Buddhism on the Installment Plan: the Gift is in the Giving…
Don’t worry about what you can get from this life and this world. Give all that you can give, before it is too late. Too many people see this life and this world as transactional, i.e. what do I get? But, if you’re Buddhist, then that is the wrong question to ask, and anything obtained in that way is fraught with great risk. Because giving is the path of righteousness and the foundation of karmic justice, that somehow some way you will be rewarded for your generosity, details to be left to future generations to determine, whether that is truly necessary or not.
It’s not. The only thing that is important is the act of giving itself, regardless of whether the outcome bears fruit or not. Because if everyone gives from the bottom of their hearts, then the outcomes can only be good. This is not the jungle, and the laws of the jungle no longer apply. This is the law of the dharma, and the dharma dictates dana, giving, Possessions are loaded with contradictions, anyway, after all, and the rewards are subject to interpretation. If you can’t take them with you, then why bother with them?
The devil is in the details, of course, as always, and it’s no different here. Because the act of possession is the great conundrum of modern existence: the more we get and spend and squirrel away, the more miserable we are somehow some way. The math just doesn’t add up and it likely never will. It’s the modern curse, the high price of buying a house, but I often wonder if that’s not a curse but a blessing. It does signify the end of freedom, after all. So, there’s that. It also opens up the possibilities of other lifestyles that just might offer substantial benefits. A kuti in a Thai Forest Temple cost me nothing—nice.
I only know that it is more appropriate for these self-engorged capitalistic end-times than the prevailing paradigm, which is probably the cause of this effect. The original teachings of JC and the Buddha are almost superfluous at this point, anyway, what with so much cultural baggage added on over all the years, much of it far from the original teachings…
If there’s anything more annoying, as a Buddhist Studies MA student, than having to memorize lists of lists after lists full of lists from the annals of the ancients, it’s having to plow through the re-definitions of all those terms from the mouths of the moderns (is ‘anals’ a word?). This is not high scholarship. This is the business of busy-work, the intellectual equivalent of keeping that shovel moving to justify your union job, or to keep your position as the arbiter of privilege in the fan-boy chat-pages of Facebook…
It has long been predicted that Buddhism’s future is in the West, and for better or worse, that may very well be true. So the question then becomes: what kind of Buddhism would that be? For purposes of dialog and dialectic, I see the two chief protagonists to be the Thai Forest Tradition and Zen, both of which have numerous and faithful adherents in the West, and both of which can claim some purity of faith and doctrine…
Theravada Buddhism has it easy, when it comes to dhamma (dharma) talks, just pull out the old mind-kilesa-breath-nose-navel-‘Buddho Buddho Buddho’ playbook, rinse and repeat, hard to screw up unless you want to get into the murky afterbirth of past lives and kamma (karma), doing Yogic headstands and plotting Ptolemaic cosmic epicycles, trying to explain how anatta (non-self) somehow gets reborn, when there really is nothing there to begin with. But still they do. It’s embarrassing, especially when some of the same ones…
streaming consciousness... 
Reply