[Buddha-l] Buddhism and Politics

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 15:17 +1200, Sally McAra wrote:

> I think you will agree that this thread says more about the processes of 
> routinisation and institutionalisation of religion than it does about 
> Buddhism in "Asia vs the west".

Exactly. My original point was that Buddhism is not routinized in the
West and therefore is not as reprehensible as Buddhism in Asia. But give
it time. The Western Buddhists will undermine Buddhism every bit as much
as the Asians have done.

> I tend to look out for particularities and exceptions in this sort of
> situation, probably out of a misguided desire to see the positive
> things about humanity, since so much I hear every day on the news etc
> is so distressing.

I have come to think that God's greatest gift to humanity is the ability
to deny reality and remain positive enough to face another day. (I am
speaking poetically, of course.)

> I wonder where the TBMSG fits into this picture? Do their members think 
> like liberal westerners on such matters as sexual orientation?

Ambedkar's book The Buddha and His Dhamma is European to the core. It is
a masterful translation of Buddhist canonical texts into European
enlightenment rhetoric. So in some ways it is quite a revolutionary
work. But my impression is that most members of TBMSG are deeply
conservative in contrast to their Western brethren and sistren.

> My Asian friends who are Christian seem to regard Buddhism as an
> outdated & irrelevant tradition.

They are right. Asian Buddhism IS outdated and irrelevant. I think they
would be much better off becoming Christians, while Western Christians
and Jews would be much better off discarding their outdated and
irrelevant religions in favour of Buddhism or Vedanta. I think the
future of the human race may depend on everyone in the world changing
religion by next Monday at the latest. 

> Fair enough - so long as you are aware it is a culturally-constituted 
> view... (do you hate statements like that?)

Not at all. 

> But if a Buddhist is against certian particulars like abortion or 
> homosexuality (for example) but supports a progressive political party 
> concerned with say, environmental protection, social welfare and 
> eradication of poverty, is he or she "conservative" or not?

No one on earth is uniformly conservative or progressive. I should hope
almost everyone tries to find a good balance between conserving useful
traditions and progressing to better ways of doing things than our
ancestors dreamed possible. And I quite accept that this means no two
people will quite agree on what is worth conserving and what needs to be
thrown out. That's why we all have no honest alternative to being
liberal.

> (i would put one of those irritating smile emoticons in here but i
> gather you forbid them)

Yes, using emoticons is the only way to be banished from buddha-l for
the next seven lifetimes. ;-)

-- 
Richard Hayes