Buddhism: The Tradition v.s. The Religion
The historical teachings of the Buddha and the development of a Burmese Buddhist culture and society are not one and the same. Although this may come off as a somewhat obvious statement for some, it is far more subtle— and misunderstood— than one might expect. This is one of the many fascinating points that came up in my conversation with Soeya Min on a recent podcast episode. In the following excerpt, he shares how many of the conventional Buddhist customs he’s learned to follow (and believe) have in fact no bearing on the actual path that the Buddha was teaching, but are rather a development of Bamar society. These words are all the more prescient today, when the perverted characterizations of the faith encouraged by the military regime along with nationalist monks have attempted to rewrite what the Buddha was actually pointing towards. That’s why, at this time especially, it’s critical to be able to separate what Soeya Min refers to as the local “tradition” and the actual “religion,” so that one can be critical of how those entrenched in power are using (or misusing) these principles.
“If you have to place blame, I would blame more on the traditions and the teaching stories that we spread through our generation.”
“I think our society is more of a traditional society than a Buddhist society, to be honest. That's what I feel. Because all those traditions are put together, mixed with Buddhism to feel like you have to follow those traditions. Actually, those are just traditions! Like women are not allowed in some places, pagodas; and even Pa Auk Sayadaw said that those are just traditions, not the teachings of the Buddha. So, I think more it's not about the religion; it's about the [Bamar] traditions that we have, the teachings, the history books that we have written, the teachings in the schools, it’s all more of a tradition.
If you have to place blame, I would blame more on the traditions and the teaching stories that we spread through our generation, through words, not just written-down history. Just with words, stories; kings, heroes, men in the past act this way, and so, you have to act this way. I think that's more of it than putting it on the religion of the Buddha.
Because if you really dive deeply into Buddhism, there's no gender! Maybe because it was back in India like 3000 years ago, there may be some. But at the heart of it is the compassion, mettā, muditā, cetanā, and karunā. Those are the four main things that you have to use in your daily life. And that's more aligned with the teachings of Buddha than having things like misogynistic stuff in Burmese, right? That stuff for me, that's more of a tradition, not the religion. Maybe it’s some exaggeration from some, maybe a word or a few or from some texts from Buddhism. But personally, I don't think it's on the religion.”