The idea is to go back to the root. Find the beginning. Who said what first. And how do we know. From a linear standpoint, what is the truth?
I have always had this thought in terms of my own practice - it doesn't matter who said what first, or how authentic it is because what comes your way is what is supposed to come your way. Now that I am entering into the world of scholarship in Buddhist studies, and I find myself researching different foundational concepts in order to, not only present them to my students who may or may not have had exposure before, understand how ideas developed in a linear way.
Why? I am not sure - academia seems to be linearly (historically?) oriented. Maybe this is my own education speaking, but when one is not presenting proper context (historic or otherwise), the class could be taken as "less serious" or "ungrounded."
Thus, here is the Pali Canon online - supposidly the original words of the Buddha remembered by his deciples and passed down orally over generations. Someone wrote it down (i'm not yet sure who) and now it is translated into English. Lucky Us!
Friday, November 19, 2010
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Empowerment
The three yanas, according to Tibetan Buddhism are three stages of one's path to enlightenment.
Thinking about this, in relation to social engagement and activism, seems one can extract three stages there as well. When thinking about how social action works with the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism, a context needs to be created to frame 'engagement' effectively.
Reggie Ray writes the following from a Tricycle article considering the concept of Empowerment:
We talk a lot about “empowerment” in the Vajrayana and it is important to understand exactly what that means. To receive empowerment doesn’t mean that someone grants you the power to escape from your life, or to override and control things you don’t like; rather, they help you tap into the power you inherently possess to surrender utterly to your unique life, which is the only gateway in the entire universe through which you can enter eternity.
Reginald Ray, "The Vajrayana Journey is an experience of love, power, and freedom"
The conversation overlaps in the world of development - it is quite popular to talk about women's empowerment, empowering others to take responsibility for their improvement or education, for example. One can't deny the agency in this word - empowerment implies someone doing the empowering and someone receiving the empowerment. Is it possible to empower oneself? In the Vajrayana tradition, no. In the conversation about the ethics of development, it has become popular to talk about empowerment as the receiver of resources taking responsibility for their own empowerment.
I am not sure this concept actually works, but maybe is just something to tell ourselves as we attempt to create what we perceive as a better life for people who we perceive are living in poverty.
Development remains a touchy issue - I don't pose that there are any solutions, actually, only that there needs to be constant questioning as "development" continues to happen in many parts of the world.
Thinking about this, in relation to social engagement and activism, seems one can extract three stages there as well. When thinking about how social action works with the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism, a context needs to be created to frame 'engagement' effectively.
Reggie Ray writes the following from a Tricycle article considering the concept of Empowerment:
We talk a lot about “empowerment” in the Vajrayana and it is important to understand exactly what that means. To receive empowerment doesn’t mean that someone grants you the power to escape from your life, or to override and control things you don’t like; rather, they help you tap into the power you inherently possess to surrender utterly to your unique life, which is the only gateway in the entire universe through which you can enter eternity.
Reginald Ray, "The Vajrayana Journey is an experience of love, power, and freedom"
The conversation overlaps in the world of development - it is quite popular to talk about women's empowerment, empowering others to take responsibility for their improvement or education, for example. One can't deny the agency in this word - empowerment implies someone doing the empowering and someone receiving the empowerment. Is it possible to empower oneself? In the Vajrayana tradition, no. In the conversation about the ethics of development, it has become popular to talk about empowerment as the receiver of resources taking responsibility for their own empowerment.
I am not sure this concept actually works, but maybe is just something to tell ourselves as we attempt to create what we perceive as a better life for people who we perceive are living in poverty.
Development remains a touchy issue - I don't pose that there are any solutions, actually, only that there needs to be constant questioning as "development" continues to happen in many parts of the world.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Sulak Sivaraksa at the Garrison Institute's Satyagraha Event
Sivaraksa as one representative articulating one approach to "Engaged Buddhism." He has had an interesting life filled with jail time and activism. In this video, he calls says strongly that, "The West has been thinking too much." This goes along with what Tsoknyi Rinpoche speaks about in many of his teachings regarding the subtle body problem that seems to be manifest in the western experience - too much thinking creates blocks, cultural blocks, in the body.
This is a good video to show in a discussion about the definition of Engaged Buddhism - what is it? who is engaged or not engaged and how to we figure that out? But, best to give some context about Sivaraksa's life and where his motivation arises to do the work he is doing.
This is a good video to show in a discussion about the definition of Engaged Buddhism - what is it? who is engaged or not engaged and how to we figure that out? But, best to give some context about Sivaraksa's life and where his motivation arises to do the work he is doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
