Good Morning Everyone,
As is sometimes the case, especially on a certain “Buddhist” website, my words create a bit of a irksome response. I posted my note on “Self” sometime ago. It and the follow-up note, “Blog” created a small stir. Some of us coming to Buddhism seem to think that this way will result in a state of peacefulness and serenity undisturbed by discord, words, or thoughts. Not so.
Some Masters have taught that silence is the way, that when we speak we make a big mistake. This is so in some ways, but not in others. The Buddha taught that we are not only wasting our time discussing ideas about something, but that such discussions themselves are an actual hindrance. This is so, but again, I think in a rather narrow context. When Masters say such things I think they are more often than not referring to achieving an aim of realization. When we are in a sociologically homogeneous group this is so. To get to homogeneity, however, we must discuss terms, compare and contrast practices, and work toward coming to an agreement on the foundations of our effort.
When put into structures, our beliefs become a serious challenge for "like-mindedness" to occur. Belief systems and the structures within them are very important to some religions. The Buddha Way, on the other hand, is just that, a way. Ideas about it are often, as we pointed out, a hindrance. Yet, as we can all plainly see, we like to talk about what we know or think we know. To do this, it seems to me, we must hold lots of discussions regarding our definitions of terms. Such discussions can be difficult, but I think necessary for the sake of insuring we are talking about either the same idea or similar experience.
So many ideas branded as "religious" are actually Christian specific, for example, with very specific understanding not shared by other religions which may use the same word. This is my argument with the current batch of atheistic writers who attempt to debunk "religion" but are in fact debunking a rather parochial view of religion instead. If I may be so challenging, I do not think there is a single "religious" word, concept, or idea that is or can be commonly understood amongst those considering themselves to be "religious." Therefore, a dialogue addressing such foundational terms like "self," "heaven," "nirvana," "sin," "salvation" is absolutely essential.
I will begin such a dialogue over the next few weeks as we approach a season considered by many to be “religious” and by some, a pain in the ass.
Be well.
As is sometimes the case, especially on a certain “Buddhist” website, my words create a bit of a irksome response. I posted my note on “Self” sometime ago. It and the follow-up note, “Blog” created a small stir. Some of us coming to Buddhism seem to think that this way will result in a state of peacefulness and serenity undisturbed by discord, words, or thoughts. Not so.
Some Masters have taught that silence is the way, that when we speak we make a big mistake. This is so in some ways, but not in others. The Buddha taught that we are not only wasting our time discussing ideas about something, but that such discussions themselves are an actual hindrance. This is so, but again, I think in a rather narrow context. When Masters say such things I think they are more often than not referring to achieving an aim of realization. When we are in a sociologically homogeneous group this is so. To get to homogeneity, however, we must discuss terms, compare and contrast practices, and work toward coming to an agreement on the foundations of our effort.
When put into structures, our beliefs become a serious challenge for "like-mindedness" to occur. Belief systems and the structures within them are very important to some religions. The Buddha Way, on the other hand, is just that, a way. Ideas about it are often, as we pointed out, a hindrance. Yet, as we can all plainly see, we like to talk about what we know or think we know. To do this, it seems to me, we must hold lots of discussions regarding our definitions of terms. Such discussions can be difficult, but I think necessary for the sake of insuring we are talking about either the same idea or similar experience.
So many ideas branded as "religious" are actually Christian specific, for example, with very specific understanding not shared by other religions which may use the same word. This is my argument with the current batch of atheistic writers who attempt to debunk "religion" but are in fact debunking a rather parochial view of religion instead. If I may be so challenging, I do not think there is a single "religious" word, concept, or idea that is or can be commonly understood amongst those considering themselves to be "religious." Therefore, a dialogue addressing such foundational terms like "self," "heaven," "nirvana," "sin," "salvation" is absolutely essential.
I will begin such a dialogue over the next few weeks as we approach a season considered by many to be “religious” and by some, a pain in the ass.
Be well.
No comments:
Post a Comment