Should compassion lead to evangelizing?
 

I wanted share some thoughts that have been troubling me with the hope of getting other viewpoints. I am new to Buddhism and by all account a neophyte. I come from a Christian background that emphasized evangelizing the gospel.

It is my understanding that Buddhists generally don’t evangelize…is that correct? But the Four Noble Truths are grounded in recognizing and understanding suffering. With this comes a development of compassion for all living things. So when I see other people suffering, I have the desire (craving?) to help them by sharing the Middle Way with them in hopes of ending their suffering…which I guess I consider evangelizing. Am I thinking about this the wrong way?

Thanks for your thoughts.

hi No Regrets

imo, yes

But the Four Noble Truths are grounded in recognizing and understanding suffering. certainly...however, imo, it is also essential the 'sufferer' recognise their suffering and personally aspire to be free of it

With this comes a development of compassion for all living things. indeed

So when I see other people suffering, I have the desire (craving?) to help them by sharing the Middle Way with them in hopes of ending there suffering…which I guess I consider evangelizing. Am I thinking about this the wrong way? my understanding of 'evangelizing' is preaching to those who do not want to listen

for example, Buddha taught:

And what, monks, is the power of benevolence? There are four ways of benevolence; by gifts, by friendly speech, by helpful acts and by bestowal of equity. This is the best of gifts: the gift of Dhamma. And this is the best of friendly speech: to teach again and again Dhamma to those who wish for it and who listen attentively. And this is the best of helpful acts: to arouse, instil and strengthen faith in the unbeliever; to arouse, instil and strengthen virtue in the immoral; to arouse, instil and strengthen generosity in the niggard; to arouse, instil and strengthen wisdom in the unwise. And this is the best bestowal of equity: if a stream-winner becomes equal to a stream-winner; a once-returner equal to a once-returner; a non-returner equal to a non-returner; and an arahant equal to an arahant. This, monks, is called the power of benevolence.

AN 9.5 imo, when we engage with a person that is suffering, it is not necessary to plunge straight into the Buddha-Dhamma

Buddhism is natural truth thus we can discuss concepts, such as suffering, love, attachment, skilful means, etc, without ever disclosing we are talking from a "Buddhist" point of view

but, as i originally mentioned, even in professional secular counselling, it is essential that the client engage in an search or inquiry for solutions. so the onus, including in buddhism, is placed on the sufferer to learn to help themself

kind regards

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

The general idea.... This & this
The very exceptional case: Upatissa-pasine
Then this

I have also found this to be true in my experience. When I first discovered Buddhism (after a frustrating 35 years!), I wanted everyone to know how excited I was at finally finding a solution to my problems, it really was a 'revelation'. It took me a while to calm down and realise that I couldn't change peoples minds, they had to discover answers for themselves.

What I have learnt is to try and follow the eightfold path, as advised by the Buddha, and live by example. Maybe someone will notice and think to themselves 'I wonder why that bloke's so chilled out all the time' http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

Thanks for the responses and viewpoint. And thank you plwk for pointing me to "source" material.

Imo it is fine to bring awareness of Buddhism to those who are ill-informed of it, if you think it is appropriate under the given circumstances. For example, you can nudge a freind in the right direction if you seem him/her suffering due to an unhealthy belief or lifestyle. This is not necessarily craving. The Buddha taught dhamma to others out of compassion rather than an interest to spread his techings or to gather up a following.

Imo, the word evangelism does not even apply to Buddhism because the core Buddhist concepts are hardly based on beliefs but verifiable facts. Evangelism is a term commonly used in Christianity where you feed your beliefs to others in subtle ways. It is not necessarily forcing others but long-term, subtle persuasion to take up a belief system. In Buddhism, we do not ask anyone to believe. We just invite them to learn and practice so they can see for themselves if what they took up on faith is true. There is a difference between verifiable faith and a belief.

My understanding is evangelising is about preaching and converting to " something " - this concept seems incompatable with the Buddhist aim. Often I can give my understanding of a situation to others and realise after that I were giving a Buddhist view, so to speak .... my intent was not to preach or convert. Even to my children I have no desire to teach, preach or convert. I am a tutorial leader at uni and don't see that I teach there either, although I seek to promote learning and the aquisition of knowledge for the students who attend the tutes.

How much of ourselves is aligned and attuned to awareness
and the creation of positive karma?

In a sense we have to 'evangelize' or exemplify one higher ideal part of
our self, to our other selves. In doing so we become empowered to
help ourself (as a priority) and more able to understand the next step
in our path . . .

So one might say the need to evangelise is a measure of insecurity
over our own practice . . .

Hopefully that makes some sort of sense :)

I sometimes like to joke that "no Buddhist monk ever came knocking at my door!"

Having said that, I think there is a bit of a difference between the approach taken by those of other major religions who often wish to convert us all or so it seems. They mean well usually, but it is just not very well received.

But on the other hand, I think that the word "Dharma" not only represents the teachings of the Buddha, but in another sense and meaning it is simply the truth of the way things are. Having said that, I think it is possible to help others along teaching dharma in a skillful manner, even to those who are not Buddhists. This can be done from the perspective of simple things, like helping them reduce their anger, or trying to get them to think a little more positively for example.

Especially for Mahayana practitioners, we are trying to not only reduce our own suffering, but the suffering of others too. One of the best ways to do this is to teach dharma to others, but it doesn't have to be in a dogmatic way. It can be done in a way that has an actually has an effect on their day to day experience.

Terma

Evangelizing is something rude.

It is an imposition of a believe -thought to be superior- over other.

Evangelizing is about believes.

IMO, the teachings of Buddha are not into that. They are more like a therapy. To realize the source of suffering; its causes. Takes time, takes effort, and has nothing to do with believes and their imposition.

If we can give our love and compassion unconditionally, we shall be teaching the beneficiary how to love and be compassionate through our example. We don't need to teach him/her how to love, we simply need to show it to him/her. In this way we spread the Dharma because the Dharma is all about love and compassion - how to be happy and how to avoid suffering - this is the essence of the Buddha's teachings.

To No Regrets,
Buddhism is a phylosophy, one that concerns oneself.If I meet a catholic ,I will tell him to live his religion to the fullest.If I meet a Jehova's witness,a protestant i will tell them the same.
..I have never tried to bring anyone to beleive in Buddhism.
Buddhism is not about that.Buddhism is about conquering oneself , not others.
.For others, Buddhism gives me Compassion and Loving kindness.

a simple buddhist named
loong