Buddha has become a hip marketing tool.......is this a good thing?

[Booko]

I don't see anything wrong with having a statue of the Buddha in a restaurant or bar, but to use him as a marketing tool is another thing, especially for establishments that serve meat or alcohol or are trendy and overpriced.

It's common enough in Chinese restaruants to have a statue of the Buddha, even though they serve meat, and sometimes alcohol. But I don't see that as anywhere near the same thing.

One of my former employers had a plan to open a gay bar called Mecca, and I always thought that was a really bad idea. (Nothing came of it, though.)

Yes, I think that would be a really bad idea...

I have to giggle every time I see "Shiraz" wine in the store. It's a city in Iran, which means someone named a *wine* after a city in a Muslim country? Weird. And then secondly, it's the town where the Bab came from, which for me makes it doubly weird. But I seriously doubt anyone meant to be disrespectul by giving that name to a brand of wine. For all I know, it just references a grape stock that comes from the area, and is no more scandalous than calling a type of wine "Concord."

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't see anything wrong with having a statue of the Buddha in a restaurant or bar, but to use him as a marketing tool is another thing, especially for establishments that serve meat or alcohol or are trendy and overpriced.

I wouldn't expect Buddhists to be as offended as Christians would be if you opened a strip club called Revelation or a gay bar called Beloved Disciple, but only because Buddhists tend to be less excitable about that kind of thing. One of my former employers had a plan to open a gay bar called Mecca, and I always thought that was a really bad idea. (Nothing came of it, though.)

I think it's inappropriate, but I don't have any problem with the Buddha being seen as a positive figure in our culture; we could do with more of that. So in the end, I'm ambivalent about it.

This is so interesting, because so far in this thread, the Buddhists who have chimed in have remained largely unemotional about this issue, and members who have regarded this issue as offending Buddha and exploiting him have been largely non-Buddhists. Is this an example of practicing non-attachment? Are we being seen as doormats from the non-Buddhist community? I know for me, it is practicing non-attachment of the image of Buddha. This is different from taking refuge with Buddha IMO.



Why is it that others have more problems with this issue than Buddhists - at least so far? I really enjoyed your post, Booko, because you fleshed out your reasoning why these marketing campaigns are considered offensive. Do others feel the same as she? That Buddha is considered a human manifestation of God, and therefore, divine in some aspects? And that Buddha among other manifestations should be treated with a certain level of reverence by the public?




Peace,
Mystic

 

[Smoke]

This is so interesting, because so far in this thread, the Buddhists who have chimed in have remained largely unemotional about this issue, and members who have regarded this issue as offending Buddha and exploiting him have been largely non-Buddhists. Is this an example of practicing non-attachment?

I'm inclined to think so.

Are we being seen as doormats from the non-Buddhist community?

I think in a time when religious believers are often confrontational and easily offended, the Buddhist reaction shows Buddhism in a favorable light.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Drat! I have given out too much karma. I need to wait 24 hours before giving out some more. These are all great replies and much food for thought from both sides! :flower:




Peace,
Mystic

 

[Smoke]

This thread keeps reminding me of Seung-San's Dropping Ashes on the Buddha. If I can find my copy, I think I'll take it to work with me tonight to re-read it.

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

Why is it that others have more problems with this issue than Buddhists - at least so far? I really enjoyed your post, Booko, because you fleshed out your reasoning why these marketing campaigns are considered offensive. Do others feel the same as she? That Buddha is considered a human manifestation of God, and therefore, divine in some aspects? And that Buddha among other manifestations should be treated with a certain level of reverence by the public?

Well, I don't believe that Buddha is a human manifestation of God and I would still not think very highly of the idea of exploiting him just out of mutual respect and I don't appreciate it when Jesus Christ is exploited ( I think somebody mentioned that same concept ). I think it comes down to a "do unto others as you would have done unto yourself" thing.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[c0da]

There was a cocktail bar on holiday we went in that had a Hawaiian theme to it, but had a Hotei Buddha statue in the corner, which I thought was rather random for a Hawaii bar:areyoucra .

I wouldn't say it is offensive. I think it is just businesses trying to exploit a fad whilst they can. Like somebody has already pointed out, it is like the Che Guevara t-shirts and badges lots of people have. I wonder how many of them know the history of Che and his role in the Communist revolution in Cuba, similarly, I'd imagine only a few people who sport pictures of the Buddha or who go to bars with Buddha statues know much about the religion.

I think one reason why Hotei statues and pictures are often used is because of his appearance. He's a smiley guy who enjoys his food! He seems like such an approachable guy.

I think the only potentially dangerous thing about using the image in situations like bars would be that maybe something similar that has happened to the celebration of Saint Patrick in Catholisism could happen to the image of The Buddha in the West, although I don't think that is very likely.

 

[St0ne]

Man I really need some practice at this non-attachment thing, I can just imagine a dharma bum putting his cigarette out on a buddha statue as a sign of his non-attachment.

 

[caminante]

i don't think real buddhist would care if buddha is a "marketing tool or not"...their care about his teachings, his path, his enlightment, they do not care, or chould not care, about the statue or figure of the buddha, for it is only a statue, or an image and os i elieve their philosophy is not being touched...maybe, people would want to aproach even more to it, and that would not be a bad thing.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Man I really need some practice at this non-attachment thing, I can just imagine a dharma bum putting his cigarette out on a buddha statue as a sign of his non-attachment.

That sentiment sounds like a great idea for a koan:


What sound does Buddha make when nicotine is smeared on his image?




Peace,
Mystic

 

[St0ne]

a very good koan indeed.

 

[Smoke]

Man I really need some practice at this non-attachment thing, I can just imagine a dharma bum putting his cigarette out on a buddha statue as a sign of his non-attachment.

Seung Sahn didn't really suggest that we should drop ashes on the Buddha. Stephen Mitchell's preface to Dropping Ashes on the Buddha explains:

The title comes from a problem which Soen-sa gives his students for homework. It goes like this:

Somebody comes into the Zen Center with a lighted cigarette, walks up to the Buddha-statue, blows smoke in its face and drops ashes in its lap. You are standing there. What can you do?

This person has understood that nothing is holy or unholy. All things in the universe are one, and that one is himself. So everything is permitted. Ashes are Buddha; Buddha is ashes. The cigarette flicks. The ashes drop.

But his understanding is only partial. He has not yet understood that all things are just as they are. Holy is holy; unholy is unholy. Ashes are ashes; Buddha is Buddha. He is very attached to emptiness and to his own understanding, and he thinks that all words are useless. So whatever you say to him, however you try to teach him, he will hit you. If you try to teach by hitting him back, he will hit you even harder. (He is very strong.)

How can you cure his delusion?

Since you are a Zen student, you are also a Zen teacher. You are walking on the path of the Bodhisattva, whose vow is to save all beings from their suffering. This person is suffering from a mistaken view. You must help him understand the truth: that all things in the universe are just as they are.

How can you do this?

If you find the answer to this problem, you will find the true way.
​

In a letter, Seung Sahn explains further:

When we admit that the Buddha statue is the Buddha statue and that the ashes are ashes, the problem is that Buddha said the Buddha-body permeates all the Dharma-realms and everything in the universe has Buddha-nature. So where can you drop ashes if not on the Buddha-body? That is the disease of this person. How are you going to cure this disease?
​

Seung Sahn gave this problem to his students as a koan, so don't expect find the answer here.

 

[lilithu]

The article brings up a point about possible exploitation. Is Buddha being exploited in the name of consumerism?

I have no aversion to this campaign, personally. I'm not overjoyed, but I do not see this as counter-productive either.

It's not the fact that it's the Buddha that bothers me. I think that consumerism in general is exploitive and unskillful. Consumerism is based on cultivating attachment.

It's based on convincing people that they need to buy things that they don't really need. And the easiest way to do that is via selling "brands", whether that be a designer label like Christian Dior or an exotic "other" like images of the Buddha.

Consumerism is based on convincing people that buying things will solve their problems and fulfill their spiritual needs. Spirituality in a box, available at your local K-mart.

As for exploitation, it may be more difficult to see the harm this does with cultures as strong as Asian cultures. Whatever is done with images of the Buddha here, the cultures are still preserved back East. But look at Native American spirituality, which is in a much more fragile condition, due to genocide both physical and cultural. People of European descent go to certain tribes and say they want to learn Indian spirituality. They learn about medicine wheels and dream catchers, sweat lodges and peyote, thunderbirds and rain dances. And then what happens? Medicine wheels and dream catchers get mass-produced and sold. Images of thunderbirds show up on things to make them exotic. They name a car after it. People decide that they want to "practice" Native American spirituality just so they can get stoned. Euro-Americans give "workshops" on Native spirituality, charging large amounts of money for things they did not invent, and giving none of the proceeds back to the tribes. Sports team mascots do mockeries of rain dances at games.

That is exploitation. That is cultural colonialization.

But there is harm done in selling images of the Buddha too. As a person of Chinese descent growing up in a country where the dominant culture was Euro-American, I grew up not liking my own skin. Everything I saw on tv and in movies lifted up whites as superior, normative. From a Buddhist non-attachment pov, it may be no big deal that there are bikinis with his face on them. But from the pov of an Asian-American, the idea that you can put the Buddha's image on someone's underwear BUT NOT Jesus' image reaffirms the idea that one is higher, more important, more sacred, more valuable than the other.

 

[gnostic]

I don't like it.

Unless these people marketing the Buddha, give a large proportion of their profits to the Buddhist schools and temples, then it is purely exploitation. And I doubt that any of these money go to them.

 

[Ashley-Yin]

what you have to ask yourself is are these people in any way Buddhist?

I am for this if they are Buddhist, doing a vegetarian menu, or very artistic t-shirts
I am against it if they are not Buddhist and are making money off of The Buddhas' immaterialistic back.