Really. This post is not about Tiger Woods.
(Did you see what Bill Maher said about Buddhism last night?)
If you saw Real Time With Bill Maher Friday night, or read the written version of his closing “New Rules” segment — which is more what this post is about — you might think this is about Tiger Woods, just like you might have thought it was just Woods (and, “sex addiction”) that Maher was talking about. But this is about Buddhism, and how people perceive and talk about it.
I’ve been getting some guff from people for covering the Tiger Woods/Buddhism affair on Shambhala SunSpace and on our Facebook page. Some people think it’s “tabloidy” to cover it, that it’s all about celebrity. My argument, though, is that if the Buddhist media (that includes bloggers!) isn’t covering it, other media, who don’t necessarily understand Buddhism very well, will be framing the discussion of Buddhism. And that’s what Maher did with his “New Rule.”
And, as with the whole “Tiger Woods and/or Brit Hume” discussion, the reason it’s important to talk about such things is because, if we don’t, then the mistaken ideas that are put forth by media figures (well-meaning or not) are sure to remain out there, and to then be mistaken as not-incorrect by others.
I should say: I have a lot of admiration for Maher. I feel like his politics often represent my own, I think he’s uncommonly inventive and funny, I think he’s generally well-informed, and I admire his bravery; the man comes out and says things that people often just aren’t brave enough to say. (He’s also a truly great stand-up comedian.) But some of the things he’s now said/wrote about Buddhism — much like what Howard Stern said the other day — are just plain off, satire or not, and should be addressed.
Or at least that’s how I see it. My question is, what about you?
Here are some excerpts of what Maher said. (Heads-up: There are some not-nice things said here.) To be fair, you should really read all of what he said, for complete context, but here’s the ending, the part I wanted to address, for reference:
[Buddhism] really is outdated in some ways — the “Life sucks, and then you die” philosophy was useful when Buddha came up with it around 500 B.C., because back then life pretty much sucked, and then you died – but now we have medicine, and plenty of food, and iPhones, and James Cameron movies – our life isn’t all about suffering anymore. And when we do suffer, instead of accepting it we try to alleviate it.
Tiger said, “Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves” makes us unhappy, which confirms something I’ve long suspected about Eastern religions: they’re a crock, too.
Craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life — I don’t want to learn to not want, that’s what people in prison have to do. Buddhism teaches suffering is inevitable. The only thing that’s inevitable is that if you have fake boobs and hair extensions, Tiger Woods will try to f**k you.
And reincarnation? Really? If that were real, wouldn’t there be some proof by now? A raccoon spelling out in acorns, “My name is Herb Zoller and I’m an accountant.” …something?
People are always debating, is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy: it’s a religion. You’re a religion if you do something as weird as when the Buddhist monks scrutinize two-year-olds to find the reincarnation of the dude who just died, and then choose one of the toddlers as the sacred Lama: “His poop is royal!” Sorry, but thinking you can look at a babbling, barely-housebroken, uneducated being and say, “That’s our leader” doesn’t make you enlightened. It makes you a Sarah Palin supporter.
Again, as with what Stern said the other day — beyond also being the work of a professional humorist-slash-curmudgeon — there’s some fair reasoning to what Maher is saying here. On paper, from a non-Buddhist’s point of view, these are valid questions and points. But if you’re a Buddhist — and I’m not talking about being “offended” here — you just know that a lot of what Maher’s talking about is off the mark.
I won’t address it all here, but for example: whatever you do or don’t think about reincarnation, many Buddhists would agree that the more important hallmark of Buddhism is its capacity to help us to discover our capacity for re-birth, to help us wake to the way the world is in this moment, with an enhanced — less conditioned, more connected — clarity. Some Buddhists might place a strong emphasis on literal reincarnation, but all, I’d venture to say, are much more concerned with this very life we have now.
That’s a much more important point. Isn’t it?
And yes, the “medicine, food, iPhones, and James Cameron movies” that Maher holds up as examples of how we suffer less these days are very much part of many of our lives these days. Sounds like progress, for sure. But honestly, aren’t the latter two items in this list (as examples) more emblematic of how we escape from the down and dirty — but incredibly valuable — business of looking reality in the face? Don’t get me wrong; I love my gadgets and I love a good film. But how often do we dive into interfacing with these as ways to distant ourselves from others — and from the unsatisfactoriness we perceive in ourselves?
What Maher is missing, to my mind, is that what the Buddha — and so many who have learned from his example — discovered is that there is much to be gained from appreciating all of the aspects of life: the medicine, the movies, the difficult times, the quiet times. Because when the power goes out and you’re left without your iPhone or a movie-world to escape to, it’s a fine, fine thing to be able to be just as happy as you were before everything went black.
It’s not about “Life sucks and then you die.” It’s about, in the Buddha’s words, “suffering and the end of suffering.” And that’s always worth talking about.
Right?
Or am I losing my sense of humor?
[By the way: you'll also find this post at The Worst Horse, where a bunch of other comments have come in.]
23 Comments
Great article! Thanks for your thoughts on this :)
Some reader comments via Facebook —
Manda Hohmann: "Great post, and excellent points. Thanks for sharing."
Carmen Josephine Hurtado: "He really needs to learn more about Buddhism…I posted my opinion on his FB page. I'm not a Buddhist, but I was offended by what he said. I expect more from him, he should get the facts straight and not just care about making a joke. "
I think this was an excellent treatment of something which is all too prevalent in the media/general consciousness: the misunderstanding of other religions (and I don't think this extends only to Buddhism, for what it's worth). I think it's important that if we're going to make light of religion (and I'm not opposed to that, per se), we need to make sure that we're at least characterizing it correctly. I think it's important to be able to laugh at ourselves, but I also think it's important to make sure that you understand the topic at hand, before making public statements
Peoples' religions are often one of the most important parts of 'who' someone is – I think you did an excellent job here in responding, without making it personal or about 'your' belief system. Great post and great points raised. I agree with every one of them.
Bill Maher can be brilliant and insightful, and he can also be factually deprived. That's OK, as he is at the end of the day, an entertainer. Some of his opinions have been dismissed by eventual facts, and some of his opinions are just that, opinions. Opinions are like "noses," as the saying goes (sort of); we all have them.
Bill is also a habitue of the Playboy Club, so the idea of "craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life," maybe makes sense, for him. Is he a happy, centered, peaceful man? Maybe not.
He would do well to consider Buddha's true teachings. In the meantime, we have this opportunity foir a nice discussion in the media about What the Buddha Taught, and what he didn't. Metta.
this is not the first time Bill has shown his great ignorance about the human spirit. it's completely unsurprising.
I too really like Bill Maher and appreciate his insights and humor. However, I agree that his take on Buddhism was uninformed as well as unfortunate because many people who watch him will believe what he says and not try to "see" for themselves. :-)
I also agree with your point that we may "suffer" less in the material sense (we have access to food, shelter, medicine, entertainment, news, etc.), but so many people suffer within themselves (and are very unhappy despite their material comforts). This is what Buddhism has shown me – that we must find happiness and contentment within ourselves. As you said, what happens when the electricity goes out and we don't have all these distractions? We are only left with ourselves and the relationships we have with others.
More reader comments via Facebook —
Megan M: "Howard Stern? oh boy… it's been real, SS. Namaste."
Todd Mantell: I've long been a fan of Bill and I've long been a fan of Buddhism. My problem with what Bill said was that it was kind of the cynic's game, dismiss something out of hand without making real salient points. For example: "Craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life" does nothing to dispel the truth of the four noble truths. In fact all he did was kind of say it another way. Yes Bill, it IS life; it is endemic to life. The thing I love about Buddhism is that it's never the point that it's "bad", just simply that it will lead to you being less happy than you otherwise could be. Tiger actually IS the perfect example. Because he followed pleasure and desire and eventually you do have to pay the piper. One would guess Tiger is not the happiest chap these days.
I agree with him: suffering is so outdated, death is so outdated. At least it feels like that when it comes to my miserable life. Oh, no, not that again! Buddhism doesn't teach that suffering is inevitable. Buddhism recognizes that suffering is inevitable, which is what Maher recognizes too, whenever a joke doesn't go over. I can avail myself of Buddhism's redemptive power. All I have to do is leave this page and my Maher-induced suffering disappears completely.
oh my, you guys are so serious! this is hilarious! Yep, he's wrong (which is even funnier) on a lot: take note next time you find yourself agreeing with him…he's probably got some stuff wrong again!
And do keep posting these kinds of things, it's not "tabloidy", it can raise interesting questions and ideas.
More reader comments via Facebook — Paul J: "…the man comes out and says things that people often just aren’t brave enough to say." Actually, he spouts predictably politically correct platitudes, the typical "blame-it-all-on-Bush, Sarah-Palin-is-a-stupid-bitch" rubbish. That's the opposite of bravery, dude. Time to drop this fan page. You're obviously never going to get off this Tiger Woods bullshit. "
Branden Brazil: "An excellent response to Maher's comments."
Jennifer Garbutt Winahradsky: "Indeed."
More discussion of religion from Maher and his panel last night here on the post-show videocast, "Overtime." http://www.hbo.com/#/real-time-with-bill-maher/ep...
Can you really equate, say, Pat Robertson with Thomas Merton? The Maher mentality, which throws all religions in one big pot of irrelevance, does just that. Hitchens and Rumi and Merton all share shelf space in my room. What does that mean?
Suffering is part of god realm experience too – it is not a question of having everything you want like food iphones TV etc. Siddhartha left his palace because of seeing old age sickness and death. These affect everyone and we cant buy ourselves out of it. Check in with Mr. Maher as to whether he still thinks happiness is found in chasing appearances in 20 years or so.
Ah, yes, because movies, food and drugs provide a life time of fulfillment.
This is what happens when you smoke too much marijuana – wonderful insight, but a degradation of common sense. You tend to clump things together and believe whatever it is that you want to believe. Unfortunately bill is a semi-intelligent person, so he can create elaborate ways to generalize.
Most notably though – not surprisingly – he wants to co-opt many of the benefits of buddhism for his illustrious desire to confront dogma. Predictable, really.
Good thoughts. Thank you for this thoughtful post. ____Maher's misconceptions may come in part from the common mistranslation of "dukha" as "suffering" or "pain." This leads to the incorrect conclusion that the Buddha meant life consists of nothing but outright pain. But that isn't what the Buddha taught. It also consists of initially pleasurable experiences that result in boredom or even suffering over time, such as food, iPhones, and James Cameron movies.
As far as why there's no scientific "proof of reincarnation" (the Buddhist concept is properly called "rebirth"), there is. Maher may want to take a look at the peer-reviewed scientific work that's been done on the subject by respected physicians, which has been ignored by the scientific community. Most notable is the work of Ian Stephenson, MD and most recently Jim Tucker MD, both from the University of Virgnia. I'm not sure how significant the concept of rebirth really is for a lot of western Buddhists anyway
I'm both a Buddha fan and a Maher fan. I thought what he said was pretty funny, and in part true. For many in the world, there is less suffering because of human advancement in science, technology, medicine and I would even say because of political science, psychology, and law.
I've never found Bill Maher to be insightful. I think he's a tool of the mainstream left (which is only slightly less asinine than the right wing), and a bigot. Once again, he's exposed his ignorance so obviously to anyone who has read even a one page description of Buddhism that his drooling fans deserve to suffer through his commentary. If he is just an entertainer, as one commenter stated, I wish he would stick to entertainment instead of posing as some political pundit. As a progressive myself I'd like to say "Bill, dont do us any more favors, OK?"
PS: I'm sure the millions of people in the world dealing with sex addiction are ready to lynch this guy over his comments. Bigotry #2 all in the same article. Maybe next week he'll bash gays, jewish people, and the elderly?
IMHO – Bill Maher misses a vital point when he speaks of religions. He fails to see that spirituality is not just about belief. For me, I sought the Buddhist path as a means of expanding consciousness. I experienced a glimpse of awakening when I was younger and sought that experience through means that were somewhat in my control. Critics like Bill Maher do not see any level of consciousness beyond this one – Buddhism may be a religion for some – but for me it was a means of discovering meditation and the peace that it brings.
Karma, neh? Each has a path and our conditioning goes far toward determining whether we are able to even consider the possibilities of anything beyond material form. For those wanting nothing more than this (not that, not that), may you be happy. For those seeking release from suffering, may you be happy. "Through even the small virtue I have accumulated may all the positive aspirations of beings be fulfilled in an instant." Seems as if all of us, including the entertainers, are meditating on where we are unable to let go of our attachments to the skandas (form, thoughts, feelings, impulses, consciousness).
Sorry, I am totally disgustetd by Maher's satire or whatever you want to call it. We Buddhists are always easy to pick on because everyone knows that we rarely ever get really "mad" (its against our religion!) I thought his insensitivity and his purposefully ignorant comments were crass, pointless, tasteless and worthy of substantive rebuke. No uproar from us, though #we'reallmeditating
C'mon, this is pretty funny, especially the raccoon spelling out his identity with acorns.
I also like Maher's "new rules" attacking people with too many bumper stickers on their cars, and people who tattoo kanji on their body as if it were some special hierogylph.
I'm a tattooless Buddhist with too many bumper stickers, but I'm not going to get bent outta shape about Maher's comments. Much of great comedy relies on a kind of misperception, a persona the comedian embodies. Maher happens to play himself, and walks the line between pundit and comedian. (See George Carlin's diatribe on why he doesn't vote. I bet it's not going to convince you not to vote, but you'll still get a chuckle.)
That said, I think we Buddhists might be ultrasensitive to any comments about our religion/lifestyle/metaphysics because we get so little attention in the mainstream, even within the discussions of religion. I DO think that Buddhism, along with agnosticism and athiesm and the nonreligious, deserve more coverage in general in the media, since those demographic segments are growing. But that's a media issue in general.
Anyway, Carlin:
"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote — who did not even leave the house on Election Day — am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."
–Tim, http://speakyourdreams.wordpress.com/
C'mon, this is pretty funny, especially the raccoon spelling out his identity with acorns.
I also like Maher's "new rules" attacking people with too many bumper stickers on their cars, and people who tattoo kanji on their body as if it were some special hierogylph.
I'm a tattooless Buddhist with too many bumper stickers, but I'm not going to get bent outta shape about Maher's comments. Much of great comedy relies on a kind of misperception, a persona the comedian embodies. Maher happens to play himself, and walks the line between pundit and comedian. (See George Carlin's diatribe on why he doesn't vote. I bet it's not going to convince you not to vote, but you'll still get a chuckle.)
That said, I think we Buddhists might be ultrasensitive to any comments about our religion/lifestyle/metaphysics because we get so little attention in the mainstream, even within the discussions of religion. I DO think that Buddhism, along with agnosticism and athiesm and the nonreligious, deserve more coverage in general in the media, since those demographic segments are growing. But that's a media issue in general.
Anyway, Carlin:
"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote — who did not even leave the house on Election Day — am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."
–Tim, http://speakyourdreams.wordpress.com/
Nice article,
To me, It's irony that Bill Maher mentioned 'IPhone/Avartar' as counter argument against 'pessimistic' Buddhists view to the world for if we look deeper into these two it wont belong that they'll find Buddhists elements in those 'enjoyable' things. For example, I believed it myself that IPhone has Zen Buddhists ideology in its design, and Interconnectedness or 'Dependent Arising', again Buddhists world view, is also a prevalent theme in the Avatar movie; Maher should look into that before he make fun of Buddhism.
I used to like his shows and his movie, I used to believe that he is intelligent, post-modernist, and brave, but now I believed that he also has a lot of flaws like many that he had make fun of, including us. What really sad to me is that he couldn't be this shallow.
Okay, It's a just a joke but at least it should be based on reality, and it's not okay to make a fun of something that's lack of such.