đŸ’Ÿ Archived View for library.inu.red â€ș file â€ș ian-mayes-envisioning-a-buddhist-anarchism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 10:55:14. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

âžĄïž Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Envisioning a Buddhist Anarchism
Author: Ian Mayes
Date: November 2011
Language: en
Topics: buddhism
Source: Retrieved on 2020-10-11 from https://parenthesiseye.blogspot.com/2011/11/envisioning-buddhist-anarchism.html

Ian Mayes

Envisioning a Buddhist Anarchism

I see Buddhist anarchism as being important for two reasons. I see

Buddhism as essentially being about the individual’s personal liberation

from unnecessary suffering. Anarchism I see as essentially being about

freeing the world, through a profound social and political

transformation, from unnecessary pain. We create all of this unnecessary

pain and suffering ourselves.

The distinction between the two is that pain is usually a physical or an

“external” thing, such as what you would normally think of with pain.

There is also emotional pain, such as what comes with the loss of a

loved one. Suffering is the particular kind of agony that comes about by

holding onto an idea that something “should not” be happening that is

happening, or “should” be happening that is not happening. This turns

whatever pre-existing pain into something else, something worse. That’s

suffering. Suffering is created by our own habits of mind, where we

choose to put our attention and what we choose to hold onto. Pain on the

other hand is inevitable in life, however the social systems and

institutions that humanity has chosen to organize the world with creates

more pain for people than is necessary. A Buddhist anarchism would

simultaneously be eliminating unnecessary suffering in the psyche and

unnecessary pain in the world, and towards more joy and appreciation of

life.

The other reason why I see a Buddhist anarchism as being important is

that I see the two philosophies as complimenting and completing

each-other. It is a union of the personal and the political, the

psychological and the social, so to speak. This is ultimately about

liberation in its fullest sense – both on the individual personal level

and within the larger social body.

The philosophy of anarchism implies that a fundamental shift in the

consciousness of people is necessary. In order to have a new world

without domination, property or authority, people would need to be

accustomed towards living with more benevolence, attentiveness, caring

and flexibility with each-other. However, this shift in consciousness is

rarely explicitly stated or elaborated upon in anarchist discourse, and

the skills necessary for how people can achieve this shift in

consciousness are almost never taught within anarchist circles.

The other angle to this is related to the arguments for what is called

“Engaged Buddhism,” and that is that far too often Buddhism in practice

becomes a means for people to escape from the world, to ignore the

sufferings of others, and to blindly contribute to the injustices of the

world. If one really does wish for the liberation of all beings, then

one would inevitably be drawn to more thorough social engagement for

working towards this.

Time has passed

A number of months have elapsed since I wrote my previous essay about

this subject. I’ve received a number of different responses to it, all

across the board. I’ve had some time to reflect further on the matter.

One thing that has struck me is that there really is no pre-existing

philosophy that is formulated which goes into depth about “Buddhist

anarchism.” Various people have used this label to describe themselves,

different articles, blog posts, audio or video recordings have been

made, yet there has been no real lineage or tradition established for

“Buddhist anarchism” as such.

This term was first publicly noted as being used 50 years ago, in 1961,

by Gary Snyder with his essay entitled “Buddhist anarchism.” Given that

Snyder is still alive, that means that we are still in the period of the

first generation of living “Buddhist anarchists.” The whole thing is

still very much in its initial formative stage, which means that we all

can still define and lay out what we would like for a Buddhist anarchist

philosophy to be. I would like to contribute a few more pieces here

about what I would like for such a philosophy to include, this time

drawing more from the core tenets of Buddhist philosophy than my

previous essay did.

Disclaimers for potential subtlety

One thing that I would like to say right away is that I do not see

Buddhist anarchism as being in any way connected with the various

tyrannical governments, religious superstition and patriarchal

traditions around the world that are associated with Buddhism. The

“Buddhism” that a “Buddhist anarchism” is connected to would be the core

philosophical tenets of Buddhism. The various outgrowths of Buddhism

which are fundamentally at odds with the philosophy of anarchism are not

a part of Buddhist anarchism as I see it.

I do admit that there are many different kinds of Buddhist philosophies

out there. There are many different kinds of anarchist philosophies out

there as well. Put together, this means that there exist innumerable

different ways in which “Buddhist anarchism” can take form and be

expressed by different people. My own background that is influencing my

perspective on Buddhist anarchism is coming from my experience with

Vipassana Meditation, which derives from a Theravada Buddhist tradition,

and anarcho-communism which is associated with the writings of the

Russian anarchist philosopher Peter Kropotkin.

Core Components

Despite all of the diversity within Buddhism, there do exist some things

that are core to Buddhism and that all of the different traditions have

in common. Looking at these core elements, I see a number of parallels

and cross-overs with the philosophy of anarchism. Let’s start with the

Four Noble Truths.

The First Noble Truth of Buddhism is that suffering exists everywhere.

Wherever you look you will see people miserable or in some way

experiencing some degree of suffering in their lives. This would then

correlate with anarchist philosophy which says that the world that we

live in is organized in a way that is fundamentally corrupt and harmful

to life. Anarchists everywhere share the commonality of looking around

at the world and seeing a society that is deeply and pervasively against

life. The world as we know it is really messed up.

The Second Noble Truth of Buddhism says that suffering has a cause, and

that is craving, aversion and ignorance. In other words, “having to

have” something, having to avoid something, or simply refusing to look

at life as it is are the causes of suffering. These three causes of

suffering correlate with the anarchist philosophy’s pointing to the

institutions of capitalism and the state, and underlying that domination

per se, as being the cause for all of the corruption and oppression of

the world. Domination at its root is based on craving and aversion for

it comes about when those at the top of the hierarchy “have to” have

things their way, even at the expense of others, and no other

possibilities are tolerated or permitted.

Anarchists frequently decry the ignorance that is prevalent in society

as well, seeing that as being a fundamental part of the problem.

Anarchists see the social tendency for people in our society to ignore

or disregard the various injustices and horrors that exist in our world

and instead focus attention on trivialities, superficialities and

entertainment. This social dynamic of continuing distractions ensures

that all of the injustices and horrors will continue.

The Third Noble Truth of Buddhism is that it is possible to overcome

suffering. There exists a psycho-spiritual condition called “nirvana” or

“enlightenment” and individuals through their own effort can attain it.

The correlation of this with anarchism is that of the vision of a new

utopian society which exists without the state or capitalism, without

domination or hierarchy, and that instead is based on free people

organizing together directly as equals and sharing all of the world’s

resources in common. Similar to the Buddhist assertion that it is

possible for people to reach this radically different condition through

their own efforts, anarchists assert that societies of people can create

this radically different world through their own efforts as well.

The Fourth Noble Truth of Buddhism is that there is an explicitly

delineated path for people to follow to reach nirvana. This is called

the Noble Eightfold Path. I won’t go into each of the points for the

Noble Eightfold Path here, perhaps that can be a topic for another

article. Instead I will look at the three categories that the Noble

Eightfold Path is broken down into: morality (sila), mastery over one’s

mind (Samadhi) and experiential wisdom (panna). For the philosophy of

anarchism there is also an explicitly stated means for achieving a

social revolution that has three different components. This involves

practices that are characterized by the principles of prefigurative

politics, self-organization and direct action.

The Buddhist concept of morality (sila) is basically that one should not

do or say things that will harm others, and that one should work towards

doing and saying things that helps others instead. The idea is that if

one does or says things that hurt others, one is also at the same time

hurting one’s own self psychologically and spiritually as well. I see

Buddhist morality (sila) as corresponding with the anarchist notion of

“prefigurative politics,” which is the principle that one’s actions and

the projects that one engages in now should reflect the kind of world

that one wants to see in the future within it. “Be the change you wish

to see in the world.” At the heart of an anarchist morality, expressed

through a prefigurative practice, would be relationships where the

autonomy of each individual is respected, without coercion, and where

everyone’s needs are valued equally. Altogether this would mean that

one’s actions and projects would be done for the benefit of others as

well as for one’s self, and that they are done for the sake of a better

future as well as for the present.

Mastering one’s own mind (Samadhi) is about developing the ability to

control what thoughts one has on one’s mind at any given time, being

able to choose where one places one’s attention, and being able to

clearly make decisions and follow through with them. Meditation is a

kind of practice that is used to develop mastery over one’s own mind.

The anarchist correlation that I see with this is the principle of

self-organization, which is where a group of people organize their own

affairs together directly and democratically without utilizing social

hierarchies or groups outside of them to make decisions for them. I see

this as relating in that in order for a group to survive and thrive in a

self-organized way, they need to develop means to facilitate what is

being talked about, where the group’s attention is placed in a given

situation, and to make collective decisions and carry them out

effectively. In a way Samadhi and self-organization are both forms of

“self-organization,” just one is on the individual level and the other

is on a larger social level. Self-organization within a group would

require the same kind of cohesion, clarity and self-discipline that are

characteristics of Samadhi.

Experiential wisdom (panna) is about experiencing a deeper understanding

of the nature of existence personally and directly. This kind of

understanding goes beyond what can be read about in books or writings.

In fact it goes beyond what can adequately be expressed in words at all.

It has to be lived to be understood. I see this as correlating with the

anarchist principle of direct action, which is that of meeting needs and

making necessary changes without being told to or asking for permission

from some form of authority. I see these as relating in that what is

learned in the process of carrying out direct action and the kinds of

changes that this brings about within people by going through this

process is beyond anything that can be learned or gained by writing or

talking alone. Direct action brings about a deep fundamental shift in

people, very similar to the kinds of shifts that come from panna. These

are both shifts on the direct experiential level. Direct action dispels

the illusions of authority, panna shatters illusions altogether. When

you are able to see first-hand things getting done without authority,

you get a sense of what a straw-man authority is. When you experience

the truth that is beyond all words, you can see how paltry words are.

Marking a new existence

Buddhism also has a particular understanding of the nature of our world.

This is summarized by what are called the “three marks of existence.”

Looking at each of these I realized that each can form the basis for an

argument for an anarchist world. The three marks of existence are

impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and no-self (anatta).

The idea behind impermanence (anicca) is that everything is always

changing, everything comes and goes, and that nothing stays the same

forever. “This too shall pass.” I see this as being an argument for

anarchism in that I see the complexities and constantly changing nature

of things and situations as being beyond the scope of authority figures

or institutional bureaucracies to be able to understand or handle.

Things just change too much and too often to keep up. In my view the

people who are living and experiencing the changes themselves are those

who are in the best position to understand the situation that is going

on, and hence are in the best position to be able to deal with it

appropriately. For those who are cut off from the situation itself or

detached from others who are also experiencing it, the understanding can

only be partial.

Suffering (dukkha) was already discussed above as the First Noble Truth

of Buddhism. It is that suffering exists and is a fundamental part of

the human experience. This in turn relates to an argument for anarchism

in that the world that we live in now is filled with immense pain and

injustice, and subsequently that this is unnecessary and that we can do

something about it.

The third mark of existence is no-self (anatta), which is that there is

no essential permanent “self” for an individual. In other words,

everything that comprises “you” is so contingent on innumerable

different factors and variables, be they biological, social, cultural,

material, etc. that there is no basic core “self” which exists

independent of all of that. That is, if all of the different

contributing influences and components from different sources are taken

away, nothing is left.

I see the anarchist correlation to no-self (anatta) as being that all of

the notions of property, social status and political power exist as mere

social constructs that are comprised by innumerable different factors

all coinciding together. The efforts of countless people combined to

make a material object that someone considers to be “theirs.”

Generations of acquiescence, obedience and the social construction of

meaning combined to create what is called a “king” or a “politician.”

All kinds of factors reinforced by scores of people created what we have

now. No Divine Intervention came and created relationships of

domination, nor did capitalism and the state naturally exist since the

beginning of time – we created it all ourselves together and it would

not exist without us.

Eight Streams Leading to One

It has been said that the entirety of Buddhism can be summarized with

this phrase: “Abandon unwholesome qualities, cultivate wholesome

qualities, and purify your mind.” Similarly, a take on anarchism can be:

“Abandon capitalist and state-based ways of doing things, create and

participate in free and cooperative-based ways of doing things, and

clean your mind of the mainstream domination-based programming that

fills it.” But what does all of this look like in practice? And what

would a specifically Buddhist anarchist approach look like?

Towards this end I have identified eight different pre-existing

independent practices, projects or sub-cultures which I believe that

woven together could form the fabric for what a specifically Buddhist

anarchist practice can be. None of these are explicitly “Buddhist

anarchist” per se, but they form the beginning foundations for the

practical expression of it.

where Buddhists do activism (or activists practice Buddhism). Under this

name, various groups like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, the Zen

Peacemakers and Thich Naht Hanh’s people do the political and social

activist work that they do. It could be said that a Buddhist anarchism

by definition is a kind of “engaged Buddhism.” The only difference is

that the political orientation here is a radical anarchist one.

anarchists and Buddhists are often among them, who say that animals have

rights, that animals should be free, and that they should be treated

with care and respect. In practice this view-point can be expressed by

refusing to eat animal flesh, by abstaining from animal products

altogether, or by engaging in more militant actions to free animals from

captivity. From an anarchist stand-point this can be justified by the

desire to do away with all forms of domination and oppression, and the

captivity and killing of animals can be seen as one form of that. From a

Buddhist stand-point this can be justified by a desire for compassion

for all living beings, by the wish of “may all beings be liberated.”

often have the desire to reclaim public space, to open up space for

everyone outside of the control of the state or private property.

Buddhists often want more people to know about and to practice

meditation. Put these two together, and you have the Public Meditation

Project. This is an endeavor to have people practice meditation out in

the open in public spaces. This can also be done as “meditation flash

mobs,” where people semi-spontaneously arrange to all meet up together

at the same time and place to meditate in public. Reclaiming public

space does not have to be aggressive, in fact no talking even needs to

happen at all. It can be done sitting down in complete silence and

stillness.

anarchism and punk rock music have been strongly associated with each

other. The anarchist sub-culture often blends into the punk rock

sub-culture, and vice versa. Because of the efforts of authors such as

Noah Levine and Brad Warner, and others, a new sub-culture has come

about of Buddhist punks, or “Dharma Punx.” While not explicitly

“anarchist,” Noah Levine’s writings at least often make casual reference

to how what he is advocating is “revolutionary” and “radical.”

Often-times the Buddha himself within this sub-culture is referred to as

being “the rebel saint. This particular sub-culture has probably done

the most to help develop a Buddhist anarchist culture.

Community: Coming from the self-help scene is a practice called

“Nonviolent Communication,” or “NVC” for short. This is a series of

conceptual and interpersonal tools that can be applied to help with

resolving conflicts between people, developing personal clarity or

sensitively listening to others. From a Buddhist perspective I see this

as in many ways being a kind of “applied Right Speech.” From an

anarchist perspective the principles and theory underlying NVC

explicitly rejects relationships of domination, and NVC is viewed as

being a way to help overcome it. Most recently something has emerged

from NVC that is called the “Consciousness Transformation Community.”

The CTC is based around a set of 17 “core commitments” which basically

summarize the kind of consciousness that NVC aims for. In the realm of

interpersonal relationships, NVC and the CTC can be viewed as tools and

a framework for practicing Buddhist anarchism.

there exists a tendency called “radical political straightedge.” This is

a kind of social intersection where people are into punk rock music,

hold radical political views, and abstain from all forms of alcohol

consumption, recreational drug use and intoxication in general. Within

the Buddhist morality (sila), there is a precept where one who wishes to

develop along the Buddhist path vows to abstain from all forms of

intoxication. Radical political straightedge can be seen as one step on

the Buddhist anarchist path within a (sub-)cultural context.

Stephen Batchelor who is a former Buddhist monk in both the Tibetan and

the Zen traditions who has renounced his monk-hood. He has recently been

writing about what he calls “Buddhist atheism.” This approach is

basically where all of the metaphysical ideas within Buddhism such as

the notions of rebirth and reincarnation, as well as beliefs in deities

and “higher” and “lower” cosmologies, are stripped away from Buddhism.

Similar work has been taking place in Japan with something that is

called “Critical Buddhism.” This has been the work of some Japanese

Buddhist scholars to modernize Buddhist beliefs to make it all more

relevant and applicable to a contemporary audience. Given that most

anarchists are atheists (ie, “no gods, no masters”), or at least come

from a Western secular outlook on life, such forms of Buddhism would be

the most appropriate for a Buddhist anarchism.

and services are offered freely as a gift. With this nothing is offered

with a price-tag or as a part of a trade or exchange. Everything is

given without any strings attached. People may give things to the

original giver, but that is done so as a gift in itself, not as

“payment” or “reimbursement.” A number of different anarchist events and

projects operate as a gift economy, as do a number of Buddhist events

and projects as well. Within the Buddhist context the practice of

operating with a gift economy is connected with the virtue (Pāramitā) of

“Dāna,” or “generosity.” Within the anarchist context, the gift economy

would form the basis for an anarchist-communist society. There is much

potential within the gift economy to be explored.

Letting Go For Freedom

Perhaps the most succinct to-the-point summary of Buddhism is this one

quote that has been attributed to Gotama the Buddha: “Nothing whatsoever

should be clung to.” Clinging to ideas of the way things should be, what

should be happening, what people should be doing, etc. is one of the

sure ways to ensure that one will experience suffering. Likewise, for

anarchists, clinging to ideas of how the world should look, how projects

should be carried out, ideas of identity or ideological purity have also

caused a lot of suffering. I believe that one of the biggest

contributions that Buddhism can make for anarchism is precisely this

peace of mind which comes from not clinging. Without clinging,

desperation, anxiety and putting demands on one’s friends and comrades

goes away. Instead, projects can be carried out with calm, clarity and a

sense of inner spaciousness. This in turn can set the tone for the kind

of world that we would like to live in.

Taking Up Responsibility

Having said all of this, I want to emphasize — anarchism and Buddhism

are not the same thing. They are two separate traditions. They are two

traditions that complement each-other like two sides of the same coin of

true and total liberation. Buddhist anarchism is something new, even

though it has very long and ancient roots. My hope with writing all of

this is to help to make space for this something new to emerge further.

Both traditions emphasize responsibility, individuals taking

responsibility for themselves in the fullest way possible. The same goes

with the future of the philosophy and practice of Buddhist anarchism. If

we want for it to grow, develop or evolve, the responsibility is up to

us. As with everything, when it comes down to it, it is always up to us.