keep liberalism out of buddhism

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
Locked
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16472
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am

dylanj wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:35 pm
I asked for sutta suuport for a particular idea. Not tired rhetoric about sjws, which has no relevance to the question.

I'm waiting....
i already posted soma sutta which unequivocally teaches against any form of identity politics
Sorry, I don't understand how that sutta has anything to do with the Alt-right rhetoric of "Identity Politics", "SJWs", and other such labelling. Why bring in these non-Buddhist concepts into the conversation?

Clearly the Path is about trancending identity. However, what you seem to be advocating here is what some Mahayana teachers (apologies for mentioning the Enemy) would call "emptiness sickness" - ignoring worldly conditions, and the necessary work needed to overcome them, in a futile attempt to jump directly to awakening.

The Path, after all, involves right speech, action, livelihood.

I thought you might bring up passages such as:
Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions. If that happens, you should train like this: ‘Our minds will remain unaffected. We will blurt out no bad words. We will remain full of compassion, with a heart of love and no secret hate. We will meditate spreading a heart of love to that person. And with them as a basis, we will meditate spreading a heart full of love to everyone in the world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.’ That’s how you should train.
https://suttacentral.net/mn21/en/sujato#sc23
I would have two things to say about that:
1. That is a very advanced practice, though one that I've heard Tibetan monks talk about in relation to their attitude towards the Chinese invasion.
2. The Buddha did not forbid even monks from defending themselves physically, or admonishing others. However, as that, and other, Suttas indicate, one should not speak or act out of malice.

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 1611
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by cappuccino » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:25 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
"emptiness sickness" - ignoring worldly conditions, and the necessary work needed to overcome them, in a futile attempt to jump directly to awakening.

"worldly sickness" - ignoring the truth, and the necessary work needed to overcome ignorance, in a futile attempt to heal the world

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16472
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:31 am

cappuccino wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:25 am
mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
"emptiness sickness" - ignoring worldly conditions, and the necessary work needed to overcome them, in a futile attempt to jump directly to awakening.

"worldly sickness" - ignoring the truth, and the necessary work needed to overcome ignorance, in a futile attempt to heal the world
Excellent point. Both extremes seem unproductive.
And how does a person practice to benefit both themselves and others? It’s when a person practices to remove their own greed, hate, and delusion, and encourages others to remove theirs. That’s how a person practices to benefit both themselves and others. These are the four people found in the world.”
https://suttacentral.net/an4.96/en/sujato#sc5
“Mendicants, a good person is born in a family for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of the people. For the benefit, welfare, and happiness of mother and father; children and partners; bondservants, workers, and staff; friends and colleagues; and ascetics and brahmins.
https://suttacentral.net/an5.42/en/sujato#sc1
:heart:
Mike

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3142
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:39 am

dylanj wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:00 am
the suffering of women would be more alleviated by them accepting that society forces them into a submissive role by & large as opposed to trying to change the whole darn world
I think the above Cultural Marxist SJW comment (which blames society rather attributes causes to other factors) has not been confirmed to be true or challenged.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16472
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:59 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:39 am
dylanj wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:00 am
the suffering of women would be more alleviated by them accepting that society forces them into a submissive role by & large as opposed to trying to change the whole darn world
I think the above Cultural Marxist SJW comment (which blames society rather attributes causes to other factors) has not been confirmed to be true or challenged.
"Cultural Marxist SJW" is just an identy created in the imagination of the reactionary right, in any case... :thinking:

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3142
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:13 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:59 am
"Cultural Marxist SJW" is just an identy created in the imagination of the reactionary right, in any case... :thinking:
Not really. As a mere example, if a say a certain woman may have spinal pains due to having large breasts, I may get accused by a cultural Marxist of 'misogyny' (despite my merely stating a fact). When SN 37.3 says there are five types of suffering particular to women, is SN 37.3 misogynist here?

Personally, I was challenging the view of the OP that women are forced by society into submissive roles (since I think both men & women can enslave themselves in submissive roles due to natural internal defilements). However, this view of the OP is certainly classic Cultural Marxism, i.e., the belief women are oppressed. This is what Marxism is; the doctrine of oppression & revolution against the perceived oppression.

Therefore, maybe I was wrong is saying the OP was not misogynist. Upon re-evaluation, the OP sounds misogynist because the OP believes women are oppressed but wants women to accept their oppression. I apologise MikeNZ66. I was wrong. :tongue:
Last edited by DooDoot on Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:25 am, edited 3 times in total.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16472
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:23 am

Well, of course, people sometimes say dumb stuff. And of course there are gender differences. But in my experience this SJW labelling only comes up as a dismissive concept used in reactionary-right rhetoric...

Your milage may vary...

In any case I don't thing political rhetoric from any angle is a useful measure of the Dhamma.

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3142
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:28 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:23 am
But in my experience this SJW labelling only comes up as a dismissive concept used in reactionary-right rhetoric...
I disagree. As soon as someone jumps out, with little rationale or discussion, accusing another of 'misogyny', 'racism' , 'antisemitism', 'Nazism', etc, that is generally the Cultural Marxist approach. For example, you were the only poster here to respond in that manner. The other posters who disagreed with the OP sought to engage in a discussion with the OP about the OP's views. Personally, the last thing I would accuse the poster of was 'misogyny' because I viewed the poster as sincere yet wrong. However, upon reflection, I can see how the post might look genuinely 'misogynist' although that was not my first impression.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16472
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:33 am

I didn't accuse the poster of mysogyny, I said it was a mysogynistic argument. Please pay attention.

You are, of coruse, welcome to argue with my conclusion (or about whether, in fact, I chose my words carefully enough) since I may have been mistaken, but trotting out rhetoric and stories about being abused in other contexts is not actually an argument.

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3142
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:42 am

Sure. But I rarely react in those ways because I generally view phenomena in terms of causes & conditions. I view women as generally 'needy', like feminist groupies that might cling to a certain monk. Thus women, due to their own needs, can become submissive. I also view men as generally needy, who might cling to women they believe they need. Thus men, due to their own needs, can become submissive. I view things about women that annoy men. I view things about men that annoy women. I'm not so much into labels like 'misogyny'. The ordinary world is interconnected, as the Buddha taught. Ordinary men need women; ordinary women need men. Thus, each must submit to each other in a wholesome way & recognise each other's needs.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

Upeksha
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:23 am

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Upeksha » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:14 am

Just out of interest, when people here say 'keep liberalism out Buddhism,' what do they mean by 'liberalism?'

i.e. in America this term signifies a kind of progressive politics. But in political philosophy it signifies a tradition of thinking which has its roots in figures such as John Locke, Immanuel Kant and JS Mill + contemporary thinkers such as John Rawls and Isaiah Berlin.

There are many different strands of political liberalism, some of which are contradictory, but all tend to privilege two key principles: 1. private property rights. 2. maximum freedom for the individual from the state.

Is this what people here want 'out' of Buddhism? Or are they using the term loosely to signify something like 'progressive views I don't like.'

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20149
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by retrofuturist » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:16 am

Greetings Upeksha,
Upeksha wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:14 am
Just out of interest, when people here say 'keep liberalism out Buddhism,' what do they mean by 'liberalism?'
I'm guessing they're really referring to the post-modern form of 'progressivism'.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"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

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Upeksha
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:23 am

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Upeksha » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:23 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:16 am
Greetings Upeksha,
Upeksha wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:14 am
Just out of interest, when people here say 'keep liberalism out Buddhism,' what do they mean by 'liberalism?'
I'm guessing they're really referring to the post-modern form of 'progressivism'.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Okay, well if the thread is to take shape in a meaningful way, it is best to get clear about all of this.

Post-modern thinkers tend to be highly critical of liberalism.

What is called 'cultural marxism' is not post-modern at all - this has its roots in 20th century German thinkers (Adorno, Marcuse, Fromm) influenced by Freud, Hegel and Marx.

I think people are pretty confused about all of this.

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by dylanj » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:45 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
dylanj wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:35 pm
I asked for sutta suuport for a particular idea. Not tired rhetoric about sjws, which has no relevance to the question.

I'm waiting....
i already posted soma sutta which unequivocally teaches against any form of identity politics
Sorry, I don't understand how that sutta has anything to do with the Alt-right rhetoric of "Identity Politics", "SJWs", and other such labelling. Why bring in these non-Buddhist concepts into the conversation?
these aren't alt-right concepts. i used to be a communist. leftists use them too & they refer accurately to a specific phenomenon. anyway if they were it wouldn't invalidate them.

the sutta is clearly relevant, Mara is discriminating against Soma for being a woman & she more or less responds with a simple "I'm not a woman". That's not very feminist is it?
mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
Clearly the Path is about trancending identity. However, what you seem to be advocating here is what some Mahayana teachers (apologies for mentioning the Enemy) would call "emptiness sickness" - ignoring worldly conditions, and the necessary work needed to overcome them, in a futile attempt to jump directly to awakening.
where does the buddha say we need to fight politically against worldly conditions
hint: he does not, anywhere at all. & there's much i'm sure that'd suggest otherwise e.g. the 10fold wrong speech
mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
The Path, after all, involves right speech, action, livelihood.
yes & those all manifest as forms of abstinence, nothing proactive that would serve a political function.
mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
I thought you might bring up passages such as:
Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions. If that happens, you should train like this: ‘Our minds will remain unaffected. We will blurt out no bad words. We will remain full of compassion, with a heart of love and no secret hate. We will meditate spreading a heart of love to that person. And with them as a basis, we will meditate spreading a heart full of love to everyone in the world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.’ That’s how you should train.
https://suttacentral.net/mn21/en/sujato#sc23
great yes i will co-opt this & use it in favor of my argument.

mikenz66 wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
I would have two things to say about that:
1. That is a very advanced practice, though one that I've heard Tibetan monks talk about in relation to their attitude towards the Chinese invasion.
2. The Buddha did not forbid even monks from defending themselves physically, or admonishing others. However, as that, and other, Suttas indicate, one should not speak or act out of malice.

:heart:
Mike
it being advanced is 1) debatable & 2) no excuse whatsoever for transgressing it. to suggest otherwise is regrettable.

self-defense & admonishment are different & these are valid forms of acting against misogyngy & racism etc. on an interpersonal 1-on-1 level, when the opportunity arises & one has the chance to actually do something.

trying to solve these problems systemically on the other hand is foolish & a waste of one's efforts. it's like trying to remove all the suffering in the world without removing one's own.


:anjali:
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by dylanj » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:46 am

Upeksha wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:14 am
Just out of interest, when people here say 'keep liberalism out Buddhism,' what do they mean by 'liberalism?'

i.e. in America this term signifies a kind of progressive politics. But in political philosophy it signifies a tradition of thinking which has its roots in figures such as John Locke, Immanuel Kant and JS Mill + contemporary thinkers such as John Rawls and Isaiah Berlin.

There are many different strands of political liberalism, some of which are contradictory, but all tend to privilege two key principles: 1. private property rights. 2. maximum freedom for the individual from the state.

Is this what people here want 'out' of Buddhism? Or are they using the term loosely to signify something like 'progressive views I don't like.'
i mean identity politics & social justice - modern american liberalism. not classical economic liberalism altho i can complain about that too if u'd like :)
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests