|
Buddhism as a Bridge
Sermon by Jonathan Harvey
September 1, 2002
Unitarianism is a faith often described as a religion with a common ethical code but no common creed. In the USA if not Asia, Buddhism often functions as a religious setting with a common meditation practice and spirituality but no common creed. And both attract many people also attached to other faith traditions.
Although most UUs are generic agnostics, there is nonetheless a national UU Christian fellowship, a UU Buddhist Fellowship, a national group called UUs for Jewish Awareness, a Covenant of UU Pagans, and the Friends of Religious Humanism, an organization devoted specifically to promoting humanism in the UUA. All of these groups have chapters that meet monthly at the San Francisco Unitarian church on non-competing Saturdays. Wandering in your UU bookstore if you are a UU Christian you might pick up some book by James Luther Adams or be subscribing to the bimonthly "Good News" which true to our Universalist roots proclaims no one is in hell. If you are a UU Buddhist, you probably subscribe to "UU Sangha". UU Humanists probably subscribe to "The Humanist" and read books by Corliss Lamont. If you are a UU pagan, you may have a subscription to "Sacred Cosmos".
Suppose you are attracted to Buddhism, and wander through a Buddhist bookstore. Buddhist meditation has really taken off in the Jewish community as a tool of spiritual renewal. If your background is Jewish you may wish to read "Funny you Don't Look Buddhist" by Sylvia Boorstein or "The Jew in the Lotus" by Roger Kamenetz. If you also live in Denver, Colorado you may want to worship with a group of Jewish Buddhists led by Mordecai Twerski, a rabbi devoted to integrating Buddhist meditation and Jewish ritual. This has become so prevalent in America that the book "Judaism for Dummies" has an entire chapter on Jewish Buddhists.
I recently attended a panel discussion on emerging American Buddhism lead by 3 speakers named Salzberg, Goldstein, and Kornfeld. The moderator introducing them assured us they were not a law firm.
Christians fascinated by their own monastic and mystical traditions have aften been drawn to Buddhism. If your background is Christian, you might want to read Thich Nhat Hanh's "Living Buddha, Living Christ" or look at "The Still Point" by Japan-based Jesuit William Johnston. You might want to join the on-line Yahoo group of Christian Buddhists or the geocities list-server of Christian Buddhists. For native Buddhists, the Christian-Buddhist encounter is of special interest since on the one hand Buddhism clearly influenced some early Christian mystics like St. Benedict and the Desert Fathers, while on the other hand Catholic missionaries in Asian countries did much to erode Buddhist culture there. The journal of Buddhist Christian studies has been published semi-annually for several years now, and it contains both Christian-friendly articles and other pieces severely critical of Christianity.
An agnostic or humanist might be motivated to explore Buddhism after reading the high praise of Buddha's thought in fiercely anti-Christian writers like Bertrand Russell or Friedrich Nietzche. Or perhaps after encountering the high praise of Buddha is such champions of science like Albert Einstein or Arthur C. Clarke.Such an explorer might wish to read Stephen Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs" or join another e-mail list called "Sasana-the Sangha for Skeptical Buddhists" centered in Salt Lake City.
So far there is no widespread literature or organizations promoting pagan Buddhism. However, Alice Walker, esteemed author of "The Color Purple" has in fact identified herself as a 'pagan Buddhist' although I know of no institution or journal promoting such a thing.
Finally, although being gay isn't really a religious orientation, Buddhism tends to attract many gays and lesbians since classical Buddhism is devoid of any strong anti-gay sanctions, even though Buddhism has generally not been aggressively pro-gay either.
What unites all these groups is a common commitment to Buddhist meditation practice and Buddhist ethics, the cultivation of mindfulness, compassion, and non-attachment.
How is it then that Buddhist practice has been receptive to folks of so many different religious backgrounds??
Buddhism is classically a non-theistic religion. Note I said "non-theistic" not "atheistic". That is because Buddhism traditionally maintains an attitude of non-hostility to believers in a Deity if they derive real comfort and inspiration from such a practice. Buddhism holds that it is ethically wrong to sew seeds of skepticism if a faith-practice is genuinely edifying & inspiring. There is a choice to remain at ease with other people's God-language even when the practitioner has no belief in a Creator deity. Walpola Rahula has written,
"According to Buddhism, our ideas of God are false and empty. Though highly developed as theories, they are all the same extremely subtle mental projections, garbed in an intricate metaphysical and philosophical phraseology. These ideas are so deep-rooted in man, and so dear to him, that he does not wish to hear, nor want to understand any teaching against them"
So Buddhism walks a line between respecting people's beliefs and encouraging questioning. Buddhists would like people of any belief to feel free to practice meditation, but remains inwardly free of any defined notion of God.
10 years ago Dalai Lama presided over a 10-day gathering of rabbis in Northern India exploring how Buddhist practice can deepen one's appreciation of Judaism and a year or so later he presided over a 8-day conference of Catholic monks and nuns with similar goals for Christianity. The Dalai Llama also promotes the searching and critical aspect of Buddhism. In addressing the British Parliament, the Dalai Lama used these words "Don't believe easily. Deeper awareness, genuine awareness demands questioning"
Buddhism also encourages freedom of thought. Again, professor Rahula has written
Buddha taught, encouraged and stimulated each person to develop himself and to work out his won emancipation, for man has the power to liberate himself from all bondage through his personal effort....It is on this principle of individual responsibility that Buddha allows freedom to his disciples....The freedom of thought allowed by the Buddha is unheard of elsewhere in the history of religion. This freedom is necessary because according to the Buddha, man's emancipation depends on his own realization of Truth, and not on the benevolent grace of a god or any external power as a reward for obedient good behavior.
Here is a quote from one of Buddha's own sermons
It is proper that you have doubt that you have perplexity for a doubt has arisen in a matter which is doubtful. Be not lead by reports or tradition or hearsay. Be not lead by the authority of religious texts, nor mere logic, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea this is our teacher. But when you know for yourself that certain things are wholesome and good, then accept them and follow them.
This may be summed up in the Zen saying "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him".
This tradition of free thought while seeking enlightenment, and tolerance for multiple traditions is what has allowed people from multiple faith-backgrounds to find meaning in Buddhist meditation practice.
When I became a UU in Ohio, I was told that many members of UU churches had another faith-tradition. There was even a little jingle that circulated "UUism is the church to have if you are having more than one". And indeed at the first UU church I attended, the chief treasurer was also involved in a Quaker church a mile away. At the Akron UU church, I became friendly with a Hare Krishna. A large pagan group was active at a UU church in downtown Cleveland. And as I mentioned the San Francisco UU church has active chapters of UU Christians, UU Buddhists, and UU pagans and UU humanists.
Nonetheless, in 21st century America one sometimes gets the impression that another religion to have if your having more than one may be Buddhism. The Wednesday morning meditation class at Spirit Rock that I attend about once a month is taught by a Jewish woman. Up in Burlingame there is the Catholic retreat house called Mercy Center which regularly has sessions in Buddhist meditation led by Father Thomas Hand who describes himself as a Zen Christian. Several Protestant churches sponsor Buddhist meditation sessions. And last May I myself regretted trying to register too late for Spirit Rock's daylong retreat on Buddhism for agnostics.
What are some differences, similairities, strengths and weaknesses of UUism and Buddhism, and how can they learn from each other?
One obvious difference is that Buddhists seem to get a lot out of spending hours at a time in silence saying absolutely nothing.
What Unitarianism offers to seekers is a forum for discussion, a promise to respect your views, and a community of moral support. Buddhism offers a training of the heart and mind to deeper self-awareness and awareness of one's environment.
A weakness of classical Buddhism is a lack of tradition for concern for social justice, and a lack of interest in the social structures of the larger community. Indeed, some observers are suspicious that Buddhism offers solace more than challenge, and may appeal to some Americans by simply being too easy. Buddhism's lack of prophetic voice is evidenced by that fact that Buddhist monasteries in Asia, like many Christian monasteries in the West have become too rich and powerful to the point of abuse. It's a weakness that American Buddhists are painfully aware of, and it's an ongoing matter of discussion in Buddhist periodicals. It is why when Thich Nhat Hanh appears in Berkeley he is protested by the Communist party. After all in America Buddhism tends to attract people from the more liberal end of the political spectrum. But a corresponding strength of Buddhism is an ethic of patience and attempt to get people to examine the personal roots of their opinions and prejudices. An interesting example of this is the way that Thich Nhat Hanh contributed in the 60s and 70s to trying to end the Vietnam war. Hanh's writings on Vietnam are remarkably non-confrontational, matter-of-fact statements of why America's motives for entering Vietnam were based on a delusional understanding of the situation in that country. His whole approach is marked throughout by a Buddhist patience and goodwill to all listeners. He was never in your face, though he got into your heart. When I was a freshman at University of Pennsylvania, I loaned a copy of Hanh's short book "The Lotus in the Sea of Fire" to a friend of mine who was a very earnest friendly well-meaning reactionary hawk. Hanh's book opened his eyes to the fact that there really was a strong case against the Vietnam war. I believe that this book was able to touch the heart of my reactionary friend in a way that would have been impossible for any American anti-war activist. So while I think Buddhists can learn much from UUs and also Jews & Christians about concern for justice in the larger body politic, I think UUs can learn something from Buddhists about how to conduct a dialogue in depth that touches the heart as well as the mind. Professor Jan Willis is a black woman who grew up in the Jim Crow south, now actively promoting Buddhist meditation. The heart of her talk a few weeks ago at the San Francisco UU church was how sometimes you need to have work hard on your own bad stuff before you can tackle that of other people. In thoroughly Buddhist language, she reiterated the saying of Jesus "Take the log out of your own eye, before you take the speck out of your brother's eye", a good prerequisite for all social justice work.
This ties in with a precept of Buddhism from which I think UUs could learn much. One must respect for one's native religious tradition even if one wishes to depart from it. If one from a Jewish background unhappy with a narrow and restrictive upbringing comes to a Buddhist teacher, it is considered important that the new aspirant learn to treasure what is best in the Jewish tradition before becoming a devotee of Buddhism. The Buddhist teacher will direct him to study the great Jewish teachers. The nursing of grudges against a previous faith-tradition is deeply discouraged in Buddhism, and Buddhist teachers try to nip it in the bud early, in spite of Buddhism's non-theism. If Karen Armstrong is right in her claim that Western religious fundamentalists often discard the best of the very traditions they claim to be defending, then it is all the more important that religious liberals treasure the best of those traditions. Obviously, I feel a weakness of UUism is its willingness to allow members to nurse grudges against old churches in which they had negative experiences. Many people are UUs for years remaining hostile and prickly to all God-language, or mention of traditions in which they had bad experiences. Our own irritation at traditional religion is surely justified when traditional churches engage in political oppression of gays, censorship of good literature and attempts to suppress sound science from high school curriculum. This is demanded by our sense of social justice. Still, a cultivation on the part of religious liberals of treasuring the best elements of traditional faiths, is important, both because often fundamentalists discard them, and it can help us to make sure we are acting on knowledge not prejudice.
From a agnostic/humanist point of view, Buddhism is to be commended for avoiding metaphysical speculation, and dogmatic supernaturalism. This is potentially complimentary to the humanist endorsement of scientific skepticism, which as our 5th source of wisdom states teaches us to "guard against idolatries of mind and spirit". Unfortunately, Asian Buddhism can get very rigid over claims that our meditation practice is better than yours which is surely idolatry of Spirit. Also, while Buddhism is fairly free from supernatural *dogma*, it is very socially tolerant of folk myths & of what some might call superstition. Buddhist philosophy holds that we cannot really have certain ironclad knowledge of a higher transcendental world, but there is no tradition of skeptical investigation in Buddhism in the sense of controlled experiments or attempts to debunk local folk myths. The best Buddhist teachers tell you that obsession with the miraculous is unhealthy and narcissistic and they say that anyone who tells you meditation can help you levitate is a charlatan, but there is little incentive or sense of method for exposing such a fraud, and not a lot of cultivation of critical thinking in the Western sense.
Since I am a card-carrying member of the Sangha for Skeptical Buddhists, as well as a member of a couple of Western Skeptic societies, I obviously have mixed feelings about this. Classical Buddhism, for better or for worse, is very patient with simple devotees whose entire piety is to light candles in front of statues of Boddhisattvas, and pray to departed ancestors. Buddhist philosophers hold this may not amount to very much, but if it works for you, go ahead. This can become whole focus of ones spiritual life, as is often the case with Catholics in rural parts of Europe or America. I fear that such Buddhists are not empowered if their leaders become abusive of their wealth and power. Given the rise of destructive religious cults in America such as the suicidal "Heaven's Gate" cult with its focus on UFOs, I am not sure how far to extend such tolerance. I have read a very good essay by a Buddhist on why we should not pay attention to the UFO craze, explaining that this obsession had narcissistic roots.
But Buddhism does not excel at nor is it interested in empirically exposing false miraculous claims. Actual sceptical investigation of UFOs is what Western scientists excel at. On the other hand, Western science isn't necessarily good at rooting out human narcissism. Perhaps when it comes to UFO silliness & other weird beliefs, Western science can educate the head, and meditation can educate the heart. Sadly, an obvious polarization of opinion among Western Buddhists is their level of respect for Western science. I am keenly aware of being a great champion of Western science in a way that some American Buddhists are not. I recently read a story that was sad instance of a Buddhist with a good heart but not trained in skeptical thinking. He was actually an ex-Buddhist, a young Korean who gave an deeply insightful and penetrating account of how the monasteries in his country had betrayed their mission when they got too rich and politically powerful. He goes on to describe his conversion to Christian fundamentalism after hooking up with Campus Crusade for Christ and reading Josh MacDowell's "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" which if you're not familiar with it is one of the shallowest and most disingenuous defenses of Christianity ever written. I liked the values of this young man- his heart was in the right place, but he had no ability to see thru the paper-thin argumentation of McDowell. I think its cool that the Dalai Llama is spending a lot of time with rabbis and Catholic monks, but I wish this good young man had been more wary of fundamentalists.
On an encouraging note, there is already evidence that the Western and Buddhist Spirit are cross-pollenating each other is positive and fruitful ways. I mentioned that in Asia, different schools of Buddhism are rivals , each often claiming to be the 'true' path to Enlightenment and disparaging of other schools. Surely this is an "idolatry of mind and spirit" that our humanist principles warn against. The great thing is that here in America is there real dialogue for the first time between practitioners of diverse Buddhist meditation traditions [Tibetan, Vietnamese] in a way that rarely occurs in Asia. Here Buddhism may have already learned something from the same American democratic spirit that so deeply informs Unitarianism as well. Meanwhile, UUs are learning that spirituality really can be cultivated without dogma and superstition, and here UUs may have already learned something indirectly from Buddhism.
|