5 ms·
I'm not sure which is more disrespectful, but I do think the two situations are different. If I'm immersed in a culture or practice and I reject some aspects of
by md_ 4y ago
I'm not sure which is more disrespectful, but I do think the two situations are different. If I'm immersed in a culture or practice and I reject some aspects of it, from a place of familiarity, that means something different--maybe something more disrespectful!--that if I display the trappings of a culture without understanding what they mean.
- cuteboy19 4y ago> removed of their source context and used in a way that is contrary or even disrespectful of their original intent. Ironically all this talk of cultural appropriation is "contrary or even disrespectful of the original intent" of Buddhism. Buddhism never belonged to Magadha, India or Asia, so it is not possible for anybody to appropriate it. It is not anyone's property to begin with
- md_ 4y agoWho said anything about geographic locality?
- lolinder 4y agoEach of those places has a very different culture. Buddhism is not a monolithic entity. It took on vastly different forms in each of the places it landed. Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism have different scriptures, different approaches to bodhisattvas, different paths to awakening. Was it disrespectful of the Chinese to take Buddhist teachings when they arrived and transform them to fit their cultural context? Should we go eliminate Buddhism from China because it's not native there and they twisted it to fit their culture?