Hey people Lately I've been thinking... (not that I don't do that more often.. but I was thinking something that is relavent for this forum ).. Most of the social initiatives in my country seem to be of Christian origin.. that makes perfect sense, since this country has deep christian roots.. but still.. I wonder... Where are the buddhist initiatives to help others? Buddhism is said to be all about compassion and yet I have a hard time finding any buddhist social care stuff. The Hare Krishna folk are handing out soup for free.. but buddhist? It's no stress to find websites for meditation guidance or the occasional 'donate money for this and that project in Tibet, Vietnam etc'.. but local suffering? No sir-e! What's up with that? Are there too few buddhist to start up something like that? Are the people who meditate in groups just yuppies trying to escape their normal busy lives? I'm not looking for buddhists social initiatives because I want to help 'in the name of Buddha' or 'win souls' or whatever.. not at all.. but it does feel kinda weird that when I'm volunteering now, that they are praying to Jesus before dinner (even though there are other religions present as well). Does anyone feel the same way? Do you have any experience with local buddhist involvement in the community? I'm very curious!
I think we totally need more of that stuff. I think there are plenty of community oriented ideas that buddhism can learn from christianity.
I don’t belong to any Buddhist organizations or such but I’ll attempt to answer this by paraphrasing Alan Watts’ response in his book, The Book. It seems that the Western world, and Protestantism in particular, has been duped into believing that we exist as separate egos. That we are in fact separate beings. And so, as separate beings removed from the influence of others or “objects” man cannot live up to the expectation of always doing good and the right thing. But he is taught that he should be able to control his destiny and always do right. As this is an impossible task he feels tremendous guilt and undertakes “humanitarian” efforts to ease his conscience. This leads to social services, hospitals, foreign aid, etc. So, Alan asks, what are the outcomes of these programs? What will happen once we have cured all diseases and fed all the poor? Is there a benefit to having every Bengali and Zulu buying appliances and TV sets? Has their life actually been improved? Can we, or should we, impose our standards on them even though our society is riddled with its own problems, mal-content, cancers, and dementias? And…and, we can’t seem to enjoy what we have! We may provide temporary relief, but true help can only be provided to others by giving them the tools to realize their true Ultimate Nature. So what do you do? [font="]In addition, according to Robert Thurman, the Buddha forbade his monks to justify their existence in any way. They were to exist so that the society could serve the individual, and lead them away from ignorance. Not the other way around. The principle is that society is only served if the individual’s happiness is first secured; social needs are secondary, as they will follow the happiness of each individual. But then there's the example of Ashoka... [/font]
a lot of vietnamese buddhists were sort-a marxist during the time of the vietnam war... as it goes along with their ideas of equality, compassion, things like that... thus burned themselves alive to protest the vietnam war... yet the philosophy does not mention any specifics on politics... i think buddhists would collectively share no specific views on social iniatives, because that kind of thing sort of goes against teachings... and plus, it would depend on what kind of buddhist you were, which social iniatives you would support... mahayana buddhists think differently than other for example... but the whole idea of one common opinion goes against buddha, IMO. and the thought of social iniatives "in buddhas name" sounds like it doesnt belong at all. Wouldnt it make sense that buddhists would push for iniatives in their own name rather than in buddhas?
Mui... I tried to make it very clear in my post that I'm not looking for any 'collective' buddhist initiatives that are aiming at helping out of 'buddha's name'. I'm very well aware of the fact that buddhism has many ways and that there aren't any dogma's.. therefor there aren't any collective views on the where and how to live your life in detail. Anywho.. it does feel kind of weird that in (at least) my country all buddhist practices seem to focus solely on meditation and the reading of scripts etc. When people however (out of their own, individual will) want to participate in any social projects, they mostly end up volunteering for some Christian initiative. I did that before and I'm doing that now.. but it does feel awkward at some times working for an organisation that doesn't only focus on helping but is also evangelising (even though it's only a little bit). Besides that.. there are numerous examples of buddhists social initiatives elswhere in the world. One of them being the hospice for aidspatients in San Francisco (you can read about it here: http://www.dharmalife.com/issue15/hospice.html). Now as to the comment of Meagain. I absolutly get where you are coming from. I've always found it a very patronising view that 'we people of the first world' should 'help' third world countries. In my opinion, those countries would've been a lot better if we hadn't stuck our nose in their bussiness in the first place. Plus, it would be very easy to just send money overthere and go on with our own (material, luxuries) life over here, thinking we did good. What I'm aiming at is more helping at small, local projects. Where I'm working now, they have the goal to give 'illegal immigrants' (illegal is such a nasty word to describe fellow humanbeings, but sadly, that's the way politics refer to them) a roof over there heads during day time, as well as some food and basic education. Also, they try giving some information on AIDS, since most of them are young african males. I, for my self, would never aim to get everyone to a standard of living where they can buy a microwave, dishwasher or whatever. But when it comes to basic stuff, like human contact (a lot of US prisoners have little to no human contacts outside of prison and are really lonely), food and shelter.. I think it's safe to say that that's not too patronising. What do you think?
It is important for social justice programs to be in place, If people can feel their worth something, they can develop their own spirituality. It is not wise to debate on justifying existance, why the christians do what they do etc. because those things are not relevant. The relevant issue is that Social Justice (humanitarian aid) is important for the cause of promoting spirituality.
So.. you mean like.. people should be provided with the basic necessities (food, water, shelter) in order for them to have the time to develop their spirituality?
Hm.. ok.. I can see why people who are with one food in the grave due to starvation or whatever aren't really too busy with spirituality (unless they already have a faith, in which case they are most likely clinging onto that one). However.. (and this is an old discussion and probably a bit offtopic here).. how do you feel about religions (incl. Buddhism) giving those stuff (food, shelter) to people? Don't you think it's a hidden way of evangelising? Like the place I volunteer in now.. they pray to Jesus/God before the meals.. even though there are muslims and other religions present as well. They could've well hold a moment of silence so everyone could pray or meditate or whatever... I've always had a bit of a problem with stuff like that.. but ah well.. still.. here I am, looking for the opinions on buddhist initiatives That's basically it.. I'd like to see some buddhist initiatives but without trying to force that religion onto the ones you are helping. But forcing/evangelising people isn't really something of buddhist culture anyway so.. risk is small I guess.
Every seven seconds, an African child die of starvation Go figure out if you need an ego to think that "it is not cool, I will go there to figure out what I can do" The fact there are different cultures for raising of people all over the world influence the fact you underline velvet. I was raised in a chirstian family and I see there is a saviour complex in every French citizens (including me). The master whom my religion worship introduced he acted for whole mankind salvation. That is certainly not a weakness, but misunderstanding lead us to mistake (2000 years is already a “time”). White people are guilty since they chose proselytism and went to make modernity the new religion all over our world. That pretty fucked up much of cultures. The problem is that yes, we are all guilty, and that yes, if the world blows I would feel much more responsible and able to understand (so to take position and then act) than any African children. So ... There is definitly a reason for us to be Does any of you think one of his brother man cannot sustain its own needs if you give him the right and ability to do so (I mean a land to work and freedom)? There are differences between our own cultures, between Europe and America America's ego saviour complex is certainly a huge something... (I really do not have any point of view about it, could it be a fact?) Truth will appear, and justice remain for eternity "Let people be, trust men and love them"
Yeah I once wrote to A buddhist colony seeking answers on shame, and have recieved no response. I think they live by a laze faire philosophy. You know let it be...
In the JudeoChristian world Buddhists tend to be quiet. My Buddhist friend runs the volunteer department of the local hospice. I have helped him out at times. Other Buddhists do other things. It's important to understand that Buddhists aren't showy about helping others as there is no time when they are not trying to help others. Everyday things are included in the practice. They aren't looking for kudos for helping as that's sort of not the point at all. Wherever people are helping each other in this entire world you will find buddhists hidden amongst the crowd of workers. Tantric Buddhists in general do not advertise. Peace.
I agree that Buddhists don't make themselves obvious when being charitable but there seems to be a trend with Charitable religous/spiritual groups and that is that they generally tend to be out to convert people at the same time. Thing is from my experience of Buddhists to say that they aren't charitable seems a little odd. Every ordained Buddhist I know (I know quite a few) has done some sort of charity work at some point, my aunt spent a lot of time I think in Malasia or somewhere in that region doing aid-workery type stuff, I don't know exactly what she was doing but it's along those lines. In England we have a small chain of shops called Evolution. This is run pure by charitable Buddhists and relies entirely on workers giving up their free time to help out, everything you buy there is dirt cheap as a result but all the proceeds go to charity. If you go into virtually any Buddhist community (or at least any that I've come across) and put across the idea of not being charitable you will get some very strange looks. Blessings Sebbi
