Progressive Buddhism

Self, No-self, Psychology and Buddhism

buddhistethics@gmail.com (Buddhist_philosopher) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:48:00 +0000

Ha! Thanks for that last post Shonin Justin. I just came across the same over at the Tricycle blog. I posted some comments there and then over at my blog, but figured it's good grist for the Progressive Buddhism mill as well.

In the interview, Epstein says, roughly, that the self is real, it's just not really real. Tricycle editors picked up on that in their title:

The self exists, it’s just not as real as you think.

My response(s) follow, slightly edited.

Hmmm… Is that like saying a creator God exists, it’s just not as real as you think? Sounds fishy. Perhaps skillful, but fishy nonetheless.

Sabbe dhamma anatta, all phenomena are not-self. Even nibbana is anatta. And all of samsara is associated with the 5 khandhas, which are the basis for all other dhammas. Where then, lies the self in Buddhism? (hint, next to unicorns and the creator God).

On second thought, yes, the Buddha does make wide use of the term atta as a reflexive pronoun: “nowhere is found one who is dearer than [one]self; in this way for others too the self is dear. Thus one should not harm others who loves [him/her]self.” (Nevajjhagā piyataramattanā kvaci; Evaṃ piyo puthu attā paresaṃ, Tasmā na hiṃse paramattakāmo’’ti.) fom the Mallika sutta in SN I,3 (#8). But this should be read as making an ethical point rather than a metaphysical one: you [think] you have a self, and it is dear to you; this is also true of others, so develop metta/lovingkindness for all (as you do yourself).

In this way the Buddha uses the term in a practical or conventional manner. When speaking of the true nature of things, though, the above quoted sabbe dhamma anatta, along with anatta as one of the “Marks of Existence” should suggest clearly his teaching of no-self. This is as much of a categorical denial as I can think of. He doesn’t deny the existence of the self to the wanderer Vacchagotta precisely because FOR HIM (this confused Brahmin) it would lead to a belief in annihilationism. So in that instance we have the Buddha’s silence. (SN 44:10)

As for the necessary fiction of self; yes it probably is needed at some level, but at the point of awakening we are said to finally(!) let go of the “asmi mana” the conceit or mania of I AM. I suppose as long as we have the conceit of self, it’s useful to act accordingly :)

I'm curious about the apparent streak of neo-Puggalavadins or Attavadins (those who teach that there is a person, or there is a self) in contemporary Buddhist circles. I suppose it has to do with our cultural fascination with the self: liberating it, actualizing it, helping it. If you're trying to gain self-liberation, self-actualization, or self-help you're probably off on a wild-goose chase. Much like trying to have a conversation with an omniscient, benevolent, creator God.

Check out the Sabbasava sutta. There the Buddha lists 16 unwise reflections:

1. What am I?
2. How am I?
3. Am I?
4. Am I not?
5. Did I exist in the past?
6. Did I not exist in the past?
7. What was I in the past?
8. How was I in the past?
9. Having been what, did I become what in the past?
10. Shall I exist in future?
11. Shall I not exist in future?
12. What shall I be in future?
13. How shall I be in future?
14. Having been what, shall I become what in future?
15. Whence came this person?
16. Whither will he go?

Now, as I mentioned in my first response above, any questioning into the self is thus pretty fishy. BUT, it could perhaps be skillful for some people. Just as in the Tevijja Sutta, where the Buddha tells young Brahmins that he'll teach them "the way to union with Brahma" and in fact teaches them ethics and meditation toward awakening, we perhaps could tell people we'll help them "discover their true self" only to lead them, through ethics and meditation, to the understanding of no-self. I'll leave you with one last snippit from the Pali sources (many thanks to Thanisarro Bhikkhu for compiling some Pali sources on Anatta):

“Monks, where there is a self, would there be (the thought), ‘belonging to
my self’?”
“Yes, lord.”
“Or, monks, where there is what belongs to self, would there be (the thought),
‘my self’?”
“Yes, lord.”
“Monks, where a self or what belongs to self are not pinned down as a truth
or reality, then the view-position—‘This cosmos is the self. After death this I will
be constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change. I will stay just like that for
an eternity’—Isn’t it utterly & completely a fool’s teaching?” — MN 22

To say that this is a denial of only a certain kind of self seems to me to miss the point. It's like, to reiterate the above, saying that the Buddha only denied a certain kind of creator God, and thus perhaps there is one after all for Buddhists. Any view of self, it seems, is going to spiral into wasted time and effort trying to understand, fix, help, whatever, it (unless, again, guided by a wise teacher toward the understanding that there is no self). Similarly, views of God can be played with (as in the Tevijja sutta) by the wise, in order to bring others to an understanding of ethics, meditation, and wisdom (aka the Buddha's 3-fold path).

But in the hands of the unwise, people like me, speculation on the self or God is just likely to waste time.. how many gods can dance on the head of a pin? Oh, I'm sorry, that was angels. I'll have to speculate on that in a future post.

Can Buddhism and Psychology Co-Exist?

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:33:00 +0000

"Meet a doctor who thinks you can better understand the self by destroying it"

After the confusion about 'annihilating the self' is cleared up this is a very interesting story.

Can Buddhism and Psychology Co-Exist?

Buddhists Need Love Too: The Dharma of Dating

dbrodribb@hotmail.com (Dan_Brodribb) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:55:00 +0000

Dan Brodribb is a writer and stand-up comic. His misspent past also includes stints as a pro-wrestling announcer, substitute teacher, video store clerk, martial arts instructor, crisis worker, and heavy metal musician. He is a lay member of the Order of Buddhist Contemplatives. Learn more about him at danbrodribb.blogspot.com

Buddhists need love too.

I mean, I realize I’m relatively new to the practice of meditation, but we can’t ALL be monks, right? Someone has to ensure the human race survives.

That doesn’t mean I don’t take training seriously. I’m always looking for ways to reduce suffering in my life while training myself to be a more compassionate, equanimous person.

Enter online dating. Or any kind of dating at all, come to think of it.

There's no question in my mind: dating is dharma in action. I remember reading a Buddhist book and thinking, “You know, you could substitute the word ‘dating’ for the word ‘meditation’ and you could have pretty much the same book.”

You learn surprising things about yourself when you go out with people. You are tested. And if you’re lucky, you get to practice some righteous smooching (Not to be confused with Right Smooching which isn’t part of the eightfold path, but at times I think should be).

But online dating comes with it’s own challenges, especially if you’re new to it or returning to the dating world following a long term relationship. It’s easy to get frustrated, either with the people out there, the LACK of people out there, or even yourself.

Love is a roller coaster ride. Here are four ways Buddhist training can help with the ups and downs.

1 - Stay Present
At first with online dating, it’s easy to get discouraged. Then...it happens. A clever, funny message appears in your inbox. You go back and forth a couple times, and have a couple of nice exchanges. Suddenly, you start thinking of the future. You imagine what he or she will be like when you meet in person. The next thing you know you’re flashing forward to a wedding, kids, growing old together…

Then you meet in person and are devastated to discover that not only is there no chemistry, they have horrible taste in shoes.

On the other hand, it’s equally easy to get caught up in all the things that went wrong on previous dates and in previous relationships. Some of us are tempted to relive every dating mistake we’ve ever made in our mind, or worse, pay bitterness from a former relationship forward to the next people we meet.

But that’s unfair to the other person. It’s also unfair to ourselves.

Be where you are. Live here, not some imaginary future. Pay attention to the person you‘re with, instead of comparing them to the person in your mind.

2 - Equanimity
Dating is an emotional business. There‘s exhilaration, there‘s despair, and there's everything in between. These feelings are normal. They also aren’t worth getting worked about because they will change.

In fact, even when you’re in a relationship, feelings are transitory. Sure, at first, it feels like your love is unshakeable and everlasting. Four months later, you are shocked to find yourself wanting to smother him with a pillow because you can’t stand the way he grinds his teeth when he sleeps. But fear not, that feeling too will pass.

In fact, this would be a good time to remind you that…

3 - Everything Changes
Sometimes, when you’re feeling single and frustrated and miserable, it feels like you’ll be that way forever. But situations change. Even feelings change. In fact, we've all heard the story about people finding peace with singleness (Singlitude? Singularity?)--and then meeting someone, throwing their entire world into disarray.

As one friend told me. "I can't fall in love with somebody now. I have too much STUFF to do!"

Romance reminds me of a quote by screenwriter William Goldman: “Nobody knows anything.”

Might as well get used to it.

4 - Actions have consequences
Dating is cruel, but fair. I’m not saying that people DESERVE to have bad dates, but there are folks out there entertaining the mistaken idea that the world owes them a boy- or girlfriend.

It doesn’t work like that.

If you treat people like they are out for themselves and will betray you at the first available opportunity…you will probably find what you are looking for. If you expect the best from people while being clear about what those expectations are, you have a better than even chance of finding someone who can meet them.

Tired of dating jerks? Learn to notice the warning signs and stop going out with them. Wondering why women never call you back after the first date? Time to take a look in the mirror and see what you‘re putting out there.

Dating is scary because rejection feels so personal. But that‘s an illusion. I‘ve never met anyone who WANTED to hurt other people. I know from experience one of the hardest things to do in dating is to stay true to yourself while minimizing the damage you do to other people. Sometimes people make mistakes. But it is never personal. Try not to take it that way.

After all, right smooching might not be on the Eightfold Path, but with the right person, it’s a heck of a lot of fun.

Conference on Contemporary Buddhism in the West

buddhistethics@gmail.com (Buddhist_philosopher) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:20:00 +0000

For those with an academic penchant and transportation to the west coast of the US, there is a conference next March that should be of interest (from here):

Buddhism without Borders: Contemporary Buddhism in the West

at the Institute of Buddhist Studies
Berkeley, California
March 18 - 21, 2010

Conference Schedule*

Thursday, March 18
Early registration and check-in 11:00 - 2:00

Panel I: Buddhist Experiences: Expressions and Subjectivities, 2:00 - 5:00 p.m.
Daniel Veidlinger, California State University, Chico
"From Indra's Net to Internet: The Effects of Social Networking Websites on the Acculturation of Buddhism in North America"
Ruth Fitzpatrick, University of Western Sydney
"Transforming Tara, Meanings in Motion"
Erik Braun, University of Oklahoma
"The United States of Jhana"
Kimberly Beek, McMaster University
"Telling Tales Out of School: The Fiction of Buddhism in North America"
Respondent TBD

Friday, March 19
Panel II: Buddhisms in America, 9:30 - 12:30
Jeff Wilson, Renison University College, University of Waterloo
"Regionalism within American Buddhism"
Charles S. Prebish, Redd Chair in Religious Studies, Utah State University
"Buddha in Mormon Land: American Buddhist Challenges in a Dominant Mormon Culture"
Duncan Ryuken Williams, University of California, Berkeley
Michihiro Ama, University of California, Irvine
"The First White Buddhist Priestess"
Respondent TBD

12:30 - 2:00 Lunch break

Panel III: Transnational Buddhisms, 2:00 - 5:00
Richard K. Payne, Institute of Buddhist Studies
"Syncretism and Syntax: An Examination of Yogi Chen's Christian Homas"
Chapla Verma
"Comparative Study of Zen Buddhism in Japan and North America"
Todd Perreira
"Beyond Americanization: On the Transnational Boundaries of Theravada America"
David McMahan, Franklin & Marshall College
"Buddhism and Multiple Modernities"
Respondent TBD

Keynote Address and reception, 5:00 - 8:00
The Keynote Address and reception will be open to the public. A catered reception will follow Prof. Tweed's address.

Saturday, March 20
Panel IV: Identifying Buddhists, Buddhist Identity, 9:30 - 12:30
Richard Hughes Seager
"Dharma Images and American Buddhist Identity"
Christine Walters, University of South Florida, Tampa
"Denominationalism in American Buddhism"
Mindy McAdams, University of Florida
"Finding Buddhism in Blogs"
Wakoh Shannon Hickey, Duke University
"Two Buddhisms, Three Buddhisms, and Racism"
Respondent TBD

Lunch break, 12:30 - 2:00

Panel V: Living Buddhism: Community and Family, 2:00 - 5:00
Helen Baroni, University of Hawaii at Manoa
"Zen at a Distance: Isolation and the Development of Distant Membership"
Jitka Cirklová, Faculty of Social Science, Department of Sociology
"Buddhism as Value Source in the Course of New Identity and Lifestyle Formation in the Czech Republic"
Eve Mullen, Emory Univeristy
"Care for the Dying: Innovative American Buddhist Institutions"
Zach Zimmerman, Princeton University
"Bringing Up Buddhists in America"
Respondent TBD

Dinner (on your own), 5:00 - 6:30

6:30 Special film screening: TBD

Sunday, March 21
Panel VI: Interpreting Buddhism in the West, 9:30 -12:30
Franz Aubrey Metcalf, The Forge Institute
Mira Nicelescu
"The Jewish Buddhists: The Upcoming Rise of a New School of Buddhism?"
Galen Amstutz, independent scholar
"Kiyozawa In Concord: Will Shin Buddhism Manage to Make a More Successful Contribution to American Religious Thought in the 21st Century?"
Jeannine Chandler, Siena College
"An Analysis of Western Involvement in the Dorje Shugden Controversy"
Respondent TBD

Conference closing remarks, 12:30 p.m.

* This schedule is tentative and subject to change

Homeless Meditation Practitioners

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:23:00 +0000

I received the following request for help from Jon at Homeless Meditation Practitioners. Please help if you can.

Hi Dharma-Friends,

I recently went to work for a San Antonio Interfaith Ministry that provides services for the Homeless.

I have been volunteering there for years. But now I am on the Payroll, which means I can hang around more often, without having to run off and do something else to pay my bills.

So, as I look down the sidewalk at all the gentle spirits waiting for us to unlock the door...so that they can come in and get a hot shower and a hot meal...I think about my own Buddhist Practice.

I think about Buddha, wandering the hills with his disciples....all renuncites...ascetics...homeless... wandering...wandering...and now... I see them here...right in front of me.

I see the Wandering Ascetic Renunciate Bhikkus and Anis (Monks & Nuns) of the Twenty-First Century.

Now listen, Jesus is very popular here. In fact, there are only a few open, random nights for me to offer meditation...because so many Churches are coming down here to minister to the Homeless. Which is wonderful.

But, like in so many other areas...Where is the Buddhist Community?

So, I wondered how many of my Meditative Friends I could get down here or to start a HMP in their area? Nothing big...just sitting and walking and maybe reading from the Dhammapada.

This website is dedicated to this. It is for all of us...to encourage one other, to streach ourselves, and to practice better.

If you are a Lama, Roshi, Priest, Monk, Nun, Teacher, Meditation Center Director, average meditator like me, or currently living the Homeless Life....

I would love to get your help, advice, and posts.

So, Welcome to Homeless Meditation Practitioners(HMP) Website.

My plan is simple.

Meet with the Homeless at the Downtown San Antonio Shelter... several nights a month.

Bring in fresh flowers, incense, colorful alter-style fabrics, do walking and sitting meditation with them...and read from the Dhammapada.

Ask all my Buddhist & Meditative brothers and sisters to join with me in this experience.

Remember:

"Master your words. Master your thoughts. Never allow your body to do harm. Follow these three roads with purity And you will find yourself upon the one way, the Way of Wisdom."

namaste
jon clark

http://homelessmeditationpractitioners.blogspot.com/2009/08/hmp-homeless-meditation-practitioners.html

Traditional vs Modern: My resolution

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:34:00 +0000

It was about 20 years ago that I was initially interested in Buddhism. I was drawn by the various tantalising nuggets of wisdom and the promise of inner peace. I was put-off by apparent tendencies towards supernaturalism, and preoccupation with faith-based metaphysical theories. After the teacher of our undergraduate meditation course went off to become a nun I didn't take it any further.

More than 10 years passed, in which I started a career and had a son, before I returned to Buddhism in the form of Zen. Zen suited me well. I was attracted by it's simple, down-to-earth emphasis, being relatively free of supernatural and metaphysical elements, although I still found it sometimes traditionalist and backward-looking.

Lurking around in online Buddhist forums with my tentative new 'Buddhist' identity, I was told repeatedly that those who did not accept literal rebirth as an article of faith were 'not real Buddhists' and was reminded of the more conservative and authoritarian aspects of the faith. In the light of our modern understanding of the universe and the mind, I grew weary of the narrow, backward-looking nature of much contemporary Buddhism and the tendency of some Buddhists to try to exclude people like myself and I wondered if the best solution was to find like-minded individuals and call ourselves something else altogether.

I felt that the teachings of the Buddha and his descendents should not be discarded but should be re-examined in the light of modern understanding - and vice-versa. The setting up of this blog as an area to discuss these things unmolested was part of that.

With a full-time job, family, a long commute to work, daily meditation practice and MBCT training I don't have a lot of time for blogging. But looking back, it also occurs to me that I no longer feel this tension in my practice in the way that I did.

I think this comes down to irrelevance of metaphysical theories to Zen practice (although in form it can still be very traditionalist), I think that my practice itself has helped and my MBCT training is helping too.

For me now, it seems likely that there will always be valid traditional forms of Buddhism and yet it is through mindfulness based therapies and similar secular approaches that the Buddhist methods will be (and already are) opened up to the mainstream. For those who wish to go beyond the great matter of birth and death, to realise the unborn, there is still Zen. And for those wish for a good rebirth or to end rebirth there is Tibetan or Theravada.

So now it seems to me that there is no need to 'reform Buddhism' since there are enough avenues for people of all persuasions to benefit from it, one way or another.

What If the Buddha Had Lived In Our Era?

jamie.guinn@yahoo.com (Jamie G.) — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:56:00 +0000

Well, I was going to post an entry titled, "Buddhayana: An Already Emerging Western Tradition", but WH already pretty much beat me to it when he posted back in 2007 an entry titled "A Post-Modern Buddhism?".

Then, with all the recent back and forth on what constitutes "real" Zen practice and how some teachers are saying home practitioners who don't meet with local sanghas and teachers are "doing it wrong" I was going to write an entry titled "Time For A Zen Buddhist Reformation In the West?". But, I'm still in conflict after reading some more material. I think I need to get a hold of Chogyam Trungpa's "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism".

So, now I want to ask the readers, because this is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, if the Buddha had lived through our era, with exposure to western philosophy and scientific training, how do you think his teachings would have differed, if even at all? I'm not so much interested in which approach or flavor of Buddhism he would have favored more, but how would some of the basic tenets of Buddhism may have differed, such as rebirth or karma.

Can such a question even be asked? Is it absurd to even speculate?

Discuss away... or even better... blog about it, and link back here so we can all take a look at what you've come up with.

Thanks and Good Luck

noreply@blogger.com (Kyle) — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:39:00 +0000

Thank you all for your support over the last year as a contributor to Progressive. I have decided that it is time for me to move on, spend less time online, and more time doing other things in real life. This stuff has consumed me more than I would have liked. I have removed the last few posts as they were rather controversial, as god forbid we actually talk about controversial topics.

Be Well All.
Kyle

Know the Truth for Yourself

buddhistethics@gmail.com (Buddhist_philosopher) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:40:00 +0000

This seems to be a central mantra of many Western Buddhists. The idea is that we shouldn't accept things on mere faith (like those other religions do), but should instead evaluate how ideas and practices actually work for us. The idea is expounded in the much loved (in the West) "Kalama Sutta" - actually called the Kesamuttisuttaṃ if you ever want to look it up in Pāli (click here and scan down to #5, paragraph #66).

I'm no expert on the text or the tradition that follows, but it was the focus of (I believe) a full week of reading and discussion in my Intro to Buddhism college course and I have seen it used countless times by other Western authors and teachers. Yet I've also learned that it is traditionally an obscure text, rarely commented upon or used in teaching. And it has been suggested that our Western love of this sutta stems largely from our rejection of the other (Christianity for most of us).

The real impetus for this post, though, is a recent musing by Amod Lele, over at his wonderful blog Love of All Wisdom. There he describes his acceptance of "one and a half noble truths."

It makes me wonder:

for Progressive Buddhists (if we so claim that label) - how do we approach such basic teachings as the Four Noble Truths?
Do we need to accept them as a pretty basic starting point for our practice and understanding?
Can/should we be skeptical as many suggest we should be toward karma and rebirth?
Do we accept them with saddha (faith/confidence) for the tradition or our own teachers, or wait until we are fully awakened ourselves before we feel confident in endorsing the possibility of awakening?!
When is healthy skepticism instead the fetter of doubt?

Too many questions? haha...

A Suggestion About Discussing Racism

jamie.guinn@yahoo.com (Jamie G.) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:00:00 +0000

Since the issue of race and racism has been a big topic lately all over the Buddhist blogosphere, I thought Jay Smooth made some wise and skillful suggestions when discussing racism. Thanks to Constance Casey for bringing this to my attention.

Greetings

noreply@blogger.com (Joseph) — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:10:00 +0000

Hello all,

Since this is my first post on Progressive Buddhism as a contributor I figure I should introduce myself and explain a little of how I became involved with Buddhism. First off I have a Bachelors Degree in Philosophy and I am currently attending film school; right in the middle of a two year diploma program. I actually started my post secondary education as a Management student thinking that a career in Human Resources would be the best career for me. Thanks to a particularly competent high school teacher, who commented that I had a very philosophical outlook on things, I decided to take Philosophy 1000 as part of my general studies requirements. I lasted about a month as a management student and by semester two I had officially switched my major to Philosophy.

Such a move raised an important question from those around me: “what are you going to do with a degree in philosophy?” Admittedly this is a valid question. After all I had given up on a degree that would ensure a solid middle management position, nice salary, and likely some decent benefits for the real world life I would soon be exposed to. But there was something about philosophy that captivated me and since I have never been one to follow the crowd I decided to go with something I’d enjoy. Turns out my decisions was right, I discovered I had a talent for philosophy as well as a particular dislike for “normal” jobs. I honestly had no idea what I was going to do with a philosophy degree, but I knew that it was something that I enjoyed and felt that it fit with who I am.

Growing up in a particularly non-religious home I was never really directly exposed to religion but through the media and people I met in life I was well aware of the role it plays on the world stage. Since philosophy encourages one’s thirst for knowledge I began taking religious studies course to find out all I could about this strange phenomenon I had only experienced through others. I found the academic approach taken to be particularly efficient when it came to illustrating where each tradition came from, what they believed, and why they believed it in that particular way. We made our way through all the Abrahamic Traditions and it was all pretty interesting, but once we got to Buddhism things changed for me.

A funny thing happens when you place religions side by side and analyze them rationally and objectively. Anything you had been skeptical about before hand becomes more pronounced, irrational logic becomes blindly obvious, and any doubt regarding whether or not your own beliefs will coincide with a religion is erased. Now, it wasn’t at this moment that I became a Buddhist, still not exactly sure if I’m a full-fledged Buddhist yet, but it seemed I had found a set of beliefs that was consistent with my own. I ended up taking every Buddhist related course my university offered, including a graduate level course where we had to come up with a new perspective on Buddhism.

Since then I have been constantly reevaluating my beliefs as a Buddhist, attempting to figure out if it’s appropriate for me to identify with this particular religion. I am not someone who believes that anyone one set of beliefs will bring us “truth,” actually believing such a thing would be contradictory to who I am. I am a philosopher; I love learning new things and firmly believe that true knowledge comes from many different sources. When you shut your mind to a set of beliefs you shut your mind off to any knowledge that system may offer you. At the very least you shut your mind off to a source of experience in your life.

Thinking about this with respect to Buddhism led me to a rather comforting conclusion. Buddhism doesn’t require you to be a completely devoted and unyielding follower, it encourages learning and experience. One needs only to listen to one of the many Buddhist leaders to know that Buddhism has a lot to offer, but you need not shut your mind to other systems to benefit from Buddhism. Knowing this I began to identify with the religion to the point when people inquired about my beliefs I would identify with Buddhism. It is a system of beliefs that is more consistent with my own beliefs than it is different because of this it makes sense for me to identify with it.

I hope this gives you an idea of where I’m coming from and the approach I take to Buddhism and Buddhist topics. I am glad to be here and look forward to discussing the progressive form of Buddhism this blog represents.

Reciting the Metta Sutta in solidarity with the monks of Burma

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 07:52:00 +0000

Last Wednesday was Metta Sutta Day in Burma. However, the government there has clamped down on the traditional chanting of this sutta because of it's association with the protests there in 2007.

As an act of solidarity, Rev. Danny Fisher has recorded himself chanting the sutta and has put it on YouTube in the hope that others will do the same in a viral video campaign.

All you'll need is a web-cam, digital camera or microphone, the sutta (above) and access to YouTube. Please join in if you can.

gently holding the idea of death

noreply@blogger.com (elaine4queen) — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:20:00 +0000

scrodinger's cat is a thought experiment in which a cat is theoretically inside a box, and has a 50-50 chance of being dead or alive. this, to work as a metaphor for something in science which would otherwise be difficult to explain - how can something be a wave and a particle at the same time?

the idea of a thought experiment is to explain a real life scenario which would not be carried out, so no cats are harmed!

in this case, the thought experiment encourages us to hold the idea of life and death as possibilities - illustrating the wave/particle business in quantum physics. but, for me, the schrodinger's cat experiment resonates with the idea of meditating in part to make a good life, and in another part to make a good death. and, further, the exercise of holding both the idea of life and the idea of death in awareness at the same time.

here is a clip where the experiment itself is explained

Review: Zen - ("Dogen, The Movie")

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 07:31:00 +0000

This isn't a full review, just a quick recommendation really.

'Zen' is a drama based on the life of Japanese Zen Master Dogen. Overall, I enjoyed it very much. Beautifully shot and well acted, although for me it was let down slightly by a couple of CGI scenes, especially one where Dogen attains enlightenment and flies into the sky on a huge lotus flower. I also suspect that much of the character drama and many of the characters were invented to create a story that works as a movie. There is a scene in which a Dogen advises a woman with a dying child to visit the every household in which no one has ever died. This is a parable I've heard attributed to both Buddha and Jesus, but not Dogen. It is peppered with some of Dogen's sayings - enough to get a flavour of his teachings.

It wasn't easy for me to get hold of a copy - I had to get it imported from Hong Kong, but for me it was a must-see.

7/10

The preview is here: Zen

And there is a more substantial review here: Religious film lacks thrill of temptation

Amongst White Clouds

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 06:30:00 +0000

Another video. This one is a documentary about hermit monks and nuns iving in the remote mountains of central China. The scenery is stunning and it has a wonderful stillness to it. It's great to see that this ancient tradition continues to survive.

Sickest Buddhist

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:18:00 +0000

Bit of an abrupt change of tone here. But I thought you guys might appreciate this video by Arj Barker of Flight of the Conchords fame.

Sickest Buddhist from GenerateLA on Vimeo.

Impermanence and suffering: Our story

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:11:00 +0000

Can I share something with you all?

My wife suffers with anxiety. We've been trying for a child for about a year. She is afraid that she'll never be able to have one. She miscarried in January and again in April. Many people have no idea what miscarriage can be like, thinking of it as nothing more than a 'heavy period'. In fact, it can really be a bereavement. Now she's pregnant again, which is great in a sense, but in another means a great deal of stress and worry for her - especially during this early period.

My role, of course, is to give her whatever support I can. And mostly this means listening and being there for her. My own practice has helped me tremendously. As a Zen Buddhist and someone learning to teach MBCT of course I've suggested meditation, but she can't - the silence and doing nothing makes her feel anxious - perhaps she feels too strongly that she has to 'try to relax', I'm not sure. But anyway she's not inclined to keep trying and it's not beneficial for me to pressure her.

She is sympathetic to the 'Buddhist approach' and gets some benefit from listening to the wisdom of Edward Brown (SFZC), Pema Chodron and Ekhart Tolle. Yoga, pilates, the gym and having a dog also help.

After losing her pregnancy symptoms the second time, she had a scan but had to wait for another 12 days for a second scan to confirm it. That period was possibly the most difficult period of her life. Even though she has a great career, and a loving family and plans for the future, she found it so intensely distressing that she was contemplating suicide.

After we confirmed the second miscarriage, she had a breakthough. She realised that she couldn't go on like that and at some level she decided that things had to change. She simplified her life as much as possible and decided just to stop ruminating about the past and future so much and live more in the present. It was borne of sheer necessity but influenced by Buddhist thought, and Ekhart Tolle too.

My brother-in-law also found Eckhart Tolle helpful while he was splitting up with his wife (he now does Soto Zen practice). And he gave her some valuable 'spiritual' support at that time too. One of my Soto Zen teachers cited 'The Power of Now' as one of his favourite Zen books even though it's not technically Zen. I also quite like it myself, although there are parts about the evolution of consciousness that I'm happy to leave.

For me the fundamental principles of Buddhism are universal and different approaches suit different people. Something that occured to me was that perhaps 80%+ of the population would benefits from applying these principles to the way they live and yet 95% of the population are put-off by the trappings of traditional Buddhism. This is why I started to study Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy. And hearing face-to-face how MBCT is helping people with chronic depression and other problems - people who would never practice Zen - just reinforces this view.

I'm all for ways to make these principles accessible for people who wouldn't go near a traditional Zen dojo.

Thanks for listening.

_/\_ Justin

Zen: The Boot Camp

noreply@blogger.com (PeterAtLarge) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:01:00 +0000

Zen. It’s a word so much bandied about, in our Western culture, with often so little understanding that it has come to mean, to paraphrase the Red Queen, whatever we want it to mean. Most of us agree, though, that its many associations encompass a special kind of discipline of mind, a special kind of formal perfection in all things material, and an acknowledgment of the irreducible enigma of human existence.

Now learn about Zen as it is practiced in the training monastery at Eiheiji in Kaoru Nonomura’s book, Eat Sleep Sit: My Year at Japan’s Most Rigorous Zen Temple, originally published in Japanese in 1996 and recently translated into English—(and not to be confused with Elizabeth’s Gilbert’s “Eat, Pray, Love.”) Nonomura, renamed Rosan for his life as a Zen monk trainee, chose to drop out from the Tokyo business rat race at the age of thirty in order to find deeper meaning for his life, and signed up instead for a demanding existence of hard work, spiritual practice and self-denial at Eiheiji. As we find out from his story, he got more than he bargained for.

I have always admired what I have known about Zen, but I have honestly never warmed to it. Rosan’s experience helps me to understand why. To describe Eiheiji as boot camp does too much honor to the US Marine drill sergeants, who seem positively avuncular by comparison with these monks. Subjected to a daily regimen of constant physical, verbal and emotional abuse, sleep deprivation, and illness-inducing dietary insufficiency, the trainees at Eiheiji are required to perform every task to perfection or risk the kicks, beatings and tongue lashings that rain down upon them at the slightest deviation from accepted standards.

The rules are written down in the 13th century text by Dogen, the founder of Zen Buddhism. They are prescriptive down to the last detail and cover everything from washing the face and use of the toilet to the sounding of each bell and gong—and there are many of these at Eiheiji, each sounded for a differently prescribed occasion at a differently prescribed moment in the day. The rules are also inflexible. They must be learned and followed. Infraction is punishable, and punished without mercy. The same with procedures for cleaning, sitting, serving, eating… A new trainee may not make eye contact with an older one, but hurry past with eyes averted and hands clasped in respect. Eye contact, even inadvertent, is rewarded with an immediate cuff and a shouted rebuke.

Rosan’s narrative in this short book is as crisply detailed as the monastery’s rules, following the day-to-day physical existence of a trainee and describing the rituals and practices with such precision that we are drawn in to feel actually present and engaged ourselves. We feel the hard edge of the winter’s cold and the incessant pain in legs and knees that accompanies motionless sits that last for days on end. There comes a point when you begin to wonder, in all this insistent physical detail, where the spirit enters into this religious life—and then you remember that, for the Zen practitioner, the spirit is precisely IN the physical detail. It’s a matter of surrendering the distractions of self and the self’s needs, and paying unwavering attention to what is there—even if only the blank surface of the wall in front of you—or to the task at hand. “Eat Sleep Sit” provided me with an experience as close to Zen as I’m ever likely to come.

As a footnote to this reading, I happened to tune in to "Nova" last night on the television, and found myself watching a marvelous episode, Secrets of the Samurai Sword. It's a fine reminder of the symbiosis between Zen practice and others aspects of Japanese culture. In the sword-making process, strict attention to detail and observation of ritualistic detail, from the preparation of the steel to the honing of the sword's edge, assures a quality unmatched in any other part of the world. Distinctions between craft and art vanish in this process, as do traditional distinctions between matter and spirit. In the context of our culture of mass production and mass consumption, the patience, focus, and insistence on perfection leave the viewer awe-inspired and nostalgic for a time when such qualities were valued.

Buddhism Bad! More Misconceptions about Buddhism

noreply@blogger.com (Kyle) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:55:00 +0000

You know this whole Western vs non-Western Buddhist thing really is just a back drop to a bigger issue of ignorance by some people who don't know what Buddhism really is. For me, I'd rather stop fighting with my friends for we are all Buddhists, just simple Buddhists without qualifiers at the end of the day. If we disagree on practice or tradition, it is something we can work through, but with this kind of ignorance "Buddhism Bad!" we need to stand together as one tradition, regardless of race, culture or practice. People really do believe this shit, and hopefully, we can be a helpful force to spread some truth about what Buddhism really is all about.

(edit: Sorry, I had to add a couple of the funnest and saddest quotes from this article.)
http://lutheransurrealism.blogspot.com/2009/07/buddhism-bad.html
There are no criteria for anger within Buddhism. You are never supposed to be angry. You just stay calm, and focus on your own inner peace. Buddhism doesn't even have moral criteria. The ten commandments has no correlative in Buddhism. Everything just is. If someone chops your leg off, your job is to remain sanguine. If someone kills a child, try to see everything as transience, and stay in the groove. There are no jeremiads in Buddhism. Say om again and get on with nothingness.

Tibet itself was once a martial nation before Buddhism came, but it's become a bunch of marshmallows sitting around on pillows.

Therefore, Buddhists don't have a journalistic tradition. Even if they did have one, they wouldn't have any newspapers, because freedom of the press doesn't exist in any Buddhist countries. We used to have freedom of the press, at least, in the Protestant west, but now that Buddhism and Marxism have combined to wipe out our intellectual class and turn them into followers of the Pied Piper, I don't expect much from that sector any longer.

If so, why hasn't anybody done a report on the evils of Buddhism, and how it turns its practitioners into mental marshmallows? Maybe when you are doing the research, you turn into such a marshmallow you can't finish the report.

Ok Thank you Jack for reminding me about this scene from Ghostbusters!! Very appropriate given the comments above. LOL

So in honor of this rather ill-informed individual, here is a list, in no particular order, of commonly held misconceptions about Buddhism and Buddhists that I have heard and seen over the last few years from many not familiar with the teachings. Feel free to add your own.

1. Buddhism is about lapsing into some tranquil black hole.
2. All Buddhists are vegetarian and don’t drink alcohol.
3. All Buddhists are pacifists and non-violent.
4. Enlightened Buddhists have supernatural powers and live in a different reality.
5. With enough good Karma one can acquire enlightenment.
6. All Buddhists believe in literal reincarnation.
7. People that take psychedelic drugs can experience nirvana.
8. Buddhism is a nihilistic religion.
9. Buddhists believe the Buddha is a God and is worshiped as such.
10. Good Buddhists shouldn’t have opinions, hold judgments or express emotional feelings.

Buddhism may need a Plan B

noreply@blogger.com (Shonin Justin) — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:08:00 +0000

The latest Buddhist Geeks podcast is an interview with Zen teacher Norman Fischer who argues in favour of secular and therapeutic expressions of Buddhist wisdom, such as Jon Kabat-Zinn's Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction. This obviouly ties in closely with what I was discussing in my recent posting Mindfulness Based Therapy and Buddhism

As Buddhism transitions to the West, we see that it is doing so in a couple different ways. Some forms look more like their original Asian roots, while others are secular and non-Religious in their presentation. Zen teacher Norman Fischer, an early 2nd generation teacher in the lineage of Shunryu Suzuki Roshi, calls the more traditional forms part of "Plan A" and the more secular forms, "Plan B."

In this interview we discuss with Norman the importance of Plan B approaches, like Jon Kabat-Zinn's Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction. We also discuss his personal experience teaching Plan B at places like Google. Finally, we explore how the livelihood of trained and competent meditation teachers may relay heavily on Plan B approaches.

For anyone who isn't already a subscriber to Buddhist Geeks - I thoroughly recommend it.

bare knowledge and repeated mindfulness

noreply@blogger.com (elaine4queen) — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 08:32:00 +0000

Yesterday I went to a dharma day inspired by the Satipatthana Sutra at London Buddhist Centre. It was a really great day, rich inspiration for practice. The previous day i listened to this reading of the Sutra from this page (second one down - also with links to three alternative translations from different scholars) several times. It is really lovely to listen to, and I am listening to it again now. 'New technology' is hardly news, and technology for recording and listening to the human voice has been around for a while, but this access we have now to dharma and meditations is absolutely unparalleled, and I continue to be struck by the astounding implications - you can have world reknowned teachers talking to you in your own home, and if you want to hear the talk again, you can! This is a mutation on the contemplative life which simply could not have existed at all before the last very few years. Of course, this also means there is an active world wide sangha, again, at a previously unimaginable level. We live in very particular times.
All the better to apprehend the very simplicity of teachings. Here, in the Satipatthana Sutra we are assured that with 'bare knowledge and repeated mindfulness' we have enough material to take our practice all the way.

Digham va assasanto digham assasamiti pajanati digham va passasanto digham passasamiti pajanati: = "He, thinking, 'I breathe in long,' understands when he is breathing in long; or thinking, 'I breathe out long,' he understands when he is breathing out long.

Our day was a mixture of talks and practices, I won't attempt to document it all, but there were two things beyond the Sutra itself (yes, still listening to it!) that are particularly in my mind to write about. Ratnachuda led us in an unusual version of Metta Bhavana. In the FWBO we learn and practice Metta Bhavana alternately with mindfulness of breathing from the beginning, it is not seen as either an optional or an advanced meditation, but one to be engaged in from day one (or day two!) Usually we are reminded that we chould choose for our difficult person someone we have a minor irritation with. Being foolish, I had taken a bit of a detour for the past year or so and had chosen to use someone very difficult for me, and had reached a point where it really wasn't Metta i was practicing, but a kind of harmful masochistic clinging. One day recently I simply couldn't engage with it at all. I had reached an impasse. I thought of 'only' doing myself, and then I thought of just taking the instruction to use an easier person more seriously. I am not sure why I had dismissed the idea of working just with myself so quickly, and I am indebted to Ratnacuda for leading the meditation in this way otherwise I might never have experienced it. He suggested thinking of the part of yourself that you find easiest as your easy person, and working through to a part of yourself that you are less happy with as your difficult person. I found it really productive and healing, and I would certainly use it again. What was I doing using someone I find so harmful in my meditation? What does it say about the Metta I have been offering myself?
The whole day went in to the evening, with Mitra ceremonies and a Puja, but I was never going to last that long, and I was really tired (I have fibromyalgia and get very tired) and I was just thinking of going home when Dhammarati arrived. Because of my illness there are lots of order members who I don't know because I rarely go to LBC in the evenings. So, even though I spend a lot of time there, there are still plenty of people I don't know. I have to admit now, that I do not remember the name of the order member I was talking to when he arrived, but they knew each other and she introduced us, and he shook my hand. His presence was of an order that I thought, ok, let me just stay for this one last talk. And I am very glad I did. He talked very plainly about the Sutra, and about practice. Very insightfully. And he brought the day together in it's conceptual simplicity; everything you need to know to practice, you probably already know. You just need to do it deeper.

Wandering Dhamma

bschedneck@gmail.com (Brooke Schedneck) — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 19:44:00 +0000

I have started my own blog and wanted to let the readers of Progressive Buddhism know about it! I will still post to Progressive about my ideas about Buddhism in America/modern Buddhism but I have my Wandering Dhamma blog for my research interests.

I was awarded a Fulbright to research meditation retreats in Thailand so that is what I will be doing next year, starting next month. I will post to Wandering Dhamma about my experiences there but will be doing a few posts before I leave.

I hope everyone will take a look!

Here is the link:

http://wanderingdhamma.wordpress.com/

How to Evangelize a Buddhist.

noreply@blogger.com (Kyle) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:10:00 +0000

I know this is some material that's been spread around the Evangelical web for sometime, and they do take this seriously, but nevertheless, its some pretty amazingly misinformed stuff. I'm sure a lot of you have been exposed to this before, but I couldn't help myself. If you haven't read it yet, enjoy!

Bridges For Evangelizing Buddhists
Truth about Buddhists

Some brief snip-its:

The gospel can be appealing to Buddhists if witnessing focuses on areas of personal need where the Buddhist belief system is weak.

Riiiiight, a belief system. You are very correct, a belief system is weak.

Suffering: Buddhists are deeply concerned with overcoming suffering but must deny that suffering is real.

If suffering isn't real, then was my first marriage just an illusion?

Meaningful Self: Buddhists must work to convince themselves they have no personal significance, even though they live daily as though they do.... Each person is made in Gods image with an immortal soul and an eternal destiny.

I don't need to work at convincing myself that I'm insignificant, my ex-wife reminds me of this everyday. I'm curious, if God made us in his image, then, as Voltaire said, did we not return the favor?

Future Hope: The hope of nirvana is no hope at all - only death and extinction.

Crap, you're right! If I find 'hope in death', then this is a shitty religion I am following.

Moral Law: Because karma, the Buddhist law of moral cause and effect, is completely rigid and impersonal, life for a Buddhist is very oppressive. Under karma, there can be no appeal, no mercy, and no escape except through unceasing effort at self- refection.

Hell that's not the definition of Karma, that's life in New Jersey. (Sorry all my New Jersey friends, I was born there so I can make a little fun :-)

Merit: Buddhists constantly struggle to earn merit by doing good deeds, hoping to collect enough to break free from the life of suffering. They also believe saints can transfer surplus merit to the undeserving.

Hey guys, I got my merit badge in snoodling and apparently that isn't a good deed. Any saints out there willing to transfer some surplus merit to me, please?

Desire: Buddhists live a contradiction - they seek to overcome suffering by rooting out desire, but at the same time they cultivate desire for self- control, meritorious life, and nirvana.

I'm curious, how does one root out desire? Cause I live next to a Chipolte and I'd really like to know cause those burrito bowls are costing me a fortune and I lack any self control.

When witnessing to Buddhists avoid terms such as "new birth," "rebirth," "regeneration," or "born again." Use alternatives such as "endless freedom from suffering, guilt, and sin," "new power for living a holy life," "promise of eternal good life without suffering," or "gift of unlimited merit."

Ohhhh I like it! "New Power of Eternal Good Life with Unlimited Merit" Christ, is this some kind of game show or a religion?

Understand Buddhist beliefs enough to discern weaknesses that can be used to make the gospel appealing.

Because pointing out peoples flaws is a very Christian thing to do, right?

While using bridge concepts, be careful not to reduce Christian truth to a form of Buddhism. Buddhism has been good at accommodating other religions. Do not say "Buddhism is good, but Christianity is easier."

Yea, and definitely under no circumstances should one say "Buddhism is good, but marijuana is better."

Ok, I'm done, I'm all out of really lame jokes about this.

Should a Buddhist ever Resort to Violence?

noreply@blogger.com (Kyle) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:48:00 +0000

In my previous post here, concerning Michael Jackson, several people posted some very emotional and heartfelt comments, none less valid than the others. In these comments I could definitely feel the entire range of emotions, as one of this blogs own contributors so very eloquently pointed out in his comment. I think it is something that many humans who feel these types of emotions in real life, like anger, pride or hate, may find themselves involved in violent incidents and confrontations. One of the comments on the post asked what all this, being anger towards Jackson's alleged child molestations, had anything to do with Buddhism. I think violence, on a basic personal level, is a very important topic for all Buddhists (and non-Buddhists alike). I see from these two observations a question that asks; should a Buddhist ever resort to violent measures?

In this relative world, we will all encounter situations or people that will illicit from us emotions such as angry, hate and fear; all emotions that have the potential for a physical outburst or violent reaction. Fortunately, most of us are capable of preventing those emotions from extending that far, but sometimes, the people we face will push us to our limits of compassion and understanding. Growing up in an abusive household, I know the pain and scars left behind by violence, but after many years, through mindfulness of my thoughts and emotions I have been able to let go of a lot of the hate and anger and even find some compassion. Many of you too have also conquered hate towards another person and been able to forgive and show compassion. I think this gift of compassion is a gift we give ourselves, not the ones who hurt us.

"Forgiveness is primarily for our own sake, so that we no longer carry the burden of resentment. But to forgive does not mean we will allow injustice again."
~Jack Kornfield

However, does the understanding or expression of compassion always mean non-violence? Can a violent act be an expression of compassion? I think in some rare cases, based on the circumstances of the act, yes, violence can be an act of compassion. In this world, there will always be a few people incapable of compassion, empathy or understanding, whose only motivations are the obtainment of the objects of their desire. I believe in psychology they are commonly referred to as sociopaths. Just as we would help a person out of a burning house, so we should help a person being the victim of violence from another person, even if it takes violence itself to end it. When I talk about being the victim and helping by using violence, I am talking about seeing the actual act of aggression being perpetrated right then and right there, and not as in some form of reprisal. In my opinion, turning a blind eye and not helping, as so many people do these days, is sometimes the uncompassionate thing to do. I know I would not hesitate for one instant if I saw a woman being raped or a child being abused, that I wouldn't place myself in between the attacker and the victim, even if that meant using force. Sometimes the only words a man with a knife will listen to are the words from a man with a gun.

That said, I don't think violence should ever be taken lightly or used in a vigilantly sense. The Buddha said "In this world hate never yet dispelled hate, only love dispels hate. This is the law, ancient and inexhaustible." And I couldn't agree more with that statement. I detest violence, but in rare cases violence can sometimes be the only means to end a particular violent event. But in no way will the use of violence add to the understanding and compassion between humans, and this, I think should be our first priority. What do you think?

(ps These scientology ads here are a great example of a cult.)

Forgive thy Sins?

noreply@blogger.com (Kyle) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:09:00 +0000

I’ll be completely upfront, this is of course just my opinion, but I am somewhat sickened and disturbed by the amount of people praising Michael Jackson, the media circus surrounding his death and the concert being held in his honor. To me, the evidence and amount of allegations of his pedophilia were pretty solid, yet there are so many that have gladly looked past these horrific past transgressions to toss admiration and kudos to the memory of this man.

The parents of some of the children, who allowed there kids to sleep over with Jackson are partly to blame, and no one can argue that Jackson had somewhat of a difficult life living in the constant limelight of fame, but at the end of the day, sexual molestation of children, no matter what the circumstances is repugnant and despicable. Time and again, the psychological problems that children of sexual abuse suffer later in life has been documented quite substantially by the scientific community. This is not about some petty crime, but about a crime that has lifelong lasting effects on the victims.

For us Buddhists, what responsibility do we have to speak our minds in these cases, to point out the disturbing actions of others? I’m not talking about pointing out the actual crimes, as I think that it is quite apparent that we have the same responsibility as anyone else to report these types of crimes, but more in a moral sense, of peoples past crimes and forgiveness of these ‘sins’? We all have things in or past we aren’t proud of, and we all have been the victim of a crime at some point were we have forgiven the offender; but to hold a concert in some kind of twisted homage to this pedophile, to me, crosses a line of not only good taste but also somehow says if you are famous and make lots of money, somehow the standards of decency don’t apply to you. What do you think?