Buddhism at high schools?

One can talk about philosophy without talking about religion -- there's, man, let's see --
Plato
Aristotle
Descartes
Locke
Rousseau
Marx

Plus yeah, the Dalai Lama has gone to Harvard. Where he interacts, mainly, with people over the age of 18. 'Tain't so in High School, which is also (if it's a public school) funded by the state and, as a result, wants to keep church (yes, it's considered church, even though it's Buddhism) and state. The fact that you yourself are a Buddhist does not make it any more likely that the school board or principal (you were thinking of consulting with them before going ahead, were you not?) would approve. In fact, I'd say that would make the likelihood go down.

Change the shoe onto the other foot and imagine what it would be like if a teacher who is a practicing Southern Baptist started talking about Jesus, saying he was the greatest philosopher, etc. etc. Even without attempting to convert anyone, it would be considered inappropriate in most instances, would it not?

There are a lot of other ways to introduce philosophical discussions, yes?

The Virgin Mary maybe?

Interesting. What if I was an atheist and wanted to discuss Jesus or what if I was an atheist and wanted to discuss religion in general with my students? Would I have to ask for approval? I am not criticizing your view just trying to understand its meaning. How I understand it is that either religion is taboo and must not be discussed by anyone, be it atheists or Christians or Jews etc. OR and that would be also interesting, religion at high school is NOT taboo, unless it is mentioned by someone who is practicing a religion. But that would be clearly discrimination of such a person. And that would lead to a very one sided situation where teenagers would be influenced by the atheism of their teachers because only atheists would be allowed to talk to them about problems of life philosophically.

Another idea that comes up is that anyone, be it Christian or Muslim or Jew or anyone religious, is potential danger to youngsters once he or she starts talking about his or her religion.

I guess I know where those fears come from. There is a difference about giving info about a certain religion based on facts and somethin else is pushing students into believing that it works.

Maybe a teacher is allowed to say> Christians believe that Jesus Christ was a great guy and helped to make the world a better place. But the teacher is not allowed to say: I also believe that Jesus was a great guy and his example helps me to overcome problems.

And one more idea. Would it be possible to extract the philosophy from Buddhism and only discuss the philosophy? Where is the religious part?

I know some of you will say> leave the kids alone. But when I was a kid and the teachers left us kids alone totally when it came to religion, automatically we believed that such is the real state of things and religion is bullshit. Because none of the teachers ever talked about it and if they did, only ridiculed it as essentially stupid matter. So most of us believed that in our real lives it will be better to steer clear off religion, because that is what sensible adults do.

Just one more idea, please.

I imagine I am a high school student and my English teacher has been practicing Buddhism for ages. Then I would really want to hear him talk about his experience. Not all the time, but from time to time and if it was fun or any interesting, I would consider it a part of my school life. I would myself decide what is good or false about the stuff he talks about. It is like reading a book about a guy who tried to live in a Buddhist temple in Japan. Lots of ppl read the book only to find out what it could be like to live in such a strange place, but are hardly any interested in trying to do the same thing. I guess I would really mind if a teacher of mine would push anything into my head, be it materialism, idealism, Plato or Jesus, but would be pleased to hear any interesting things about whatever the person really seems to know about. If she was an ex figher jet pilot, it would be great to hear about piloting fighter jets and I would not expect many students to decide to become figher jet pilots.

You still need permission; it is still a church and state issue no matter who is doing the talking. Plus it's a common courtesy to talk to your boss re the curriculum.

There's plenty of religious education that goes on. It goes on in churches, synagogues and mosques. It goes on in Catholic schools, cheders (Hebrew Schools) and in homes.

There is a certain amount of influence that teachers exert. Kids may laugh it off, but it's true, teachers do. And when teachers show a bias or a favoritism or its opposite, as you are well aware (as you remember from your own experience), kids of any age will pick up on it.

Lots and lots of philosophers out there, like I said. But when it starts to poke into religion -- and Buddhism does, no matter how much you try to extract it (the religion is all about the philosophy, much more so than most other faiths, as I understand it) -- then you've got a very different issue going on.

Personally, I'd've been appalled at learning anything about Judaism, other than Holocaust information, anywhere other than in my house or my synagogue/Hebrew School.

Perhaps religion could be taught in history class
as cultural examples of what people used to believe in.
Commercialism has a far greater impact on our lives now.

What about discussing the meaning of religion or the connection between religion and philosophy? I think this is part of their high school curriculum, to learn something about religion. Our school's policy is to try to interconnect subjects, for example English lessons and history, history and physics, physics and chemistry etc. So current problems like religion - i see no reason why that should not be part of the school's curriculum. The teacher doesn't have to show any bias, just lead an open discussion. It is up to the students to come to conclusions if they are looking for conclusions.

The point is you can't pretend that religion and all its cons and pros doesn't exist these days. And high school students should learn to discuss reality, which religion is part of. I wouldn't look at religion as something that is primarily biased but as a phenomenon of the current world, and at the age of 16, 17 or 18 I guess students should be ready to critically look at issues connected with religion and philosophy and how these issues relate to our lives.

I think when you discuss globalization or economic problems of the third world with the students, they tend to turn off, but when you start talking about things like happinness, love, caring, and such, they immediately open up and are eager to participate and think and discuss, because it is something that they deal with all the time.

Unless you're attending a parochial school, religion is not taught, discussed or otherwise mentioned in the United States. Therefore, most people are
opposed to it, other than in church settings or at home, like jespah mentioned already.

stach

I don't see any problem in introducing buddhism in the way you propose. Just don't preach it. I am of the opinion that you can say just about anything if you just refrain from that preachy tone. It is the style more than the message that is objected to very often.

I think it could turn out to be a very interesting debate if you put it into some context. Take some universal issues, something humans everywhere have to deal with. Highlight the traditional western way of dealing with it and compare it to how buddhism relates to the issue. This should be easy if you are a buddhist in the western world. I, for one, experience the conflict between my buddhistic style of thinking and my western style of thinking all the time.

Would probably lead to increased promiscuous sex.

In many ways buddhism is the philosophy of hinduism extracted from that religion. Buddhism is a philosophy, and for those who chose to follow that philosophy it is a way of life. It is not, and has never been, a religion. Those who think it is are missing the key points of it.

(Stach teaches in the Czech Republic, I think.)

hmmm, hmmm, interesting

Well, definitely I was not going to teach Buddhism formally unless the students ask me to explain certain issues or topics. I was thinking of spending two or three lessons debating problems of religion, philosophy, Buddhism - as my own personal experience - how it may or may not relate to our actual life.

I guess the difference between our country and the US is huge when it comes to religion. Communists basically wiped off religion from the country, only the hardcore - i don't mean it negatively - Catholics kept their faith and principles, mostly in the mountains far away from big cities and communist offices. So in our country, young people are quite open-minded about religions, now that we are free to choose from the neverending counter of religious ways, but of course, almost nobody likes the idea of being pushed and manipulated. But in general, young people are interested in alternative Christianity and all alternative styles and religions. Young people usually don't like duties and discipline so they tend to choose the religion or philosophy that seems liberal.

The message from Buddhism (from its philosophy, but hey what makes a religion a religion?) I have already told them is that having a regular, healthy regime kind of life will give them benefits and feeling good and happy while doing crazy things, taking drugs, eating too much, partying too much and changing partners all the time will really make a hell of their lives. This is the kind of message I tend to drop from time to time and I hope I am allowed to as a teacher.

Ah, my apologies for thinking you were in the US. In the US, there would definitely be church-state issues.

Dunno how it is by where you are. However, I would still stay away from a specific faith's philosophy unless you're willing to start talking about other faiths as well -- because even omission can be seen as subtly favoring that which is not omitted. I'm not saying you have to discuss every single religion out there since the dawn of humanity, but just covering one would look like a preference pretty much no matter how you'd try to spin it.

Well, there is buddhism in this. People who don't like duties and discipline will live as free from it as they can for as long as they can. If the at some point realize the problems and unhappiness that may come from living like this they may be tempted to change their lifestyle. That is buddhism. Not adopting a way of life because it is supposed to be the most beneficial. Buddhism is about getting to the most beneficial lifestyle through living out your attatchments; suffering through them. Living without discipline will teach you the benefits of having discipline, and after enough "lessons" in the form of life-experience, things will often change to the better...

I think such subjects should most definitly be taught in high schools. The high school I attended only had a class on Mormon beliefs and I think all high schools should have more options on philosphy and religon.

After school hours, one can join a club at the Public School, that discusses various religions ( or even a specific religion) and such a meeting can take place on school property in the U.S.

The case I'm familar with ( read about it in the newspaper ) allowed a Rabbi to form a club devoted to Judaism and the Rabbi offered free kosher pizza to get the kids to attend club meetings at the school ( but after regular hours).

This specific club was open to all kids no matter what their religion was.