Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Marxism & Buddhism
The Dalai Lama has expressed his Marxist beliefs. He even went as far as telling the students that he even considered joining the Communist Party. Is Marxism, and even Communism, REALLY compatible with Buddhism? Is it possible to be a Buddhist Communist?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304186404576389523194617398.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304186404576389523194617398.html
0
Comments
socialism maybe, but communism failed.
One of his ministers, Ngawang Jigme, stayed behind and helped form the Tibetan Autonomous Region. The plan was to have it be just another province of China, but Jigme got the top brass interested in giving it Autonomous Region status, which would confer certain rights on the Tibetans, recognition as a minority, and certain benefits. I just came across info on this recently. Interesting character, N. Jigme.
Hence any political views that encourages "class wars" "over throwing authority" and "blaming the rich" will only bring more suffering.
Many western democracies (not all) already incorporated socialism well into the capitalist system. Any falling back onto old Marxist ideas is self-destruction.
Are all the protest in Greece etc really helping things?!!!
Class wars and resentment against the rich are poisoned versions of wishing compassion and kindness towards less advantaged people. Overthrowing authority implies a violent conflict, we are in a democracy now so it is outdated. We have other avenues, the problems persistent not due to lack of channels rather through apathy and lack of organization.
The centuries long struggle to end the caste system, and the struggles in the 1860s and 1960s to bring equality to Blacks were both "class wars" and attempts to overthrow corrupt authority.
The enlightened monks didnt expressed any beliefs except in the dhamma. Communism is an idea that did not work.
The Buddha pre-dated Marx. This simple fact will always fly in the face of any claim that the Buddha was a Marxist.
HHDL says he's a Marxist, I believe him (but question that he gets Marxism or think maybe he did it for strategic reasons).
Compatibility is irrelevant. When the Buddha advised politicians he did not criticize their "party" affiliations, but taught them how to conduct themselves within their station. Bhikkhu Bodhi addresses this thoroughly in In the Buddha's Words, (pp. 107-108, 111-118, & 130-142). :buck:
:buck:
moreover, there is considerable evidence and good reason to see the early buddhist movement as a populist, egalitarian political movement along with being a spiritual tradition. there was a very oppressive caste system and the fact that _any_ person was free to join the order and/or learn the dhamma was nothing short of revolutionary. the caste system in india was a defacto class system and the justification for the inequality and oppression therein was founded on belief in the vedic religion. both early buddhism and jainism rejected this inequality completely - by admitting everyone they were effectively creating a social movement that undermined the established order, ie. "authority". the penalty for a lower caste member even _learning_ the vedic scriptures was death .. it is possible that this is part of gotama's motivation for taking such pains to distinguish dhamma from all other systems (most of which were based on the vedas), to do otherwise might endanger his lower caste followers.
to say that buddhism has no political impact is simply to ignore the facts of history. significant social movements will always have political impact - impossible for it to be otherwise, failure to recognize this amounts to delusion.
my opinion.
peace.
From a Western perspective, the use of the term "class warfare" refers to different income groups, NOT different castes nor differences in citizenship status.
Furthermore, some people might argue that capitalism is not analogous to slavery.
I would also assert that most material misery is not caused by rich people, and, in fact, there would be more material misery if we did something extreme like imprison or divest the rich. Thus, lashing out against them as many former communists movements have done can only be an expression of hate and/or delusion, similar to anti-Jewish or anti-Asian movements.
The caste system is based on social classes. In America, Blacks were in a different social class before the end of slavery, and even after slavery.
path, I forget about politics.
When I vote, I choose the candidate who cares more
about the weakest segment of the society.
Conceptually, economic standing is independent of caste or slavery. For example, a lower-caste person can have more wealth or income than a higher caste person. And a slave can have a higher level of material welfare than a freeman.
Furthermore, a low-income person can rise to higher levels of income, thus move to a higher class. It happens all the time, though not as much as some would prefer.
Whereas, it is much more difficult, if not impossible, to be promoted to a higher caste or to become a freeman.
I'm not going to continue to debate it with you, because you are so hung up about your definition that you have totally missed the point of the post.
I respect that you have a different viewpoint than mine. Enough said.
Only if you have morally, ethically and financially un-corruptible leaders. Good luck with that!
The proletariat had only workforce to sell and did not own any production facilities.
The bourgeois owned land and industry.
This way of dividing is still prevalent, hence most people are still of the working class - though they have, because of union struggles, better salaries than in the capitalist glory days.
New company forms (like stock selling) and the introduction of knowledge-based jobs challenges the classic definition.
Don't take the advice of musicians too seriously!