[Buddha-l] NYTimes.com: Let Us Pray for Wealth

[SJZiobro at cs.com]

Joy,

You've been very kind in further clarifying your take on this matter.  I would agree with you that one can make any act of virtue an act of religion in the manner of which you speak here.  Where I don't agree is that, outside of the practice of the theological virtues, each virtue has its specific object, and that object is not necessarily allied with an exercise of religion. At any rate, your remarks are interesting and a help.

Regards,

Stan

"Joy Vriens"<jvriens at free.fr> wrote:

>Hi Stan,
>
>>Now that I have a few minutes more I thought to add the following. First, one can use religious principles along with a political ideology, for instance, theories of dana in conjunction with the implicit socialism of those who consider it wonderful to pay large amounts of taxes to the government so that government can make of one's society a workers paradise. Whether or not paying taxes is an act of religion is, however, more that open to question. 
>
>Not for me. Religion goes deeper for me than "paying", taxes or donations or otherwise. Religion is directly tied up with the meaning of my life and my motivations and I would like to add to that that the meaning of life is not an absolute for me. I know we used the term charity earlier, but I think more in terms of dana and in my specific (I think) interpretation of that term, which is generosity, openness. Generosity doesn't limit itself to money or gifts, it includes giving of my person, my time etc.  Religiously speaking, the act of "giving" is not so much about what I "give" or about my giving, but about my choice to "give" or to refuse to "give". My default religious setting is to "give". So when I pay taxes, it is part of my continuous act of religion, but if I refused to pay taxes it would be a decisive act of non-religion. As a member of society I could never consider my refusal to pay taxes as an act of religion. So for me it is not open to question.
>
>I see myself as living in polytheistic world like the ancient Greeks and Romans. I have to make offerings to the various gods of health, justice, wisdom, celebrity, fortune, political power etc etc. Every counselor and service provider I need to make my life work is a god to whom I need to sacrifie. Translated, this means that I am aware that I am not in control of my life, that I am dependent on others and other factors to lead it well and that I acknowledge that. If I neglect this or that "god" (e.g. I tend to neglect the god of sport and fitness, a question of time and choices), one day that god will probably make me par for my negligeance.    
>
>>At best, in my understanding, it would be an act of the virtue of justice in giving whomever their due, and this accords with all the relevant Gospel and other New Testament writings.
>
>Yes, and trying to be a good quietist, I tend to consider that if someone considers something is their due, I won't contest it. Didn't the Buddha say that anyway it isn't mine? 
>
>>Second, I think your use of Luke here misses the point of Christ's parable against religious pride, arrogance, and a lack of mercy. The real issue here is self-knowledge and knowledge of the Other.
>
>I don't know what the real issue is here, or what it is generally believed to be. I see the main issue as humility, one of the main virtues of christianism and one of its most powerful teachings. 
>
>>Third, is it the case that the Buddhist sutras and shastras supports and favors big government and the paying of taxes? 
>
>I don't know. I am not good at living by a book anyway.
>
>Joy
>_______________________________________________
>buddha-l mailing list
>buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
>http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>