[Buddha-l] Another Unitarian perspective on Buddhism

[Richard P. Hayes]

How can I write this message without having to confess that yet again my
lovely wife and I went to the Unitarian-Universalist church? If it helps
any, we went mostly to show off our fancy new coveralls and shiny new
gum boots, not for spiritual nourishment. (I had to say that lest any
spies from the FWBO are reading this.)

The sermon yesterday was all about the obligation of the wealthy to take
care of the poor. The minister approached the topic by looking at what
several religious traditions have had to say on the topic. She read
passages from Leviticus, from various books of the New Testament and
from the Qur'an. She also elaborated on what the Jewish, Christian and
Muslim traditions have had to say about wealthy people and their
obligations to help the poor. She also had ample quotations from Hindu
and Buddhist texts. I think she may have said more about Buddhism than
the other traditions, but maybe that's only my perception, since my ears
were perked up.

The minister did not say anything about how Buddhism addresses the topic
that I did not already know. I have written about this topic several
times. But what I did find interesting was that she said things I have
never heard in any American Buddhist setting during the past thirty-five
years. And I do sort of wonder why. Why do I have to go to a Unitarian
church to hear an excellent Dharma talk about our collective social
obligations to alleviate poverty?

One claim of the Unitarian-Universalist minister was that American
Protestantism has evolved in a particularly self-centered way. Not that
it directly and openly advocates being selfish, but rather that certain
Protestant doctrines lend themselves to being interpreted as invitations
to neglect the needs of others. The Calvinist notion of election, for
example, has been seen by some something like this: No one knows for
sure whether they have been elected for salvation. One must look for
signs. One sign is that those who are elected by God for salvation will
receive favors here on earth, such as wealth. The corollary of this is
that the poor are receiving a sign that they are NOT in God's favor. If
if God doesn't think they are worth saving, then why should we? 

According to some strains of American Protestant thinking, God looks
after those who look after themselves. That's why God is in favor of
private social security accounts. That's why God occasionally pops out
from behind a Bush (alas, not a burning one) and says things like "You
worked hard for your money. It's your money not the government's. Why
should you use your hard-earned money to pay the way for people who did
not have the discipline to get rich by the sweat of their own brow?
Didn't you read the story in the Bible about the grasshopper and the
ant?"

Are American Buddhists pretty much indistinguishable from American
Protestants? In many ways, I think, it's pretty hard to tell the players
without a program. Is an attitude toward wealth and poverty one of those
ways? I don't know.

-- 
Richard Hayes
Department of Philosophy
University of New Mexico