[OlgaBorovikovva]

A Christian pastor once said to me, "Eastern spiritual practitioners focus on their own practice and become complacent." He made me think of Buddhists. It seems that faithful Christians are very attentive to other people's sufferings and take swift actions to help them in any way they can, even when these suffering are arising from disasters, conflicts, starvation, and diseases, which can be threatening to their own lives.



We, Buddhists, are interested in cultivating our inner qualities. We may not want to engage in worldly affairs. Before helping others, we need to develop capacity to cope with our own sufferings skillfully, but when will we be ready to help others? Should we wait until we are enlightened? People are suffering at the present moment.

We cultivate compassion toward all living beings. For this purpose, should we be more socially engaged?

[Optipitle]

wow. this video certainly demonstrates many of the aspects of Christian charity that are often criticized, namely, mixing evangelism & materialism with helping others. in the last century, in Asian countries, Christian missionaries were often criticized for buying converts, given them token material gifts & novelties

naturally, i would disagree with your Christian pastor friend. Christians are generally seen to be more socially engaged because:

1. they may have a goal of evangelism, which can be intrinsically self serving

2. they have the institutional networks & institutional funding to be able to perform large scale high profile charity work

for example, if we compare the number of Westerners that go churches (& give money to the churches) with the number of Western Christians that actually perform the charity work, we will probably find the ratio of the later to be quite small

or we compare the number of large corporations & businesses that fund Christian charities to that of Buddhist charities, we will probably find the ratio of the later to be quite small

Buddhism in the West is small; those attracted to Buddhism in the West often do not have great financial means, given they are not materialistic, unlike many Christians; therefore Buddhism generally does not have the institutional & financial clout to perform large scale high profile charity work

however, most (small) Buddhist groups i know try to do as much charity work as they can. at least in Australia, they often must participate with Christian organisations, because only the Christian organisation can provide the infrastructure needed. the Buddhists i know that offered a soup kitchen did so at a Christian charity centre. if you are a Buddhist and wish to do suicide telephone counselling, you have no choice but to do it with a Christian charity

***

also, i think it is important to keep in mind how the need for Christian charity work often arises. i apologize to sound very critical but, historically, Christian charity work works hand & hand with Western political imperialism. 1st the Western/Christian soldiers enter a foreign nation (eg. Somalia, as shown in the video); then 2nd, the missionary workers follow, to heal the mess

historically, such as when the Pope of Rome divided the new world into two, giving one half to Portugal and the other half to Spain, the Christian soldiers create the problems and then the Christian missionaries offer Christ as the solution

the US war in Iraq was often rationalized on religious grounds. how many times did GWB mention 'Christ'? then these Christian charity groups follow up and boast about their good deeds

***

the USA is a society of gross economic inequity yet also more Christian than probably most other Western nations. the gross wealth of the many Christian members of the US government, including Presidential nominees (eg. Paul, Romney, Santorum, the two Evangelical women, Palin & Bachmann), is clear to witness. yet the gross economic inequity must obviously, somehow, be related to the US version of Christianity. thus again, one hand of Christianity somehow takes and then another hand of Christianity gives. it is like later hand of Christianity is covering up the sins of the former hand

***

anyway. Buddhism historically does not have such a schizophrenic relationship with the world. it has not required charity arms to clean up its sins

Australian history is replete with the sins of Christianity, which are still debated today, such as Christian missionaries removing indigenous children from their families

personally, i sponsor three African children (in reality, communities) thru a Christian charity. i do find it funny when a five year children supposedly writes to me, in a manner far more mature for their age, saying things such as: "God bless you for your good idea to sponsor me; God this, God that, on & on". obviously, it is the charity worker & not the child writing these St Paul style letters to me, which read like an Epistle, rather than the words of a five year old children. anyway. i am happy with the community photos i receive & i trust my money is being put to good use. the crops & people look healthy, which is all that matters

just some reflections

[P9CCd35R]

A Christian pastor once said to me, "Eastern spiritual practitioners focus on their own practice and become complacent." He made me think of Buddhists. It seems that faithful Christians are very attentive to others' sufferings and take swift actions to help them in any way they can, even when these suffering are arising from disasters, conflicts, starvation, and diseases, which can be threatening to their own lives.

We, Buddhists, are interested in cultivating our inner qualities. We may not want to engage in worldly affairs. Before helping others, we need to develop capacity to cope with our own sufferings skillfully, but when will we be ready to help others? Should we wait until we are enlightened? People are suffering at the present moment.

We cultivate compassion toward all living beings. For this purpose, should we be more socially engaged?

I think that it is a mistaken attitude to make sweeping assumptions about Buddhists being less caring and compassionate than Christians and that they should be more socially engaged.

The Buddhists I have had/have contact with are often already working in socially engaged jobs, give what they can to charity and are frequently involved in voluntary work of one kind or another.

They also tend to just get on with it quietly, without trumpeting about their qualities to others.


.

[feseEscaple]

Having been a Christian for over 30 years who was involved in many different denominations that range from Presbyterian to Pentecostal and almost everything in between, I can say without reservation that the ultimate goal of most Christian social programs are to convert people to the Faith. I'm not saying this is a bad thing because a lot of good is done in the process, but there is almost always a hook either hidden or open. Many if not all Christian shelters, orphanages, etc. require Church service attendance.

The Fundamental type churches are aggressive about converting people to their particular brand of Christianity and all forms of charity are for the sole purpose of conversion of the "lost". The more liberal churches tend not to be so aggressive and have more of a live and let live attitude. When these "liberal" Churches do charity it is more for the sake of those who need help than for the growth of the Church, although if you would like to become a part of the church you more than welcome.

From a Buddhist perspective this type of giving has very little merit associated with it. Giving without any attachment is the way to gain merit. Even the desire for merit is to be avoided. IMO, because of this, Buddhist charity tends to be more personal and individual.

I have included a link below to the Buddhist Peace Fellowship web site. It is worth checking out. There are Buddhists that are committed to being socially engaged. The thing to remember is that The Buddha's purpose in teaching is the liberation of all beings. Buddhist organizations are not that different from Christian in that their goal is the liberation of all beings where Christian organizations goal is the conversion of all people. These two points of view are totally different in intent and outcome, but it could be argued that both are working with an agenda.

This is their Mission Statement.

Mission Statement

The mission of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship (BPF), founded in 1978, is to serve as a catalyst for socially engaged Buddhism. Our purpose is to help beings liberate themselves from the suffering that manifests in individuals, relationships, institutions, and social systems. BPF's programs, publications, and practice groups link Buddhist teachings of wisdom and compassion with progressive social change.

We strive to:

Offer a public witness, through our practice, for peace and protection of all beings
Raise humanitarian, environmental, and social justice concerns among Buddhist communities
Bring a Buddhist perspective to contemporary peace, environmental, and social justice movements
Our practice of contemplation and social action is guided by our intentions to:

• Recognize the interdependence of all beings
• Meet suffering directly and with compassion
• Appreciate the importance of not clinging to views and outcomes
• Work with Buddhists from all traditions
• Connect individual and social transformation
• Practice nonviolence
• Use participatory decision-making techniques
• Protect and extend human rights
• Support gender and racial equality, and challenge all forms of unjust discrimination
• Work for economic justice and the end of poverty
• Work for a sustainable environment


http://www.bpf.org/

[SteantyjetMaw]

One more thing, I am very familiar with Samaritans Purse. I was a donor at one time. They are excellent at what they do and are usually one of the first organizations at disaster site. The head of this organization is Billy Graham's son Franklin. I can tell you this, they share the gospel everywhere they go but they never require anything from those they help.

[rasiasertew]

Sorry, one more link.

Prison Mindfulness Institute

http://www.prisondharmanetwork.org/index.html

[Rasklad]

We, Buddhists, are interested in cultivating our inner qualities. We may not want to engage in worldly affairs. Before helping others, we need to develop capacity to cope with our own sufferings skillfully, but when will we be ready to help others? Should we wait until we are enlightened? People are suffering at the present moment. I guess the we here refers to western Buddhists, in which case I think Bhikku Bodhi's essay is right (including the part about the mainstream Left, something which I'm sure applies to me):

Seeing the immensity of the world’s anguish has raised in my mind questions about the future prospects for Buddhism in the West. I’ve been struck by how seldom the theme of global suffering—the palpable suffering of real human beings—is thematically explored in the Buddhist journals and teachings with which I am acquainted. It seems to me that we Western Buddhists tend to dwell in a cognitive space that defines the first noble truth largely against the background of our middle-class lifestyles: as the gnawing of discontent; the ennui of over-satiation; the pain of unfulfilling relationships; or, with a bow to Buddhist theory, as bondage to the round of rebirths. Too often, I feel, our focus on these aspects of dukkha has made us oblivious to the vast, catastrophic suffering that daily overwhelms three-fourths of the world’s population.

An exception to this tendency may be found with the Engaged Buddhist movement. I believe this is a face of Buddhism that has great promise, but from my superficial readings in this area I am struck by two things. First, while some Engaged Buddhists seek fresh perspectives from the dharma, for many Buddhism simply provides spiritual practices to use while simultaneously espousing socio-political causes not much different from those of the mainstream Left. Second, Engaged Buddhism still remains tangential to the hard core of Western interest in Buddhism, which is the dharma as a path to inner peace and self-realization.

If Buddhism in the West becomes solely a means to pursue personal spiritual growth, I am apprehensive that it may evolve in a one-sided way and thus fulfill only half its potential. Attracting the affluent and the educated, it will provide a congenial home for the intellectual and cultural elite, but it will risk turning the quest for enlightenment into an private journey that, in the face of the immense suffering which daily hounds countless human lives, can present only a resigned quietism.

By way of contrast, take Christian Aid and World Vision. These are not missionary movements aimed at proselytizing but relief organizations that provide relief and development aid while also tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. Similarly, the American Jewish World Service doesn’t aspire to convert people to Judaism but to express Judaism’s commitment to social justice by alleviating “poverty, hunger, and disease among the people of the developing world regardless of race, religion, or nationality.” Why doesn’t Buddhism have anything like that? Surely we can find a supporting framework for this in Buddhist doctrine, ethical ideals,archetypes, legends, and historical precedents. You can read the whole thing at http://www.bodhimonastery.net/bm/ima..._Buddhists.pdf

If you look at forums like this, you find an almost total absence of critical engagement with social structures and the reality of daily life for the people of the world. We live in a world where (roughly) the richest 500 people are as wealthy as the poorest 500 million; 30,000 children a die because they're too poor to buy the necessities of life (and, I believe, they're too poor because we're too rich); the horrors which climate change is going to unleash on the world are at the edge of human imagination, they are so awful. So why, or how, can this, and the 10-mile-long list of similar or worse facts, pass by without comment?

On the subject of Christian aid (as opposed to Christian Aid!), I'm not and have never been a Christian but I went to a (very expensive) school run by Benedictine monks, who, in addition to training the sons of the rich to take their place at the head of the social pyramid, also worked in the slums of Peru and in a particularly grim part of London in a remarkably selfless way. They did what was right (education and medical assistance) and whist I've never been able to understand how they could support, through their school, such an unjust social system, they did work hard to ameliorate some of the worst consequences of that support without making any attempts to proselytize.

[Natashasuw]

If you look at forums like this, you find an almost total absence of critical engagement with social structures and the reality of daily life for the people of the world. We live in a world where (roughly) the richest 500 people are as wealthy as the poorest 500 million; 30,000 children a die because they're too poor to buy the necessities of life (and, I believe, they're too poor because we're too rich); the horrors which climate change is going to unleash on the world are at the edge of human imagination, they are so awful. So why, or how, can this, and the 10-mile-long list of similar or worse facts, pass by without comment

Hi Lampang,

Thank you for your comments and for posting Bhikkhu Bodhi's article.

I don't think anyone in this forum is unaware of the suffering and problems in the world and I'm sure many of us are already doing whatever we can for others. Personally I've worked for years with disadvantaged inner city teenagers and their families and have been involved in a range of voluntary unpaid charity activities.

However at BWB we're primarily a Buddhist learning community for the discussion of the teachings of the Buddha and not a political or social action site aiming to try to change the world.

There are "engaged Buddhism" sites on the internet which people can join for that purpose if that's their main requirement.

[CHEAPPoem]

I don't think that we have to 'be something' in order to help or improve our environment. It is not about being Christian, Catholic, Buddhist. It is about the personal conviction that we all can do something so to improve our and others life for the better of everybody.

[Frannypaync]

at BWB we're primarily a Buddhist learning community for the discussion of the teachings of the Buddha That's no doubt true (though a quick look at the list of recent topics shows an awful lot which are no less tangential to core teachings than anything which might fall under the rubric of Engaged Buddhism) but it doesn't really explain why the individual is privileged over the social. In my understanding, morality, concentration and wisdom are all placed on a equal footing (am I wrong? I could well be!) But whilst you get a lot on meditation and a little bit on study, on most forums (and most discussions generally), there is virtually no mention of morality (and, for me, political engagement is morality in different clothes). Why is that? Is it because of our cultural hangups about not wanting to judge? Is it that we don't want to be judged? Is it that we don't want to run the risk of upsetting others? I honestly don't know but it seems to provide evidence that Bhikku Bodhi is on the right track.

[8Uxtkz7F]

why the individual is privileged over the social.

Depends on the cultural background. After many years doing research in Mayan villages we have systematized the way this villagers have developed cultural artifacts that are focused at both sides of the equation. Social and individual. And they are not nothing at all.

[stutnerman]

^ Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant in discussions among western Buddhists.

[derty]

Seeing the immensity of the world’s anguish has raised in my mind questions about the future prospects for Buddhism in the West. I’ve been struck by how seldom the theme of global suffering—the palpable suffering of real human beings—is thematically explored in the Buddhist journals and teachings with which I am acquainted. BB seems to be living in his own world. Buddhists in general are very well aware of global suffering & examining the real causes.

It seems to me that we Western Buddhists tend to dwell in a cognitive space that defines the first noble truth largely against the background of our middle-class lifestyles: as the gnawing of discontent; the ennui of over-satiation; the pain of unfulfilling relationships; or, with a bow to Buddhist theory, as bondage to the round of rebirths. Very ironical statement from a monk, who is basically a "beggar", supported by the middle-class, i.e., by those who work, and who is a chief dogmatist of the superstition of the bondage of round of rebirths. BB has spent much of his life translating Buddha's words then, composing his own idiosyncratic footnotes which try to explain most teachings as pertaining to his cherished & loved superstition about the round of rebirths.

Too often, I feel, our focus on these aspects of dukkha has made us oblivious to the vast, catastrophic suffering that daily overwhelms three-fourths of the world’s population. Non-sense.

An exception to this tendency may be found with the Engaged Buddhist movement. I believe this is a face of Buddhism that has great promise, but from my superficial readings in this area I am struck by two things. First, while some Engaged Buddhists seek fresh perspectives from the dharma, for many Buddhism simply provides spiritual practices to use while simultaneously espousing socio-political causes not much different from those of the mainstream Left. what is exactly wrong with socio-political causes not much different from those of the mainstream Left? did not Buddha teach social & government responsibility in a similar manner to the principles of the Left?

Second, Engaged Buddhism still remains tangential to the hard core of Western interest in Buddhism, which is the dharma as a path to inner peace and self-realization. Yes. Buddha taught inner peace & realisation were the priority. Inner peace prevents many of the actual causes of the disadvantaged peoples, i.e., support of materialism & the corporate & political structures that main the world's status quo.

If Buddhism in the West becomes solely a means to pursue personal spiritual growth, I am apprehensive that it may evolve in a one-sided way and thus fulfill only half its potential. Attracting the affluent and the educated, it will provide a congenial home for the intellectual and cultural elite, but it will risk turning the quest for enlightenment into an private journey that, in the face of the immense suffering which daily hounds countless human lives, can present only a resigned quietism. Sounds very similar to BB's own life, that of a university educated scholar who became immersed in superstition & translated scriptures to make merit for his own salvation.

By way of contrast, take Christian Aid and World Vision. Yes. I personally sponsor three children thru World Vision. I actually work for a living, in a middle-class way, so I can actually provide financial support to World Vision. And what is BB doing, apart from talking about it?

These are not missionary movements aimed at proselytizing but relief organizations that provide relief and development aid while also tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. I doubt they are tackling the causes of poverty & injustice, which are political, which often have their roots in the divisions & power vacuums left behind by Western colonialism, which a perpetuated by the Western political & industrial military elites, which support political division in many nations, support puppet governments in many nation and which sell weapons to keep these nations in perpetual civil war & poverty. BB assertion here is close to absurd.

Similarly, the American Jewish World Service doesn’t aspire to convert people to Judaism but to express Judaism’s commitment to social justice by alleviating “poverty, hunger, and disease among the people of the developing world regardless of race, religion, or nationality.” Why doesn’t Buddhism have anything like that? Charity is a cure rather than prevention. A ounce of prevention is worth an pound of cure. Historically, Buddhist societies have not had the sociopolitical issues of the Christian world, as mentioned in my first post on this thread. Worse, to fall back on the American Jewish example, of a sub-culture that are probably the world's most economically elite, is rather non-sequitur.

I have criticized BB often on this forum and must continue to do so. When is he ever going to comprehend the message of the Buddhas, which empowers the individual to find inner peace, inner contentment & right action, so the causes of social injustice are not perpetuated.

[Gilowero]

Well, that's one way to end a discussion.

[Noxassope]

If you look at forums like this, you find an almost total absence of critical engagement with social structures and the reality of daily life for the people of the world. We live in a world where (roughly) the richest 500 people are as wealthy as the poorest 500 million; 30,000 children a die because they're too poor to buy the necessities of life (and, I believe, they're too poor because we're too rich);

so? how do you propose to change this situation?

the horrors which climate change is going to unleash on the world are at the edge of human imagination, they are so awful

sounds very superstitious to me. although common sense tells me cutting down trees makes the local environment hotter, there is not evidence to date for man made climate change that is larger than the variations in sunspot activity that influence the temperature of the earth. in its history, the world has had hotter periods than now

So why, or how, can this, and the 10-mile-long list of similar or worse facts, pass by without comment?

Buddha taught the world follows the stream of ignorance & craving resulting in Dependent Origination. the most well intentioned advances in medical technology have resulted in increased population. the world follows in natural course to where ever it is heading. the Buddha taught to be liberated from this world rather than be emotionally attached to it

On the subject of Christian aid (as opposed to Christian Aid!), I'm not and have never been a Christian but I went to a (very expensive) school run by Benedictine monks, who, in addition to training the sons of the rich to take their place at the head of the social pyramid, also worked in the slums of Peru and in a particularly grim part of London in a remarkably selfless way. They did what was right (education and medical assistance) and whist I've never been able to understand how they could support, through their school, such an unjust social system, they did work hard to ameliorate some of the worst consequences of that support without making any attempts to proselytize.

As I mentioned in my original post, elitism & charity go hand in hand; just like Christianity, colonial exploitation & slums in Peru go hand in hand.

I honestly don't know but it seems to provide evidence that Bhikku Bodhi is on the right track.

if it is believed Bhikku Bodhi is on the right track then generally that is the wrong track. Bhikku Bodhi's pow is non-sequitur

as Buddhists, we examine causes & conditions. the causes & conditions for the Western charity movements are well documented, namely: human atrocities, poverty, slavery, child labour, etc, of the Industrial Revolution, colonialism, Great Depression, war, etc. when Western Buddhists wish to do charity work, for the purpose of doing human good rather than promoting Buddhism, they often do it with a Christian charity. this is not a competition between religions. there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

for example, in Sydney Australia, if you wish to be a telephone crisis counselor, you do it with 'LifeLine', a Christian charity group. now, the head of this charity group, called 'The Wesley Mission', is one of the largest owners of commercial office real estate in the Sydney CBD. i have heard the Church of England is another major property owner in the CBD. so once upon a time, 200 years ago, these English church groups invaded Australia, took the land from the indigenous people (who mostly died of introduced diseases anyway), built office buildings and then used some of the rental income to finance their charity wings

so Bhikkhu Bodhi expect Buddhists to complete or act on this scale?

which events caused the problems in Japan, Korea & China? Japanese imperialism? or the prior Western imperialism, with British atrocities in China & American threats to colonize Japan? which events caused refugees in Indochina and societies unable to recover from disasters in Bangladesh and in several African countries? colonialism? Cold War?

From the beginning, World Vision's activities have been focused on giving people – especially children – opportunities to alleviate their suffering and to improve their lives. In 1947, American missionary Dr Robert Pierce travelled to China and Korea and encountered people who regularly had to go without food, clothing, shelter or medicine. During the Korean War in the early fifties, he helped set up orphanages to care for children who’d been abandoned or orphaned.

Upon his return to the US, Pierce began raising funds to continue and expand his work in Asia. The strength of the public response was such that, in September 1950, World Vision was founded, with Pierce as its president.

World Vision was established in Australia in 1966. During that decade, World Vision expanded its operations to meet the needs of refugees in Indochina and of people recovering from disasters in Bangladesh and in several African countries. Where long-term assistance was needed, children began to be sponsored by Americans, Australians and others.

In the 1970s, World Vision's focus broadened from assisting the individual child to include community development. Since the 1980s, the “welfare” approach has gradually changed to a more collaborative relationship. Poor, marginalised people and communities work with World Vision to improve their lives and take control of their futures. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution founded in 1863 in Geneva, Switzerland, by Henry Dunant. Its 25-member committee has a unique authority under international humanitarian law to protect the life and dignity of the victims of international and internal armed conflicts.

Until the middle of the 19th century, there were no organized and/or well-established army nursing systems for casualties and no safe and protected institutions to accommodate and treat those who were wounded on the battlefield. In June 1859, the Swiss businessman Jean-Henri Dunant traveled to Italy to meet French emperor Napoléon III with the intention of discussing difficulties in conducting business in Algeria, at that time occupied by France. When he arrived in the small town of Solferino on the evening of June 24, he witnessed the Battle of Solferino, an engagement in the Austro-Sardinian War. In a single day, about 40,000 soldiers on both sides died or were left wounded on the field. Jean-Henri Dunant was a shocked by the terrible aftermath of the battle, the suffering of the wounded soldiers, and the near-total lack of medical attendance and basic care. He completely abandoned the original intent of his trip and for several days he devoted himself to helping with the treatment and care for the wounded. He succeeded in organizing an overwhelming level of relief assistance by motivating the local villagers to aid without discrimination. kind regards

[Zdfjpbth]

In my understanding, morality, concentration and wisdom are all placed on a equal footing (am I wrong? I could well be!) But whilst you get a lot on meditation and a little bit on study, on most forums (and most discussions generally), there is virtually no mention of morality (and, for me, political engagement is morality in different clothes). Why is that? Is it because of our cultural hangups about not wanting to judge? Is it that we don't want to be judged? Is it that we don't want to run the risk of upsetting others? I honestly don't know but it seems to provide evidence that Bhikku Bodhi is on the right track

I'm not really understanding why this appears to be getting rather heated, Lampang.

The 5 lay precepts are concerned with morality and we have had plenty of discussions here on different aspects of them .

As far as Bhikkhu Bodhi is concerned, he is not the spokesman for Buddhism nor for this website.

[Justlovemy]

I'm not getting heated and I'm a bit perplexed why you think I, or my posts, are. In the post you quote, I made some - in my view - extremely mild, inoffensive observations and was hoping to have a discussion about these (and the post is clearly related to the OP). If you disagree, that's fine and if you think it's out of place, I apologise. And given the responses, I guess I must have unwittingly caused offence so I won't pursue this any further.

[Seeseeskeva]

However at BWB we're primarily a Buddhist learning community for the discussion of the teachings of the Buddha and not a political or social action site aiming to try to change the world.

There are "engaged Buddhism" sites on the internet which people can join for that purpose if that's their main requirement.

Aloka-D,

Please accept my apology. I am very sorry if I have broken the code of this forum. I am still new to this forum. Probably I should not have started this thread (and the previous one). I did not intend to initiate arguments on political or social actions.

I just have a question on Buddhist compassion. It comes from my heart.

I am from Japan, so I am culturally much closer to Buddhism than to Christianity. Here in the U.S., I meet with American Buddhists and read Buddhist literatures in English. I am very impressed how earnestly Americans practice Buddhism.

I also have made friends with Christians in the U.S. They are very good friends. They supported my family when my son was dying and through all the painful events that followed. Now I hear about their Christian teachings and activities. Naturally I start to compare the two religions.

Because of my recent experience, compassion has become an important subject of my contemplation. I am very serious about it. My understanding about compassion will determine how I will live from now on. It will impact me, my wife, child, and parents. I am trying to find a reason for living the rest of my life.

From my point of view, I see lack of discussion from Buddhists about actively exercising compassion for people suffering in other regions of the world. However, my perception might be totally wrong. I might be ignorant of Buddhist efforts. That is why I would like to learn from other people in this forum.

This is my personal inquiry. Nothing more. I was hoping that some discussion in this forum could help me shape my understanding of Buddhist compassion (it actually did help, thanks to the participating members).

If I feel that Buddhism is inadequate, lacking social dimension of compassion, I will work with Christians and may become a Christian myself.

Would you please advise if this forum could foster such a discussion? Should I try other sites?

I am leaning toward the latter. I understand that we want to avoid emotional arguments. Discussion has to be healthy, promoting inner peace, and I know it may be difficult with this subject.

Thank you, and again I'm sorry.

[gDGwm8BC]

And given the responses, I guess I must have unwittingly caused offence so I won't pursue this any further.

Lampang,

Thank you for your posts. They gave me some insights. I really appreciate it.

Everyone else,

Please accept my gratitude for taking your time to answer my question. I am sorry if my question made you feel uncomfortable. Next time, I will try to post something more pleasing or neutral.

[Illirmpipse]

I'm not getting heated and I'm a bit perplexed why you think I, or my posts, are. In the post you quote, I made some - in my view - extremely mild, inoffensive observations and was hoping to have a discussion about these (and the post is clearly related to the OP). If you disagree, that's fine.

I agree. I see nothing getting heated (despite Element's critical posts).