Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was wondering what Buddhism has to say about the current crises swirling around us.
How would a Buddhist leader respond to them?
I found some answers from the Dalai Lama here:
I can only speak about my understanding about Theravada Buddhism, but -- generally -- we don't believe that there's a god out there who will answer prayers and fix things for us. So, to put it simply, if it's gonna be fixed, we gotta fix it. That's not to say that Thais (for example) are always good at fixing stuff, although I have to admit they seem to have been doing fairly well at this particular time.
One thing in particular, I don't think you'd see the resistance to wearing masks that you see in this country. Some of that -- in Thailand -- is to do with more passivity, but there's also an effort to not harm others. If you can spend ten minutes trying to catch a cockroach to let him out the front door (rather than squash him), then you're more likely to help others by not spreading the virus.
A study of Buddhism in Thailand and that country's responses to various
crises should provide some understanding to a westerner, however imperfect.
I can't help but wonder how an entire country would fare under actual
governance by a Buddhist sage, but then a Buddhist sage might never
undertake governance in the first place.
A better understanding is perhaps in the individual Buddhist response
to crisis, as with wearing masks and staying home demonstrating compassion
for others. phetaroi's post seems to agree with this view.
Such a view might be worthwhile if extended to collective individual responses.
When many Buddhists act with such compassion, the virus (or any other
threat) abates. Characterizing this as passivity might be an error. There is
a distinction to be made with intent, I think.
Last edited by highplainsrus; 07-04-2020 at 08:41 AM..
Gautama would have likely said - What crisis? Things to be concerned with, go as they should. Things not to be concerned with, should not be concerned with.
high, you are bound to physical. This is not Buddhist stance.
A study of Buddhism in Thailand and that country's responses to various
crises should provide some understanding to a westerner, however imperfect.
I can't help but wonder how an entire country would fare under actual
governance by a Buddhist sage, but then a Buddhist sage might never
undertake governance in the first place.
A better understanding is perhaps in the individual Buddhist response
to crisis, as with wearing masks and staying home demonstrating compassion
for others. phetaroi's post seems to agree with this view.
Such a view might be worthwhile if extended to collective individual responses.
When many Buddhists act with such compassion, the virus (or any other
threat) abates. Characterizing this as passivity might be an error. There is
a distinction to be made with intent, I think.
Just to clarify, there is a great deal of passivity among Thais in many aspects of daily life. I'm not so sure that's a result of Buddhism, although that may be a part of it.
I can only speak about my understanding about Theravada Buddhism, but -- generally -- we don't believe that there's a god out there who will answer prayers and fix things for us. So, to put it simply, if it's gonna be fixed, we gotta fix it. That's not to say that Thais (for example) are always good at fixing stuff, although I have to admit they seem to have been doing fairly well at this particular time.
One thing in particular, I don't think you'd see the resistance to wearing masks that you see in this country. Some of that -- in Thailand -- is to do with more passivity, but there's also an effort to not harm others. If you can spend ten minutes trying to catch a cockroach to let him out the front door (rather than squash him), then you're more likely to help others by not spreading the virus.
As well as the fact that it's simply more of a cultural norm to wear masks and see people wearing them. When you can buy a mask at every 7-11 and go through your day seeing a lot of people wearing them without anyone batting an eyelash, it goes a lot further toward everyone being willing to wear them, than it does in cultures where nobody ever wears them and it seems odd to people, as well as the cultural history/attitude that the only people who wear masks are "bad guys" up to no good so people actually are nervous seeing someone in a mask.
Quote:
Originally Posted by highplainsrus
A study of Buddhism in Thailand and that country's responses to various
crises should provide some understanding to a westerner, however imperfect.
I can't help but wonder how an entire country would fare under actual
governance by a Buddhist sage, but then a Buddhist sage might never
undertake governance in the first place.
A better understanding is perhaps in the individual Buddhist response
to crisis, as with wearing masks and staying home demonstrating compassion
for others. phetaroi's post seems to agree with this view.
Such a view might be worthwhile if extended to collective individual responses.
When many Buddhists act with such compassion, the virus (or any other
threat) abates. Characterizing this as passivity might be an error. There is
a distinction to be made with intent, I think.
I would call Thai "passivity" and Buddhist "compassion" two different things. The Thai culture is very much about not causing offense (which even means at times Thais will take measures that would seem rude to Westerners in their desire to not outwardly cause someone offense or difficulty), not making waves and causing a ruckus, and they also tend to venerate and obey authority a lot more than in the west (whether it's warranted or not), etc.
I suppose you could call it compassion sometimes (as in the case of เกรงใจ/greng jai), but I wouldn't always characterize it that way, and sometimes "compassion" means different things to different people (in that some would see more compassion in telling someone a hard truth than in lying to spare their feelings even though lying may have {possibly bigger} consequences down the road, etc.).
I would call Thai "passivity" and Buddhist "compassion" two different things. The Thai culture is very much about not causing offense (which even means at times Thais will take measures that would seem rude to Westerners in their desire to not outwardly cause someone offense or difficulty), not making waves and causing a ruckus, and they also tend to venerate and obey authority a lot more than in the west (whether it's warranted or not), etc.
I suppose you could call it compassion sometimes (as in the case of เกรงใจ/greng jai), but I wouldn't always characterize it that way, and sometimes "compassion" means different things to different people (in that some would see more compassion in telling someone a hard truth than in lying to spare their feelings even though lying may have {possibly bigger} consequences down the road, etc.).
That's an excellent summary of the concepts, and I agree that compassion and passivity are not the same thing, although sometimes they may intersect. And the greng-jai aspect is something different yet.
When any of the three concepts are missing in Thai daily life, it almost seems jarring.
In concept, the three principles should make for a truly beautiful society. But, of course, there are other things mixed in there that seem quite in opposition, and can make Thai culture not as beautiful as one might expect it to.
It's a fascinating that I think is probably only really observed when one is there NOT on a tour.
That's an excellent summary of the concepts, and I agree that compassion and passivity are not the same thing, although sometimes they may intersect. And the greng-jai aspect is something different yet.
When any of the three concepts are missing in Thai daily life, it almost seems jarring.
In concept, the three principles should make for a truly beautiful society. But, of course, there are other things mixed in there that seem quite in opposition, and can make Thai culture not as beautiful as one might expect it to.
It's a fascinating that I think is probably only really observed when one is there NOT on a tour.
Sure. It can be compassionate to not want to hurt someone else, but it can also be of benefit to the person who doesn't want to cause offense, if they're uncomfortable with conflict. So it could be argued that it might not always be for compassionate reasons.
And of course, in concept you'd think it's a great idea, until you realize it also means some of the more negative aspects, like blind following of authority that can be an issue at times, or, as I mentioned, someone's desire not to offend leading to other or worse consequences.
And yes, you're right, I think one would have to be in Thailand longer than a week or two for vacation to pick up a lot of it (in part because it can take time, and in part because one has more of a motivation when one isn't simply a tourist), and one would have to be observant as well. There was a lot I learned about Thai culture simply from seeing how Thais interact with each other and with me, that a lot of foreigners probably never noticed (and there was probably plenty I never noticed as well).
Gautama would have likely said - What crisis? Things to be concerned with, go as they should. Things not to be concerned with, should not be concerned with.
high, you are bound to physical. This is not Buddhist stance.
Sure. It can be compassionate to not want to hurt someone else, but it can also be of benefit to the person who doesn't want to cause offense, if they're uncomfortable with conflict. So it could be argued that it might not always be for compassionate reasons.
And of course, in concept you'd think it's a great idea, until you realize it also means some of the more negative aspects, like blind following of authority that can be an issue at times, or, as I mentioned, someone's desire not to offend leading to other or worse consequences.
And yes, you're right, I think one would have to be in Thailand longer than a week or two for vacation to pick up a lot of it (in part because it can take time, and in part because one has more of a motivation when one isn't simply a tourist), and one would have to be observant as well. There was a lot I learned about Thai culture simply from seeing how Thais interact with each other and with me, that a lot of foreigners probably never noticed (and there was probably plenty I never noticed as well).
It's sort of like "mai pben rai". A wonderful little concept...until it isn't.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
