6 ms·

Creating West Coast Buddhism (2024)

72 points by surprisetalk 7mo ago

mvkel 7mo ago
This was an enjoyable read. It seems Buddhism has followed the same path as any other religion/practice of the same age. I imagine that today's Christianity doesn't look much like it did in 500AD, just as I imagine Scientology in 1,000 years will have evolved. Is this a bad thing? Does religion not represent our perception of the meaning of life, evolving with us as knowledge, wisdom and tolerance (or lack thereof) is passed through the generations?
- _fw 7mo ago
  The teachings of the Buddha explicitly encouraged it. Buddhism is the only religion I know of that instructs you to fully abandon it, as once you’ve fully grokked what it has to teach… you won’t need it any more. IIRC the Buddha said it was like carrying the oar of a boat: once you have used it to get you to your destination (nibbhana), carrying it is needless.
  - gavmor 7mo ago
    > Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, puriso mahato udakassa ... ‘yan-nūnāhaṃ tiṇakaṭṭhapaṇṇaṃ saṅkhaṇiyaṃ saṅkhaṇeyyaṃ, tenañ-ca mahaudakaṃ abhinaveyyaṃ hatthipādena vā aṅgapādena vā ... Atha kho so puriso taṃ kulhiraṃ āropetvā pāre gaccheyya. Tam-enaṃ loko ‘kiṃsu, bho, karissati kulhirena pāraṃ gato’ti? Evaṃ, bhikkhave, dhammaṃ desitaṃ ājānāsi: ‘pāraṅgamanaṃ dhammaṃ, anupagamma dhamma’ti. > सेय्यथापि भिक्खवे पुरिसो महतो उदकस्स ओरिमतटे ठितो एतस्मिं चत्ते ओरिमा तटा कल्लंणं भयंवरं, परमा तटा निब्बयं भयंविरं, न च नावाय संयताय न च पुल्लेन गन्तब्बं। तं किमन्तरेन। यन्नुनाहं तिणकट्ठपण्णं संकलिय च मज्झे उदकं अभिनवेन्तं हत्थिपदेन व अङ्गपदेन व तीरणं करोमि। अथ खो सो पुरिसो तिणकट्ठपण्णं संकलिय च मज्झे उदकं अभिनवेन्तो हत्थिपदेन व अङ्गपदेन व तीरणं करोति। तं पच्छा समन्ततो गन्त्वा पारे गच्छति। तं एं लोको किं नु खो करिस्सति कूल्हिरेन पारा गतो ती? एवमेव खो भिक्खवे धम्मो देशितो अजानासि। पारं गमनेन धम्मं नुपगम्म धम्मं। Alagaddūpama Sutta (MN 22) of the Majjhima Nikāya, part of the Pali Canon. (MN 22, सेय्यथापि... से अंतまで)
    - wise_blood 7mo ago
      https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=plain&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=plain...
  - hmm37 7mo ago
    Very similar to Zhuangzi (Daoism). 荃者所以在魚，得魚而忘荃蹄者所以在兔，得兔而忘蹄言者所以在意，得意而忘言吾安得忘言之人而與之言哉？ The fish trap exists because of the fish; once you've gotten the fish, you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit; once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning; once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can have a word with him?
    - _fw 7mo ago
      I love this! Thank you.
- dijksterhuis 7mo ago
  i really like that shunryū suzuki quoting dogen talking about "one continuous mistake" is a complete and utter misquote. internalised understanding, attitudes, views etc. are more important that being able to recite things from a book.
- snayan 7mo ago
  It depends on the root of the evolution I would say. Sure, if someone has gone through the process and achieved enlightenment like Buddha, they may be able to evolve the teachings to better fit the times. However, my gut says that is often not the case, and much of the evolution is egoic in nature at the hands of a charismatic individual who wants to fulfil their desire or lust for power. I'm far from an expert on Buddhism, but my own journey has taught me that ultimately we must kill our Buddhas and inner realization ultimately is a journey you must walk alone and discover for yourself. The teachers along the way may serve as wayfinding, but must ultimately be discarded. If the evolved state of the religion seems like a big club, and isn't serving it's members to strike out on their own on their inward journey, to achieve independence and sovereignty, it should be questioned in my opinion.
- graemep 7mo ago
  > I imagine that today's Christianity doesn't look much like it did in 500AD I would would say it does look pretty similar. The Council of Nicea nearly 200 years earlier had established a consensus/mainstream theology. The papacy existed, although it did not claim the same level of authority. Even churches were built in styles similar to modern ones. > Is this a bad thing? Does religion not represent our perception of the meaning of life, evolving with us as knowledge, wisdom and tolerance (or lack thereof) is passed through the generations? In principle it is not a bad thing, but it is a matter of opinion. Christianity and Buddhism are both revealed religions so losing the truths the founder of the religion taught is a bad thing, learning more is a good thing. Which is which is a matter of opinion.
_fw 7mo ago
I was surprised to see Jack Kornfield, Sharon Salzburg and Joseph Goldstein not mentioned here. They’re the founding forces behind the Insight Meditation Society in MA, which although isn’t the West Coast, is perhaps the most influential force in popular Buddhism in the West. Kornfield also set up Spirit Rock Meditation Centre in California though, which gets tens of thousands of visitors a year. Having dived really quite far into Buddhism over the past five years, I’ve found their flavour of Insight Meditation (as per the New Burmese Method based on Mahasi Sayadaw’s teachings) absolutely life changing. A great read, thank you for sharing. If anybody is interested in reading further - Goldstein’s podcasts, Mahasi Sayadaw’s writing, Kornfield’s introductory texts and ANYTHING by Bhikku Bodhi are a phenomenal place to start.
- Wonnk13 7mo ago
  yea I'd +1 this. It's a real blindspot in the author's writing. I don't think you can write about meditation in the US without mentioning IMS. Headspace and all the other mcmindfulness apps that start with "focus on your breath" are all derived from Insight meditation. I've sat IMS, it's an incredible facility.
- bitslayer 7mo ago
  It does mention the Insight Meditation Society.
- jackschultz 7mo ago
  Be Here Now network, which started with Ram Dass, still does mostly weekly videos from Goldstein and Kornfield. Search for their names where you listen to your podcasts. Incredibly good to listen to. Other ones I listen to are in the Thai Forrest Tradition, started from Ajahn Chah and now talks from Abhayagiri, Amaravati. Other one from Mahayana, which has so many talks and probably the best book I've read, Seeing That Frees, is Rob Burbea. He died from cancer in 2020, which is incredibly sad given how young he still was and much he's produced for us. All of these people give different angles on the teachings of the Buddha. I highly suggest listening and reading from these people and the differing traditions all talking for similar goals of how to look at the world for the acknowledgement of dukkha (pain / suffering) and how to deal with it. You don't need to sit and meditate either to get the benefits.
helterskelter 7mo ago
Interesting article, I've been thinking about this lately myself. Buddhism influenced German philosophy in the 1800's through Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, which basically influenced everything that came afterwards, and it also influenced art through Dada which you could argue was really a crypto-Buddhist/Taoism fusion expressed through a somewhat distorted Western lens, and that really goes on to influence postmodernism to a huge degree. This embedded it in Western thought in a much deeper way than 1960's fascination with Zen and Tibetan Buddhism IMHO. I think Buddhist philosophy still has a way to go making its way through the West -- liberal democracy's crisis of vacuuity is something we're really struggling to come to terms with, and it feels like Western society is slipping into a full-blown existential crisis. Seems like fertile ground for a religion and philosophy that a large part of is predicated on nothingness and how to live and be content in the void. I have to admit though that it's unbelievable watching the market's seemingly unlimited ability to coopt, repackage and in turn sell literally anything, even a religion and philosophical system which would be completely opposite to a consumer society.
- sigbottle 7mo ago
  > it's unbelievable watching the market's seemingly unlimited ability to coopt, repackage and in turn sell literally anything, even a religion and philosophical system which would be completely opposite to a consumer society. In some sense, this is one manifestation of what Nietzche said was a good state. A scrappy, anti-metaphysical system that doesn't need to rest on grand notions of reason or morality (not that there is no reason or morality, but in the traditional Western metaphysics sense; I find that people often conflate the two, I certainly did at one point), that simply outcompetes, adapts, and comes out on top. On the other hand, I think Nietzche would have hated the outcome and would have worked to further refine his philosophy. I wonder what his thoughts would be in the 21st century. Also through your comment, I realize I don't actually understand subtle differences in Eastern philosophy. Confucianism would have been up Nietzche's alley (no metaphysics), but Buddhism is a weird mix of "metaphysics" in the sense of spirits and gods, but not "metaphysics" in the Western Platonic tradition, and is in fact in many ways opposite to many of the dualities and boundaries that Western metaphysics creates.
- stared 7mo ago
prieveschl 7mo ago
This was a great article, thanks so much for sharing. As a buddhist who started in Tibetan Vajrayana as a teenager and has ended up chanting NMRK in the SGI, I can appreciate that faith, like human beings, adapts to its time and surroundings. While personal gain and financial enrichment and the like have infected almost every faith there is on earth (we are all fallible to some extent) the through line of an ever-narrowing compression of practice makes sense on the pursuit of enlightenment. And, while study is essential in any pursuit of the mind, the mind is sometimes our biggest adversary. Here is what I wrestled with for years, and I think it’s worth sharing because I suspect some of you have wrestled with it too. Every Buddhist tradition agrees that all living beings possess Buddha nature. The Lotus Sutra’s parable of the Jewel in the Robe says it plainly: you already have a priceless jewel sewn into your clothing. You always have. You just don’t know it’s there. Enlightenment isn’t something you earn or achieve. It’s something you already are. So if that’s true — if the jewel is already there — why is it so hard to find? And this is where I kept getting stuck. Because the tool we use to look for the jewel is the same tool that hides it from us. Our consciousness. Our thinking, analyzing, questioning mind. The very thing that makes us human is also the thing that stands between us and what every tradition says is our birthright. Each school of Buddhism is, in its own way, a set of gymnastics designed to get the mind out of its own way. Zen tries to crash it with paradox. Tibetan practice tries to transmute its energy. Pure Land tries to exhaust it into surrender. And each one works, for some people, some of the time. But the fundamental problem remains: you cannot use the mind to escape the mind. This is the contradiction I brought with me to Nichiren Buddhism. And to be honest, I found the same contradiction here, stated more plainly. We say that a single sincere recitation of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo contains the entirety of Buddhahood within it. And I believe that. But we also say: don’t stop chanting. Keep going. Practice daily. Because your delusions will reassert themselves by tomorrow morning. So which is it? Is one moment enough, or isn’t it? The contradiction dissolves when you stop thinking of practice as a means to an end and start seeing it as living itself. Each breath you take is a complete act. No single breath is insufficient. But you keep breathing — not because the last breath failed, but because you’re alive and that’s what living things do. Each moment of chanting or meditating, each act of compassion, each time you turn toward someone else’s suffering instead of away from it — that’s not a step on the path to enlightenment. It is enlightenment, expressed through action. Kierkegaard wrote that life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards. Perhaps that’s why Pure Land buddhists seek this fundamental meaning at the time of death, that that is when enlightenment will reveal itself. But remember the jewel? It’s right there, any moment you honestly reach for it. Thank you again for this fantastic perspective on the trajectory of this universal search for truth!
MassPikeMike 7mo ago
The article "FTFY Buddhist Ethics" [1] comes to a similar conclusion about the development of West Coast Buddhism but isn't on board with it. IMHO an interesting contrarian take. [1] https://vividness.live/ftfy-buddhist-ethics https://vividness.live/ftfy-buddhist-ethics
- akoboldfrying 7mo ago
  Thank you for linking to this. Years ago I chanced upon this website, and it was my first experience of reading something about Buddhism that seemed to consciously strive for clarity, for intelligibility to an interested layperson, rather than for what I'll call "easy mysticism" for its own sake.
  - wise_blood 7mo ago
    If you want a list of common points among traditions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Points_Unifying_Therav%C4%81da_and_Mah%C4%81y%C4%81na https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Points_Unifying_Therav%C... some may be more difficult to comprehend, but it's all there
threethirtytwo 7mo ago
Honest question: Is buddihsm real? Does it have any basis in scientific and objective reality? Or is it fiction? I don't mean side stuff like meditation improves your IQ I mean does the fundamental point of buddihism have any basis in reality. If it is fiction, why is it so popular among technical people like people who come to HN? Are the people on HN who are interested in Buddhism aware it is fiction/real?
- _doctor_love 7mo ago
  > Is buddihsm real? Does it have any basis in scientific and objective reality? Or is it fiction? These are Buddhist questions. :) The Buddha famously told his followers not to accept his teaching merely because he said it, instead he told them to "go and see for yourself." The point is that if you want to know if buddhism is real, try out the practices and see if they make sense to you and make a difference. If the practices work, adopt them, if you find them worthless, abandon them. You get free will and karma in Buddhism. Great 2-for-1 special. Another way to come at it is to consider the good old Four Noble Truths. There are different ways to say them but this is how I learned them: * Life is full of suffering * Suffering is caused by attachment to desire * There is a way beyond attachment * Meditation and Buddhism is the way beyond attachment (or to Enlightenment, if you prefer)
  - thinkling 7mo ago
    +1 on most of this. A small note: I think “suffering” is an unfortunate translation as it connotes dire circumstances or real pain, whereas I understand dukkha to include simple discontent, dissatisfaction, and stress. I take the Buddha to have said roughly, “I teach the origin of unhappiness and how to liberate yourself from it.”
    - _doctor_love 7mo ago
      > I think “suffering” is an unfortunate translation as it connotes dire circumstances or real pain, whereas I understand dukkha to include simple discontent, dissatisfaction, and stress. Agree. Suffering doesn't send the right message in terms of what the word is trying to signal. The best version I've heard is likening life to a carriage ride, and the wheel is just never quite right, so it's always just a little bit uncomfortable. Nothing's just ever quite right.
someone7x 7mo ago
Wow never thought I would see an article mention Shinryu Suzuki, very cool. I read Zen Mind Beginner’s Mind as a kid and I still remember practicing the sitting and breathing like it was a magical tome. The hardest part I remember is the nothingness of meditation and I remember his warnings not to fixate on trains of thought. I should probably reread it sometime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_Mind,_Beginner%27s_Mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_Mind,_Beginner%27s_Mind
stared 7mo ago
I used to think that in Buddhism, the pursuit of the Void is existential masochism, a glorified search for doom. It brought to my mind Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, and such. Thanks to "Buddha-Dhamma For Inquiring Minds" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu (an ADHD-friendly question & answer format, https://www.suanmokkh.org/books/121 https://www.suanmokkh.org/books/121), I understood that it is an unfortunate coincidence of words. These two concepts of Void or Emptiness are very opposite, as opposite as Hell and Heaven. To my understanding, I would use the word "Clarity" instead. Light passes through, interacts with it, but does not cling to anything.
- N_Lens 7mo ago
  Thanks for sharing.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
trane_project 7mo ago
"But the cost of the mindfulness revolution has been Buddhism’s lost monopoly on many of its core concepts. Very few of those using Buddhist practices will ever become Buddhists in a religious sense. California Buddhism is one of the most successful cultural syntheses of the last century; but as far as conversion goes, it seems that it is Buddhism that has embraced California rather than the other way around." Pretty much. Sad state of affairs. I don't care if people find something positive in Buddhism and offer their own takes, but too many people call their offerings "Buddhism" for the clout. Finding a qualified teacher becomes very difficult if you are actually interested in Buddhism. On the positive side, I don't actually agree with the first sentence. You still have to find a proper Buddhist teacher if you want to be taught the good stuff. Even if you found the instructions somehow, it either requires proper motivation (at which point you are a buddhist) or a transmission for those methods to actually work.
- pasquinelli 7mo ago
  > Finding a qualified teacher becomes very difficult if you are actually interested in Buddhism. you can find that same complaint 1000 years ago.
- jrvarela56 7mo ago
  I guess then if you did not receive instruction from the Buddha himself you cannot call yourself a true buddhist.
  - kelseyfrog 7mo ago
    Buddhas are fairly easy to meet on the road.
  - trane_project 7mo ago
    No need. You just find someone that has a proper transmission, meaning that they were taught by a teacher that also had transmission, and so on. It's sort of like medical school. Your doctor was trained by doctors that trained under other doctors and so on. People are free to take whatever they want from Buddhism and practice and teach it, even if completely unqualified. There is no dharma police to call. I was just making the point that calling teachings that reject core tenants of Buddhism by the same name is often just done to help them associate with whatever "clout" the word Buddhism has in the popular imagination. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction is an example of how to properly go about this process without overstating what it really is.
daoboy 7mo ago
The majority of my encounters with West Coast Buddhism have been... off-putting. Particularly in the SF tech scene, there is an unfortunate 'competitive enlightenment' vibe amongst many of those who profess to follow Buddhist teachings. "Oh, you've only attained the second jhāna? I got through all four on my first try." I am certain there are plenty of genuine and sincere practitioners out there, but my small sample has not included any.
- trane_project 7mo ago
  If it's any consolation, they are full of shit. In the second jhana and above, the factors of initial and sustained attention disappear. In practical terms, this means you cannot direct your thoughts away from the object of concentration once you enter such state. You have to decide beforehand how long you will be in that state and give yourself a mental timer. See Dipa Ma's biography for a case of someone actually entering higher jhanas that way. This is the reason that anything beyond the first dhyana is not encouraged in Mahayana, as it is impossible to apply vipasyana in a state of concentration so deep that you cannot direct your mind. The teachers popular in the SF scene are inflating their own achievements and the ones of their students by using very lightweight criteria. I had that experience when I attended a TWIM retreat before their founder died. According to them, I reached the fourth or fifth jhana. I can assure you I did not.
  - throwforfeds 7mo ago
    Yeah, agreed, there's a lot of misinformation. I'm always encountering people that say they just started, followed a guided meditation on the jhanas and entered fourth jhana within a week. And then the signs they describe are all just your basic things that arise when you first start having some facility over your practice, probably not even stability in the first jhana. Not to mention that it's impossible to be following a guided, external voice when you're in such a state of absorption. As Chogyam Trungpa would probably say, they're all practicing spiritual materialism.
- jmspring 7mo ago
  I worked in SF prior to the dotcom bust. Since I was commuting and made a day of when I had to be in the office. I took yoga with Larry Schultz - the yoga teach for the Grateful Dead, he had a studio near 4th and Brannon (I believe, memory foggy). He was great to listen to stories and learn from. As mentioned in another post, I've been to SF Zen Center events both in practice and adjacent classes. The tech scene now has become much more narcissistic than it was then. I didn't see the evolution as clearly as I did in Palo Alto while working there and in Mountain View. I would not couple the tech scene with spiritual practices themselves. Judge the so called practicioners not the practice / practice instructors/organization.
jmspring 7mo ago
I’m not digging into beliefs and the like. I’ve been to Tassajara Zen Center as well as Green Gulch. SF Zen Center is a treasure. The meditation room and part of the library were impacted by a fire recently - https://www.lionsroar.com/tassajara-zen-mountain-centers-zendo-destroyed-by-fire/ https://www.lionsroar.com/tassajara-zen-mountain-centers-zen... Tassajara in the Santa Lucia range (south of Carmel valley) can be a harsh environment.
w10-1 7mo ago
> as far as conversion goes, it seems that it is Buddhism that has embraced California rather than the other way around That's not really the measure (and to be expected: Bodhisattva's always work within their context) As early as 1960's Suzuki-Roshi would leave off temple duties at Sokoji because so many students wanted to learn meditation (and not just practice comforting rituals). For the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions, practice is everything - not philosophy, opinion, or behavior. Yes, it's nice that the West has embraced Buddhism and that Buddhism has managed to provide a philosophical counterpoint without actually conflicting. But thousands - hundreds of thousands? - of people have gone through deep meditation training in the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions (coast to coast); for most it has been life-changing. That wasn't due to "Buddhism" but to the lifelong commitment of (on the order of a hundred) effective teachers (many of whom are now aging out). I would recommend at some point in anyone's life, that they build up to some deep meditation practice - weeks-long sessions - from real teachers in these longstanding traditions. There's nothing better for opening the envelope of life.
- flats 7mo ago
  I agree with almost all of this, & yes, retreats can be life-changing. They certainly have been for me! However, I do not understand this comment: For the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions, practice is everything - not philosophy, opinion, or behavior. Right action is an essential element of the Noble Eightfold Path. I have myself found the teachings concerning behavior to be a central element of my practice as I have gone deeper with the dhamma.
  - w10-1 7mo ago
    (sorry for delayed response) I agree about right action. I (shouldn't have) used "behavior" (probably idiosyncratically) to mean performative actions to signal compliance - projections for the sake of their impact, like holding opinions for the sake of the ensuing emotions (illusions) or expounding them for the sake of social acceptance. "Right action" I take as practice in all of one's interactions, just as dharma is philosophy and opinion, but as practice in thinking and communicating. Similarly, forms are maintained for practice purposes (not for weeding or highlighting people, etc.)
amriksohata 7mo ago
Many of these philosophies are repackaged Hindu traditions
- throwforfeds 7mo ago
  My teacher (former gelug monk of 20+ years) said during one talk years ago that Buddhism could be considered a form of Hinduism, as of course there are so many streams of Hinduism and no singular form of it. Buddhism had to be in dialogue with the environment that it sprung from, even if it rejected core tenants of mainstream "Hinduism" of the time (primarily caste, ritual purity, the denial of atman, etc). And of course the Jains were doing similar things in that early period. So yeah, Buddhism came out of Hindu tradition, and Hindu tradition brought teachings from Buddhists back into their spiritual paths as well (like Hatha yoga in the Amrtasiddhi [1] and even Patanjali's yoga sutras contain a good amount of early Buddhism in it [2]). It's almost as if the teachings on interdependence are correct! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritasiddhi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritasiddhi [2] https://www.academia.edu/25517181/Some_Problematic_Yoga_Sutras_and_their_Buddhist_Background https://www.academia.edu/25517181/Some_Problematic_Yoga_Sutr...

72 points by surprisetalk 7mo ago

mvkel 7mo ago

This was an enjoyable read. It seems Buddhism has followed the same path as any other religion/practice of the same age. I imagine that today's Christianity doesn't look much like it did in 500AD, just as I imagine Scientology in 1,000 years will have evolved. Is this a bad thing? Does religion not represent our perception of the meaning of life, evolving with us as knowledge, wisdom and tolerance (or lack thereof) is passed through the generations?

_fw 7mo ago
The teachings of the Buddha explicitly encouraged it. Buddhism is the only religion I know of that instructs you to fully abandon it, as once you’ve fully grokked what it has to teach… you won’t need it any more. IIRC the Buddha said it was like carrying the oar of a boat: once you have used it to get you to your destination (nibbhana), carrying it is needless.
- gavmor 7mo ago
  > Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, puriso mahato udakassa ... ‘yan-nūnāhaṃ tiṇakaṭṭhapaṇṇaṃ saṅkhaṇiyaṃ saṅkhaṇeyyaṃ, tenañ-ca mahaudakaṃ abhinaveyyaṃ hatthipādena vā aṅgapādena vā ... Atha kho so puriso taṃ kulhiraṃ āropetvā pāre gaccheyya. Tam-enaṃ loko ‘kiṃsu, bho, karissati kulhirena pāraṃ gato’ti? Evaṃ, bhikkhave, dhammaṃ desitaṃ ājānāsi: ‘pāraṅgamanaṃ dhammaṃ, anupagamma dhamma’ti. > सेय्यथापि भिक्खवे पुरिसो महतो उदकस्स ओरिमतटे ठितो एतस्मिं चत्ते ओरिमा तटा कल्लंणं भयंवरं, परमा तटा निब्बयं भयंविरं, न च नावाय संयताय न च पुल्लेन गन्तब्बं। तं किमन्तरेन। यन्नुनाहं तिणकट्ठपण्णं संकलिय च मज्झे उदकं अभिनवेन्तं हत्थिपदेन व अङ्गपदेन व तीरणं करोमि। अथ खो सो पुरिसो तिणकट्ठपण्णं संकलिय च मज्झे उदकं अभिनवेन्तो हत्थिपदेन व अङ्गपदेन व तीरणं करोति। तं पच्छा समन्ततो गन्त्वा पारे गच्छति। तं एं लोको किं नु खो करिस्सति कूल्हिरेन पारा गतो ती? एवमेव खो भिक्खवे धम्मो देशितो अजानासि। पारं गमनेन धम्मं नुपगम्म धम्मं। Alagaddūpama Sutta (MN 22) of the Majjhima Nikāya, part of the Pali Canon. (MN 22, सेय्यथापि... से अंतまで)
  - wise_blood 7mo ago
    https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=plain&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=plain...
- hmm37 7mo ago
  Very similar to Zhuangzi (Daoism). 荃者所以在魚，得魚而忘荃蹄者所以在兔，得兔而忘蹄言者所以在意，得意而忘言吾安得忘言之人而與之言哉？ The fish trap exists because of the fish; once you've gotten the fish, you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit; once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning; once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can have a word with him?
  - _fw 7mo ago
    I love this! Thank you.
dijksterhuis 7mo ago
i really like that shunryū suzuki quoting dogen talking about "one continuous mistake" is a complete and utter misquote. internalised understanding, attitudes, views etc. are more important that being able to recite things from a book.
snayan 7mo ago
It depends on the root of the evolution I would say. Sure, if someone has gone through the process and achieved enlightenment like Buddha, they may be able to evolve the teachings to better fit the times. However, my gut says that is often not the case, and much of the evolution is egoic in nature at the hands of a charismatic individual who wants to fulfil their desire or lust for power. I'm far from an expert on Buddhism, but my own journey has taught me that ultimately we must kill our Buddhas and inner realization ultimately is a journey you must walk alone and discover for yourself. The teachers along the way may serve as wayfinding, but must ultimately be discarded. If the evolved state of the religion seems like a big club, and isn't serving it's members to strike out on their own on their inward journey, to achieve independence and sovereignty, it should be questioned in my opinion.
graemep 7mo ago
> I imagine that today's Christianity doesn't look much like it did in 500AD I would would say it does look pretty similar. The Council of Nicea nearly 200 years earlier had established a consensus/mainstream theology. The papacy existed, although it did not claim the same level of authority. Even churches were built in styles similar to modern ones. > Is this a bad thing? Does religion not represent our perception of the meaning of life, evolving with us as knowledge, wisdom and tolerance (or lack thereof) is passed through the generations? In principle it is not a bad thing, but it is a matter of opinion. Christianity and Buddhism are both revealed religions so losing the truths the founder of the religion taught is a bad thing, learning more is a good thing. Which is which is a matter of opinion.

_fw 7mo ago

I was surprised to see Jack Kornfield, Sharon Salzburg and Joseph Goldstein not mentioned here. They’re the founding forces behind the Insight Meditation Society in MA, which although isn’t the West Coast, is perhaps the most influential force in popular Buddhism in the West. Kornfield also set up Spirit Rock Meditation Centre in California though, which gets tens of thousands of visitors a year. Having dived really quite far into Buddhism over the past five years, I’ve found their flavour of Insight Meditation (as per the New Burmese Method based on Mahasi Sayadaw’s teachings) absolutely life changing. A great read, thank you for sharing. If anybody is interested in reading further - Goldstein’s podcasts, Mahasi Sayadaw’s writing, Kornfield’s introductory texts and ANYTHING by Bhikku Bodhi are a phenomenal place to start.

Wonnk13 7mo ago
yea I'd +1 this. It's a real blindspot in the author's writing. I don't think you can write about meditation in the US without mentioning IMS. Headspace and all the other mcmindfulness apps that start with "focus on your breath" are all derived from Insight meditation. I've sat IMS, it's an incredible facility.
bitslayer 7mo ago
It does mention the Insight Meditation Society.
jackschultz 7mo ago
Be Here Now network, which started with Ram Dass, still does mostly weekly videos from Goldstein and Kornfield. Search for their names where you listen to your podcasts. Incredibly good to listen to. Other ones I listen to are in the Thai Forrest Tradition, started from Ajahn Chah and now talks from Abhayagiri, Amaravati. Other one from Mahayana, which has so many talks and probably the best book I've read, Seeing That Frees, is Rob Burbea. He died from cancer in 2020, which is incredibly sad given how young he still was and much he's produced for us. All of these people give different angles on the teachings of the Buddha. I highly suggest listening and reading from these people and the differing traditions all talking for similar goals of how to look at the world for the acknowledgement of dukkha (pain / suffering) and how to deal with it. You don't need to sit and meditate either to get the benefits.

helterskelter 7mo ago

Interesting article, I've been thinking about this lately myself. Buddhism influenced German philosophy in the 1800's through Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, which basically influenced everything that came afterwards, and it also influenced art through Dada which you could argue was really a crypto-Buddhist/Taoism fusion expressed through a somewhat distorted Western lens, and that really goes on to influence postmodernism to a huge degree. This embedded it in Western thought in a much deeper way than 1960's fascination with Zen and Tibetan Buddhism IMHO. I think Buddhist philosophy still has a way to go making its way through the West -- liberal democracy's crisis of vacuuity is something we're really struggling to come to terms with, and it feels like Western society is slipping into a full-blown existential crisis. Seems like fertile ground for a religion and philosophy that a large part of is predicated on nothingness and how to live and be content in the void. I have to admit though that it's unbelievable watching the market's seemingly unlimited ability to coopt, repackage and in turn sell literally anything, even a religion and philosophical system which would be completely opposite to a consumer society.

sigbottle 7mo ago
> it's unbelievable watching the market's seemingly unlimited ability to coopt, repackage and in turn sell literally anything, even a religion and philosophical system which would be completely opposite to a consumer society. In some sense, this is one manifestation of what Nietzche said was a good state. A scrappy, anti-metaphysical system that doesn't need to rest on grand notions of reason or morality (not that there is no reason or morality, but in the traditional Western metaphysics sense; I find that people often conflate the two, I certainly did at one point), that simply outcompetes, adapts, and comes out on top. On the other hand, I think Nietzche would have hated the outcome and would have worked to further refine his philosophy. I wonder what his thoughts would be in the 21st century. Also through your comment, I realize I don't actually understand subtle differences in Eastern philosophy. Confucianism would have been up Nietzche's alley (no metaphysics), but Buddhism is a weird mix of "metaphysics" in the sense of spirits and gods, but not "metaphysics" in the Western Platonic tradition, and is in fact in many ways opposite to many of the dualities and boundaries that Western metaphysics creates.
stared 7mo ago

prieveschl 7mo ago

This was a great article, thanks so much for sharing. As a buddhist who started in Tibetan Vajrayana as a teenager and has ended up chanting NMRK in the SGI, I can appreciate that faith, like human beings, adapts to its time and surroundings. While personal gain and financial enrichment and the like have infected almost every faith there is on earth (we are all fallible to some extent) the through line of an ever-narrowing compression of practice makes sense on the pursuit of enlightenment. And, while study is essential in any pursuit of the mind, the mind is sometimes our biggest adversary. Here is what I wrestled with for years, and I think it’s worth sharing because I suspect some of you have wrestled with it too. Every Buddhist tradition agrees that all living beings possess Buddha nature. The Lotus Sutra’s parable of the Jewel in the Robe says it plainly: you already have a priceless jewel sewn into your clothing. You always have. You just don’t know it’s there. Enlightenment isn’t something you earn or achieve. It’s something you already are. So if that’s true — if the jewel is already there — why is it so hard to find? And this is where I kept getting stuck. Because the tool we use to look for the jewel is the same tool that hides it from us. Our consciousness. Our thinking, analyzing, questioning mind. The very thing that makes us human is also the thing that stands between us and what every tradition says is our birthright. Each school of Buddhism is, in its own way, a set of gymnastics designed to get the mind out of its own way. Zen tries to crash it with paradox. Tibetan practice tries to transmute its energy. Pure Land tries to exhaust it into surrender. And each one works, for some people, some of the time. But the fundamental problem remains: you cannot use the mind to escape the mind. This is the contradiction I brought with me to Nichiren Buddhism. And to be honest, I found the same contradiction here, stated more plainly. We say that a single sincere recitation of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo contains the entirety of Buddhahood within it. And I believe that. But we also say: don’t stop chanting. Keep going. Practice daily. Because your delusions will reassert themselves by tomorrow morning. So which is it? Is one moment enough, or isn’t it? The contradiction dissolves when you stop thinking of practice as a means to an end and start seeing it as living itself. Each breath you take is a complete act. No single breath is insufficient. But you keep breathing — not because the last breath failed, but because you’re alive and that’s what living things do. Each moment of chanting or meditating, each act of compassion, each time you turn toward someone else’s suffering instead of away from it — that’s not a step on the path to enlightenment. It is enlightenment, expressed through action. Kierkegaard wrote that life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards. Perhaps that’s why Pure Land buddhists seek this fundamental meaning at the time of death, that that is when enlightenment will reveal itself. But remember the jewel? It’s right there, any moment you honestly reach for it. Thank you again for this fantastic perspective on the trajectory of this universal search for truth!

MassPikeMike 7mo ago

The article "FTFY Buddhist Ethics" [1] comes to a similar conclusion about the development of West Coast Buddhism but isn't on board with it. IMHO an interesting contrarian take. [1] https://vividness.live/ftfy-buddhist-ethics https://vividness.live/ftfy-buddhist-ethics

akoboldfrying 7mo ago
Thank you for linking to this. Years ago I chanced upon this website, and it was my first experience of reading something about Buddhism that seemed to consciously strive for clarity, for intelligibility to an interested layperson, rather than for what I'll call "easy mysticism" for its own sake.
- wise_blood 7mo ago
  If you want a list of common points among traditions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Points_Unifying_Therav%C4%81da_and_Mah%C4%81y%C4%81na https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Points_Unifying_Therav%C... some may be more difficult to comprehend, but it's all there

threethirtytwo 7mo ago

Honest question: Is buddihsm real? Does it have any basis in scientific and objective reality? Or is it fiction? I don't mean side stuff like meditation improves your IQ I mean does the fundamental point of buddihism have any basis in reality. If it is fiction, why is it so popular among technical people like people who come to HN? Are the people on HN who are interested in Buddhism aware it is fiction/real?

_doctor_love 7mo ago
> Is buddihsm real? Does it have any basis in scientific and objective reality? Or is it fiction? These are Buddhist questions. :) The Buddha famously told his followers not to accept his teaching merely because he said it, instead he told them to "go and see for yourself." The point is that if you want to know if buddhism is real, try out the practices and see if they make sense to you and make a difference. If the practices work, adopt them, if you find them worthless, abandon them. You get free will and karma in Buddhism. Great 2-for-1 special. Another way to come at it is to consider the good old Four Noble Truths. There are different ways to say them but this is how I learned them: * Life is full of suffering * Suffering is caused by attachment to desire * There is a way beyond attachment * Meditation and Buddhism is the way beyond attachment (or to Enlightenment, if you prefer)
- thinkling 7mo ago
  +1 on most of this. A small note: I think “suffering” is an unfortunate translation as it connotes dire circumstances or real pain, whereas I understand dukkha to include simple discontent, dissatisfaction, and stress. I take the Buddha to have said roughly, “I teach the origin of unhappiness and how to liberate yourself from it.”
  - _doctor_love 7mo ago
    > I think “suffering” is an unfortunate translation as it connotes dire circumstances or real pain, whereas I understand dukkha to include simple discontent, dissatisfaction, and stress. Agree. Suffering doesn't send the right message in terms of what the word is trying to signal. The best version I've heard is likening life to a carriage ride, and the wheel is just never quite right, so it's always just a little bit uncomfortable. Nothing's just ever quite right.

someone7x 7mo ago

Wow never thought I would see an article mention Shinryu Suzuki, very cool. I read Zen Mind Beginner’s Mind as a kid and I still remember practicing the sitting and breathing like it was a magical tome. The hardest part I remember is the nothingness of meditation and I remember his warnings not to fixate on trains of thought. I should probably reread it sometime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_Mind,_Beginner%27s_Mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_Mind,_Beginner%27s_Mind

stared 7mo ago

I used to think that in Buddhism, the pursuit of the Void is existential masochism, a glorified search for doom. It brought to my mind Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, and such. Thanks to "Buddha-Dhamma For Inquiring Minds" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu (an ADHD-friendly question & answer format, https://www.suanmokkh.org/books/121 https://www.suanmokkh.org/books/121), I understood that it is an unfortunate coincidence of words. These two concepts of Void or Emptiness are very opposite, as opposite as Hell and Heaven. To my understanding, I would use the word "Clarity" instead. Light passes through, interacts with it, but does not cling to anything.

N_Lens 7mo ago
Thanks for sharing.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

trane_project 7mo ago

"But the cost of the mindfulness revolution has been Buddhism’s lost monopoly on many of its core concepts. Very few of those using Buddhist practices will ever become Buddhists in a religious sense. California Buddhism is one of the most successful cultural syntheses of the last century; but as far as conversion goes, it seems that it is Buddhism that has embraced California rather than the other way around." Pretty much. Sad state of affairs. I don't care if people find something positive in Buddhism and offer their own takes, but too many people call their offerings "Buddhism" for the clout. Finding a qualified teacher becomes very difficult if you are actually interested in Buddhism. On the positive side, I don't actually agree with the first sentence. You still have to find a proper Buddhist teacher if you want to be taught the good stuff. Even if you found the instructions somehow, it either requires proper motivation (at which point you are a buddhist) or a transmission for those methods to actually work.

pasquinelli 7mo ago
> Finding a qualified teacher becomes very difficult if you are actually interested in Buddhism. you can find that same complaint 1000 years ago.
jrvarela56 7mo ago
I guess then if you did not receive instruction from the Buddha himself you cannot call yourself a true buddhist.
- kelseyfrog 7mo ago
  Buddhas are fairly easy to meet on the road.
- trane_project 7mo ago
  No need. You just find someone that has a proper transmission, meaning that they were taught by a teacher that also had transmission, and so on. It's sort of like medical school. Your doctor was trained by doctors that trained under other doctors and so on. People are free to take whatever they want from Buddhism and practice and teach it, even if completely unqualified. There is no dharma police to call. I was just making the point that calling teachings that reject core tenants of Buddhism by the same name is often just done to help them associate with whatever "clout" the word Buddhism has in the popular imagination. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction is an example of how to properly go about this process without overstating what it really is.

daoboy 7mo ago

The majority of my encounters with West Coast Buddhism have been... off-putting. Particularly in the SF tech scene, there is an unfortunate 'competitive enlightenment' vibe amongst many of those who profess to follow Buddhist teachings. "Oh, you've only attained the second jhāna? I got through all four on my first try." I am certain there are plenty of genuine and sincere practitioners out there, but my small sample has not included any.

trane_project 7mo ago
If it's any consolation, they are full of shit. In the second jhana and above, the factors of initial and sustained attention disappear. In practical terms, this means you cannot direct your thoughts away from the object of concentration once you enter such state. You have to decide beforehand how long you will be in that state and give yourself a mental timer. See Dipa Ma's biography for a case of someone actually entering higher jhanas that way. This is the reason that anything beyond the first dhyana is not encouraged in Mahayana, as it is impossible to apply vipasyana in a state of concentration so deep that you cannot direct your mind. The teachers popular in the SF scene are inflating their own achievements and the ones of their students by using very lightweight criteria. I had that experience when I attended a TWIM retreat before their founder died. According to them, I reached the fourth or fifth jhana. I can assure you I did not.
- throwforfeds 7mo ago
  Yeah, agreed, there's a lot of misinformation. I'm always encountering people that say they just started, followed a guided meditation on the jhanas and entered fourth jhana within a week. And then the signs they describe are all just your basic things that arise when you first start having some facility over your practice, probably not even stability in the first jhana. Not to mention that it's impossible to be following a guided, external voice when you're in such a state of absorption. As Chogyam Trungpa would probably say, they're all practicing spiritual materialism.
jmspring 7mo ago
I worked in SF prior to the dotcom bust. Since I was commuting and made a day of when I had to be in the office. I took yoga with Larry Schultz - the yoga teach for the Grateful Dead, he had a studio near 4th and Brannon (I believe, memory foggy). He was great to listen to stories and learn from. As mentioned in another post, I've been to SF Zen Center events both in practice and adjacent classes. The tech scene now has become much more narcissistic than it was then. I didn't see the evolution as clearly as I did in Palo Alto while working there and in Mountain View. I would not couple the tech scene with spiritual practices themselves. Judge the so called practicioners not the practice / practice instructors/organization.

jmspring 7mo ago

I’m not digging into beliefs and the like. I’ve been to Tassajara Zen Center as well as Green Gulch. SF Zen Center is a treasure. The meditation room and part of the library were impacted by a fire recently - https://www.lionsroar.com/tassajara-zen-mountain-centers-zendo-destroyed-by-fire/ https://www.lionsroar.com/tassajara-zen-mountain-centers-zen... Tassajara in the Santa Lucia range (south of Carmel valley) can be a harsh environment.

w10-1 7mo ago

> as far as conversion goes, it seems that it is Buddhism that has embraced California rather than the other way around That's not really the measure (and to be expected: Bodhisattva's always work within their context) As early as 1960's Suzuki-Roshi would leave off temple duties at Sokoji because so many students wanted to learn meditation (and not just practice comforting rituals). For the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions, practice is everything - not philosophy, opinion, or behavior. Yes, it's nice that the West has embraced Buddhism and that Buddhism has managed to provide a philosophical counterpoint without actually conflicting. But thousands - hundreds of thousands? - of people have gone through deep meditation training in the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions (coast to coast); for most it has been life-changing. That wasn't due to "Buddhism" but to the lifelong commitment of (on the order of a hundred) effective teachers (many of whom are now aging out). I would recommend at some point in anyone's life, that they build up to some deep meditation practice - weeks-long sessions - from real teachers in these longstanding traditions. There's nothing better for opening the envelope of life.

flats 7mo ago
I agree with almost all of this, & yes, retreats can be life-changing. They certainly have been for me! However, I do not understand this comment: For the Soto Zen and Vipassana traditions, practice is everything - not philosophy, opinion, or behavior. Right action is an essential element of the Noble Eightfold Path. I have myself found the teachings concerning behavior to be a central element of my practice as I have gone deeper with the dhamma.
- w10-1 7mo ago
  (sorry for delayed response) I agree about right action. I (shouldn't have) used "behavior" (probably idiosyncratically) to mean performative actions to signal compliance - projections for the sake of their impact, like holding opinions for the sake of the ensuing emotions (illusions) or expounding them for the sake of social acceptance. "Right action" I take as practice in all of one's interactions, just as dharma is philosophy and opinion, but as practice in thinking and communicating. Similarly, forms are maintained for practice purposes (not for weeding or highlighting people, etc.)

amriksohata 7mo ago

Many of these philosophies are repackaged Hindu traditions

throwforfeds 7mo ago
My teacher (former gelug monk of 20+ years) said during one talk years ago that Buddhism could be considered a form of Hinduism, as of course there are so many streams of Hinduism and no singular form of it. Buddhism had to be in dialogue with the environment that it sprung from, even if it rejected core tenants of mainstream "Hinduism" of the time (primarily caste, ritual purity, the denial of atman, etc). And of course the Jains were doing similar things in that early period. So yeah, Buddhism came out of Hindu tradition, and Hindu tradition brought teachings from Buddhists back into their spiritual paths as well (like Hatha yoga in the Amrtasiddhi [1] and even Patanjali's yoga sutras contain a good amount of early Buddhism in it [2]). It's almost as if the teachings on interdependence are correct! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritasiddhi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritasiddhi [2] https://www.academia.edu/25517181/Some_Problematic_Yoga_Sutras_and_their_Buddhist_Background https://www.academia.edu/25517181/Some_Problematic_Yoga_Sutr...