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings James,
James Tan wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:41 am Could you elaborate how those people with bodhisattva vow interfere in the affairs of all sentient beings ? Isn't making a vow does not necessarily in reality interfering in the affairs ?
"The Bodhisattva vow is the vow taken by Mahayana Buddhists to liberate all sentient beings." (Wikipedia entry on Bodhisattva Vow, first line)

If you fall within the realm of "sentient beings", then they are avowed to liberate you... if you don't see your spiritual autonomy as your own affair, then maybe you don't see this as interference?

:shrug:

I don't recall the Buddha trying to impose the Dhamma, the goal of liberation, or even his view of liberation upon others. Even when he encouraged his first disciples to spread the Dhamma, he said...

‘Go forth for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and humans. Let no two of you go in the same direction. Teach the Dhamma which is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful in the end. Explain both the letter and the spirit of the holy life, completely fulfilled and perfectly pure’ (Vin.I,20).

Nothing there about interfering with, or forcing the Dhamma upon those who are not interested in hearing it. In fact, the Vinaya explicitly talks about instances where the Dhamma should not be taught to another.
If I remembered correctly , you said you are not interested in Mahayana teachings . I hope this is not offending .
No, I'm not offended, but I remind you, as I said to members earlier, don't get caught up in the example itself... all I wanted to know is if Theravada avoids elitist interference in the affairs of others. The example of the bodhisattvas is merely intended to serve as a comparative frame of reference... it is not the topic itself, or else I would have put this topic in the "Connections to Other Paths" sub-forum.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by sentinel »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:04 am Greetings James,
James Tan wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:41 am Could you elaborate how those people with bodhisattva vow interfere in the affairs of all sentient beings ? Isn't making a vow does not necessarily in reality interfering in the affairs ?
"The Bodhisattva vow is the vow taken by Mahayana Buddhists to liberate all sentient beings." (Wikipedia entry on Bodhisattva Vow, first line)

If you fall within the realm of "sentient beings", then they are avowed to liberate you... if you don't see your spiritual autonomy as your own affair, then maybe you don't see this as interference?

:shrug:

I don't recall the Buddha trying to impose the Dhamma, the goal of liberation, or even his view of liberation upon others. Even when he encouraged his first disciples to spread the Dhamma, he said...

‘Go forth for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and humans. Let no two of you go in the same direction. Teach the Dhamma which is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful in the end. Explain both the letter and the spirit of the holy life, completely fulfilled and perfectly pure’ (Vin.I,20).

Nothing there about interfering with, or forcing the Dhamma upon those who are not interested in hearing it. In fact, the Vinaya explicitly talks about instances where the Dhamma should not be taught to another.
If I remembered correctly , you said you are not interested in Mahayana teachings . I hope this is not offending .
No, I'm not offended, but I remind you, as I said to members earlier, don't get caught up in the example itself... all I wanted to know is if Theravada avoids elitist interference in the affairs of others. The example of the bodhisattvas is merely intended to serve as a comparative frame of reference... it is not the topic itself, or else I would have put this topic in the "Connections to Other Paths" sub-forum.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Ok , I understand the example .

Perhaps , the bodhisattva only sees the Sufferings of sentient beings , spiritual autonomy is somewhat modern day invention .

Out of compassion , imo lending a hand is not interfering intruding in the vast sea of samsara .


What we called Theravada is but a name given to those who accepted specific terms and conditions where the Primary concern , reason and focus is to end their own sufferings .

Therefore , Theravada elite influences on others are limited not in great scale . Even if they wanted to there is not much can be done . Surely , interfering is something not in the list .
You always gain by giving
User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by Nicolas »

Some quotes that come to mind:
Kinti Sutta (MN 103) wrote: While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, some bhikkhu might commit an offence or a transgression.

Now, bhikkhus, you should not hurry to reprove him; rather, the person should be examined thus: ‘[...] I can make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome.’ If such occurs to you, bhikkhus, it is proper to speak.
[...]
Then it may occur to you, bhikkhus: ‘I shall be troubled and the other person will be hurt; for the other person is given to anger and resentment, and he is firmly attached to his view and he relinquishes with difficulty; and I cannot make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome.’ One should not underrate equanimity towards such a person.
Abhayarājakumāra Sutta (MN 58) wrote: In the case of words that the Tathāgata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by Bundokji »

Difficult to answer.

What constitutes Theravada? It is a gradual training, and progress on the path do not seem to be linear. We also have a mundane and supra-mundane understanding of the teachings. The teachings do not focus only on the action, but the intention behind it. There is also the notion of going against the grain, or as retro puts it once "following the Dhamma from a point of strength". Individual practitioners have wide range of temperaments and personal inclinations. The teachings has something to offer to the beginner as well as the more advanced practitioner.

Considering the above, i conclude that it depends on the individual practitioner and the life situation he/she finds himself/herself in.

More generally, and based on my practice and personal observations, i think Buddhism has a conservative approach to helping others. The human situation is too fragile, flawed and complicated to be repaired on the collective level, and seeing this is essential to the practice in my opinion. The more the practitioner sees his own situation and his own misery, he would naturally turn inward, minimizing interference with the world. I also imagine that if the practitioner succeeded in making a major break through into his own delusions reaching a certain level of mental development, he would still need help, but probably from an exclusive group of people (the Ariya Sangha).

I do not see much value in the mundane teachings. It did not help me, and i fail to see how it can help others in any meaningful way.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Does Theravāda avoid elitist interference in the affairs of others?

Post by budo »

1) I think Engaged Buddhism is a good way to get Buddhists killed by non-Buddhists of two types
- A) those who claim to be Buddhists but aren't. There is actually a strict definition of what constitutes as Buddhist in the suttas, which involves hearing the true dhamma. So people who call themselves Buddhists and proselytize and preach to non-Buddhists about what they're doing wrong will get real Buddhists killed.
- B) Those of other faiths/athiests.

2) The Buddha himself couldn't enlighten many people because they were not ready, this is why he actually wanted to be a Pacceka Buddha but Brahma convinced him otherwise. The majority of Buddhas are Pacceka Buddha's, they have no desire to help others because they know it's a mostly pointless endeavour, there is of no use to tell someone you are enlightened. A Buddha can appear before you and give you the most purest dhamma, but if you cannot comprehend it, then it won't matter. So it's absolutely arrogant for Mahayanists to assume they can enlighten people by avoiding enlightenment themselves (Boddhisatva vow), which brings me to point 3

3) If you're not enlightened yourself how can you enlighten others? It's the blind leading the blind.
Post Reply