Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:12 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:03 pm
I'm pretty sure if we really want to go looking, the source is likely one of the Chinese apocryphal bodhisattvaśīla scriptures in the 1400's of the Taishō Canon. That's just a guess, those scriptures have all sorts of things in them.

But its very common to be of the opinion that cheating will get you reborn as a homosexual. Even people who are okay with homosexuals may be of that opinion, since why would you kick a man while he's down (while he's homosexual, so to speak, in this instance)? Even if misconduct leads to birth as a homosexual, it doesn't make any sense then to be extra cruel or what-have-you toward homosexuals because of what happened in the past.

That being said, I'd be interested if there's canonical sources for this. I hear it often enough that people have to be pulling it from somewhere, and I hear it often coming from Thai Buddhism, so I think it may be some śrāvaka Buddhavacana in their canon.

It's like if I learned that Queequeg (sorry to use you as an example here) has a terrible non-contagious genetic skin condition and that he got it as a result of being a rapist in 1850 or something, then I decided to treat Queegqueg like he's a rapist right now and make conclusions about his person based on his skin condition and that I've decided he's still a rapist.

It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Abhidharmakosha maintains that male homosexuality is a result of excess desire in the mind stream. Tibetan medicine maintains it is principally the behavior of the mother.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2428
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:43 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:12 pm
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:03 pm
I'm pretty sure if we really want to go looking, the source is likely one of the Chinese apocryphal bodhisattvaśīla scriptures in the 1400's of the Taishō Canon. That's just a guess, those scriptures have all sorts of things in them.

But its very common to be of the opinion that cheating will get you reborn as a homosexual. Even people who are okay with homosexuals may be of that opinion, since why would you kick a man while he's down (while he's homosexual, so to speak, in this instance)? Even if misconduct leads to birth as a homosexual, it doesn't make any sense then to be extra cruel or what-have-you toward homosexuals because of what happened in the past.

That being said, I'd be interested if there's canonical sources for this. I hear it often enough that people have to be pulling it from somewhere, and I hear it often coming from Thai Buddhism, so I think it may be some śrāvaka Buddhavacana in their canon.

It's like if I learned that Queequeg (sorry to use you as an example here) has a terrible non-contagious genetic skin condition and that he got it as a result of being a rapist in 1850 or something, then I decided to treat Queegqueg like he's a rapist right now and make conclusions about his person based on his skin condition and that I've decided he's still a rapist.

It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Abhidharmakosha maintains that male homosexuality is a result of excess desire in the mind stream. Tibetan medicine maintains it is principally the behavior of the mother.
"So what does the lady have to do, be on top?" he said, only with half a joke in his mouth.

There's a slightly convincing argument that hormones in the womb cause homosexuality, and that women who've had more sons in general are more likely to produce homosexual sons, but IMO it seems like a false correlation, and I don't think any of the actual hormone mechanics have been demonstrated.
Last edited by Caoimhghín on Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:44 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:43 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:12 pm
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:03 pm
I'm pretty sure if we really want to go looking, the source is likely one of the Chinese apocryphal bodhisattvaśīla scriptures in the 1400's of the Taishō Canon. That's just a guess, those scriptures have all sorts of things in them.

But its very common to be of the opinion that cheating will get you reborn as a homosexual. Even people who are okay with homosexuals may be of that opinion, since why would you kick a man while he's down (while he's homosexual, so to speak, in this instance)? Even if misconduct leads to birth as a homosexual, it doesn't make any sense then to be extra cruel or what-have-you toward homosexuals because of what happened in the past.

That being said, I'd be interested if there's canonical sources for this. I hear it often enough that people have to be pulling it from somewhere, and I hear it often coming from Thai Buddhism, so I think it may be some śrāvaka Buddhavacana in their canon.

It's like if I learned that Queequeg (sorry to use you as an example here) has a terrible non-contagious genetic skin condition and that he got it as a result of being a rapist in 1850 or something, then I decided to treat Queegqueg like he's a rapist right now and make conclusions about his person based on his skin condition and that I've decided he's still a rapist.

It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Abhidharmakosha maintains that male homosexuality is a result of excess desire in the mind stream. Tibetan medicine maintains it is principally the behavior of the mother.
"So what does the lady have to do, be on top?" he said, only with half a joke in his mouth.
The post-conception behavior of the mother, not whether she is cowgirl or missionary.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2428
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:53 pm

Yes, my silly joke can be put aside, but what behaviours specifically?

I'm interested. I'd only laugh if it was profoundly a hilarious answer ("She eats too many sausage-shaped foods," etc.), but I have no idea what Tibetans would have thought produced homosexual children.

There is an ayurvedic sexual dysfunction where a man is said to have deficient sperm ducts, and he must first suck semen out of a healthy male in order to fill his own ducts as so that he may have his own erection and his own orgasm, thus causing the man to seek out oral sex with other men.

The mechanics all have a certain logic to them, but the condition as a whole makes no sense. It makes sense though, that bisexual or otherwise straight-behaving men could be in the position of receiving oral sex from a submissive homosexual. They could observe the sexual dynamics of the situation and see the homosexual only get himself off after his partner.

"Why does he have to swallow the semen before orgasming?" they might wonder. "Oh, because he can't on his own," and then the above answer follows based on what the person in question saw before them and how they interpreted the situation.
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2428
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:59 pm

Wait a minute.

If its "caused by" a mother's post-conception behaviour, is it the mother's "fault" that an otherwise straight child is born gay instead?

Is it "caused by" a mother's specific post-conception behaviour or "accompanied by" these certain behaviours?
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

Sādhaka
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:52 pm

Tibetan Medicine would recognize that it wouldn’t be the mother’s post-conception behavior alone; and that karma & vipaka from previous lifetimes would be a factor too.

Same with Abhidharma: i.e. it would not be excess desire alone, but also the way that excess desire was put into action in previous lifetimes.

Sādhaka
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:53 pm

Norwegian wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am
Sādhaka wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:10 am
Norwegian wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:20 pm
The one Buddhist on this planet that is the most well-known, who most certainly is as traditional as one could possibly get, namely His Holiness the Dalai Lama, has said many times, that he prefers socialism, and that he is a Marxist.
And he also said that he had “no worries” about Donald Trump getting in office:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/23/dalai-l ... ction.html

:shrug:
That was in 2016. Update yourself a bit:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48772175
In a scathing assessment, he said the 45th president's time in office was defined by a "lack of moral principle", a contrast to remarks made in 2016 when he said he had "no worries" about a Trump presidency.
Asked about the US president, whom the Tibetan spiritual leader has previously unflatteringly impersonated, he said: “His emotions [are] also a little bit,” and made a gesture waggling his finger near his temple. “One day he says something, another day he says something. But I think [there is a] lack of moral principle. When he became president, he expressed America first. That is wrong. America, they should take the global responsibility.”

Oh, I do remember now seeing similar articles relatively recently; I’d just forgotten that I had seen them.

The point is, is that the Dalai Lama had even said that he had no problem with a Donald Trump presidency at all in the first place.

Aside from likely an couple actions Trump did that contradicted promises he’d made during his campaign, as to exactly why the Dalai Lama would have said it at all in the first place, then criticized Trump later on; one could only speculate....

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9642
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:58 pm

Fortyeightvows wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:55 am
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:48 pm
ford_truckin wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:37 pm
Best not to express your views too openly if you happen to be a conservative. A pro-life, pro traditional marriage stance will get you banned fast even though you can find support for these viewpoints in Buddhist texts.
Stop exaggerating. No one has ever been banned for expressing pro-life or pro traditional marriage views. They get banned for posting slurs and other offensive remarks.

Talk about snowflakes.
That's not really an exaggeration, because promoting or glorifying or elevating traditional marriage as far superior to nontraditional 'arrangments' would count as 'offensive.'.
I have not seen it, snowflake.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:09 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:52 pm
Tibetan Medicine would recognize that it wouldn’t be the mother’s post-conception behavior alone; and that karma & vipaka from previous lifetimes would be a factor too.

Same with Abhidharma: i.e. it would not be excess desire alone, but also the way that excess desire was put into action in previous lifetimes.


In Tibetan Medicine it is considered to be primarily the conduct of the mother, but also whether the amount of reproductive fluid is even. In other words:

"More semen, a boy will be born; more menstrum, a girl will be born. Equal amounts, apart from the divisions of ambiguous gender, cause the birth of twins; incompatible birth location; physical deformity, these are births caused by harmful impurities.

At the time of conception when the father’s sperm, the mother’s egg and the bardo consciousness are together, if there is more semen of the father, there will be birth as a boy; if there is more menstrum, i.e. the red element, a girl will be born a girl. If the semen and menstrum are even, a neuter, a hermaphrodite, or someone who changes gender will be born and at the time of the mer mer po stage of the mixing of semen and the red element twins will be born from a division into two or three sections because of being divided by wind. Also each section will have a some greater, lesser, or an equivalent amount of semen and menstrum, producing births as above. "

Here ambiguous gender is a translation of the term paṇḍaka, and there are several types of paṇḍaka, with hermaphrodites and gay people included in this category.


In Abhidharma, excess affliction in general is the primary cause of a paṇḍaka. No cause is speculated upon in terms of conduct in past lives, it is simply stated that because of excess afflictions of both sexes (anger for lesbians), such people are incapable of holding pratimokṣa vows. But there is no sort of moral judgments about these people since there are many kinds of beings of ambiguous gender, like nāgas and so on.
Last edited by Malcolm on Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:13 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:59 pm
Wait a minute.

If its "caused by" a mother's post-conception behaviour, is it the mother's "fault" that an otherwise straight child is born gay instead?

Is it "caused by" a mother's specific post-conception behaviour or "accompanied by" these certain behaviours?
There is no such thing as an "otherwise straight" child. Generally speaking, gender differentiation, in Tibetan Medicine and Ayurveda, occurs about three weeks after conception, though it can be changed in the third week of pregnancy.

If you are gay, you were born that way, according to Tibetan Medicine. So, nothing to really get bothered about. People who issue moral judgements about gender preferences, including the desire to change genders, simply have no idea what the facts are beneath such wishes and seem to have this idea that if you are a miserable in a male body, you should not seek to change this. But of course we know throughout history that there are men and women who are more comfortable in gender identities different than what their genitalia might indicate.
Last edited by Malcolm on Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Könchok Thrinley
Former staff member
Posts: 1975
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Könchok Thrinley » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:09 pm
In Abhidharma, excess affliction in general is the primary cause of a paṇḍaka. No cause is speculated upon in terms of conduct in past lives, it is simply stated that because of excess afflictions of both sexes (anger for lesbians), such people are incapable of holding pratimokṣa vows. But there is no sort of moral judgments about these people since there are many kinds of beings of ambiguous gender, like nāgas and so on.
By pratimoksa vows do you mean the ordained precepts or also the lay precepts? And what does that mean concerning modern gay followers, since the understanding is bit different nowadays? I mean I don't think I am less capable upholding 5 lay precepts, although the definition of sexual misconduct can be a rather tricky/hazy one as many modern teachers don't go into that topic.
“Observing samaya involves to remain inseparable from the union of wisdom and compassion at all times, to sustain mindfulness, and to put into practice the guru’s instructions”. Garchen Rinpoche

Formerly known as Miroku.

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm

Könchok Thrinley wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:09 pm
In Abhidharma, excess affliction in general is the primary cause of a paṇḍaka. No cause is speculated upon in terms of conduct in past lives, it is simply stated that because of excess afflictions of both sexes (anger for lesbians), such people are incapable of holding pratimokṣa vows. But there is no sort of moral judgments about these people since there are many kinds of beings of ambiguous gender, like nāgas and so on.
By pratimoksa vows do you mean the ordained precepts or also the lay precepts? And what does that mean concerning modern gay followers, since the understanding is bit different nowadays? I mean I don't think I am less capable upholding 5 lay precepts, although the definition of sexual misconduct can be a rather tricky/hazy one as many modern teachers don't go into that topic.
Both. There are no "lay vows" in Buddhadharma. This idea is a misconception borrowed from Christianity. From an Abhidharma point of view, and Vinaya, you can certainly be refuge holder, but you cannot receive the vows, even if you undergo the pratimokṣa vow ceremony, other than as an aspiration.

This is not the case with Mahāyāna pratimokṣa, only Hinayāna pratimokṣa.
Last edited by Malcolm on Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9642
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:17 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:03 pm
It's like if I learned that Queequeg (sorry to use you as an example here)
There's no Queequeg to mind. :tongue:
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9642
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:24 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm
This is not the case with Mahāyāna pratimokṣa, only Hinayāna pratimokṣa.
Can you elaborate on that?
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Dan74
Former staff member
Posts: 2778
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Dan74 » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:32 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:32 pm
Dan74 wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:38 am
I guess over the years I've become pretty conservative on some social issues. But US Conservatives is something else entirely. For me, classical conservative vs progressive is simply that - emphasis on preserving what is traditional, established vs emphasis on changing, reforming and throwing away. Any thinking person needs to look at matters on a case-by-case basis, but there is still bound to be an a priori bias towards conserving or changing.
This is ridiculously simplistic. The short and fast version is the conservatives want conserve their class privilege, which are the means by which they have attained wealth and power. This attitude begins right with person considered the founder of the modern conservatism, Burke. While lounging (or playing golf) in saccharine paternalism which pretends to a concern for others, conservatives in general simply want to make sure that they get to keep the benefits of their class privileges, which they did not earn for themselves, but came into on the backs of others.

Progressives seek to make sure that in a society were there is an enormous disparity between people in terms of class and privilege, those who have an outsized amount of power due to their wealth and power do not deprive those who lack wealth and privilege (most of us) of our basic rights, and seek policies to make sure that no one secures wealth and privilege through exploiting others. This may involve wealth redistribution from rich to the poor; whereas conservative policies seek to redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich.
Ridiculously simplistic, Malcolm? I think we have a kettle-and-pot situation here. The equivalent of your (mis)characterisation of conservatives is that the progressives want more welfare so that they can continue to be lazy and sponge off the system. Or if not, that they feel guilty for their privilege and advocate more for the poor, while they continue to enjoy upper class existence. Such "explanations" are just intellectually lazy strawmen that avoid engaging with the substance of the arguments.

Many prominent conservatives did not come from wealthy families. Take the recently diseased Roger Scrutton. Or Jorge Borges who never really enjoyed wealth or privilege in his own country. Or even Tolkien, who after his father's death had to subsist with his mother on the handouts of a few relatives, until they stopped.


Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:32 pm
In modern times, in so called first world countries, this is most crucially felt at the environmental level, where the those who have wealth and power live in regions that are relatively unpolluted, whereas the poor and powerless are forced to live in toxic environments.

At this phase of the game, progressives want to save the environment, whereas, over the last 20 years or so, conservatives have abandoned all sense and gone full tilt climate denialism, not because they really believe there is no problem, but because it is inconvenient for their accumulation of wealth and power.
Some European conservative governments (even the British Tories) have embraced reducing emissions in order to ameliorate clime change. While some people on the Left are resistant, due to job losses. It's not black and white.

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:53 pm

Dan74 wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:32 pm

Many prominent conservatives did not come from wealthy families. Take the recently diseased Roger Scrutton. Or Jorge Borges who never really enjoyed wealth or privilege in his own country. Or even Tolkien, who after his father's death had to subsist with his mother on the handouts of a few relatives, until they stopped.
Borges, proves my point admirably -- he began a social democrat in his youth, and only became a conservative after he became successful. As I said, the political point of view of conservatives is "I got mine."

Some European conservative governments (even the British Tories) have embraced reducing emissions in order to ameliorate clime change. While some people on the Left are resistant, due to job losses. It's not black and white.
Who are some of these leftist climate deniers?

Simon E.
Posts: 7434
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Simon E. » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:54 pm

And who are these Tory eco warriors? The house magazine of Brit Conservatives is The Spectator and they are climate change deniers to a man..As is the current Home Secretary Priti Patel. No one actually knows what Boris really thinks about anything..
Last edited by Simon E. on Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The difference between us and Tara is that she knows she doesn’t exist”.

Malcolm
Posts: 30164
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:56 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:24 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:16 pm
This is not the case with Mahāyāna pratimokṣa, only Hinayāna pratimokṣa.
Can you elaborate on that?
You can read this in the Kosha, chapter 4.

Norwegian
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Norwegian » Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:58 pm

Dan74 wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:32 pm
Some European conservative governments (even the British Tories) have embraced reducing emissions in order to ameliorate clime change. While some people on the Left are resistant, due to job losses. It's not black and white.
https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/uk/ - "Insufficient"

The UK is currently projected not to achieve its own medium-term climate targets, with government projections showing it will not achieve the emission reductions required to comply with its fourth (2023-2027) and fifth (2028-2032) carbon budgets.

The UK Labour Party has pledged £250 billion to drive its plans for a ‘Green Industrial Revolution’, while recently committing to a 2030 phase out of fossil fuel vehicle sales and £3.6bn for a national charging network. These policies alone would make the UK a climate frontrunner with no other major developed country yet committing to such ambitious actions.

This is in contrast to the Conservative Party which has announced only a limited number of climate-related policies in their election manifesto, including £9.2 billion for improving the energy efficiency of schools, hospitals and homes, and a brought-forward ban on gas-boilers in all new homes from 2020. An announced ban on fracking was subsequently criticised for not being permanent. Many other parties, including the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National Party, and the Greens, have made action on climate change a high priority in their election campaigns.
"The Guru is the Buddha, the Guru is the Dharma,
The Guru is the Sangha too,
The Guru is Śrī Heruka.
The All-Creating King is the Guru."

-- The Secret Assembly Tantra

User avatar
Dan74
Former staff member
Posts: 2778
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Dan74 » Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:53 pm
Dan74 wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:32 pm

Many prominent conservatives did not come from wealthy families. Take the recently diseased Roger Scrutton. Or Jorge Borges who never really enjoyed wealth or privilege in his own country. Or even Tolkien, who after his father's death had to subsist with his mother on the handouts of a few relatives, until they stopped.
Borges, proves my point admirably -- he began a social democrat in his youth, and only became a conservative after he became successful. As I said, the political point of view of conservatives is "I got mine."
You seriously think that was the reason? Borges didn't do well at all under the quasi-fascist Peron government. Didn't push him to the Left though. He had reasons for his convictions. Just like Tolkien.
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:53 pm
Some European conservative governments (even the British Tories) have embraced reducing emissions in order to ameliorate clime change. While some people on the Left are resistant, due to job losses. It's not black and white.
Who are some of these leftist climate deniers?
Look at the long-standing opposition to coal-mining reduction in Poland or reduction in native timbers logging in Australia. In both cases by left-wing unions. It's not surprising really, since as you imply, it is human nature to look after our own livelihood. But you seem to suggest that this is prevalent on the Right, while the Left selflessly fight for the common good.

@Norwegian, Labour has not been in government for a long time, so pledging isn't the same as doing. While the Tories may not be doing enough, the point is that they have not denied anthropogenic climate change for a long time. Same with most Scandinavian governments Left and Right.

Locked

Return to “Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mikenz66, MSN [Bot] and 18 guests