Yidams on a bikini

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
mechashivaz
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:50 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by mechashivaz » Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:41 am

Brunelleschi wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:35 pm
mechashivaz wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:04 pm
There's a post going around on social media addressing the depictions of Buddha, Tara, and some yidams being placed on bathing suits, skirts, shirts, etc. and people are expressing “outrage” and are calling for a boycott of Amazon who is selling this merchandise. As practitioners I would think folks would be beyond this kind of attitude. These images are sacred to us but to others they're just nice art. If we begin to police what images people who aren't Buddhist should and shouldn't wear it becomes a slippery slope and wasted effort. It even seems that if a practitioner were disturbed by this they've been missing the point of the Dharma, although I certainly think a practitioner should not engage in wearing or distributing such things. Some one seeing these images may even be drawn to Dharma because of them, as I and other have been; drawn in by the exotic images only to become devoted practitioners years later.

Thoughts?
I disagree. There's of course no point in being "upset" or angry - but otherwise I completely agree with the protestors. It cheapens their (the symbols) meaning.

You wouldn't use a Bible as bathroom reading material.
How does it "cheapen" their meaning? Who decides the value of their meaning other than an individual? You could say, " it cheapens the meaning TO ME." But you're not qualified to make a blanket statement of objective value on behalf of others.

I have no respect for the Bible, it records the story of a demon in the guise of a god torturing people for not obeying. What kind of all powerful psychopath murders the ENTIRE world, besides one family, with a flood? Before we stray too far off topic, I've know devoted xtians who had Bibles in their potty rooms.

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:51 am

mechashivaz wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:41 am
Brunelleschi wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:35 pm
mechashivaz wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:04 pm
There's a post going around on social media addressing the depictions of Buddha, Tara, and some yidams being placed on bathing suits, skirts, shirts, etc. and people are expressing “outrage” and are calling for a boycott of Amazon who is selling this merchandise. As practitioners I would think folks would be beyond this kind of attitude. These images are sacred to us but to others they're just nice art. If we begin to police what images people who aren't Buddhist should and shouldn't wear it becomes a slippery slope and wasted effort. It even seems that if a practitioner were disturbed by this they've been missing the point of the Dharma, although I certainly think a practitioner should not engage in wearing or distributing such things. Some one seeing these images may even be drawn to Dharma because of them, as I and other have been; drawn in by the exotic images only to become devoted practitioners years later.

Thoughts?
I disagree. There's of course no point in being "upset" or angry - but otherwise I completely agree with the protestors. It cheapens their (the symbols) meaning.

You wouldn't use a Bible as bathroom reading material.
How does it "cheapen" their meaning? Who decides the value of their meaning other than an individual? You could say, " it cheapens the meaning TO ME." But you're not qualified to make a blanket statement of objective value on behalf of others.

I have no respect for the Bible, it records the story of a demon in the guise of a god torturing people for not obeying. What kind of all powerful psychopath murders the ENTIRE world, besides one family, with a flood? Before we stray too far off topic, I've know devoted xtians who had Bibles in their potty rooms.
You're wilfully ignorant of the view of Buddhist teachers on this subject. Statues of the Buddha are to be respected as is Dharma material. If you're unable to see why representations of the Buddha - the symbol of this entire religion - is cheapened by putting it on tank tops, bikinis, or a toilet (like in the New York Times-article) I can't say much but that we'll have to agree to disagree.
Last edited by Brunelleschi on Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:54 am

Mantrik wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:05 am
Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:20 am

If I saw you do that in person I would slap you.

I'm reporting this post - it is disparaging of other religions.
Why would you be in my bathroom watching me read the Koran? You're welcome, of course, but you'd have to fight your way past the girls clad in bikinis covered in pics of Jesus, Mo and Muni.

As for slapping me.......I'm terrified. I should report you for threats of floppy behaviour.
You're joking about using the sacred text of another tradition as toilet paper. A community which in the west currently is facing immense stigma and racism - it's a thin line between that and Islamophobia. So no, I don't think it's funny - my comment is a reflection of that. I'm letting you know that I oppose those kind of comments and that there are people out there that would react sternly to someone acting in that manner.

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:59 am

mechashivaz wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:34 am
Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:20 am
Mantrik wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:17 am


Opposite.
Debunking. Of course I am posting this from the bathroom whilst making good use of the Koran. ;)
If I saw you do that in person I would slap you.
Is that slapping part of your "Buddhist" conviction too?
It is a reflection of my thoughts and feelings for someone joking about using the sacred text of another tradition as toilet paper. I don't think it's funny and my comment reflects that. It's a crude, borderline racist joke at the expense of a community that in the west faces subtle and not-so-subtle racism on a daily basis. It's my comment you have a problem with? Alrighty then. :coffee:

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:05 am

I'm exiting this thread - I've said my piece. We'll have to agree to disagree.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17657
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Grigoris » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:53 am

Keep it above the belt people or I will start dealing out slaps.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Mantrik » Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:56 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:53 am
Keep it above the belt people or I will start dealing out slaps.
Does this mean we can only discuss bikini tops and not bottoms?
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Mantrik » Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:28 pm

Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:59 am
It's a crude, borderline racist joke at the expense of a community that in the west faces subtle and not-so-subtle racism on a daily basis. It's my comment you have a problem with? Alrighty then. :coffee:


I'll make this general, in the context of the OP:

We need to be free to take the piss out of any and all religions or the terrorists and oppressors win, as freedoms are now gradually being eroded even by the Western governments themselves. Most people I know of all faiths and none value that freedom of expression more than pandering to professional offence-takers getting all worked up on behalf of people who have not asked for their views or support in the first place.

I may not like someone having a pic of the Yidam Garuda on their swimming trunks as a pecker next to a pecker, or using a Bible page to wipe their ass come to that, but I'm not going to accuse them of blasphemy and I'm certainly not going to walk up to them and slap them. If you feel that way, you may wish to remind yourself of the old adage about putting on a shoe rather than seeking to cover the world in leather.

People will take the piss out of religion and they will misappropriate and misuse religious symbols as long as there are countries where they are free to do so. How you feel, communicate and act about that is something perhaps to learn from.

We often exhibit cognitive dissonance, and I may simultaneously be upset and angered at the activities of a cult, provide suppport for victims if asked.......and still laugh at their dressing up antics and take the piss out of the bonking baldies with lead roles in the pantomime.

I think members here are quite able to distinguish when there is serious cause for concern - murder, corruption, exploitation and deceit by those calling themselves 'Buddhists'. Tits in a Thigle isn't one such concern.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
Josef
Posts: 2205
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Josef » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:56 pm

Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:33 am
Josef wrote:
Sat Jun 09, 2018 6:13 pm
Mantrik wrote:
Sat Jun 09, 2018 5:34 pm
Which Yidams are we going to get upset about most?
Garuda gets slapped on everything you can thing of and doesn't seem to be harmed too much by the experience.

Then we have the yantras, mantras and seed syllables we can get upset about as well.

Then there's the reverse sutuation - people see a naked young Vajrayogini in fine pubic detail and get very upset....or conversely they get aroused, just as they used to use Khajuraho as accessible porn sculptures.

Nobody is ever likely to take any notice unless Buddhists start stoning people to death for blasphemy so best to ignore it and stick with our own context and our own practice.

I think we are now past the point of any control over images of Yidams so should focus on protecting the rituals rather than the images - the meal not the pictures on the menu.
Well said.
This kind of religious defensiveness is the foundation of things like the Rohingya genocide and other horrors.
As practitioners of the bodhisattvayana petty concerns about religious piety are not something to engage in.
What does respecting Buddhist symbols and a genocide motivated by longstanding ethnic and political tensions in a former military dictatorship have to do with each other. This doesn't make any sense.

Demanding some respect is not equal to hudud punishment (stoning). One must be able to approach issues without this kind of black and white thinking.

There is a tradition within Buddhism to respect Statues (place them high, not on the ground) and Dharma materials (don't place it on the ground, don't throw it in the trash) - this is part of that.

Relevant nytimes-piece: https://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... he-buddha/
If you cant see the relationship between religious dogmas and ethnic and political tensions you should look more closely, and not just at the situation in Burma. We can see similarities throughout the region and in the Middle East. The partition of India is a great example. People become attached to these kinds of ideas and then lash out, often violently, when the tension is present if they see their religion disrespected.

My point however is that demanding the respect of others for our iconography is pointless and unrelated to our own practice.
Yes, there is a tradition of respecting Buddhist images, among Buddhists. Non-Buddhists have no commitment to do so. Out of common courtesy they probably should but Im sure we can all agree that there is a lack of courtesy around these kinds of things and we live in a time when there is even political pushback against basic decency.
Kye ma!
The river of continuity is marked by impermanence.
Ceaseless flowing of appearance.
Beautiful and repulsive.
The dance of life and death is a display of the vast expanse.
With gratitude the watcher and the watched pass through the barrier of duality.

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:58 am

Mantrik wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:28 pm
Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:59 am
It's a crude, borderline racist joke at the expense of a community that in the west faces subtle and not-so-subtle racism on a daily basis. It's my comment you have a problem with? Alrighty then. :coffee:


I'll make this general, in the context of the OP:

We need to be free to take the piss out of any and all religions or the terrorists and oppressors win, as freedoms are now gradually being eroded even by the Western governments themselves. Most people I know of all faiths and none value that freedom of expression more than pandering to professional offence-takers getting all worked up on behalf of people who have not asked for their views or support in the first place.
Ok. I'm going to be honest - I really disagree with you on this issue. There is, and has been for a quite some time, public figures espousing racism under the mantle of "free speech". Just one of many recent examples is Geert Wilders (the wildly Islamophobic dutch politician) who is about to throw a "Prophet Mohammed-cartoon competition". Why? Well of course it is a matter of free speech! :quoteunquote:

Wilders of course has a history of racism, calling for the banning of mosques, headscarfs and calling muslim immigration a trojan horse making references to the Eurabia conspiracy theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia). Disrespecting Islam, the Koran, and Mohammad is all framed as a matter of free speech. Even calling for "fewer moroccans" in the Netherlands is referenced as "free speech"


Here he is calling moroccans "scum" and it is predictably framed as a matter of "freedom". He also ties street gangs into what he calls the ongoing "Islamization" of the Netherlands.


What's the point? Wilders and people like him frame everything as a matter of "free speech". This is true for figures like Tommy Robinson the former EDL-leader, Roseanne Barr and far-right commentator Katie Hopkins. This is also true for white supremacist Richard Spencer holding "free speech rallies" across America. Spencer is actually refreshingly honest as he admits that he doesn't really care about free speech per say but that it's a useful way of framing these issues. Spencer is saying something important here - he is admitting that the far-right cynically uses free speech in order to propagate hatred. The end goal of fascists is of course to strip away our rights and freedom.
I may not like someone having a pic of the Yidam Garuda on their swimming trunks as a pecker next to a pecker, or using a Bible page to wipe their ass come to that, but I'm not going to accuse them of blasphemy and I'm certainly not going to walk up to them and slap them. If you feel that way, you may wish to remind yourself of the old adage about putting on a shoe rather than seeking to cover the world in lehis ather.
In regards to Buddhist symbols the point is that there are recommendations by scripture and teachers to treat these symbols with respect. Why? In order to help people. It is damaging to one's mind to cheapen and disrespect these symbols. That is my viewpoint.

When it comes to Islam the point is (as I layed out above) that it is no longer about the valid critique of Islam - it is racist attacks under the guise of free speech. This has become very clear. Again, it is not about protecting free speech for these people. It is about attacking a minority. Therefore I don't need a lecture about my personal morals for not sugarcoating my language when it comes to reacting to conjuring up images about desecrating their sacred text. So yes, I'd react strongly.

Here's a muslim viewpoint of the issue by Mehdi Hasan: https://www.newstatesman.com/mehdi-hasa ... mentalists

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Mantrik » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:15 pm

Brunelleschi wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:58 am
Mantrik wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:28 pm
Brunelleschi wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:59 am
It's a crude, borderline racist joke at the expense of a community that in the west faces subtle and not-so-subtle racism on a daily basis. It's my comment you have a problem with? Alrighty then. :coffee:


I'll make this general, in the context of the OP:

We need to be free to take the piss out of any and all religions or the terrorists and oppressors win, as freedoms are now gradually being eroded even by the Western governments themselves. Most people I know of all faiths and none value that freedom of expression more than pandering to professional offence-takers getting all worked up on behalf of people who have not asked for their views or support in the first place.
Ok. I'm going to be honest - I really disagree with you on this issue. There is, and has been for a quite some time, public figures espousing racism under the mantle of "free speech". Just one of many recent examples is Geert Wilders (the wildly Islamophobic dutch politician) who is about to throw a "Prophet Mohammed-cartoon competition". Why? Well of course it is a matter of free speech! :quoteunquote:

Wilders of course has a history of racism, calling for the banning of mosques, headscarfs and calling muslim immigration a trojan horse making references to the Eurabia conspiracy theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia). Disrespecting Islam, the Koran, and Mohammad is all framed as a matter of free speech. Even calling for "fewer moroccans" in the Netherlands is referenced as "free speech"


Here he is calling moroccans "scum" and it is predictably framed as a matter of "freedom". He also ties street gangs into what he calls the ongoing "Islamization" of the Netherlands.


What's the point? Wilders and people like him frame everything as a matter of "free speech". This is true for figures like Tommy Robinson the former EDL-leader, Roseanne Barr and far-right commentator Katie Hopkins. This is also true for white supremacist Richard Spencer holding "free speech rallies" across America. Spencer is actually refreshingly honest as he admits that he doesn't really care about free speech per say but that it's a useful way of framing these issues. Spencer is saying something important here - he is admitting that the far-right cynically uses free speech in order to propagate hatred. The end goal of fascists is of course to strip away our rights and freedom.
I may not like someone having a pic of the Yidam Garuda on their swimming trunks as a pecker next to a pecker, or using a Bible page to wipe their ass come to that, but I'm not going to accuse them of blasphemy and I'm certainly not going to walk up to them and slap them. If you feel that way, you may wish to remind yourself of the old adage about putting on a shoe rather than seeking to cover the world in lehis ather.
In regards to Buddhist symbols the point is that there are recommendations by scripture and teachers to treat these symbols with respect. Why? In order to help people. It is damaging to one's mind to cheapen and disrespect these symbols. That is my viewpoint.

When it comes to Islam the point is (as I layed out above) that it is no longer about the valid critique of Islam - it is racist attacks under the guise of free speech. This has become very clear. Again, it is not about protecting free speech for these people. It is about attacking a minority. Therefore I don't need a lecture about my personal morals for not sugarcoating my language when it comes to reacting to conjuring up images about desecrating their sacred text. So yes, I'd react strongly.

Here's a muslim viewpoint of the issue by Mehdi Hasan: https://www.newstatesman.com/mehdi-hasa ... mentalists
However hideous the examples, I place freedom of expression above all restriction of speech which offends people. In the UK we now have a culture which is reaching the point where it drags people into court for offending anyone about anything. Literally, anything.

We have a term for thin-skinned people who seek to become offended - 'snowflakes', so timid they ban speakers from universities in case they offend students. Instead, they should invite the most racist and objectionable speakers in the land and defeat them with debate, reduce their crap to dust. We are raisign a generation which is unable to deal with life itself, and needs 'safe spaces' to hide in.

If we prevent expressions of the growing list of 'isms' we lose not only our ability to expose and refute those views, we drive them underground............and as with IS they will inevitably resurface in a more extreme form.

You seem obsessed with Islam. My daughter lived on the same street in Leeds as the London Bombers.......where girls were abused, spat at and and assaulted merely for being white, where women were locked inside by men who were not aversed to beating, murdering and torturing - in the name of Islam. Which Islam would you like to defend from ridicule? Which Islam deserves protection in case followers get offended by a few words?

When the IRA were shooting and bombing people (incuding myself) there was a huge amount of humour and ridicule of them and of both Catholics and Protestants in the context of the fighting. Should we have been violently oppressed for daring to make fun of those who wished that very oppression through terrorism?

We've seen bombings and murders of people who ridicule Islam.......for me, this is the worst aspect of all - the acts of the oppressors behaving like the Inquisition or Burmese troops which show us where we may be headed when we curtail free speech.

No religion has the right to insist that we cannot ridicule it, and I believe we have a right, even a duty, to cause offence to people whose arguments deserve the harshest rebuttals of their teachings and actions. Humour is an amazingly effective way to demolish dogmatic and repressive systems.

If their response, like yours, is to be violent, one has to question the validity of their path and the teachings they claim to use to justify that violence. Your 'slap' is but a microcosm of the attitude whereby regimes arise and use stoning and beheading for those daring to speak out, even as a joke.
I can wipe my ass with a Bible becuase blasphemy is no longer a crime, but the backlash is the oppressive idea that we must not upset a single member of any religion for any reason whatsoever.

You're welcome to want a country where violence protects religion, and the violent religious fanatics are protected from even the gentlest ridicule.

Chuck the wooden Buddha on the fire, with the Koran and the Bible - it is no more than a bonfire of the vanities.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

Norwegian
Posts: 1399
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Norwegian » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:41 pm

I of course would want for these things like yidams and so on to be respected, even not ever used and abused by those who have not received them and are not qualified to receive them. But I also understand that in this kind of world, a world inhabited by sentient beings, that is not really ever going to happen. At least a certain amount of people will misuse and abuse things - anything in fact. As soon as a phenomena is known, it can be misused and abused by people, because that is how things usually go.

I really abhor seeing Muslims threaten others with violence and terrorism because of a drawing of Mohammed or whatever it may be. And when that actually happens, that people get raped and beaten, maimed and killed, in the worst ways possible, I wonder whether these people are completely sane or if they're actually possessed by demons.

Yes, it is really sad to see bikinis with yidams on them. It's really stupid. And if we are to do anything, it'd be asking them to please stop, and have some respect, and otherwise giving general information such as this being religious symbols that should be treated with respect. But we can't really force people. It's up to them to show some basic human decency.

I will never however, threaten others with violence, for wearing a yidam bikini, or for say stepping and standing on top of a sutra with filthy shoes. It's not my karma. It's theirs. I should instead feel sorry for them and their ignorance, and the consequence this has for them. So, compassion.

Also I am very much fond of freedom of speech (which also means that there's always consequences to what you're saying, and there's also something such as right speech). But if someone says something that others find "offensive", then I can only say: So what? You do not have to pursue that person and somehow seek to exact revenge upon them, demanding some sort of consequence. You can just let it go.

As Mantrik mentions, in today's society there's an ever increasing tendency amongst some to behave like snowflakes, where anything that can be interpreted as offensive - regardless of how minute - must result with a shouting contest and the other person being fined, losing their job, being imprisoned, and having their lives ruined. There's this insatiable appetite for wanting to be offended so you can have something to be angry about and then using that energy that comes with this to try to destroy the other person, simply because you don't disagree with what they said.

And unfortunately they are given more space and more time. It's ridiculous.

I quite like Stephen Fry's words on this topic, that of being offended:
phpBB [video]


So if someone picks out buzzwords like "racism" (when it doesn't apply at all whatsoever) and then start threatening people with violence for having offended them or something else, it's a clear sign that things have gone too far, and that they should take a step back, relax, and try to reflect on the four thoughts that turn the mind instead. Or at least just have a cup of tea and read a good book.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17657
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Grigoris » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:47 pm

Brunelleschi wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:58 am
Here's a muslim viewpoint of the issue by Mehdi Hasan: https://www.newstatesman.com/mehdi-hasa ... mentalists
Nice opinion piece! Wish I had read that back when the Hebdo attack occurred.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17657
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Grigoris » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:08 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:15 pm
However hideous the examples, I place freedom of expression above all restriction of speech which offends people. In the UK we now have a culture which is reaching the point where it drags people into court for offending anyone about anything. Literally, anything.
I think that this idea of "freedom of speech" is a scam. Freedom of speech is pointless when there is unequal access to the mediums of conveying one's message.

Freedom of speech only exists for the rich and powerful that have access to mass media. The rest of us are just background noise.

Hate speech should not be protected, as hate speech leads to hate crimes. Hate speech should not be considered valid speech and should not be given the same level of legitimacy as intelligent and reasoned speech.
We have a term for thin-skinned people who seek to become offended - 'snowflakes', so timid they ban speakers from universities in case they offend students. Instead, they should invite the most racist and objectionable speakers in the land and defeat them with debate, reduce their crap to dust. We are raisign a generation which is unable to deal with life itself, and needs 'safe spaces' to hide in.
Yeah, those damn snowflake Black people and Muslim minorities and LGBTQ people and other disenfranchised, dispossessed and disempowered idiots. They should just suck and up and grow a spine!
You seem obsessed with Islam. My daughter lived on the same street in Leeds as the London Bombers....... where girls were abused, spat at and and assaulted merely for being white
Whereas in the other 99.9999999999% of the UK...
...where women were locked inside by men who were not aversed to beating, murdering and torturing - in the name of Islam. Which Islam would you like to defend from ridicule? Which Islam deserves protection in case followers get offended by a few words?
According to your love of free speech, those that espouse wife-beating-child-hating should be allowed to spread their influence and legitimise the actions of the people that you seem to oppose. So what is it going to be big boy? Freedom of speech regardless of content (thus allowing people to incite others to action) or regulation of hate speech?
When the IRA were shooting and bombing people (including myself) there was a huge amount of humour and ridicule of them and of both Catholics and Protestants in the context of the fighting. Should we have been violently oppressed for daring to make fun of those who wished that very oppression through terrorism?
The IRA is a particular group with a specific strategy and course of action AND for your information: not all Muslims are wife-beating-child-haters. So the comparison is invalid.
We've seen bombings and murders of people who ridicule Islam.......for me, this is the worst aspect of all - the acts of the oppressors behaving like the Inquisition or Burmese troops which show us where we may be headed when we curtail free speech.
We have seen the mass-exterminations by western forces (or with their support) of people that support Islam. Maybe this is a factor influencing the bombing and murders too?
No religion has the right to insist that we cannot ridicule it, and I believe we have a right, even a duty, to cause offence to people whose arguments deserve the harshest rebuttals of their teachings and actions. Humour is an amazingly effective way to demolish dogmatic and repressive systems.
Ridicule is not humor.
I can wipe my ass with a Bible becuase blasphemy is no longer a crime, but the backlash is the oppressive idea that we must not upset a single member of any religion for any reason whatsoever.
And this is where your argument falls apart completely. Nobody said that you cannot engage in valid and logical critique, being offensive for the sake of being offensive is not valid or logical.

Read the article that Brunelleschi linked to, I am sure that any intelligent and rational person will find it very enlightening.
Chuck the wooden Buddha on the fire, with the Koran and the Bible - it is no more than a bonfire of the vanities.
If you don't want to be a loud mouthed hypocrite you should start with your personal religious icons and paraphernalia. Videotape it and put it on youtube and, who knows, maybe you will start a positive trend. ;)
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Mantrik » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:20 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:08 pm
Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:15 pm
However hideous the examples, I place freedom of expression above all restriction of speech which offends people. In the UK we now have a culture which is reaching the point where it drags people into court for offending anyone about anything. Literally, anything.
I think that this idea of "freedom of speech" is a scam. Freedom of speech is pointless when there is unequal access to the mediums of conveying one's message.

Freedom of speech only exists for the rich and powerful that have access to mass media. The rest of us are just background noise.

Hate speech should not be protected, as hate speech leads to hate crimes. Hate speech should not be considered valid speech and should not be given the same level of legitimacy as intelligent and reasoned speech.
We have a term for thin-skinned people who seek to become offended - 'snowflakes', so timid they ban speakers from universities in case they offend students. Instead, they should invite the most racist and objectionable speakers in the land and defeat them with debate, reduce their crap to dust. We are raisign a generation which is unable to deal with life itself, and needs 'safe spaces' to hide in.
Yeah, those damn snowflake black people and Muslim minorities and LGBTQ people and other disenfranchised, dispossessed and disempowered idiots. They should just suck and up and grow a spine!
You seem obsessed with Islam. My daughter lived on the same street in Leeds as the London Bombers.......where girls were abused, spat at and and assaulted merely for being white, where women were locked inside by men who were not aversed to beating, murdering and torturing - in the name of Islam. Which Islam would you like to defend from ridicule? Which Islam deserves protection in case followers get offended by a few words?
According to your love of free speech, those that espouse wife-beating-child-hating should be allowed to spread their influence and legitimise the actions of the people that you seem to oppose. So what is it going to be big boy? Freedom of speech regardless of content (thus allowing people to incite others to action) or regulation of hate speech?
When the IRA were shooting and bombing people (including myself) there was a huge amount of humour and ridicule of them and of both Catholics and Protestants in the context of the fighting. Should we have been violently oppressed for daring to make fun of those who wished that very oppression through terrorism?
The IRA is a particular group with a specific strategy and course of action. And, just for your information: not all Muslims are wife-beating-child-haters. So the comparison is invalid.
We've seen bombings and murders of people who ridicule Islam.......for me, this is the worst aspect of all - the acts of the oppressors behaving like the Inquisition or Burmese troops which show us where we may be headed when we curtail free speech.
We have seen the mass-exterminations by western forces (or with their support) of people that support Islam. Maybe this is a factor influencing the bombing and murders too?
No religion has the right to insist that we cannot ridicule it, and I believe we have a right, even a duty, to cause offence to people whose arguments deserve the harshest rebuttals of their teachings and actions. Humour is an amazingly effective way to demolish dogmatic and repressive systems.
Ridicule is not humor.
I can wipe my ass with a Bible becuase blasphemy is no longer a crime, but the backlash is the oppressive idea that we must not upset a single member of any religion for any reason whatsoever.
And this is where your argument falls apart completely. Nobody said that you cannot engage in valid and logical critique, being offensive for the sake of being offensive is not valid or logical.

Read the article that Brunelleschi linked to, I am sure that any intelligent and rational person will find it very enlightening.
Chuck the wooden Buddha on the fire, with the Koran and the Bible - it is no more than a bonfire of the vanities.
If you don't want to be a loud mouthed hypocrite you should start with your personal religious icons and paraphernalia. Videotape it and put it on youtube and, who knows, maybe you will start a positive trend. ;)
I defend your right to speak up, of course. You seem able to do so without being rich or powerful.
However, as usual, too many straw men to shake a stick at, topped with non sequitur at the end.
Look up 'ridicule' ;)
Look up 'snowflakes' - they are usually overly protected middle class twats.
Humour is not supposed to be 'valid and logical critique'...what a daft idea.
Whye would all humour be 'hate speech'....you're so fond of huge exaggeration.
I know it may be a shock, but in wars, both sides ridicule and lampoon each other.
Trouble is, when you dive in, you present me with so many wild creatures there's no point rounding them up as they all fight each other. ;)
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17657
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Grigoris » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:30 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:20 pm
I defend your right to speak up, of course. You seem able to do so without being rich or powerful.
To an audience of you, who happens to not be listening. ;) Background noise.
Look up 'snowflakes' - they are usually overly protected middle class twats.
Yes, but we are not talking about protecting middle-class twats, we are talking about protecting Muslim minoirty groups in Europe.
Humour is not supposed to be 'valid and logical critique'...what a daft idea.
"According to Diogenes Laërtius, when Plato gave the tongue-in-cheek definition of man as "featherless bipeds," Diogenes plucked a chicken and brought it into Plato's Academy, saying, "Behold! I've brought you a man," and so the Academy added "with broad flat nails" to the definition."

That is an example of humor as valid and logical critique.
Whye would all humour be 'hate speech'....you're so fond of huge exaggeration.
Talking about straw men...
I know it may be a shock, but in wars, both sides ridicule and lampoon each other.
Like completely irrelevant.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:37 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:15 pm
However hideous the examples, I place freedom of expression above all restriction of speech which offends people. In the UK we now have a culture which is reaching the point where it drags people into court for offending anyone about anything. Literally, anything.
Then there needs to be a debate about what is deemed permissible by law and what is not. These matters will be settled in the court.
We have a term for thin-skinned people who seek to become offended - 'snowflakes', so timid they ban speakers from universities in case they offend students. Instead, they should invite the most racist and objectionable speakers in the land and defeat them with debate, reduce their crap to dust. We are raisign a generation which is unable to deal with life itself, and needs 'safe spaces' to hide in.
I like where this is going. Snowflake is just a made-up term by the (far) right that doesn't really mean anything. Studies show university students in the U.S. are still very pro-free spech.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/us/c ... peech.html
If we prevent expressions of the growing list of 'isms' we lose not only our ability to expose and refute those views, we drive them underground............and as with IS they will inevitably resurface in a more extreme form.
Right. If we prevent thinly veiled racism under the guise of free speech (a tactic used constantly by the far right as I pointed out earlier) we'll create sympathy for IS. This is of course completely false. Actual research show that what leads to radicalization among muslim youth is opposition to foreign policy (such as the Iraq war and the situation in Syria) and a sense of alienation.

Here's a great article by Mehdi Hasan on the subject: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi- ... ccounter=1

In 2008, a classified briefing note on radicalisation, prepared by MI5's behavioural science unit, was leaked to the Guardian. It revealed that, "far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could . . . be regarded as religious novices." The analysts concluded that "a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation", the newspaper said.

For more evidence, read the books of the forensic psychiatrist and former CIA officer Marc Sageman; the political scientist Robert Pape; the international relations scholar Rik Coolsaet; the Islamism expert Olivier Roy; the anthropologist Scott Atran. They have all studied the lives and backgrounds of hundreds of gun-toting, bomb-throwing jihadists and they all agree that Islam isn't to blame for the behaviour of such men...

Instead they point to other drivers of radicalisation: moral outrage, disaffection, peer pressure, the search for a new identity, for a sense of belonging and purpose


See also research from Stanford university in extremism and alientation among muslims in America: https://news.stanford.edu/2016/03/17/te ... on-031716/
You seem obsessed with Islam. My daughter lived on the same street in Leeds as the London Bombers.......where girls were abused, spat at and and assaulted merely for being white, where women were locked inside by men who were not aversed to beating, murdering and torturing - in the name of Islam. Which Islam would you like to defend from ridicule? Which Islam deserves protection in case followers get offended by a few words?
Not really - but muslims are the bogeyman of the moment. Types of prejudices are connected and the rise of hate crimes against muslims coincide with an rise in antisemitic hate crimes (see https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germa ... KKBN1I9251).

An example: Euarabia conspiracies (muslim overtaking of Europe) is fueled by antisemitism as the far right believes this is in essence a jewish plan. Thus far-right conspiracies nurture BOTH antisemitism and racism against muslims/Islamophobia.

The second half of your parapgraph reads like your run-of-the-mill far-right pundit. It's not really helping your case. If anyone is spat at or abused verbally they should file a police report. This is a question of personal morals - not Islamic teachings. To think that this is somehow a feature of Islam or muslims is a bit weird.
When the IRA were shooting and bombing people (incuding myself) there was a huge amount of humour and ridicule of them and of both Catholics and Protestants in the context of the fighting. Should we have been violently oppressed for daring to make fun of those who wished that very oppression through terrorism?
I don't think there are too many people opposed to anyone criticizing or ridiculing groups such as IS. This is a red herring.
We've seen bombings and murders of people who ridicule Islam.......for me, this is the worst aspect of all - the acts of the oppressors behaving like the Inquisition or Burmese troops which show us where we may be headed when we curtail free speech.
Right. And I like all reasonable people oppose this.
No religion has the right to insist that we cannot ridicule it, and I believe we have a right, even a duty, to cause offence to people whose arguments deserve the harshest rebuttals of their teachings and actions. Humour is an amazingly effective way to demolish dogmatic and repressive systems.
The point is not critique of religion but rather that said "critique" is being used to promote racist views - which result in Actual violence against muslims. I oppose disrespecting people or religion just for the heck of it but it should not be illegal - but again, this is not the issue here.
If their response, like yours, is to be violent, one has to question the validity of their path and the teachings they claim to use to justify that violence. Your 'slap' is but a microcosm of the attitude whereby regimes arise and use stoning and beheading for those daring to speak out, even as a joke.
Right. Me saying I would react very negatively to say someone desecrating the sacred text of a minority that is the victim of racism and racist violence is the same as autocratic regimes imposing stoning or beheadings. Me saying "I would slap you" is simply me saying I would react very strongly.

The problem is that you seem ignorant to the fact that xenophobic/racist/hateful rhetoric (be it towards muslim or others) have real consequences and result in actual violence.

Donald Trump used vicious racist rhetoric and hate crime has been up since he won the election:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 55026.html

Rise of the "alt-right" in the U.S. tied to racist attacks:
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018 ... sm/146319/

German study shows online hate speech leads to violence:
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... nsequences

After people like Nigel Farage cynically used the Brexit campaign to stir up anger against immigrants and minorities hate crimes have risen drastically:
http://time.com/4985332/hate-crime-uk-2017/

Hate crimes in Britain up since Brexit:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-m ... -qb7hd7xl7

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Brunelleschi » Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:56 pm

Norwegian wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:41 pm
Yes, it is really sad to see bikinis with yidams on them. It's really stupid. And if we are to do anything, it'd be asking them to please stop, and have some respect, and otherwise giving general information such as this being religious symbols that should be treated with respect. But we can't really force people. It's up to them to show some basic human decency.
I don't think anyone in this thread has suggested otherwise.
I will never however, threaten others with violence, for wearing a yidam bikini, or for say stepping and standing on top of a sutra with filthy shoes. It's not my karma. It's theirs. I should instead feel sorry for them and their ignorance, and the consequence this has for them. So, compassion.
As I pointed out earlier, my reasons for opposing Yidams on a bikini is that it is damaging (bad karma) for the people doing it. That's whole point. That is really a separate issue from using the mantle of "free-speech" to promote racism.
Also I am very much fond of freedom of speech (which also means that there's always consequences to what you're saying, and there's also something such as right speech). But if someone says something that others find "offensive", then I can only say: So what? You do not have to pursue that person and somehow seek to exact revenge upon them, demanding some sort of consequence. You can just let it go.
That's not the point. The point is using the term "free speech" as a cover for promoting racist views which is a favorite tactic of the far-right (see above). You can afford to "just let it go" as it doesn't have any real consequences for you. Notice how in every poll about free speech the ones that are at the blunt of it (Blacks, LBTQ:s, muslims, women etc) and for which it has actual consequences are the ones most skeptical to the concept of "absolute" freedom of speech. See the New York Times article I posted earlier.

See also this excellent article by Owen Jones on the topic of the far-right and free speech:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -far-right
So if someone picks out buzzwords like "racism" (when it doesn't apply at all whatsoever) and then start threatening people with violence for having offended them or something else, it's a clear sign that things have gone too far, and that they should take a step back, relax, and try to reflect on the four thoughts that turn the mind instead. Or at least just have a cup of tea and read a good book.
Right - so now "racism" is a buzzword. Again, see my response to Mantrik. Violent and racist speech has real life consequences for those being targeted. Racist, anti-muslim, and anti-immigrant rhetoric in the U.S. and Europe is up and so is racist attacks and far-right terrorism. These things are connected.

Tenfold increase in attacks against Swedish mosques in 2017:
https://www.dailysabah.com/islamophobia ... en-in-2017

Hate crimes up in the U.S. since last election:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 55026.html

Rise of the "alt-right" in the U.S. tied to racist attacks:
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018 ... sm/146319/

German study shows online hate speech leads to violence:
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... nsequences

Hate crimes in Britain up since Brexit:

http://time.com/4985332/hate-crime-uk-2017/

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-m ... -qb7hd7xl7

Rinchen Samphel
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 4:47 am

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Rinchen Samphel » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:28 pm

Who would have known Yidams on Bikinis was so interconnected with Trump, Islam, hate speach, etc. Damn, mind = blown, dogg.


Buddhism wont be damaged by Yidams on bikinis, but by its practitioners falling victim to their own afflictive emotions.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17657
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Yidams on a bikini

Post by Grigoris » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:37 pm

I think that is the perfect note to end this conversation on.

Thank you Rinchen Samphel!

If anybody has got something to add, that will not pull this conversation around in circles, please feel free to PM me.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Locked

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Adamantine, Baidu [Spider], heart, Josef and 56 guests