Agnostics “R” Us...

@Elmer B Fuddled, this is not an article for sensitive readers, but it outlines the truth about Tibet and the Dalai Lama. For disclosure purposes, the author, Michael John Parenti, is a political scientist, academic historian and cultural critic, and is left wing.

If somebody were to quote 19th century slaveholders and Confederate leaders' pleasant sayings about life, this would be justifiably criticized. If you do this for the Dalai Lama, who has a horrendous record of leadership in 20th Century serf and slave-ridden Tibet, before becoming a CIA operative, there is no outrage - nobody is disturbed or cares to know about it.

Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

 

First off I could not give a damn about the Daily Lama, or their affiliates in corruption. I've read about the monks and the hatred they put on their civilians. All of that corrupt religion is proof that the only god or gods they worship is the god of money. Like the man said, keep tossing your money in the basket, buying your stairway to heaven.

 

I think you should actually read Buddhist texts. There are no calls for eye gouging or serfdom in them. Yes feudal Tibet was not ideal but no feudal society is.

It is a pity but every system of government is cruel whether we see it or not.

Read a basic book on Buddhism and tell me where you see calls for cruel punishments or serfdom.

 

And you may read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius

 

I have read some of it.

Good stuff.

I do think the mixing of any philosophy whether secular or religious with politics is nearly always a bad idea.

E.g. the most famous avowedly atheistic governments was Stalinist Russia. All religions were put down and there was a philosophy of equality called Communism. How many millions were killed in that time?

 

I have no problem with contemplationg certain aspects and teachings of the original Buddha, for exploring different ways of approaching life. I was referring to monks, and especially the Dalai Lama, who has been spoken of here as an admirable person. While in power as the leader of Tibet, living in a 240 room mansion, like the living god is supposed to be, the country practiced serfdom and slavery, torture, other horrendous human rights violations, with an average lifespan of 35 years in 1951, for the common people of course. This was not only in feudal times, it remained this way until 1959, when he was forced to flee after losing a revolt against Chinese rule, after which he worked for the CIA.

 

Hey Dave, sounds a bit "airy-fairy" to me as well. Mind if I take a stab at it?

 

I am not trying to defend feudal Tibet and it was basically feudal up to the mid 20th Century.

I don't think the Dalai Lama had much choice where he lived either. There was a political system in place in which he was a cog. He has said many times that he would not advocate going back to the old Tibet.

As far as working for the CIA I actually don't blame him. He was opposed to the Chinese takeover of the country. Why wouldn't he work with whoever might chase them out?

I go by what the man says now. I have only read him talk about compassion, meditation and non-violence.

 

Fine, if you believe that this man cares one bit about anybody but himself, and has not been in league with those who inflict misery and death upon innocent people, there's nothing I can say to change your mind. If it were up to me, I'd have the lying, corrupt SOB listed as an undesirable, and permanently barred from entering the United States.

It's a fantasy, to think that this man is not a despot and exploiter no matter how beautiful his writings allegidly are.

 

Stab away by all means Lane.

Woody Allen said:
“I have an intense desire to return to the womb.
- Anybody’s.”

 

Religion can be such a divisive subject. I hope there is something after this short life on earth. Some people have suffered tremendously with physical afflictions that they deserve better. Also many of the same have no money to purchase basic necessities.

I don’t know how anyone can know if there is a God or an afterlife without proof, but I don’t blame anyone for having faith. Usually people with some religion in them are more pleasant to be around than pure atheists. At least that is what I have observed in my life. Right now I got too many nagging body issues to even think about a God or an afterlife. It seems beyond my comprehension to think too deeply on such subjects.

I guess the most us are lucky to have food and shelter. I feed the wild deer every day lately to help them endure the bitter cold. It was -18F this morning where I live. We could use some global warming.

 

Yes, you are right about it being impossible to know if there is an afterlife or a god and it is beyond my comprehension as well. I'm also with you, in that I don't care much for many who call themselves Atheists.

 

To admit to being a non-believer, particularly if one uses the term ‘atheist,’ is to ask to be viewed as an unpleasant, even an aggressive person.

I have never understood why, however that opinion also appears to be prevalent on this site.

Can somebody kindly explain.

 

People associate Atheism with totalitarian communism. They believe that Atheists want to ban religion and close the churches. As an Atheist, I have no problem with people practicing religion in their homes, churches, private schools, etc, but it has no place in government, or public schools.

Religion is a business, and religious institutions should pay the same taxes that secular businesses do - no more, no less. Many religious people disagree with this position.

 

Atheism does not represent a hateful stance.

It is quite simply - non belief in god.

 

I ran across this video today that I thought some might find of interest. Never have heard of an argument for there not being an "evil god" before:

What, if anything, makes an all-good god less absurd than an all-evil one?
For centuries, many Western theologians and philosophers have answered the ‘problem of evil’ – how a benevolent god could allow for pain and suffering – with the argument that, in order for humans to perform good deeds, they must be free to choose between good and evil. In this animation from the Centre for Inquiry UK, the British philosopher Stephen Law considers the inverse scenario: if there were a fully evil, omnipotent god, could we possibly imagine he would allow for good deeds to be performed in the name of freedom to choose evil?

https://aeon.co/videos/what-if-anything-makes-an-all-good-god-less-absurd-than-an-all-evil-one

Enjoy.

 

‘All the religion we need is kindness.’

 

That's it. I'm out. Respect for cult-leading con men like this one, is the straw that broke the camel's back. It was nice while it lasted, but this is not my cup of tea. Goodbye and good luck.

 

The quote given is a gem. The man himself is a gem. The Buddhist principle is a gem.

We all take a view of course. I have never set out to offend anybody, though by speaking my truth I know that I have done, and more than once.

Best Wishes buddy - your input has always been welcome on here. Disagreement is also healthy.

Dave x
Jazzer

 

Disagreement is very healthy, Dave, so no worries. The man, the quote, the principle, they are all gems.

When it comes to people leaving the discussion, I always think "Some people are like clouds. When they go away, it's a brighter day."

 

I could only give you an "agree" response to your comment. Just wanted to emphasize that I totally, TOTALLY agree with what you said. This thread will be brighter now that this cloud has gone away.

 

Or until your god strikes.

 

I feel drawn towards those people who speak love and peace.

Those who speak against those who speak peace do not appeal to me.

 

Quite a remarkable contrast from the post just prior to this one. Thanks @Jazzer, for continuing to share your thoughts on the importance of love, peace, kindness, respect, and so much more. You're a gem on this forum.

 

‘Buddhist principles appeal to me. I’m not an expert, but it seems to me to be more of a philosophy of life, than a religion. There is no deity, no intermediary, no one to revere, bow down to, or pray to. A bit like a religion, except you can cut out the ‘middle man.’

I’m sure a lot of you folks know much more about it than I do. I’m just a novice.

 

I am not an expert to be sure. I have been practicing/following Buddhism in general and what is called Secular Buddhism in particular now for about 15 or 20 years. You can read a bit about it here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_Buddhism

The first two books of his I really resonated with were "Buddhism Without Beliefs" and then later "Confessions of a Buddhist Ashiest".

One of the "founders" if you will of Secular Buddhism he is English but lives in France with his French wife. He was a Tibetan Monk for 10 or 15 years and then went to Korea and spent time as monk in a Zen monetary where he met his later to be wife who was a Nun in the monastery. He is worldwide known in the Buddhist community and very active in the USA.

Anyway, long way to say you can look up what he has written on Amazon.co.uk I bet.

You can see his website here:

https://www.stephenbatchelor.org

He also is one of the founders of Bodhi College, which you can read about here:

https://bodhi-college.org

Secular Buddhists are not considered Buddhists by some Buddhists mostly because they think if one does not believe in reincarnation then one can not be a Buddhist. The Buddhists have their divisions much like Christians and in some ways worse and many more traditions than the usual Christian types seems to me.

Anyway trust this is useful.

 

That photo is how things look where I live.

A small chilled out Buddhist nation.

I know you're not getting any younger and struggle with Parkinson's, tinnitus, the loss of your beloved Sylvie, but...

If you ever get the urge to fly across the globe, I have a room for you, wheels to take you around and everything is on me (food, wine, everything).

I mean that Dave... you are most welcome.

 

Thank you so much Daniel
- we are two of a kind, for sure
xx