Friday, September 23, 2011

How will Western Buddhism differ from traditional Eastern forms?

The future-Buddha Maitreya is usually depicted enthroned or seated in Western-style rather than cross-legged as in Eastern Buddhism. For a long time it has been prophesied that future developments will come from the West. What new forms will Western Buddhism take?|||There is no western and eastern there is only one consciousness.|||Western Buddhism is already taking new form.


Many groups are dropping the belief in reincarnation.


Many groups are affirming atheism.


Many teachings are taking a more cognitive-behavioral approach to retraining.


Scientists are studying the effects of long-term meditation on patterns in brain functioning, and this is opening up new understandings about meditation ... which, in turn, will make meditation more appealing to atheists who previously thought the effects of meditation were all just the power of suggestion.





At the same time, those traditions being taught by immigrated monks, in Zen, in Thervadan, in Tibetan Buddhism ... they are being taught exactly as practiced in their country of origin, so these Western groups are taking on these forms of Buddhism.|||I wouldn't say how "will" it be different but how is it "already" different. I am a Euro-American who is fully ordained in a Japanese Mahayana Buddhist lineage. The lineage I belong to (Nichiren Shu) has had temples in the US since 1914. So here is what I have observed is taking shape:





Equality between men and women much more than you will even find today back in Japan. For instance, after we have tea and snacks the men and women will both help clean up and wash the dishes, but the old Japanese style is that only the women would do it. Also, we have both men and women who are ordained as priests (or ministers if you prefer that term). While there are female priests in Japan, in the USA it is more likely that female clergy will be running a temple or Sangha on their own and not just assisting the male clergy.





Ordained and lay members are also on a more equal footing though here there is clearly a division of labor as the ordained are trained to do ceremonies that the lay members are not. It is also most often the case that the priests have received a college education or equivalent in Buddhism and some have more advanced degrees, so the priests are also certified teachers of the Dharma. However, when we have study groups at our temples everyone can contribute and participate in the discussion.





Lay members are more eager to participate in retreats and to take up meditation practices (though in our tradition this means extended chanting meditation and not just silent sitting). In Japan, Buddhist practices are things that usually only the priests do (chanting, meditating, etc...) but in America the whole point of being even a lay member is to practice or even have a daily practice that can be done at home.





There is a more democratic structure to the temples and practice centers as there are boards of directors and other such things. Basically the Japanese temples in the USA have from the beginning organized themselves like the Protestant Churches (and have even called themselves churches at times - a practice we convert Buddhists are rolling back as we feel no need to mimic Protestantism).





Karma and rebirth are indeed viewed with more skepticism and/or the stress is put on their metaphorical value more than their literal meaning. Some American Buddhist groups do seem to drop these things and other parts of traditional Buddhist cosmology all together to just extract those things that match our scientific and even materialistic world view. The traditional schools like Nichiren Shu will not do that however, but there will be a deemphasis on metaphysics and more of an emphasis on what are these teachings trying to tell us about our life here in this moment.





The sectarianism of the founders of the various lineages (and they all had the view that only their teaching/practice was the best and others had it wrong, read Dogen's Bendowa for instance, or Shinran's Kyogyosho) is also being deemphasized. We see no need to perpetuate medieval polemics. When these things are brought up we are careful to keep it all in context and to emphasize that the underlying motive of criticism and debate in Buddhism must be compassion and practicality.





Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,


Ryuei|||lol, these christians are really giving themselves a showing up. so intolerant. anyway, i will try to answer your question.





to answer it simply: i dont know what new forms western buddhism will take.





but,i dont see how western buddhism should differ from eastern. the word buddha means enlightenment. which can be attained while sitting on a chair or sitting cross legged. the buddha became enlightened through vipassana meditation, when you attend a retreat, you may sit cross legged or on a chair while meditating, its up to you.





The enlightened one taught that we should come to our own realisations through experience, we should not just blindly accept something just because we are told it. im not to educated on different types or forms of buddhism, i am a theravada buddhist, i am from the "west".





just do what feel right for you, whatever religion or sect, the core basis is all the same anyway, just the outer shell that changes.





you should try not to think about the type of buddhism too much, it will happen naturally.


why not visit www.dhamma.org to find your local vipassana meditation centre and go for a 10 day retreat. i think it would benefit these angry christians too, lol, they can still keep the outer shell of their religion, but the observation of their breath and sensation will make them more equanimous.





did you know that jesus was a reincarnation of a tibetan holy man? and that the 3 wise men were monks coming to determine this. the proofs in tibet! read " jesus lived in india", great book!|||First lesson for buddhists:





Buddhists have no logical alternative but to accept that Jesus is God:





“I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse.





You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. “





For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,


Col 2:9 (NIV)





Now watch this space for lesson no: 2|||LOL MAY BE

No comments:

Post a Comment