tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1517892305917115037.post2227867518741690513..comments2023-09-19T10:03:27.883-06:00Comments on New City of Friends: What on earth is authentic Buddhism?Dayamatihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04125167790936883271noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1517892305917115037.post-60189350986952242042009-08-26T06:31:33.403-06:002009-08-26T06:31:33.403-06:00First allow me to thank you for the opportunity to...First allow me to thank you for the opportunity to respond and clarify (I stumbled across this while trolling for possible responses to my translation of a collection of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's essays published last year)<br />Second, for quoting me /wildly/ out of context, and finally for attributing a set of presuppositions to me without having, apparently, read any of my (admittably meager) published work, including the Buddhist Studies Review paper from which the quote was extracted.<br /><br />Sarcasm aside, that paper gives the lie, to the imputed presupposition that the Kaalaamasutta does not deserve the attention of scholars today.<br /><br />I have no objection whatsoever to the Westies' radical modifications/adaptations of Buddhism. That, after all is what the Chinese, then the Japanese did. Repeatedly. (and, for that matter the Indians & probably Sri Lankans over the centuries). My goodness, there is no such thing as "authentic Buddhism". <br /><br />Similarly, while I have no use for the apparently intolerant dogmatasm of E-sangha (I'm not familiar with it), I have no objection to their promoting /their/ brand of Buddhism.<br /><br />To a large extent my comment quoted here are of a scholarly nature: I fear that a set of presuppositions in western scholarship have closed off multiple interpretive possibilities, and far from building obstacles (to appropriate the metaphor) I am trying to open windows by calling into question presuppositions that I believe have hamstrung western scholarship.<br /><br />This may be relevant to practicing Buddhists as well, in that the presuppositions/inclinations etc. that have so informed the western practice of Buddhism might--unquestioned--serve as a barrier to broader possibilities and understandings. Too often, westie buddhists come to Asia, cry "That's not /real/ Buddhism" and flee back to the west.<br /><br />Anyway, the Kaalaama paper is part of a larger effort to extract an epistemology from the Nikaayas, what I call in my most recent paper an epistemology of liberation, that in turn will support new interpretations of such constructs as the five aggregates and dependent origination. But to open the window for new interpretations, requires calling into question some of the old presuppositions. The Kaalaama paper showed that the sutta in question is more an ethical than an epistemological text and that the proto-scientific interpretation that has become popular is questionable.<br /><br />Finally, hey! Good to hear from you. Years ago we both participated in the buddha.short.fat.guy newsgroup.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17761121305173575721noreply@blogger.com