Buddhism: Opium for the Masses?

Buddhism has long been ignored in America but now that it is gaining in popularity, it is often being labeled as being practiced mostly by "New Age" types looking for the next spiritual fad. That seems to be the general thesis of Mark Vernon's recent article, "Buddhism is the New Opium of the People" for The Guardian news outlet. His example upfront is that of David and Victoria Beckham's four foot golden Buddha in their living room and how it smacks of consumerism.

And, perhaps he would be right if we were all like David and Victoria Beckham but most of the "western Buddhists" I know (and ones I am in contact with) are just as concerned about the commercialization of Buddhism as anyone else. Read any Buddhist blog for a time and eventually they'll write about Buddhist iconography and concepts being manipulated to sell everything from booze to yogurt. But, what can any of us do in the long run to get such companies to not manipulate our religion for their commercial gain? No much. Unfortunately, religion has long been usurped by those would seek to make a buck off it. However, that crass commercialism does not automatically delegitimize a belief system in and of itself. Sincere adherents can't be expected to answer for opportunists who don't even know what Dharma means, let alone practice it.

Unfortunately, that's not the only gripe that the author has with Buddhism in America. Vernon's article goes onto make the claim that Buddhism in America is a form of "zoning out" and avoidance of the problems of modern life. In doing so, he relied heavily upon a quote philosopher, Slavoj Zizek that paints all of western Buddhism as nothing more than a drug:

Western Buddhism presents itself as a remedy against the stresses of modern life though, as Slavoj Žižek has noted, it actually functions as a perfect supplement to modern life. It allows adherents to decouple from the stress, whilst leaving the causes of the stress intact: consumptive forces continue unhindered along their creatively destructive path. In short, Buddhism is the new opium of the people.

James: Firstly, this quote does nothing to define what Zizek (or Vernon for that matter) mean by, "Western Buddhism" which is an amorphous label of a brand of Buddhism that doesn't even exist in any concrete terms. It's just a catch-all phrase that sweeps up all American Buddhists into a convenient box that is then labeled with nearly every possible misconception of Buddhism imaginable.

It's easy to attack all American Buddhists as starry-eyed, "New Age," wannabe Buddhists when you lump them into a conveniently undefined category. Especially since there are no "Western Buddhist" monasteries to visit, no "Western Buddhist" lineage to consult and no "Western Buddhist" doctrine to define it. In other words, "Western Buddhism" is a blank canvas that anyone can color to define American Buddhists/Buddhism in any way they like-good or bad.

But, getting to the meat of the above quote, Buddhism is not interpreted by most American Buddhists as just another self-help fad that allows you to zone-out of life, disconnect from everyone and feel groovy. You can't compare David and Victoria Beckham's flirtation with Buddhism to all American Buddhists who are trying sincerely to practice what Buddha taught to improve their lives, and the world. And, simply because Buddhism is new to Americans doesn't mean that we see it as a commodity to flash around like a jewel encrusted necklace or watch--even if some high-profile celebrities do so.

The majority of Buddhists I know in America live very humble lives, have small Buddha statues (if at all) and a sparse altar space from, which to meditate. We do seek to "decouple" (to use his word) from the mental poisons of greed, hatred and delusion but that is not the same thing as numbed-out nihilism and disconnecting from the world. Other than that, we buy books from teachers to guide our practice who are highly respected people in their storied lineages and throughout Buddhism world-wide. And to label "Buddhism" as practiced in Asia as "medieval" is demeaning and purely ignorant of 2,500 years of tradition. If Buddhism, at its roots, is "medieval" then why are scientists today finding much to agree with in Buddhist philosophy? Such as seeing comparisons between concepts of rebirth and the first law of thermodynamics?

Vernon digs his hole of confusion deeper by saying, "For if Buddhism is to live in the modern world, it must be treated as a living tradition, not a preformed import." Is he honestly saying that the only valid form of Buddhism that can be treated as a living tradition in America has to be American made? If so, that's just plain absurd. There is no reason why Zen in America can't be a living, valid tradition for American culture despite it's Japanese roots. That's just silly. We'd have to say the same for Christianity; that's it's just a preformed import from Israel and not a valid living tradition. It seems, for someone who has a lot of strong criticism of American Buddhists, Vernon doesn't seem to understand the adaptability built within Buddhism very well.

As for meditation, it's not seen as the defining Buddhist practice except to a few traditions; namely Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. It preposterous to claim that meditation was never apart of early Buddhism because that was how Buddha realized enlightenment. Now, the modern, English word, "meditation" surely wasn't used but the concepts are still the same. But don't believe my supposedly ignorant, "New Age" American Buddhist, mind. Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh wrote a lengthy book on the Buddha's life, and if meditation wasn't a fundamental aspect to Buddhist practice then the 82 year old Zen monk Nhat Hanh must be a liar?

Vernon then makes the implicit claim that most American Buddhists don't even know what meditation is about; that we see it as just some "feel good" vibe in an isolated moment and not something that helps us deal with the real world in a more balanced and responsible way:

What is also missed in the focus on meditation is the ethical challenge implicit in his call. Any practice must concern your whole stance towards the world, and it's a stance that is intensely, relentlessly critical. The aim is to enquire into all aspects of your form of life.

James: Anyone who is practicing Buddhism as a way to escape life hasn't fully studied the Dharma from long-time practitioners and teachers. And, to lump those people in with all American Buddhists is irresponsible and makes the authors come across as simply looking for away to demean and discredit the growing number of sincere Buddhists across America.

~Peace to all beings~

What is the Zen of Pornography?

What does this article have to do with Zen? Not much except the author's attempt to make a two sentence statement about pornography into a koan. Other then those two sentences there is no other reference to Zen or Buddhism. YET. Yet the title of the post is, "The Zen of Porn: If Pornography is Everywhere, Is It Nowhere?"

Upon reading that I thought that the article was going to be about some Zen Buddhist porn star or something. Instead it's an article about one woman's crusade against pornography.

I don't want to get into the debate about pornography itself (Though I will say that I consider pornography along with much of sexuality to be a personal matter). That said I found it somewhat disrespectful that she was using the Zen label to draw attention to an article about pornography. It appears to me that once again Zen has been misused for a catchy, "cool" title.

I know that it's often better to ignore this kind of thing but it seems at some point we need to say something if for no other reason than for self-respect. Yes, it's important not to get angry with every misuse of our Buddhist labels but it's also important to value our traditions--and ourselves. I don't think we need to get offended at every misuse of Buddhist labels either but at some point it comes down to showing courtesy for other beliefs and people.

Yes, it's important for ourselves to not get attached to simple words but simple words also carry sacred energy and meaning too. At some point we have to say something or we'll end up with Zen toilet seat covers and Zen toilet paper. Yes, it's important to keep the peace and not get personally invested in such disrespect but it's also important to stand for something.

Imagine saying, "The Christianity of Porn," you'd get bombarded by people finding offense and rightly so. Sometimes you have to draw a line. Yes, Buddhism is more than words but there is still a tradition to it and it would be sad if we just let all of our traditions disappear. True we don't need all of those things to practice meditation but then don't we just become someone who happens to meditate?

If Buddha is just a word then why do we take refuge in it? Don't we do Buddha's gift of the Dharma to us a bit of a disservice? Maybe I'm not a "real Buddhist" but I like some tradition and sacredness in my beliefs. I enjoy having things to respect and find meaning and value in.

Some people just don't know any better so I'm not saying we should insult them back but I am advocating that we educate whenever we have the opportunity.

~Peace to all beings~