Christian Oaks used to write for BuddhaJones before "the big wake-up," as he calls it. I caught up with him to ask if he'd be interested in blogging here now. Below is our e-mail exchange, edited.
Here are some of Christian's old "flashback" articles:
- Fractured Koans
- Los Angeles Crime Blotter
- Various Schools of Nichiren Buddhism, Represented as Menu Items
- Are you a pacifist? Take this quiz.
BB: What do you mean by the big wake-up?
CO: I mean I woke up. I realized that I was deeply involved with a sangha that wasn't a sangha at all. Instead, it was like a multi-level marketing company that made claims of exclusive access to an amazing product. I was pressured -- sometimes subtly, sometimes overtly -- to sell this product to myself, my friends and family.
As with all schemes of this sort, the pitch is that you're doing something to benefit these customers and the world by letting them in on the fabulous opportunity to embrace a special brand-name product. I woke up to that fact that this is not Buddhism.
BB: What woke you up?
CO: I made a little gap between me and this dubious sangha. This happened by accident.
In Northern California where I live, there are many Buddhists of all stripes. Ever the relentless marketer, I made a deal with one of my co-workers. He would come to one of my meetings if I agreed to go with him to a weekend Shambhala training. I enjoyed the whole vibe and spirit of Shambhala.
I was a Nichiren snob, of course, so I never even considered changing brands. But maybe I touched on what the Shambhala people call basic sanity. I looked at my own sangha from a new perspective. I used to think I needed the corporate apparatus of that sangha to somehow maintain my relationship with my chosen brand of Buddhism. What I understand now is that the buddhadharma is inside me, and it has nothing to do with winning converts and feeling like I joined the right club.
This was around 2003. A lot of people I knew were coming to similar conclusions through various other pathways. I call it the big wake-up because so many of my friends woke up at the same time. One friend left the company in dramatic fashion, making big statements of disavowal, and I saw that this is actually the hard way to leave, because the whole company is trained to rope strays back into the herd, or shoot them dead so they don't infect others with thoughts of leaving.
The best way to leave is to slip out the back, jack. Just drop off the radar without a peep. Don't respond to the company's calls and messages. Don't give them another ounce of your personal energy, because if you do, they'll use it as a crowbar to leverage you back in to the company or else hit you over the head with it.
By the way, that's how you can be sure you're involved in some very questionable group dynamics, when you want to leave but part of the group's mission is to make leaving difficult and shameful.
My writing for BuddhaJones was the first hint I had that my group was more messed up than I was willing to face. I insisted on using a pseudonym. I was terrified that other members of the group would find out that I was involved in something independent and slightly subversive.
Oy, the shock and betrayal your readers will feel when they learn Christian Oaks is not my real name. There were times when group members would forward a link of an article I wrote and say, "Have you seen this? Who is Christian Oaks? What a jerk." Some of them probably suspected me.
BB: If you blog at BuddhaJones will you continue to use a pseudonym?
CO: With myspace and facebook, everybody is putting their personal business on the street, which I think is foolish for a host of reasons. I will blog "pseudonymously," as you suggest on the intro page. You and I both know of people who have been forthcoming online about who they are and what they believe with regard to Nichiren Buddhism. Unfortunately, there are some messed up people out there who make weird and credible threats. Mental illness is by no means confined to Nichiren practitioners, but I think the company actually reinforces beliefs and behaviors that are inconsistent with sane, civilized living. I learned some very perverse interpretations of the buddhadharma from the company and I know others have as well, and taken them more to heart, more than is appropriate.
BB: Whoa. You have to elaborate on that. Are you saying that your former sangha fosters mental illness?
CO: Har. I guess I should backpedal now. I'm not a mental health professional, so take my observations with a grain of salt. What the company does is encourage and reward religious fanaticism. Fanatical opposition to rival Nichiren groups, fanatical adulation of their billionaire leader, fanatical crushing of all perceived "enemies." Yes it's messed up. I won't back off that point. It's a real sickness in the Nichiren Buddhist community.
BB: After you left, did you affiliate with another Nichiren-related group?
CO: I did a little shopping, but no. I'll make one more offensive blanket statement about Nichiren practitioners. We're a bunch of sheep. We talk big about being leaders but we're a bunch of followers. We have no faith in our individual agency and power. We think we have to join a group to be of any consequence. We love to be in a little hive of groupthink and mutual reassurance. We rationalize our sheeplike instincts by saying that the sangha is one of the three treasures of Buddhism and you can't practice correctly without belonging to a group. I question that belief.
I don't have an answer yet. I'm just seriously questioning.
12 comments
Very interesting and funny! Many people will see their reflections in the words of Mr Oaks. Some will see one side of the mirror and others their side. "Nichiren Snob" - a lovely phrase and so clear!
I deleted your comment from this thread because it included the names of individuals in a specific organization, attributing hearsay quotes to them. I know you weren't trying to offend anyone, but please try to avoid posting these types of comments here.As I told Nichijew/Mark: It is permissible, possible and preferable to write about one's thoughts, feelings and experiences without calling out individuals or specific groups.
Isn't Cristian Oaks "calling out a specific group"? I gotta tell ya, I'm confused about what you do and do not find acceptable.
Christian doesn't name names or cite brands, yet he makes his point crystal clear. Anyone who knows anything about the group in question knows he hit the nail on the head -- even you, Cultmember.In Mario Puzo's Godfather books and films, there is one word that is never uttered.Capisce?
Yet in "Various Schools of Nichiren Buddhism, Represented as Menu Items," Christian mentions several sects by name, even the dreaded G-word.
That article is from Christian's archive of material from the old site. It's a great time capsule, IMO. Do you think it should be deleted? I'm willing to consider your argument. As I explained, Armchair's post on this thread was deleted because it named specific individuals and attributed quotes to them. It was hearsay."Joe Blow of Chanting, Inc. said, 'The concept of esho funi no longer applies to us....'" or (as was posted in another thread) "Linda Leader said that Chanting, Inc. is in decline..." Hearsay.I let the "Linda Leader" comment stay just because I didn't notice it soon enough to delete it. Now that it's up, it's a good example of what I don't want to see on this site, namely gossip about various Nichiren groups. Christian's article is satire, not gossip, IMO. But as I said, I'm willing to consider your argument.Nichijew's deleted comments speculated about the death of a specific, named "leader." The comments were offensive by any reasonable standard. In other posts, Nichijew named specific groups, and I let those posts stay. They're instructive by negative example, perhaps. I finally cut him off because I'm sick of his shtick and have no intention of letting him colonize and monopolize this site with his obsession.In general, Nichiren Buddhists have a very hard time talking and writing about Nichiren Buddhism without endlessly referencing their sect or "leaders" or priests -- or former sect -- or dogmatically repeating undigested quotes from Nichiren. I'd like to goad readers into getting beyond these limitations if I can.Ultimately, though, my moderation policy is entirely arbitrary. I won't just delete stuff without comment, or ban people without warning. I'll provide a reason, but I don't expect my reasons to convince or satisfy everyone. Participate at your own risk.
I don't want anyone's comments deleted. I'm not a fan of moderation (in the message board sense). It just seemed inconsistent to me. Your rule that people can talk about sects or orgs as long as they don't mention their name is rather Orwellian, IMO. I was wondering how you would deal with Nichijew. Buddhajones is about irreverence and there isn't anyone more irreverent than he is. I find the best approach is to ignore him, but he seems to me to perform a function similar to Dostoevsky's Idiot. All moderation on a message board is subjective and I'm glad you're up front about that.
...like listening to a friend contemplate divorce or recover from it. They talk about their ex even as they say "I'm really getting over my ex," you know they're not getting over it because they talk about it so much. You almost want to say shuddup already and get on with your life. (You can't say shuddup tho because you are part of your friend's support system.) It's okay to say "STFU about your ex and don't mention her name in my presence. It is time for you to move on." Strong medicine tastes bitter. We need a kick in the tookus.
I respect Beryl's guidelines about not mentioning specificnames, which I should not have done, having not rememberedat the time. However, I would ask you, Beryl, to shootthe post back to me and I will amend it to delete the namesmentioned (the quotes were *quite accurate, but I understandyour concerns)and I will take out the specific attributions and repost them? I think if we don't havethis kind of information, we can't discuss the illnessesin ND's Buddhism and what we can do about that and I thinkwe are ALL concerned about that. I would, however, askin the sense of ichinen sanzen: bodhisattva/bodhisattva,we be polite and circumspect with each other, Mark. Wedon't want to dismiss you as hopeless and blindly argumentative. WE want a civil dialogue with YOU.Civil. You are very good with words. Do you understandthat one?Respects,Armchair
I agree, but think that Goading may not be enough. A Whip, Chair and Mace may be needed! Keep up the good work and "Non Illegitimi Carborundum"
I just learned that I cannot restore or access a comment I have deleted. (Sorry, Armchair.) So from now on, I'm going to rely on the "Hide this comment" rating system.When you're logged on the site, you'll see you have an opportunity to rate comments on a scale from 1 to 4 -- 1 meaning "unproductive," 4 meaning "excellent." There is also a rating of zero, meaning "hide this comment." (The zero rating used to be called "Censor this obscenity!")To hide a comment, three different users must give it a rating of zero.This is more democratic than having a moderator make unilateral decisions about acceptable content. Also, as I understand it, I can restore hidden comments if they have been unfairly hidden.So let's try this system and see how it works.
I read this after posting a comment to a different post which did contain references to a group, so I may end up getting moderated there - if I do, it's OK. I am a medium-paced learner.I think that Mr. Oaks is wrong about Nichiren believers being a bunch of sheep. I feel very privileged to belong to a non-sectarian Nichiren Buddhist group (unofficially called the Gathering of Friends) here in the Los Angeles area. We had out first retreat a couple of weeks ago, attended by members of various Nichiren sanghas, as well as a couple of Hindus and some unaffiliated beginners. I genuinely think that's the wave of the future.I cannot speak to whether or not the sangha in question (hereafter SIQ) encourages mental illness. I have encountered situations where people with mental health issues of their own were placed in a position of giving "guidancce" to others. It would have been comical if it wasn't so alarming. Beryl, I would like to propose a sort of compromise remedy for references to a particular sangha. That is, maybe we can use a different acronym for each post or reference. For example, in my other post, I used the term "rather controlling group" (RCG). In this post, I used the term "sangha in question" (SIQ). It could be a fun game, coming up with new acronyms. But then, I'm easy to amuse. I enjoy analyzing the patterns in my tile grout.Stay well and happy, Byrd in LA