Heavy Cross To Bear

night-shifts are, as per, slooow at the moment. but a site i'm really enjoying, killing the buddha, is helping the time pass more quickly. reading several articles is also causing me to look back and reflect on my own religious upbringing as the son of a Rector and subsequent shift to Buddhadharma.

it's stating the obvious to say that Buddhadharma is still relatively new to the West and i think many like myself come to it with a certain amount of religious baggage and quite probably several misconceptions too.

even mentioning Buddhism and religion in the same breath will sometimes bring up waves of protest and subsequent debate that the former can't be classed as the latter. along similar lines some will say that the concept of God is entirely absent within Buddhism, and while this may be true in the sense of an almighty Alpha and Omega, the suttas and sutras frequently mention devas, indras, asuras and other heavenly beings. this being so, it's not uncommon to hear the claim such examples amount to cultural baggage which Buddhadharma has aquired since early times in its history and at the extreme end of the debate the implication that one of the great tasks facing Buddhadharma in the West is to purge it altogether of these "superstitions".

the Kalama Sutta has become an oft quoted favourite to support the arguement that Buddhism favours an approach where if what is read or heard does not sit with one's own experience (or in some cases, one's preference) then one must dismiss it altogether and carry on regardless. but we need only read Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's introduction to the sutta to see that this is a mistaken interpretation -

Although this discourse is often cited as the Buddha's carte blanche for following one's own sense of right and wrong, it actually says something much more rigorous than that. Traditions are not to be followed simply because they are traditions. Reports (such as historical accounts or news) are not to be followed simply because the source seems reliable. One's own preferences are not to be followed simply because they seem logical or resonate with one's feelings. Instead, any view or belief must be tested by the results it yields when put into practice; and — to guard against the possibility of any bias or limitations in one's understanding of those results — they must further be checked against the experience of people who are wise. The ability to question and test one's beliefs in an appropriate way is called appropriate attention. The ability to recognize and choose wise people as mentors is called having admirable friends 

judging by the above comments i have often observed an acceptance of and agreement with  - Instead, any view or belief must be tested by the results it yields when put into practice - but an inconsideration of - and — to guard against the possibility of any bias or limitations in one's understanding of those results — they must further be checked against the experience of people who are wise.ofcourse i am making generalisations here and certainly don't claim to speak for all Western Buddhists, none the less i do believe there is some validity in the observation. 

many new to Buddhism have left behind their Christian faith (such as i myself) and in certain cases this "conversion" has created some tension between themselves and their family members. part of the appeal perhaps of Buddhism, are the radical differences - rebirth, not-self, emptiness, enlightenment and so on and so forth. and thus anything within Buddhadharma that appears even remotely similar to the religion they have come from, or even religion in itself, appears to threaten the sense of conversion to a radically different way of seeing the world which they have just begun to undertake.


so we will sometimes hear either blatently or subtly, an attack on their old outlooks and faith. a derision and perhaps a certain sense of anger directed to that which they have turned away from. and its at this point that i realise i have not always been so exempt from such a tendency. but i believe that in order to let go then we need to stop being so angry and upset at our religious pasts, stop being so derisive, halt in some cases our desire to outright attack them and instead turn back and face them.

we need not fear that in doing this we somehow betray our refuge. facing is not to be taken as agreeing with or re-converting. i prefer to see this "turning around", a process that i am beginning with baby-steps to undertake, as a way of making peace with our past. a way of dropping the anger, dropping the resentment and learning to appreciate rather than shun our religious histories, whatever they may be.

when i think of the encouragement and curiousity my own mother, an evangelical christian, has displayed towards the Dharma path i have undertaken then i realise the depths of the selfless love she has for me. a love that makes her say yes to coming with me to Three Wheels, a love makes her encourage me to attend Chomon, a love that makes her sit and listen with interest and i read to her from Kiyozawa's diary. but i can not say that i have been so encouraging or curious to engage with and share in her own path. and i think this speaks back to the anger i spoke of earlier, an anger that in my own case is unfounded, has no basis, an anger that is selfish. 

and so i am learning to turn around. i no longer want to harbour this purposeless anger. i want to make peace with and understand my religious history and i want to share in my mothers own path with the same interest, curiosity, encouragement and above all love that she has displayed for me on mine. and so i look forward to, in the not too distant future, picking up some Meister Eckhart, some Thomas A Kempis and other works of the christian mystics and reading and discussing them with her. it's a small start - baby-steps. 

in the words of the Dhammapada - let a man conquer anger by love. may these words, my mother's love for me and mine for her and Amida Buddha's Infinite Light guide me through this undertaking, step by step.


namu amida butsu