Buddhism and Cultural Translation - Discussion
Matthew:
One of the striking features of Buddhism as a religion which has spread worldwide is how varied its manifestations are. Having a spirit of exploration and direct perception, it tends to withstand being adapted to different cultural contexts. In India, Buddhism emerged as something Indian. When it made its way to China, it became Chinese. In Thailand, it became Thai. And so on.
This feature of adaptability to local culture is present from the beginning with the historical Buddha, and continues throughout history. For example:
It makes me wonder, are we developing a distinctively "Western" form of Buddhism? Is that something to be desired? Without that, it seems people may have to overcome two levels of foreignness before they can understand a given Buddhist idea - first the foreignness of the concept as something new, but then also the foreignness of the cultural presentation that the explanation is embedded in. If someone is learning Theravada, it seems like they need to at least partly grok the Southeast Asian and Indian flavor to fully digest the concepts in their proper context. If Zen, same for China and Japan. If Tibetan Buddhism, same for Tibet. This seems to create obstacles to easy understanding and explanation, since one needs to learn a new context before they can fully understand the actual text.
Once someone overcomes this culturally-conditioned barrier, the ideas themselves are pretty universally applicable, which is what makes Buddhism appealing to so many in the first place. But the cultures that produced those presentations did so by framing it on their own terms, finding efficient entryways that already existed.
Doing this takes time, of course, often several generations, and Buddhism simply has not been a force in "the West" for such a long time yet. But are there good examples of this type of cultural adaptability starting to happen? Could we consider MCTB one such example? Is this something we should want, or will it happen naturally? Interested in hearing your thoughts.
This feature of adaptability to local culture is present from the beginning with the historical Buddha, and continues throughout history. For example:
- The instruction in the Bahiya Sutta is a subversion of a phrase from the Upanishads - see footnote 2 on this page
- Chan Gong-ans/Zen Koans are subversions of Chinese and Japanese literary games
- The three characteristics could even be taken as subversions of the Upanishad triad of Sat, Chit, Ananda, or eternal-being (counteracted by impermanence), self-knowledge (counteracted by no-self), and bliss (counteracted by dukkha)
It makes me wonder, are we developing a distinctively "Western" form of Buddhism? Is that something to be desired? Without that, it seems people may have to overcome two levels of foreignness before they can understand a given Buddhist idea - first the foreignness of the concept as something new, but then also the foreignness of the cultural presentation that the explanation is embedded in. If someone is learning Theravada, it seems like they need to at least partly grok the Southeast Asian and Indian flavor to fully digest the concepts in their proper context. If Zen, same for China and Japan. If Tibetan Buddhism, same for Tibet. This seems to create obstacles to easy understanding and explanation, since one needs to learn a new context before they can fully understand the actual text.
Once someone overcomes this culturally-conditioned barrier, the ideas themselves are pretty universally applicable, which is what makes Buddhism appealing to so many in the first place. But the cultures that produced those presentations did so by framing it on their own terms, finding efficient entryways that already existed.
Doing this takes time, of course, often several generations, and Buddhism simply has not been a force in "the West" for such a long time yet. But are there good examples of this type of cultural adaptability starting to happen? Could we consider MCTB one such example? Is this something we should want, or will it happen naturally? Interested in hearing your thoughts.
Matthew, if you haven't listened to this lecture yet, I think you would _love_ it. All about how the buddha was using a lot of puns and subversions of proto-hindu ideas in his teachings.
For what it's worth!
https://www.audiodharma.org/series/207/talk/2602/
Buddhism Before the Theravada
The Buddha did not teach in a vacuum. His teachings were directed to those who shared the social world in which he lived. John Peacock, a British scholar who studies and translates in more than a dozen languages and is familiar with the philosophical environment of the Buddha’s day, maintains that by framing the Buddha’s teachings in their original context, it is possible to recover the original meaning of teachings that have been ignored and lost by later Buddhist schools—including the Theravada. This weekend class will examine many of the ways in which Buddhist practice was radically different from the Brahmanical and Upanishadic thinking of the time and, indeed, how it differs in substantive ways from much present day understanding of the Dharma. The exploration will detail the Buddha’s shift away from metaphysical thinking to a focus on internal experience and ethical activity. In the process there will be consideration of how the Buddha’s earliest teachings diverge from much of the western philosophical tradition, and often from what has become the traditional view of the Dharma today as well.
Matthew:
The terms "diṭṭhaṃ sutaṃ mutaṃ viññātaṃ" (seen, heard, sensed & cognised) are found in at least 45 Pali suttas. Also, contrary to common beliefs about a pre-Buddhist Atman, there is actually little, if no, debate with Brahmins in the Pali suttas about an "Eternal Atman". When the Buddha used the term "atta" ("self"), he used it to refer to "ego", "identity" or "possessiveness". Wiki says: "The chronology of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, like other Upanishads, is uncertain and contested". It appears more logical to me the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad took the terms "diṭṭhaṃ sutaṃ mutaṃ viññātaṃ" (in Sanskrit draṣṭā, śrotā, mantā & vijñātā) from Buddhism and used these term to create a doctrine of god or Atman to debunk/attack Buddhism. It appears illogical to move from psychology to theology, i.e., that the Upanishad writers would cognise the human senses but then create a theory of god or Atman from the human senses. Generally, the history of religion is one of theology. Therefore, as said, it appears logical the Brahmins believed in a tribal self-affirming god (Brahma), as they did in the Pali suttas (similar to the Hebrews in the Bible) but, when atheist Buddha arose with his psychology, the Brahmins took that Buddhist psychology and transformed it into a theology, as the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad appears to do. I think it will be found the history of the later Hinduism is one of attacking and subverting Buddhism rather than the Buddha subverted Brahminism. The Pali suttas literally say (possibly MN 95) the Buddha intended no harm to the lineage of Brahmins.
The standout feature of all of these variations is that they introduce Buddhism by taking something that already exists in the culture, that people are already familiar with and primed for, and flipping it around. This is the use of upaya on a society-wide level.
I doubt there is any evidence for the above. The two examples from India provided appear spurious.
It makes me wonder, are we developing a distinctively "Western" form of Buddhism? Is that something to be desired?
The core teachings of the Pali suttas cannot be articulated any better. The terminology in the Pali suttas is far more advanced and precise than anything in the West. Also the personality of the Buddha (namely, the manner in which he spoke & interacted with people) is thoroughly modern.
Also if you search for the authors there are some podcast interviews and videos available on YouTube.
David McMahan's academia page also has some open access papers: https://fandm.academia.edu/DMcMahan
A
David McMahan's academia page also has some open access papers: https://fandm.academia.edu/DMcMahan
A
terry:
aloha stirling,
Ideas may be worthwhile.
Thank you for your post Terry. Since we are considering ideas:
The Great Way is not difficult,
for those who have no preferences.
Let go of longing and aversion,
and it reveals itself.
Make the smallest distinction, however,
and you are as far from it as heaven is from earth.
If you want to realize the truth,
then hold no opinions for or against anything.
Like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When the deep meaning (of the Way) is not understood
the intrinsic peace of mind is disturbed.
As vast as infinite space,
it is perfect and lacks nothing.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - Seung Tsan
for those who have no preferences.
Let go of longing and aversion,
and it reveals itself.
Make the smallest distinction, however,
and you are as far from it as heaven is from earth.
If you want to realize the truth,
then hold no opinions for or against anything.
Like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When the deep meaning (of the Way) is not understood
the intrinsic peace of mind is disturbed.
As vast as infinite space,
it is perfect and lacks nothing.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - Seung Tsan
...can you have too much Seung Tsan?
The great way is a fantasy
because we all have preferences
especially those who prefer no preferences
and delight in empty rituals of letting go,
like those that sacrifice children to make it rain.
So worried about a feather of sense contact from the smallest distinction
that they entangle themselves in their own thornbush of hell
and put an garden slug on the teacher's cushion
because it holds no opinions for or against anything.
Fighting like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When awakening is not awake
the vivid mind seems like disturbance.
Mind is trivial,
imperfect and incomplete,.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - not Seung Tsan
...you can have too much Seung Tsan!
because we all have preferences
especially those who prefer no preferences
and delight in empty rituals of letting go,
like those that sacrifice children to make it rain.
So worried about a feather of sense contact from the smallest distinction
that they entangle themselves in their own thornbush of hell
and put an garden slug on the teacher's cushion
because it holds no opinions for or against anything.
Fighting like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When awakening is not awake
the vivid mind seems like disturbance.
Mind is trivial,
imperfect and incomplete,.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - not Seung Tsan
...you can have too much Seung Tsan!
shargrol:
The great way is a fantasy
because we all have preferences
especially those who prefer no preferences
and delight in empty rituals of letting go,
like those that sacrifice children to make it rain.
So worried about a feather of sense contact from the smallest distinction
that they entangle themselves in their own thornbush of hell
and put an garden slug on the teacher's cushion
because it holds no opinions for or against anything.
Fighting like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When awakening is not awake
the vivid mind seems like disturbance.
Mind is trivial,
imperfect and incomplete,.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - not Seung Tsan
...you can have too much Seung Tsan!
because we all have preferences
especially those who prefer no preferences
and delight in empty rituals of letting go,
like those that sacrifice children to make it rain.
So worried about a feather of sense contact from the smallest distinction
that they entangle themselves in their own thornbush of hell
and put an garden slug on the teacher's cushion
because it holds no opinions for or against anything.
Fighting like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.
When awakening is not awake
the vivid mind seems like disturbance.
Mind is trivial,
imperfect and incomplete,.
Indeed, it is due to your grasping and repelling
That you do not see things as they are. - not Seung Tsan
...you can have too much Seung Tsan!
I'm really not taking your point here. Why would you say such things? I suppose you see it as an antidote to "holiness." The devil has his uses.
The name "lucifer" means light-bringer. Mara challenged the buddha, "I am the enlightened one! Me!" The buddha tapped the ground and the whole earth was his witness. All the demons of the sky could not withstand it.
Mind is inherntly pure, like a newborn each moment. Even if that newborn is smeared with blood, shit and meconium. And wails.
So, smear away. "That's just how it is and that is OK too."
terry
"The great way is a fantasy."
~shargrol