Now that is interesting!
Jewish Buddhist
The first American convert to Buddhism was Jewish. Very interesting indeed.
Is Buddhism a Failure?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Jewish Buddhist
The first American convert to Buddhism was Jewish. Very interesting indeed.
Buddhism isn't a failure, it's just that the supernatural religions have aggressively taken advantage of human ignorance and gained popularity. Monotheism has a clear advantage in warfare, as it promises life after death. Furthermore, it conditions people to accept a single dominating ruler who's orders cannot be questioned. Buddhism promises only peace of mind and good health, both of which are not very glorious.
But what about Samurai? They were Buddhists and they did rule over Japan for centuries. They used Buddhism to sharpen their skill with the sword,,,didn't they? So they could go into battle in the right frame of mind and die without feeling fear of death. Or I thought that was the whole point anyway.
Their emperor was considered a god. Buddhism suffers somewhat for it's mildness, as it cannot fundamentally eliminate rival beliefs.
I would say the majority were Shinto at the time but some of them were buddhists and even had issues with the dichotomy. But buddhists are people before they are buddhist and being buddhist doesn't change that. Many just increase their levels of rationalization until they felt comfortable again...I'm not killing him, he is in the way of my blade or it is his karma.
The Tibetan buddhist rule of Tibet is particularly shameful.
It was a complete theocracy with the priesthood an unquestionable ruling elite supported by a landed gentry and serfs little more than slaves with all the corruption and human rights abuses that come with that form of government.
Unfortunately it can be difficult to sort through the revisionist "history" offered by both the Chinese and the Tibetan Gov in exile.
I don't know of a website I could just point you to.
Basically it went from one sucks to another sucks. I would say the serfs are slightly better off except that they are being rapidly displaced in their own country. Its not like they had religious freedom or political freedom before or after and the Chinese have brought them out of the iron age, more or less.
yeah, I read that the Tibetans didn't really take to Buddhism much, until it was thoroughly blended with whatever was their indigenous theology.
Theocracies were pretty much always the norm everywhere there is a sizable populations and usually involve a large number of serfs. I imagine places like Tibet, where the land doesn't yield much, it must have been much worse. It's too bad they didn't make an agreement or treaty with the English before China took over.
It seems like people in Tibet could be doing better relatively speaking, but it also seems to be coming at the expense of losing their culture, their land, their political power and just about everything to Han Chinese. I thought it seemed like the Dali Lama has a decent idea of a secular Tibet. I'm not sure.
But, my guess is that the Han Chinese will soon have such a sizable number of people there soon, there won't really be much of a Tibet for the Tibetans. Another powder keg. I wonder if they'll blame "The West" too?
There are several books on the topic written by Englishmen who travelled there before the 1950s. I don't have my reading list with me now, but if I remember, I'll send you the titles.
I don't link all your quotes, believe it or not.
I know: shocking. You can dismiss it here, if you like. Yet, this is what you've said previously. :shrug:
Dismissed.
