|
|
Blues
for Buddha
-By Jed Mckenna
Mind is the sword.
Heart is the will to use it.
Being critical of Buddhism isn't easy. Buddhism is the most likable
of the major religions, and Buddhists are the perennial good guys of
modern spirituality. Beautiful traditions, lovely architecture, inspiring
statuary, ancient history, the Dalai Lama — what's not to like?
Everything about Buddhsim is just so — nice. No fatwahs or jihads,
no inquisitions or crusades, no terrorists or pederasts, just nice people
being nice. In fact, Buddhism means niceness. Nice-ism.
At least, it should.
Buddha means Awakened One, so Buddhism can be taken to mean Awake-ism.
Awakism. It would therefore be natural to think that if you were looking
to wake up, then Buddhism, i.e., Awakism, would be the place to look.
The Light is Better Over Here
Such thinking, however, would reveal a dangerous lack of respect for
the opposition. Maya, goddess of delusion, has been doing her job with
supreme mastery since the first spark of self-awareness flickered in
some monkey's brainbox, and the idea that the neophyte truth-seeker
can just sign up with the Buddhists, read some books, embrace some new
concepts and slam her to the mat would be a bit on the naive side, as
billions of sincere but unsuccessful seekers over the last twenty-five
centuries might grudgingly attest.
On the other hand, why not? How’d this get so turned around? It’s
just truth. Shouldn’t truth be, like, the simplest thing? Shouldn’t
someone who wants to find something as ubiquitous as truth be able to
do so? How can anyone manage to not find truth? And here’s this
venerable organization supposedly dedicated to just that very thing,
even named for it, and it's a total flop.
So what’s the problem?
Why doesn’t Buddhism produce Buddhas?
The problem arises from the fact that Buddhists, like everyone else,
insist on reconciling the irreconcilable. They don’t just want
to awaken to the true, they also want to make sense of the untrue. They
want to have their cake and eat it too, so they end up with nonsensical
theories, divergent schools, sagacious doubletalk, and zero Buddhas.
Typical of their insistence on reconciling the irreconcilable is the
Buddhist concept of Two Truths, a poignant two-word joke they don’t
seem to get, and yet this sort of perversely irrational thinking is
near the very heart of the failed search for truth. We don’t want
truth, we want a particular truth; one that doesn't threaten ego —
one that doesn’t exist. We insist on a truth that makes sense
given what we know, not knowing that we know nothing.
Nothing about Buddhism is more revealing than the Four Noble Truths
which, not being true, are of dubious nobility. They form the basis
of Buddhism, so it's clear from the outset that the Buddhists have whipped
up a proprietary version of truth shaped more by market forces than
any particular concern for the less consumer-friendly, albeit true,
truth.
Buddhism may be spiritually filling, even nourishing, but insofar as
truth is concerned, it's just the same old junkfood in a different package.
You can eat it every day of your life and die exactly as awakened as
the day you signed up.
Bait & Switch
Buddhism is a classic bait-and-switch operation. We’re attracted
by the enlightenment in the window, but as soon as we’re in the
door they start steering us over to the compassion aisle. Buddhists
could be honest and change their name to Compassionism, but who wants
that?
There's the rub. They can’t get us in the door with compassion,
and they can’t deliver on the promise of enlightenment.
It's not limited to compassion, of course. Their shelves are stocked
with all sorts of goodies and enticements, practically anything anyone
could want, with just the one rather notable exception.
If they had just stopped when they had Anicca, impermanence, and Anatta,
no-self, then they would have had a true and effective teaching they
could be proud of, except there would be no they because Buddhism would
have died with the Buddha. They'd have a good product, but no customers.
This untruth-in-advertising is the kind of game you have to play if
you want to stay successful in a business where the customer is always
wrong. You can either go out of business honestly, or thrive by giving
the people what they want. What they say they want and what they really
want, though, are two very different things.
Me Me Me
To the outside observer, much of Buddhist knowledge and practice seems
focused on spiritual self-improvement. This, too, is hard to speak against
— except within the context of awakening from delusion. Then it's
easy.
There is no such thing as true self, so any pursuit geared toward its
aggrandizement, betterment, upliftment, elevation, evolution, glorification,
salvation, etc, is utter folly. How much more so any endeavor undertaken
merely to increase one's own happiness or contentment or — I'm
embarrassed just to say it — bliss?
Self is ego and ego resides exclusively in the dreamstate. If you want
to break free of the dreamstate, you must break free of self, not stroke
it to make it purr or groom it for some imagined brighter future.
Maya's House of Enlightenment
The trick with being critical of so esteemed and beloved an institution
is not to get dragged down into the morass of details and debate. It's
very simple: If Buddhism is about enlightenment, people should be getting
enlightened. If it's not about enlightenment, they should change the
name.
Of course, Buddhism isn't completely unique in resorting to shoddy marketing
tactics. This same gulf between promise and performance is found in
all systems of human spirituality. We're looking at it in Buddhism because
that's where it's most pronounced. No disrespect to the Buddha is intended.
If there was a Buddha and he was enlightened, then it's Buddhism that
insults his memory, not healthy skepticism. Blame the naked emperor's
retinue of lackeys and lickspittles, not the unbeguiled lad who merely
states the obvious.
Buddhism is arguably the most elevated of man's great belief systems.
If you want to enjoy the many valuable benefits it has to offer, then
I wouldn't presume to utter a syllable against it. But, if you want
to escape from the clutches of Maya, then I suggest you take a very
close look at the serene face on all those golden statues — and
see if it isn't really hers.
|
|