Buddhism in Britain

This is the time of our lives

One of the things that drew me to the Thai Forest Sangha was the radically simple teachings of Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho. Here were teachers who did not believe in the past or the future, but knew these as either uncertain memories or imagined possibilities that we can be aware of in this moment. Reading Ajahn Chah’s talks one is struck by the directness, the humour, the lack of dogma and the humanity. At no point does he give an impression that he wants to convert us to Theravada Buddhism or that he regards beliefs, books and religious rituals as anything more than potentially helpful conventions. And Ajahn Sumedho has followed in his footsteps.

Ajahn Sumedho is sometimes said to have only given one talk during his long teaching career – it is just that he has given it thousands of times. And this is because he focuses on the present moment, how he perceives and experiences ‘now’, and in encouraging those he is teaching to let go of thinking and to ground awareness in knowing whatever conditions are present.

Ajahn Sumedho has long been an inspiration to me because not only is he living and teaching from a radical mindful awareness, but because he also has a naturally sceptical outlook – one which I share – as do many others educated in European and American culture. Indeed, scepticism is a widespread global attitude. In his practice teachings he gives litle to doubt because he does not offer or encourage belief. He discourages anyone from taking on a Buddhist identity or becoming a Theravada Buddhist and uses very little of the Pali Canon – the scriptural source for Theravada Buddhism.

Had Ajahn Sumedho presented sets of doctrines or texts to learn and believe, I am sure that my sceptical mind would have quickly found fault and I would have looked elsewhere. Ajahn Sumedho has never spoken about kamma and rebirth or Buddhist cosmology as beliefs to be taken on, or confirmed that he is aware of spirits and other worlds, or has memories of previous lives or regards these as important and central doctrines that mark one out as properly Buddhist. In fact, quite the opposite - he has regularly described such beliefs as uncertain and not neccesary for awakening.  I recall him saying that memories of past lives – for example if he recalled being Cleopatra - would just be memories in this moment – uncertain, unsatisfactory and impersonal – the three characteristics of any memory and any condition.

Ajahn Sumedho interprets conditioned arising (dependent origination) as applying in this moment – in fact has said that this is the only way that it can operate – given that the past and future are just uncertain conventions.

Ajahn Sumedho’s sceptical and pragmatic approach towards Buddhist ideas, beliefs and scriptures - and his interpreting them as only applying in the present moment - has made him seem radical and unorthodox to some conservative Buddhists. These are people who believe that scriptures are of central importance, who believe that Asian Buddhist institutions are at the heart of authentic Buddhism, and who have faith in a literal understanding of kamma, rebirth, other realms, and a magical interpretation of enlightenment.  These are the kind of attitudes – and superstitions - that are commonly associated with religions of all kinds and which are off-putting to many modern people otherwise attracted to the wisdom teachings of Buddhism.  

It is Ajahn Chah’s and Ajahn Sumedho’s unwavering focus on the practice of awakening in this moment, that has made their message a universal one independent of the particular Theravadan convention that it comes from. And the wide appreciation and appeal of this approach to people from all cultural backgrounds is a testament to its integrity and power. Ajahn Sumedho has been a very successful teacher because of his sceptical and pragmatic attitude and his focus on present moment practice.

Were it not for the fact that Ajahn Sumedho is an exemplary Theravada bhikkhu, one would find his teachings very secular. And this dissonance – a robed bhikkhu talking in a very non-dogmatic, pragmatic and secular way – is part of what creates a depth and universality to his message and makes it so appropriate to this time.

Ajahn Sumedho emphasises abiding in the present moment and this is his key message (and the key to awakening). Many, including me, have benefitted greatly from this teaching. It is a much needed and healthy focus on practice and direct acceptance of the reality of our lives, rather than living a fantasy life based on an unwitting elevation of the thinking intellect and its favoured ideas over everything else.

This message is vitally important; there are Buddhist authorities and organisations that purvey an intellectual Buddhism and assume that thinking oneself to enlightenment is possible, or who regard enlightenment as just superstition. So Ajahn Sumedho’s simple and direct pointing to awakening is a much needed antidote, bringing insight rather than ‘cleverness’, and opening the possibility of awakening to all.

However, taken in the wrong way, his appearing to dismiss the value of conventions, external form and discursive thinking can mislead. These are meant as important teaching guidelines and attitudes for practice, but may themselves harden into beliefs – anti-intellectualism and a passive ultra-conservatism, or even nihilism, being possible outcomes.

These beliefs are common in non-ordained Buddhists, but can find support even in some traditional Sangha’s - where they can appear as virtues.  One great attraction of traditional Sangha’s for many is their appearance of following a way of life and practice that originates from the Buddha.  So, any significant change of behaviour or adaptation to contemporary conditions could alienate support.

The traditional Sangha is in effect re-enacting what many idealise as the original way of life of the Buddha. It is hardly surprising that the Sangha discourages innovation, independent thinking, reform and adaptation, and encourages sticking to traditional rules and behaviours. 

However, although one can see how this conservatism serves to maintain the traditional reputation of the Sangha, ultra-conservatism cannot be applied in the lives of the non-ordained contemporary Buddhist. Certainly if this leads to or is combined with adopting a passive, nihilistic, anti-intellectual attitude, or pathologically ‘nice Buddhist’ persona, or imagining that one is a proxy nun or monk, this can be disastrous in a context of work and relationships, and may mean that one fails to realise one’s potential and creates unnecessary suffering for friends and family. Turning practice guidelines into misguided beliefs in this way is not being kind or honest to oneself and also fails to accept the different context and potential value of living an engaged life in the world.  

More than that, they are beliefs that fail to honour this particular life and this time.

Courage, adaptation, creative thinking, enterprise and initiative are usually essential in order to make a living and to thrive in the world as a non-ordained Buddhist and interestingly enough, these behaviours can sit very well alongside meditation and mindfulness practice…they are not mutually exclusive.

Indeed, the challenges and opportunities for the non-ordained Buddhist in this time are potentially vast. Using the noble eightfold path as a framework for an engaged, ethical and enterprising life is not only entirely possible, it is what it is meant for.

And, contrary to some opinions, awakening is not something confined to ordained Buddhist clerics and refined monastic lifestyles.  This does not mean that non-ordained practitioners have nothing to learn from the renunciant lifestyle and those who gain their livelihoods as Buddhist clerics – quite the reverse - but it does mean that we each have to work within our context and value and honour our particular lives, rather than seeing them as inferior in some way to an imaginary idealised (idolised) Buddhist lifestyle. 

Too many of us wander in romantic fantasies and have lost sight of the fact that this - just this - is the time of our lives - and our lives are short. 

 

 

God is not a thing

I have something of a soft spot for the Church of England. Given that all religious institutions are far from perfect, the Anglican Church contains some impressive people. 

I attended a Christian – Buddhist dialogue at the Buddhist Society in London on Monday. Our guest was Archbishop Rowan Williams - a highly articulate, warm and knowledgeable speaker. And someone who proved easily able to make meaningful connections between Buddhist and Christian ideas, practices and doctrines. He mentioned his close friendship with the late John Crook of the Western Chan Fellowship. 

A range of ordained Buddhist speakers from Theravada and Mahayana traditions spoke about topics arising mostly from the Metta Sutta and the Heart Sutra. Speakers were:

Ajahn Amaro, Amaravati Buddhist Monastery

Venerable Chueh Ru Shih, London Fo Guang Shan Temple

Geshe Tashi, Jamyang Buddhist Centre

Rev Prof Kemmyo Taira Sato, Three Wheels Temple

So, we heard about mindfulness, loving-kindness, emptiness and form, dependent origination and the trikaya doctrine. Apart from loving-kindness, these are probably some of the most abstract concepts in Buddhism. Ironically, emptiness seemed to get most air-time – at least from Mahayana contributors. Dr Williams admitted that emptiness was a challenge for Christians, but when we spoke about conditions being empty of a solid enduring essence – or looked at from another perspective of all that we experience as being process and movement – a fullness - then this was easier to appreciate.

I was pleased that Dr Williams emphasised that God is not a thing or object among other objects and that he said that much talk by Christians about God was 'a little ambitious' - a wonderful understatement - since God was a mystery. There was discussion as to whether ‘Dhamma’ as in the ‘truth of the way things are’ which supports or permeates all that is, could be considered as ‘God’. Perhaps yes, if only we could get theistic faith traditions to agree what the word ‘God’ refers to, and to avoid using it quite so indiscriminately.

Dr Williams referred to a range of early Christian teachers and mystics, and some Greek terms for types of knowing. I am afraid I failed to note these, but I was again struck by the wealth of knowledge represented in European philosophical, scientific and religious history – much of it unread or unknown to us today – and which appears to be both very interesting and potentially helpful to those investigating or enquiring into our human condition, the nature of suffering and liberation, and what makes for a gracious life.   

Perhaps those on the Buddhist path would do well to investigate our own culture and history a little more to seek out the resonances with Buddhism that undoubtedly exist. Since the Buddhist path is based on an honest and pragmatic enquiry, and assumes that truth is inherent in our human experience and available to all, it is obvious that some other seekers, scientists, and philosophers will have something of value to contribute. 

 

What is the best Buddhist tradition?

I'm often asked by those new to Buddhism how one actually becomes a Buddhist and what groups one should join. My advice is to not worry about taking on a 'Buddhist' identity - Buddhism is a practical path rather than a tribe that one joins. But visiting one (or preferably more than one) group can be very helpful, so you need to check what is available within travelling distance. Use the Internet to gather information about local groups and check on their reputations.  There is great diversity within Buddhism and a great number of different traditions have become established in the UK. Some of these traditions have their roots in Asian cultures; some are home-grown varieties. 

A great advantage that we have today is the huge range of good material on the Internet, including e-books and talks from a wide range of Buddhist teachers. We can find numerous Buddhist blogs and Facebook groups where we can interact with Buddhist practitioners, ask questions, and study previous conversations. These are a good way to become familiar not only with particular varieties of Buddhism but also with the qualities of different teachers. Using the Internet enables us to find out in a few weeks what might previously have taken months or even years of determined research.  

As well as reading books and information from particular traditions, and listening to talks on the Internet, we can also visit local groups. This can be a hit and miss business, since we may live in an area where there are few groups. Our aim should be to find a group of like-minded practitioners who we can trust, learn from, and establish friendship. This takes time and should be carried out with a degree of caution.

We should not expect any Buddhist teachers or groups that we visit to demand large fees from us, or to expect us to take part in particular rituals, or to pressurise us in other ways, and we should expect that those teaching or leading such groups should be clear about what it is they teach, their backgrounds, and their levels of competence.

If we cannot find a congenial and reputable local group, then the internet might become our main channel to a virtual Buddhist community. Ideally, we can also occasionally visit reputable centres for retreats or day visits and perhaps after a while, we may even consider launching our own local group.

One growing source of support for practice is in the ‘mindfulness’ movement. There are lots of training courses in mindfulness and these can be very helpful in many ways. And there is the relatively new 'secular Buddhist' movement.

It is not necessary to have a personal guru or teacher, (although some practitioners find this helpful, and some major Buddhist traditions do have gurus). The vast array of material on the Internet means that we can listen and interact with many teachers, without having to establish a particular relationship with just one.

I would strongly encourage both new and more experienced practitioners to adopt an independent attitude to their practice and not to develop a dependency on a particular individual teacher. The psychological projection and idealisations that can drive such dependencies may harm both the student and teacher. There are just too many examples of this to imagine that any teacher is entirely immune to the abuses of power that become possible after being ‘sanctified’ by pious disciples.

The main focus, of course, for those who are interested in the path of awakening, is to actually practice it. Although the Buddha's teaching has developed into a diverse range of religions, at its core is an emphasis on investigating our experience. This focus cannot be seen as ‘religious’ in the sense of requiring knowledge of rituals and doctrines, but is more like the development of a skill. Just as a potter works with clay, and a musician with his instruments, we practice with our mind and body, paying attention to our sensory experience in developing our abilities to concentrate and gain perspective and insight.

No matter what our backgrounds, we can all develop the ability to be mindful, to live good lives and to awaken. Awakening or enlightenment is a natural human potential and does not require us to adopt any particular identity, follow any particular doctrine, or to swear allegiance to any particular religion.

I am often deeply dismayed by the sectarianism and tribalism that I find in English Buddhism especially since it is only about forty years old. Please do not assume that the local group that you stumbled into and have grown to like is ‘true and pure Buddhism’, no matter what those leading the group might say. And please do not assume that links with an Asian tradition, a deep familiarity with Himalayan caves, and a set of impressive robes, automatically makes someone a wise, intelligent and well-behaved human being.

...Although some good teachers do match this description!

And don't imagine that 'modern' Buddhist organisations are trouble-free either. These often have their own problems - ranging from 'dodgy teachers', through non-Buddhist rituals such as deity worship, and a lack of real insight into any authentic Buddhist practice.

I also encourage you to consider your own heritage. European culture has much of great value and we should not simply dismiss this in a search for the 'ancient wisdom of the orient'. Good Buddhist teaching does not criticise and devalue Western culture.

Honour your history.

We have to adopt the same careful and circumspect approach to finding good groups, teachings and teachers as we do with any other serious enterprise. 

 

TICK THE BOX FOR BUDDHISM - CENSUS MARCH 2011

The next – and probably last – UK Census is to take place on the 27^th March 2011. For the second time it includes a controversial voluntary question about religious affiliation.

 

Many commentators are critical of the design of this question and even the originators – the Office of National Statistics - accept that it only measures the weakest form of religious affiliation. Given that the question is voluntary and it is not clear why the ONS want the data, it might have have been better omitted from this census.

The design of the 'religion' question is based upon an outdated view of identity where each of us is assumed to have a strong and exclusive identity with just one major faith / religion / belief system / philosophy.  This is clearly unreasonable: many have sympathies or strong connections with more than one such 'religious ideology'. So we have jewish - buddhists; christian humanists; pagan - vegan - buddhists; islamic - buddhist - humanists; and just about every other combination that is possible. 

One cannot help wondering whether the real purpose of this question is to get a (misleadingly) large christian vote as a proxy for 'britishness'. 

However, even though the question and the thinking behind it are flawed, it seems important that we heed the UK’s Network of Buddhist Organisation (NBO) campaign to encourage us to Tick the Box for Buddhism. Unfortunately, the figures from the last census question on religion have been directly used to justify government policy towards  faith groups.

During the year I spent as the NBO development officer, I found that although Buddhism and its values are widely respected, some practitioners – mainly western converts - are reticent and sometimes confused about the nature of their involvement with Buddhism. Even those who turn up regularly to Buddhist retreats may be uncomfortable with declaring themselves as Buddhist.

There are other complex factors.

Declaring oneself a Buddhist seems to imply for some, a more serious devotion to their practice, and to require beliefs (perhaps rebirth) with which they are uncomfortable. So to be Buddhist requires that we must be some sort of 'pious saint'. This is  obviously a distorted view, since like most spiritual paths, Buddhism supports all levels of involvement and conviction.

Many Buddhists have a knee-jerk opposition to anything that smacks of government control or monitoring. There is a concern with what appears to be ever greater invasions of privacy though CCTV, questionnaires, and databases of various kinds. Although these may be well-intentioned, they are often clumsy, based on flawed thinking (like identities) and the data has a way of falling into the wrong hands.

And there are others who have a rather undiscriminating (naive?) view of politics and avoid any civic involvement which might involve some sort of Buddhist influenced opinion – this is the ‘don’t mix Buddhism with politics’ attitude. Whilst I strongly agree that Buddhist practice traditions should keep well away from political affiliation and party political activity, at a mundane or grassroots level we are all involved in deciding on policies in our communities and we can all influence those who govern us.

And as citizens of a democratic country we have the right (often hard won and with great sacrifice by our ancestors) to make our opinions known and to stand up for what we believe will help our communities. And we can all peacefully and patiently publicise campaigns, activities and attitudes that are motivated by compassion and kindness, rather than their opposites.

And if we start to be more open and public about Buddhism and our practice we are helping others to become aware of the benefits of this path.  

I am not suggesting a chauvinistic or aggressive proselytising Buddhism, but simply taking opportunities to present the ways that Buddhist practice helps us to understand our human condition and to lead better lives. Looking at what is going on in the world under the banner of ‘religion’, where even an act of cold-blooded and cowardly murder can get applauded by 'religious' leaders, there seems to me an urgent need for more sane and moderate religious practitioners to stand up and be counted.

And looking at the way that greedy capitalism and inequality seem to dominate our social structures and livelihoods and the way these are leading us into environmental degradation and huge social problems, we also need well-motivated social activism and engagement, and this is also a strength of the Buddhist path.

I think it would be a very helpful outcome for all if the Census showed an increase in numbers of Buddhists. I don’t see this from a partisan perspective of wanting Buddhism to dominate in some way; just that I see Buddhism as strongly espousing good basic human values and behaviour, and this is what we need at the moment: kindness, courtesy, a willingness to listen and the avoidance of dogmatic attitudes.  

So spread the word. Encourage friends and networks to Tick the box for Buddhism at the Census on March 27^th.  

 

The Pope in Westminster Hall

Some weeks ago I accepted an invitation as part of the group of ‘Members of Parliament and Civil Society’ to listen to an address by His Holiness Pope Benedict in Westminster Hall on 17^th Sep 2010. I had been invited because of my position on the executive committee of the Network of Buddhist Organisations and because I had contributed to a variety of government led committees over the past few years. The previous government had made efforts to include individuals from faith groups in a wide range of interfaith and consultative faith councils and I had offered a Buddhist viewpoint on proposed legislation and community matters where I felt it possible to do so.

And so I found myself negotiating several security checks and entering a large and drafty Westminster Hall, the oldest part of the Palace of Westminster and a space which I had  previously only walked through on my way to meetings.

On this occasion the space was filled with rows of seating sufficient for the nearly two thousand guests invited to hear the pope. We had to arrive much earlier than the pope and his entourage and so I had over an hour of sitting amongst the ‘great and the good’ and observing them arriving and taking their seats; for some reason the peers in particular reminding me of Bertie Wooster's observation that his great aunts greeted each other – ‘like mastodons meeting across primeval swamps’.

There were some theatrical moments, such as when a troop of household cavalry (unfortunately without their horses) marched across the end of the hall with swords drawn, and then just before the pope’s entry the state trumpeters sounded an impressive fanfare. Various groups of senior Catholic and Anglican clerics and a few from other faiths had already arranged themselves as the pope and Rowan Williams and attendants arrived, descended the steps and took their positions on chairs at the head of the hall.

I noted that the speaker of the House of Commons made some welcoming remarks which also included a reference to the trial of Sir Thomas More, who had been found guilty of treason for siding with the then pope rather than with King Henry the eighth in events which led to the great split between the English Church and the Church of Rome and created our current rather complex and curious brand of democratic theocracy.

This reference made it clear to all that the relationship between the Holy See and the English state has not often been an amicable and constructive one. 

The pope’s address (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2010/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20100917_societa-civile_en.html) contained no surprises. He asserted the Churches primacy in matters of  morality and ‘truth’  stating - ‘If the moral principles underpinning the democratic process are themselves determined by nothing more solid than social consensus, then the fragility of the process becomes all too evident.’

It is unfortunate that the pope’s claim for the moral superiority of the Catholic Church has been so seriously compromised by many damaging revelations of sexual abuse and the reluctance of the Church to respond compassionately and honestly to this. The Churches reaction to problems has always seemed to be a self-serving one intended to hush things up and blame others.

There are also many, including me, who regard the policies of the Catholic Church on sexual matters, contraception, and the status of women, as deeply misguided and harmful. (See The Pope and AIDS for example). Having myself experienced cruel behaviour from Catholic nuns when at primary school and heard my mother speaking of the emotional and physical cruelty inflicted on her and her sister at the hands of Catholic nuns, I am understandably sceptical when I hear the Catholic hierarchy making claims for its moral superiority.

The pope also asked that religion not be marginalised and Christians be allowed to follow their conscience when this clashes with the requirements of their workplace. 

But considered properly, this is a much more complex issue, and perhaps the simplest response is to say that employees have the ultimate choice of resigning if they do not like what they are asked to do; and in a democratic society, of contributing their voices to opposing legislation or behaviour in the workplace with which they disagree.

An awkward fact for the senior Catholic hierarchy, and which applies to all other major faiths, is that faith communities do not all support the same beliefs, doctrines and policies, but are actually tapestries of different opinions, practices, conflicting teachings and different schools. So to speak of Catholic conscience as though it is obvious what this is, and is synonymous with the Vatican's policies, is to misrepresent matters. For example, see Catholics for Choice at: http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/about/default.asp

So who defines the 'Christian conscience'? Is it the Vatican, or individual Catholics, or protestants, or methodists or any of a large number of other denominations? If the workplace is allowed to become a battleground for conflicting (and subjective) religious conscience and different religious groups are given what amount to special privileges in the workplace, the result will be an increase in division and conflict. Our innate tendency to tribalism needs no such encouragement.

The pope also dislikes secularism and atheism, even though it is secularism that supports freedom of religion (surely a good thing?) and atheism cannot simply be equated with inhuman behaviour such as exemplified in Nazism. This was a comparison that the pope could hardly wait to make soon after he landed in Scotland. Surely Hitler was motivated by 'religious' nationalism, the glory of the fatherland, and the acquiring of personal power rather than any great opposition to religious belief? 

And there are many philosophical and religious movements such as the various traditions of Buddhism that are acknowledged for their peaceful and compassionate behaviour and their profound psychological and ethical systems, and yet which are non-theistic, since a creator god does not feature as a core belief.

It is tempting to think that the instincts of the Catholic Church were set in antiquity by its position at the political heart of the Roman Empire with a large dose of arrogance,  self-serving attitudes and wealth coming from that inheritance. The Catholic Church was forged towards the end of the Roman Empire by the Emperor's Constantine and Theodosius as a political tool to bring cohesion to an empire under threat.  The resultant self-importance and sense of entitlement to interfere in the internal politics of any nation has never left the Catholic Church. Perhaps this close and long connection between the Catholic Church, politics, and power is why politicians can feel so at home in this church. And perhaps it is more accurate to regard the Catholic Church as primarily a politically motivated organisation, than one interested in truly spiritual matters. 

Although there are many good Catholics at all levels in the church, they behave well in spite of, and often in opposition to, the teachings coming from the male clerical hierarchy at the head of their Church. The Vatican hierarchy seems blind to alternative viewpoints.

Lest we imagine that it is only the Catholic Church which suffers from these issues, we should look carefully and objectively at the institutions with which we engage. Power really does seem to corrupt and one can find examples of authoritarian, self-serving and misogynistic regimes in other faith institutions. And Buddhism is not exempt from this problem.

The problem may appear to be that of keeping institutions true to their aims and yet in sympathy with current conditions. However, it is probably at least as helpful to consider this as an issue of how power is held and used and how livelihoods and status are maintained. And of course, these factors are interwoven. Whatever else they are, religions are often the source of livelihoods and social status for many, and good livelihoods and status are things that people have always been prepared to fight for.

There is little doubt that the Catholic Church feels embattled in its former European heartland and that it  characterises this as the result of recent aggressive secularism. This seems misguided. There has been a protracted retreat of most traditional religions in Europe over several centuries and this is as much to do with citizens feeling sufficiently confident and financially able to make their own choices as it is to the values of the enlightenment and the scientific world-view gaining greater currency. The old religious model of a dominant male clerical hierarchy, institutionalised autocracy, and unquestioning obedience from followers, is an oppressive hang-over from antiquity that is unacceptable to modern, well-educated and prosperous citizens.

At the end of the programme, after the pope had individually met previous and present parliamentary leaders, he walked down the aisle passing close to the guests on the way out. A frail figure involved in powerful religious, political and social upheaval.  I was surprised to feel some sympathy towards him as he passed by – or perhaps the pope was simply getting the benefit of my sense of relief that my stint as an ‘extra’ was over.

 

Sally and the NBO

Last week I was fortunate to be able to attend the celebration of Sally Masheder's life in Bristol. I arrived in good time but was surprised to find only a few seats left vacant in the large hall. By the time the celebration commenced, more chairs had to be found and the numbers had gone up to well above two hundred. Given that this was at 3.00pm on a Wednesday and many attending had to take time out from work, the size of the congregation demonstrated the love and high regard that so many had for Sally, and the sheer number and range of her interests.

Not only had she been a busy General Practitioner in a Bristol Health Centre, but also very active in both interfaith and in Buddhism, especially Chan Buddhism. And she was a much loved grandmother. For many years, she had  acted as the Secretary of the Network of Buddhist Organisations (NBO). Indeed, I regarded her as an engine or dynamo at the heart of the NBO generating energy, organising meeting agendas and keeping in touch with the many NBO members and friends, through email and phone calls. 

She appeared indefatigable and so it was a great shock to us all when she found out that she was so seriously ill.

Sally had always been a very strong supporter of the NBO. She realised the importance of encouraging understanding and friendship between the many different Buddhist traditions in the UK. Without deliberate effort to promote friendship, the tendency is for groups to develop in isolation and for misunderstanding, suspicion and sectarianism to grow. We might believe that Buddhism is different and that serious Buddhists will naturally get along, however, this is not the case. Buddhists are human and human groups tend to be suspicious and fearful of each other, so deliberate effort is required to encourage groups to meet and to develop a mutual regard and understanding.

Even during the several years that I have played a role in the NBO I have been surprised at the latent (and actual) tensions and conflicts which exist between different parts of the broader Buddhist community and the unfair criticism that has sometimes been directed at those volunteers who help to run the NBO itself.

Sally became used to the occasional heated accusation that the NBO does not represent UK Buddhism, especially when she passed around invitations from government sources to consult with Buddhists, or she organised events where ethical issues such as homosexuality were discussed. The fact is that no single UK organisation represents Buddhism in any complete or all-encompassing way whatever those running such organisations might believe. UK Buddhism is diverse and complex and it seems to me to be misguided for any organisation to consider and act as though it had a monopoly on 'legitimate Buddhist opinion'.

Given the diversity of UK Buddhism, those running the NBO come from a wide range of supporting traditions. They try to operate in an open, transparent and consultative way. Any sincere and well-meaning Buddhist organistion or individual who fully supports the NBO aims, is welcome to attend NBO meetings and offer their opinion, or contribute their time. This seems to me the only way that a national organisation such as the NBO can operate: as an open and participative organisation that assumes that those participating do so with the best of intentions and with integrity and sincerity: Which basically means that members and supporters act from Buddhist values and that this is given the highest priority.

The loss of Sally has dealt a severe blow to the NBO. I am sure that the best way of recognising Sally's great contribution is to support the NBO so that it becomes an even more inspiring expression of Buddhist values and practice. I think it is inevitable that as Buddhism becomes more established in the UK,  the need for intra-Buddhist cooperation will grow. Hopefully the NBO will continue to be a major force to help enable this and by doing so we can avoid sectarian barriers becoming established within UK Buddhism.

So please support the NBO so that it can undertake more good works, organise more intra-buddhist events, improve its communications and channels between Buddhists and civic bodies, and work even better. And please come forward to offer any time or skills you have.

The celebation of Sally's rich life was a very joyful and memorable event. At the end, the chanting by the Western Chan Fellowship was strongly evocative and grounding. And the final poem  encouraged us to acknowledge loss but get on with life with renewed vigour:

If I should go before the rest of you
Break not a flower nor inscribe a stone
Nor when I'm gone speak in a Sunday voice
But be the usual selves that I have known
Weep if you must
Parting is hell
But life goes on
So sing as well

Joyce Grenfell 

 

 

The Triple Gem Buddhist Foundation

I am pleased to announce that the Triple Gem Think Tank has grown into the Triple Gem Buddhist Foundation - a new charity. Our web site is www.triplegem.com and we are amending the site to reflect its new status and role. TGBF will continue to publish news on legislative and other proposals that affect Buddhists and Buddhism and on other matters that are relevant. For example the growing profile of 'mindfulness therapy' and its relationship to 'religious Buddhism'. We also plan to establish a dhamma teaching role.

We continue to invite constructive involvement and comment from people of good faith.

Terminally Disorganised?

Is Buddhism terminally disorganised? This arresting phrase was used in reference to recent controversy around bhikkhuni ordination. There does seem to be a lack of robust Buddhist institutions, and a marked reluctance to create them. Perhaps, in the West, this is a knee-jerk antipathy to 'organised religion' and a fear that Buddhism might develop oppressive and bureaucratic structures riven by political factions. Or perhaps there is just too much fear and distrust between Western Buddhists.

But can we conceive of helpful organisations? Ones which strive for openness, democracy, consensus, involvement, and the truth? Surely, some inspired by the Buddha's teachings and having realised how valuable the Buddhist path is, might feel moved to volunteer time to help disseminate Buddhist news, support for students, networking initiatives, and other organisations which can help Buddhism to become firmly embedded in Western culture?

I notice that the NBO struggles to find sufficient voluntary effort, as does every other worthwhile Buddhist initiative that I have ever been involved with, whilst other 'faiths' appear to struggle somewhat less.

Buddhism in Higher and Further Education

As some will knowl, the focus of a recent unsuccesful bid for funding from the Community Development Fund was about researching and implementing support for Buddhist groups on campus. Recently I attended a day’s training on Student Leadership run by the Coexistence Trust at the Houses of Parliament.

There were about 60 young students representing predominantly the Jewish and Moslem faiths, but with some Sikhs, Hindus, Christians, Bahai and others. There were also around 10 representatives from various interfaith groups such as the Tony Blair Foundation, Interfaith Action, Three Faiths Forum, Faith matters, the City Circle and others.

The day itself was run by the Coexistence Trust which focuses on Jewish – Islamic links and explains why the audience was predominantly from these groups. The purpose  was to encourage young people of faith (particularly Jewish and Islamic) to initiate joint campaigns, social action, and interfaith projects on campus.

I seemed to be just about the only Buddhist there and was asked a few questions by students I spoke with. They asked me why there was not a Buddhist Society at some of their universities - in particular LSE (with a large Asian presence) and Nottingham. They also noted that Buddhism seemed largely absent from what might be characterised as the ‘public square’. They knew little about Buddhism and found it quite hard to make contact depending on their locations. I also became aware of the energy being devoted by other faiths towards involving and reaching out to young people.

Given the acknowledged ‘greying of Buddhism’ it seems to me that there is an important area of work here for  Buddhist organisations and groups to be aware of and contribute to – namely making contact with and supporting students on campus. Unless we get a bit more organised and active with young people and university students – tomorrow’s leaders, parents and activists – then it is likely that Buddhism will decline in the UK.

Although there are debates to be had about just what Buddhism is and what sort of engagement Buddhists might undertake in the ‘public square’, my own view is that if we at least accept that Buddhist teachings are helpful and lead to human flourishing and reduced suffering, then we must be prepared to share these teachings and practices with others. Buddhism is in the unique position of offering a non-theistically based way of life and thus avoiding the endless conflicts caused by different interpretations of ‘god’ and god’s will. (This is perhaps why those from theistic and especially Abrahamic faiths sometimes try to ignore or marginalize Buddhism – they bracket it with atheism or humanism).    

Perhaps if Buddhist teachings continue to have a strong imfluence in western psychology and therapy, then this is a good legacy. However, I cannot help feeling that such an outcome would lose a lot of great value – the ideas and practices inherent in community and Sangha, the subtle and profound insights into the relationship between emptiness and form, and the ethical teachings of Buddhism, come together in a unified way to form a complete path, a path that is not present in the deconstructed and packaged products created for therapeutic consumption.

Accordingly I suggest that a high priority for the NBO and the Buddhist Society is to plan and implement a joint range of activities intended to reach out to young people on campus, to provide support to Buddhist Societies, to provide local Buddhist contact information for students, to identify a range of good speakers and teachers who are prepared to visit universities, to create and maintain Buddhist student internet sources and to think of creative ways to engage young students.

Perhaps we can create a UK Student Buddhist organisation as has been done with most other faiths

Such a project has the possibility of bringing  a broad range of Buddhists together in a productive and good cause and can perhaps help reinvigorate and give some focus to the broader ‘Buddhist community’.

I must add that there are already many good Buddhist activities going on in Universities – Manchester is the one I know most about – although Cambridge and Oxford have various significant Buddhist initiatives. I am also aware that All Faiths and None (AFAN) is active in further education and has some excellent ideas and initiatives.

Healthcare Chaplaincy at the Buddhist Society

On Sunday I attended a healthcare chaplaincy meeting at the Buddhist Society. Dr Desmond Biddulph, the Vice President of the Buddhist Society  introduced Keith Munnings who proceded to talk to us about the progress the Buddhist Healthcare Chaplaincy Group has made in setting up and agreeing accreditation procedures for Buddhist chaplains wanting to work (invariably on a voluntary basis) in the NHS. Tim Battle, a CofE minister heads up the multifaith chaplaincy group which is agreeing a single accreditation process for each faith group, including Christianity.

The BHCG will present their process at the end of March or thereabouts to the Multifaith Chaplaincy committee. It is good to see the Bud.Soc. sponsoring this initiative.

The meeting was attended by around fourteen or so, a largish group (5) regarding the Forest Sangha as their home tradition. There is clearly some work to be done on the draft accreditation process, but there are detailed competencies and background information and these can be found at the Buddhist Society web site or at: http://www.buddhacommunity.org/lay_ministry_day.htm.

You can register an interest in healthcare chaplaincy via http://www.thebuddhistsociety.org/events/index.html