A reader asks:

What is the Buddhist perspective on this

10 die as Buddhists, Muslims clash in Myanmar

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/21/world/asia/myanmar-clashes/index.html

My Response:

The world is a big place, and there are all sorts of situations. Sometimes these situations lead to violence. Nevertheless, you are right, these people aren’t acting in a particularly Buddhist fashion. Buddhists eschew violence in all forms.

So what’s going on here?

Just because someone identifies as a Buddhist (Or in the case of this article, we can say the say about Muslims) doesn’t mean that’s what they focus on to the exclusion of all else. Here in America, most people identify as some flavor of Christian. How many people who identify as Christians do things like steal, lie, cheat, judge, and other things that their own belief system condemns? Not all of them, but there definitely some. Believe me, Christians don’t have the monopoly on hypocrisy. Buddhism has its share as well, as do all the others.

Along the same lines, just because a person identifies as a Buddhist, that doesn’t instantly make them a devout monk. The vast majority of people in Eastern countries are born Buddhists, were raised to believe in the Buddhist traditions, and generally follow an appropriately Buddhist lifestyle there. But I repeat, they are not monks. They fight, go to war, cheat, steal, and do all the bad things people elsewhere do. It all depends on where their priorities lie.

Being Buddhist doesn’t preclude you from being human as well.

A Reader Writes:

I was wondering what your thoughts are on the increasing ‘appropriation’ of Buddhism in the west.

I’ve been noticing that there are a number of people writing blogs who are accusing people of appropriation if they have, for example, ohm or Buddha tattoos or Buddhist jewelry. As someone who identifies as being Buddhist I am not offended by this and I do not understand why some people would feel the need to verbally attack others for exploring a different culture through art or fashion.

In fact I would go as far as to say that this is a very un-Buddhist thing to do.
Any thoughts, and have you noticed this at all?

My Response:

I did a post on tattoos way back, and that still holds up pretty well. You can check that out, but as far as the Buddhist approach goes, I don’t see much wrong with having a tattoo.

I think what you are asking is whether or not as a Buddhist, do non-Buddhists wearing the symbols of Buddhism offend me? No, and I suspect most Buddhists will agree with me on that. Symbols and pictures are just things; nothing to get worked up about.

One thing I find personally annoying are people with Chinese Kanji symbols tattooed on them, when they don’t understand Chinese. The tattoo artist always tells them it means “Peace” or “Love,” or something nice like that. I always look at people and tell them with  a straight face that it means “Jackass.” Then I explain that I don’t speak Chinese either, and it could say anything. Sometimes I get a laugh, sometimes I don’t.  Still though, getting something you don’t understand tattooed on you seems like a risky proposition. Getting a Buddha or a eight-spoked wheel or a Lotus tattooed on you if you don’t really know what they mean could be risky too.

Now, from a not-especially-Buddhist-but-still-common-sense point of view:

Let’s go into hypotheticals for a moment. You get a tattoo of a Buddha on your arm. It’s pretty cool huh? Then ten years down the road, you want to marry a girl/guy who is a Christian or Muslim.  That’s going to be an issue. Maybe you’ll even want to (gasp!) convert to one of those faiths yourself.  Now you’ve got a problem. Maybe you say that would never happen; OK, but could you have a Christian or Muslim supervisor at work? Friends? Seems like a definite possibility.

This kind of situation may be exactly the cause of the “attacks” you mention in your question. People fear what is different, and, at least in the USA< Buddhism is one of those “others” for many people.

(And for the record, I have no idea what that Kanji means. Hopefully it’s not something too nasty.)

A reader asks:

How does the feelings of depersonalization tie in to the Buddhist philosophy?

DP briefly described is the feeling that the world is unreal and that the self is disconnected from this world which seems foreign. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depersonalization

I’m trying to tie it in to the concept that we are all one, and that the world is less illusionary in this state.

I’ve heard it described as the evil twin of enlightenment because there is a strong feeling of consciousness and awareness.

People who’ve experienced this condition often have anxiety issues, as I have. But I think that this anxiety and the altered perception is more indicative of something that Buddhism could explain better. I’m only just learning about Buddhism.

My Response:

A reader asks :

Can you please explain the Buddha’s teaching on the concept of having children? Whether it is true by the 4 noble truths if you want stop suffering you have to find the cause and stop the causing. So the suffering related to children and raising them and leaving them when you die can be stopped by not having them in the first place if one decided to do so?

My Response:

There is certainly physical suffering in childbirth. No doubt about that. There’s also mental and emotional suffering when your children are sick and in pain. They have emotional and personal issues as they grow up, which also cause you suffering as a parent. Over the years, the roles reverse, and your aging will cause suffering for your children, as will your eventual death. Yes, children are a great source of suffering.

On the other hand, I think most parents will say that it’s worth it. The pleasure of having children and watching them grow into successful adults is one of life’s greatest rewards. Is this attachment? Yes. Did Buddha warn against attachments? Yes.

This is a pretty deep question when you start thinking about it. If you, as a Buddhist, have children and do your best to reduce their suffering, then teach your children about the eightfold path, and they grow up to reduce the suffering of others, does that balance out the suffering? Suppose they have grandchildren who spread loving-kindness around the world as well. Children are a long-term legacy that can have effects long after we are gone.

Are you, right now, affecting your great-grandparents karma, just by existing? It seems reasonable to me. The goodness (or badness) that we do in life continues long after we’re gone.

There are many other point-of-view on this complex topic. I’d love to hear yours below!

A reader writes:

Is it possible for literally anyone to be a Buddhist?  Anyone from an Inuit to a Rain Forest Tribesman?

My response:

Absolutely!

There are some belief systems out there, such as Judaism, that have a heavily ethnic membership (Jews as an “ethnicity” as opposed to Jewish belief), so I do understand the question. Although many people stereotypically think of Buddhists as Asians, there is no particular racial aspect to Buddhism. I’m a Caucasian American, and I know Buddhists of most other races and ethnic groups. Where you came from doesn’t mean anywhere near as much as where you’re going, or where you want to be. You can take that statement either literally or spiritually.

I don’t know any Inuit Buddhists or Buddhists from the Rain Forest, but I’ll bet they are out there. The greatest population of Buddhists is obviously in the Eastern Asia regions, but that’s simply because it’s where Buddhism started out, and where it’s had the most time to spread. Nowadays, it’s pretty much everywhere. It’s a good deal more slow-growing than some of the other “religions” out there, simply because most Buddhists don’t place a heavy emphasis on evangelizing.

This isn’t terribly recent, but I only just came across it. It’s from Piers Morgan’s show last April, but it’s still a very “Enlightening” video. It runs around 43 minutes, so set aside a little time to watch it. I don’t always agree with everything I’ve ever heard the Dalai Lama say, but he’s always fascinating.

A Reader writes:

To anyone who could give me some information,

I have a book in which the protagonist is given a ring with the head of Buddha, made from gold, and which has rubies for eyes. She has a bad time with people wanting the ring, or just wanting to take it from her. I am wondering if Buddhists would find the ring offensive, as I believe a Christian would a ring with the face of Jesus with rubies for eyes, or if people would have some reason to want the ring other than just a fairly nominal amount of money it would bring?

My Response:

I don’t know the book, but you see this sort of thing in movies sometimes.  No, I don’t think Buddhists would be offended at all. Nor would a serious Buddhist desire the ring, for monetary or any other value. Remember, a “serious” Buddhist doesn’t grasp for wealth unless it is given to him or her. At least in theory; I’m sure there are many Buddhists out there that wouldn’t turn away a valuable item if it came into their possession.

Just remember, Buddhists try not to become overly attached to material things. Gold rings, money, ideas, even people can become dangerous attachments. But to chase someone down in order to steal a valuable ring… is not very Buddhist.

As far as this concept being offensive goes… No, most Buddhists wouldn’t care. Even the Buddha, or an image of him, is nothing special. It’s just another thing to be attached to. I’ve written before on the mistaken idea that Buddhists worship idols. They don’t. All those Buddha statues you see are simply art.