• commentary
  • MONDAY JUNE 11 2012 9:04 PM

Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: Death by Buddhism?

by Brad Warner

Yesterday someone sent me a link to a story in the New York Times about a guy who had died when he and his wife were expelled from a Buddhist retreat.

There is so much I could comment on this story that it’s hard to know where to begin. So I’ll begin with the title. If you look at the URL for the story it’s clear that the New York Times originally titled it “Mysterious Yoga Retreat Ends in Grisly Death” and then later changed it to “Mysterious Buddhist Retreat Ends in Grisly Death.” Which goes to show you just how much the mainstream media, and by extension the mainstream public, knows about Eastern religions. You fine folks who read my posts and follow the Buddhist magazines and websites and what-not know the difference. But like nerds of all kinds, we Eastern religion nerds often forget that there’s a whole wide world of people out there for whom Yoga and Buddhism and Hare Krishna and Zorastrianism and Sufiism and all the rest appear to be just one big very weird thing. It’s really important to keep in mind that those of us who do know the differences are a tiny, itty-bitty, teeny-weenie minority. To the rest of the world our pointing out that yoga and Buddhism are two different things seems about as relevant as the Godzilla geeks I used to know arguing about whether Godzilla is actually green or not (he’s not, by the way, except that recently sometimes he is).

This is important because it’s hard for me to imagine that anyone who participated in this retreat actually knew anything about Buddhism at all beyond what they heard from its leader, one Michael Roach Geshe. I would think that even a very cursory glance at some of the beginner’s level books about Buddhism would have alerted them to the fact that something rather odd was going on here.

For starters, the retreat these folks got expelled from was supposed to last three years, three months, and three days. That’s just too gosh darned long! The early Buddhists did three month retreats during the Indian rainy season when there wasn’t much else anyone could do. This tradition is carried on in many places in the form of what Japanese Buddhists call an ango, a retreat lasting around 90 days that typically occurs in the Summer (though spring, winter and fall angos are common these days too). Three months is pretty intense and there’s a good reason Buddha never recommended doing retreats any longer than that.

While reading the story I found myself wondering just how Mr. Roach Geshe justified such an excessively long retreat. A clue can be found on their website which says, “The word ‘enlightenment’ sounds vague and mystical, but the Buddha taught that it is quite achievable by deliberately following a series of steps. The three-year retreatants have been studying and practicing the steps very seriously for the last six or more years, and by going into the laboratory of solitary retreat they hope (to) realize the final goal taught by Lord Buddha.”

So they figured that if they went at it really hard for three years they’d get enlightened. Just like Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha? I’ve run across that designation for Gautama Buddha before and it always seems like a signal that something strange is afoot. I suppose whoever made it up thought that the designation Buddha (the Awakened One) wasn’t quite grand enough and chose to borrow the word “Lord” from Christianity in order to make Gautama seem more supernatural. Whenever I come across someone who talks about “Lord Buddha” I assume they want to make the point that Gautama Buddha is, to them, a kind of god.

Again, this flies in the face of what any introductory text will tell you about Buddha. It’s another clue that the folks who participated in this retreat were the same kinds of people who don’t know any more than the New York Times does about the differences between Buddhism and yoga and whatever else falls under the umbrella heading of Eastern spirituality.

I spend a lot of time on the internets shaking sock monkeys around and poking fun at people who advance all sorts of incredibly obvious hookum as “Buddhism.” This story drives home the point that this stuff isn’t always funny. In fact it can be very serious and very, very sad.

Apparently Mr. Roach Geshe was one of a growing number of people trying to link Buddhism with so-called “prosperity theology.” This is something that first appeared in American Protestant Christianity in the 1950s and claims that the real teaching of Christ was that if you followed him you could get rich. Which flies in the face of pretty much everything Jesus is reported to have said in the Bible. But the folks who follow prosperity Christianity seem to know as little about what’s in the Bible as the people who follow prosperity Buddhism know about what Buddha taught.

I can see the appeal of prosperity theology. Look, I’m going to move to Los Angeles in a week. You best believe that if I thought I could pray my way to a higher income I’d be praying all the time! But I’m extremely skeptical of words like “prosperity” and “abundance” as they are used by middle class Westerners of the early 21st century. Compared to most of the rest of the world, we already start out with way more than we really need. Yet we still want more because our economically driven society continuously emphasizes the need to consume. If we can find some religious justification for greed we’ll grab it. It’s very attractive. I don’t think any of us are completely immune its charm. I certainly am not.

But, again, even a quick look through the most basic books about Buddhism — or, for that matter, a scan through any of the gospels — will tell you that Buddhism is definitely not compatible with prosperity theology — and neither is Christianity. Yet if these things are advanced by people who appear to be authorities, who wear the right robes and speak in the correct way, a lot of folks who really ought to know better will swallow them whole.

I’m not sure if it’s easier to dupe people into thinking any old spiritual sounding nonsense you make up is Buddhism than it is to dupe people about our more familiar religions. If people want to believe this kind of stuff they’re going to. But I feel like I’m going to have to keep pointing out that not everything that calls itself “Buddhism” has anything at all to do with Buddhism for quite a while.

Mr. Roach Geshe has posted a very long open letter on his website describing his take on what happened. Amidst a lot of ass-covering language there emerges a description of a retreat that was really far too intense for any of its members. Silent retreats with small groups of people often cause those among the group who may already have psychological difficulties to experience those difficulties even more intensely than they might experience them in a more “normal” setting. Of course people go off in the midst of straight society all the time. But there’s nothing like an intense spiritual retreat to really bring these things to the surface. The more intense the practice, the more likely it’s going to cause someone’s psyche to crash and burn.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, when you’re getting into meditation practice you’re dealing with some serious mojo, this is not to be taken lightly. And if you think you need a more intense or extreme practice to get you into the deeper stuff faster…you most assuredly do not. It’s absolutely crucial to take this stuff slowly. If you try to rush it, bad things will happen. We’re all full of lots of bad stuff. If you think you can push right through into the great enlightenment of Lord Buddha without first dealing with your own accumulated negative shit, you’re dead wrong.


***

Brad Warner is the author of Sex, Sin and Zen: A Buddhist Exploration of Sex from Celibacy to Polyamory and Everything in Between as well as Hardcore Zen, Sit Down and Shut Up! and Zen Wrapped in Karma Dipped in Chocolate. He maintains a blog about Buddhist stuff that you can click here to see. You can also buy T-shirts and hoodies based on his books, and the new CD by his band Zero Defex now!


Related Posts:

Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: Thich Nhat Hanh Is Wrong
Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: Doesn’t Buddhism Count Homosexuals As Sexual Deviants? Putting The Fallacy To Bed
Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen: Meditation, Depression and the Sense of Self
Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen: I Resent My High School
The Human Potential Movement Can Suck My Ass
Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: How To Make A Zen Monster
Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: The End of the World As We Know It
Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: Win A Date With Brad Warner!!!
Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen: Uninvited To The Buddhist Party
Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen: Secure Your Mask Before Helping Others
Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen: Juggling
Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen: Crazy Wisdom – The Story Of A Drunken Sex Pervert Who Revolutionized Buddhism

 
Comments
mellon

mellon

USA
October 2004

JUN 12, 2012 08:54 AM

You are revealing your lack of knowledge of the Tibetan Mahayana tradition here. Master Asanga is widely revered in Buddhism because he meditated for three years, but didn't attain bodhicitta, so he left in disgust, but then he met a woman who was sanding a block of iron to make a needle, and decided he could do another three. Long story short, he attained bodhicitta after twelve years of retreat.

So your notion that three years is exceptionally long is false. It's a traditional length (as is three months) in Tibetan Buddhism. If you google around for "three years, three months and three days," you will find lots of respected Buddhist teachers who have done these retreats, including Michael Roach and Christie McNally. This was to be her second three year retreat, so it's hard to argue that she didn't know what she was getting into.

As for your "prosperity gospel" claim, Buddhism teaches that actions lead to like results. Geshe Michael teaches that generosity, not prayer, leads to prosperity. This teaching is consistent with the teachings of the Buddha, and represents the lowest of the three motivations to practice Buddhism. I know Zen tries to get away from putting this stuff into words, but Zen is not all of Buddhism—it is a Buddhist sect, with some beliefs that are not widely held by other sects.

"Lord Buddha" is an honorific—in Tibetan they use honorific language to refer to the Buddha, treating him with the same respect one would have given a king back when kings were a big deal. It doesn't mean that he's a god—it means that he's highly revered. I find the term uncomfortable for the same reason you do, but it's not something Geshe Michael made up.

As for whether the retreaters are ready, isn't that up to them to decide? Who are you to make the decision for them? The Diamond Mountain board actually made a decision that Christie and Ian had to cut their retreat short at DM, but they did this for specific reasons, not because "three years is too long."

You wrote a great article about topping the Lama from the bottom a while back. You might want to reflect on how this relates to the situation at DM. We are quick to look for someone to blame when tragedy strikes, but Ian was and Christie is an adult. I went to the same teachings they did, and I didn't stab anyone, get evicted, or try to live in a cave without adequate supplies in the high desert.

Ian was a good friend, and a very smart and strong-willed person. He did what he did for a reason. It didn't turn out the way he anticipated, but for you, who never met him, to decide that he was a deluded cult zombie under the spell of an evil svengali is a bit of an overreach. Do you think people who try to climb dangerous mountains are cult zombies because they willingly risk death for a goal I suspect you consider unappealing?

Brad_Warner

Brad_Warner

NEWSWIRE

Akron, OH

JUN 12, 2012 09:59 AM

Thanks Mellon. I actually meant to revise this article before it went live regarding the matter of 3 year retreats and a few other things. I'm in the middle of moving house and unfortunately the piece went up before I could fix it due to my miscommunication with the SG newswire editor. I put a comment at the end of the piece on the blog. But that comment didn't appear here.

So, for all the world I WAS WRONG ABOUT THE TRADITION OF 3 YEAR RETREATS!!!! I put up an whole article on this matter and on my revised opinion of what happened on my website. The URL is http://wp.me/p2mHBp-eX

Also, I feel bad for having taken the NY Times piece at face value. The fact that they couldn't tell the difference between yoga and Buddhism should have clued me in that perhaps their other info was also not completely reliable.

As for your question about mountain climbing... I've never really understood people who do deliberately dangerous things in order to have big experiences. So it's hard for me to comment upon it.

I feel strongly, though, that Buddhism is about discovering the beauty and joy of the world we are already living in. I read Buddha's traditional life story as a repudiation of doing extreme practices in order to find that truth. He taught the Middle Way, not a way of extremes.

I'm sorry if this piece was hurtful to you (or anyone). It wasn't meant that way. It's just that I've seen a lot of extreme stuff in the name of Buddhism and other forms of Eastern spirituality and a lot of prosperity theology applied to Buddhism (The Secret, for example, which references Buddhism all over the place but never specifically claims to be Buddhist).

Anyway, I'll put something else about this up on SG as soon as I get a break from packing.

mellon

mellon

USA
October 2004

JUN 12, 2012 03:09 PM

No worries. It's been kind of a rough couple of weeks. First we lose Ian, and then we become the latest bunch of religious nuts that people can bash even though they know nothing about us.

So my reaction was more "oy, even Brad is on the Evil Svengali bandwagon?" People like to attack Geshe Michael, because he's nonconformist, so it's a wearying task to keep up with Wikipedia, and every article that gets published serves as "source material" that "proves" the point people want to make there.

My point about mountain climbing was just what you said: I don't get it either. I mean, I get wanting to go to beautiful, harsh places, but there's no way I'd walk across the Khumbu icefall knowing that it's a roll of the dice whether I'm still alive on the other side. But people do find meaning in it. So we shouldn't judge them, IMHO. If they are loved ones, we should make sure they are doing it because it's what they want to do and not because they are trying to commit suicide in a very expensive and scenic way. And as Buddhists I think we probably shouldn't fund dangerous mountain climbing expeditions. But ultimately everyone has the right to choose how they will live their lives.

I was actually going to do the three year retreat, but it didn't work out for me. The reason I wanted to do it is that while I feel that it's wonderful to enjoy the world, there really is truth to the truth of suffering. We can enjoy the honey on the razor blade, but there's still a razor blade. I wanted to find out if the things they teach are true, and the way you find out is to practice.

You've done retreats, so you know how sweet it gets in the middle part. People who have done three year retreats tell stories about what happens after the first six months and the first year that sound even sweeter. It's true that if you do a three year retreat, you miss out on things while you're in. But what happens while you're in is life experience too, and what happens to your mind when you don't talk, or argue, or get interrupted by your cell phone or by twitter for three years is said to be very special.

Anyway, thanks for the note. You're the first person who's written one of these articles who's been willing to talk about it with an open mind. It's a breath of fresh air, and much appreciated, even if we don't ultimately agree on every point.