Comments on: BG 180: The Invisible Forces that Shape Western Buddhism

By: galaxy

galaxy — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 12:15:03 +0000

Very good message

By: JoelG

JoelG — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:31:48 +0000

@Hokai. You're right about the third option. These kinds of discussions are precisely what is needed. They're part of the process of making all of the available options clearer to people, so that they don't mistakenly believe it's an all-or-nothing, quit-or-regress situation. Looking forward to the next one!

By: Hokai

Hokai — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:55:57 +0000

@JoelG Good points, but there must be a third option, in addition to quitting-or-regressing, and it plays out in a variety of ways, depending on many factors, as I'm sure you're aware. A) I stand my ground without falling for the attractive-repulsive magical group-think; while B) looking for teachers who are clear about the present healthy level of meaning making being at-least-rational (one would expect post-rational among contemplatives); and C) taking part in activities that don't replicate the fundamentalist impulse, but instead boldly give new expression to core dharmas, whether in view, meditation, or ritual.

@acutia I did my best to compensate as the discussion went on:)

@Alan Glad you enjoyed it, and hope you find the rest entertaining. I did use some unusual themes.

By: Alan

Alan — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:06:43 +0000

Really enjoyed this podcast and I look forward to the rest of the series too. Clarity when it comes to cultural influences is something very rarely seen (let alone discussed) in the Dharma, and Hokai is certainly the guy to help us 'stick our heads out of the box' of our unseen assumptions that we might at least be able to formulate the construction of a more appropriate box to house our practice.

By: acutia

acutia — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:05:54 +0000

This is a good start to the series, though maybe a wee bit meandering, especially as from previous pods we all know Hokai can do focussed and precise. I'm looking forward to the rest. Hopefully they'll get a little more meaty.

N.B. To BuddhistGeeks: You should have a look at the comments/trackbacks above. Other than JoelG they are spam/noise.

By: JoelG

JoelG — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:08:29 +0000

I wonder if an individual's own developmental center of gravity would count as one of these invisible forces. Let's say a college-educated practitioner–a big Joseph Campbell fan with a strongly rationalist, materialist bent–joins a Tibetan sangha, under the assumption that all of the deities are purely metaphorical representations of impersonal energies at play in the universe, and that they are understood as such by both the Tibetan teachers and the Western students involved in the sangha. Over time, however, he or she starts to see that practitioners/teachers in the sangha seem to actually believe in discarnate dakinis, protector deities and so forth. They don't regard these beings as metaphors at all, and seem to have an unquestioning belief in rebirth, the supernatural abilities of various gurus and other stuff that conflicts with a materialist worldview.
As the rationalist gets more and more involved in the sangha, he or she starts to feel as though a big bait-and-switch has occurred. In fact, what you have is an invisible culture clash. If the rationalist fails to see that the sangha inevitably will have a mix of developmental levels, with some people at the rationalist level and others oriented toward the magic/mythic, he or she might just quit altogether.
But another option would be to abandon the rationalist approach and slowly start to internalize these beliefs that had once seemed so strange. This might happen if other rationalists in the sangha are mum about their take on what's going on, and the sangha itself thereby has taken on an apparent center of gravity that might be described as magic/mythic. So an invisible force, kind of by default, ends up exerting a lot of influence on the hypothetical practitioner. Being aware of these forces, though, creates options for that person, as Hokai pointed out.
Anyway, thanks for the great discussion. I'm looking forward to the rest of the talks.