If the “Victims of Communism” are going to get a memorial, then what about the victims of Buddhism? Just a thought…
Who ARE Buddhism’s victims? Well, let’s see now:
*Opposition from the (ultra-nationalist Sinhalese) sangha in Sri Lanka was instrumental in scuttling a peace agreement with the (Hindu) Tamils.
*Buddhism in Thailand is well-integrated with the mafia there (are monks involved in human trafficking for the sex trade?) as well as Thai nationalism (which targets leftists and Muslims).
*Taiwan’s Buddhist leaders have been responsible for various scandals of a more petty nature (sex and money), with many of them fund-raising like TV evangelists.
*Bhutan’s lamas help suppress the rights of ethnic Nepalis in that country (who may even make up the majority of its population).
Odd you should mention this, one of my senior prosecutor students is busy prosecuting a Tibetan Lama (the defendant is medium high up in the Buddha “food chain”) for a double rape (two victims including a “sister nun”).
It is amazing to me what a complete “la la land” bullshit view of Buddhism and Daoism most westerners have. And it is a source of utter amazement to me how the Tibetan buddhist have so stunningly marketed their “line” of half baked buddhism, mixed with Tantra and generic New Age horseshit to both white Californians back in Cali and Taiwanese here on the island.
Every time I see one of those creeps in their dirty brown robes wandering around the Taipei Train station I am tempted to beat the fuck out of them on general principles.
But then I do not because I am a “real buddhist” and I just feel metta (loving kindness) for them.
Swami Brian
Abbot of the San Chung California Buddhist Temple and Tax Haven
Damn that Thai monk who gave you that unpleasant fiddle as a child, screaming Jesus, but I don’t think you can so readily write-off Thailand’s Buddhists with such a broad brush.
Yes, there are some awful injustices by insitutional Buddhism, but is it really any worse than the church in the west? Who is doing the harm? Individual monks or Buddhism as a whole? Are the principles of Buddhism, institutional or otherwise, really that bad? Akin, say, to the belief prospered by Christianity that humans, and only humans, have a unique relationship with god and thus unique entitlement to ravage all that god put on this planet?
Peter Hopkirk’s Trespassers On The Roof Of The World paints a less than idyllic view of the way Tibetan Buddhists regarded outsiders. Fairly brutal lot. Pulling people apart by tying their limbs to four horses pulling in different directions seems like a less than charitable approach to 19th century tourism. I fail to see where the peaceful, utopian, coloured western view comes from.
I do agree on the institutional brutality of Tibetan Buddhism, mind you. The Dalai Lama has been unbelievably succesful in distorting the view on this lot, methinks.
All “Isms” are bound to disappoint because, beneath the surface, they’re all the same – elaborate schemes for avoiding having to think and elevating the sow’s ear of human frailty to the silk purse of divine will.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]I do agree on the institutional brutality of Tibetan Buddhism, mind you. The Dalai Lama has been unbelievably succesful in distorting the view on this lot, methinks.
HG[/quote]
Correct. Of course it took Francis Younghusband to tame the barbaric buddhists and loutish lamas and bring civility to Tibet as the British did to other untamed lands.
A lot of the Tibetan monks in India and Nepal, particularly the younger ones, are only monks because it’s the only way they can get any kind of schooling. They’re not monks because they are pious Buddhists and so they often ignore the “rules” of Buddhism, resulting in various sexual crimes and scandals.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]Whatever happened to those marauding Tibetan thugs that used to cause quite a bit of bother in the pubs and clubs of Taipei, all those years back?
Would have been very nice to see Scott front those bastards - consider it lama by proxy.
HG[/quote]
Who’s Scott? And do you mean confront those bastards or front those bastards as in leader of the gang, so to speak?
The other notable example is Burma (Myanmar), a F@#$ed up basket case of a country if there ever was one. Its leaders are supposedly Buddhist.
I think it is a common misconception that all Buddhists are peace-loving, have never had a war etc. Because if you look at the situation in most Buddhist countries today they are far from peaceful and have a lot of human rights problems. Most of them are not even democratic.
As regards sex and money scandals involving monks. These sorts of things happen in every religion. It is not good of course. One of the problems relates to the fact there are too many monks or it is too easy to become a monk. It is true that many young men become monks to get an education or escape poverty rather than a religious calling. You can’t blame them and the society often gives them an undue amount of respect that allows them to get away with things they shouldn’t.
[quote=“wix”]I think it is a common misconception that all Buddhists are peace-loving, have never had a war etc. Because if you look at the situation in most Buddhist countries today they are far from peaceful and have a lot of human rights problems. Most of them are not even democratic.
[/quote]
You would have thought the history of say Vietnam and Cambodia would have knocked out the happy smiling Buddhist idea.
Look, I understand English isn’t your first language, and too that a writing/reading penguin is an impressive beast, but please try and learn the subtle art of context.
Scott was the second poster in the thread. He’s big on M&M’s, which I thought were mere choccies, but context would suggest violence of some kind.
Notwithstanding the fact that some buddhists are drinking, gambling womanizers, and the military thugs who seized control of Myanmar are supposedly buddhists, and Tibetan buddhism has some less than savory historical precedents and practices. . .
Still:
Buddhists tend to be less arrogant, high and mighty about the superiority of their faith, and intent on converting their neighbors than Christians or Muslims, and
Have caused only a tiny fraction of the violence that Christians and Muslims have caused, even on a per capita basis.
So, maybe it’s not so naive for people to feel Buddhism may be a better faith.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]
Look, I understand English isn’t your first language, and too that a writing/reading penguin is an impressive beast, but please try and learn the subtle art of context.
Scott was the second poster in the thread. He’s big on M&M’s, which I thought were mere choccies, but context would suggest violence of some kind.
Perhaps I should add that I like Buddhism, have studied some Tibetan (forgotten two or three years’ worth!), and have fond memories of studying in Tibetan monasteries. True, there are lots of good people out there, whether ordained or not, and many aspects worth preserving.
But Buddhism as a culture, or set of institutions, seems unable to engage in meaningful reform. At least the Catholics might think about cleaning house if they get a tough enough pope. But Buddhism is more like Shi’ism, or Orthodox Christianity. Lots of lamas (or their functional equivalent) with no real accountability to anybody except their patrons, and a tendency to gravitate toward the most chauvinistic political options in their respective countries.
If I ever have kids, I would be reluctant to encourage them to get involved in Buddhism, despite its many great cultural accomplishments. The odds of it contributing to the quality of their lives strike me as low, in view of how Buddhism is typically practiced.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]I do agree on the institutional brutality of Tibetan Buddhism, mind you. The Dalai Lama has been unbelievably succesful in distorting the view on this lot, methinks.
HG[/quote]Have you read his autobiography? It doesn’t go into great detail on this issue, but to me it’s very clear that he wasn’t happy about many things in the old system, and had just started to try to change things when outside events intervened and changed everything.
I agree with Brian that many Westerners have an overly rosy view of some aspects of traditional Tibetan culture. Of course I don’t agree about the other stuff, but I will say this: I think that the idealism of absolutely everything Tibetan can in some cases be a hindrance to serious study, contemplation, and practice of Tibetan Buddhism.
