I’ve seen and heard of some rather crass usages Buddha statues. I heard of one used in an adult picture, for example, though thankfully I’ve never seen it. There are definitely ways to abuse it. But there’s a lot of gray area in between. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Not to be argumentative or belabor the point—I just think it’s an interesting topic—but is there a wrong way to use a Buddha (or any iconic) statue or symbol? On the one hand, it’s just an object; on the other hand, because it’s an image of the Buddha, couldn’t it be considered just as potentially potent as any other Buddhist image?

I probably wouldn’t put one in my garden, but whenever I see one, no matter what the form, it serves as a nice reminder.

Sbtokyo hello and welcome to the JLR. Regarding the Buddha statue issue, the photo in question was not in a garden but one of a few outdoor shrines outside the main temple building. It is not clear from the pictue though. In any case, I agree that there is nothing wrong inherently with this statue or that. Merely how it is used. I gather from others I have met that they justend up as decoration without further thought. That is my pint of frustration I guess. Butlike you said, I think ego my own ego is at play.:-/

I think your reaction to the garden Buddha is common, I’ve had it myself, yet the photo on the left of your blog of the sitting Buddha at Sensoji Temple begs for perspective. How is the little garden Buddha in the store any different from an expensive bronze Buddha that happens to be located in a temple garden? Further, since all objects reflect to some incomplete degree the original thing they signify, where do you draw the line at “this is worthy and this is artificial”.

I suspect that a person’s ego is involved in drawing the line.