teaching buddhism in w (1)

If you don't already know, there are long ancient traditions (e.g., Buddhism) that highly regard "fearlessness" (or what are called "fearlessnesses" in Buddhism). These (primarily E.) traditions, secular and religious, teach that fearlessness is the virtue of all other virtues. Meaning, that if one doesn't get the base foundation of fearlessness down well, integrated, corrected, growing--then, the other virtues will collapse on this 'crack' in the foundation. I won't cite all the literature for this, but I have done so in my book The World's Fearlessness Teachings

I wish in this blog to briefly discuss a couple of things about fearlessness and its direct (and indirect) relationship to Buddhism (if such a generalization about "Buddhism" is feasible anymore in this postmodern world): (a) there are problems in teaching Buddhism to W. audiences in postmodern universities and higher education generally, (b) the Buddhist ancient concept of the ideal Buddha is founded on qualities of the "four fearlessnesses." I'll insinuate some analogies here with teaching Buddhism and teaching fearlessness, as this latter theme has been on my mind of late (see the prior blogposting as well). 

First, l wish to talk about a particular problem of teaching Buddhism in the W. in the modern and postmodern world/curriculum of liberal education. The analogy can be made that teaching fearlessness is virtually identical and so you can take the quote I am using here on this problem and substitute "fearlessness" for "Buddhism"--at least, I think such a juxtaposition creates interesting tension and spaces for dialogue that needs to be had. It helps problematizing any "ideal" curriculum on fear and fearlessness, of which I am so passionate about. 

I take the lead on this first, and pedagogically-oriented, problem from Hori (2002), where he argues that for many years Frank Reynolds,a respected scholar and practitioner of Buddhism in the W., has been writing critically about teaching Buddhism in the modern and postmodern university, as well as in wider contexts, especially in relation to the crisis in liberal education in general (1). Hori (paraphrasing Reynolds) speaks of the 4 Problems of Pedagogy in this regard: 

"He [Reynolds] cautions us against transmitting an overly simplistic picture of what Buddhism 'really is,' against depicting the history of Buddhism as either a one-directional degeneration from its originally pure form or a one-directional unfolding of its true essence into its modern form, against over romanticizing Buddhism in a way that caters to disaffected [disenchanted] Western intellectuals, and against emphasizing its 'other worldly' aspects while ignoring the social, political and economic forms in which Buddhism has actually appeared." (p. 170)

[again, try substituting "fearlessness" for "Buddhism" in this quote]

Second, I wish to bring "fearlessness" into the Buddhist context in one particular way (of many other ways), that is, re: the teaching on the "four fearlessnesses" of the Buddha. These are part n' parcel of the ideal qualities/attributes of the Buddha and thus, the goal of the initiate in Buddhism and one would suppose the goal of any curriculum of Buddhism at its best. Few people, even Buddhists I've met, seem to know about this teaching and/or they merely don't talk about it--and, they have not made the connection with my work on this over the decades--all of which I find extremely strange. Okay, to present the basic of this teaching I'll use one Buddhist scholar (Gold, 2007), among others, who articulates (in English transl.) the "four fearlessnesses" of the Buddha (ideal) (2): 

"Sa-pan begins the Gateways by praising the guru and Manjurri for possessing two lists of qualities shared in the essence of all Buddhas, the Four Specific Knowledges and the Four Fearlessnesses.... [Sa-Pan wrote:] own attainment of confidence in the four specific knowledges and [their use] for others [of] the four fearlessnesses to roar like a lion in the midst of the assembly [3].... the four fearlessnesses--realization, abandonment [teaching] the path to Buddhahood, and teaching its obstacles.... through this method, in composing texts himself, explaining them to others, and clarifying wrong views, he fears nothing.... the perfect Buddhas fearlessly engage.... The Buddhas are, thus, the paradigmatic scholars." (pp. 17-18)

To further implicate this ideal of the "paradigmatic scholars" (i.e., those on the path of fearlessness in the matured and advanced levels), and in the teaching of fearlessness and Buddhism, I draw on Paltseg (1992), another Buddhist scholar: 

"The four fearlessnesses of those who have gone beyond.... A. the fearlessness in connection with becoming enlightened through the understanding of all phenomena.... B. the fearlessness in connection with the wisdom that eliminates all contamination [4].... C. the fearlessness in connection with teaching others how to avoid hindrances.... D. the fearlessness in connection with the accomplishments of the state of suchness, which is the path of renunciation in order to achieve all excellences.... The four fearlessnesses are the aspects of the fearlessness that a Buddha has in terms of fulfilling his [sic] own excellent purposes as well as the excellent purpose of others." (p. 72)

A major point in Paltseg's description is that it is not so much a "fact" whether the perfect Buddha can accomplish any of the four fearlessnesses per se as described in the ideal but rather that the perfect Buddha "has no fear of these doubts" that are part of the path of fearlessness in regard to the four fearlessnessnes. I find that a refreshing and very intelligent notion of process, becoming, and not to get fixed on the 'end' but the way being most important--the methodology, the praxis--that is, "has no fear of these doubts" that arise inside and outside amongst those who argue about the four fearlessnesses and whether they are attainable and logical, etc. And all of these teachings, says Paltseg, lead fearlessness along the "correct path, which is the antidote [to fear = suffering]." (p. 74)

I won't go into more elaboration here, other than to leave these ideas and teachings up on the platform for further inquiry, especially under the agenda of a 21st century curriculum (integral, 2nd-tier, etc.) on fear and fearlessness. 

End Notes

1. Hori, like Reynolds, make the point that the postmodern university/culture cannot be ignored in teaching Buddhism; they also assert that many ideals of humanistic liberal education and philosophy are greatly under attack, much of it rightly so, by postmodern, postcolonial, poststructuralism, and other movements and philosophies. Liberal education they argue has largely disintegrated--and, is looking for reconfiguration or is looking at extinction. 

2. This teaching is from Sa-Pan and Gateways (text), neither of which I am personally familiar. 

3. "Assembly" refers to one or both of followers and opponents to the speaker/teacher (e.g., Buddha).

4. Although this is not clear in Paltseg's text per se in my brief scanning, it is to my mind referring to contamination as anything that is fear-based (i.e., could be called pathology = source of suffering).

References

Gold, J. C. (2007). The dharma's gatekeepers: Sakya Pandita on Buddhist scholarship. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Hori, V. S. (2002). Liberal education and the teaching of Buddhism. In V. S. Hori, R. P. Hayes & J. M. Shields (Eds.), Teaching Buddhism in the west (pp. 170-93). NY: Routledge. 

Paltseg, L. K. (1992). A manual of key Buddhist terms: Categorization of Buddhist terminology with commentary. [Trans by T.K. Rikey & A. Ruskin). New Delhi, India: Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, Dharamsala.

Read more…