-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Jon Johanning
> I've been practicing this stuff for over 20 years, and I know a lot of
people who believe it. They live all over the place (check around for
your local Buddhist center -- I'm sure there are more than a couple in
Toronto). They do pretty much the same things on weekends that any one
else does, except go to church :-). Sometimes they go on weekend
retreats.
** And I'll wager that not all of these people believe and do the same things. My point is that 'modern' Buddhists infuse their Buddhism with a modern worldview and modern assumptions. This transformed the tradition... and probably made Buddhism in the 'west' possible. And, ummm... Toronto is really far from where I'm living now. You must learn to avoid clinging to the email address... let it be and you will know that I live with the frozen void, in Winnipeg (it was -55 here last week... IN YOUR FACE, TORONTO!).
> I don't quite understand your meaning here, but if you mean that brief
summaries don't completely capture all the subtleties of the subject, of
course. That's also true of Marxism, quantum mechanics, and, I dare say,
pomo literary criticism. So...?
** That's what I mean. And yes, it is true of Marxism, quantum mechanics, and pomo literary criticism. So when people do write summaries they are engaging in an ideological exercise which *creates* a new versions of the theory itself. In religion this insantiated by thinkers like Eliade and W.C. Smith... So... this kind of summarising is bad and should be avoided, although is probably inevitable for introductory purposes. You listed off some basic believes... are these creeds from the local monastery? To them emcompass collective or personal ritual meditation? (and so on). I don't mind details... I just wanted to call you on a general claim you made about Buddhism which I think is false... however true it is for your community. Some Roman Catholic communities believe in reincarnation. Some Sikhs worship Devi... sometimes Jews possessed by spirits seek help from Islamic clerics...
> Well, pardon me, Your Highness, but some people (namely philosophers of
religion) *are* interested in it. But in any case, there are specific
Buddhists all around you, as I said above. Check some out.
** I just wanted to let you know ahead of time that I wasn't going to debate about the intricacies of Dharma... however I'm perfectly willing to talk about the history of Buddhism. I'm interested in what people believe about Dharma as an object of study. I'm not interested in debating the truth such claims.
> I'm sorry, but you keep talking about Buddhism as if it is dead and
buried, while I (and Brian) are talking about it as a contemporary way
of life. Buddhism in Western countries such as North America is quite
liberated from sexism -- you just haven't "encountered" it in real
life, apparently.
** Of course I have encountered it. If I treat Buddhism as if it is dead and cremated it is because I'm interested in the historiographical development of Buddhism, not living Buddhism. Most of what you have said about Buddhism today is probably correct - I've emphasised that several times.
> I'm not an expert on medieval everyday life, so I can't give you the
references off-hand (except for Chaucer -- I suspect he represents the
attitudes of a good many folks of his time). Talk to your medieval
historian colleagues in Toronto; I'm sure they can give you all the
references you need.
** When I did look at material from medieval everyday life and presented it on-list it was passed over in silence...
> I notice that you back-peddle a lot from your generalizations when they
are challenged.
** I was being nice, and accommodating. I thought I'd qualify myself befor someone pulled out a particular challenge to a generalisation that I'd made, but I didn't have a specific error in mind. Of course you've simply made a generalisation (you back-peddle a lot) about my position without giving an example of a generalisation that I've made needs to be revised or qualified. So, I'm going to consider taking back my apology and let my posts stand as they are. I'll qualify them on a line by line basis.
***
I don't have any ethnographic reports handy, sorry. But I am thinking especially of Chinese and Japanese history, where as is well known there were plenty of Buddhists who also enjoyed sex heartily. The Christian sort of gloominess about sex leading to eternal Hell was just not there until the missionaries showed up.
If you want a scholarly treatment of the subject, you might look at Bernard Faure's _The Red Thread: Buddhist Approaches to Sexuality_ (Princeton U. Press). A more popular book is John Stevens: _Lust for Enlightenment: Buddhism and Sex_ (Shambala Publications).
** Faure's work looks really interesting. His book on gender and purity within Buddhism has also been published as of last year. Most of the reviews are quite good. The main points of criticism seem to be: 1. Faure makes the methodological assumption that sexual desire is an omnipresent feature of hte human condition... and posits that lust can never be eliminated. This may or may not be a helpful assumption since it probably crosses the emic / etic border. 2. Faure also tends to view monastic regulations in general contra to the self-understanding of the practitioners, thus providing a new interpretation of the meanings systems while putting aside a more contextualised understanding (again, this crosses the emic / etic border). 3. Faure reduces injunctions prohibiting sex to pragmatic devices rather than soteriological reflections... when perhaps both should be considered. Other than that... The Red Threat (and the second volume on gender and purity) seem to be excellent works. Unfortunately both have been taken out of the UofM library and aren't due back for some time... and I'm not inclined to pull rank on a student using them for research.... so... I've filed the references away and will have a look at them in March. (Thanks).
Reviews: Jose Cabezon, Journal of the American Academy of Religion vol. 4 1999. Liz Wilson, Journal of Religion vol 81, no. 1, 2001. Paul Ingram, Cross Currents vol. 49, no. 3, 1999.
ken