Abusing the Buddha

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
libraryman
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:57 pm

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by libraryman » Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:10 pm

binocular wrote:
ihrjordan wrote:I really don't see it as an issue.
It seems like an issue inasmuch that under the name of Buddhism, they are teaching and doing things that don't seem to be Buddhist.

When one sees others abusing Buddhism - or at least it seems like they are abusing Buddhism - what should one do? Just sit there and take it?
Is that different from samourai in Japan? They also use mindfullness too... Am i right?

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by binocular » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:12 pm

How do these -
ihrjordan wrote:yes and depending on your degree of pride and ego that is how much that article and this whole "mindfulness movement" should offend someone
anatta1 wrote:It's a simply colour/visible object...
...
don't go too far....
Just seek in deep Paramattha Dhamma...
fit with this:
waterchan wrote: DN 1:
“If, bhikkhus, others speak in dispraise of me, or in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha, you should unravel what is false and point it out as false, saying: ‘For such and such a reason this is false, this is untrue, there is no such thing in us, this is not found among us.’
?

- - -
And anyway, what is this abuse of Buddhism thing? Is that even possible?
It's when people "speak in dispraise of me, or in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha."

Doshin wrote:I think that the feeling identified with Buddhism, is a good starting-point to work on; does one have his/her own view, or does on have the "Buddhist" view.
What do you mean?
That since one might not have the right understanding of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha yet, that therefore, when one sees others criticize the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, one should just be silent and not think of it any further?
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Doshin
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:01 am

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by Doshin » Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:35 am

binocular wrote:
Doshin wrote:I think that the feeling identified with Buddhism, is a good starting-point to work on; does one have his/her own view, or does on have the "Buddhist" view.
What do you mean?
That since one might not have the right understanding of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha yet, that therefore, when one sees others criticize the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, one should just be silent and not think of it any further?
(my highlights in the above quoted)

I don't consider "a good starting-point to work on" being the same as "just be silent and not think of it any further". What I tried to hint on, was that ones feeling offended, might have an internal root within one self; and one would have to peel of one layer of the onion, to get closer to the cause.

Righteous anger is still anger, and a source for dukkha. I therefore don't see a counter"attack" as a wholesome approach to the issue (something with anger feeding on anger). As one implied, I would consider it more wholesome to exercise equanimity, and talk/explain to people, if they show interest in my view on this issue.

I would aim towards equanimity, with a direction of something like "they badmouth their deluded view on Buddhism, not my personal views, why should I feel offended". But others must walk another route on their path, with another approach, and in the end we will each learn our own lesson.

And when is it 'abused' Buddhism ? I guess it is any Buddhism not equal to the "true one", there are several lineages, and they can't all be true, are they all (but one ?) wrong/abused as well ?

_/\_

EDIT: wrong "there" changed to "their"
Knowing about dhamma, does not imply knowing dhamma

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by binocular » Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:03 pm

Doshin wrote:I don't consider "a good starting-point to work on" being the same as "just be silent and not think of it any further". What I tried to hint on, was that ones feeling offended, might have an internal root within one self; and one would have to peel of one layer of the onion, to get closer to the cause.
And that cause needn't be an unskillful one. Unless we are to posit that attachment to and holding dear the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha is unskillful.
Righteous anger is still anger, and a source for dukkha.
Nobody here was suggesting righteous anger. Some of the replies struck me as a bit too passive, too uninvested in Buddhism.

For those who keep raising the point that a quote that is misattributed to the Buddha is somehow fine because it’s nice or noble or whatever, that is entirely irrelevant. Honesty is a radical practice in Buddhism. Not just honesty when it suits us but being honest when things are misrepresented (even in a seemingly well intentioned manner).

One thing that the Buddha is recorded as saying is that when teachings or sayings are ascribed to him which he did not say, it is the duty of those who practice the Dharma to correct such misattributions. By asking Buddhists to allow misattribution and misrepresentation, once a quote is known not to be from the Buddha, you are asking them to be deliberately dishonest and to misrepresent the Buddha and the Dharma. That is not acceptable. Hold yourself to a higher standard – one of being as accurate and honest as you can be – and you will find it a far more transformative practice than making excuses for misattributed platitudes.

http://www.fakebuddhaquotes.com/radical ... -buddhism/
I would aim towards equanimity, with a direction of something like "they badmouth their deluded view on Buddhism, not my personal views, why should I feel offended".
And when is it 'abused' Buddhism ? I guess it is any Buddhism not equal to the "true one", there are several lineages, and they can't all be true, are they all (but one ?) wrong/abused as well ?
It seems to me that if one takes Buddhism personally, then one will take personally anything that in any way has to do with Buddhism. This doesn't automatically mean joy when it is praised and agreed with, and grief or anger when it is dispraised (although for some people, this is how it goes). But I think it does mean that one will feel moved in some way to some action. This may involve talking to those praising or dispraising, or not. It may be an invitation to reflect on the praise and criticism, check if they are true or not. It may be an invitation to reflect on one's commitment to the path.


A few days ago, I had invited a venerable to post in this thread, because I know he has some poignant things to say on the topic.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Doshin
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:01 am

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by Doshin » Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:27 pm

binocular wrote:
Doshin wrote:I don't consider "a good starting-point to work on" being the same as "just be silent and not think of it any further". What I tried to hint on, was that ones feeling offended, might have an internal root within one self; and one would have to peel of one layer of the onion, to get closer to the cause.
And that cause needn't be an unskillful one. Unless we are to posit that attachment to and holding dear the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha is unskillful.
Of course it does not have to have a unskilful cause in every case. But I would suggest that it would be beneficial to fully understand ones "feeling offended", before one takes action and stands up to argue(/fight ?) for Buddhism's reputation.

Actually you did cut out what I see as a wholesome act in the given example: I would consider it more wholesome to exercise equanimity, and talk/explain to people, if they show interest in my view on this issue.
binocular wrote:
Righteous anger is still anger, and a source for dukkha.
Nobody here was suggesting righteous anger. Some of the replies struck me as a bit too passive, too uninvested in Buddhism.
Youre right, I might have put a little to much in "just sit and take it", in my mind its continuation would be ".. one should stand up for ones right". And you did not make that suggestion, sorry.

That said, I still put statements (none made explicit, but that was the tone I sensed in some of the posts) like "How dare they...", "Some one should put them right, and not just sit and do nothing", as a kind of anger. In other words, expressing ones offendednes could very easily come out as righteous anger.
binocular wrote:It seems to me that if one takes Buddhism personally, then one will take personally anything that in any way has to do with Buddhism. This doesn't automatically mean joy when it is praised and agreed with, and grief or anger when it is dispraised (although for some people, this is how it goes). But I think it does mean that one will feel moved in some way to some action. This may involve talking to those praising or dispraising, or not. It may be an invitation to reflect on the praise and criticism, check if they are true or not. It may be an invitation to reflect on one's commitment to the path.
With this, I suspect that we are trying to write the same. Your version just has more/another wrapping ?

_/\_
Knowing about dhamma, does not imply knowing dhamma

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Abusing the Buddha

Post by binocular » Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:03 pm

Doshin wrote:With this, I suspect that we are trying to write the same. Your version just has more/another wrapping ?
Yes, it seems so.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], robertk and 61 guests