Buddhism a la surprise

[Skybird]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/I...ow/3995810.cms

Non-violence can't tackle terror

18 Jan 2009, 0451 hrs IST, PTI
NEW DELHI: The Dalai Lama, a lifelong champion of non-violence on Saturday candidly stated that terrorism cannot be tackled by applying the principle of ahimsa because the minds of terrorists are closed.

"It is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence," the Tibetan spiritual leader said delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture here.

He also termed terrorism as the worst kind of violence which is not carried by a few mad people but by those who are very brilliant and educated.

"They (terrorists) are very brilliant and educated...but a strong ill feeling is bred in them. Their minds are closed," the Dalai Lama said.

He said that the only way to tackle terrorism is through prevention. The head of the Tibetan government-in-exile left the audience stunned when he said "I love President George W Bush." He went on to add how he and the US President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting unlike politicians who take a while to develop close ties.

[Letum]

If it can't be tackled with out violence, then it can't be tackled at all in the long run.
Fortunately for all, H.H. the D.L. is certainly not infallible.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Letum

If it can't be tackled with out violence, then it can't be tackled at all in the long run.
Fortunately for all, H.H. the D.L. is certainly not infallible.

Neither are you.
Let there be nobody mistaken, that the use of force probably has brought more ends to bad things, and has helped more good things in man's evolution to emerge than mere philosphies and good intentions alone. As Thomas Mann said: "Tolerance of evil is a crime", and it never leads to anything different than this: tolerating evil. the dalai Lama said "their minds are closed." I assume he means the same thing like me when saying they are blind by mind and heart. Such people you can't reach with reasons and arguments or intentions. you stop them and hinder them to carry on with all means needed to acchieve that effect, or they carry on. Simply that. As the Dalai Lama also is quoted to have said some years ago: "If somebody has a rifle and starts shooting at you, eventually it may be a good idea to pick up a rifle yourself and start shooting back." Call it pragmatic pedagogics.

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I met the Dalai Lama once, the late 90s. I had my preconcieved notions about him which were quite contrary to my thoughts of him now. Shipmates were waiting for me to make a spectacle out of the event. He, a relatively short man dressed in robes, I being 6'-4" and then as many would tell you somewhat intimidating in size and manners. When he came up to me he looked as is if he was about to climb a mountain. I looked down thinking to say something colorful and get a laugh at his expense.

We took one anothers hand and looked at each other. Just then he let loose with the biggest most geniune smile I had ever seen on anyone in my life which in turn brought the same from me. There was a certain strength in him, in his arms, in his grip and a hardness I thought from having seen too much in life. I thought how can I hate this man he is so kind I am glad to have met him.

I don't agree with his beliefs I wish I could have spoke to him in peace and love with what I now know of Mashiach. But I don't hate the guy for it, that word 'hate' today unfortunetly it is all too common place.

Whats so hard or surprising to say you love someone you've never met why is it so difficult for so many? By 'stunning' the audience like he did with those words I wonder how close they must be to being like them who attacked Mumbai.

I understand what you mean. I also once met him, in the early 90s, and beside him several other Lamas as well. I am not completely overthrown and enthusiastic about him, that simply is not in my stoic cold temper, but surely one needs to be already dead in order to not realise that there is something special around this man, and that he means it straight, open and honest, whatever it is. If more leaders of peoples in the world would be like that, this world would be a better place, no doubt. Unfortunately, we need to deal with the world as it is - and it lacks such leaders. We only know that we could desperately need them, to learn by their example.

[Stealth Hunter]

I would sooner convert to Buddhism than any other religion, though. I like their philosophy of peace, enlightenment, and tapping in with your surroundings.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

I would sooner convert to Buddhism than any other religion, though. I like their philosophy of peace, enlightenment, and tapping in with your surroundings.

Converting to it makes little sense, since converting to it has no real meaning for you or anybody else and will help you nothing. Of course there are many schools and sects and lineages you can gain membership in, and they have ceremonies and rituals like other religions, but all that has nothing to do with what Buddha wanted to point at, at best it teaches you over time what "it" is not. You already have one head on your shoulders, and you don't need somebody else's head put on top of it, not even Buddha's, so use what you've already been given. All what you will ever need you already have.

Learn about and then check for yourself with reason and logic the basic ideas of Siddharta's reasoning and argument. What you find convincing in your analysis and find to be of good for you and others, and not being at the cost of anybody else - keep that and live by it. Doing so is a thousand times better than practicing rituals and "spiritual practices". If you do so, the rest will come by itself. There is no enlightenment you could "gain". Free your mind from images and conceptions. Stop worrying about whether you want to "convert" to Buddhism or not. It is totally unimportant and will give you nothing, and the question can only hinder you. Leave it behind like the steps of the stairs behind you - you hardly give them any second thought, do you.

Stop searching for something, and don't yearn for it outside yourself. That's the essence of Buddhist practice, really, and it is quite simple: awareness. But people do not believe that and start to hassle around. Not before then life become's complicated and mind gets upset. Ideas raise, theories and and clever thoughts, arguments are given and counter-arguments appear - clearness leaves, confusion reigns.

Best way to clear a muddy water is not trying to clear it - but to let it be.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

I would sooner convert to Buddhism than any other religion, though. I like their philosophy of peace, enlightenment, and tapping in with your surroundings.

Yeah but the food gets a tad dull after a while. Other than that its all good.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Let there be nobody mistaken, that the use of force probably has brought more ends to bad things, and has helped more good things in man's evolution to emerge than mere philosphies and good intentions alone.

Shall we compare the number of violent deaths in countries where the use of violent
force is common place with the number of violent deaths in countries where the use of
violent force is rare?

It is a culture of peace, rather than the domination of enemies via force, that produces
lasting peace.

There are many hundreds of times fewer violent deaths, illnesses, famines, disasters,
wars, genocides etc. now than there where 2000 years ago. This is not because we
use more force now, but because of medicine, modern farming, law, government and
other such "mere philosophies and good intentions".

[Skybird]

Shall we compare the numbers of revolutions, violent uprises and wars being fought against "evil" with where the world would be today if they would not have been fought, not to mention: would have been lost? Should we consider the number of tyrants and dicators who had been driven out by force, barbaric ideologies overcome by violent resistance, and the power monopoles of some and abuse of these broken with brute force?

Peaceful revolutions are a relatively young phenomenon, and not many examples are to be given. Wars have had a tremendous influence in shaping the world we currently have. Also in shaping our today's freedoms, and local peace.

Freedom is no natural right by birth, but a conseqeunce of action. Freedom needs to be fought for, and needs to be defended, if needed by force. He who is not willing to fight for freedom, his or that of his children, does not deserve freedom, for he does not esteem it. Such is a man who carelessly throws it away and does not see the loss, and minimises it.

And let's face it - Ghandi only is a name in the history book because he confronted the British, and the British Empire after all - and despite undeniable excesses - all in all was a relatively civilised power that I rate much higher in reputation than it is en vogue today. If Ghandi would have had to deal with Stalin's Russia or Hitler's Third Reich, with Tamerlan'S kingdom or the Mongoles, we would not even know today that he ever had existed, for already his first pacifistic rally would have been shot or hacked into bloody pieces.

[Letum]

Indeed. He would have been hacked to death by any government that viewed the use
of force as the best means of solving a problem.

It's a jolly good thing the British Empire where not as keen on force and violence as
you seam to be.

All revolutions; violent or non-violent, good or bad, have at their core a popular
ideology or philosophy that moves the population as one. No small minority in power
can resist the will of the majority then the majority act as one either violently or
peacefully.

Peaceful revolutions happen several times a year in Europe and have done for
quite a while now.
Being peaceful by nature, so very effective and common place, perhaps you don't
notice them for what they are anymore, but revolutions they are. They could be done
violently, but it is a good thing they are not!

I believe the next one in the UK will happen some time this year, although it is yet to
be announced.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Letum

Shall we compare the number of violent deaths in countries where the use of violent
force is common place with the number of violent deaths in countries where the use of
violent force is rare?

I vote this as the dumbest argument so far for 2009.

-S

[Letum]

The only reason elections do not throw the old rules out of the window is because
so far most people are happy with the old rules.
That does not mean elections are not capable of as much revolutionary change as a
civil war. There is nothing a violent revolution can do that an election can not.

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I vote this as the dumbest argument so far for 2009.

-S

I vote it the most obvious.

That aside, care to elaborate?

[Rockstar]

I met the Dalai Lama once, the late 90s. I had my preconcieved notions about him which were quite contrary to my thoughts of him now. Shipmates were waiting for me to make a spectacle out of the event. He, a relatively short man dressed in robes, I being 6'-4" and then as many would tell you somewhat intimidating in size and manners. When he came up to me he looked as is if he was about to climb a mountain. I looked down thinking to say something colorful and get a laugh at his expense.

We took one anothers hand and looked at each other. Just then he let loose with the biggest most geniune smile I had ever seen on anyone in my life which in turn brought the same from me. There was a certain strength in him, in his arms, in his grip and a hardness I thought from having seen too much in life. I thought how can I hate this man he is so kind I am glad to have met him.

I don't agree with his beliefs I wish I could have spoke to him in peace and love with what I now know of Mashiach. But I don't hate the guy for it, that word 'hate' today unfortunetly it is all too common place.

Whats so hard or surprising to say you love someone you've never met why is it so difficult for so many? By 'stunning' the audience like he did with those words I wonder how close they must be to being like them who attacked Mumbai.