Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 1746
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by PeterC » Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:39 am

Nemo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:44 am
It looks like old money thinking new money is uncouth. Obama committed the same crimes. He also arrogantly dismissed Trump publicly as a filthy peasant with money. The Trumpian perspective is the real elite is money. They seem to have a point and the properly educated and cultured whose hierarchies are being dismantled are losing their minds. It literally makes no difference to the bottom 50%. Life for them just gets harder every year. This is a skirmish between 2 factions of an utterly corrupt ruling class. I suspect if Bernie is blocked again Trump will be guaranteed a second term.
He committed exactly the same war crimes. He did nothing to stop, and indeed advanced a murderous, pointless campaign that has killed millions of innocent people, cost the US trillions of dollars and destroyed the economies of multiple countries.

So as far as that comparison goes, they’re the same. But really we cannot equate the republicans and the democrats morally when we look beyond that. The track record on healthcare, the environment, education, poverty alleviation etc all cleary makes the republicans look like the bad guys. And that’s before you get into issues like shoving their ‘religion’ down others’ throats, the land grab for political power through gerrymandering, stuffing the judiciary with barely-qualified idealogues, etc.

They both suck. But they are not the same

humble.student
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 1:35 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by humble.student » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:51 am

PeterC wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:34 am
humble.student wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:45 am
Simon E. wrote:
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..
The late Roger Scruton wrote a book about environmentalism.
He also took money from the tobacco industry to publish articles about how regulating smoking infringed on human rights. So I’m not sure I’ll be accepting his opinions at face value
Not accepting anyone's opinions at face value, but instead, investigating the facts for oneself, is always the wisest course of action.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:15 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:39 am
Nemo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:44 am
It looks like old money thinking new money is uncouth. Obama committed the same crimes. He also arrogantly dismissed Trump publicly as a filthy peasant with money. The Trumpian perspective is the real elite is money. They seem to have a point and the properly educated and cultured whose hierarchies are being dismantled are losing their minds. It literally makes no difference to the bottom 50%. Life for them just gets harder every year. This is a skirmish between 2 factions of an utterly corrupt ruling class. I suspect if Bernie is blocked again Trump will be guaranteed a second term.
He committed exactly the same war crimes. He did nothing to stop, and indeed advanced a murderous, pointless campaign that has killed millions of innocent people, cost the US trillions of dollars and destroyed the economies of multiple countries.

So as far as that comparison goes, they’re the same. But really we cannot equate the republicans and the democrats morally when we look beyond that. The track record on healthcare, the environment, education, poverty alleviation etc all cleary makes the republicans look like the bad guys. And that’s before you get into issues like shoving their ‘religion’ down others’ throats, the land grab for political power through gerrymandering, stuffing the judiciary with barely-qualified idealogues, etc.

They both suck. But they are not the same
The problem that Americans have, is that we find ourselves with an empire even if we don't look like a 19th c. colonial empire. Our empire is based on favorable trade, military protection, and the dollar as international reserve currency - we just don't actually annex foreign nations and administer them directly. Basically its the Post WWII order of capitalist countries. Other than that, we are boxed into a certain set of choices because we want to maintain that empire - the dollar being a reserve currency is a tremendous boon to our economy that not many people appreciate. It also make English the international language of business - another advantage that is hard to quantify but brings great benefit. Republicans and Democrats both have to more or less make decisions along the lines of keeping the Empire. I suppose the difference in Republican and Democrat approaches is that the Democrats at least feint in the direction of humanitarian policy through soft foreign policy administered through the State Department to say, promote strengthening of courts and the rule of law abroad, or development. Republicans seem to have less faith in these programs and don't pretend at all.

We're at an inflection point where both Right and Left want to stop being Empire. I don't know what they expect will happen. Trump thinks we can withdraw and be a player simply because we have the economic weight and everyone will fall in line to make deals with us. He thinks international relations and maintaining empire is like his Trump organization in NYC Real Estate development (the reality is that he is actually not even one of the big players in NYC real estate, and neither is Kushner).

The Left wants to ensure that domestic workers come first before extending favorable trade terms that tend to benefit the financial and business sectors, and others only by trickle down. Theoretically, that's what Trump wants to help workers but we have yet to see him actually do anything other than overclock the financing of the economy in some sort of demented musical chairs trickle down. We will see people get screwed by this economy... we just don't know when the music will stop.
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
PeterC
Posts: 1746
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by PeterC » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:27 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:15 pm
The problem that Americans have, is that we find ourselves with an empire even if we don't look like a 19th c. colonial empire. Our empire is based on favorable trade, military protection, and the dollar as international reserve currency - we just don't actually annex foreign nations and administer them directly. Other than that, we are boxed into a certain set of choices because we want to maintain that empire - the dollar being a reserve currency is a tremendous boon to our economy that not many people appreciate. It also make English the international language of business - another advantage that is hard to quantify but brings great benefit. Republicans and Democrats both have to more or less make decisions along the lines of keeping the Empire. I suppose the difference in Republican and Democrat approaches is that the Democrats at least feint in the direction of humanitarian policy through soft foreign policy administered through the State Department to say, promote strengthening of courts and the rule of law abroad, or development. Republicans seem to have less faith in these programs and don't pretend at all.
The exercise of military power abroad has become an unquestioned premise. Perhaps one day a president will have the courage to give the alternative a chance. The post-2001 wars have, to date, had direct costs to the US of 7-9 trillion. It’s almost inconceivable what could have been done with that money. The benefits from nonaggression would have been so much greater than the gains from spending it on military action.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:41 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:27 pm
The exercise of military power abroad has become an unquestioned premise. Perhaps one day a president will have the courage to give the alternative a chance. The post-2001 wars have, to date, had direct costs to the US of 7-9 trillion. It’s almost inconceivable what could have been done with that money. The benefits from nonaggression would have been so much greater than the gains from spending it on military action.
Yes. We've lost all imagination. We've abandoned coalition building and international diplomacy in favor of whacking everything that looks annoying. Not to say that wasn't part of the playbook in the past. Its just become almost the whole playbook at this point.

I'd suggest its because diplomacy got hard. It was easy when the world was Free and Communist, and all our allies were rebuilding because WWII destroyed their capacities. We could just lend money and sell manufactured goods, and loan out our military as a protection racket and ensure loyalty around the world. Then those relationships started to balance out and we had to pivot to being a leader among peers. And then other powers started rising up and making things even more complicated, with trade deficits, and international capital flows etc. etc. The point is, the its much harder to maintain, and I don't know if Americans have it in the character to play this much more complex game. And so now we just try to bully.

As I watched the towers fall on 9/11, I saw what was coming. The US was going to start checking off names on the shit list until we exhausted ourselves and went bankrupt beating up phantoms. We're getting closer to capitulation and bankruptcy every day with a huge human cost overseas and domestically.

Yep. This shit needs to just stop.
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

Sādhaka
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:13 pm
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.
Malcolm wrote:
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.

“...or someone who changes gender...”

This must be referring to changing gender in the womb....

Even though being embodied in samsara at all, that is whether heterosexual or not, is we could say produced by affliction, I still think there is a difference between a actual hermaphrodite, indeterminate-sex or intersex person, and androgynous being; and someone who wishes to change sex outside of the womb or someone who seeks to perform & prefers to perform a procreative physical act with someone else of the same sex.

Regardless as to whether anyone turns this into a moral judgement or not, recognizing two different afflictive processes and/or mindsets; i.e. one that happens inside the womb, and the other that happens outside the womb albeit influenced to some degree by what happened inside the womb and past karma.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:46 pm

For all his faults, Toynbee offers an interesting framework to look at this. The US has devolved to a Universal State where the creative minority has lost vitality, and now the guiding principle is to just maintain. Its the process of death. It could come quick, or it could get dragged out for thousands of years like in Egypt.

In this case, we can only hope for what Nemo describes - the quick death of this civilization and the rising of the new.

Well. Nice to speculate on a Sunday morning over coffee.
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

Sādhaka
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:50 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:41 pm
As I watched the towers fall on 9/11, I saw what was coming. The US was going to start checking off names on the shit list until we exhausted ourselves and went bankrupt beating up phantoms. We're getting closer to capitulation and bankruptcy every day with a huge human cost overseas and domestically.

Yep. This shit needs to just stop.

This is specifically where Ron Paul would have been our man, even if some people may disagree with what his other policies would have been.

in my opinion, this alone would have made him a worthy President.


Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:46 pm

In this case, we can only hope for what Nemo describes - the quick death of this civilization and the rising of the new.

Well. Nice to speculate on a Sunday morning over coffee.

Hence the following post (my post) in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=32710&sid=77da627b ... 32#p515241

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:58 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:50 pm
Hence the following post in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=32710&sid=77da627b ... 32#p515241
Well, I'm too dependent on this, whether I like it or not. I have a young family who would not fare well on the road in armageddon. I don't like to think of the person that kind of adversity would make me. This relative comfort I enjoy is the best bet for Dharma practice also. I want to make this opportunity available for more - not destroy what we have in the hopes it will be better later. If Buddhist mythology is to be consulted... its a long time before Maitreya comes, and the world goes through a lot of suffering before then. None of us will see it. We'll likely only see the flames of hell.
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

Sādhaka
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:05 pm

Good point^.

But I think that the kalpa-ending conflagration would be a swift painless death, we then would all be reborn in the upper deva realms of the form realm for some time, and then ‘the universe’ would start all over again.

In my comment in the presidential race poll thread, I was half-joking about this; because whether I like or not, I don’t think the kalpa is set to end anytime soon.

We could see another smaller type of civilization reset soon though; hopefully not too painful of one for everyone’s sake.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:19 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:05 pm
Good point^.

But I think that the kalpa-ending conflagration would be a swift painless death, we then would all be reborn in the upper deva realms of the form realm for some time, and then ‘the universe’ would start all over again.

In my comment in the presidential race poll thread, I was half-joking; because whether I like or not, I don’t think the kalpa is set to end anytime soon.

We could see another smaller type of civilization reset soon though; hopefully not too painful of one for everyone’s sake.
On the Buddhist mythological timeline, the kalpa ending conflagration is not due for a long while. What we're looking at, this civilization reset, could be an enlightened transition (unlikely, but the best we can hope for) or an environmental and humanitarian disaster followed by generations of reset (if we avoid extinction) - but probably (hopefully? Extinction is the one outcome I don't think any of us wants) something in between. The fact that we have a proliferation of nuclear weapons makes the prospect of leaders of societies becoming so desperate that mutual annihilation no longer gives them pause before pushing those buttons more likely. If the hope is snuffed, we are doomed. In the scheme of things, a few generations is a blip. For the people who have to live through it... literally a lifetime and more. I don't wish that for anyone. And so the only choice is to try and make this work and have a reasonably enlightened transition.
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: 30759
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:30 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:42 pm


“...or someone who changes gender...”

This must be referring to changing gender in the womb....
No, it refers to intersexed people.
Even though being embodied in samsara at all, that is whether heterosexual or not, is we could say produced by affliction, I still think there is a difference between a actual hermaphrodite, indeterminate-sex or intersex person, and androgynous being; and someone who wishes to change sex outside of the womb or someone who seeks to perform & prefers to perform a procreative physical act with someone else of the same sex.
They are all paṇḍakas, and all for the same set of reasons. One cannot perform a procreative physical act with a person of the same gender. It is also unkind to subject these people to moral judgements. A transgendered person is someone who was born that way, even if they need to have reassignment surgery. This is why the Dharma recognizes that there are more than two genders. Modern society should catch up.

Sādhaka
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Sādhaka » Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:02 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:30 pm
One cannot perform a procreative physical act with a person of the same gender.

Of course not. I’m sure you know what I meant.


A transgendered person is someone who was born that way, even if they need to have reassignment surgery.

They don’t need to, and the reassignment will not change them to the gender that they think they are. I mean people can do whatever they want, but it certainly should not be subsidized (I’m not implying that you would necessarily think this); of course if someone wants to start some charity or gofundme....


This is why the Dharma recognizes that there are more than two genders. Modern society should catch up.

There would be basically three then. Male and female; and the third would include: hermaphrodite, intersex, eunuch, and androgynous beings?

Malcolm
Posts: 30759
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:23 pm

Sādhaka wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:02 pm
A transgendered person is someone who was born that way, even if they need to have reassignment surgery.
They don’t need to, and the reassignment will not change them to the gender that they think they are. I mean people can do whatever they want, but it certainly should not be subsidized; of course if someone wants to start some charity or gofundme....
Gender, in the USA, is a legal definition in 48 states, not a biological one.

This is why the Dharma recognizes that there are more than two genders. Modern society should catch up.
There would be basically three then. Male and female; and the third would include: hermaphrodite, intersex, eunuch, and androgynous beings?
Actually, five: male, female, intersexed people (this is modern name for hermaphrodites); people with same sex orientation, and congenitally-sterile people.

Most transgendered women would be considered eunuchs, from a classical Buddhist point of view. Since all of these gender definitions are defined because of criteria for entering the Sangha, women are left out of it, hence included in same sex orientation in general. However, we could consider transgendered men eunuchs as well. The other two kinds of paṇḍakas, voyeurs and people who are only sexual active with the phases of the moon are not in consideration here.

User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 374
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Supramundane » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:46 pm

"Buddhist leaders asked the Senate to hold a fair and complete impeachment trial for President Donald Trump in a letter sent to all sitting US senators this week. At least 149 Buddhist teachers, scholars, authors, and practitioners, including Roshi Joan Jiko Halifax, Professor Robert Thurman, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, Ven. Thubten Chodron, Rev. angel Kyodo williams, David Loy, and Ven. Karma Lekshe Tsomo, have signed the letter, which urges senators to “provide moral leadership” and “assess the evidence . . . without prejudice or partisanship” during the critical impeachment hearings. “If each of you pauses, breathes, and takes some moments to honestly look into your heart and conscience, we hope you will recognize that the current president is not capable of providing moral leadership or acting in a manner consistent with ethical conduct or truth,” the letter reads. “Since he cannot, you must.”

Read the full letter here. . "

Source: tricycle

User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 374
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Supramundane » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:46 pm

"Buddhist leaders asked the Senate to hold a fair and complete impeachment trial for President Donald Trump in a letter sent to all sitting US senators this week. At least 149 Buddhist teachers, scholars, authors, and practitioners, including Roshi Joan Jiko Halifax, Professor Robert Thurman, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, Ven. Thubten Chodron, Rev. angel Kyodo williams, David Loy, and Ven. Karma Lekshe Tsomo, have signed the letter, which urges senators to “provide moral leadership” and “assess the evidence . . . without prejudice or partisanship” during the critical impeachment hearings. “If each of you pauses, breathes, and takes some moments to honestly look into your heart and conscience, we hope you will recognize that the current president is not capable of providing moral leadership or acting in a manner consistent with ethical conduct or truth,” the letter reads. “Since he cannot, you must.”

Read the full letter here. . "

Source: tricycle

madhusudan
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by madhusudan » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:16 am

It's sad that people trading on their wisdom would let their TDS flare up in such an embarrassing manner. It's been a 3 year long get-him-at-all-costs impeach the m-fer "resistance" totally partisan secret basement impeachment without actual crimes.

User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 1746
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by PeterC » Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:31 am

madhusudan wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:16 am
It's sad that people trading on their wisdom would let their TDS flare up in such an embarrassing manner. It's been a 3 year long get-him-at-all-costs impeach the m-fer "resistance" totally partisan secret basement impeachment without actual crimes.
Where to start.

1. People were opposed to him from day 1 because there was extensive and credible evidence that he and people around him solicited support from a foreign country to interfere in the 2016 elections to his advantage. Given how small his margin of victory was, it's quite possible that without that support he would have lost. That's why they call themselves 'resistance' - because they view him as illegitimate.

2. He's being impeached over an attempt to get yet another foreign country to attack what he perceives as his main opponent in the 2020 election. He achieved this by witholding money from them that he was obliged to pay.

3. There are many, many other things he's done in the presidency that range from the unseemly and distasteful through to the outright illegal. His continued use of the office for personal profit is the most common one.

What has been submitted in the articles of impeachment is only the tip of the iceberg. Even if you only watched Fox News you would know the main outlines of this.

By all means, speak freely, but please speak honestly.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2463
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Caoimhghín » Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:00 am

Trump Derangement Syndrome, that's a funny one. The problem with such an silly tactic is that it easily goes both ways.

How many Trumpers had Hillary Derangement Syndrome when they chanted "Lock her up?"

Whoever the next conversative celebrity is after Trump, and whoever the next Trump opponent is, there will be a "Derangement Syndrome" for them too. When you're Canadian, you approach these things with popcorn.

:popcorn: :meditate: :toilet:
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
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 9953
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Does Buddhism Require You To Be a Liberal?

Post by Queequeg » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:33 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:00 am
Trump Derangement Syndrome, that's a funny one. The problem with such an silly tactic is that it easily goes both ways.

How many Trumpers had Hillary Derangement Syndrome when they chanted "Lock her up?"

Whoever the next conversative celebrity is after Trump, and whoever the next Trump opponent is, there will be a "Derangement Syndrome" for them too. When you're Canadian, you approach these things with popcorn.
There's a variation on Godwin's Law with Republicans in general, including Trump supporters, where any critique is eventually met with an invocation of the Clintons and Hillary in particular. "But Hillary..." If the conversation keeps going, they will start with crypto-racist arguments about how Obama was the worst president ever, ending up with, "And he wasn't even born in the United States! And he's a muslim!"

smh
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

Locked

Return to “Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Fa Dao and 59 guests