comparative religion

"Our" culture has fetishized Buddhism in a way that over-represents its goodness. Here’s what I believe is a cultural observation:

The buddhism that landed in the West has mostly been interpreted through a Green or higher lens (occasionally Orange like Sam Harris), so people think Buddhism is (1) itself green and (2) a coherent concept (rather than a wide and branching set of interrelated and sometimes contradictory religions, lineages, philosophies, cultural beliefs, etc). People say things like Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion for example, or buddhism has more transformative practices or is more mystical.

Often they’re comparing it to Christianity. I think this is mistaken; I think they’re the same, but most of the Christianity in the West is interpreted through an Amber or lower lens, because that’s what’s most available in our own culture. This would be true of the vast majority of the Buddhism in Thailand and other places where it’s commonplace. Mostly Buddhists in countries where it’s the majority religion (equivalent of Christianity) are worshipping statues or getting a meal and an education, not contemplating Nagarjuna and nonduality. All the critiques people throw at so-called Christianity are actually critiques of lower levels of development, and all of the praise people throw at so-called Buddhism is actually praise of higher levels of development. In other words, unsurprisingly, I’m claiming that all the criticism and praise is projection and not inherently in the religions themselves. This leads me to an almost-prediction: I wouldn’t be surprised if we start seeing Orange and Green and Teal interpretations of Christianity in Asia and the Middle East, where it’s foreign.

I want to say more about Christianity at higher levels, and I want to say more about why I think this noticing matters, but I’ll save that so I can go ahead and post before 3p central.

On Things I Loved That I Dropped. In a workshop I attended several days ago, everyone ended up sharing, one-by-one, about their experience or relationship with the subject of God (with a capital G). When it was my turn, I described being very young, with no training around religion or God, experiencing a very personal relationship with a God that cared about me and that was the still point at which all the chaos in my young life (and in the whole world) made sense. From this, I rested on a belief that somewhere beyond my understanding, life made sense. In many ways, this relationship not only comforted me but actually saved me.

Later, in college, I was exposed to traditional Christianity and took all the traditional teachings and trappings of it on as my own. I was a devout believer and I ended up leading the bible studies, not because of my expertise, but because of my earnest belief. And then, I began to find things about this Christianity I had learned, that I could not make sense of. As the questioning grew into serious doubt, I found I could no longer believe what I couldn’t believe. Through tears, I formally broke up with the very personal God of my youth, still vibrant in my experience, because I falsely believed that I could not have my real experiential God if I could not believe in the teachings that were associated with him. It has taken my years to begin to reclaim my God (different now, much more expansive, but still experientially real), leaving behind what no longer feels integral.

There are other things that I have loved and left behind based on trappings associated with it rather than on the essence of the thing (reading fiction, singing and playing the guitar, for example). As I move toward more integration in my life, I find myself rediscovering some of those things I loved from my past. They are not the same, having been laid aside for decades, yet rediscovering them is bringing my joy.

Do you have things that you loved that you dropped because of the trappings?

Can we handle the truth? If UpTrust works the way it’s intended, it will make truth more accessible. But what percentage of the population currently has the capacity to face truth?

Perhaps alongside truth, the tech will make the skills for being with the truth more accessible too. And avoidance will come in for the assist when needed?