Ecodharma: Chapter 2 (part three)

[Kokuu]

This week's reading is p60-73 ('Deconstructing the Self 'to chapter end)

In this section of the book, David Loy looks Buddhist practice in terms of seeing the nature of the self as essentially empty, and asks how this relates to our engaging with social and environmental issues.

In some ways, this feels to me to be out of place with the message of the book yet it needs to be addressed as there can seem to be a definite tension between seeing beyond our small self and engaging fully with the relative world.

Of course, in Zen, we do have an answer to this, and the two sides are never separate from each other.

Questions to ponder this week, or else feel free to talk about any parts of this section which speaks to you:

Do you feel a tension between your sitting practice and Engaged Buddhism or is it more of a seamless whole?

What is the relationship between the lack of a solid self and the work of an activist or Engaged Buddhist?

On the flipside, is there a danger that being involved in Engaged Buddhism and social/environmental struggles work to make our self feel more solid?


We will be taking a break next week before moving on the chapter three to give people a chance to catch up.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday-

[Juki]

I think both of your first two questions come down to the interplay between two fundamental aspects of Mahayana practice: interconnectedness and the Bodhisattva vows. If you truly recognize that everything is connected, and if you truly embrace the vow to save all sentient beings, then there is no difference between our sitting practice and engaged Buddhism.

I've just finished the reading for the week, and I will try to add more later. But, I will admit that I too found this part of the chapter to be maybe misplaced. I was reading along wondering where Loy was going with all this. But the last three pages were pretty powerful, and brought everything into focus nicely.

Gassho
Juki
sat today and lah

[Doshin]

I think both of your first two questions come down to the interplay between two fundamental aspects of Mahayana practice: interconnectedness and the Bodhisattva vows. If you truly recognize that everything is connected, and if you truly embrace the vow to save all sentient beings, then there is no difference between our sitting practice and engaged Buddhism.

That is where I sit too on these questions. Thank you

Doshin
St

[aprapti]

at the end (it was quite a bit of work ), on page 72, Loy tells us about his favorite koan. A student asks his master: "what is the constant activity of all buddha's and bodhisattva's ?" The answer: "responding appropriately." I like this answer. And for me the answer on your three questions is to find in this word appropriately..

aprapti

sat

[Juki]

at the end (it was quite a bit of work ), on page 72, Loy tells us about his favourite koan. A student asks his master: "what is the constant activity of all buddha's and bodhisattva's ?" The answer: "responding appropriately." I like this answer. And for me the answer on your three questions is to find in this word appropriately..

aprapti

That may have been my favorite part of the reading.

Gassho
Juki
sat today and lah

sat

That was probably my favorite part of the reading.

Gassho
Juki
sat today and lah

[Tairin]

Wow! I don’t know about anyone else but I found that last reading to be a bit of a slog and I agree with you Kokuu, it felt a little out of place.

I liked that koan about “responding appropriately “ too. I’ll have to keep that one in mind.

Do you feel a tension between your sitting practice and Engaged Buddhism or is it more of a seamless whole?

Unless I am missing the point of this week’s questions my answer is “no” and I don’t see how there could be tension or conflict. I think I made this point in the last section. I don’t see the ecological collapse being a Buddhist thing anymore than there are Buddhists walking this Earth that are impacted by climate change. Same as Christian or Muslims or Hindus.

I really liked the quote from Richard Louv about the child going into the woods to find God. Yes the Absolute (my substitute for “God”) is the same everywhere but there is no question that I feel closer to the Absolute in some situations/environments than others. This is one of the lessons from Jundo that I really treasure is to try to see the beauty even in the muck or the garbage dump.

Thank you for contributing to the conversation here. I appreciate reading other people’s opinions and views



Tairin
Sat today and lah

[Heiso]

I think I may be in a minority in that I quite enjoyed that section, for me it kind of summed up Juki's point about the interplay between interconnectedness and the way of the Bodhisattva - with perhaps a bit too little on the latter although maybe that is to come in future chapters.

I was at an event recently with some meditators from various traditions where I explained for me, sitting is wonderful and can give us great insight but it's the the precepts that guide us when we re off the cushion, which is most of the time - and I think this section bridged the earlier part of the chapter about other/this-worldly practices to a more engaged approach where we learn, as that koan told us, to respond appropriately.

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

[Dogukan]

I enjoyed reading these pages, but I also found them a little bit misplaced as well. I think the subject of the book is a very difficult one to deal with. Ecology and Dharma - these are pretty big topics. And when you try to combine them, it seems almost inevitable to misplace some parts. It should be difficult enough to design even an essay on this subject, let alone an entire book. And Loy, credit where credit's due, has been doing very well so far.

At the end of the day, I really enjoyed how Loy emphasized the importance of reconstructing the self, as well as deconstructing it. It really seems to be the point where emptiness can be found in its real form, i.e., unlimited potentiality. And that's why being engaged in issues like climate crisis can be a serious matter for Buddhist practitioners, as this unlimited potentiality inherently excludes nothing. There are plenty of answers to why one should "bother with" ecology, yet most of them remain purely pragmatic and appeal only to reason. This one, however, can be considered a proper Mahayana response to this burning and modern problem. And it's truly great to see that these centuries-old Mahayana concepts can still provide us with a strong foundation for finding a solution to a modern problem.

The above-mentioned koan and quotations were truly great indeed.
Responding appropriately. Isn't it the answer already to what can we do in the face of ecological problems?

It's great to read this book with all of you, I greatly benefit a lot from each of your reviews. Thank you for your time and companionship.

Gassho, Doğukan.
Sat.

[Kaisui]

I am coming to this one a bit late so I won't add too much. I will say that I really liked this quote too, that the Absolute/Source/God is the same everywhere, but I am not.

I really liked the quote from Richard Louv about the child going into the woods to find God. Yes the Absolute (my substitute for “God”) is the same everywhere but there is no question that I feel closer to the Absolute in some situations/environments than others. This is one of the lessons from Jundo that I really treasure is to try to see the beauty even in the muck or the garbage dump.

And on the tension between sitting practice and Engaged Buddhism, I feel more a tension between the sense that everything is OK just as it is, and the urge to make things (e.g. the environment) better. But working through this is part of practice, and thus it is a seamless whole... I'm finding it helps to shift away from thinking of everything being OK, to thinking that my identity/sense-of-self is OK (or rather, non-existent, not needing to be propped up or defined).

Gassho,
Kaisui
sat&lah