Taboo against the transcendent

Looking at the slick Buddhist magazines in the bookstore a couple of blocks away from where I live I am inclined to believe that a dumbed down, mediocritized version of Buddhism is winning the day, versus Buddhism according to the Buddha.  

Granted, that looking at some aspects of Buddhism intellectually is difficult even for trained academicians, there should not be so much dumbed down and mediocritized Buddhism circulating in the market place.  (People are not that stupid!)

I confess, that I don’t have a good answer to explain this phenomenon.  The only thing that has recently crossed my mind as a likely explanation is that, somehow, marketing the transcendent is a taboo.  It would be like going back in a time machine to the Victorian era trying to sell Playboy magazines, hoping to make a fortune.  

Along with the particular taboo just mentioned, I would include the example of publications and research about people who have been abducted by interdimensional or extraterrestrial beings, psychedelic drug culture, shamanism, gnosticism, out of body and near death experiences, past lives, alternative healing strategies, etc.  I realize that this is an odd assortment of subjects but I believe that while these subjects have their followers, they are treated, more or less, as taboos in the public market place of ideas and by the mainstream media (MSM).  Therefore, I should not be surprised (but I am!) that Buddhism sold in the slick magazines, with a corporate look, have been significantly bowdlerized in which the element of the transcendent has been either expunged or altered.

But why the taboo against the transcendent which I believe to be the case with Buddhism today?  This is a tough nut to crack.  The problem certainly has its origin in the common, everyday collective psyche this much is obvious.  Looking into the collective psyche it is not without fear, and accompanying this fear, a drive to keep everything simple, safe, and controllable, above all ‘human’.  This is the view of anthropocentrism, that man is the measure of all things—there is nothing higher.  In other words, transcendence is impossible because there is nothing higher than man.  But Buddhism denies this.  The Buddha never claims to be a human—he is higher than even a god (A. ii. 37).

While modern Buddhism likes its Buddhas all-too-human the fact remains that Buddhas are not human and their teachings call for the transcendence of all that is human and godly.  So the taboo against the transcendent will remain, more or less, as long as human arrogance holds sway. 

 

Comments

[azanshi]

Human kind cannot bear very much reality, and as buddhism per se is solely about absolute reality, very, very few "humans" are able to comprehend the immeasurable virtues found in even a single drop of such "pure" buddhism.

Let me tell you a small story by the famous Rumi.

There was in a secluded place a lake, which was fed by a running stream. And in this lake were three fishes, one very wise, the second half wise, and the third foolish. One day some fishermen passed by that lake, and having espied the fish, hastened home to fetch their nets.The fish also saw the fishermen and were sorely disquieted. The very wise fish, without a minute's delay, quitted the lake and took refuge in the running stream which communicated with it, and thus escaped the impending danger. The half wise fish delayed doing anything till the fishermen actually made their appearance with their nets. He then floated upon the surface of the water, pretending to be dead, and the fisherman took him up and threw him into the stream, and by this device he saved his life. But the foolish fish did nothing but swim wildly about, and was taken and killed by the fishermen.

Now, what are the marks of the wise man, of the half wise, and of the fool?

The wise man is he who possesses a torch of his own. He is the guide and leader of the caravan. That leader is his own director and light. That illuminated one follows his own lead. He is his own protector. Do ye also seek protection from that light whereon his soul is nurtured. The second [one] who is half wise, knows the wise man to be the light of his eyes. He clings to the wise man like a blind man to his guide, so as to become possessed of the wise man's sight. But the fool, who has no particle of wisdom, has no wisdom of his own, and quits the wise man. He knows nothing of the way, great or small, and is ashamed to follow the footsteps of the guide. He wanders into the boundless desert, sometimes halting and despairing, sometimes running. He has no lamp wherewith to light himself on his way, nor half a lamp which might recognize and seek light. He lacks wisdom, so as to boast of being alive, and also half wisdom, so as to assume to be dead. That half wise one became as one utterly dead in order to rise up out of his degradation. If you lack perfect wisdom, make yourself as dead under the shadow of the wise, whose words give life. The fool is neither alive so as to companion with 'Isa, nor yet dead so as to feel the power of 'Isa's breath. His blind soul wanders in every direction, and at last makes a spring, but springs not upwards.

[Ona]

Nice post. It is interesting how where Buddhism, or for that matter Yoga, have flourished in the US, it is in the context of a secularized "relax and feel good" kind of approach. The transcendent aspects are challenging, even frightening. Who wants that? :)

[minx]

Once as I asked my Master on a way for humans to approach the genuine buddhadharma, he answered;

"Any culture where people bow to each other, is predestined to perish in ignorance, pride and wars.
Any culture where people do not bow to each other is equally predestined to perish in ignorance, pride and wars. if you find a way out of this dilemma then you have your answer."