Towards Open-Source Buddhism

in

This guest blogpost comes our way from Dennis Hunter, a writer currently coordinating the upcoming Yarne retreat with Pema Chödrön at Gampo Abbey in Nova Scotia.

These days, a lot of us are asking the question: What is Western Buddhism? Often, the inquiry seems to focus on the “Western” part. What is uniquely Western about the Buddhism we are practicing? How does it differ from traditional Asian Buddhism? How is Western culture changing Buddhism, and vice versa?

But what do we mean by “Buddhism,” anyway? We often use that word as if Buddhism were one unitary thing, when really (like everything else, and like the Buddha taught) the juggernaut of Buddhism is made up of component parts, and each of those parts is made of component parts, and so on. When we talk about Buddhism in the West, what do we mean? Zen? Theravada? Tibetan Buddhism? Nichiren? Pure Land? Shingon? Some conglomeration of all of these? Something else?

If we could put “Buddhism” under a microscope and look with great magnification at its many traditions and schools and lineages and teachers and practitioners, we might find it is webbed with arteries and capillaries, riddled with neurons and mitochondria—much the same as we are. Mysteriously, the ongoing process of becoming and unbecoming that we label as “Buddhism” happens in the general vicinity of these component parts, and seems to adhere to them—but nowhere can we pinpoint its exact location. There is no one thing that can be called “Buddhism,” just as there is no single place or culture that encompasses the entire “West.”

What we call Buddhism is a widely distributed network phenomenon designed to optimize the human experience. Like the Internet, it started out as someone's idea, but then spun out of control: no one person or group now owns it, and it is being modified and updated from day to day in millions of little increments, from every corner of the known world.

Where is “the Internet?” It seems to adhere somehow to the computers and networks that are part of it, but the Internet itself can't be found. Where is “Buddhism?” It seems to adhere to the people and networks that are practicing it, but the Buddhism itself can't be found. Yet both the Internet and Buddhism can be demonstrated, utilized, applied in countless ways.

If there is anything unique about “Western” Buddhism at this moment, perhaps it is that all of the world's Buddhist traditions—as culturally and doctrinally distinct from one another as a Southern Baptist is from a Russian Orthodox—have descended upon us at once. We are living now in a flux of pan-Buddhist dialogue taking place in a Western crucible, blending traditions that for two-and-a-half millennia have evolved in separate geographic and cultural regions. Buddhism's embrace of Internet technologies in the last two decades has speeded up this process enormously.

Earlier this year, I heard from a hardcore Vipassana practitioner living in Scotland, who had just finished sitting a Zen sesshin and was preparing to attend a Mahamudra retreat the following weekend. Bam! Just like that, intensive practice in three completely distinct Buddhist traditions, with wildly different approaches, in the space of one week. Was there a previous time and place in history when such a broad range of Buddhist traditions was so freely available to one person, and so ripe for the picking?

This smorgasbord of Buddhist traditions also creates confusion—especially for the beginning student who is not firmly grounded in one tradition from the start. Beyond the obvious danger of bringing a consumer’s “shopping mentality” to spiritual practice—going from one tradition and teacher to another and always leaving them behind when they begin to provoke discomfort by challenging your ego—there is also the risk of mixing views from different traditions in an unskillful way.

Still, despite the potential confusion, to be a carrot bobbing in this Western melting pot of Buddhist traditions is to be part of a new fusion cuisine that is being consumed even as it is being cooked. If you listen to a few episodes of Buddhist Geeks podcasts, or read an entire issue of Tricycle or Buddhadharma from cover to cover, the flavor of your understanding will be at least subtly colored by teachings from other Buddhist traditions. It is unavoidable.

In my own practice, I have benefited from this kind of fusion. Although I study with a Tibetan teacher and look towards the Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism as the primary lighthouse by which I navigate the waters, I have at times experienced bubbles of conceptual confusion and intellectualization that were helpfully popped by the sharp concision and no-nonsense directness of Zen teachings. At other times, exposure to the Theravadan view of the stages on the path of awakening—different in many ways from the Mahayana and Vajrayana views—has helped me view the teachings and practices in a more expansive light. I have even deepened my Buddhist path, at times, by incorporating spiritual teachings and practices from outside of Buddhism altogether. As long as I feel firmly rooted in my “native” tradition, I find this sort of cross-fertilization to be fruitful.

I now have to admit, though, that I know less than I once imagined I did what “Western Buddhism” is, or what it may become. It feels sometimes that there are as many “Western Buddhisms” taking shape among us as there are Western Buddhists who practice them. As with the emergence of Linux in the world of computers, perhaps what we are witnessing in the West today, with so much polymorphous blending of traditions, is the emergence of Open-Source Buddhism. (This moniker is, in fact, already in use on numerous websites.) Like the populist software movement from which it borrows its name, Open-Source Buddhism proposes a grassroots, do-it-yourself alternative to the old closed, proprietary operating systems. And it may yet produce new applications that were not possible within the framework of those systems.

However, buyers beware: I have dabbled in Linux, and frankly it gives me a headache. I am, in fact, writing this on a Linux-driven machine that someone bamboozled me into buying a couple of years ago, using a simplified, Linux-for-Mom-and-Pop user interface called Ubuntu that attempts to bring open-source computing to the masses. While I adore the cultural philosophy of openness and integrity and interdependence that stands behind my computer's operating system, on a pragmatic level it often leaves much to be desired. Performing even basic actions—installing a new software program, for example—seems to demand an almost hacker-like degree of technical proficiency. There is no central help desk to turn to when something goes wrong—and something is always going wrong. Time and again, I have searched for answers to things that ought to have been simple, and in response I have been thrown into jumbled web forums where self-appointed Linux gurus “explain” the solution to my problem in a language that might as well be Martian for as much good as it does me. For two years I have been stumbling, wide-eyed, through what I regard as the Wild West of operating systems.

Open-Source Buddhism, I suspect, is much the same. Already emerging in our midst, it is full of great promise and potential—but actually using it, at this point, is not for the faint-of-heart. Its day may be coming soon, but it has not arrived just yet.

Meanwhile, in aligning yourself with any established tradition, you will trade off some of your freedom and idealism, and you will make yourself vulnerable to certain flaws that are inherent to those systems—but in return you may have a better user experience. You will have access to hands-on training, the support of peers, and expert technical support that are difficult to find in the open-source world. In the realm of computer programming, I do know people who are highly proficient at using Linux, but it must be said that they are people who first knew their way around at least one of the old, proprietary systems very, very well. They didn't start out as open-source gurus.

The lesson? Pick the tradition that resonates most with your heart and mind, and immerse yourself in it as completely as you can. Rely on a qualified expert to help you fine-tune your machine. Work out the bugs, and eliminate the malware. Know how to use your chosen operating system thoroughly and properly. Learn how to trouble-shoot when problems arise. Then, and only then, will migrating to Open-Source Buddhism become a truly viable option.

Dennis Hunter is a writer from New York City, currently living as a monk in a Buddhist monastery in Canada.

Image 1: From the Flickr photostream of University of Denver.

Image 2: "Buddha quilt," from the Flickr photostream of artethgray.

Share with a Friend

Email to a Friend

Already a member? Log in to share this content.

You must be a Tricycle Community member to use this feature.

1. Join as a Basic Member

Signing up to Tricycle newsletters will enroll you as a free Tricycle Basic Member.You can opt out of our emails at any time from your account screen.

2. Enter Your Message Details

Enter multiple email addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
jay7z's picture

What is open source?

dennishunter's picture

Hi Jay,

Here's Wikipedia's definition of open source:

"The term open source describes practices in production and development that promote access to the end product's source materials. Some consider open source a philosophy, others consider it a pragmatic methodology. Before the term open source became widely adopted, developers and producers used a variety of phrases to describe the concept; open source gained hold with the rise of the Internet, and the attendant need for massive retooling of the computing source code. Opening the source code enabled a self-enhancing diversity of production models, communication paths, and interactive communities. Subsequently, the new phrase "open-source software" was born to describe the environment that the new copyright, licensing, domain, and consumer issues created.

"The open source model includes the concept of concurrent yet different agendas and differing approaches in production, in contrast with more centralized models of development such as those typically used in commercial software companies. A main principle and practice of open source software development is peer production by bartering and collaboration, with the end-product, source-material, "blueprints", and documentation available at no cost to the public. This is increasingly being applied in other fields of endeavor, such as biotechnology."

This all begins to sound pretty familiar, if we look at the broader trends in the development of Western Buddhism today.

What do you think?

Dennis

jameskennethpowell's picture

I liked your article Dennis,

I hosted a local open source buddhism television show from 2003-2005 and started opensourcebuddhism.org in 2003, my youtube channel opensourcebuddhism in 2005...covering all religions, but especially Buddhism. My thinking was that Buddhism is "big enough" to fit them all in there. I disagreed with your article to some extent. I think the "source code" for opens source Buddhism has to be the no self doctrine, for Mahayanists, also perhaps Nagarjuna. From Nagarjuna alone, I think you can foray into all the Buddhisms...but without no self or zeroness (a.k.a. "emptiness"), I am not sure it is a form of Buddhism. I also think today, youngsters can jump in anywhere. I had a young person write me about which was "better", Tibetan or Chinese? I replied with my student documentary comparing Gelukpa with Chan Buddhism...the student opted for Gelukpa. He just jumped right in, as can we all in any of the traditions around the globe today...in my humble opinion. Nice article!

albill's picture

Before I dropped out of my doctoral program, my dissertation area was on the mixing of different Buddhist traditions in America by practitioners. It is a growing phenomena.

onezenzoo's picture

The internet or more specifically the Web, unlike computer operating systems, works independently of what type of operating system you are using. The operating system, even if it was developed in the "Open-Source" model is just like the senses; ears,eyes,smell,taste. Being necessary to experience existence. As you mentioned it has its limitations, based to some extent on the experience of the user. I would say western Buddhism is like an "Open-Source Web-Software" rather than an operating system. The source code for the Open-Source Web-Software being the same Open-Source code that the rich Buddhist traditions are built on. This "Western" Web-Software gives everyone the opportunity to contribute but has rules of the game just like all phenomena. What is emerging is a different kind of community building on the strengths of what went before but in the language of now rather than then. Inherently, it must respect the source code otherwise it couldn't work. Being that the source code has always been "Open-Source" no one entity can own it. No matter what tradition you say you belong to, it is still part of the Open-Source code and is connected to all other code. Just like the popular Web Software Wordpress, it can be expressed in countless ways. It can be designed as the tradition you follow and for another it can be another flavor, color, tradition.

"May the source be with you"

;)

Dominic Gomez's picture

Interesting discussion on Western/open source "varieties" of what is generally known as "Buddhism". I use the word "varieties" in the sense alluded to by William James in "The Varieties of Religious Experience". James asserts that there are specific aspects of human consciousness that contain energies that could come to a person’s assistance in time of great need. The result is what he refers to as the "religious experience".
Similarly, that which we know as "Buddhism", rather than being analogous to open-source web software, or a kind of operating system, or even comparable to the internet itself, is more like the electricity needed to run hardware and software (i.e. human beings and their bodies and minds).
IOW, Buddhism is simply life itself, which people call upon and try to tap in times of great need. And for the majority of modern Westerners who attached themselves to one or the other of the varieties of "Buddhism" (or "religious experience"), a "great need" can be the search for a viable alternative to the traditional Western religion they've grown up with, or simply an academic curiousity.

Wisdom Moon's picture

[quote] The lesson? Pick the tradition that resonates most with your heart and mind, and immerse yourself in it as completely as you can. Rely on a qualified expert to help you fine-tune your machine.[/quote]

This is great advice. There is a big danger in eclecticism of going for breadth rather than depth. I would contend one point though - the idea that any particular tradition of Buddhism is flawed and that you need to look at another tradition to overcome those flaws. Surely each tradition of Buddhism has it's own complete presentation of teachings and our being stuck is really about not having immersed ourself in the views that it teaches? I can't disagree that hearing something familiar in different words, or from another point of view can give you some insight that you felt you lacked - I, too have read around and felt that I got insights from other Teachers and traditions, but in the end, I felt this was quite lazy of me. I was looking for someone to give me the answers rather than spending time contemplating and meditating on the teachings in the tradition I was studying in to develop the insights of those meditations which would have solved my stuckness.

I feel, in the end, if you ground yourself deeply in one tradition, you understand all the other traditions effortlessly and you won't need to migrate to 'Open Source Buddhism' for insights. Just because there is a vast banquet of Buddhist teachings available on the internet, jumping from site to site and tradition to tradition won't necessarily lead to deeper understanding of what Buddha taught because, as you say, without a proper grounding you can get lost and not know what to practice.

Dominic Gomez's picture

I agree. Ultimately, it is the individual her- or himself who makes the final decision of how best to live as a human being. Respecting one another based on our inherent dignity as buddhas is the starting point (and end result) of all forms of Buddhism. At least it should be.

timchandler's picture

This analogy is a real stretch for me. Seriously. I guess there are so many forms of Buddhism you could compare it to just about anything... But open source software? Open source is a license. It grants the ability to modify or use freely someone else's or some other groups work. So are you saying that if someone else does the work, I can freely use it, and that somehow is western Buddhism? But I should remain grounded and not change the work? Isn't that why we like open source? We get to create something new using 80% someone else's stuff, shortcutting the heavy lifting code work? That's Buddhism?

I dunno. I see pieces of it, and I get where you're going. But naw... Too much of a stretch for me.

Ps. If you want to stay grounded don't open source Buddhism, buy Microsft Catholic 2011. It comes with clear instructions and full support for the life of the user.

albill's picture

Tim, I think you're missing the meta point. I suggest http://www.openbuddha.com/what-is-open-source-buddhism/ to explain it a little.

timchandler's picture

Thanks for the read and discussion, it's why I hang out here on tricycle. That said, I stand by my comments and don't believe I'm missing the "meta" point, which if we're using technology references actually means "description" more than "larger" or "underlying". There is no point, after all. The analogy only works under certain conditions with accepted assumptions about how open source concepts are applied - which isn't broad enough for me. Understand, by saying that, I have conceded it does work sometimes for some people. If I had seen this on openbuddha.com I would simply have moved on. Here on tricycle... It seemed a worth while discussion. All of this said, the additional meta data is appreciated, I'm sure many will add it to their data models in true open source fashion...

korenganas's picture

I'd like to take the discussion about Open Source one step further, as the analogy seems to fit. As a mental health professional, I have observed a proliferation of "Mindfulness-Based Interventions," (MBI's) derived from Dharma teachings, but presented in a secular context in the mental health and healthcare world (perhaps the ultimate Open Source application). To be sure, many of these MBI's have reduced suffering. I wonder, however, what is the impact of stripping down the dharmic understanding and underpinnings of mindfulness practice and using it as a "tool" in clinical applications? Considering how yoga has been adapted in the west, where could this be headed? I have more thoughts at the link below, but welcome discussion on this topic in any forum.
http://cultivatingeb.blogspot.com/2011/04/psychology-mindfulness-secular...

avalmez's picture

The analogy to open source software makes sense to me as a buddhist experimentalist (someone else came up with the phrase "buddhist experimentalist", and though it carries a somewhat negative connotation that's no doubt enticing, it's to point).

Anyways, the key points (note: the key, not some, points) about open source software (setting aside the licensing for the moment) are that:

(1) it's "free" as in "free beer", as open source people like to make light of this fact (a very self-deprecating bunch these folks can be - they embraced the reference "geek" long before the day it became cool to be a geek)

(2) its code base is also free as beer, meaning the actual program encoding from which the software is created is also freely available to the general public

(3) finally, those so inclined are free to modify the code base to remove any bugs they may encounter in the end product, or, even better, to improve the code to make it their liking.

Many positives and negatives can be made when applying the open source model to something like religion, but it's both easy and appropriate to assert religion is essentially open source and has been almost since humankind first "conceived" that it has "mind".

Witness the many denominations (schools, traditions) that exist of any religion. Further, there is no essential difference between the generative processes that lead to different flavors of a religion, and those that result in new and improved flavors of open source software: users of both religion and software seek to remove bugs and enhance the end user experience of the "products" they utilize.

In fact, the Buddha himself was an open source geek in that he rejected contemporaneous religions for having failed to address suffering, and founded a religion that was not just a new flavor of the day, but based on new doctrine, scripture - i.e., created from an entirely new code base.

As for licensing, the Buddha himself gave his apostles license to remove bugs from and add enhancements to the religion we now call Buddhism, when he, not suggested, but instructed them to always be of an open mind and reject/improve upon the Buddha's teachings according to their personal (end user) experiences.

The saying goes that all politics are local and I guess that used to be very true of religion as well. And while the Buddha's instructions in a sense require that Buddhism remain very local indeed, the globalization of Buddhism will not doubt bring new teachings into the fold and toss out those that have not stood the test of time (e.g., those that are essentially superstition),

What I believe should be most exciting about the future of Buddhism is not just how Buddhism will impact Western culture, but how Western culture will impact Buddhism. that's not something I think adherents should be fearful of, but embrace - just as the Buddha would have wished imho.

So for going on about this...there's more (is there a tele-evangelism equivalent arising in Buddhism?), but enough