Being critical of Buddhism is not easy.
Buddhism is the most enjoyable of the major religions, and Buddhists are the eternal good guys of modern spirituality. Beautiful traditions, beautiful architecture, inspiring statues, ancient history, the Dalai Lama – what’s not to love?
Everything about Buddhsim is so…nice. No fatwahs or jihads, no inquisitions or crusades, no terrorists or pedophiles, just nice people being nice. In fact, Buddhism means kindness. Nice-ism.
At least it should.
Buddha means Awakened, so Buddhism can be interpreted as Awakened-ism. Awakism. So it would be natural to think that if you were looking to awaken, then Buddhism, meaning Awakism, would be the place to look.
::: Light is Better Here
Such thinking, however, would reveal a dangerous lack of respect for the opposition. Maya, goddess of illusion, has been doing her job with supreme mastery ever since the first spark of self-awareness flickered in a chimpanzee’s head, and the idea that the neophyte seeker of truth can join the Buddhists, read a few books , embracing some new concepts and hitting it to the mat might be a bit naïve.
On the other hand, why not? How come this got flipped so much? It’s just the truth. Shouldn’t it be, like, the simplest thing? Shouldn’t someone who wants to find something as ubiquitous as the truth be able to? And here’s this venerable organization supposedly dedicated to that very thing, even named after it, so what’s the problem?
::: Why doesn’t Buddhism produce Buddhas?
The problem arises from the fact that Buddhists, like everyone else, insist on reconciling the irreconcilable. They not only want to wake up to the truth, they also want to make sense of the false. They want to have their cake and eat it too, so they end up with nonsensical theories, divergent schools, clever doublespeak, and zero Buddhas.
Typical of the Buddhist insistence on reconciling the irreconcilable is the concept of Two Truths, a poignant joke of two words that they don’t seem to understand, and yet this kind of perversely irrational thinking is at the very heart of the failed search for truth. We do not want the truth, we want a particular truth; one that does not threaten the ego, one that does not exist. We insist on a truth that makes sense given what we know, not knowing that we know nothing.
Nothing about Buddhism is more revealing than the Four Noble Truths, which, not being true, are of a rather dubious nobility. They form the foundation of Buddhism, so it is clear from the start that Buddhists have crafted a proprietary version of the truth shaped more by market forces than by any particular concern for the less consumer-friendly, albeit true, truth.
Yes, Buddhism can be spiritually filling, even nurturing, but when it comes to truth, it’s junk food. You can eat it every day of your life and die exactly as awake as the day you signed up.
::: Bait and Switch
Buddhism is a classic bait-and-switch operation. We are drawn to the lighting in the window, but as soon as we are at the door, they begin to guide us down the aisle of compassion. Buddhists could be honest and change their name to Compassionism, but who wants that?
There is the problem. They cannot sell compassion and they cannot deliver enlightenment.
This falsehood in advertising is the kind of game you have to play if you want to stay successful in a business where the customer is always wrong. You can honestly go out of business or prosper by giving people what they want. However, what they say they want and what they really want are two very different things.
::: I i i
To the outside observer, much of Buddhist knowledge and practice seems to focus on spiritual self-improvement. It’s also hard to speak against this…except within the context of awakening illusion. Then it’s easy.
There is no such thing as the true self, so any search for its aggrandizement, improvement, elevation, elevation, evolution, glorification, salvation, etc., is sheer madness. How much more any effort undertaken simply to increase one’s own happiness or satisfaction or, I am ashamed to say, bliss?
The self is ego and the ego is the realm of the dream state. If you want to free yourself from the dream state, you must free yourself, not pet it to make it purr or prepare it for an imagined brighter future.
::: Maya’s House of Enlightenment
The trick to being critical of such an esteemed and beloved institution is not to get sucked into the morass of details and debate. It’s very simple: if Buddhism is about enlightenment, people should be becoming enlightened. If it’s not about lighting, they should change the sign.
Of course, Buddhism is not entirely unique in its survival tactics. This same gulf between promise and performance is found in all systems of human spirituality. We’re seeing it in Buddhism because that’s where it’s most pronounced. No disrespect to the Buddha is intended. If there was a Buddha and he was enlightened, then it is Buddhism that insults the memory of him, not healthy skepticism. Blame the emperor’s naked retinue of tailors and spit-lickers, not the boy who just states the obvious.
Buddhism is possibly the highest of man’s great belief systems. If you want to enjoy the many valuable benefits it has to offer, then I wouldn’t dare utter a syllable against it. But if you want to escape Maya’s clutches, I suggest you take a very close look at the serene face of all those golden statues to see if it’s not really hers.