Do Buddhists proselytize?

[Kaishin]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

... but when "I vow to save all sentient beings," there is no one in need of saving, and no need to save them, so what gives?

There are no sentient belngs in need of saving ... yet sentient beings are in need of saving, and it is the task of Bodhisattvas like us to save them! (Zen is not seeing things as an "either A or B" proposition ... and so often in a Buddha's Eye, A is precisely B!). Sentient Beings are suffering, precisely because sentient beings things there is a self in need. At the Heart of saving sentient beings is teaching them that "there are no sentient belngs in need of saving", the Wisdom of this Beautiful Path. No self, and so no suffering! :shock:

But the saving does not end there ...

At the same time, folks need saving in other ways ... food, shelter, companionship, a shoulder to lean on too. There may be "no sentient belngs in need of saving", but some folks are hungry and lonely tonight.

"Saving" is a very loaded word for some because of "Judeo-Christian baggage" that they carry around with them (and should put down ... cause often it is baggage of their own packing!) ... so one can substitute a word such as "help, aid, rescue" or the like if one wishes. It is our Bodhisattva Vow then to "Aid All Sentient Beings!" through both material goods like food and medicine, a friendly ear and helping hand ... and by making these Teachings available.

...

Also, do not try to convince friends or relatives about Buddhist Practice. Instead, I suggest you just be with them as a good, caring, gentle friend or relative ... son or daughter, parent ... and they will get the point. In fact, if they see a change in you from before ... if they see that you have, in fact, become a more caring, gentle, whole, content person than who they knew before ...

... they will get the message more than anything that can be said in words.

Gassho, J

Thanks, Jundo. I still struggle with the word "save" (all that Christian stuff from my youth); this clarifies the matter.

_/_

[ZenHarmony]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

Wow... I so love the conversations I read here, and learn so much from them

Deep respect to all,

Lisa

[doogie]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

Thank you, Jundo. I understand what you mean. And yes, "save" is a loaded word. It comes with a lot of baggage, and not just because of the Christian connotation. It doesn't feel like the right word to me (setting aside no right and no wrong). It feels like a word we're stuck with, doing the best we can with it. Like fishing with pliers. You can't save someone from hunger, or save them from drug addiction, or from themselves, from their clinging to a self, or from suffering. You can give them food, shelter, teachings, comfort, love, friendship, and support. But who has ever been saved, and what have they ever been saved from? Everyone dies, and no one escapes suffering (except through death.) it can be minimized, delayed, or even transformed into medicine, but not eradicated. And yes, I understand, we strive even though it's an impossible task. But strive to what? To save someone suggests the saver is in a less precarious or superior position. But isn't that an illusion'? No one's farther along the path, since the path doesn't lead anywhere, and no one but the dead is out of danger. No one knows any more than another because there is nothing to know, and anyone who thinks they do know something for sure is crazy. No, I'm not sure I can in good conscience vow to save all sentient beings, but I can vow to help all beings the best I can (at least until I can come up with a better word for it.)

[Jundo]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

...But who has ever been saved, and what have they ever been saved from? Everyone dies, and no one escapes suffering (except through death.) it can be minimized, delayed, or even transformed into medicine, but not eradicated....

Oh, well, fortunately we don't believe in "death" either. Or "birth" for that matter. I mean, since there are no sentient beings, who exactly is there to be born and die?!

Is the river born or become dead as the ripples rise and fall on its surface? We may see the ripples come and go, but miss the river's flowing flowing flowing.

I mean, when you are asleep and have a dream at night ... where does the dream "go" when the alarm clock rings and you awaken? 8)

Gassho, J

[ZenHarmony]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

I mean, when you are asleep and have a dream at night ... where does the dream "go" when the alarm clock rings and you awaken? 8)

How do we know that the dream isn't reality and reality the dream?

(and yes, I ask in all seriousness, not as a study in duality)

Lisa

[Jundo]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

I mean, when you are asleep and have a dream at night ... where does the dream "go" when the alarm clock rings and you awaken? 8)

How do we know that the dream isn't reality and reality the dream?

(and yes, I ask in all seriousness, not as a study in duality)

Lisa

Hi Lisa,

I sometimes say that, for Dogen, the separate things, people and events of the world are so unreal when viewed as Emptiness, that they all come back the other way ... thus rebounding each as Real as Real can be, each a precious jewel in its own way. Master Dogen spoke of Muchu Setsumu, a 'dream within a dream' ... a dream so dreamy, but not merely just dreamy ... a dream of life, but our lives nonetheless and the place for living and awakening. All is a dream perhaps ... but just our very lives here and now, a dream that is just plain wonderfully dreamy (even when sometimes oh so scary)! A kind of fiction, but a story being written now ... largely by how we write it in our Wisdom or Greed, Anger and Ignorance. Dream On, Oh Dreamer!

It is a waking dream at night and in broad daylight, eyes closed or wide open.

Gassho, J

[mr.Lou]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

How do we know that the dream isn't reality and reality the dream?

(and yes, I ask in all seriousness, not as a study in duality)

Lisa

For the Mahayana Buddhists of the Tibetan tradition- or as far as the Lama that I had the occasion to converse with at a monastery in the Himalayas -states this question was really the source of their entire study. For them, enlightenment is achieved when true acceptance of realizing that they, and all humanity,are all simply a dream and the product of the Dreamer, Brahman, is the key to freeing one's self from the curse of existence (samsara) as is taught by Guru Rinpoché. Milaripa, according to their tradition, is the only person to have ever achieved enlightenment in a single lifetime and was thus liberated from existence at the conclusion of his first incarnation. It is definitely a question that appears in many Buddhist traditions.

For me, such a question only inspires me to ponder: Aren't dreams and reality simply two sides of the same coin we call consciousness, and therefore ultimately the same thing under different names?

[andyZ]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

For me, such a question only inspires me to ponder: Aren't dreams and reality simply two sides of the same coin we call consciousness, and therefore ultimately the same thing under different names?

Hi Lou

I think in Buddhism it's not that we seek liberation from existence it's that we seek liberation from rebirth or rather liberation from dukkha.

I would say that dreams and reality are indeed the sides of one coin, however this coin can't be named. All the words and ideas revolve around "it" and try to describe that which can't be named. What do you call it when you're sitting deeply in zazen when there's nothing to name and nobody to name it? Reality or dream, both and neither?

[Rich]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

The thing is everyone wants to find a way out of sickness, old age, and death and there is no way out - you have to do it. So its a slippery slope to tell someone to study Buddhism and meditate and everything will be just fine. If asked, Maybe you could say something like 'I practice zen meditation and it helps me understand myself and deal with life' or 'Studying Buddhism and practicing sitting meditation has helped me get thru some difficult times'
but if you don't walk the walk it won't matter what you say, even a child can see right thru you.

[Porpoise]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

This question is not with regard to approval or acceptance by society or others, but more a curiosity regarding Buddhist proselytizing.

I don't see a problem with wanting to share something precious like the Dharma. Though I wouldn't sell it door to door. :wink:

[disastermouse]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

Honestly, until you become dissatisfied or unsuccessful to a certain degree with 'false' or 'impermanent' means of the attainment of happiness, or until you cannot repress the ego's horror at death, illness, and old age - Zen will have little appeal to you. I think you have to fall 'out of love' a little with pleasure and goal-striving. Otherwise Zen, even if explained passing adequate, will appear as strange.

Repeatedly people at work ask me what the purpose of meditation is. When I tell them, 'When meditating correctly, there is no purpose.' they give me a very odd look and ask why, then, I do it. I usually answer that it's the only time in life where there is absolutely no purpose. I then note that there are many positive effects of zazen, but those effects are not the purpose of zazen. Zazen is the purpose of zazen - it is a surrender of sorts - except that when done correctly, there is nothing to surrender and nothing to which to surrender.

How does one proselytize that to a consumerist population for whom the founding conceptions of spirituality lie in a 'heaven/damnation' Judeo-Christian viewpoint? It would be very difficult.

Chet

[mr.Lou]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

Repeatedly people at work ask me what the purpose of meditation is. When I tell them, 'When meditating correctly, there is no purpose.' they give me a very odd look and ask why, then, I do it. I usually answer that it's the only time in life where there is absolutely no purpose. I then note that there are many positive effects of zazen, but those effects are not the purpose of zazen. Zazen is the purpose of zazen - it is a surrender of sorts - except that when done correctly, there is nothing to surrender and nothing to which to surrender.

How does one proselytize that to a consumerist population for whom the founding conceptions of spirituality lie in a 'heaven/damnation' Judeo-Christian viewpoint? It would be very difficult.

Chet

What is the difference that you see between answering the questions of your co-workers and proselytizing? Aren't both simply the sharing of your knowledge of your religious practice with others?

[Ekai]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

Reading the comments on talking to coworkers about Buddhism reminds me of something that happened to me at work a few years ago. A previous employee, who was a devout Christian, was having a conversation with another employee about Christianity and Buddhism. Well, we have an open workspace so we hear everyone. During this discussion, my Christian friend blurts out real loud, "I don't like Buddhists because the Bible says they are atheists!" :shock: I thought this was totally funny because he had no idea I was a Buddhist and we were already friends. Over time, he learned about my Buddhist path and lightened up his views. Otherwise how could we be friends if he clung to his perceptions that Buddhists are bad?

Gassho,
Ekai

[disastermouse]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

What is the difference that you see between answering the questions of your co-workers and proselytizing? Aren't both simply the sharing of your knowledge of your religious practice with others?

The difference is that I can offer very little reason to become Buddhist to people who think there is something to achieve and someone to achieve it. Zen is inherently self-selective.

Chet

[Jundo]

Re: Do Buddhists proselytize?

What is the difference that you see between answering the questions of your co-workers and proselytizing? Aren't both simply the sharing of your knowledge of your religious practice with others?

The difference is that I can offer very little reason to become Buddhist to people who think there is something to achieve and someone to achieve it. Zen is inherently self-selective.

Chet

There is where I usually step in to remind folks that saying "there is nothing to achieve" does not mean "there is nothing to achieve."

Just because there is "not a thing about you in need of change, and anyway, no 'you' to change" does not mean that there are not many things about you you had best change.

"No purpose" is a very great purpose, and so we practice diligently.

Now, back to your discussion.

Gassho, J