politics

Is cultivating anger a moral imperative?

Image of Vajrapani. who is massively muscled and stepping into the warrior pose. He is deep blue in color, with bulging eyes and prominent fangs, heavily muscled, and wields a stylized thunderbolt in his right hand. Instead of an aura, he’s surrounded by dancing flames.

Mahāyāna Buddhism emphasizes compassion, and yet it portrays awakened beings who look anything but peaceful and loving. The best-known of these is Vajrapāṇi, “the bearer of the thunderbolt,” who is massively muscled and lunging into the warrior pose many of you will know from yoga.

Vajrapāṇi is midnight blue in color, with bulging eyes and prominent fangs, and, as his name suggests, he wields a stylized thunderbolt in his right hand. Instead of being surrounded by a gentle aura, he’s wreathed in dancing flames. Vajrapāṇi doesn’t represent ill will, which all awakened and nearly-awakened beings have long overcome. Instead he embodies enlightened energy — the compassionate desire to help others.

Speech with the power of thunder

Although the first part of Vajrapani’s name literally means “thunderbolt,” one of its secondary meanings is “denunciation in strong language.” The connection is that this critical yet compassionate speech has the power of thunder.

Coming back to our everyday experience, when a parent sees their child about to run into the road, or do some other harmful action, it is useless for them to issue a warning gently, because the message will almost certainly fail to penetrate the child’s excitement. Instead the parent speaks loudly and forcefully — even angrily. Yet the intention, as with the Bodhisattva, is to help and to protect, not to harm.

Also read:

Language is often so imprecise that one word, one concept can embrace opposites. “Anger” is like that. It encompasses both the desire to help and protect, and the desire to hurt and to harm.

Adjusting our vocabulary

It’s interesting to ask whether the words people used in the past had the same range of meaning. I’m not in a position to say, but when I was reading an essay the Roman Stoic Seneca wrote on anger, it was clear that he was referring to a state of being completely out of control. I’m sure Seneca at times would have spoken loudly, clearly, passionately, and with a desire to prevent harm being caused — that is, angrily — and that he probably wouldn’t have regarded this as the same emotion that leads to people throwing things around, punching people in the face, and harming innocent bystanders, which is the kind of thing he was warning us against in his essay.

So maybe we should call the unhelpful, harmful form of anger “rage,” and the fierce compassion or moral urgency shown by the parent or by Vajrapāṇi “passion.” (Many people seem to believe that having passion is un-Buddhist. This idea can arise from a mistaken understanding of the goal of Buddhist practice. We’re not aiming to become emotionless, but instead to rid ourselves of unhelpful emotions such as selfish craving and ill will. It doesn’t help that these unhelpful emotions were often called “the passions” by early translators of Buddhist texts. It’s natural that modern readers would take this to mean that we’re meant to get rid of passion in the sense of strong emotion. But at the time these translations were made the word passion primarily meant “suffering,” which selfishness and ill will cause. Powerful forms of love and other skillful emotions that we might call passions do not cause suffering.)

I once heard the Dalai Lama say that anger transforms the world faster than compassion, but that’s why you have to be very careful with it. He points out that the spiritually useful anger (passion) is directed against the harmful action, not against the person. This is what distinguishes it from harmful anger (rage), where we want to hurt the other person.

When the Buddha talked about anger (kodha, in Pali) it was always destructive anger he meant. He didn’t seem to have a word for the “clean” anger that is passion. Yet passion is sometimes evident in his speech when he felt the need to criticize someone. Sometimes this can sound shocking to the modern reader, such as when he said, “It is not fit, foolish man, it is not becoming.…” [emphasis added]. This sounds like ill will, but in fact it was the Buddha’s compassionate attempt to save someone from themselves.

The “come-to-Dharma moment”

In Christianity they talk about a “come-to-Jesus moment,” which one Bible website describes as “a pivotal point when a person confronts an important truth — especially an uncomfortable or life-altering reality —and makes a significant decision or change.” Being called “foolish” by the Buddha was a wake-up call — a “come-to-Dharma” moment. Hearing it would have been an indication that you were way out of line. So although the Buddha’s words may sound harsh, they were intended to prevent suffering.

I had a come-to-Dharma moment in my twenties. I had been in a Buddhist study group where a number of people had difficulty understanding some of the vocabulary, which I happened to be familiar with. Being an arrogant young man, I expressed myself in highly condescending and insulting language. Soon after, one of the teachers took me for a walk to tell me, very directly and forcefully, just how inappropriate my speech had been. He was passionate — angry — but there was no rage. Although I had been insulting to others, he didn’t direct any insults at me. He didn’t try to hurt my feelings. He just pointed out, clearly and directly, the painful truth: I had behaved in an arrogant manner that was antithetical to the way we were expected to comport ourselves while discussing spiritual teachings.

A few days later I went on a month-long intensive meditation retreat, in which I squirmed and festered with resentment, remembering his criticism and refusing to accept it. Eventually, after much suffering, a bubble of defensiveness burst within me, and I could finally accept that the teacher had been right. I saw then that I had been trying to impress others with my intelligence because I believed, deep down, that I was unworthy of love. It was that recognition that prompted me to ask for ordination.

This is what passion (good anger) can do. It breaks through the defenses we build up in order to justify our wrong-doing.

Sometimes it’s okay to offend people

In a conversation with a prince called Abhaya, the Buddha explained the difference between his sometimes fierce, passionate communication and ordinary anger. Abhaya had been sent by a rival teacher to entrap the Buddha by asking him if he would utter speech that is disliked by others. If he were to say yes, then the prince was to point out that he had behaved unkindly, just like any ordinary person. (We can tell from this that the Buddha’s passionately critical speech was well-known!) If the Buddha were to say no, then he was to be reminded that he had in fact said things that others had found painful to hear. The expectation was that the Buddha would be “like someone with an iron cross stuck in his throat, unable either to spit it up or swallow it.”

When he attempted to spring his rhetorical trap, Abhaya was holding a baby on his lap. The Buddha, deftly turning Abhaya’s simile to his advantage, asked whether, if the baby were to get a sharp object stuck in its throat, Abhaya would fish it out, knowing that this would cause the baby pain. Naturally, Abhaya said he would, because he loved the child. The Buddha pointed out that because he too had love for other beings, he would sometimes speak in a way that they find unpleasant. He can do this because he “knows the right time to speak so as to explain what he knows to be true, correct, and beneficial, but which is disliked by others.”

The Buddha had enough empathy to know whether the person being addressed might be receptive to his words. It’s not a good idea, for example, to offer criticism when someone is already under stress, because they’re already defensive.

Also, the Buddha will only say what’s true. He’s not going to exaggerate or distort.

He’ll only say what he believes will be helpful, because his concern is for the other person’s spiritual well-being. Only under those conditions will he say something that he knows will be upsetting to the other person. This kind of speech might well sound and look like anger, but it’s really passion, which is anger, purified by mindfulness and empathic considerateness, so that it is intended to help, not to hurt.

The power of passionate speech

Anger in the good sense of passion can be spiritually helpful. It can help us maintain maintain healthy boundaries when others disrespect us. It can free us from the shame that can arise when we have been disrespected. It can respond to the suffering and injustice we see in the world. Sometimes it will motivate us to act — not necessarily in the moment of anger itself, but later, when we reflect on the suffering or injustice we’ve witnessed. This kind of anger can be the manifestation of our most cherished values, expressing themselves passionately, in a skillful way.

When passion arises, because it is a state of arousal physiologically resembling rage, we have to be very mindful of our speech. We need to focus on the action rather than attacking the person. We need to avoid sarcasm and put-downs. We need to stay grounded in our bodies and be mindful of our feelings so that we don’t lose control.

Catch unhelpful anger early

Seneca advises us to catch our anger early. Since nothing good can come of rage, it’s helpful to deal with it before it gets out of hand. We can do this by learning to recognize the physical sensations that accompany its upwelling.

For most people this is difficult, or even impossible, because extreme anger shuts down the parts of the brain that allow us to be mindful. You’re therefore more likely to have success if you train yourself to recognize the physical signs of rage while you’re in a mindful, balanced state. To do this, vividly remember past examples of rage arising within you, so that you can recognize what bodily sensations trigger this powerful emotion. You might recognize things like surging energy, a sharp intake of breath preparing you for action, your pulse quickening, tightness in certain parts of the body, and so on. Having done this, it’s more likely that if rage begins to erupt in daily life, you’ll recognize it and respond more skillfully than usual.

Handle with care

Often, when rage is arising, the most skillful response  is to step back and cool off. Once we’ve brought ourselves back to something resembling emotional balance — which might take anywhere from minutes to days —  we can try engaging more reasonably.

To help us step back from rage, we can recognize the harm it can do. Remember arguments you’ve been involved in, whether in personal interactions or on social media. Recall how unpleasant and intoxicating rage is, and how hard it is to let go of anger and resentment. Constant anger is exhausting. Anger is of course painful for those we inflict it upon, and can can provoke them to be angry at us. And chronically angry people are often unpopular.

For all these reasons, we need to be wary of anger. Yet passion — anger purified, its energy harnessed — can also be a powerful motivation for righting wrongs. It might even be an ethical imperative for us to connect with our anger. Indeed, the Dalai Lama has made that point in one of his books. It’s title? Be Angry!

This is an extract from one of the forthcoming chapters of a book I am writing on politics as a spiritual practice, which I’m currently releasing as a course, called As the World Falls Apart.

Read More

Toward more compassionate conversations online

A woman's hands holding a phone, with a big heart emoji showing overlaid on an image.

Here are things I try to observe in my own communication online, especially around politics. These lessons are drawn from mistakes I’ve made in the past. Frankly, I’m still making these mistakes — but not as often as I used to.

  • Before logging in to social media or initiating any conversation that might result in conflict, pause and set an intention, perhaps along the lines of: “May I be kind to myself and others. May I recognize that anger is destructive. May I remember to be respectful. May I connect with others rather than provoke discord.”
  • Be selective about who you follow on social media. Unfollow or mute people who are frequently hostile or critical, even if they’re on your end of the political spectrum. I ended up unfollowing people who were witty and clever in the way they wielded criticism when I began to realize it was emotionally toxic. If you can find compassionate individuals, follow them. I don’t necessarily mean people who gush about love and light all the time. Compassionate people may simply be helpful, bringing clarity without heat, and explaining complex situations without being unduly emotive.
  • Imagine how you would feel if you were the person you’re talking to. If you’re tempted to insult them, remember what it’s like to be on the receiving end of insults. If someone has already been criticized by others, imagine what it’s like to be piled onto. Even if you refrain from insults, remember that it’s hard to be contradicted, and be sensitive with any criticism you offer.
  • Think of conversations as collaborations rather than competitions. You’re not there to win battles. If the other person is competitive, they’re still collaborating with you. They’re teaching you who you are and giving you an opportunity to practice compassion for self and other. They’re prompting you to dig deeper so you can find wiser ways to respond. Remember: “All people and all circumstances are your allies.”
  • One of the principles of effective, compassionate communication is to ask questions — out of curiosity, not as “gotchas.” If you point out the limitations or mistakes in someone’s thinking, they’ll dig in. If you ask them to elaborate and they come to see those limitations for themselves, they may have an epiphany.
  • Don’t just criticize things you don’t like; also share your ideals. People need to be presented with better alternatives. If can embrace complexity, or if you have a vision of a society that embodies your spiritual ideas, then present that unashamedly.
  • Watch your tone carefully. Pay attention to whether you’re even subtly trying to put the other person down, or to make them look or feel bad. Don’t exaggerate or misrepresent the other person’s point of view. Avoid addressing someone with sarcasm, which is a form of hostility.
  • Mocking someone’s appearance or infirmities does not become any less odious just because they have different politics from you or because they do harmful things.
  • It’s not natural to be discussing loaded topics all the time, so take longer-term breaks from social media and political conversations. Limit your time online so that you’re not constantly stressing yourself out. If politics proves to be a conversational flashpoint, families and friends can decide to avoid talking about it.
  • It’s okay to walk away from a an unproductive or heated argument. This might feel hard at first, because we can obsess, itching to retaliate. But those feelings will pass. Tomorrow you probably won’t regret not having had the last word, and soon you’ll have forgotten about the conversation altogether. You can agree to disagree: “I don’t think either of us is going to change the other’s mind, so I’m going to go do something else now. Thank you for taking the time to discuss this.”
  • (This is sometimes my last ditch effort at communicating as I’m walking away.) If someone’s being truly hateful, try saying “You can be better than this.” It’s always true, because we can all always be better. Because it recognizes the other person’s capacity for change, it’s always helpful. It doesn’t suggest they’re bad, and so it’s not unkind. It’s also not something they’re likely to disagree with.

The radio personality Peter Segal shared a list called “Peter’s Rules of Twitter,” one of which was “Never, ever insult someone personally. Mockery is fine, as long as it’s aimed upwards.” Comedians similarly say “punch up, not down.” In other words, make jokes at the expense of those who have power, high status, and privilege — if they deserve it. But don’t mock those who lack power. And note the word “personally.” If you are to be critical, make it about what someone has done or said, not about who they are.

We can still be critical — even very critical. I have no problem with describing a politician’s behavior as “corrupt” if that word is appropriate. It’s important that political leaders’ injustice or wrongdoing is exposed and condemned. I see this as following the lead of the Buddha, who sometimes called out bad behavior in strong terms.

Many times, though, I’ve started to compose a mocking reply directed at a politician or media figure and have deleted before posting it. Sometimes I realize that others have already said what I would say, but better. Mostly, though, I don’t think it’s good for my soul.

To end, I’ll share Peter Segal’s final piece of advice: “To survive on the veldt, humans evolved to crave sugars and fats and to get energized by anger and fear. We don’t live on the veldt anymore. Refrain from feeding obsolete hungers.”

Read More

Politics as a spiritual practice

"As the world falls apart." A standing Buddha statue looks over a city at sunset. The image, apart from the Buddha, is riven through with cracks.

It’s hard not to get overwhelmed by what’s going on in the world.

Politics is polarizing, the news cycle fuels outrage, and social media tears relationships apart. A lot of us are swinging between anger, anxiety, despair, and exhaustion.

You want to stay engaged. You want to care. But you also want to hang on to your well-being.

That’s exactly why I created “As the World Falls Apart” — a course on treating politics as a spiritual practice.

This isn’t about taking sides. It’s about transforming how you relate to what’s happening.

In the course, I guide you through:

  • Practical in-depth teachings that reframe political engagement as part of your path of awakening.
  • Guided meditations that help you work directly with fear, anger, and polarization.
  • Community discussions where you can share your journey and learn from others.
  • Live Zoom calls to deepen practice, get moral support and clarity, and stay connected in real time.

Imagine being able to follow the news without losing your balance. Imagine disagreeing without dehumanizing. Imagine responding from clarity and compassion instead of reactivity.

The alternative is that we swing between anxious obsession and despondent disengagement.

It doesn’t have to be that way.

If you want your political life to become part of your spiritual path rather than a threat to it, I invite you to join As the World Falls Apart.

This course is only available to Wildmind’s sponsors. But joining is easy. Just click the button below for details. (There are lots more benefits to being a sponsor!)

With love,
Bodhipakṣa

Click here to become a sponsor and join me in “As the World Falls Apart”

Read More

Join me in “As the World Falls Apart”

A leaf that is decaying into a scaffold of veins, backlit by the golden light of the setting sun.

I am launching a major new course for 2026, on the topic of how we deal with political turmoil.

Here’s why:

It sometimes seems that the world we’re living in is falling apart in terrifying ways.

I feel oppressed by the knowledge that the world is on a very wrong track at the moment. My fears of where things might go are a heavy burden to carry. The events unfolding around me were once unthinkable and are now shocking and I view them with a sense of disbelief. It’s like one day I woke up and found myself in the wrong timeline. How can all this be happening?

Much that we value is being lost or is under threat: a livable climate, free speech, the rule of law and due process, the reliability of the US as an international partner, our expectation that the world had learned “never again” with regard to genocide, the assumption that larger countries should not invade smaller ones just because they can, the belief that all human lives matter and that racism and xenophobia are wrong, economies in which ordinary people can better themselves, trust in science and medicine — even democracy itself.

n so many ways a familiar world (imperfect though it is) seems to be crumbling around us, being replaced by something crueler, less human. The forces of authoritarianism and fascism, although largely defeated, never went away, even in liberal democracies, but they’re undergoing a dark resurgence.

Change is coming at us so fast that it’s easy to feel overwhelmed. We might feel paralyzed with terror. We might feel tempted to give up in despair. We might find ourselves consumed with rage.

I have to say, some of you might be sick of politics. You might want to just hide.

But that’s what authoritarians want. They do and say outrageous and cruel things at a breakneck pace so that we’ll feel overwhelmed and hopeless, and so that we’ll stop paying attention. We can’t let that happen, because things will just get worse. Many, many people will suffer.

We can’t directly change the upsetting things that are happening in the world around us. But we can change how we respond to them. And if we want the world to change direction, that’s what we’re going to have to do.

A new course

For the last few months I’ve been working on a new course on how we can learn to stay calm, open-hearted, and optimistic as the world is falling apart.

The course is structured around three broad headings for spiritual practice:

  1. Feet On the Ground: This means learn to calm ourselves even in the midst of chaos and outrage. This involves not just mindfulness, but the sense of calm empowerment that comes from knowing we’re doing the best we can with the resources available to us. We practice self-care to keep ourselves in balance. We get smarter about reading the news and using social media.
  2. Heart Wide Open: This includes actions such as supporting ourselves with self-compassion, staying open to the sufferings of others, and cultivating joy as a form of resistance. It includes becoming more fearless. It includes reconnecting with the good that exists in the world and remembering that there are more people who want peace and unity than want violence and division. It includes connecting with and working with those people.
  3. Keep Looking Up: This includes developing and maintaining our faith in a better world. It involves becoming clearer about what a better world would look like. It’s about learning to work with other people of good will to make that a reality.

Taking action — which is one of the emphases of this course — doesn’t necessarily mean becoming an activist. It might mean encouraging those who are. It might mean holding a sign at a rally. It might mean contributing to groups that are working for good. It might mean staying in touch with others who know that what’s going on is wrong, and offering each other moral support. It might include smiling at strangers, and showing that you’re not cowed. It might mean reading an inspiring book with friends. However little we can do, it’s important we do it.

We can push for the creation of a better world, starting here, starting now. In the future, you’ll want to be able to say, “We couldn’t stop them. But we slowed them down. And when the insanity collapsed in on itself, we’d already worked out how we wanted to rebuild things.”

How it works

This course is based on others I’ve run in the past — especially “Love Your Enemies” and “Politics As a Spiritual Practice” — which many people found helpful. I’ve been substantially reworking the materials from those courses and creating new content to make sure I address the renewed threat of fascism and authoritarianism, how we resist it, how we live with it, and how we make it less likely to happen next time.

  • The course starts Wednesday, 28th of January.
  • This course has a weekly email, which will go out on Wednesdays at 5 AM US Eastern Time. Each email contains a substantial essay, or a part of one.
  • There will be meditations, but the emphasis is more on the readings, reflections, and practice suggestions.
  • The number of emails isn’t finalized, but the course will probably run for the whole year.
  • There will be live Zoom discussion groups every two weeks where we can talk about the articles, our thoughts and feelings, and our lives. I’m aiming to do these at two different times, to accommodate people in the US, the UK and Europe, and Australia and New Zealand. Bear in mind it’s not possible to suit everyone’s schedule. Details to follow.
  • We can also have written discussions in the community website. Participation and sharing are important.

Our world falling apart is an opportunity

The title of this course is not meant to be alarmist or depressing. In a sense the world is always falling apart. Our own bodies are falling apart, right now. The leaf in the photograph above is falling apart. What keeps things together is the ongoing work of building and sustaining. As well as falling apart, your body is constantly healing and growing. The leaf’s very falling apart is the condition that supports the growth of new leaves. Old institutions die, and new ones are created.

The falling apart of the old world is like the death of a leaf. It looks like a loss. But it’s also an opportunity for new growth. We know that the world we lost, no matter how much we mourn its passing, can never be put back together again the way it was. And it shouldn’t. It fell apart because it was a bad world for too many people. What we grow in the leaf litter has to be something better, fairer, more just, more human. It has to be a world in which all people can flourish. That’s what we need to aim for. What is that world like? How do we get there? We’ll talk about that together.

This course is only open to those who sponsor Wildmind, thereby giving me the opportunity to reflect and write. But it’s easy to become a sponsor, and it’s only $8 a month. That’s a sound investment in an exploration that will help you feel happy and balanced amidst the turbulence, and that will help you be of more use to our suffering world.

With love,
Bodhipakṣa

👉 Click here to become a sponsor and to join me in “As the World Falls Apart” 👈

Read More

Learning the demons’ secret names

A few weeks ago my partner and I went to a pro-Democracy rally a couple of miles down the road. I’d decided that I wanted to spend my time there meditating, so I took along a yoga mat and my meditation bench, and sat down to meditate. In front of me sat a piece of pink card on which I’d written in black sharpie, “Buddhists For Democracy.”

I’d planned to do lovingkindness meditation, and I did for the first few minutes. But very soon I realized I wanted to chant a mantra. I wanted to chant the mantra of Padmasambhava.

The mantra goes: Oṃ Āḥ Hūṃ Vajra Guru Padma Siddhi Hūṃ.

Sometimes I chanted the mantra under my breath. Sometimes I repeated it mentally.

I kept this going for an hour, while people cheered, passing cars honked their horns, and one guy yelled over and over, “You’re all criminals!”

Chanting the mantra felt like a very significant thing to do, but to explain that I’ll have to say a little about Padmasambhava.

The Precious Teacher

Padmasambhava has another name: Guru Rinpoche, the Precious Teacher. He lived in the 8th and 9th centuries, but there’s so much mythology surrounding him that it’s very difficult to know anything for sure about his life.

Legend says that he converted Tibet to Buddhism. He was founder of one of the major schools of Tibetan Buddhism, the Nyingmapa school.

The legends say he came from a place called Oddiyana. That might be the present-day Swat valley in Pakistan.  At that time, Oddiyana was a major center of Vajrayāna Buddhism.

Maybe Padmasambha was born in Oddiyana, but there are conflicting accounts. Some stories say that he was the son of a local queen, but also he is said to have been born in the calyx of a lotus flower that appeared on Lake Danakosha, and appeared fully formed fully formed as an 8 year old boy, who King Indrabuti then then adopted. In fact, Padmasambha’s name means “born from a lotus.”

So you see what I mean about him being shrouded in myth. We really just have to approach him as a legendary or mythic figure. In the stories that are connected with him, we have to look for a more mythic sense of meaning.

What’s more certain is that he was a teacher of Dzogchen, which is the Tibetan for “Great Perfection.” Indian Buddhists called this Ati Yoga, or the “Highest Practice.” The aim is to see through appearances in order that we can rest in the innate luminosity and purity of the mind.

The part of Padmasambhava’s life I want to talk about is his conversion of Tibet to Buddhism.

Failure to Launch

King Trisong Detsen, 38th king of Tibet, wanted to convert his country. His first attempt at that was inviting a famous Indian monk called Shantarakshita.

Shantarakshita was a Mahayana monk who founded Samye monastery, where Tibetans could learn about traditional Buddhist teachings, like the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path, and about newer Mahayana teachings. But at night the demons of Tibet destroyed all the work from the previous day.

Taking this as a kind of mythic truth, the way Shantarakshita was trying to introduce Buddhist practice to Tibet just didn’t work. It didn’t fit the local conditions. We can see the demons that dismantled the monastery at night as wild, destructive forces in the Tibetan psyche at that time.

Tibet at that time was a very wild, warlike country. It was full of power struggles. It was steeped in superstition, a place where people worshipped local deities and demons, and employed sorcerers to dispose of their enemies. Machiavellianism and magic were the demons of Tibet.

The rational, philosophical approach that Shantarakshita was trying to introduce just didn’t work for the Tibetans.

Converting the Demons of Tibet

So Shantarakshita in turn invited Padmasambhava. He was a great scholar, but he was also a deep meditator and a magician (siddhi). So when Padmasambhava arrived in Tibet, his main task was not to teach the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. It wasn’t to teach meditation. It was to get to grips with Tibet’s demons. He took them on in a kind of spiritual combat. In other words, in some way he tackled the wild forces in the Tibetan psyche.

He was fearless. The legends are that he battled demons until they revealed their secret names to him. And once he’d done that he was able to convince them to become protectors of the teachings, rather than opponents of them.

This, I think, means that he really got to know and understand what made the Tibetan people tick. And with that understanding he was able to show them that the Dharma (the path to awakening) was a superior way of living — in terms that made sense to them.

Padmasambhava was a Tantric teacher, and the Tantra doesn’t say “This thing you’re doing is bad; do the opposite.” It says something more like “This thing you’re doing may be bad, but the underlying energy behind it is neither good not bad, so take that energy and redirect it in a more helpful direction.”

Buddha 3.0

The Buddha himself did things like this. For example, he said, “The supreme conqueror is not one who conquers a million others in battle, but the one who conquers a single person: themselves.” He’s asking people prone to competition to channel their competitive energies in a more challenging and rewarding direction.

So I imagine Padmasambhava did something like this with the demons of Tibet (that is, Tibetan culture). Understanding what motivated Tibetans, he showed them a different way of being. He showed them a different kind of warriorship. A different kind of magic.

This isn’t an easy thing to do, because when we’ve committed to a certain way of being, it becomes our whole world-view. Bar some earth-shaking change in our lives, we just can’t imagine seeing things in a different way. It takes a true spiritual genius to tune in to people’s deep motivations and to open their minds to seeing a different goal, a different way of being.

The Buddha was a genius like that, and so was Padmasambhava, which is why Tibetans call him “The Second Buddha.”

Gautama was Buddha 1.0, and Padmasambhava was Buddha 2.0.

We’re deeply in need of a Buddha 3.0.

We need someone that can do battle with the demons of our own culture. This battle is not a literal one. It’s a metaphorical battle that involves cultivating insight and understanding rather than wielding weapons. It’s not a battle where we aim to destroy some in order to save others. It’s a battle without enemies, where we compassionately desire to help all beings. The battle is not aimed at defeating beings, but at defeating harmful ideas. And those ideas can only be defeated if we understand them, and understand why people hold them.

The Demons of the Modern Era

Every culture has its demons (and again, that’s destructive psychic and cultural forces, rather than actual demonic entities).

Here are four contemporary demons that have a powerful distorting effect on the human psyche.

1. Materialism

Materialism has to be one of the biggest contemporary demons. Here materialism refers to the belief that happiness comes from consuming and by having more.

While it’s obvious that freedom from financial worry allows us to be happier, there are diminishing returns from accumulating wealth. Psychology studies show that happiness mainly comes from things like being kind, having gratitude, self-compassion, mindfulness, and having a sense of meaning and purpose in life. These are also things that various spiritual traditions, including Buddhism, teach.

If materialism were a true source of happiness, Elon Musk would be the happiest person on the planet. Instead, he seems to be to be extremely unhappy, probably because he lacks all the true bases of a happy life.

The accumulation of wealth that we see in the world at the moment seems morbid. It’s as unhealthy as filling every inch of your house with old newspapers and empty food containers. It’s worse than that, since at least hoarding trash doesn’t generally harm other people. As Nathalie Robin said, “If a monkey hoarded more bananas than it could eat, while most of the other monkeys starved, scientists would study that monkey to figure out what the heck was wrong with it. When humans do it, we put them on the cover of Forbes.”

Materialism is creating vast inequalities, and it’s also destroying the ecological systems that allow us to have civilizations.

2. The Sanctity of the Free Market

Society is distorted by the belief that the free market is sacrosanct. Suggest limiting the power of a corporation to cause harm, and a whole bunch of people will call you a “communist” — although what you’re suggesting is that the duly elected representatives of the people take action to protect the majority of the people (us) from harms caused by a minority (the corporations in question).

It doesn’t really matter what you suggest — making it illegal to put poison in foodstuffs, for example — there are going to be people who say that it’s all up to the individual consumer, as if life should ideally consist of ordinary people going mano a mano against massive corporations that have bottomless pits of money for lawyers.

In reality, there is no such thing as a free market. Markets operate only because of laws and rules. A completely free market becomes a mafia state, where nothing is off the table, and everyone ends up strong-armed by the most ruthless. And there’s nothing free about that.

3. Short-termism

Businesses focus on their quarterly results, and sometimes they sabotage themselves in the long term, for example by cutting their research and development budgets, in order to produce short-term results.

A well-known New Yorker cartoon by Tom Toro shows a man and three children sitting by a camp fire, a ruined city in the background. The man says, “Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.”

Short-term thinking is the opposite of wisdom. The Buddha used to ask, “What is for my long-term happiness and well-being?” He advised us to use that perspective as a guide for life.

The Toro cartoon illustrated the short-termism inherent in our attitude to the environment. Corporations focus on short-term profits. Our atmosphere is accumulating carbon dioxide, and as it does so it gets hotter, weather patterns are disrupted, and sea levels rise. Corporations’ efforts to maximize their profit will have catastrophic effects, but this doesn’t factor into their thinking. Those costs will be borne by others. Their profits are private, while the cost of creating those profits is public.

It’s not just corporations, of course. Individuals play a part. But it’s mostly big business that is the problem.

4. Tribalism

The Buddha points out that every one of us is subject to sickness, old age, death, and the loss of everything that is precious to us. We’re all in it together. He then in effect asks us how, knowing this, we are going to live. Given these facts, the most appropriate way for us to live is compassionate recognition of our shared plight as human beings.

Those who don’t get that we’re all in this together are usually in the grip of fear. Studies show that many people, when they are reminded of impermanence, loss, and death, cling tightly to some form of identity. They identify with one group, which they see as existing in opposition to other groups. They see their own group as inherently superior. Others just don’t matter. They may even be seen as the enemy. Tribalism says that hating, persecuting, or destroying this enemy is what’s needed to bring happiness. Currently, tribalism’s popular enemies are immigrants and trans people.

All of us are tribal to some extent. It’s part of human nature to align with other groups of people. But tribalism forces us into a narrow form of empathy, where we have a limited capacity for compassion unless it’s for people similar to us. Buddhist practice — and Christian practice too, in theory — encourages us to see past tribalism so that we can relate to all people as fellow humans, and all living beings as fellow feeling beings.

Conservatives are more prone to fear (possibly for genetic reasons) and so are more likely to fall into tribalism, but liberals do this as well. Liberals often talk about compassion, but end up despising those they think are uncompassionate. They rarely see the irony in this. They may assume that if they show enough disdain, conservatives will want to become better people.

Buddha 3.0

These four things — materialism, the false idol of the free market,  short-termism, and tribalism — are not the only demons in western culture. They’re just the ones I notice most often. They are all tangled up with each other, in ways I don’t need to spell out. I could also have mentioned individualism, the denial of evidence, and the naive techno-optimism of what’s been called the TESCREAL movement.

Padmasambhava did not destroy the demons of Tibet. Instead he recognized their essential energy and offered it a sacred purpose. We need to do the same with contemporary demons. We need not simply to condemn them, but to understand them deeply. Padmasambhava learning the secret names of the demons of Tibet means he understood their essence.

To understand the essence of cultural forces does not just mean knowing a bunch of facts. It means understanding the minds that are caught up in those forces. And since our own minds are entangled in the demonic cultural patterns I described above, we need to understand our own minds. We might look at fascists in horror, but there’s a bit of fascism in all of us. To understand them, we have to look at ourselves.

The Deep Listening of Compassion

When we see people with views we profoundly disagree with, our instincts say: let them know they’re wrong, criticize what they say, tell them what (in our eyes) is true! Yet arguing with people  is remarkably ineffective at changing their minds. Even giving them new information doesn’t work.

What has been shown to work, over and over again, is starting from a place of empathy, refraining from criticism, and asking questions that encourage them to unpack their thinking. Often when people explain themselves fully they start to change their minds. In today’s polarized world they’re rarely given a chance to talk in depth about their beliefs. They often simply confirm with other members of their tribe what they, as members of the same tribe, are supposed to believe. And when challenged by outsiders they become defensive or aggressive. These are not good conditions in which to reflect.

Because they haven’t explained their beliefs to others, they’ve never explained them to themselves, either. They don’t know what they really believe until they make it appear for an interested, empathetic listener. Only then can they become aware of weaknesses and limitations in their thinking. If you give them a chance to do this, by asking questions in a nonjudgemental way — having shown that you’re a non-threatening listener — you can then ask them more probing, critical questions, and present them with information that’s new to them. Freed from the need to be defensive, they can reflect. This is what changes minds.

Because we’re tribal, we rarely talk to people this way. Our main interest is showing people who are not in our tribe that they are wrong and bad.

To learn the secret names of the demons, we have to leave no place in our hearts for hatred, resentment, and contempt. This means learning to recognize those unskillful states, which are often hidden from us. They hide in plain sight in our minds, but we don’t recognize them because we take them to be “righteous anger.” We think our outrage shows our rightness. It doesn’t. It shows that we have a sense of superiority, and are thus under the sway of the demons. Understanding the demons means recognizing whatever stands in the way of love and compassion, and letting it dissolve away.

This does not mean “being nice.” Being nice usually means not wanting to challenge people. Padmasambhava challenged people big-time. But he did it without hatred, out of compassion. The combination of incisive challenge and and care for the people (or their ideas and actions) being challenged is illustrated by Padmasambhava’s famous “wrathful smile.”

We Can’t Wait For the Buddha

Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that a new Buddha will appear in the calyx of a lotus flower in the midst of a mountain lake. He or she is not going to appear from a Pure Land or be born from a queen.

We can’t wait for a savior.

It’s up to us. We have to become the saviors. We are all invited to become emanations of Padmasambhava. Buddha 3.0 is the sum total of out collective awakening. It’s a movement of minds committed to understanding the modern psyche with the same skillful means Padmasambhava had mastered.

We need to learn the demon’s secret names; to dig deep; to look closely at our reactivity and overcome it with compassion. We need to understand others with compassion — not just feeling warmth toward them, but compassionately and empathetically understanding how they think. What makes them tick? Why do they believe the things they believe and do the things they do?

The answer to such questions can never be “Because they’re stupid” or “Because they’re evil.” The answer has to be framed in terms they themselves would recognize and assent to. It has to be framed in the same terms you would use if you thoughtfully described why you believe the things you believe, and do the things you do. Because you’re the same as them. You have the same fundamental desires for freedom, safety, and to matter. You just go about trying to fulfill those desires in a different way. We need to understand those desires if we’re to help the world find better ways to meet them.

So this is why chanting the Padmasambhava mantra seemed significant. It felt like I was sending something powerful into the world. It wasn’t coming from me, but simply flowing through me. I was chanting an invocation to call forth Buddha 3.0 — inviting awakening to emerge and convert our modern demons. Consider yourself invited.

A Spiritual To-Do List

Invitations are good, but we have a lot of work to do on ourselves.

  • We need to reject materialism, living with greater simplicity even if it’s sometimes inconvenient. Think: low carbon, low plastic, plant-based. We need to find meaning and satisfaction in our lives through friendship, spiritual community, and compassionate action.
  • We need to reject the false idea that “freedom” consists of allowing the powerful to do whatever they want. We need to see freedom as what allows all people to live happy, fulfilled, creative lives to the best of their ability. We desperately need a society with less inequality and greater fairness: a society that works for the benefit of all. This is not radical; this is common-sense.
  • We need to reject short-termism, considering what’s best for our own and others long-term happiness and well-being. It’s too late for us to leave a better world to our children and grandchildren than the one we were born into, but we have to think about how to mitigate the  damage we’ve caused, and to create the best possible circumstances for our children and for future generations.
  • We need to free ourselves from tribal thinking — especially political, national, and racial thinking. We need to question our own beliefs and live with honest intellectual humility, recognizing the limits of our knowledge. We need to start from the basis of seeing that we’re all in it together.

So it’s up to us to be Buddha 3.0. Needless to say, this isn’t an easy thing. It’s not something we can do all at once. It’s a life-long task. So why not begin now?

What will your next step be?

Bodhipaksa

Wildmind is a Community-Supported Meditation Initiative. Click here to find out about the many benefits of being a sponsor.

Read More

Gratitude in a time of calamity

First, the calamity

We’re on a very bad path in the US at the moment. Many of you live in the US, as I do, although many of you don’t. However, as they say, “If America sneezes the rest of the world catches cold.” What happens here affects the entire world. Many people outside the US are concerned, worried, or despondent. In some cases they are seeing the rise of politicians and voters inspired by what’s happening here.

I’m not going to detail the calamity. Let’s just mention that it’s not normal to have masked men grabbing people from the streets, from hospitals, from courtrooms, and government offices, while refusing to show ID or provide warrants. It’s not normal for the government to be sending people abroad to concentration camps where they are tortured and have no hope of ever being set free. It’s not normal for the highest court in the land to allow this to happen.

What is happening is not normal. It’s a calamity. It’s the collapse of democratic norms. Usually we’d rely on elections to get us out of a calamity caused by government action. But much of what is going on right now is illegal, and governments that commit crimes are not generally open to being removed from power, because then they might end up in prison.

Things are grim, and the grimmest part is that this has only just begun. It’s pretty much guaranteed that there is much worse to come.

On top of this, we all have our individual difficulties to deal with: an aging spouse, a messy divorce, struggling to make ends meet, uncertainties about our health, and so on.

It’s a lot to deal with.

Next, the gratitude

I’m not suggesting that gratitude is going to overthrow an authoritarian regime, stop masked men from kidnapping people off the streets, or restore democracy. But I do suggest that it can help us stay more emotionally balanced while bad things happen.

The worst things we can do are to become hopeless and despondent, thinking that things can never get better. We need optimism — the positive optimism of confidence, not the toxic optimism of just assuming things aren’t really that bad and that even worse things won’t happen. We need faith that there are things worth fighting for.

There are people who want us to feel afraid, traumatized, and hopeless, because it makes it easier for them to accomplish the evil acts they’re set on. Finding joy and optimism is an act of resistance. Creating emotional resilience is an act of resistance.

As an image someone recently shared in the Wildmind community says, “If you ever feel heavy because you care deeply about injustice, suffering, and ecological destruction, remember that a trillion dollar propaganda machine was built to make you numb, and it didn’t work on you.”

The same is true regarding the destruction of democracy and the rule of law.

Gratitude helps.

Even in normal times, our minds have a tendency to focus on the things that we don’t like — things that are going wrong, or aren’t going the way we would like them to go, people that annoy us, events that disappoint us, and so on.  We also have a tendency to take good things for granted, forgetting that most things in our lives are actually going well. These tendencies are inherent, and evolutionary psychologists say they’ve been useful for our species’ survival by helping us to avoid danger. But in modern times our main problem is usually not avoiding dangers. It’s learning to be at ease, to be happy, and to create and sustain loving connections with others.

Gratitude gives us a break from obsessing about the things that are going wrong, and turns our attention to the things that are going right. I have a practice of sitting down every morning and writing down five things (at least) that I’m grateful for. They’re often small things. This morning I shared my gratitude for learning from a kind and wise man in my dreams, text messages from my teenage son, an injury that’s healing (and another that at least is not getting worse), and the joy that has come from simplifying my possessions and making sure that the things I own have homes.

The secret, I find, is to avoid rattling through these things in a rote fashion, but to dwell on each one. I describe this as “holding each one in my heart until I feel the goodness of it.” In other words, I take something that’s good in my life, and I think about it for a little while. I might just let it lie in my mind. Or I might imagine what life would be like without it. Usually after just a few seconds I begin to feel a warm glow of joy. That’s what I call “feeling the goodness.”

This is the opposite of taking good things for granted. It’s the opposite of dwelling on the negative. And it has the opposite effect of those things. It uplifts me rather than dragging me down. It gives me joy rather than leaving me feeling disgruntled and critical.

Another secret is not to see my morning gratitude practice as the be-all-and-end-all of gratitude. It’s a gentle reminder at the start of the day of the direction I want my mind to move in. I want to be more appreciative. I want to take joy in life’s little things. And so I remind myself to keep returning to gratefulness throughout the day.

Every so often I’ll just pause and appreciate little things, like the way the leaves are blowing in the wind, or that sewers exist, or that there are shops just down the road where I can buy the food I need. This brings joy to life. It changes the very structure of the brain. It changes who we are.

(Feel free to join me and the others here who regularly share what they’re grateful for.)

We need joy and gratitude in order to get through these difficult times.

Rebecca Solnit Points out that beneath our anger is love: “You are angry the children are being bombed or the forest is being cleared because you care about them, so it’s not the feelings about the forces of destruction that is primary. It’s the love, and not losing sight of that is crucial.”

If we’re just angry, we’re playing a similar game to the authoritarian, who is angry and hateful about almost everything. We need to see what’s good and stay in touch with it. This takes practice.

Arash Javanbakht, a psychiatrist and a neuroscientist at Wayne State University, says “When you’re afraid, all you’re thinking about is what you’re afraid of.” He also points out that we need to balance the bad things we’re hearing by focusing on the good — even simple things like science, the arts, and sports.

There will be a time when this is all over. Maybe they won’t rig the elections enough. Maybe there will be a massive, non-violent uprising. In the meantime:

  • In a time of lies, appreciate truth.
  • In a time of division, be grateful for connection.
  • In a time of denunciation, recognize and celebrate the good in others.
  • And most of all, in a time of hatred, be grateful that love persists. Show it to others. Give them support and encouragement.

As the lawyer and commentator Joyce Vance likes to sign off, “We’re in this together.”

Promo for Wildmind's meditation initiative

Wildmind is a Community-Supported Meditation Initiative. The post above is an abbreviated version of one written for the community. Click here to find out about the many benefits of being a sponsor.

Read More

Democracy and spiritual practice

The statue of liberty atop the freedom monument in Riga, Latvia. It shows a bronze female figure holding three stars above her head, against an intense blue sky. Photograph by Kiryl, on Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/a-statue-of-a-person-holding-a-torch-with-freedom-monument-in-the-background-6iFTZTED40o

Because of the alarming political situation in the US, which has parallels with events in other countries, I’ve been writing about how we, as spiritual practitioners, might skillfully face the troubling emotions politics can give rise to.

The two emotions that stand out for me are fear (where is this all going? how bad will things get?) and despair (mourning the loss of democratic norms).

To help me to deal with these potent emotions, I’ve adopted three slogans: Feet on the ground. Heart wide open. Eyes upward (or keep looking up). These provide a framework for my practice.

  1. Feet on the ground means finding ways to keep ourselves emotionally balanced, so we  can avoid panic and despair. We might want to be mindful in our news consumption. We might choose not to follow those who build followings on social media by generating, outrage, and follow instead people who are informed, compassionate, and balanced. Keeping up a daily meditation practice helps us be calmer. Keeping up our friendships (especially with those who are wise and balanced) helps us with emotional regulation. We might also understand that what’s happening today is part of a long historical pattern of swings between more democratic and autocratic styles of government.
  2. Heart wide open reminds me that it’s important not to shut down and disengage, no matter how overwhelming the news might be. We need to create an inner space of compassion — staying in touch with our own suffering — and live from that space. We need to stay in touch with the reality of others’ suffering, and do what we can to help.
  3. Eyes upward reminds me that we mustn’t ever let what’s happening now seem acceptable. We must remember, at a time of viciousness and chaos, what’s good and normal, and how things should be. But a return to normal, difficult as it is to imagine the path that takes us there, wouldn’t be enough. “Eyes upward” means aspiring to create a better, fairer society than we had before. Above all, it means developing a deeper appreciation of democracy and wanting a better, more inclusive, less corrupt democracy.

Democracy Is Under Threat

In fact, one of the things we are losing, or might be losing — and this is a source both of grief and fear — is democracy itself. The grief comes because of the freedoms and security we have lost. The fear comes for many reasons, but chief amongst them is that when leaders are no longer subject to democratic accountability, very bad things start to happen, from political persecution up to torture, murder, and genocide.

Democracy goes through periods of expansion and contraction. There were very few democracies before World War I, but an explosion of them afterwards. Democracies in that period also became more truly democratic, extending the franchise to working class men and to women.

Before WWII there was rise of authoritarianism and a decline in democracy. But after that war, the former colonies shed their European overlords, former dictatorships became democracies, and democracy expanded again. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, many former communist dictatorships adopted democratic forms of government. The number of people living in democracies peaked around 2006, after which democracy there was a rise once again of authoritarianism. Sometimes this authoritarianism took the guise of “illiberal democracy” where elections take place, but the ruling party has rigged things so that they’re almost certain to stay in power. Orbán’s Hungary is a prime example of this.

Right now we’re seeing a stark decline in democracy in the United States. Danger signs include:

  • the president taking control of governmental spending (a function reserved for congress)
  • threats to media outlets and law firms that the president regards as enemies
  • threats against judges (and actual arrests)
  • the executive branch defying court orders
  • the government attempting to take over the running of universities, etc.

These are all classic moves in establishing a Hungary-type authoritarian pseudo-democracy.

Recognizing the long-term ups and downs of democracy reminds us that it’s not “game over” when a country becomes authoritarian or even an outright dictatorship. Authoritarian regimes tend to implode, and people’s hunger for freedom and self-determination can never be entirely suppressed.

Reasons to Have Faith In Democracy

I have faith in democracy as the best form of government for complex modern states. It is our best hope for a dignified human existence. And it is the best political system for facilitating spiritual practice.

I say this knowing that there is no such thing as a perfect democracy. Human beings are themselves not perfect, and we are emerging from a history soaked in blood. We cannot slough off the past, and have to learn from it, sometimes painfully, in order to move on.

I offer four grounds to support my claim that liberal democracy is the best form of government.

1. Liberal Democracies Are More Peaceful

It is exceedingly rare for democracies to go to war with each other. The establishment of democracy in virtually all of Europe and South America has drastically reduced the incidence of war in those areas of the world. The more democracies there are, the more peaceful the world is likely to become.

Autocracies are inevitably violent. Their leaders are themselves belligerent and intolerant. They see wars as a good way of distracting a population from the poor standard of living that results from their inept leadership. Their populations are often unable to protest against wars. This is the case in Russia, for example. People may be so misled by propaganda that they don’t understand what’s going on. Many people in Russia think their soldiers are fighting Nazis in Ukraine. The more freedom there is, and the more the media is able to report what’s going on, the more opposition there is to war.

When autocratic leaders don’t direct violence against other countries, they often do so against less-favored citizens of their own countries. Liberal democracies tend to be peaceful places to live. Citizens do not generally have to fear that they will be dragged off for holding dissenting views. As Orwell wrote, “No system except democracy can be trusted to save us from unspeakable horrors.”

2. Liberal Democracy Allows for Material Flourishing

Liberal democracies tend to provide a far higher standard of living than autocratic regimes. The 10 countries with the highest standard of living are all liberal democracies, and yet liberal democracies count for only a third of the world’s governments.  

Liberal democracies tend to be stable, predictable, and durable. No democracy is perfect, but in the main they have strong political institutions and legal systems, and democracies usually choose  people with demonstrated competence to staff its agencies. Authoritarian regimes, offer government posts as rewards to those who demonstrate loyalty to the leader. Corruption flourishes, and as a result, the country and its economy become inefficient. The more dysfunctional and corrupt a democracy is, the more likely it is that it’s in the process of becoming authoritarian.

The more flawed a democracy is, the worse the standard of living tends to me. Neither the UK and US is anywhere near the top of the standard of living chart (the US is 15th, while the UK is 22nd), and both countries have been downgraded by the Economist Intelligence Unit from “full” to “flawed” democracies.

3. Liberal Democracy Allows for Emotional and Spiritual Flourishing

There is a reason why so many great spiritual and philosophical teachers—including the Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, and Plato—arose in the so-called Axial Age. The invention of iron meant that society was no longer living at a subsistence level. People could use iron axes to clear forests for agriculture use, and plow fields with iron-tipped plows. The agricultural surplus they generated, they could transport long distances in carts with iron-rimmed wheels. This created cities, where minds could more easily meet and talk.

With a higher standard of living, and with more free time, people could now ask questions like,  “What is my life’s purpose? What does it mean to live a good life?” To focus here on material flourishing is not to be materialistic. It’s to recognize that freedom from material want allows for spiritual flourishing.

Many of the qualities necessary in the political culture of a democracy — a democracy’s “personality,” so to speak — are skillful traits of trust, ethics, and empathy. These qualities give rise to well-being in those that bear them and open them up to spiritual growth.

By contrast, authoritarian regimes produce unhappy people. Authoritarian governments engender feelings of powerlessness and cynicism. People may believe a regime’s propaganda for a while, but eventually they realize that they are surrounded by lies. Everyone is corrupt, and nothing is done well, but changing things is almost impossible.

Authoritarian regimes have to distract their populations from their problems. One way to do this is to generate hatred. Leaders will often target a despised group that they blame for society’s problems. In this way, authoritarianism encourages unskillful emotions of hatred and intolerance. For the same reason it encourages simplistic black and white thinking, rather than more nuanced thinking that encourages truth-seeking.

4. Liberal Democracies are Tolerant of Spiritual Exploration

One of the “personality traits” of democracies being their tolerance of diversity, democracies tend to allow for spiritual experimentation. Mature democracies officially recognize, minority religions such as Buddhism, and often give them access to special benefits, such as tax-exemptions. Although in some ways the US is a religiously intolerant nation, people who are Buddhists or members of other minority languages have been elected to high office.

The American experiment took as axiomatic the idea that people should be free to follow their own conscience in seeking a life that’s meaningful. For that reason, the founders of the US avoided having a state religion. In contrast, autocratic nations often have a favored state religion, and minority religions may be disadvantaged, discriminated against, or even persecuted.

Because of these positive conditions, Buddhist sanghas tend to flourish in democratic nations.

So for these four reasons — democracies being more peaceful, prosperous, emotionally skillful, and supportive of spiritual exploration — I describe democracy as the most desirable form of political organization.

We Are the Majority

As democratic norms are eroded, we need to avoid panic (feet on the ground), yet we need to care deeply (heart wide open) and channel our love anger into opposing harmful changes. And as we do these things we need to keep reminding ourselves and others of democratic ideals, and of the material, emotional, and spiritual benefits of democracy (eyes upward). We need to keep democracy in people’s minds and on people’s tongues, and resist their tendency to see what’s happening as inevitable and unstoppable.

It’s the desire for freedom that’s unstoppable. Yes, sometimes people take democracy for granted. Sometimes they’ll vote for authoritarian leaders because they’re struggling economically or afraid of demographic change. And for some people the cruelty is the point.

But as I’ve written before, “[it’s] important to remember that there are many people in the US (and elsewhere, of course) who believe in kindness, generosity, tolerance, compassion, democracy, standing up to autocrats, and protecting the world that sustains us. That’s much more than half of the population. We are the majority.

We are the majority. And we will prevail.

Promo for Wildmind's meditation initiative

Wildmind is a Community-Supported Meditation Initiative. Click here to find out about the many benefits of being a sponsor.

Read More

Stay in touch with the good

A black woman wearing a leopard print headscarf, under which mini braids are visible, has her hand on her chin and her head tilted back as she looks upward.

As human beings, we are psychologically porous. We’re open to influences from outside ourselves, including others’ words and actions. That’s largely a good thing, because it means we can learn from other human beings.

But it also means that what’s going on around us can affect, in not-so-good ways, our sense of what’s normal and what’s right.

Peer-pressure is one term we use to describe that kind of influence. It’s a term that might suggest a conscious attempt by an individual of group to persuade someone to do something, like a group of teens pressuring one of their members to try smoking.

But this pressure can also be indirect; we witness people talking and acting in certain ways, and even if they don’t try to sway us, their actions can become a cultural norm that we want to conform to. We want to fit in. This pressure comes not from our peers, but from ourselves.

Moral compasses can shift

There are, however, more subtle ways that we conform to what’s around us. Our sense of right and wrong can shift without our even knowing about it. This happens not because we want to conform, but because our moral compass responds to the magnetic field of what’s happening around us.

This isn’t about wanting to fit in. It’s simply that we are attuned to our environment, and as moral values, actions, and speech change in our society, we change too. And this can happen in good ways. Generally there’s been a shift toward greater tolerance, for example. In 2005 gay marriage was almost unthinkable in the US. In 2015 it was legal everywhere, and more and more people accepted it. The more people there are accepting something, the more likely others will start accepting it too.

Also see:

On the negative side, if we see cruelty and dehumanization around us, we may start to buy into it. We get used to it. Tune it out. We may believe the story that the person snatched off the street and deported to a hellish prison camp is a dangerous gang member, even though no evidence, or only laughable evidence, is given to support this.  The government says that’s the case, but there’s no due process and no opportunity for the abducted person to defend themselves against legal charges, because there are no legal charges. Many of us may want to believe the government. We assume they must have their reasons. Or maybe we don’t care much because we don’t think this will happen to us and we lack empathy for those who are effected.

Shift happens

I remember seeing moral change happen to a young man, not long after Margaret Thatcher had been elected. We were both 18 and had worked together for a few months over the summer. We happened to bump into each other on a train platform, and when the train arrived he pushed his way past other travelers in his haste to get on board.

After I caught up with him he told me that you have to grab what you want in life. Having been been brought up to make sure that older people and women with children were seated first, I was shocked by his selfishness. He hadn’t been like that before, but the Thatcherite ethos that greed is good had taken root in his mind. He saw boarding a train as a way to show he was a “winner” in life’s competition, rather than as an opportunity to be civil to others.

Binding our minds to the good

One way we can resist becoming less skillful is to explicitly root our lives in moral values. As a Buddhist, I have lists of ethical precepts to guide my actions. The simplest of these is the five precepts. These are practices where we consciously aim to abstain from unskillful actions. There are, however, although ethically skillful actions we can commit ourselves to. For the sake of convenience, I’ll combine these:

  1. I undertake to abstain from harming living beings, and vow to live with compassion.
  2. I undertake to abstain from taking what’s not given, and vow to live with generosity.
  3. I undertake to abstain from sexual misconduct, and vow to live with respect for others.
  4. I undertake to abstain from untruth, and vow to live with honesty and integrity.
  5. I undertake to abstain from intoxication, and vow to live mindfully.

Ethics as a free choice

These are not rules. There is no authority making us obey them, and no punishments, beyond the natural consequences of our actions, for failing to observe them. Each precept contains something we choose to undertake for the benefit of ourselves and others. Together they comprise a set of “training principles” (sikkha-pada) through which we aim to change ourselves through the decisions we make in life.

To keep themselves oriented to these precepts, many people chant them daily, often as a prelude to their sitting meditation practice.

I talk about this as “binding our minds to the good,” but this does not imply a lack of freedom. A ship that’s adrift, being pushed around by the winds and tides, is not free. A ship that has sails and an anchor is free.

Ethics as a mirror

But simply saying words doesn’t change us. We need to keep coming back to examining our thoughts, words, and actions against the yardstick of the ethical principles that the precepts remind us of. For example, no matter how badly some politicians behave, it’s unethical for us to wish harm upon them. No matter how much we think an item of fake news might help our cause politically, if it’s untrue we shouldn’t spread it. Fighting these temptations is difficult, but it’s a good difficult. It’s the kind of difficulty that makes us better people.

The Buddha pointed out to his son that just as a mirror reflects our appearance, moral reflection shows us who we are. The precepts give us a way of seeing ourselves.

By holding ourselves to a framework of ethical standards, we’re more able to prevent the moral forces around us from pulling our inner compass out of alignment . Sangharakshita described this in terms of becoming a true individual rather than a group member. The group member feels they’re right because they’re doing the same as others are doing. The true individual’s moral compass is better insulated, and they can rely more on the precepts.

Keep looking up

In responding to our current political situation, one of the phrases I’ve been bearing in mind is “Keep looking up.” This means, stay in touch with your ideals. Keep aspiring for and working toward a better world. It also means, don’t accept the erosion of what’s good and right.

At the moment, what’s good and right is under grave threat in the US.

  • Free speech is being punished and curtailed.
  • The right to legal defense is under attack.
  • Judges are being threatened for upholding the laws and the constitution.
  • Due process is being dispensed with, so that the government claims it has the right to determine, without needing a trial, who is and isn’t guilty of crimes.
  • The government is saying it can snatch people off the streets and deport them to inhumane prisons overseas, and that these decisions are irreversible, even if they are illegal.
  • The government is saying that it can break the law with impunity and ignore the courts.

Our crumbling democracy

With remarkable rapidity, an entire democratic system is crumbling, because without due process, and especially without habeas corpus (the right to challenge your imprisonment) there is no basis for a democratic society. Any of us might vanish at any time. When means we’re fearful, and silence ourselves. Which means that our speech is not free, because it can land us in prison. Or in my case it could get me deported. This article, if brought to the attention of the immigration services, could get my green card revoked. This has happened to others.

And this is just the start. The track record of autocratic leaders is well-known. They always persecute political opponents, who they harass, jail or even kill. That is the path we are on, and we are moving down it much more quickly than most people had feared.

We have no idea how far things will go before they are reversed. This will happen, because human beings aspire to freedom. But we don’t yet know how this reversal will be brought about. Will we even have free and fair elections in future? Neither do we know how long it will take.

Aim higher

In the meantime, we have to keep looking up. Don’t just long for and work for a return to free speech, due process, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. Long for and work for a world that’s better than what we had, because our democracies are always flawed, and democracy in the US was more flawed than most.

The law has never been equally applied to all, regardless of social status, sex, or race. It’s always been harder for some people to vote than others. Not everyone’s vote is equal. Those in power have often served the interests of the rich and powerful more than their own citizens. Our task is not just to return to the democratic norms we used to take for granted, but to create a better, fairer democracy for ourselves and our descendants.

To that end, support courage when you see it. When a university refuses to comply with governments attempts to curtail its academic freedoms, celebrate and support them. Support courageous politicians. When a librarian refuses to remove books that contain LGBTQ themes or  ethnic minority characters, praise them. Support courageous publications and give them your attention and your money. When someone gives a TED talk and names a coup as a coup, share this as an example of courage that we should emulate. When someone shows up at a demonstration and waves a banner showing resistance to the erosion of democratic norms, appreciate them and thank them.

These are all things we can look up to and emulate.

Keep looking up. Things will get better, but only if we remind ourselves and everyone else that they can.

Promo for Wildmind's meditation initiative

Wildmind is a Community-Supported Meditation Initiative. Click here to find out about the many benefits of being a sponsor.

Read More

Keep your feet on the ground with mindful news consumption

Feet wearing shoes, seen from above looking straight down, standing on a kerb .The kerb and road are dotted with small golden leaves.

A friend of mine recently went on a trip to visit a friend and to do some sightseeing. The effects of this on her mental health were amazing — and she ascribes much of the benefit of that to having spent less time imbibing the news.

Actually, imbibing isn’t the right word. Right now, taking in the news can be like, as they say, trying to drink from a firehose. It’s overwhelming.

Outrage by design

Partly this is by design. The intent, in the words of a government advisor, is to “flood the zone with shit.” This means to keep doing outrageous things, and to lie continuously.  There are probably a number of motivations behind this.

We can be reeling so much from one outrageous news story that others slip under the radar. We can only protest so much.

As Brandolini’s Law reminds us, it takes an order of magnitude more effort to debunk lies than it does to tell them. Lying continually exhausts your opponents and the media.

Provocative tactics such as renaming an international body of water can have people up in arms about things that barely affect them, while other things are going on that will have serious effects on their lives.

And people who feel overwhelmed and traumatized by what’s going on might just tune out and not even pay attention to what’s happening at all. A passive population is helpful if you’re pushing policies that a lot of people disagree with.

Off-balance and not thinking clearly

The news is often emotive, and that’s especially the case right now for many of us. We can end up emotionally constantly on edge, off balance. And when we’re on edge our minds tell us that it’s important we don’t miss out on anything important, so we spend even more time reading, listening to, or watching the news. Which makes us even more anxious.

When we’re panicked or despairing, we don’t think or perceive clearly. We think of “solutions” that will make things worse. We lose perspective and assume that nothing can be done. We fail to notice what people are already doing, and so we don’t offer them our support.

We become convinced that our outrage will help change things. But that’s not true. Action changes things. Outrage exhausts us and prevents us from taking action.

At times of crisis it’s important that we keep our feet on the ground, emotionally. And so we need to be aware of the tendency we have to be made anxious and outraged by the news, and how this can lead to further news consumption — a vicious emotional cycle.

News fasting

A temporary total news fast can be useful as a way of resetting ourselves emotionally. Some people do this long-term and still stay informed. When I’ve gone on news fasts I’ve found that I’m still aware of what’s going on. People discuss the news on social media. They share links to news stories, which we see, even if we don’t read the stories. People tell us about the news face to face. So we don’t become totally disconnected from what’s going on. And that’s a good thing, because there are often things we should be aware of.

I tend to think of news fasts as being good when we need to “detox,” but in the longer term it’s a question of managing our news consumption — mindfully.

Real mindfulness

Mindfulness is an over-used and often misused term. Someone recently wrote me a scathing email accusing me of being “unmindful” for having made a typo in an article. I decided not to respond, but if I had I might have pointed out that mindfulness is principally a tool for monitoring ourselves. It’s for noticing whether our thoughts, emotions, and actions are beneficial or harmful for ourselves are others. If we’re mindful, we might write a kind message pointing out a typo, even if our first instinct is to get on our high horse about it.

So being mindful of news consumption isn’t just code for “reading fewer news stories” — which is what we do in the world. What it means is being sensitive to ourselves — which is do do with what’s happening inside us. What effect is our news consumption having on us? Not just in general, but as we’re actually reading or watching the news? How does it make us feel? Is it exhausting us? Making us anxious? Is it a neutral experience? Are we actually enjoying it?

This may change from day to day and minute to minute, because there are so many factors that affect our well-being, such as whether we’ve slept well, how demanding our work is, how our personal relationships are going, and so on.

We need to keep checking in with ourselves, and this gives us the freedom to change what we’re doing. If you’re having a growing sense of dread as you read story after story, maybe stop?

Notice the effect the news, and the feelings it creates, is having on your thoughts and actions. Is anxiety compelling you to stay immersed in the news? Maybe you really should stop!

Downshift emotionally

I suggest downshifting to less emotionally demanding news media. Television news is emotionally “hot.” It bombards you with moving and still images. You hear the voices of people you loathe. You see people arguing. It’s a lot to take in. The only time I ever

The radio news is a lot cooler, because you don’t get the emotional impact of all the visuals.

Reading the news is cooler still. You can pick and choose what you read, while with radio and television news programs someone else is choosing everything for you.

Choose wise sources

But even within the realm of reading about the news, there’s a spectrum. There are partisan news outlets that rely on outrage to get and keep readers “engaged.” Often do do this they will exaggerate or otherwise be deceptive. There are other news sources that are more balanced, thoughtful, and accurate.

We can be drawn to outraged commentators. We might assume that these people have the passion and anger to really change things. But often what they’re doing is a performance. It’s called “moral grandstanding.” People worked up and excited, but they end up exhausted and stressed as well. If these outrage merchants every give practical advice, it’s usual impractical.

I find it helpful to read analysis that puts things in a historical context. I’ve mentioned before people like historians Timothy Snyder and Heather Cox Richardson, legal experts Joyce Vance and Teri Kanefield, and expert on authoritarianism, Ruth Ben-Ghiat. These are people who illuminate without inflaming.

We can learn that what’s going on right now politically is part of a pattern that’s been going on for centuries. This can help us, because we have a tendency to think that when our side wins an election, everything’s going to be okay now. It’s not. These centuries-long struggles will continue. We can also learn from history that we are not alone. Others have faced challenges, too. In fact we can see that others have had things much worse than we have. Compared to the US Civil War, or either of the World Wars, we’re in a good situation. To say that is not to downplay the real suffering that’s happening now. It just helps us put things in perspective so that we don’t panic as much.

Be selective

I’m hearing people say that they’re exhausted trying to keep up with everything. That’s what your opponents want, so don’t give it to them. If you do read in-depth, limit that to the things you most care about. Adam Savage, the former presenter of Mythbusters, recently said that his news “titration” strategy is “kind of scanning the headlines from a distance and sort of getting a rough idea of what’s going on.” That’s wise. I’ve no doubt that sometimes Savage also reads in-depth about those issues he most cares about.

I used to subscribe to the email newsletters of the commentators I mentioned above, mostly through their Substack blogs. But having emails piling up in your in-box is emotionally demanding. So instead I’ve switched to using an RSS app. RSS is Really Simple Syndication, and it’s a technology that’s been around since the early days of blogging. As well as just sitting there, waiting to be read, blogs also “broadcast.” You can subscribe to them so that every post ends up on, for example, an RSS app. Using an RSS app is like having a blog you can visit that’s composed of posts from all the websites you’re most interested in.

I use an RSS app called Reeder on my computer and phone. If you go to your app store and search for “RSS reader” you’ll find a bunch of them. Some are free. Some aren’t.

So now, instead of reading emails because they’re in my in-box, nagging me, I have to go to my RSS app and see what’s there. I don’t feel that I need to read everything. Sometimes I don’t have the time.

Connect with others

We are social animals. Getting support from others online is great. Spending time with friends is fantastic. It’s grounding.

You can start or join a book group. The other week I bumped into a woman in a bookshop who was looking for Timothy Snyder’s “On Tyranny” — a book I love and have recommended to innumerable people. She needed one because she was joining a book group. That’s a great text to discuss because it’s short, informative, and practical.

You can also get together with others to plan resistance strategies from letter-writing to staging protests.

Remember there are more decent people who have empathy than evil people who lack it. There are more of us than there are of them.

Look for the helpers

Fred Rogers said, “When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, ‘Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.'”

Feeling alone is terrible. But we’re not alone. There are people who are working hard and who have our backs. Unions, the ACLU, and other organizations are launching lawsuits to restrain authorities from acting outside of what they’re legally allowed to do. There are journalists who are working tirelessly to uncover what’s happening. Find out who these people are. Watch what they’re doing. Let the positive be part of the news you’re consuming.

Be a helper

More than that, support organizations that are doing good. Find out how to donate to them. Mostly that information is right on their organizations’ home pages. By doing this you make yourself part of the news. You won’t be in the headlines, but few are. Most soldiers in Ukraine, who are fighting to preserve their democracy, their freedoms, their country, and their fellow citizens, are never going to be featured in newspapers or have Wikipedia pages. But what they’re doing is historic, and will be talked about centuries from now. Similarly, your much easier, much less risky contributions to support good organizations are part of history.

You can participate in non-violent action. My partner and I recently made a sign for a protest outside our state capital building (she attended — unfortunately I couldn’t). We have participated in boycotts of businesses whose politics we believe to be harmful. I look forward to more marches, demonstrations, pickets, and other displays of resistance.

Help make history. Be part of the news.

Find refuges

As you try to mindfully manage your news consumption, you will find yourself getting upset, angry, and fearful about things that are happening. That’s not a failure on your part. It’s just you having normal emotional reactions to very abnormal circumstances. You’re going to need to keep finding ways to bring yourself into balance.

Back to my friend who found that site-seeing and going on forest walks helped her to detox from the news; we can’t all do that, exactly, but we can look for other ways to turn our attention away to the news for long enough that our minds become calmer and bodies start to relax. I find I’m reading much more than I used to. I’m finding the physicality of real books, and the ability to immerse myself in the stories they contain.

Get out into nature. Make crafts. Meditate. Do things that keep you sane, and that you can connect with others over. As everything becomes more politicized, we need more things we can do that are not political.

Anyway, these are my suggestions for ways you can help keep yourself grounded. Give some thought to what might work for you.

Any other suggestions? Or examples of things you’ve been finding helpful? Please share them below.

Read More

Mythbusting the Buddha having been born a Hindu

Vishnu as the Buddha, flanked by disciples. From the San Diego Museum of Art Collection.

Many people “know” that that the Buddha “was born a Hindu.” But this, like the ideas that he was a prince and that he left home after seeing “the four sights” is also untrue.

The “Hindu Prince”

Writers often bundle myth of the Buddha having been born a Hindu together with his supposed princely status. For example, a website called “Smart History” says:

The man who became known as the Buddha was a Hindu prince, named Siddhartha Gautama, who was born in the 5th or 6th century B.C.E. to a royal family—the leaders of the Shakya clan—living in what is now Nepal.

This is just one of many places making this claim. The problem is, as I’ve said in earlier mythbusting articles, that many writers just repeat what other writers have said. They don’t check this information against the scriptures, which are our earliest and most reliable guide to the Buddha’s history. And so myths can go unchallenged for centuries.

This presentation of the Buddha as a former Hindu is just a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad account of history.

Brahmanism versus Hinduism

Practitioners of the spiritual traditions around at the time of the Buddha didn’t necessarily give names to their religions. There was nothing called “Buddhism.” Followers of the Buddha just said they were “followers of the Buddha” or or his Dharma. They didn’t say they were “Buddhists.”

Brahmins don’t seem to have had a name for their tradition either. Buddhist say they were Brahmins who had “mastered the Vedas” (vedānaṁ pāragū). Or they describe them as “accomplished in the Vedas” (vedasampanno). That may be how they described themselves, too.

Nowadays we call this religious tradition “Brahmanism.” Its not called “Hinduism,” which is a much later term.

It’s true that Brahmanism was one of the phenomena that, combined with others, became Hinduism. But it wasn’t Hinduism.

Wikipedia summarizes the current understanding of the relationship of Brahmanism and Hinduism by saying: “Brahmanism was one of the major influences that shaped contemporary Hinduism, when it was synthesized with the non-Vedic Indo-Aryan religious heritage of the eastern Ganges plain (which also gave rise to Buddhism and Jainism), and with local religious traditions.” [Emphasis added]

Another Wikipedia article says, “Hinduism developed as a fusion or synthesis of practices and ideas from the ancient Vedic religion and elements and deities from other local Indian traditions.”

Brahmanism was an influence on Hinduism, which emerged later, but it was just one influence.

The baffled Hindu time-traveler

Let’s imagine you were to take a modern Hindu back to the time of the Buddha. They probably would not accept that they and the Brahmins back then were doing the same thing.

The modern Hindu would see Brahmins reciting the Vedas, and think, “Cool!”

But then they’d see them sacrificing cattle and be shocked.

The modern Hindu would see no temples in the Buddha’s India. He’d hear Brahmins talk of an afterlife in heaven or with the ancestors, but no talk of reincarnation. But he’d hear Buddhists talking about rebirth all the time. He’d also hear Buddhists, but not Brahmins, talking about samsara.

The modern Brahmin would see animist cultures worshipping local deities and believe that this was “Hinduism,” but the Brahmins of the Buddha’s time would not recognize the animists as being part of their own religious tradition and the animists would certain not regard themselves as being part of Brahmanism.

As Bhikkhu Sujato says in a talk on whether the Buddha was a Hindu, “what we understand of as Hinduism today didn’t even remotely exist in the time of the Buddha.”

Buddhism is older than Hinduism

One thing that will surprise many people is that Buddhism is older than Hinduism. The Buddha established the Buddhadharma during his lifetime, some 2,500 years ago. Hinduism is much younger.

When something comes about through a slow process of amalgamation and innovation, it’s hard to say when exactly it started. The formation of what we now call Hinduism took place from about the 5th to the 8th centuries, according to Bhikkhu Sujato, in the same talk I just mentioned. This, he says, was the birth of Hinduism. Guy Welbon, in “Hindu Beginnings” puts the essential synthesis rather earlier. He wrote, “It is only at or just before the beginning of the Common Era that the key tendencies, the crucial elements that would be encompassed in Hindu traditions, collectively came together.” The disagreement arises simply because it’s not possible to pin down precisely the line when a slowly evolving entity stops being one thing and starts being another.

Bhikkhu Sujato points out, “If India has always been a Hindu country, how come for hundreds of years in the archaeological record — nearly a millennium in fact — we find nothing of Hinduism and plenty of things of Buddhism and Jainism?”

Note that this isn’t some trick of language — that “Hinduism” is a new term, while the religion itself dates back to the Buddha. No, the religion itself dates from a period several centuries to a millennium after the Buddha. What came before was a collection of different religious traditions that did not consider themselves to be doing the same thing.

Sakya was not Brahmanical

But even if we were to stretch the definition of Hinduism — way beyond credibility — so that it were to encompass the Brahmanical practices of the Buddha’s time, the Buddha’s people did not even practice mainstream Brahmanical teachings.

I’ve searched the scriptures looking for a single encounter between the Buddha and a Brahmin in his homeland, Sakya, and found nothing. I’ve seen mention of “Brahmin villages” in surrounding territories (these were lands gifted by kings to Brahmin settlers) but none in Sakya.

In fact the single mention I’ve come across of a Brahmin being in Sakya was in a conversation the Buddha had with someone called  Ambaṭṭha, who recounted to the Buddha how he had once, at the instruction of his teacher, visited the capital, Kapilavatthu, and had been treated with an utter lack of respect. The Sakyans, he said, giggled at him and wouldn’t even offer him a seat. The Sakyans treated him like an alien curiosity, not as a religious teacher. Ambaṭṭha doesn’t talk about having met any other Brahmins in Sakya.

Sakya was not Brahmin-friendly.

Sakya was opposed to Brahmanical beliefs and practices

The Sakyans had a belief system that was at odds with that of the Brahmins. Brahmins were obsessed with caste, or varṇa, which was a four-fold system of socioreligious purity, with themselves at the top. The Buddha’s people saw themselves as warriors (khattiyas, which literally means “owners”). They saw themselves as superior to the Brahmins.

The Sakyans being khattiyas doesn’t mean that soldiering was necessarily their profession. Sakya didn’t have a standing army. Most men living there would have been farmers, craft workers, or traders, although probably all males had some martial training.

The thing is: the fact that they saw themselves as superior to the Brahmins utterly conflicts with Brahmin belief.  To the Brahmins, the fourfold social-religious hierarchy with themselves at the top was ordained by the gods and spelled out in their scriptures. The Sakyans insisting they were superior to the Brahmins was a rejection of the Brahmin world view, and of their religious scriptures.

The Sakyans had completely different beliefs of social classes. To the Brahmins, one’s caste was an intrinsic part of one’s being, and you could no more change your caste than you could change your species. One of the Buddha’s arguments against the Brahmin’s views on social and religious hierarchy was that there were places — Sakya was one of them — where there were only two social classes: masters and servants, and it was possible for a master to become a servant and vice versa. There was nothing intrinsic about one’s social worth, and these class distinctions were just social conventions. To the Sakyans, caste, in the Brahmanical sense, didn’t really exist. This is a huge deal. It’s an utter rejection of a key part of Brahmanical teachings.

The Sakyans’ religion

One of the Buddha’s epithets was Ādiccabandhu, or “Kinsman of the Sun.” Some people have suggested that the Sakyans were therefore sun-worshippers. But there’s no direct evidence they were, and in fact there’s no mention in the Buddhist scriptures of any gods the Sakyans might have worshipped. Whoever or whatever they worshipped, they apparently did it without the help of Brahmin priests.

They did seem to regard certain trees as sacred, and used them as shrines. The oldest known shrine in Sakya was a sacred tree at the Buddha’s birthplace, Lumbini. Trees as special places crop up all the time in the Buddhist scriptures. The Buddha was born under a tree. He realized that he’d previously had a glimpse of the path to enlightenment while he’d been sitting under a tree as a boy. He got enlightened under a tree. He taught under trees, encouraged people to meditate at the foot of trees, and died under a tree.

There are many mentions of yakkhas (native spirits that inhabited trees, mountains, etc.) in the Pāli texts, which may mean that the Sakyans worshiped not the trees themselves, but the spirits they believed resided in them. To my mind it’s highly likely that the Sakyans were animists.

I’ve seen no mention of animal sacrifice of ritual fires in Sakya, or of ritual bathing or other purification rituals, all of which were important parts of Brahmanical practice. Sakyans buried the cremated remains of their dead in burial mounds known as stupas. This was not a Brahmanical practice.

So the Buddha’s tribe (presumably along with other tribes in what is now southern Nepal) seem to have had their own religious tradition, entirely separate from what the Brahmins were doing.

The mystery of the name “Gautama”

The single strongest argument that the Sakyans were part of orthodox Brahmanism is their gotra (clan) name, which was Gautama, or Gotama. This is traditionally a Brahmin name. In fact it’s the name of a Brahmin seer (rishi), from whom the Sakyans claimed descent. This descent wasn’t genetic, incidentally (the rishi was not their ancestor), but cultural and symbolic.

How would non-Brahmins end up with a Brahmin name?

Bhikkhu Sujato explains:

As the brahmins spread across India, one of their chief tasks was to ally with the local kings and provide legitimization for kingship via their rituals and traditions. There were different Brahmanical lineages according to the specifics of how the rituals were performed and the texts transmitted, and these are sometimes raced back to the ancient seers (rishi) who originated the lineage.

Since the Sakyans didn’t embrace anything like Brahainical orthodoxy, we might safely assume that this connection with the rishi Gautama was fairly superficial. It may be that a monarch who the Sakyans were vassals of, forced them to undergo some kind of ritual blessing by a brahmin of the Gautama lineage. This would be similar to the way in which some pagans, under the influence of Christianity, underwent “conversion” but carried on with their old ways regardless.

The Sakyans were not alone in being identified with an ancient seer. The neighboring Mallas were called Vāseṭṭhas, after another ancient rishi, the sage Vāseṭṭha (Skt. Vasiṣṭha). They, too, were khattiyas (warriors), rather than Brahmins.

So the Buddha was not a Hindu.

First, Hinduism didn’t exist.

Second, the Sakyan people did not follow or even agree with Brahmanical practices.

Myths as propaganda

To say that the Buddha had been a “Hindu prince” is horribly inaccurate. It also feeds into Hindus’ claims that theirs is “India’s oldest religion” — which is simply propaganda.

Hindus claim that the Buddha was really a Hindu, and even that he was an incarnation of Vishnu (seen in the illustration above) . The most common reason given is that the Buddha/Vishnu came to argue against animal sacrifice (which has a very ancient history in the Vedas.)

Hindus often talk about their religion being very tolerant. But that tolerance can take the form of saying “No matter what you think, we consider you part of our religion. And because you’re part of our religion, we’re in charge of you.” For example, for a long time, Hindus have claimed ownership over the Buddhist holy site of Bodh Gaya. After all, Buddhism was “part of Hinduism.” Recently, Buddhist monks have been on hunger strike to protest the Indian law that gives control of a Buddhist site to Hindus.

A court case forced Hindus to give Buddhists a minority say in the running of Bodh Gaya, but still gave Hindus ultimate control over the site. Just to be clear, it is one hundred percent a Buddhist site with no historical connection with Hinduism or its predecessor religions. And it’s controlled by Hindus.

The myth of the Buddha having been born a Hindu feeds the myth of him having been a “Hindu reformer.” And this provides fuel for Hindus who want to appropriate Buddhist holy places.

Hinduism and fascism

Hinduism’s tendency to “tolerantly” absorb and exert dominance over Buddhism and other religious traditions has evolved into what’s called the “Hindutva” movement, which is a blend of Hinduism with ideas borrowed from European fascism. Hindutva is a “political ideology encompassing the cultural justification of Hindu nationalism and the belief in establishing Hindu hegemony within India,” according to Wikipedia.

Claims that the Buddha was born a Hindu are propaganda, feeding that unhealthy political trend. Such claims are not just inaccurate, but are politically harmful in a way that is damaging to Buddhism itself.

Read More
Menu

Wildmind is a Community-Supported Meditation Initiative. Explore the benefits of becoming a supporter.

X