sure you will resonate with nicanor parra, heralded for his biting, ironic, lucid style—what he called “anti-poetry.” Parra claimed poetry as a colloquial, irreverent art. “I always associated poetry with the voice of a priest in the pulpit. … Let the birds do the singing
"pure poetry is a matter of the gods, apollonian, immaculate. The impure poetry, dyonisian, advents the confusing impurity of men, the anatomy of internal and external human atmosphere; it dignifies the matters of the body, its bowels and feelings; the becoming of time. All in all, poetry without purity is and will be (anti)poetry purely human and popular"
Great article, very thought provoking. Glad you shared it with me on Twitter!
I've been thinking for it for a while now, and I have to say one thing readers who have a cursory or narrow understanding of Buddhism might need a reminder what a bodhisattva is. While the word is used a number of different ways, I think it's well captured by this definition: "a person who is able to reach nirvana but delays doing so out of compassion in order to save suffering beings"
They are beings that can escape the cycle of birth, life, death, and rebirth, but choose to put off achieving nirvana to help others. The fact that these beings are venerated should suggest to some Western practitioners of Buddhism that it isn't entirely about escaping this universe, because otherwise why would it be praiseworthy to stick around? Well, because Buddhism isn't just about escaping Samsara, it's about what we do within, because according to Buddhist teachings you can't really escape this existence without engaging in it, and in a particular way.
So many people think that Buddhism is entirely about denying this reality and disengaging from it. But look at the eightfold path, one of the key tenants of the belief system from the Pali Canon. So many elements of the path are about behaving in ways that are compassionate, healthy, productive, etc. Those who seek to escape this universe are still compelled to do good things within this universe as part of the journey.
All this is to say that while I think your concept of an "anti-bodhisattva" is an interesting and thought provoking idea, I think it sets up a bit of a false dichotomy. The very fact that bodhisattvas choose to remain within our reality to help those within shows that Buddhist thought traditionally venerates those who work to make the world better, not just those who manage to escape. One could make an argument that traditional bodhisattvas behave in a way in line with your definition of an anti-bodhisattva, working to make existence within this physical reality better.
I think the idea that Buddhism is all about achieving Nirvana and escaping Samsara is a bit of an oversimplification. Sure, it's important, but the Buddhist practitioner lives within this reality even if they are striving towards escaping it after death, and if they truly follow the teachings of the Buddha they will behave in such a way that will paradoxically make this world better/more tolerable.
Anyways, this is the gist of my thoughts after reading this article. Reading my connect now I feel like it might come off as a criticism, but I'd say more than anything I'm thankful that your article inspired me to dig back into my studies on the topics and organize my thoughts.
Ah, great comment! Thank you! And while overall I agree and don't get me wrong - I really like Buddha's teachings and we are on very friendly terms, and I am open to healthy criticism =)
Let me start my answer by pointing out the fact that in the West, Buddhism is terribly misinterpreted and plagued by mistranslations. That aside, I would also like to acknowledge that Buddhists are usually great people and engage in a lot of good works that really benefit all sentient beings.
The point that I think still stands though is - what is meant by "to save suffering beings" or why Bodhisattvas stick around. And the ultimate goal is to help sentient beings to escape. Because the beings in Samsara are suffering by default. And even though the countless Bodhisattvas are very beneficial to the world and their merit is great their ultimate goal is to empty Samsara. They will return and reincarnate until they move all beings “across” to the “other shore”.
My point here is that this shouldn’t be the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal should be to make this world into a pure land so that the beings here would not suffer or at least not suffer so much that the life here won’t be worth having.
I’m also low-key agnostic about the whole concept of Nirvana – you see no “self” can get there, so who even is there to enjoy it? Rather than a reward in some form of very abstract transcendent existent, shouldn’t our aim be first and foremost to engineer paradise here on Earth? And even though Bodhisattvas help with this, it is not their main interest.
I don’t want to see Samsara empty – I enjoy life way too much.
I'm really grateful for your kind words. Know that the greatest praise my articles can ever get is "it made me think" - makes me feel like my life's mission is fulfilled.
Woow... I totally concur and enrich with this feeling all beings in the interconnectedness of this morphogenetic field...
thnaaaank you ;)
sure you will resonate with nicanor parra, heralded for his biting, ironic, lucid style—what he called “anti-poetry.” Parra claimed poetry as a colloquial, irreverent art. “I always associated poetry with the voice of a priest in the pulpit. … Let the birds do the singing
"pure poetry is a matter of the gods, apollonian, immaculate. The impure poetry, dyonisian, advents the confusing impurity of men, the anatomy of internal and external human atmosphere; it dignifies the matters of the body, its bowels and feelings; the becoming of time. All in all, poetry without purity is and will be (anti)poetry purely human and popular"
Cool, thank you for a tip! I was actually looking for some interesting poetry.
Great article, very thought provoking. Glad you shared it with me on Twitter!
I've been thinking for it for a while now, and I have to say one thing readers who have a cursory or narrow understanding of Buddhism might need a reminder what a bodhisattva is. While the word is used a number of different ways, I think it's well captured by this definition: "a person who is able to reach nirvana but delays doing so out of compassion in order to save suffering beings"
They are beings that can escape the cycle of birth, life, death, and rebirth, but choose to put off achieving nirvana to help others. The fact that these beings are venerated should suggest to some Western practitioners of Buddhism that it isn't entirely about escaping this universe, because otherwise why would it be praiseworthy to stick around? Well, because Buddhism isn't just about escaping Samsara, it's about what we do within, because according to Buddhist teachings you can't really escape this existence without engaging in it, and in a particular way.
So many people think that Buddhism is entirely about denying this reality and disengaging from it. But look at the eightfold path, one of the key tenants of the belief system from the Pali Canon. So many elements of the path are about behaving in ways that are compassionate, healthy, productive, etc. Those who seek to escape this universe are still compelled to do good things within this universe as part of the journey.
All this is to say that while I think your concept of an "anti-bodhisattva" is an interesting and thought provoking idea, I think it sets up a bit of a false dichotomy. The very fact that bodhisattvas choose to remain within our reality to help those within shows that Buddhist thought traditionally venerates those who work to make the world better, not just those who manage to escape. One could make an argument that traditional bodhisattvas behave in a way in line with your definition of an anti-bodhisattva, working to make existence within this physical reality better.
I think the idea that Buddhism is all about achieving Nirvana and escaping Samsara is a bit of an oversimplification. Sure, it's important, but the Buddhist practitioner lives within this reality even if they are striving towards escaping it after death, and if they truly follow the teachings of the Buddha they will behave in such a way that will paradoxically make this world better/more tolerable.
Anyways, this is the gist of my thoughts after reading this article. Reading my connect now I feel like it might come off as a criticism, but I'd say more than anything I'm thankful that your article inspired me to dig back into my studies on the topics and organize my thoughts.
G-d bless and G-d speed
Ah, great comment! Thank you! And while overall I agree and don't get me wrong - I really like Buddha's teachings and we are on very friendly terms, and I am open to healthy criticism =)
Let me start my answer by pointing out the fact that in the West, Buddhism is terribly misinterpreted and plagued by mistranslations. That aside, I would also like to acknowledge that Buddhists are usually great people and engage in a lot of good works that really benefit all sentient beings.
The point that I think still stands though is - what is meant by "to save suffering beings" or why Bodhisattvas stick around. And the ultimate goal is to help sentient beings to escape. Because the beings in Samsara are suffering by default. And even though the countless Bodhisattvas are very beneficial to the world and their merit is great their ultimate goal is to empty Samsara. They will return and reincarnate until they move all beings “across” to the “other shore”.
My point here is that this shouldn’t be the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal should be to make this world into a pure land so that the beings here would not suffer or at least not suffer so much that the life here won’t be worth having.
I’m also low-key agnostic about the whole concept of Nirvana – you see no “self” can get there, so who even is there to enjoy it? Rather than a reward in some form of very abstract transcendent existent, shouldn’t our aim be first and foremost to engineer paradise here on Earth? And even though Bodhisattvas help with this, it is not their main interest.
I don’t want to see Samsara empty – I enjoy life way too much.
I'm really grateful for your kind words. Know that the greatest praise my articles can ever get is "it made me think" - makes me feel like my life's mission is fulfilled.
Have a good one my friend!