In the 21st century, in the West, "Buddhism" is treated as a set of stress-relief techniques and slogans.
This isn't strictly limited to the West: at least two of Taiwan's Four Great Mountains (i.e. schools of Buddhism) are similarly inclined, with additional cultish elements thrown in for good measure.
The cultish elements had already developed independently within corporate cultures, but adding Buddhist slogans and techniques (rather than the philosophical and devotional elements), has given it a new edge.
Buddhist cults focus on fate, inevitability, acceptance, detachment. You are helpless against the world, which by the way, works the way we say, because we are the enlightened bearers of the great tradition. And because of this helplessness, here's a set of doctrines you should follow. Corporate Buddhism additionally tries to appropriate mindfulness as "focusing on work".
And, yes, that stuff is historically there, in Buddhism. It's present in many many of the fractally complex historical branches of the Buddhist taxonomic tree. But too many people only ever see one leaf on that tree, and think "oh so this is Buddhism".
Except Buddhism is also a philosophy of action, and a set of guides for correct action. Acting rightly entails seeing rightly, and so Buddhism includes an appreciation for and guide towards empirical inquiry. This was always terrifying to authority figures, and Asia only didn't develop modern science first because Buddhist logic and experimentation were among the casualties of The Burning of Books and Burying of Scholars.
And here, in the 21st century culture of global megacorporations, we see this pattern again; the pleasant, passive parts of Buddhism are allowed in, while pretending the other parts don't exist.
But Buddhism did have rebellious warrior monks. Ashoka, the greatest Buddhist King, made it clear that the law would be enforced, and his borders protected. Acting correctly always requires brutality towards oppressors, but this part of Buddhism is unpalatable within corporate culture.
A friend of mine was concerned about a similar (mis)use of psychedelics in the service of productivity. Except that neither Buddhism, nor psychedelics discriminate in the kind of insights you end up with. So as workers are encouraged to boost creativity through microdosing, employers might be surprised to see some employees quit after they got curious, took a bit too much Ayahuasca one weekend, like it's described in some part of the microdosing forum, and started reevaluating their life as a result.
Similarly with mindfulness, first you dip your toes with some guided stuff, organized twice a week by HR. Next thing you know YouTube is suggesting you check out this Osho guy and Thich Nhat Hanh, where you find out you've only been scratching the surface. Then one day you quit your job because it disagree with your conception of right action.
I'm always amazed to see westerners, who are otherwise very weary of cultish behavior within Christian denominations, embrace and praise Eastern cults.
Osho is not a wise man, given his actions.
Thich Nhat Hanh deserves history's attention.
A horrible and oppressive introduction to Buddhism is actually worse than no introduction.
I suppose wisdom is in the eye of the beholder, as it should be. One perspective is that teachers come in many forms and always have something to impart. You take some of what they offer and leave some, but you stay on your own path.
Regarding Osho specifically, I might not have heard or read enough from him, but I have yet to come across something he's said or wrote personally, that contradicts anything said by the likes of TNH or J.Krishnamurti. And vice versa. His life has concluded, and with hindsight it's easy enough for anyone to put his words and actions in the context of his times and to deliberate as to the rightfulness of thence judgments. If you've avoided his words based on popular sentiments, do yourself a favor, listen for yourself and make up your own mind.
> Similarly with mindfulness, first you dip your toes with some guided stuff, organized twice a week by HR. Next thing you know YouTube is suggesting you check out this Osho guy and Thich Nhat Hanh, where you find out you've only been scratching the surface. Then one day you quit your job because it disagree with your conception of right action.
Yep. and five years later i'm working for non-profits making a quarter of what i used to while watching my old friends climb the tech career ladders and buy multiple properties in the bay area. and doing a far stretch better than I was when i got exposed to MBSR.
> Except Buddhism is also a philosophy of action, and a set of guides for correct action. Acting rightly entails seeing rightly, and so Buddhism includes an appreciation for and guide towards empirical inquiry. This was always terrifying to authority figures, and Asia only didn't develop modern science first because Buddhist logic and experimentation were among the casualties of The Burning of Books and Burying of Scholars.
Marcus Aurelius' Meditations includes a sentence that, in a translation I read long ago and no longer have, read something like:
"You can pass your life in calm flow of happiness—if you learn to think the right way, and to act the right way."
It took me way too long to realize that the "think the right way" is, by far, the easier part, and how dangerous it can be without the "act the right way". It also feels better. Fresher. Trendier. The "act the right way" looks and feels an awful lot like following all the advice your grandpa gave you. Very "gods of the copy-book headers" stuff. And isn't as immediately gratifying as the "think the right way" bit.
> Buddhist cults focus on fate, inevitability, acceptance, detachment. You are helpless against the world, which by the way, works the way we say, because we are the enlightened bearers of the great tradition. And because of this helplessness, here's a set of doctrines you should follow.
Reading this, it struck me how closely this fits with the popularity of Lovecraftian fiction in our current era. If we see corporations as monolithic, inhuman, malignant entities that trample humans simply for being in the way, with little concern for consequences for themselves (because "they" are too far beyond "us", too big to fail), and if we see the universe as ultimately not even apathetic towards humans, because there is no mind there at all, just incomprehensible vastness that swallows us all in eventual oblivion -- then this superficial Buddhist take makes a great deal of sense. An inevitable fate, nothing to do but accept it and detach ourselves to try to minimize the unpleasantness.
But then, accepting this perspective personally makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy for oneself.
This isn't strictly limited to the West: at least two of Taiwan's Four Great Mountains (i.e. schools of Buddhism) are similarly inclined, with additional cultish elements thrown in for good measure.
The cultish elements had already developed independently within corporate cultures, but adding Buddhist slogans and techniques (rather than the philosophical and devotional elements), has given it a new edge.
Buddhist cults focus on fate, inevitability, acceptance, detachment. You are helpless against the world, which by the way, works the way we say, because we are the enlightened bearers of the great tradition. And because of this helplessness, here's a set of doctrines you should follow. Corporate Buddhism additionally tries to appropriate mindfulness as "focusing on work".
And, yes, that stuff is historically there, in Buddhism. It's present in many many of the fractally complex historical branches of the Buddhist taxonomic tree. But too many people only ever see one leaf on that tree, and think "oh so this is Buddhism".
Except Buddhism is also a philosophy of action, and a set of guides for correct action. Acting rightly entails seeing rightly, and so Buddhism includes an appreciation for and guide towards empirical inquiry. This was always terrifying to authority figures, and Asia only didn't develop modern science first because Buddhist logic and experimentation were among the casualties of The Burning of Books and Burying of Scholars.
And here, in the 21st century culture of global megacorporations, we see this pattern again; the pleasant, passive parts of Buddhism are allowed in, while pretending the other parts don't exist.
But Buddhism did have rebellious warrior monks. Ashoka, the greatest Buddhist King, made it clear that the law would be enforced, and his borders protected. Acting correctly always requires brutality towards oppressors, but this part of Buddhism is unpalatable within corporate culture.