"Just Sitting" and the Buddhism of privilege

[tedmac]

Breaking radio silence with a thought, or a question, for discussion.

I think sometimes that most Western Buddhism (I would argue Buddhism in general) is a religion of privilege. When we use the computer for these discussions, how often do we remember the mountains stripped of coal, the heavy metals leaching from used computers in dumps in Africa, the workers who don't have the luxury of a sangha, electronic or otherwise? Our practice--simple as it is--is fueled by the suffering of millions. I think it is important to abide in this awareness.

Just as all the previous Sugatas, the Buddhas
Generated the mind of enlightenment
And accomplished all the stages
Of the Bodhisattva training,
So will I too, for the sake of all beings,
Generate the mind of enlightenment
And accomplish all the stages
Of the Bodhisattva training.

[Kokuu]

Hello Ted

I agree. Not just our computer discussions but our food, clothes and everything around us. Our lives, not just our spiritual practice, are live of privilege. For me, dharma practice puts me more in touch with this than I would be otherwise. Can I help? Little by little, making choices that include rather than exclude and remaining aware of my privilege. Is that enough? I don't know.

As Thich Nhat Hanh says in his meal verses at Plum Village:

In this food,
I see clearly the presence
of the entire universe
supporting my existence.

This plate of food,
so fragrant and appetizing,
also contains much suffering.


Gassho
Andy

[TimF]

I agree. However, I feel it is also important to remember that in order to practice Zen, one does not need any of these "things". There is no need of a temple, sangha, figure of Buddha, incense, zafu, or a book on how to practice. There is only the dharma. This is - in my humble opinion - what also makes it a practice that does not involve the "suffering of millions".

"If you find no one to support you on the spiritual path, walk alone."
~ Buddha

Fortunately, we have this sangha and our teachers to share the journey with us.

Gassho,
Tim

[Dosho]

Yes, I do believe we should "abide in this awareness", but we shouldn't drown in it either. We do what we can when we can; the rest will only serve to torture us and allow us to wallow in our own moral high ground. We must be a part of that world, getting dirty like everyone else. To live is to invite suffering. Such cannot be completely avoided. To practice is to attempt to alleviate it. But we will not solve the world's problems today, tomorrow, or perhaps even in our lifetime. But we try nonetheless, thinking of others but not neglecting ourselves.

And yes Kokuu, in my limited experience as a priest in training who knows no more than anyone else, that is enough.

Gassho,
Dosho

[Kokuu]

Thank you, Dosho.

[Ryumon]

I think sometimes that most Western Buddhism (I would argue Buddhism in general) is a religion of privilege. When we use the computer for these discussions, how often do we remember the mountains stripped of coal, the heavy metals leaching from used computers in dumps in Africa, the workers who don't have the luxury of a sangha, electronic or otherwise? Our practice--simple as it is--is fueled by the suffering of millions. I think it is important to abide in this awareness.

I wonder why you suggest this has something specific to do with Buddhism. If you were to say "our Western lifestyle," then I would agree with most of what you say. But there's nothing specific to Buddhism that engenders suffering in others, which is what you seem to be suggesting.

Gassho,

Kirk

[tedmac]

I don't mean to imply that Buddhism in particular engenders suffering; rather, that as Buddhists I think we sometimes forget that we are involved, even if we sit alone with no bells, whistles, or sangha. It is tempting to think that the simplicity of 'just sitting' relieves us of our complicity.

When I refer to Buddhism as a "religion of privilege" I may be speaking mostly of Western Buddhism; I know very few Buddhists who live in extreme poverty compared to other members of American society. If Buddhism were more mainstream in the US, that might not be true. And, as much as I may romanticise the idea, I'm not standing in line to be the next Hotai.

At any rate, I throw it out as a point of reflection and discussion.

Back to the cushion.
-Untei

[Dosho]

When I refer to Buddhism as a "religion of privilege" I may be speaking mostly of Western Buddhism; I know very few Buddhists who live in extreme poverty compared to other members of American society. If Buddhism were more mainstream in the US, that might not be true.

So, if you believe Buddhism is a religion of privilege, why would there be less poverty if there were more Buddhists?

Is it because more people would be then be privileged? Or because those who would be privileged would do more to alleviate poverty?

What you posted sounds nice, but I'm not very clear on what you are trying to express.

Gassho,
Dosho

[Entai]

"To save all sentient beings... " is a challenge to us all.

Gassho,
Entai

[tedmac]

So, if you believe Buddhism is a religion of privilege, why would there be less poverty if there were more Buddhists? Is it because more people would be then be privileged? Or because those who would be privileged would do more to alleviate poverty? What you posted sounds nice, but I'm not very clear on what you are trying to express.

Gassho,
Dosho

Apologies for my less than skillful communication. I'm not saying there would be more or less poverty if there were more Buddhism, and I am not suggesting that we need to do more to alleviate poverty. What I was trying to express is that, in my opinion, the simplicity of Buddhist practice hides the suffering that we cause, even through the seemingly harmless act of participating in an online sangha. I'm also not attempting to develop a calculus of suffering where sitting differently, or longer, or more, or less somehow "cancels out" the karma we generate just through existing and being-in-the-world.

I am suggesting that everything we do, even simply sitting alone in the dark, is supported by the suffering of the world--and that we must continue to sit while staring that suffering straight in the eye, something that I do not do as often as I could.

Peace,
Untei

[Jundo]

Hi,

I just recommended two books by so-called "Engaged" Zen Buddhists ... David Loy and Daiho Hilbert ... that are on point. Together with many other engaged figures, such as Thich Nhat Hanh, Bernie Glassman and Robert Aitken, they teach that Buddhism and social action can go hand in hand. Furthermore, technology and modern economic wealth can be used for many purposes ... often for waste or harm, yet often for good.

http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?12106-TWO-BOOK-RECOMMENDATIONS-from-JUNDO-Money-Sex-War-Karma-Living-Zen

It is true that Zen Buddhism ... not just now, but in the past ... was always something of an "elite" practice. Throughout its history, Zen practice has been rather limited even in the Buddhist world ... a small, minority, economically "elitist" practice ... limited to those folks who had the time, energy, basic literacy and access to doctrine and teachings and teachers (this is "A Way Beyond Words and Letters" ... but even the legendary 'illiterate' 6th Ancestor had folks read to him and mastered the basic doctrines and teachings of Buddhism and Zen), who possessed a personal calling to pursue the way, philosophical bent, dedication to practice, simple financial and social freedom and such ... time to "sit on their ass" literally! ... to undertake Zen practice. In the old days, all this was pretty much limited to monastics (and not even to all or perhaps most of those!) ... and the peasants and general population were much more concerned with immediately pressing things like working in the fields, keeping fed and staying alive! The vast vast majority of the Buddhist world in Asia ... in the past and even today ... is most focused on ordinary people worshiping and praying to the Buddhas & Bodhisattvas as godlike beings who can help keep the worshiper and those they love and pray for healthy, happy and free of harm (the same as most -any- religion in the world, any church or temple from Boston to Bangalor).

What does this mean?

The Buddha taught laypeople that having a bit of wealth and opportunity is not a problem. HOW YOU USE THE WEALTH, RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITY IS WHAT IS KEY. This came up on another thread recently too ...

These questions of balancing wealth, personal security and Buddhist Practice are nothing new.

These questions of how to balance wealth and Buddhist Practice and Renunciation are not just something faced now for the first time. Nonetheless, the temptations we all face these days are particularly great. We must be very careful to find a good way in this modern world of sometime excess.

This may be a good time to repost some of the Buddha's advice to householders on wealth. The Buddha did teach one path for homeleavers ... having nothing much besides a robe on their back and a begging bowl. But he also taught another path for lay folks on whom Buddha & the Band depended to supply the robes, offer land for the monasteries, put food in those bowls.

Buddha's basic point comes down to ... if one has wealth, use it for good purposes ... don't live to excess ... and don't be attached. Zen traditionally values also the simple, intangible treasures of life ... the things which money cannot buy.

http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?11853-Treating-the-practical-as-the-absolute-ethical-concerns&p=119606&viewfull=1#post119606

Gassho, Jundo

[Tiwala]

Apologies for my less than skillful communication. I'm not saying there would be more or less poverty if there were more Buddhism, and I am not suggesting that we need to do more to alleviate poverty. What I was trying to express is that, in my opinion, the simplicity of Buddhist practice hides the suffering that we cause, even through the seemingly harmless act of participating in an online sangha. I'm also not attempting to develop a calculus of suffering where sitting differently, or longer, or more, or less somehow "cancels out" the karma we generate just through existing and being-in-the-world.

I am suggesting that everything we do, even simply sitting alone in the dark, is supported by the suffering of the world--and that we must continue to sit while staring that suffering straight in the eye, something that I do not do as often as I could.

Peace,
Untei

Thank you for this post. "Sitting alone in the dark, is supported by the suffering of the world". Forgive me for my Christian bent, but to me, Zazen is being crucified on the cross, in the posture of embrace for all that is dirty, gritty, and bloody in the world. One of the greatest things I got from this practice is less shying away from suffering. Who cares if you reach ultimate understanding if you can't even share in the suffering of others? It's a very serious business.

Thank you, again.

Gassho, Ben

[Ryumon]

What I was trying to express is that, in my opinion, the simplicity of Buddhist practice hides the suffering that we cause, even through the seemingly harmless act of participating in an online sangha. I'm also not attempting to develop a calculus of suffering where sitting differently, or longer, or more, or less somehow "cancels out" the karma we generate just through existing and being-in-the-world.

I am suggesting that everything we do, even simply sitting alone in the dark, is supported by the suffering of the world--and that we must continue to sit while staring that suffering straight in the eye, something that I do not do as often as I could.

Hmm, I don't want to get into an argument, but I'm trying to wrap my head around what you're saying. You suggest that Buddhist practice somehow causes suffering; but you don't say why this is the case. You started by a suggestion that online practice is what causes suffering (since you mentioned coal and used computers), but now it's "the simplicity of Buddhist practice" that somehow causes suffering.

I'm struggling to figure out what it is about this simplicity that causes suffering.

But then you do make sense, saying that everything we do "is supported by the suffering of the world." Okay, I doubt anyone here would disagree with that.

As Jundo points out, Zen Buddhism was long an elite practice; but I would argue that any "advanced" religious practice is and has been either for elites, or renunciants.

Again, I just don't get what you're trying to say. If it's simply that we Western dharma practitioners somehow cause more suffering than those who don't practice the dharma, I'd strongly disagree.

Gassho,

Kirk

[tedmac]

Again, I just don't get what you're trying to say. If it's simply that we Western dharma practitioners somehow cause more suffering than those who don't practice the dharma, I'd strongly disagree.

Thank you all for your comments. Kirk: I'm not trying to say that our dharma practice causes more suffering than any other practice--just that it is tempting to think that "just sitting" is a harmless activity. I *do* think that neglecting the harm we cause merely by the fact of our existence and participation in the world is potentially harmful in its own right.

As Jundo pointed out:

"The Buddha taught laypeople that having a bit of wealth and opportunity is not a problem. HOW YOU USE THE WEALTH, RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITY IS WHAT IS KEY. "

I would argue that in today's world anyone who possesses "a bit of wealth" relative to the global median is actually contributing significantly to social and environmental problems that are destructive on a massive scale. I include myself in this, and I'm not standing in line to give things away. I guess part of the issue I'm grappling with is that the "middle path" of Buddhism, when applied to wealth and privilege, takes us to a place globally that appears both unsustainable and painful.

Again, I appreciate all your thoughtful comments. Back to the cushion... er... desk!
-Untei

[alan.r]

Slavoj Zizek has written about his dislike for Western Buddhists sort of for this reason. His claim is that Western Buddhism is a fetishization rather than the real thing; that Westerners just want to be all calm and peaceful and therefore don't have to feel complicit in the dirtiness (or what he thinks of as the dirtiness) and ugliness of Capitalism. He basically says it's a way for people to hide from reality rather than actually see/realize it, etc.

At the same time, while I admire some of the other things I've heard Zizek argue, much of the stuff he's written about Buddhism (there are some talks too) belie a basic ignorance about the subject.

Gassho