[Buddha-l] Quakerly Buddhism (was: Speaking of tests...)

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 07:17 -0700, Michael Paris wrote:

> Roman Catholicism, at least the old, pre-Vatican II style (Latin Mass,
> incense, and all, in which I was raised) is a wonderful religion IF AND
> ONLY IF you take away the male-dominated hierarchy, fixations on guilt,
> and the notions of sin. 

In other words, Roman Catholicism would be just fine if it were Liberal
Protestantism or Unitarian Universalism. 

Similarly, Theravada Buddhism would be just fine if it weren't for the
exclusively male sangha, the inequality of monks and the laity, the
fixation on nirvana and the dogmas of karma and rebirth. Let's face it,
Michael. We don't belong on buddha-l. We such just pack our Buddy Holly
records up and leave these nice folks alone.

By the way, yesterday I looked through my past files to see where the
list on Quaker Buddhism was. My research showed that I was suffering
from yet another bout of false memory syndrome. (I have about five major
attacks a day.) The list I used to subscribe to was QUAKER-L. There were
a few discussions of Buddhism there once upon a time, but the list is
mostly for and about liberal Quakerism (not to be confused with the
fundamentalist type of bible-thumping Quakerism that foisted Richard M.
Nixon onto us.) It was a great list, and I may go back to it some day if
I get fed up with the fawning admiration of Unitarian Buddhists for
Thich Nhat Hanh. (I like Thich Nhat Hanh, too, but I don't have much of
a stomach for any kind of fawning.)

In my search for the mythical Buddhist Quaker list, I did turn up an
interesting essay by one Rhoda Gilman. She writes in an essay called
"Thoughts from a Quaker-Buddhist" that she has found the profound
silence and tranquility of a vipassana retreat far more satisfying than
a Quaker meeting of silent worship. (I never found Vipassana very
tranquil, but that could be because I took my mind with me. Still, I
think I know what she means.) She observes that the greatest gift that
Buddhism has to give Quakers is the deep recognition of emptiness and
impermanence, and the equanimity that results from confronting them.

What I found most interesting about Rhoda Gilman's essay was a part in
which she asks what Quakers have to offer Buddhism. Her answers
surprised me a bit, but made a lot of sense when I thought about them
for a while. The first thing she thinks Quakers have to offer Buddhism
is compassion! Buddhist compassion, she observes, is almost entirely
theoretical and mythical and too rarely boils over into the kind of
hands-on activism of Quakerism. (This reminds me of the nearly universal
criticism of traditional Buddhism in the many so-called New Religions in
Korea and Japan.)

The second thing Rhoda thinks Quakers have to offer Buddhism is the
model of a genuinely wholesome sangha. Her notion of a wholesome sangha
is one in which there is complete gender equality, equality of students
and teacher, and equality of social classes. Without this kind of
equality, she says, there can be no true community. 

Rhoda also observes that without equality there can be no true pacifism.
She observes that Sri Lankan Quakers have done a lot of work in helping
Sinhalese Buddhists arrive at more peaceful relations with both Tamil
Hindus and with Muslims.The Buddhists on their own have failed pretty
miserably in this area.

-- 
Richard Hayes