[Engaged] Negativity against engaged Buddhism?

[TyZa]

This is asked in good faith and only meant for greater understanding on my part.

I've noticed, around the internet at least, a lot of Buddhist are against engaged Buddhism. They claim it is not integral to our practice. I have seen this specifically with some Zen teachers and Zen practitioners. There are statements such as: left-wing ideology has co-opted Zen to include social justice as part of their practice. I would like input from others on this issue. To me, it seems that if you were to take vows to strive to end the suffering of others, why would you dis-engage from the suffering of others? There seems to be a large view a apolitical/nihilistic thinking which is worrying me slightly as it (ironically) seems selfish just to focus on your "no-self". To me, certain issues, such as poverty alleviation, should not be considered "political" as much as helping to reduce suffering of others. I can understand the thought that with better knowledge of no-self one may be more inclined to help others more. But, I was wondering if anyone had any experience with Buddhists who were against engaged Buddhist and their reasons and/or why do you support Engaged Buddhism. I tried searching this elsewhere I did not find anything on point. I apologize if it has been asked.

Gassho,
Tyler

SatToday

[Shokai]

Hi Tyler;

Don't go believing that Fake news now

The first pure precepts; Do no harm, Live a good life, Aid others in the same.

I can't see how some one is against engaged Buddhism

around the internet at least, a lot of Buddhist are against engaged Buddhism.

I can see how this gets twisted. I'd say without looking too far you'll find more in favor than not.
but, i'm not an expert

gassho, Shokai
stlah

[Jundo]

This is asked in good faith and only meant for greater understanding on my part.

I've noticed, around the internet at least, a lot of Buddhist are against engaged Buddhism. They claim it is not integral to our practice. I have seen this specifically with some Zen teachers and Zen practitioners. There are statements such as: left-wing ideology has co-opted Zen to include social justice as part of their practice. I would like input from others on this issue. To me, it seems that if you were to take vows to strive to end the suffering of others, why would you dis-engage from the suffering of others? There seems to be a large view a apolitical/nihilistic thinking which is worrying me slightly as it (ironically) seems selfish just to focus on your "no-self". To me, certain issues, such as poverty alleviation, should not be considered "political" as much as helping to reduce suffering of others. I can understand the thought that with better knowledge of no-self one may be more inclined to help others more. But, I was wondering if anyone had any experience with Buddhists who were against engaged Buddhist and their reasons and/or why do you support Engaged Buddhism. I tried searching this elsewhere I did not find anything on point. I apologize if it has been asked.

Gassho,
Tyler

SatToday

Hi Tyler,

Generally, I personally believe and advocate for "Engaged Buddhism," and believe that our Precepts strongly point to our opposing violence locally or on a world scale, feeding the hungry, making sure children are safe, have a clean environment in which to grow up, and that society is reasonably fair and just in its institutions. I have spoken out many times against my dear Dharma Bro. Brad and a few others who say that all concern with social policy or issues that may touch on politics should be left outside the Sangha door, including concern for certain issues that seem to arise in the Precepts. I consider myself an engaged Buddhist. For example, I think that the Precepts call on me to advocate clean drinking water for children in Flint Michigan, stronger gun control measures in America, medical care available to all, and the like. That is just my personal view as an individual Buddhist person speaking for myself.

The problem is, however, that not all Buddhists do or need interpret the Precepts in a given way, or to hold identical political opinions. I know many Buddhists, for example, who take a conservative "right to life" stance because of their interpretation of the Precept on preserving life, oppose Gay Marriage and support so-called "traditional" marriage between a man and woman, differ in their opinions on how to respond to Global Warming, or who might support their government in a particular military action because they believe that some wars are needed to save innocent lives overall and protect society (I have supported particular military actions myself as a necessary evil in some cases, but with tears in my eyes). I think we should leave room for such folks too within our Sangha communities, and say that all are sincere Buddhists concerned for the welfare of sentient beings, although disagreeing on the means. In fact, in Asia, Buddhism tends to be quite conservative as an institution, and even in the west, I know many folks whom I would call "conservative Buddhists." So long as one means to help sentient beings, and is not advocating hate and discrimination, I feel that it is everyone's right.

I also feel that we need to leave outside the Sangha door advocacy of particular candidates or insistence on particular policy stances that do not arise clearly from the Precepts. It is a hard call sometimes, but we try to leave most politics and political debate outside, and just sit Zazen dropping all differences, disagreements, views and ideas of things to fix. Then, after Zazen, we can all go back to our day to day, political opinions, policy views, debates and non-violent stances.

Gassho, Jundo

STLah

[Heiso]

Hi Tyler,

I don't think Buddhism is unique in this sense. I've seen similar debates in Judaism in which the concept of Tikkun Olam (repairing the world) is taken by some to mean literally engage with and attempt to overcome social and environmental injustice and by others to live a more observant life. I understand similar issues arise in Christianity and probably in most other religions too.

Personally, I'm with Jundo and try to live my Buddhism as engaged as it can be.

Gassho,

Neil

StLah

[Doshin]

Tyler

All of my Zen teachers were supportive and some very active in engaged Buddhism. I would not have entered into the Zen world if they had been otherwise. My experience with the opposing view is limited because it does not hold my attention. In fact Buddhism at first turned me away many decades ago because I thought it was just naval gazing as the world burned.

Doshin
St

[Ishin]

I think the issue that some folks have with "Engaged Buddhism", is that from their perspective it is not really getting to the heart of what is meant by "ending suffering." There is the suffering that comes from poverty and hunger, and the suffering that comes from the desire to be released from poverty and hunger. I am currently reading Suzuki's "Zen Buddhism" and he quotes one Chinese Chan Master when asked about a particular person struggling with poverty, his response was..

"Let him cast it away."

Saving the world, by literally saving the world is not really the same as "saving all sentient beings", from a Buddhist perspective. That all being said, if you are engaged in discovering the self/non self, the hunger and poverty of other's is your problem too. Locking ourselves away in a cloistered monastery and letting the world outside burn surely is not the way either. Politically, people may differ on exactly HOW, or the means to improve the world, as Jundo pointed out above. Some might think we need to give everyone some of our fish versus teaching a woman to fish, for example. Perhaps those who speak out against Engaged Buddhism are concerned that the focus might become more about social issues and charitable works than to actually be working towards enlightenment.

I completely get what other's like Doshin have said about being turned off by a practice that seems self absorbed and not helping out. I also was a bit hesitant about Buddhism looking at it in this manner. Realistically, I don't see how you can get to the point of any serious effort in this practice and NOT become concerned about our world, however we shouldn't under-estimate the power of working on ourselves too. Not adding to the world's suffering is a pretty good accomplishment too. So here we are stuck in duality again. Who is it who helps? Who is being helped?

Gassho
Ishin
Sat/lah

[Shoka]

TyZa,

I think one of the reasons some Buddhist centers and teachers might shy away from using the term "Engaged Buddhism" is because it was coined and is associated with a specific type of engagement.

The term was originally coined by Thich Nhat Hanh, and he developed 14 precepts that went along with this type of action. Other organizations have come along and taken up the term as well, an example would be Zen Peacemakers led by Bernie Glassman. In the Precept II discussion there is a reading from Glassman about some of the "street retreats" he has lead as a part of Engaged Buddhism. For many, because of the use of the term "Engaged Buddhism" in association with these specific groups; the term has come to mean certain types of actions. Which is why I think there are people who don't like using it.

The problem with having "Engaged Buddhism" being related to specific ideologies is that then it doesn't leave room for everyone. As we have seen from working with the precepts not all Buddhist are any one thing. In the same way, while at Treeleaf we want to encourage people to be engaged and go out in the world and actively try to make things better; we don't tell you what that has to look like.

A great example of the diversity of Buddhist is Christopher A. Ford, who is a special assistant to the president and National Security Council senior director for weapons of mass destruction and counter proliferation, and was ordained in the Prajna Mountain Order of Soto Zen Buddhism at the Upaya Institute and Zen Center.


If we look at just the idea of engaged as meaning "to be involved", in connection with being a Buddhist and take out the idea that Engaged means a specific type of action or a specific type of stance on a political topic. Then we allow for the diversity of Buddhist to go into the world and make a difference in the best way they see possible.

Gassho,

Shoka
sat/lah

[Nenka]

For me it's as simple as the separation between church* and state. Engagement is important, but I don't think it's Buddhism's place to straight up tell people what to believe in or (especially recently) who to vote for--just as I never thought it was Christianity's place to do those things either. There are gentler ways to point people towards right action--or so I believe. (Actually, I think this thread goes hand-in-hand with the "dinner with Nero" thread that's been going on the past couple days.)

To clarify, I have been to a number of protests and rallies in recent years. But I haven't gone as a representative of Buddhism. Just as myself.

Gassho

Nenka

ST

*One can argue whether Zen Buddhism in the west is religion or not. If your sangha is 501(c) (i.e. federally tax-exempt in the U.S.) then I'm just gonna call it a religious institution here.

[Hoseki]

This is asked in good faith and only meant for greater understanding on my part.

I've noticed, around the internet at least, a lot of Buddhist are against engaged Buddhism. They claim it is not integral to our practice. I have seen this specifically with some Zen teachers and Zen practitioners. There are statements such as: left-wing ideology has co-opted Zen to include social justice as part of their practice. I would like input from others on this issue. To me, it seems that if you were to take vows to strive to end the suffering of others, why would you dis-engage from the suffering of others? There seems to be a large view a apolitical/nihilistic thinking which is worrying me slightly as it (ironically) seems selfish just to focus on your "no-self". To me, certain issues, such as poverty alleviation, should not be considered "political" as much as helping to reduce suffering of others. I can understand the thought that with better knowledge of no-self one may be more inclined to help others more. But, I was wondering if anyone had any experience with Buddhists who were against engaged Buddhist and their reasons and/or why do you support Engaged Buddhism. I tried searching this elsewhere I did not find anything on point. I apologize if it has been asked.

Gassho,
Tyler

SatToday

Hi Tyler,

{Hopefully I'm not just repeating Shoka writing above but with less clarity }


Note: I'm just a lay practitioner so take what I say with a grain of salt or two. But here is my understanding of it.

---

I'm not sure if you've been studying the precepts during Ango but taking a look can help provide some insight on this. In Soto Zen we have 16 Bodhisattva precepts which are multifaceted. We have the reading as a normal person so when we read "To Refrain From Taking Life" it seems more or less straight forward. I have to take some life to keep living but for the most part its try not to kill things unnecessarily. But there is also the second position which I like to call seeing with the eyes of the Buddha. Where we try to see things from the interconnectedness of the cosmos. Where there is no birth and no death so how could there be killing? The second perspective doesn't directly provide help with what to do in difficult situation (as far as I can see.) So the precepts have to be interpreted in the context of the other precepts as well as what we bring to the table on our own. So our karma (at least from my perspective) is a reflection of our personal history so it includes how we understand the world. This can be informed by books we've read, movies we've watch, conversations, traditional viewpoints that we adopt with and without thinking deeply about them. Basically, our karma helps to provide a kind of context for the precepts. At times there will be conflicts with the usual way we deal with things and the precepts. So the precepts can help sharpen some views and tendencies while dulling and reducing others. For example, Angulimala was a follower of the Buddha who was what we would call a serial killer now. He even collected the fingers from his victims and made them into a necklace. Which on top of being horrific and disgusting is also very bad hygiene! But he becomes a follower of the Buddha and gives up his murdering ways. Taken another way, if one was already concerned and involved in social causes then the second three pure precepts, "Do good," could help encourage one to become more involved. Does this make sense?

I should add that given the complexity of social phenomena attempts to help may actually hinder and this is a sticking point for many conflicts. I recall a conversation I had with my dad about sweatshops and child labor years ago. He told me that if the kids didn't work that could mean less money for the household. He wasn't endorsing child labor but trying to get me to see unintended consequences of what I thought was a good thing (I still do.)

Any who, just my thoughts on the matter.

Gassho
Sattoday
Hoseki




Gassho
Sattoday
Hoseki

[Kyōsen]

Something about social media that I found interesting is that we can see how different Buddhist sanghas approach "engaged Buddhism". A Tibetan sangha I used to learn with went out to participate in a climate march recently, all the ordained monastics were there along with the laity, all supporting any and all efforts to seriously address climate change. This same sangha also encourages its members to vote in every election they can because they believe these things fulfill good ethical discipline.

To any who say Buddhists shouldn't be involved in politics, I might point them to these groups who are out there being engaged and politics and say "I hope you'll consider there is a very good case to be made for being engaged."

Gassho,
Sen
SatToday|LAH

[TyZa]

Wow, I did not expect this many replies! Thank you all! I don't want to quote anyone in particular as everyone's statements were helpful in giving me insight into the matter and don't want anyone to feel left out. I definitely see the exclusion factor if Engaged Buddhism goes too far and becomes overly political and how that can drive others away. On the same side of the coin, I know I've been at times disillusioned for the perceived focusing on your"self" as the world burns around you analogy. It's definitely a balance. I've had a long hiatus and I just got back so I have not been observing or following Ango. (I want to pace myself back in as I know I get burnt out easily if I tackle too much. I believe the last time I was here I was following along on the Book of Equanimity about 3 years ago. Going back through the old posts and catching up).

I would like to mention to Jundo that Brad was one of the teachers I was referencing to. I know you both are Dharma Brothers and it's interesting to see the differing approaches. I personally love Brad's books and insight and respect him. I appear to agree more with Jundo's above statement on Engaged Buddhism. To me, being raised protestant, it's kind of like the view that good works don't by themselves get you into Heaven, but that if you are changed enough (via Christian salvation) the Holy Spirit inside you would manifest in you doing good works. I think that might be what a lot of members are saying here: doing these things in themselves isn't Buddhism (I know I walking into a trap saying that but you all know what I mean), but by actualizing there is no-self, Buddhist practice would manifest in these actions towards "others" and the "universe." I do also agree that working on yourself is very important as well, I know I have caused much suffering in others from my attitude or irritability. I value all your replies. Thank you!

,
Tyler

SatToday

[Onka]

For me it begins and ends with the Feminist mantra The Personal Is Political.
Gassho
Anna

stlah

Sent from my Lenovo TB-8304F1 using Tapatalk

[Jundo]

Some very good examples of being an "Engaged" Buddhist in the following, and how the specifics of that may vary from heart to heart ...

In Soto Zen we have 16 Bodhisattva precepts which are multifaceted. We have the reading as a normal person so when we read "To Refrain From Taking Life" it seems more or less straight forward. I have to take some life to keep living but for the most part its try not to kill things unnecessarily.

Yes, our Precepts guide us to avoid violence and the killing of sentient beings. Thus, generally, we abhor war and any need for violence, especially if taken in anger. But here, things may become tricky (unless, as in any religion, the preacher or faithful follower makes it one way or hell. Personally, I believe that good and sincere Buddhists can disagree on some things while remaining good Buddhists.) So, genocide, use of chemical weapons on children, torture, raping and pillaging ... I just cannot see how any Buddhist, anywhere or any time, could support such things and remain within the Precepts, and I would easily declare so "from the pulpit" (the only exception might be, for example, possibly something like torture of a prisoner if truly thought a last resort necessary to save innocent lives ... and even then, it turns the stomach.) On the other hand, some Buddhists might sadly support a particular war, with tears in their eyes, because felt necessary to save lives overall, and protect peaceful society, rescue victims of genocide, etc. Even then, one must feel the regret and sadness of needing to do so. Our Precept studies in preparation for Jukai flesh out these Precepts and explore such ambiguities down here in Samsara (this imperfect, day to day life and world filled with competing questions).

I am reminded of my friend, a police officer and Buddhist, who killed a hostage taker in a fully justified shooting in order to rescue a child held captive. The shooting may have been right and necessary, and he knew that he did what needed to be done ... yet somehow carried the Karma and weight of that taking of a human life in his heart for the rest of his own life.

I recall a conversation I had with my dad about sweatshops and child labor years ago. He told me that if the kids didn't work that could mean less money for the household. He wasn't endorsing child labor but trying to get me to see unintended consequences of what I thought was a good thing (I still do.)

Yes, this is a kind of naive or foolish compassion that seeks to do the right thing, yet does not look at the real effects or real social or economic causes of a problem. I am reminded of this case too ...

Why Buddhist ‘fangsheng’ mercy release rituals can be more cruel than kind
The case of two London Buddhists fined for releasing crustaceans into the sea has thrown the spotlight on a ritual that involves hundreds of millions of wild animals – and a huge industry built around their capture and supply

https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2017/sep/25/buddhist-fangsheng-mercy-release-cruel-wild-animals

A Tibetan sangha I used to learn with went out to participate in a climate march recently, all the ordained monastics were there along with the laity, all supporting any and all efforts to seriously address climate change. This same sangha also encourages its members to vote in every election they can because they believe these things fulfill good ethical discipline.

Oh, I am a marcher too! I have marched in various demonstrations, and I was one of those "Chad counting" poll watching volunteers during the infamous Bush-Gore election recount in Florida. I have marched for peace, against genocide, signed petitions, engaged in a "sit-in." I have sometimes worn my robes at such an event. I have given talks here where I encourage folks to vote in elections. However, I do so ... personally ... and do not insist that every member of the Sangha fully agree with a particular stance, or support the particular candidate I support. (The only exception I would feel comfortable in making is to say clearly "from the pulpit" to never vote for a Neo-Nazi or like candidate who stands for hate and division, and also to encourage folks to vote for a generic candidate who they feel stands for peace, charity, tolerance and such values in general.) However, I hope that many people get up from the Zafu, get off their asses, and get marching and volunteering for peace, for the environment, to protect children and the poor etc. as they feel best! Get moving!

I once did the following, and it got people very upset. I have very strong feelings about the person on the Altar here, but my point is that we need to use such strong feelings as a Koan to step beyond too. In Zen we can have strong feelings and opinions but ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY step beyond all feelings and opinions AT ONCE!

Treeleaf Weekly Zazenkai - Welcoming Trump Buddha

ATTENTION: Our Zazenkai today replaces our usual wooden Buddha statue on the Altar with Donald Trump Buddha. This is not a political statement (except as some philosophers say that all things are politics). Rather, it is a call to look beyond the politics, me vs. you, us vs. them, likes and dislikes, left vs. right, loves and hates, anger and argument that may be engendered in so many of us by politics today. In our sitting, we sit as the still and whole source of all that, found beyond yet right at the heart of all the division and chaos of the world, known when our heart is still and whole.

https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?16529-October-12th-13th-Treeleaf-Weekly-Zazenkai-Welcoming-Trump-Buddha

Gassho, J

STLah

[Ishin]

Thank you Jundo



Gassho
Ishin
Sat/lah

[Kyōsen]

Treeleaf Weekly Zazenkai - Welcoming Trump Buddha

ATTENTION: Our Zazenkai today replaces our usual wooden Buddha statue on the Altar with Donald Trump Buddha. This is not a political statement (except as some philosophers say that all things are politics). Rather, it is a call to look beyond the politics, me vs. you, us vs. them, likes and dislikes, left vs. right, loves and hates, anger and argument that may be engendered in so many of us by politics today. In our sitting, we sit as the still and whole source of all that, found beyond yet right at the heart of all the division and chaos of the world, known when our heart is still and whole.

https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/show...g-Trump-Buddha

Haha! He's actually the one I think about during metta practice when we think of someone we really don't like. I think "if he were totally wise and totally compassionate, his actions wouldn't divide or harm others and so I wish for him to be free from his ignorance and to have the causes and conditions of lasting happiness." It feels conflicting to wish such good fortune for someone who does so many questionable things, but if I can't have compassion for him then how can I have compassion for the countless beings out there who may do even worse things? Having compassion for beings like him isn't just done for their benefit, but also for the benefit of everyone they harm. If he were completely relieved of his obscured thinking, no one would ever suffer from the things he says and does and so for the sake of those people I wish for Trump to be free and happy.

Gassho,
Sen
SatToday|LAH