Fundamentalism?

The Watercooler
22

Ahhhh. Thanks for explaining. This is quite helpful. :pray:

I’m not sure how to deal with a fundamentalist hermeneutic since that would not lend itself to questioning. I would have to simply have faith in those wheels.

One of the difficulties I see with distinguishing between a secularist and allegorical hermeneutic is that Buddhism is based on subjective experience. I would therefore say that any interpretation of the suttas must acknowledge that subjectivity in relation to secularist/allegorical hermeneutics.

We can’t adopt either a secularist or an allegorical hermeneutic, especially when discussing the formless realms. For example, with the dimension of infinite space, are we able to correlate that in any secularist way with the physics assertion that space is infinite and beyond what we will ever see? Perhaps. But adopting that secularist hermeneutic we would lose the subjective perception of infinite space. A similar argument could be addressed against a purely allegorical hermeneutic since we have scientifically convinced ourselves that space is indeed infinite.

Perhaps we need a middle ground hermeneutic.

Bhante Sujato’s translations do indeed use such a middle-ground hermeneutic. Bhante Sujato’s brilliant choice of simple words with broad meaning supports a wide variety of consistent personal subjective interpretations. For example, a precise use of “joy, rapture and bliss” throughout his translations affords each listener a challenge of discernment with no loss of fidelity. We as readers are challenged by Bhante Sujato’s hermeneutic to be quite precise in our own interpretations and to distinguish quite carefully between these three terms of “joy, rapture and bliss.” In this manner, his consistent and delicately ambiguous translations are actually quite precise as a whole thanks to his hermeneutic. I’m not sure what to call this type of hermeneutic? Pedagogical hermeneutic?

(sorry for the massive edits. I am struggling with my new word. )

2 Likes
23

This is where we differ! I think we need the brochure to keep the first step. It says what it’s like and what to expect when we get to the city! Otherwise we might end up in the local playground!

1 Like
24

As informative and interesting as this may be, it doesn’t mean that we will understand the import, the purpose of the teachings, as a consequence. It’s still information about something.

The four Noble Truths are not just information about something, they’re Aryan realisations.

They’re not just theoretical, they also operate on an existential level. They are known by the wise, each for themselves.

This ‘knowing’, knowledge and vision of the nature of existence and, the ‘truth’ which liberates, is not just a bunch of fun-facts and, curious meanings.

25

Even with the tour-guide we can still end up in the playground if that’s what takes our interest. Conversely, we may find our way to the lost city if, we can read the signs, like a good ‘tracker’ - without the guidebook.

If, there was a clear correlation between having the guide-book and finding the lost city then, the academics, the Pali scholars, the learned Pandita’s would have a higher success rate than the rest of us - the rabble.

It ain’t neskaserily so :slight_smile:

26

It’s not a matter of shying away from that interpretation; I accept that it’s an interpretation, but it’s not the only one and not even necessarily the right one. While arguing semantics can get tiresome, lumping terms together for the sake of convenience tends to muddy the argument when I personally think it’s important to get to the heart of the matter.

Yes, clinging of any kind is suffering. I say “ideology is a form of violence” goes too far because it’s too broad a generalization. (Which reminds me of this sutta).

3 Likes
27

We can aim at a reasonable definition with reference to the common usage of the term. Or, make it up as we go along - whatever fits our preset conclusions.

Maybe you need to talk to a local-group of fundamentalists or, go online and, peruse their uplifting vision of the world.

You can choose from Buddhist-type fundamentalism, with it’s intolerance and divisiveness and, go through the list of similar belief-systems in all the major religions.

Fundamentalism is not just a definition - a matter of semantics - the definitions can be changed to suit our individual preferences and prejudices.

As you know, due to countless recent events in history, fundamentalisms, have had a dramatic effect on the world - today.

I am talking about fair-dinkum, hard-core forms of religious extremism that have been fuelled by fundamentalist ideologies.

This includes: Islamist extremists, born-again Christians, some manifestations of orthodox-Judaism, Hindutva nationalists and, the Burmese Buddhist and, Sri Lankan Buddhist movements that have been instrumental in displacing large non-Buddhist communities and, causing a lot of unnecessary suffering.

All of these manifestations of fundamentalist-ideology are incredibly divisive and, intolerant of ‘others’ that don’t fit into - or comply with - their fundamentalist-religious- political agendas.

That’s not a semantic argument, that’s part of the world we live in as social-animals.

1 Like
28

This too is a hermeneutic strategy: Anyone may hear these words, but only the astute will understand them properly, and they must do so in ways that are not easily stated or easily taught to others.

This hermeneutic seems clearly recommended by the texts themselves, but it’s perilously close to something that the Buddha disclaimed, namely a secret or esoteric doctrine.

Beyond the potted, highly simplified examples of hermeneutics I have given, there are lots of other strategies out there, and there are ways of thinking about them in the fields of religious history and comparative religion. A more sophisticated Buddhist hermeneutic (at least, more sophisticated than what I can manage) would help us to follow the Buddha’s words, and avoid the kinds of esoteric interpretations that he disclaimed, while embracing the teaching as it was intended. Appearances of esotericism notwithstanding.

2 Likes
29

Potaliputta would have spun my head also, yes!

And indeed, I have misunderstood “violence” which is defined as “the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy”. Thanks for the correction.

Laurence, we can’t say “ideology is a form of violence” because ideas are not physical force. We can say that ideologies are often used to justify violence.

2 Likes
30

It might be a hermeneutic strategy but who cares? As practicing Buddhists - you may not be one - we have another interest. Other than, hermeneutic strategies.

We ‘practice’ the teachings and, realise there meaning through that direct engagement. Through meditation and, such like. This is not just talking about things from a hermeneutic perspective.

Do you practice Buddhism?

31

Have you ever heard of mental abuse? That’s also a form of violence. If, I threaten someone I can be charged with assault - at least in Australia. Violence comes in many shapes and forms - subtle and gross. To compare yourself with another and, feel like you are inadequate can be a form of self abuse. To love yourself and others unconditionally is the end of the possibility of violence.

32

Oh! Interesting. Then wikipedia doesn’t match Australia law. Perhaps wikipedia should change. I was originally aligned with your statement until I read the Wikipedia article.

33

I care about hermeneutics. And I practice Buddhism.

Look, we’re all different, and use different words to understand the Dhamma. You use yours, I use mine, others use theirs.

Let’s focus on the important, the Dhamma, and forget about insignificant details of how we express ourselves. :anjal:

3 Likes
34

I try to, though I’m pretty new at it.

But to know how to practice, I need to know how to read the texts. And that requires a hermeneutic strategy of some kind or another. Even one who doesn’t practice a conscious philosophy of textual interpretation still has a philosophy of textual interpretation. Why not bring this out into the open? Why the aversion to it?

3 Likes
35

There’s something that ‘must be done’ by beings to gain the state of peacefulness and, as a consequence deep natural stillness - samadhi - and then, awakening?

"What should be done by one
who is skilled in wholesomeness,
to gain the State of Peacefulness is this:
One should be able, upright, straight and not proud,
easy to speak to, mild and well content,

easily satisfied and not caught up
in too much bustle, and frugal in one’s ways,
with senses calmed, intelligent, not bold,
not being covetous when with other folk,

not even doing little things that other wise ones blame.
(And this the thought that one should always hold):
“May beings all (live happily) and safe,
and may their (hearts rejoice) within themselves.

Whatever there may be with breath of life,
whether they be frail or very strong,
without exception, be they long or short,
or middle-sized, or be big or small,

or dense, or visible or invisible,
or whether they dwell far or they dwell near,
those that are here, those seeking to exist—
(may beings all rejoice) within themselves.”

Let no one bring about another’s ruin
and not despise in any way or place;
let them not wish each other any ill
from provocation or from enmity.

Just as a mother at the risk of life
loves and protects her child, her only child,
so one should cultivate this boundless love
to all that live in the whole universe—

extending from a consciousness sublime
upwards and downwards and across the world,
untroubled, free from hate and enmity.

And while one stands and while one sits
or when one lies down still free from drowsiness,
one should be intent on this mindfulness—
this is divine abiding here they say.

But when one lives quite free from any view,
is virtuous, with perfect insight won,
and greed for selfish desires let go,
one surely comes no more to be reborn." - Metta Sutta

2 Likes
36

No aversion to it - it’s just more than this. As you practice you will make this discovery for yourself and, my conversation with you about this may begin to make more sense. You never know your luck in a lost city! :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like
37

Buddhism is certainly more than hermeneutics. No disagreement there! But I’m a words-and-languages nerd. I always have been, and I’m afraid that even after taking up Buddhist practice, I remain in this sense just as I was before.

4 Likes
38

If, we’re going to do this we have to go beyond hermeneutics - plain and simple.

The Dhamma isn’t just fun-facts and curious ideas about the Dhamma.

39

Love yourself as you are unconditionally - if you can help it? Don’t try to change yourself! In a natural forest :evergreen_tree::evergreen_tree::evergreen_tree:-s come in many shapes and sizes. The leaves don’t fall in straight rows. You are just fine the way you are dear friend.

I don’t think your a nerd just because you enjoy words and languages. :evergreen_tree::evergreen_tree::evergreen_tree:-s grow towards the sun and people ask questions. It’s in their nature, we are inquisitive and curious just as it should be - IMO.

2 Likes
40

On our spiritual journey, we’ll let go of a lot of things. But there’s a place and time for everything. There’s a time for letting go, but also time for investigating the Dhamma, and hermeneutics help me with that. :anjal:

3 Likes
41

Hermeneutics is fine there’s just more - much more - and much less, in the Dhamma. I hope this isn’t to cryptic? :blush:

1 Like