Should Zen practitioners be politically active?

[Jishin]

The practice of Zen Buddhism has a long history and is rooted in the principles of mindfulness, non-attachment, non-violence, interdependence, and impermanence. These principles are at the core of Zen practice and provide a foundation for the spiritual beliefs and practices of Zen practitioners. However, when it comes to participating in the political system, these principles may come into conflict with the demands and dynamics of politics. This can create a challenge for Zen practitioners who seek to reconcile their spiritual beliefs and practices with the demands of political involvement.

One of the key challenges faced by Zen practitioners in participating in the political system is non-attachment. Zen emphasizes the importance of non-attachment and letting go of material things, while politics often requires individuals to seek power and influence. This can create a conflict between a Zen practitioner's spiritual beliefs and their political responsibilities. In order to participate in the political system, a Zen practitioner may have to compromise their principles of non-attachment and seek power and influence, which can be at odds with their spiritual beliefs.

Another challenge faced by Zen practitioners in participating in the political system is non-violence. Zen teaches non-violence and compassion, which can make it difficult for a Zen practitioner to participate in a political system that may require them to make decisions that result in harm to others. This can be especially challenging for Zen practitioners who seek to maintain their principles of non-violence while participating in a political system that may require them to make decisions that are not in line with their beliefs.

Mindfulness is also a challenge for Zen practitioners in participating in the political system. Zen emphasizes mindfulness and being present in the moment, which can be at odds with the fast-paced and demanding nature of politics. A Zen practitioner may struggle to balance the need to make quick decisions with the need to stay grounded and mindful. This can make it difficult for a Zen practitioner to participate in the political system while maintaining their spiritual practice of mindfulness.

The principle of interdependence is also a challenge for Zen practitioners in participating in the political system. Zen teaches the interdependence of all things and the importance of seeking the well-being of all beings, which can make it difficult for a Zen practitioner to prioritize the needs of their own country over the needs of others. This can be especially challenging for Zen practitioners who seek to maintain their principles of interdependence while participating in a political system that may require them to prioritize the needs of their own country.

The principle of impermanence is also a challenge for Zen practitioners in participating in the political system. Zen emphasizes the impermanence of all things and the lack of a permanent self, which can make it difficult for a Zen practitioner to fully embrace the role of a political leader, who must make decisions with long-term consequences. This can be especially challenging for Zen practitioners who seek to maintain their principles of impermanence while participating in a political system that may require them to make decisions with long-term consequences.

For those who seek to stay true to their spiritual beliefs and practices, it may be more appropriate to work with things that align with their spiritual beliefs and values, such as volunteering, activism, or working in fields related to environmental conservation or social justice. By focusing on activities that align with their beliefs, Zen practitioners can make a more meaningful and lasting impact while staying true to their spiritual beliefs and maintaining their well-being.

My 2 cents,

Gassho, Jishin, STLAH

[Bion]

What made you think of this?

[emoji1374] Sat Today

[Jishin]

What made you think of this?

[emoji1374] Sat Today

My mind goes places it should not.

[emoji3]

Gassho, Jishin, ST, LAH

[Bion]

My mind goes places it should not.

[emoji3]

Gassho, Jishin, ST, LAH

Don’t know about “shouldn’t” . We all have thoughts and opinions about everything. [emoji1] I shall now lay back and see where this pot stirring leads [emoji23]

[emoji1374] Sat Today

[Kokuu]

Another challenge faced by Zen practitioners in participating in the political system is non-violence. Zen teaches non-violence and compassion, which can make it difficult for a Zen practitioner to participate in a political system that may require them to make decisions that result in harm to others.

I think that the same could be said of life.

Politics is definitely a place where attachments can happen but, by virtue of that, I think it is an area of life in which we can see how our thinking tends to be split into 'those I like' and 'those I don't like' and communicating with people who hold a different political view can be great for watching our reactivity and practicing Right Speech.

Activisim, volunteer work and other 'grassroots' politics is definitely something I would encourage all Zen practitioners to become involved with, but politics also has the potential to do a lot of good, so I do not have a problem with people practicing Zen being involved in that. As Rumi once said, there are many ways to kneel and kiss the ground.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday-

[Naiko]

Certainly the divisive and extreme political climate in many countries might dissuade a practitioner from wanting to participate or make a mild natured person unelectable. I would be pleased to see more such people governing though. The Buddha has something to say about righteous leadership: https://mahamevnawa.lk/en/faq-items/...g-to-buddhism/

Gassho,
Naiko
st lah

[Shinshi]

I think if I wanted to avoid anything that might expose me challenges related to the precepts - I would probably go live in a cave by myself. And that still probably wouldn't do it.

I agree with Kokuu, working towards beneficial ends outweighs the risks. But one must stay vigilant as well.

Gassho, Shinshi

SaT-LaH

[Jundo]

Kokuu, Naiko and Shinshi have my vote!

So long as one is working for the greater good, to help sentient beings, then politics and other kinds of social activism can be our Practice, Right Livelihood, Bodhisattva Work. The Bodhisattva works in the world, in the marketplace, but with a still heart and for good purposes.

The Buddha did advice many kings and leaders who professed to be Buddhists as well, and knew that they sometimes even had to use violence, administer criminal punishments and such, in that role. Although done with regret, it is sometimes necessary for the greater peace of society, and such measures may sometimes need to be taken when other courses are unavailable and it cannot be avoided, with regret and hesitancy, and hopefully fairly and justly.

Not ALL Buddhists need to be socially active and involved, and some can devote themselves to other things ... but any Buddhist can be politically and socially involved, seeking to make this world a little better, and it is a good path. In fact, some Zen and other Buddhists folks can put political and social involvement right front and center in their practice, their moving Zazen, and that is fine and possible too for those who do.

Gassho, J

stlah

[Zenkon]

Simple answer - If you don't participate in the political process, even if just by voting, you enable people like Putin to run things. Your choice.

Gassho

Zenkon

[Huichan]

It's a difficult one. Zen practitioners/Buddhists can be of varying political persuasions whilst living in the same political system, but also we all live in varying political systems that can affect how we are politcally active (as well as the extent of our political activity). We have to find our own path, even if others may not see it as something as Zen practioner 'should' do.


Ross
stlah

[Jundo]

Now, another question is whether one HAS to be engaged in politics and social action if a Zen Buddhist.

I would say that, no, one does not have to be, although I believe that Buddhists should be focused on helping other sentient beings in some way, in some kind of service to others, whether as a caretaker for those who need, parent, teacher, street cleaner, charitable volunteer, musician, artist ... I am not going to say the exact form that the service should take. Personally, I agree that every citizen should vote, and take an interest in local, national and even world events, but I would not say that one has to do so as a Buddhist.

In fact, much of Buddhist history involves one going to a monastery and closing off from society (of course, in the kingdoms and military empires of old Asia, one risked death and having one's temple burned down if displeasing the rulers, so there was often little choice. It is easier now in western republics where we do not risk jailing for expressing a peaceful opinion. Some in many countries today are still under threat.) However, while I do believe that EVERY Buddhist should focus their practice on service to others ... and should not just be wrapped up staring into their own belly button ... that other directed activity can take many forms unrelated to politics. Frankly, I hope everyone will vote and take an interest in what is happening in their town, nation and the world.

Second, not everyone in Buddhism needs to have opinions associated with progressive politics. It seems that most people in western Buddhism are on the left in their views (I will leave my personal opinions out of this discussion), I know many conservative Buddhists. Buddhism in Asia can be quite conservative, with many Buddhists having views, for example, which oppose abortion, support "traditional marriage," support the military in what they perceive as defense of society, and the like.

What Buddhism should not do, in my view, is hold any view which can be considered driven by hate, aggressive violence, prejudice and bigotry against other groups, and the like. Thus, "Zen Buddhist NAZI" would be a no go. One can be quite conservative, and hold sincere and peaceful views about what is best for society and its "sentient beings," without being hate driven, prejudiced and the like. There are many good and caring people on right and left.

My Dharma Brother, Brad Warner, sometimes expresses opinions that one should not or cannot be a so-called "woke" Buddhist. He is wrong. One can be a "woke" Buddhist, and can support policies which are usually associated with being "woke," and one can organize Buddhist Sangha and activities centered on such causes. There is much good to be said about doing so. However, one need not do so, and their are other ways of being concerned for fellow sentient beings, including sincerely held conservative views.

However, one's views of "helping sentient beings" must not be based on hate, aggressive violence, prejudice and bigotry, etc.

(One other area in which I disagree with Bro. Brad VERY much is in his tolerance of "anti-vaxxers" and his spreading of misinformation about vaccines in some of his audio casts. While I do not care so much what somebody does or does not do with their own body in their own foolishness, I do care about the indirect effect on others ... such as the elderly and immune suppressed ... who will be placed at greater risk of death and harm by people who refuse to be vaccinated. Brad also criticizes Zen centers that require proof of vaccine to enter. He is wrong, and with all the elderly and ill folks in Zen centers, it is simply foolhardy not to do so. Peoples' lives are at risk. If we were not online, I would do so here. I almost want to do so even though we are online. I usually avoid political discussion in this Sangha, but I believe that some policies are truly a matter of "preserving life.")

Gassho, Jundo

stlah

[JohnS]

I won't get into it much, but saying Brad is wrong about his views about the vax is, well, wrong. Much misinformation has been spread by those pushing the vaccine, which is being evidenced more and more every day. I'd be happy to discuss in more in private, Jundo, as I don't think this is the venue to get into it much. However, I had to call you on your blanket judgement of Brad on this. You can say you disagree, stating he is wrong as if it were fact is quite another thing altogether. I also agree with Brad about the "woke" stuff as well. Those who are such, in my experience, are actually the most intolerant people I have come across, and engage in pushing many delusions. I will leave the matter here now.

Again, teacher, I mean no disrespect in any way to you.

Gassho,

John

SatTodayLAH

[Jundo]

I won't get into it much, but saying Brad is wrong about his views about the vax is, well, wrong. Much misinformation has been spread by those pushing the vaccine, which is being evidenced more and more every day. I'd be happy to discuss in more in private, Jundo, as I don't think this is the venue to get into it much. However, I had to call you on your blanket judgement of Brad on this. You can say you disagree, stating he is wrong as if it were fact is quite another thing altogether. I also agree with Brad about the "woke" stuff as well. Those who are such, in my experience, are actually the most intolerant people I have come across, and engage in pushing many delusions. I will leave the matter here now.

Again, teacher, I mean no disrespect in any way to you.

Gassho,

John

SatTodayLAH

Please feel free to PM me any information that you have.

However, for the time being, I will stick with the view that failing to be vaxxed is indirectly killing unknown elderly and immune compromised individuals who are placed at risk, thus a clear violation of the Precepts on preserving life as much as walking past a drowning man while taking no action or, worse, tossing him a rock to hold on to.

As I said, I keep politics outside the door here, but on certain issues ... such as climate destruction of the planet, making sure that lower income folks have food and education and and safe housing and decent healthcare, and this ... it is more the Precepts than politics.

Gassho, Jundo

stlah

[JohnS]

Except the vax has been shown not to prevent anything in terms of spread, one of the many fallacies of misinformation about the vaccine. I am secure in my perception of myself not violating any precepts by not being vaxxed. In my case, the vax was contra-indicated for me, due to medical reasons. I am supposedly in a high risk group, had COVID 2x, never had a fever or cough either time. Was fine in a few days. My natural immunity now is better than a vax, this has been shown in many studies that seem to always get ignored by the media. I would think it would be more in alignment with the precepts for the medical community to tell people how to get and stay healthy than pushing meds on them, as the industry does.

Gassho,

John
stlah

[Kokuu]

I am supposedly in a high risk group, had COVID 2x, never had a fever or cough either time. Was fine in a few days. My natural immunity now is better than a vax, this has been shown in many studies that seem to always get ignored by the media. I would think it would be more in alignment with the precepts for the medical community to tell people how to get and stay healthy than pushing meds on them, as the industry does.

Being in a high risk group does not mean that everyone in it will get a bad case of Covid, and it depends on your age and other factors. However, it does mean that group is more at risk of their Covid being more serious. I am glad that you had mild cases both times but that doesn't refute the fact that your group in general is more likely to have a more serious infection.

Immunity against Covid after having Covid is indeed good but 1) that does not help people who have yet to be infected, 2) it offers less protection against new strains than an updated vaccine, and less protection than having been infected plus getting vaxed.

As regards staying healthy, this is an important thing to emphasise and I am not fond of a lot of elements of the pharmaceutical industry myself which can promote overmedication. However, I have seen a lot of people confusing innate and acquired immunity in respect of this. Whereas being generally healthy and eating well will tend to improve your innate immunity, and that is a good thing, it does not give the acquired immunity that trains the immune system to recognise specific viruses. Immunisations do that.

If you have medical reasons not to be vaccinated, that is fine, and a good reason for people who can get vaccinated to do that as part of herd immunity. Vaccines do prevent transmission, especially with certain strains such as Omicron, and is dose dependent with each vaccine dose a person has reducing the risk of passing on the virus by a further 12% on average according to a study in prisons (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02328-0). That study also shows that infection + vaccine offers greater immunity than either one by itself. So, yes, natural immunity may be similar to being vaccinated, but natural immunity + vaccine is better still so why would the media say that once you have been infected you don't need to get a vaccine when it offers additional protection?

Apologies for running long and partly with my biologist hat on.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday-