![]() ![]() Especially since, in my experience, this hasn’t always been the case. As far as I know, Lama Rangdrol isn’t Asian American, so I also appreciate his emphasis on including Asian Americans as people of color. Some of the comments I get definitely fit into one of the enumerated points above, perhaps even more precisely into something you’d find in Derailing for Dummies. Although the intent is to maintain a comfort zone for those struggling with their heritage issues, the result is the creation of segregated worship centers and organizations. The above criteria is agreed upon by a loosely formed majority consensus among Euro-American Buddhists who happen to finance most Buddhist centers and is comprised of dominant culture Buddhists. The selection process has several criteria: 1) people of color are allowed in as long as they do not bring up the heritage issue 2) people of color who have no connection to the heritage issue, such as Tibetans, are welcome because their preoccupation is with Chinese heritage rather than American heritage 3) anyone, regardless of race or culture who speaks of these issues must subject him/herself to a verbal caution from a dominant culture senior student 4) if, after being verbally cautioned, an individual persists in discussing these matters they must leave the center or organization because they are engaging in ‘non-Buddhist’ activity, and finally 5) Any public discussion of these topics is expressly forbidden and will result in Dharma center blacklisting as well as going to Buddhist hell. In an attempt to reduce the frustration a subtle selection process for Euro-American Buddhist approval has been put in place. The inseparable connection creates an understandably maddening frustration. The heritage issue inevitably arises creating the notion in minds of some peace loving Euro-Americans that their cultural past is irrevocably connected to their hate group counterparts. Inclusion means engagement with people of color whose presence is a reminder of Euro-American’s discomforting heritage. In order to do so they must include that which their hateful counterpart does not. Herein lies the dilemma our dominant culture peace loving brothers and sisters want to create a distinct compassionate group. ![]() From a more personal perspective, it’s also some comfort to know that I’m not alone in feeling marginalized. While recent blog posts have revolved around the term and notion of “Western Buddhism”, I feel Lama Rangdrol’s comments, while using the term “American Buddhism”, are particularly applicable to “Western Buddhism”, at least in the United States. So you can imagine I was curious.īelow are some thoughts from another writer, from the last century (so to speak), that spoke to me today. Yesterday a student asked me about what it means to be Buddhist, so I decided to forward her a link to a post from a year ago, “ What does it mean to not be Buddhist?” When I did a Google search for this title (too lazy to search my own blog!) the top article happened to be “ American Buddhism: What does it mean for people of color?” written by Lama Choyin Rangdrol back in 1998. Okay, I know the title feels like a continuation of everything before (and it is), but it’s not because I woke up this morning itching to write another Angry Asian Buddhist post. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |