2021/02/15

David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet - Wikipedia

David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet - Wikipedia

David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
For the companion book, see A Life on Our Planet.
David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet
David attenborough a life on our planet.jpg
Film poster
GenreNature documentary
Narrated byDavid Attenborough
ComposerSteven Price
Country of originUnited Kingdom
Original languageEnglish
Production
Executive producers
CinematographyGavin Thurston
EditorMartin Elsbury
Running time83 min
Production companies
  • Altitude Film Entertainment
  • Netflix
  • Silverback Films
Release
Original networkNetflix
Picture formatUHDTV 2160p
Original release4 October 2020
Chronology
Preceded byLife in Cold Blood

David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet is a 2020 British documentary film[1] narrated by David Attenborough.[2] The film acts as a "witness statement",[3] through which Attenborough shares first-hand his concern for the current state of the planet due to humanity's impact on nature and his hopes for the future.[4] It was released on Netflix on 4 October 2020,[5] along with a companion book A Life on Our Planet.[6]

Synopsis[edit]

From Pripyat, an area deserted after a nuclear disaster, Attenborough gives an overview of his life. Interspersed with footage of his career and of a wide variety of ecosystems, he narrates key moments in his career and indicators of how the planet has changed over his lifetime. As a child, Attenborough enjoyed studying fossils. His documentary career began in the 1950s when he began working for the BBC, a British public service broadcaster. He visited places such as the African Serengeti, in which native animals require vast areas of land to maintain grazing patterns. Over time, he noticed a decline in wildlife when searching for fish or orangutans or other animals which he was looking for as part of his documentaries. Areas of the Arctic or Antarctic were different to what the filming crew expected due to ice caps melting. The causes are anthropogenic climate change and biodiversity loss pushing the planet towards a sixth mass extinction event over a period of centuries rather than the hundreds of millennia that built up to previous mass extinctions.

Attenborough describes the film as his "witness statement" and gives an impression of what could happen to the planet over the course of a lifetime beginning in 2020 and lasting as long as his own, were human activity to continue unchanged. The Amazon rainforest could degrade into a savanna; the Arctic could lose all ice during summer; coral reefs could die; soil overuse could cause food crises. These irreversible events would cause mass extinction and exacerbate climate change further.

However, Attenborough describes actions which could prevent these effects and combat climate change and biodiversity loss. He asserts that the solution has been "staring us in the face all along. To restore stability to our planet, we must restore its biodiversity. The very thing that we've removed." He proposes that bringing countries out of poverty, providing universal healthcare and improving girls' education would make the growing human population stabilise sooner and at a lower level. Renewable energy such as solar, wind, water and geothermal could sustainably power all human energy usage. Protecting a third of coastal areas from fishing could allow fish populations to thrive and the remaining area would be sufficient for human consumption. Humans changing their diet to eliminate or reduce meat in favour of plant-based foods could allow land to be used far more efficiently. Attenborough cites government intervention in Costa Rica causing deforestation to reverse, Palau's fishing regulations and improved use of land in the Netherlands as good examples.

Production[edit]

Initially scheduled for cinematic release on 16 April 2020, the film was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.[7][8] The film premiered on 28 September 2020 in cinemas and debuted on the online streaming platform Netflix on 4 October.[8][9] The day prior, a promotional video was released showing Attenborough answer questions from celebrities.[10]

A companion book, A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and a Vision for the Future, was released in October 2020.[6][11]

Reception[edit]

The film received positive critical reception. Patrick Cremona of Radio Times gave it five out of five stars, finding it "quite unlike" Attenborough's previous works and lauding its "blending" of a "terrifying condemnation" of humans' treatment of the natural world, and a "hopeful and inspirational manifesto" of how to address the climate crisis.[12] Rating it four out of five stars, Ed Potton of The Times approved of the depiction of animals and Attenborough's "intimacy" and "authority" in his narration, but suggested that more of Attenborough's personal life could have been shown.[9] Emma Clarke of the Evening Standard called the film "an essential watch".[8] Natalia Winkelman of The New York Times praised the "astonishing nature photography" and juxtaposition between thriving and dying ecosystems.[3]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet". David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet. Retrieved 19 August 2020.
  2. ^ "David Attenborough – A Life On Our Planet". WWF. Retrieved 19 August 2020.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b Winkelman, Natalia (4 October 2020). "'David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet' Review: Ruin and Regrowth". The New York Times.
  4. ^ "Everything you need to know about Netflix's A Life On Our Planet by David Attenborough". Radio Times. Retrieved 19 August 2020.
  5. ^ "David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet | Netflix Official Site". www.netflix.com. Retrieved 22 September 2020.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b Bradley, James (6 November 2020). "Faced with catastrophe, David Attenborough and Tim Flannery search for a cure". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  7. ^ "When is David Attenborough's new film A Life On Our Planet released?". Radio Times.
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b c "David Attenborough's A Life On Our Planet leaves viewers in tears as Netflix doc reveals devastation of natural world". Evening Standard.
  9. ^ Jump up to:a b "David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet review — a pre-emptive eulogy for the Earth". The Times.
  10. ^ "Game of Thrones and Sex Education stars quiz David Attenborough on his new Netflix documentary. Digital Spy.
  11. ^ Haysom, Sam. "David Attenborough's new book and Netflix film tackles climate crisis with a 'vision for the future'". Mashable. Retrieved 19 August 2020.
  12. ^ "David Attenborough delivers poignant mission statement in powerful Netflix doc A Life on Our Planet". Radio Times.

External links[edit]



A Life on Our Planet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
For the documentary film, see David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet.
A Life on Our Planet
A Life on Our Planet
Front cover
AuthorDavid Attenborough
Jonnie Hughes
GenreNon-fiction
PublisherEbury Publishing
Publication date
October 2020
Pages272
ISBN9781529108279

A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and a Vision for the Future is a 2020 book by documentarian David Attenborough and director-producer Jonnie Hughes. It follows Attenborough's career as a presenter and natural historian, along with the decline in wildlife and rising carbon emissions during the period. Attenborough warns of the effects that climate change and biodiversity loss will have in the near future, and offers action which can be taken to prevent natural disaster. A companion book to the film David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet, it was positively received by critics.

Background[edit]

David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet is a 2020 film by the documentarian and natural historian David Attenborough. Jonnie Hughes served as director and producer, as he has on Attenborough's documentaries since 2000.[1] Initially scheduled for cinematic release on 16 April 2020, the film was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The film premiered on 28 September 2020 in cinemas and debuted on the online streaming platform Netflix on 4 October.[2][3][4]

A Life on Our Planet is the companion book to the film, released in October 2020.[5] It was written by Attenborough and Hughes, who was assisted by the World Wide Fund for Nature's science team.[6]

Synopsis[edit]

The book opens in Pripyat, an area deserted after the Chernobyl disaster. Its first part, My Witness Statement, details key moments in Attenborough's career and the parallel decline of wildlife and rise in carbon emissions. Each chapter begins with three statistics about the period which it covers: world population, atmospheric carbon dioxide and remaining wilderness. What Lies Ahead, the second part, is about the global warming and species extinction which will continue and accelerate if human behaviour continues unchanged into the future. A Vision for the Future: How to Rewild the World, the third and final section, details measures which can be taken to avoid catastrophe and live sustainably.

As a child, Attenborough enjoyed studying fossils. His documentary career began in the 1950s when he began working for the BBC, a British public service broadcaster. He visited places such as the African Serengeti, in which native animals require vast areas of land to maintain grazing patterns. Over time, he noticed a decline in wildlife when searching for fish or orangutans or other animals which he was looking for as part of his documentaries. Areas of the Arctic or Antarctic were different to what the filming crew expected due to ice caps melting. The causes are anthropogenic climate change and biodiversity loss pushing the planet towards a sixth mass extinction event over a period of centuries rather than the hundreds of millennia that built up to previous mass extinctions.

Attenborough describes the book as his "witness statement" and gives an impression of what could happen to the planet over the course of a lifetime beginning in 2020 and lasting as long as his own, were human activity to continue unchanged. The Amazon rainforest could degrade into a savanna; the Arctic could lose all ice during summer; coral reefs could die; soil overuse could cause food crises. These irreversible events would cause mass extinction and exacerbate climate change further.

However, Attenborough describes actions which could prevent these effects and combat climate change and biodiversity loss. He proposes that bringing countries out of poverty, providing universal healthcare and improving girls' education would make the growing human population stabilise sooner and at a lower level. Renewable energy such as solar, wind, water and geothermal could sustainably power all human energy usage. Protecting a third of coastal areas from fishing could allow fish populations to thrive and the remaining area would be sufficient for human consumption. Humans changing their diet to eliminate or reduce meat in favour of plant-based foods could allow land to be used far more efficiently. Attenborough cites government intervention in Costa Rica causing deforestation to reverse, Palau's fishing regulations and improved use of land in the Netherlands as good examples.

Reception[edit]

Pilita Clark included the book on the Financial Times' list of best books of 2020, under the category "Environment". Clark found that it "may not be entirely original but it is an important message from a messenger without parallel".[7] A starred review for Kirkus Reviews praised the book as "excellent", finding Attenborough "refreshingly optimistic" and the book useful for "anyone concerned with the planet's ecological future".[8] Bryan Appleyard of The Times found that Attenborough's "special pleading is fair and should be noted by other eco-warriors" and recommended the book both "to learn" and "to honour the man".[9] James Bradley of The Sydney Morning Herald found the book "extremely powerful", writing that Attenborough "captures the accelerating ruination of the planet in the starkest possible terms".[5]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Bloodworth, Adam (4 October 2020). "What Do Chernobyl And Climate Change Have In Common? Quite A Lot According To David Attenborough". HuffPost. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  2. ^ Clarke, Emma (5 October 2020). "David Attenborough's A Life On Our Planet leaves viewers in tears as Netflix doc reveals devastation of natural world". Evening Standard. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  3. ^ Morris, Lauren (23 September 2020). "When is David Attenborough's new film A Life On Our Planet released?". Radio Times. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  4. ^ Potton, Ed (16 September 2020). "David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet review — a pre-emptive eulogy for the Earth". The Times. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  5. ^ Jump up to:a b Bradley, James (6 November 2020). "Faced with catastrophe, David Attenborough and Tim Flannery search for a cure". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  6. ^ Dochartaigh, Kerri (26 October 2020). "A Life on Our Planet: David Attenborough's devastating but essential call to action". The Irish Times. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  7. ^ Clark, Pilita (18 November 2020). "Best books of 2020: Environment". Financial Times. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  8. ^ "A Life on Our Planet (Review)". Kirkus Reviews. 9 September 2020. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  9. ^ Appleyard, Bryan (27 September 2020). "A Life on Our Planet by David Attenborough, review — a passionate valedictory". The Times. Retrieved 21 November 2020.



Posted by at

누구나 꾸는 영몽 - 인천일보

누구나 꾸는 영몽 - 인천일보


누구나 꾸는 영몽


승인 2008.01.14 00:00
수정 2008.01.13 21:02


역학칼럼 - 예지연원장꿈의 종류에는 우선 기본적으로 다음과 같은 것이 있다는 것을 알아두어야 한다.

심몽(心夢)은 일상생활적인 꿈으로 평소에 생각하고 있는 것이 나타난 현상을 말하고, 허몽(虛夢)은 심신이 피곤해 있을 때 자주 꾸는 꿈으로 특별한 의미는 없다.

잡몽(雜夢)은 욕망에 관한 꿈으로 일회성인 경우가 대부분이다. 이몽(異夢)은 환각과 같은 이상한 꿈을 말한다.

영몽(靈夢)은 운세가 숨어 있는 꿈으로 예지몽(豫知夢), 경고몽(警告夢), 정몽(正夢) 등 선조나 신(神)이라 생각되는 것이 나타나 암시해 주는 꿈이다.

이중에서 중요한 것은 심몽과 영몽이다. 심몽은 보통 반복적으로 꾼 경우가 많고, 그러기 때문에 그 사람의 성격, 감정, 전생과의 연계 등이 암시되어 있다. 영몽은 앞으로 나타날 미래에 대해 수호령이 관여하기도 하며, 어쨌든 그 사람의 인생에 관한 중요한 의미가 담겨져 있기 때문에 전생의 일이나 운세의 상태를 알게 하는데 최고의 실마리가 된다.

영감이 강한 사람은 영몽을 꾸기 쉽다고 말할 수 있지만, 특별한 사람만이 꾸는 것은 아니다.

또 다른 사람에게는 의미 없는 꿈이라도 그 사람에게 있어서는 영몽인 것도 많다.

잠재의식의 유형에 따라 꿈의 상징도 변화하고 의미도 달라지기 때문에 여러분이 어떤 유형의 잠재의식을 가지고 있는가를 알아두는 것이 꿈 해석에 도움이 된다. 일반적으로 확실한 특징이 있는 것은 아니지만 대개 이것이 영몽이 아닐까 하는 단서가 있다.

그것은 운세가 바뀔 때, 인생의 전환 시기일 때, 꿈을 꾼 후에 대단히 걱정될 경우, 색이 선명한 꿈, 말소리가 들리는 꿈, 그리고 연속하여 자주 꾸는 꿈 등 이러할 때는 영몽일 가능성이 매우 높다.

다음; 사주학의 정확성
 
Posted by at

Upasika Kee Nanayon and the Social Dynamic of Theravadin Buddhist Practice by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

 Upasika Kee Nanayon and the Social Dynamic of Theravadin Buddhist Practice  by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

                   From the Introduction to the book

  "An Unentangled Knowing: The Teachings of a Thai Buddhist Lay Woman"

                          Published in 1995 

                            * * * * * * * *

 

  Upasika Kee Nanayon, also known by her penname, K. Khao-suan-luang,   was arguably the foremost woman Dhamma teacher in twentieth-century   Thailand.  Born in 1901 to a Chinese merchant family in Rajburi, a   town to the west of Bangkok, she was the eldest of five children --   or, counting her father's children by a second wife, the eldest of   eight.  Her mother was a very religious woman and taught her the   rudiments of Buddhist practice, such as nightly chants and the   observance of the precepts, from an early age.  In later life she   described how, at the age of six, she became so filled with fear and   loathing at the miseries her mother went through in being pregnant and   giving birth to a younger sibling that, on seeing the newborn child   for the first time -- "sleeping quietly, a little red thing with   black, black hair" -- she ran away from home for three days.  This   experience, plus the anguish she must have felt when her parents   separated, probably lay behind her decision, made when she was still   quite young, never to submit to what she saw as the slavery of   marriage. 

 

    During her teens she devoted her spare time to Dhamma books and to   meditation, and her working hours to a small business to support her   father in his old age.  Her meditation progressed well enough that she   was able to teach him meditation, with fairly good results, in the   last year of his life.  After his death she continued her business

  with the thought of saving up enough money to enable herself to live   the remainder of her life in a secluded place and give herself fully   to the practice.  Her aunt and uncle, who were also interested in   Dhamma practice, had a small home near a forested hill, Khao Suan   Luang (RoyalPark Mountain), outside of Rajburi, where she often went   to practice.  In 1945, as life disrupted by World War II had begun to   return to normal, she gave up her business, joined her aunt and uncle   in moving to the hill, and there the three of them began a life   devoted entirely to meditation.  The small retreat they made for   themselves in an abandoned monastic dwelling eventually grew to become   the nucleus of a women's practice center that has flourished to this   day.

   

    Life at the retreat was frugal, in line with the fact that outside   support was minimal in the early years.  However, even now that the   center has become well-known and well-established, the same frugal   style has been maintained for its benefits in subduing greed, pride,   and other mental defilements, as well as for the pleasure it offers in   unburdening the heart.  The women practicing at the center are all   vegetarian and abstain from such stimulants as tobacco, coffee, tea,   and betel nut.  They meet daily for chanting, group meditation, and   discussion of the practice.  In the years when Upasika Kee's health   was still strong, she would hold special meetings at which the members   would report on their practice, after which she would give a talk   touching on any important issues that had been brought up.  It was   during such sessions that most of the talks recorded in this volume   were given. 

   

    In the center's early years, small groups of friends and relatives   would visit on occasion to give support and to listen to Upasika Kee's   Dhamma talks.  As word spread of the high standard of her teachings   and practice, larger and larger groups came to visit, and more women   began to join the community.  When tape recording was introduced to   Thailand in the mid-1950's, friends began recording her talks and, in   1956, a group of them printed a small volume of her transcribed talks   for Distribution.  By the mid-1960's, the stream of free Dhamma   literature from Khao Suan Luang -- Upasika Kee's poetry as well as her   talks -- had grown to a flood.  This attracted even more people to her   center and established her as one of the best-known Dhamma teachers,   male or female, in Thailand.

   

    Upasika Kee was something of an autodidact.  Although she picked up   the rudiments of meditation during her frequent visits to monasteries   in her youth, she practiced mostly on her own without any formal study   under a meditation teacher.  Most of her instruction came from books   -- the Pali Canon and the works of contemporary teachers -- and was   tested in the crucible of her own relentless honesty.  Her later   teachings show the influence of the writings of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu,   although she transformed his concepts in ways that made them entirely   her own. 

   

    In the later years of her life she developed cataracts that   eventually left her blind, but she still continued a rigorous schedule   of meditating and receiving visitors interested in the Dhamma.  She   passed away quietly in 1978 after entrusting the center to a committee   she appointed from among its members.  Her younger sister, Upasika   Wan, who up to that point had played a major role as supporter and   facilitator for the center, joined the community within a few months   of Upasika Kee's death and soon became its leader, a position she held   until her death in 1993.  Now the center is once again being run by   committee and has grown to accommodate 60 members.

   

    Much has been written recently on the role of women in Buddhism, but   it is interesting to note that, for all of Upasika Kee's   accomplishments in her own personal Dhamma practice and in providing   opportunities for other women to practice as well, socio-historical   books on Thai women in Buddhism make no mention of her name or of the   community she founded.  This underscores the distinction between   Buddhism as practice and mainstream Buddhism as a socio-historical   phenomenon, a distinction that is important to bear in mind when   issues related to the place of women in Buddhism are discussed.

   

    Study after study has shown that mainstream Buddhism, both lay and   monastic, has adapted itself thoroughly to the various societies into   which it has been introduced -- so thoroughly that the original   teachings seem in some cases to have been completely distorted.  From   the earliest centuries of the tradition on up to the present, groups   who feel inspired by the Buddha's teachings, but who prefer to adapt   those teachings to their own ends rather than adapting themselves to   the teachings, have engaged in creating what might be called designer   Buddhism.  This accounts for the wide differences we find when we   compare, say, Japanese Buddhism, Tibetan, and Thai, and for the   variety of social roles to which many women Buddhists in different   countries have found themselves relegated. 

   

    The true practice of Buddhism, though, has always been   counter-cultural, even in nominally Buddhist societies.  Society's   main aim, no matter where, is its own perpetuation.  Its cultural   values are designed to keep its members useful and productive --   either directly or indirectly -- in the on-going economy.  Most   religions allow themselves to become domesticated to these values by   stressing altruism as the highest religious impulse, and mainstream   Buddhism is no different.  Wherever it has spread, it has become   domesticated to the extent that the vast majority of monastics as well   as lay followers devote themselves to social services of one form or   another, measuring their personal spiritual worth in terms of how well   they have loved and served others. 

   

    However, the actual practice enjoined by the Buddha does not place   such a high value on altruism at all.  In fact, he gave higher praise   to those who work exclusively for their own spiritual welfare than to   those who sacrifice their spiritual welfare for the the welfare of   others (Anguttara Nikaya, Book of Fours, Sutta 95) -- a teaching that   the mainstream, especially in Mahayana traditions, has tended to   suppress.  The true path of practice pursues happiness through social   withdrawal, the goal being an undying happiness found exclusively   within, totally transcending the world, and not necessarily expressed   in any social function.  People who have attained the goal may teach   the path of practice to others, or they may not.  Those who do are   considered superior to those who don't, but those who don't are in   turn said to be superior to those who teach without having attained   the goal themselves.  Thus individual attainment, rather than social   function, is the true measure of a person's worth.   

   

    Mainstream Buddhism, because it can become so domesticated, often   seems to act at cross-purposes to the actual practice of Buddhism.    Women sense this primarily in the fact that they do not have the same   opportunities for ordination that men do, and that they tend to be   discouraged from pursuing the opportunities that are available to   them.  The Theravadin Bhikkhuni Sangha, the nuns' order founded by the   Buddha, died out because of war and famine almost a millennium ago,   and the Buddha provided no mechanism for its revival.  (The same holds   true for the Bhikkhu Sangha, or monks' order.  If it ever dies out,   there is no way it can be revived.)  Thus the only ordination   opportunities open to women in Theravadin countries are as lay nuns,   observing eight or ten precepts. 

   

    Because there is no formal organization for the lay nuns, their   status and opportunities for practice vary widely from location to   location.  In Thailand, the situation is most favorable in Rajburi and   the neighboring province of Phetburi, both of which -- perhaps because   of the influence of Mon culture in the area -- have a long tradition   of highly-respected independent nunneries.  Even there, though, the   quality of instruction varies widely with the nunnery, and many women   find that they prefer the opportunities for practice offered in nuns'   communities affiliated with monasteries, which is the basic pattern in   other parts of Thailand. 

   

    The opportunities that monasteries offer for lay nuns to practice --   in terms of available free time and the quality of the instruction   given -- again vary widely from place to place.   One major drawback   to nuns' communities affiliated with monasteries is that the nuns are   relegated to a status clearly secondary to that of the monks, but in   the better monasteries this is alleviated to some extent by the   Buddhist teachings on hierarchy:  that it is a mere social convention,   designed to streamline the decision-making process in the community,   and based on morally neutral criteria so that one's place in the   hierarchy is not an indication of one's worth as a person. 

   

    Of course there are sexist monks who mistake the privileged position   of men as an indication of supposed male superiority, but fortunately   nuns do not take vows of obedience and are free to change communities   if they find the atmosphere oppressive.  In the better monasteries,   nuns who have advanced far in the practice are publicly recognized by   the abbots and can develop large personal followings.  At present, for   instance, one of the most active Dhamma teachers in Bangkok is a   woman, Amara Malila, who abandoned her career as a medical doctor for   a life in a nun's community connected with one of the meditation   monasteries in the Northeast.  After several years of practice she   began teaching, with the blessings of the abbot, and now has a healthy   shelf of books to her name.  Such individuals, though, are a rarity,   and many lay nuns find themselves relegated to a celibate version of a   housewife's life -- considerably freer in their eyes than the life of   an actual housewife, but still far from conducive to the full-time   practice of the Buddhist path.       

   

    Although the opportunities for women to practice in Thailand are far   from ideal, it should also be noted that mainstream Buddhism often   discourages men from practicing as well.  Opportunities for ordination   are widely available to men, but it is a rare monk who finds himself   encouraged to devote himself entirely to the practice.  In village   monasteries, monks have long been pressured to study medicine so that   they can act as the village doctors or to study astrology to become   personal counselors.  Both of these activities are forbidden by the   disciplinary rules, but are very popular with the laity -- so popular   that until recent times a village monk who did not take up either of   these vocations was regarded as shirking his duties.  Scholarly monks   in the cities have long been told that the path to //nibbana// is no   longer open, that full-time practice would be futile, and that a life   devoted to administrative duties, with perhaps a little meditation on   the side, is the most profitable use of one's monastic career.

   

    On top of this, parents who encourage their sons from early   childhood to take temporary ordination often pressure them to disrobe   soon after ordination if they show any inclination to stay in the   monkhood permanently and abandon the family business.  Even families   who are happy to have their sons stay in the monkhood often discourage   them from enduring the hardships of a meditator's life in the forest.

   

    In some cases the state of mainstream Buddhism has become so   detrimental to the practice that institutional reforms have been   attempted.  In the Theravada tradition, such reforms have succeeded   only if introduced from the top down, when senior monks have received   the support of the political powers that be.  The Canonical example   for this pattern is the First Council, called with royal patronage in   the first year after the Buddha's passing away, for the express   purpose of standardizing the record of the Buddha's teachings for   posterity.  During the days of absolute monarchy, reforms that   followed this pattern could be quite thorough-going and on occasion   were nothing short of draconian.  In more recent years, though, they   have been much more limited in scope, gaining a measure of success   only when presented not as impositions but as opportunities:  access   to more reliable texts, improved standards and facilities for   education, and greater support for stricter observance of the   disciplinary rules.  And, of course, however such reforms may be   carried out, they are largely limited to externals, because the   attainment of the Deathless is not something that can be decreed by   legislative fiat. 

   

    A modern example of such a reform movement is the Lay Nun   Association of Thailand, an attempt to provide an organizational   structure for all lay nuns throughout the country, sponsored by Her   Majesty the Queen and senior monks in the national hierarchy.  This   has succeeded chiefly in providing improved educational opportunities   for a relatively small number of nuns, while its organizational aims   have been something of a failure.  Even though the association is run   by highly educated nuns, most of the nuns I know personally have   avoided joining it because they do not find the leaders personally   inspiring and because they feel they would be sacrificing their   independence for no perceivable benefit.  This view may be based on a   common attitude in the outlying areas of Thailand:  the less contact   with the bureaucratic powers at the center, the better.

   

    As for confrontational reforms introduced from the bottom up, these   have never been sanctioned by the tradition, and Theravadin history   has no record of their ever succeeding.  The only such reform   mentioned in the Canon was Devadatta's attempted schism, introduced as   a reform to tighten up the disciplinary rules.  The Canon treats his   attempt in such strongly negative terms that its memory is still very   much alive in the Theravada mind set, making the vast majority of   Buddhists reluctant to take up with confrontational reforms no matter   how reasonable they might seem.  And with good reason:  Anyone who has   to fight to have his/her ideas accepted inevitably loses touch with   the qualities of dispassion, self-effacement, unentanglement with   others, contentment with little, and seclusion -- qualities the Buddha   set forth as the litmus test for gauging whether or not a proposed   course of action, and the person proposing it, were in accordance with   the Dhamma. 

   

    In addition, there have been striking instances where people have   proposed religious reforms as a camouflage for their political   ambitions, leaving their followers in a lurch when their ambitions are   thwarted.  And even in cases where a confrontational reformer seems   basically altruistic at heart, he or she tends to play up the social   benefits to be gained from the proposed reform in the effort to win   support, thus compromising the relationship of the reform to true   practice.  Experiences with cases such as this have tended to make   Theravadin Buddhists in general leery of confrontational reforms.

   

    Thus, given the limited opportunities for institutional reform, the   only course left open to those few men and women prepared to break the   bonds of mainstream Buddhism in their determination to practice is to   follow the example of the Buddha himself by engaging in what might be   called personal or independent reform:  to reject the general values   of society, go off on their own, put up with society's disapproval and   the hardships of living on the frontier, and search for whatever   reliable meditation teachers may be living and practicing outside of   the mainstream.  If no such teachers exist, individuals intent on   practice must strike out on their own, adhering as closely as they can   to the teachings in the texts -- to keep themselves from being led   astray by their own defilements -- and taking refuge in the example of   the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha in a radical way. 

   

    In a sense, there is a sort of folk wisdom to this arrangement.    Anyone who would take on the practice only when assured of comfortable   material support, status, and praise -- which the Buddha called the   baits of the world -- would probably not be up to the sacrifices and   self-discipline the practice inherently entails.

   

    Thus from the perspective of the practice, mainstream Buddhism   serves the function of inspiring individuals truly intent on the   practice to leave the mainstream and to go into the forest, which was   where the religion was originally discovered.  As for those who prefer   to stay in society, the mainstream meets their social/religious needs   while at the same time making them inclined to view those who leave   society in search of the Dhamma with some measure of awe and respect,   rather than viewing them simply as drop-outs.   

   

    What this has meant historically is that the true practice of   Buddhism has hovered about the edges of society and history -- or,   from another perspective, that the history of Buddhism has hovered   about the edges of the practice.  When we look at the historical   record after the first generation of the Buddha's disciples, we find   only a few anecdotal references to practicing monks or nuns.  The only   teachers recorded were scholarly monks, participants in controversies,   and missionaries.  Some people at present have taken the silence on   the nuns as an indication that there were no prominent nun teachers   after the first generation of disciples.  However, inscriptions at the   Theravada stupa at Sanci in India list nuns among the prominent donors   to its construction, and this would have been possible only if the   nuns had large personal followings.  Thus it seems fair to assume that   there were prominent nun teachers, but that they were devoted to   meditation rather than scholarship, and that -- like the monks devoted   to meditation -- their names and teachings slipped through the cracks   in the historical record inasmuch as true success at meditation is   something that historians are in no position to judge.

   

    So, for the period from Canonical up to modern times, one can only   make conjectures about the opportunities for practice open to men and   women at any particular time.  Still, based on observations of the   situation in Thailand before Western influences made themselves   strongly felt, the following dynamic seems likely:  Meditation   traditions tend to last only two or three generations at most.  They   are started by charismatic pioneers willing to put up with the   hardships of clearing the Buddhist path.  Because the integrity of   their efforts takes years to be tested -- not all pioneers are free   from delusion and dishonesty -- their role requires great sacrifices.    In fact, if large-scale support comes too early, it may abort the   movement.  If, over time, the pioneers do embody the practice   faithfully, then as word of their teachings and practices spread, they   begin to attract a following of students and supporters.  With the   arrival of support, the hardships become less demanding; and as life   softens, so does the practice, and within a generation or two it has   deteriorated to the extent that it no longer inspires support and   eventually dies out, together with any memory of the founder's   teachings. 

   

    In some cases, before the tradition dies out, its example may have a   reforming influence at large, shaming or inspiring the mainstream at   least temporarily into becoming more favorable to true practice.  In   other cases, the practice tradition may influence only a limited   circle and then disappear without a ripple.  For those who benefit   from it, of course, the question of its historical repercussions is of   no real consequence.  Even if only one person has benefited by   realizing the Deathless, the tradition is a success. 

   

    At present in Thailand we are watching this process work itself out   in several strands, with the major difference being that modern media   have given us a record of the teachings and practices of many figures   in the various meditation traditions.  Among the monks, the most   influential practice tradition is the Forest Tradition, which was   started against great odds at the end of the last century by Phra   Ajaan Sao Kantasilo and Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatto, sons of peasants,   at a time when the central Thai bureaucracy was very active in   stamping out independent movements of any sort, political or   religious.  We have no direct record of Ajaan Sao's teachings, only a   booklet or two of Ajaan Mun's, but volume upon volume of their   students' teachings.  Among women, the major practice tradition is   Upasika Kee Nanayon's.  Although she herself has passed away, the   women at her center still listen to her tapes nightly and keep her   teachings alive throughout society by printing and reprinting books of   her talks for Distribution. 

   

    Both traditions are fragile:  The Forest Tradition is showing signs   that its very popularity may soon lead to its demise, and the women at   Khao Suan Luang are faced with the problem of seeing how long they can   maintain their standard of practice without charismatic leadership.    On top of this, the arrival of the mass media -- and especially   television with its tendency to make image more consequential than   substance, and personality more important than character -- is sure to   change the dynamic of Buddhist mainstream and the practice, not   necessarily for the better.  Still, both traditions have at least left   a record -- part of which is presented in this book -- to inspire   future generations and to show how the Buddhist path of practice may   be reopened by anyone, male or female, no matter what forms of   designer Buddhism may take over the mainstream and inevitably lead it   astray.

                            * * * * * * * *

Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)