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.
More Myanmar nonsense and an epiphany.
Cinorjer
Veteran
Well, the "nonsense" part is my own opinion. We seem to have the monks pushing for a law that forces the man (we can assume a Muslim man) to convert to Buddhism before he's allowed to marry one of their Buddhist women. In other words, the woman and any children aren't allowed to convert to Islam. Just how this will be enforced isn't mentioned. I think the monks are just assuming no Muslim man will ever convert, so that will ban all mixed marriages without actually saying so.
rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/28/myanmar-leader-proposes-law-to-protect-buddhists-from-interfaith-marriages/
When I first became a Buddhist I was proud that no war had ever been fought in the name of Buddhism. No Buddhist crusade or forced conversions for this enlightened religion! But eventually I got over that. I had an epiphany one day. It was while trying to reconcile the actual history of Tibet against the enlightened society I expected from a Buddhist theocracy, but it serves for all Buddhist nations. I think it's important to see Buddhism and Buddhists for what it is, warts and all. However, I might be too cynical. I really am interested in opposing views out there.
This conflict isn't about Buddhism. It's about tribal identity. But that doesn't mean we can say, "Oh, this is not Buddhism at work. Those aren't good monks who understand the Dharma, not if they're calling for violence."
This is Buddhism as tribal identity. All religions are deeply interwoven into the culture's tribal identity and the actual message is secondary to the symbol. It's human nature at work. Religion becomes not something you practice, it becomes who you are. It's the same for all the religions.
If wars were not fought in the name of Buddhism, it's either because both nations were already Buddhist, or the war was fought in the name of the Emperor and he didn't need a justification. When it comes to tribes, Buddhism is just another label to fight over or defend when it comes to those other tribes that worship a different god.
rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/28/myanmar-leader-proposes-law-to-protect-buddhists-from-interfaith-marriages/
When I first became a Buddhist I was proud that no war had ever been fought in the name of Buddhism. No Buddhist crusade or forced conversions for this enlightened religion! But eventually I got over that. I had an epiphany one day. It was while trying to reconcile the actual history of Tibet against the enlightened society I expected from a Buddhist theocracy, but it serves for all Buddhist nations. I think it's important to see Buddhism and Buddhists for what it is, warts and all. However, I might be too cynical. I really am interested in opposing views out there.
This conflict isn't about Buddhism. It's about tribal identity. But that doesn't mean we can say, "Oh, this is not Buddhism at work. Those aren't good monks who understand the Dharma, not if they're calling for violence."
This is Buddhism as tribal identity. All religions are deeply interwoven into the culture's tribal identity and the actual message is secondary to the symbol. It's human nature at work. Religion becomes not something you practice, it becomes who you are. It's the same for all the religions.
If wars were not fought in the name of Buddhism, it's either because both nations were already Buddhist, or the war was fought in the name of the Emperor and he didn't need a justification. When it comes to tribes, Buddhism is just another label to fight over or defend when it comes to those other tribes that worship a different god.
5
Comments
The cause, basis, foundation or cultural identity be damned.
Many Christians believe killing is wrong.
Many Muslims believe killing is wrong.
Many Buddhists believe killing is wrong.
It's wrong, no matter who, no matter what.
So imposing specific rules based purely on religious prejudice - is wrong.
No matter who, no matter what.
Wars over basic stuff......
KIlling people over issues and just situations.......
No country should/needs to be telling anyone who
they can hang out with and what they should do.
Especially marriage and sex.
Who the hell cares what I'm doing?
Anyway.....
This is control issues.
And control issues don't stand up for
very long if your practicing...just sayin'.
A 'radical monk' ?? Yeah, no shit.
People being bad/sad Buddhists...
Another reason why more women should run
things....hahaha
The practice has shown me that there is no difference between a Muslim human and a Buddhist human, they are both mired in attachment, aversion, and delusion and capable of the same crap, and I'm right there along with them! it's like one big "kumbaya" singing circle that goes on for eternity and eventually you are happy you die to get respite but then you come back and get thrown into the circle.. no wonder Siddhartha wanted out, i do too. I'm not so convinced women would do it any better then men.. I work with 100 women and I've seen their politics ahaha, women and man are humans with the same issues just like Muslims and Buddhists.
The only way to find out, would be to make it possible.
Which I doubt will happen any time soon.
I do think there should be more women in the mix though....
Perhaps if we amended the constitution for the executive branch in America to have one male and one female president who had equal power lol, now that would be an interesting show. Men and Women seem to come together to make a good "team" as it were, playing off of each others strengths and weaknesses. This is probably one of the reasons why we've survived as long as we have.
Can you imagine them all getting together - AND co-operating - ?
(No, neither can I..... )
For me it is how we become independent of gender, tribe, species, affiliation to memes, memories and scandalous skandhas, meditational or spiritual states and our cushions. As for lousy sangha, must be the Kali Yuga.
http://buddhism.about.com/od/whatistheself/a/skandhasexplan.htm
Do we maybe need a Western missionary movement to put these Dharma heretics right? Maybe not . . .
Pre-enlightenment, there is much evidence in existence to indicate that the two minds DO function differently, in certain key areas... You know what they say:
If women ruled the world, there would be no wars; just intense negotiations every 28 days.... I'd vote for it....! If you actually believe that, you really don't know a great deal about the history of social events solely surrounding gender factors.
But this is off-topic, and I think, after addressing your comments here, we should stick to topic.
I'm not trying to have the last word; PM me if you wish to continue.
But this is not the place....
But you're missing her point: She reacted to assist sovereign land.
Whether the Falklands should 'belong' to Argentina or not, the fact is, it was British soil at the time - and still is.
Without her intervention, it could all have gone very wrong for the inhabitants.
She fought a war for a very good reason; in 'defence of the realm'.
She was justified in Law - both national AND international - and she succeeded.
But she reacted under provocation.
She didn't 'start' it.
Back to topic please.
"Do as I say, not as I do"?
Monks in Myammar may be pushing for a law that forces people to convert to Buddhism before they are allowed to marry; something which are not new actually, just that it has always been the Buddhists who are at the losing ends.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Malaysia
The said monk probably would not be able to tolerate this too.
http://forums.techarp.com/adrian-wong/23682-malaysia-land-body-snatchers.html
Monks are after all human first, Buddhists second.
And nowhere am I saying Buddhists or the Myanmar Buddhists in particular are worse than other cultures. Pointing out the abuses of other cultures to defend the abuses of our own is a time honored way of excusing our own actions. I will burn down the house of that innocent Muslim down the street because of something a Muslim is supposed to have done in another city. That guy didn't do anything to me, but it doesn't matter. He isn't innocent any more because he's one of them. They're all guilty. That's where this ends up.
Of course any list of known human rights abuses puts the Muslim world in a harsh light, with its male dominated and exclusive rules. I disagree that monk in Myanmar would have any problem at all with the tables turned, if a Buddhist son had announced the sudden conversion of his father and taken the inheritance for himself. It's exactly the same. What does this case you mention have to do with Myanmar monks insisting on their own version of sharia law?
But the fact that any religion can be used as an excuse to divide by all cultures is my point. This is Buddhism as tribal identity, not a spiritual path. But it's still Buddhism, just not the face we'd like to see.
And just one country away, Buddhists are always on the winning end, and Muslims distinctly on the losing end in Thailand.