[Buddha-l] Protestant Buddhisms

[Franz Metcalf]

Gang,

Richard Hayes and I just had this exchange:

>> The study of classic Buddhist texts has always reminded me of the joke
>> about looking for the lost car keys under the streetlight simply
>> because that's where you *could* see them, though they don't happen to
>> be there.
>
> If the purpose is to find car keys, then of course only looking under
> street lamps is quite risible. But if one is interested in street 
> lamps,
> then spending time around them is not a bad idea. Similarly, if one is
> interested in what Buddhists do and did, then reading texts about what
> they ought to do is quite silly. But if one is interested in reflecting
> on what one ought to do, then studying what the best minds have said
> about that is not a bad idea.

Of course I agree that studying ises and oughts is worth the time and 
trouble. I would just be more careful than some to resist calling the 
study of street lamps the search for car keys. Similarly, I'm not sure 
I'd call the study of Buddhist texts on what one ought to do the study 
of Buddhism. Still, like all study of philosophy it requires the 
scholar with a real vocation to engage the material as fully as 
possible (certainly not merely intellectually). In the end, one becomes 
an odd form of a practicing Buddhist, willy-nilly, and thus perhaps one 
*is* studying Buddhism, all along. So, perhaps never mind 
distinguishing these studies, after all.

As for studying living and lived religion, Richard divvied up the field 
and commented that

> Being a good scholar in any one of these
> fields requires only being open-minded to evidence that is relevant to
> that field. Trying to be open-minded to absolutely everything is
> probably a pretty good way to become a rather mediocre scholar. But it
> could make one an entertaining guest on the Larry King show.

I might rephrase this good point to suggest that being a good scholar 
requires being open-minded to a very great deal of evidence, and 
narrowing one's attention merely in one's particular scholarly works. 
For instance, I actually feel (though one might also argue the 
contrary) that being open-minded to buddha-l enriches my scholarship, 
somehow, when I write a paper on, say, the relationship of the 
developmental psychological ideas of D. W. Winnicott to Zen meditative 
practice and work with a teacher. I could explain why, but it would be 
too technical. The point is that a larger open-mindedness enables more 
openness and lucidity, even in intentionally narrow scholarly work. On 
the other hand, please recall this is coming from a guy who'd be very 
happy to be an entertaining guest on the Larry King Show.

In response to my intended ironic use of the adjective "real" (in scare 
quotes) to dignify only far future scholarship on American Buddhism, 
Richard gave a list of current--and genuinely real--scholarship on 
exactly that subject. Let me say amen, brother! This led to Richard's 
vision of wild mustard growing over the ruins of our cities, and to 
that I show an affirming flame:

     Once there were parking lots
     Now it's a peaceful oasis
     you got it, you got it

     This was a Pizza Hut
     Now it's all covered with daisies
     you got it, you got it

     I miss the honky tonks,
     Dairy Queens, and 7-Elevens
     you got it, you got it

     And as things fell apart
     Nobody paid much attention
     you got it, you got it

     from "(Nothing But) Flowers," by David Byrne

Franz Metcalf