Early Buddhism continues its impeccable lack of existence in US academia

Some may be, but in the government-funded grant systems I’m familiar with (in the science and engineering area), the decisions are made by committees of researchers and reviews are obtained from experts around the world. Of course, it’s not perfect, and there are guidelines and processes that are designed to push things in certain directions determined by policy decisions for the particular fund (e.g. some funds might require some connection with local industry, other may be focused on fundamental research).

1 Like

Funding as I understand it typically graduates towards those scholars and movements that are seen as “successful”, where success is largely associated with the approval of their peers, via peer-reviewed publications, or else simply getting hired. You can’t just say, “people need funding” therefore “the scholars in a field have no agency”. It’s reductive.

Buddhist scholars in the US have chosen to embrace Schopenism and all that followed because they believed what he was saying was true and meaningful. They didn’t have to.

Anyway, if it were true, every paper on Buddhism would end up proving that fossil fuel extraction is a good thing!

1 Like

Bhante not entirely related to your post here, but I recently finished reading (for a 2nd time) Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts and found it to be quite useful and inspiring. I’ve been reading a few of your other essays here on D&D recently and appreciate all the little technicalities and nuances that you point out within the various texts/suttas.

I thought this last paragraph from Authenticity to be quite nice and inspiring for one’s practice.


Much gratitude to you and Ajahn Brahmali for this wonderful resource. :anjal: