Sunday, June 22, 2008

Judaism and Buddhism

I was reflecting on the following scenario with Khenpo, and afterward came upon an interesting (if unsurprising) parallel in Buddhist and Jewish teachings.
You're living at a house with two other people, one of whom has prepared enough dinner for the three of you. There's other food in the house, but the prepared food looks better. Arriving home, you find a guest arriving simultaneously, and he is invited to stay by your housemates. He agrees, not knowing there's just enough to fill three stomaches. Do you

1) Shove in front of him to get your share before it's gone
2) Keep in front, leaving enough for him to snack on
3) Get in line behind him, but make it subtly clear he better not take too much
4) Let him have all of it, but make it obvious that you've been put out
5) Let him have all of it, not letting him (or the others) realize and thus feel guilty
I suspect most of my readership is at stage 2 or higher (although it's not a totally linear scale, and there are clearly other good options). I also imagine many -- like myself -- were once not even that far. What changed, and would you ever want to go back? If you see these as ascending stages of virtue, why not progress to a higher stage? Is that wisdom reserved for the saints, or do you believe there's some point after which you just gotta get yours?

(Oh, and this is what I read afterwards; hence the title of this post.)

Well, in Buddhism, it is considered that most of our suffering comes from drawing an arbitrary line in the sand, the far side of which we believe would just be giving up too much of our stash and thus condemning us to a life of misery.

It is quite an insidious trap. If you can't remember your mental state when you were at stage one, imagine trying to convince someone there that stage two feels even better. You'll likely be ridiculed for being a naive Santa Claus. And yet, being at a higher stage, you're not the slightest bit uncertain that it's more virtuous than stage one. In fact, people down there would probably not disagree.

It seems that we're all hardwired for compassion, but somehow the intellectual understanding can't manage to blossom into its active counterpart, wisdom. And yet, as we age, it seems to develop on its own.

But must we wait for wisdom to "happen" to us? It's contended in Buddhism that there's a more efficient way: develop a keen, penetrating watchfulness; instead of going through the motions like a zombie, observe the cause and effect of every action you take; deconstruct the mental compartments that separate knowledge from wisdom (a la yesterday's post); behave at all times like you believe a wise person would (WWJD!), thereby reinforcing those patterns.

Supposedly, this is a highway to becoming a "better" person. Sure, it may be easier to be a mental couch potato, but perhaps the fulfillment is more than worth the effort (which itself is a wondrous journey for anyone with the slightest bit of curiosity about life).

Some of you, I think were worried I was joining some sort of a cult. At times, I feel like all the cultural trappings have that scent (although less so than other traditions I've explored), but in its essence as a skeptical, see-for-yourself path, it's in fact the polar opposite.

No comments: