[Engaged] Negativity against engaged Buddhism?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Heiso
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Jundo
    replied
    Originally posted by 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
    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
    Last edited by Jundo; 10-15-2019, 03:49 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shokai
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • TyZa
    started a topic [Engaged] Negativity against engaged Buddhism?

    [Engaged] Negativity against engaged Buddhism?

    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
Working...