Amod Lele's first in a series of posts continuing the conversation that began with his review of Why I Am Not a Buddhist and my response. I look forward to seeing them all.https://twitter.com/loveofallwisdom/status/1262126019491790848 …
[1] There are 2 issues here: what are the characteristics of Buddhist modernism? what are the problems with Buddhist modernism? Casting Buddhist in psychologistic terms (as Trungpa does) is characteristic of Buddhist Modernism.
-
-
I’m not trying to be argumentative. Just trying to really understand. My understanding of Trungpa has meaningful differences from the modernist approaches you describe.
-
No worries. I wasn't taking this to be argumentative. "BM" is an umbrella term and there are a lot of variants under it. Trungpa's way of being BM is unique, to be sure, but I still see him as falling into the general category.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
[2] My problems with Trungpa concern this in relation to other things--the rhetoric of enlightenment as nonconceptual, and the way this was used to justify abusive behaviour (which has continued in his lineage to this day).
-
As I said I need to reread this point. I can’t argue that the community has had some deep problems.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
My understanding of your argument is that modernism goes beyond “casting” to “strip away” or deny traditional views, which I don’t think he did. The ngondro practice he taught starts with the four reminders which are all about rebirth, realm, karma, etc.
-
Not all modernists deny tradition. E.g., the Dalai Lama is both a traditionalist in certain domains and a Buddhist modernist in other ones.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.