What do you think?
Rate this book
Buddhist Romanticism
Buddhist Romanticism. An in-depth study of the pervasive influence of early Romantic thought in shaping the way Buddhism is taught in the West, and of the practical consequences of following the Romantics rather than the Buddha in approaching the problem of suffering and stress.
Freely available at dhammatalks.org
Freely available at dhammatalks.org
- GenresBuddhismPhilosophy
387 pages, ebook
First published September 28, 2015
5 people are currently reading
74 people want to read
About the author
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
131 books143 followersṬhānissaro Bhikkhu, also known as Ajaan Geoff (born Geoffrey DeGraff, 1949), is an American Theravada Buddhist monk of the Dhammayut Order (Dhammayutika Nikaya), Thai forest kammatthana tradition. He is currently the abbot of Metta Forest Monastery in San Diego County. Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu is a translator of the Pāli Canon as well as more modern Buddhist works and the author of many articles and books on Dhamma.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 16, 2018
Great read. Very thoroughly researched look at the roots of what often passes for Buddhism in the west. The comparison with the Dhamma of the Pali Canon is detailed and convincingly explained with sutta citations throughout.
A crucial work and must read for anyone practicing in the Theravada tradition. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's writings and talks are the best I've come across for gaining a better understanding of the original teachings of the Buddha.
A crucial work and must read for anyone practicing in the Theravada tradition. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's writings and talks are the best I've come across for gaining a better understanding of the original teachings of the Buddha.
Read
November 20, 2015For previous articles on this topic search "the roots of buddhist romanticism", "the buddha via the bible", and "getting out of the romantic gate". For other books on the topic see "The Making of Buddhist Modernism" by McMahan and "Romantic Dharma" by Lussier.
After reading the introduction you may skip to chapter 2, then to 5, then to 7. Only consider reading straight through if you have enough interest in the history of romanticism.
The heart of this book revolves around 20 points of romantic religion, how some modern Buddhist teachers express them, and how they actually differ from the teachings of early Buddhism. In brief, "The Romantic idea that we suffer because we feel separate from the world, and that suffering stops during moments when we have overcome that sense of separation is, from the point of view of the Dhamma, only a partial--and very poor--understanding of suffering and its end."
After reading the introduction you may skip to chapter 2, then to 5, then to 7. Only consider reading straight through if you have enough interest in the history of romanticism.
The heart of this book revolves around 20 points of romantic religion, how some modern Buddhist teachers express them, and how they actually differ from the teachings of early Buddhism. In brief, "The Romantic idea that we suffer because we feel separate from the world, and that suffering stops during moments when we have overcome that sense of separation is, from the point of view of the Dhamma, only a partial--and very poor--understanding of suffering and its end."
April 1, 2024
Edifying read on how the Western presentation of Buddhism is really just an outgrowth of German Romantic philosophy, and bares only an aesthetic resemblance to the Buddha’s teachings as explained in the Pali Canon. The ideas of interconnectedness, unity of self and world, etc are metaphysical questions that the Buddha declined to answer, seeing them as distractions from the path he taught.
Thanissaro Bhikkhu convincingly argues his case, helped in large part by his intellectual background (PhD in history of ideas, focusing on German Romanticism) and his spiritual career (longtime monk and abbot in the barebones Thai Forest Tradition of Theravada Buddhism). His argument is always clear, and he does a great job outlining the precepts of Romanticism, the precepts of Buddhism, and shows how they are fundamentally at odds.
As criticism, I do feel he collapses too much of the Western conception of Buddhism into Romanticism. Many of the ideas he attributes to the Romantics have a history going back far further in Western philosophy and religious thought, such as Neoplatonism and esoteric movements such as Hermeticism. As such, they don’t lie purely at the feet of the Romantics. Western Buddhism may very well be syncretic, and may very well be at odds with the teachings of the Pali Canon, but it’s not just Romanticism. Also, he spends a chapter discussing the transmission of Romantic ideas to the present, and runs through the thought of Jung, dismissing him as not having “attained that Oneness to the point where they could assess its worthiness as a goal”. As Peter Kingsley showed in Catafalque, Jung’s whole project was to provide a veneer of intellectual distance and respectability to the intense mystical experiences he encountered - and purposefully cultivated - all through his life.
Still, this is a genuinely interesting and insightful read. It’s simultaneously an intellectual history of German Romanticism, introduction to Theravada Buddhism, and critique of Western Buddhist thought and practice. It’s also easily found for free online.
Thanissaro Bhikkhu convincingly argues his case, helped in large part by his intellectual background (PhD in history of ideas, focusing on German Romanticism) and his spiritual career (longtime monk and abbot in the barebones Thai Forest Tradition of Theravada Buddhism). His argument is always clear, and he does a great job outlining the precepts of Romanticism, the precepts of Buddhism, and shows how they are fundamentally at odds.
As criticism, I do feel he collapses too much of the Western conception of Buddhism into Romanticism. Many of the ideas he attributes to the Romantics have a history going back far further in Western philosophy and religious thought, such as Neoplatonism and esoteric movements such as Hermeticism. As such, they don’t lie purely at the feet of the Romantics. Western Buddhism may very well be syncretic, and may very well be at odds with the teachings of the Pali Canon, but it’s not just Romanticism. Also, he spends a chapter discussing the transmission of Romantic ideas to the present, and runs through the thought of Jung, dismissing him as not having “attained that Oneness to the point where they could assess its worthiness as a goal”. As Peter Kingsley showed in Catafalque, Jung’s whole project was to provide a veneer of intellectual distance and respectability to the intense mystical experiences he encountered - and purposefully cultivated - all through his life.
Still, this is a genuinely interesting and insightful read. It’s simultaneously an intellectual history of German Romanticism, introduction to Theravada Buddhism, and critique of Western Buddhist thought and practice. It’s also easily found for free online.
November 23, 2024
One of the best books on Buddhism I have ever read, and offered completely for free via the author's website. Thank you so much! Even though I do not agree with the argument in its entirety, it is still an invaluable contribution to the Buddhist literature.
The author argues that a lot of what passes as Dharma/dhamma in the West is actually a form of Romantic inspired spirituality that developed around the turn of the 19th century. His argument relies on three things: 1. accurately describing Romantic spirituality 2. this spirituality continued to influence western and eastern thinkers throughout the 20th century, inspiring current Buddhists 3. many, if not most, Buddhist teachers actually teach Romantic spirituality, and NOT the Dharma. I believe the author makes a great case for 1 and 2, but point 3 is slightly weak.
The author has done incredible research on Romanticism and its spirituality and how its influenced many popular 20th century thinkers. It is a good record in its own right. Like many other Theravadin writers, he writes incredibly lucidly and down to earth. He's also not afraid to call a spade a spade. And he makes great use of lists and structures everything so nicely!
He also makes a great criticism of many Western Buddhist teachers who have a variety of biases that is potentially weakening the awesome power of the Buddha Dharma, such obsessions with social justice, infinity, metaphysics, "just doing your best", atheism/materialism, etc. Many of these teachers have lost sight of what the Dharma is about, offering feeble visions of what is spiritually possible and how to achieve these more lofty goals (namely, the total eradication of greed, hatred, ignorance, and suffering). Namely, many of these teachers have totally forsaken any notion of transcendence in favour of total immanence. In my opinion, the highest form of spirituality comes through the appropriate balance of both immanence and transcendence.
However, I can see why the author has been accused of fundamentalism. The book gives the impression that the Buddha only taught the four noble truths and the end of suffering, but this is incorrect. The Buddha did indeed teach some (especially laypeople) how to achieve more refined states of being, for example a couple who wanted to still be together in the next life. Importantly, the Buddha always emphasised living within an ethical framework, namely respecting karma.
This is part of the reason why I am not convinced by what he terms Buddhist Romanticism. I think it really is a form of Romantic Buddhism that many of these teachers taught. First, just because these teachers may teach a more refined state of being that closely resembles elements of Romantic spirituality, such as healing a sense of separation, does not mean that it automatically is not the Dharma/dhamma (as illustrated in the above paragraph). Even though it will not directly lead to the end of suffering, I think the author fails to realise that much of the West is very spiritually weak, while the Theravadin path requires incredible spiritual maturity just to begin to pursue, despite its apparent simplicity. I think a lot of Western Buddhist teachers know this and soften their teachings to elevate their audience in some discernible way, with the hope that it will alleviate some suffering or prepare them for more difficult paths later on (either in this lifetime or future ones). Sure, you won't get enlightened reading Jack Kornfield for example, and you may even go down the wrong path to an extent, but he may help you become just a little bit less attached, suffer a bit less, etc.
To summarise, the author fails to take into account the importance of provisional teachings, which I believe is a strength of the Mahayana path that many Westerns are more attracted to.
Moreover, the author claims that Buddhist Romanticism is totally pervasive, yet he fails to make a good overall argument, rather matching random quotes to the different elements of Romantic spirituality he has identified. No surprise that pop Buddhist best sellers don't have the most advanced teachings! If you actually go to teachers in person who aren't selling thousands of books, the author will find the Dharma is alive and well in the West. So in a sense the author should be more explicit by saying: don't think that the Dharma you read in popular Buddhist books are the ultimate teachings!
It's also frustrating that the author doesn't explicitly list the books he has drawn from. It's easy to search online who they are. Just come right out and say. - save us some time so we know who to look out for!
Overall, the connection between the Romantics and today's popular Buddhist teachers is tenuous. I think a lot of teachers may at most subconsciously be misinterpreting elements of the Dharma in line with Romantic spirituality, but that doesn't make it sufficient to not call it Buddhism anymore.
So the book is an incredible thought-provoking critique of modern Buddhism, but in my mind somewhat flawed, fundamentalist and perhaps a little too harsh.
The author argues that a lot of what passes as Dharma/dhamma in the West is actually a form of Romantic inspired spirituality that developed around the turn of the 19th century. His argument relies on three things: 1. accurately describing Romantic spirituality 2. this spirituality continued to influence western and eastern thinkers throughout the 20th century, inspiring current Buddhists 3. many, if not most, Buddhist teachers actually teach Romantic spirituality, and NOT the Dharma. I believe the author makes a great case for 1 and 2, but point 3 is slightly weak.
The author has done incredible research on Romanticism and its spirituality and how its influenced many popular 20th century thinkers. It is a good record in its own right. Like many other Theravadin writers, he writes incredibly lucidly and down to earth. He's also not afraid to call a spade a spade. And he makes great use of lists and structures everything so nicely!
He also makes a great criticism of many Western Buddhist teachers who have a variety of biases that is potentially weakening the awesome power of the Buddha Dharma, such obsessions with social justice, infinity, metaphysics, "just doing your best", atheism/materialism, etc. Many of these teachers have lost sight of what the Dharma is about, offering feeble visions of what is spiritually possible and how to achieve these more lofty goals (namely, the total eradication of greed, hatred, ignorance, and suffering). Namely, many of these teachers have totally forsaken any notion of transcendence in favour of total immanence. In my opinion, the highest form of spirituality comes through the appropriate balance of both immanence and transcendence.
However, I can see why the author has been accused of fundamentalism. The book gives the impression that the Buddha only taught the four noble truths and the end of suffering, but this is incorrect. The Buddha did indeed teach some (especially laypeople) how to achieve more refined states of being, for example a couple who wanted to still be together in the next life. Importantly, the Buddha always emphasised living within an ethical framework, namely respecting karma.
This is part of the reason why I am not convinced by what he terms Buddhist Romanticism. I think it really is a form of Romantic Buddhism that many of these teachers taught. First, just because these teachers may teach a more refined state of being that closely resembles elements of Romantic spirituality, such as healing a sense of separation, does not mean that it automatically is not the Dharma/dhamma (as illustrated in the above paragraph). Even though it will not directly lead to the end of suffering, I think the author fails to realise that much of the West is very spiritually weak, while the Theravadin path requires incredible spiritual maturity just to begin to pursue, despite its apparent simplicity. I think a lot of Western Buddhist teachers know this and soften their teachings to elevate their audience in some discernible way, with the hope that it will alleviate some suffering or prepare them for more difficult paths later on (either in this lifetime or future ones). Sure, you won't get enlightened reading Jack Kornfield for example, and you may even go down the wrong path to an extent, but he may help you become just a little bit less attached, suffer a bit less, etc.
To summarise, the author fails to take into account the importance of provisional teachings, which I believe is a strength of the Mahayana path that many Westerns are more attracted to.
Moreover, the author claims that Buddhist Romanticism is totally pervasive, yet he fails to make a good overall argument, rather matching random quotes to the different elements of Romantic spirituality he has identified. No surprise that pop Buddhist best sellers don't have the most advanced teachings! If you actually go to teachers in person who aren't selling thousands of books, the author will find the Dharma is alive and well in the West. So in a sense the author should be more explicit by saying: don't think that the Dharma you read in popular Buddhist books are the ultimate teachings!
It's also frustrating that the author doesn't explicitly list the books he has drawn from. It's easy to search online who they are. Just come right out and say. - save us some time so we know who to look out for!
Overall, the connection between the Romantics and today's popular Buddhist teachers is tenuous. I think a lot of teachers may at most subconsciously be misinterpreting elements of the Dharma in line with Romantic spirituality, but that doesn't make it sufficient to not call it Buddhism anymore.
So the book is an incredible thought-provoking critique of modern Buddhism, but in my mind somewhat flawed, fundamentalist and perhaps a little too harsh.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews