[Buddha-l] yoga (TM)

[Peter D. Junger]

Stuart Ray Sarbacker writes:

: Erik,
: I would largely agree with your evaluation here, that the patenting 
: of these methods and making them "intellectual property" is in some 
: contexts antithetical to the practices themselves. I suggested IP was 
: fascinating in that it makes clear the connection to the 
: 'materialization' of culture as 'property,' a process that may well 
: be quite questionable in intent. On the other hand, my point about 
: the resonance of initiatory schema with older models is that 
: philosophical literature and ascetic/tantric techniques have often 
: been the provenance of the materially well-off in the Indo-Tibetan 
: context. With respect to yoga and tantra, I think David Gordon 
: White's works and Ronald Davidson's present rather compelling 
: arguments in this regard. I also would argue that yoga and meditation 
: have long been utilized for worldly gain (if not material, then 
: spiritual in the form of siddhis), and that some of the more 
: 'material' forms of yoga today continue to operate on that logic 
: (ascetic discipline leading to worldly power/prowess). I would agree 
: in principle with the value of 'open source'--and in fact Buddha-L 
: might be a good example of just such a thing.

As one who has taught quite a few courses involving "intellectual
property" I feel that I should add something to this thread.  But
most of what I have to say about that subject has nothing to do
with Buddhism, except perhaps for the fact that the concept or
skanda or label of "intellectual property" is the karmic consequence
of greedy efforts to cling to that which by its nature cannot be
grasped or clung to.

The term "intellectual property" is a recent invention and hardly
existed---if it did exist at all---in the mid-fifties of the last
century when I went to law school.  It is a rhetorical device to
lump together various legal tools that allow one person to control
what others may think or may do with their thoughts and then to
say that if someone avoids those controls he is a thief stealing
the "property" of the person who claims the legal right to control
the "thief's" thoughts.

The oldest and, even today, often the most effective way of protecting 
ideas from others is to keep them secret.  Now the practice of
keeping "trade secrets" secret is, so I understand, frequently
indulged in by shamans, faith healers, and other spiritual
entrepreneurs.  The most striking example in the United States
today is "Scientology" which is highly litigious and makes extensive
use of trade-secret, copyright, and patent law to keep others
from exposing how ridiculous its claims are or from allowing
the true believers from getting hold of its teachings without
paying through the nose for them.

I find the comment about "open source" especially interesting since
the "open source movement" developed among those who write computer
software and as Arthur C. Clarke stated in his Third Law:  "Any 
sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
 EMAIL: junger at samsara.law.cwru.edu    URL:  http://samsara.law.cwru.edu