Buddhism in America
In a different forum, there was a discussion about the difficulty of finding a Buddhist teacher in the US, and why it might be that Buddhism has spread so slowly in the West, as opposed to the almost exponential growth during the Dharma expansion in Asia between 500 BCE and 1000 CE.
It is not surprising to me that Buddhism has experienced slower growth in 20th and 21st Century America than in other places and other times. Western European civilization in general has evolved into the ultimate consumerist society, while Buddhism, at its core, is the ultimate non-consumerist philosophy.
It takes a person of strong conviction to eschew the trappings of American life and embrace the relatively austere life of a Buddhist teacher. One is asked to make the sacrifices expected of other religious — dedication to the Sangha and to the vocation — with little if any chance of support beyond the subsistence level. Family life can suffer, along with the ability to raise one. If those seeking a teacher find it difficult to imagine so dedicating themselves to practice that they would travel as far as necessary and make whatever sacrifices are needed to learn, then surely it is clear to them that the same is true of those whom they would have accept the role of teacher.
As to the spread of Buddhism in Asia during the Dharma expansion, one must consider the different worlds of those times. Feudal societies have populations who look for solace in lives that they see no likelihood of improving, whether in the Sub-Continent and China of the early centuries or in Europe. There is also considerable advantage to the “powers that be” in having such a philosophy to support — as long as its adherents know their place. Consider the incestuous relationships of the church hierarchy and the various European rulers of the period 3rd through 18th Centuries CE, as opposed to the common clergy and serfdom, for a perfect example.
In addition to the political climate in that place and time, Buddhism by its nature is non-competitive. It is far more easily incorporated into similar Asian philosophies than any “outside” beliefs are into Western faiths, and that has resulted in a melding of philosophies far more clear than the mix of ideas that developed into Western Christianity. All religions build on those that came before, the difference being that Buddhism admits it, while the my-god-can-lick-your-god religions, although forced to admit previous relationships, deny any true origins short of revelation.
In terms of the spread of Buddhism into the Occident, there are basic differences in form and transmission. Western religion is easy to espouse: profess, be baptized, and don’t worry too much about the details, whereas Buddhism requires — in most of its forms — prolonged study and practice leading to transmission, if one is to teach, and a life (supposedly) of relative austerity in comparison to Western Society at large. There are hundreds of thousands of Barnes & Noble Buddhists, but few (if any) who are qualified to teach and lead others along the Eightfold Path. Then, too, where Western faiths actively discourage critical thinking, Buddhism at its core is nothing but critical thinking, culminating in the negation, in effect, of itself. (“If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.”)
It is not so much that Buddhism is incompatible with Americans, as that it is so at odds with the general ideals of our society that it doesn’t compute at all for most people. It is easy to give lip service to loving one’s neighbor, but more difficult when one is expected to put that and other virtues into one’s daily practice — instead of merely talking about it for a few minutes on the Sabbath. Even some “practicing” Buddhists of my acquaintance are so inculcated by the dualistic thinking of the West that they claim to believe in lovingkindness while refusing to give a buck to the bum on the street corner because they have already judged his worthiness and the propriety of what he may do with it. They keep the darkened windows of their Volvo up, and drive past. Westerners — some few — may tithe, but few share.
I believe, therefore, that Buddhism will spread in the West precisely to the extent that we as a society are willing to eschew the American Dream and begin looking at our fellow humans and the planet mindfully, accepting that we cannot have it all, and that the color of truth is gray — neither black nor white. Until that time, we can expect teachers and truly dedicated practitioners to be thin on the ground, at best.
Hey Bill, there is more to the West than the U.S.
In fact given your culture the place (currently) that Buddhism will find it hardest to be adopted is in the U.S.
In Australia our school kids are taught in secondary school about Buddhism. In fact this year I have been asked to attend a large regional high school in the state I live in to teach Buddhism and meditation.
Would that happen in the U.S?
>as opposed to the almost exponential growth during the Dharma expansion in Asia between 500 BCE and 1000 CE.
This was the height of the famous Nalanda University where there were many many great Buddhist thinkers and teachers…perhaps Buddhism needs a similar educational institution foundation/organization in the West?
Nonetheless, your point is well taken. There are places in Europe, as well, not nearly so illiterate about religion in general as the US.
My points precisely in re the US, about which I was writing specifically. As to Australia, isn’t it a bit difficult for us to refer to it as both The Antipodes and Western at the same time?
The world needs a great Buddhist university.
>The world needs a great Buddhist university.
Absolutely…free Buddhist education in the Nalanda style with debate and so forth
Nice post. Well said (or written I should say). Despite my screen name, I am not the most devoted student of Buddhism. I do believe that part of Buddhism entails, getting rid of desire (and/or craving or want) which is what drives America more than anything else. Countless industries have been built on creating desire and then supplying for it. Forgive me if I come of cynical, but good luck taking that on.
It is the business of Buddhists to change ourselves. Part of the result is the ability to influence some small changes in others, mostly by example and on a small scale. Beyond that, all we can do is bear witness, and make sure that the unskillfulness of our government and other entities doesn’t go unnoticed. That is all anyone can do, and imagining otherwise is dukkha. We must look at the process, not the result.
I think that you are wrong on many of your facts. Buddhism is the third largest religion identified by Americans in the United States today. It has the fastest growth of any other religion INCONUS. There are nearly 2 million American-Buddhists.
I have also lived many years in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. I can tell you that people are not so different in their suffering for consumerism, romance, and life. We may have cable TV and high speed Internet– but for the most part the world consumes with the same appetite (just with less opportunity).
The concept of Judeo-Christian ethos and theology is based on pragmatic philosophy of eternalism. There is a body that is real and therefore there must have been a creator.
That is different than some Indian theologies where there isn’t anything, and so therefore reality is a delusion. (again from a creator).
Buddhism is the Middle path, that there is neither eternalism nor nihlism, but only experience that arise and fall away.
Buddhism flourished in Greece and the Middle East for nearly two hundred years, and it was the combined greek philosophers and Dharma teachers that help mold modern Buddhism. The same Greek philosophers that helped craft Western civilization.
Your gestalt interpretations of East vs. West religious order in the ancient world is off as well. In order to study theology and become a priest in the Middle Ages required literacy and study (which started at age 5). That placed the clergy professions far outside the reach of serfs, but as the merchant class was created– many non-nobles became clergy.
In order to be Buddhist, you are only required to take refuge in the three gems of the Buddha, Sangha and Dharma. You do not have to read or study. If you wish to be a monk, you renounce your worldly life and live by the 217 precepts of the monastic life. The Buddha created a monks life to be without caste, so beggar, slave and king were all equal. And being an oral tradition, literacy was not required.
Buddhism as a practice is used widely by non-Buddhists for stress and health relief. Buddhists as a philosophy is used by Catholic priests to teach good will and ethical learning (There are many catholic and Jesuit Buddhist priests). Buddhism as a religion does not recruit or turn away.
And yet people come by the hundreds everyday. And that does not count the night stand Buddhists who read the words of the Dalai Llama and Thatch Nan Huy.
I did not start this site as a venue for debate, and I decline to engage.
If you feel an overwhelming desire to be argumentative, or correct other people’s thinking, or explain The Way Things Ought To Be, perhaps you should take a look at your control issues.
Namasté
This is a boilerplate response.