Log in

View Full Version : Marxism & Buddhism



Lowtech
15th August 2012, 05:30
i found a great post from another forum and wished to reproduce it here...


July 2011


"Religion is the opium of the people" - Karl Marx
That's only part of what Marx actually wrote, and I think that taking it out of context cheapens what Marx was actually saying here. The full quote from his introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right is:

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
Believe it or not, I think this accords quite well with Buddhism since opium is a type of pain-killer, and what the Buddha taught is the cure for the underlying illness of suffering, thereby eliminating our need for pain-killers of any kind, including Buddhism. In Buddhism, what truly matters is what one does with the teachings, not what one believes about them, which is why I think the Buddha likened his teachings to a raft in MN 22:

And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas.
To me, the main difference between the approaches of the Buddha and Marx is one of focus; whereas the Buddha's focus was primarily on how to liberate the individual from their mental suffering by mastering the process of 'I-making and my-making' involved with our conception of self, Marx's focus, the bodhisattva that he was, was primarily on how to liberate society from their suffering and alienation by changing the material conditions that support it.

l'Enfermé
15th August 2012, 15:07
I wouldn't call that a good post. Rather a very stupid and ignorant post. I'm sure Marx the "bodhisattva"(!!!) would agree.

Raúl Duke
15th August 2012, 15:44
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against buddhism and so far I like the whole "ending of suffering" focus (Eight-Fold Path) but...

Awful post....
It's all about making simple parallels like "oranges and apples." (i.e. "the opium, underlying cause" part of that post; which is only looking at something Marx said rather than comparing with a Marxist tenant)
Nothing of substance, buddhism and marxism have close to nothing to do with each other, much less than whatever similarities/compatibility one can cook up between buddhism and anarchism (there's another recent thread about that subject).

I really don't get this deal of people trying to tie together a political ideology with a religious/etc idea, it's just silly. Marxism and Anarchism, as political ideologies, are just fine without any religion aspect added to them. If that wasn't the point, still I don't see the point (what good would it do?) of finding (non-existent) similarities/compatibilities between a religion and political ideology....
keep them seperate

Paul Cockshott
15th August 2012, 16:05
I suggest you read the book ' For the soulution of the 'Caste' question, Buddha is not enough, Ambedkar is not enough Either, Marx is a Must', by Ranganayakamma you can get it from Sweet Home Publications Hyderabad
http://redcritique.org/booksandjournals/booksbyranganayakamma.htm
also
http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/ambedcararticle.pdf

eric922
15th August 2012, 20:13
I saw that post on the same forum, but I really didn't agree with it. though I did argue for socialism in that thread, though mainly in the role of dispelling myths. Buddhism and Socialism (whether it be anarchism or Marxism) are on different things. Socialism focuses on society as a whole and asks how we deal with societal problems such as capitalism and the problems that system causes due to its various flaws.

Buddhism, even Mahayana, focuses on the individual and how you can deal with the various mental suffering that arises from simply being human, problems that even socialism can't solve because those problems aren't related to economics. Buddha himself was rich and suffered. The type of suffering Buddhism deals with would still exist in socialism. Buddhism is a way to deal with individual suffering and is it is up to the individual to deal with that kind of suffering, because no one else can do it for you. Even Bodhisattva's can only teach, they cannot magically make everyone enlightened.

The Marx as Bodhisattva line was just silly and honestly kind of disrespectful to both Buddhism and Marxism. Marx never claimed to have the answers to human suffering, he merely analyzed capitalism and offered his views on it.

Zostrianos
15th August 2012, 20:19
Though some of it may be farfetched, I think the correlation between Marxism and Buddhism in that post remains very interesting, like they’re 2 sides of the same coin, one focusing on society, another on the individual.

eric922
16th August 2012, 08:18
If anyone is interested here is the article that inspired the discussion on the other forum. The Dali Lama explains why he considers himself a Marxist. I'm actually wary of posting it simply because I don't want to derail this into another Tibet thread, so can we please stay on the topic of the OP, I just felt this might be relevant to topic at hand. The author the article actually seems fairly knowledgeable of Marxism and it isn't really about the Dali Lama so much as Buddhism and Marxism.

http://www.tricycle.com/web-exclusive/occupy-buddhism?page=all,0

Zostrianos
16th August 2012, 08:31
I think the mods should merge the 2 threads

Lowtech
17th August 2012, 02:15
If anyone is interested here is the article that inspired the discussion on the other forum. The Dali Lama explains why he considers himself a Marxist. I'm actually wary of posting it simply because I don't want to derail this into another Tibet thread, so can we please stay on the topic of the OP, I just felt this might be relevant to topic at hand. The author the article actually seems fairly knowledgeable of Marxism and it isn't really about the Dali Lama so much as Buddhism and Marxism.

http://www.tricycle.com/web-exclusive/occupy-buddhism?page=all,0

Thanks Eric922, I wasn't able to post links yet, otherwise I would have included it