[abouthotels]

I think many Western practitioners have a discomfort/aversion with what they regard as the superstitious elements in traditional/Asian Buddhism. The point isn't to stand inside a Western/modernist/rationalist box and point fingers at the silly traditional Buddhists in their silly superstitious box. That's cheap and easy, and where does it get us as far as our own liberation is concerned?

Lazy

Most Westerners who have adopted "traditional" Asian religion (such as Tiltdrol and Nambillings) rarely hesitate to heap contempt onto "traditional" Western religion. Why? Because they have adopted the Asian traditional/ordinary man's religion as true but rejected the Western traditional/ordinary man's religion as superstition.

Buddhadasa was coming from a particular context. He was a Thai Buddhist who understood the morass his own cultural/religious tradition had fallen into and provided an appropriate antidote. From the point of view of Theravada in Thailand, he was going against the grain. But when Westerners with modernist inclinations invoke Buddhadasa, are we going against the grain or simply reinforcing our predispositions?

Lazy. You have misrepresented Buddhadasa again and are sounding like a DWRobot. Buddhadasa does not justify your viewpoint because the Dhamma talk that serves the basis of this thread was spoken specifically for/to a Western audience. Your stereotyping of the "Western" mentality simply has no basis in reality. Christianity is extremely popular in the West, as is Tibetan and Mahavihara Buddhism. Your DWRobot repetition is illogical. What exactly was Buddhadasa providing an 'antidote' to? Did Buddhadasa change the Thai religion? Did Buddhadasa have Thais turning up in droves to listen to his talks?

Thai Buddhism, just like Burmese & Singalese Buddhism, was/is Mahavihara Buddhism. Buddhadasa taught contrary to that. Buddhadasa heavily criticised the venerated Buddhaghosa. Buddhadasa admitted when he was a young monk, he taught Dependent Origination over three-lifetimes. Why did he change? Because he studied the Pali suttas and began to teach what he regarded as the essence of Buddhism. Early in his career, he distinguished between the mundane and supramundane and one of the first books he published was titled: "Dhamma for Puthujanas".

Your views about Buddhadasa are not correct. Thai cultural Buddhism is not essentially different to any other cultural Buddhism. Buddhadasa's aim was to reveal the essential Buddhist teachings that were lost to the world.

If you yourself personally have no perceived need for such Dhamma, please take care to not obstruct others.

Best wishes