03.29.09
The strangeness of Tibetan Buddhism
My point here is that I was righter than I knew, without getting too alarmist in the eyes of some: one of the comments actually suggested indirectly extermination of Tibetan Buddhists. As you can see, I just don’t trust these New Atheists.
Exterminating buddhists has a long history. The only safe tactic is to take threats seriously.
My position here on Tibetan Buddhism has long been contorted.
I have long been both an admirer and a critic of Tibetan Buddhism. Those criticisms are in fact present here on this blog, some time back.
Our first responsibility at this point, however, is the protection of Tibetans. I find it sad that the atheist left can make nothing out of Buddhism.
The medievalism of Tibet is easy to get indignant about, and leftists like Michael Parenti have written on this. OK, but the next you realize is the venoumous hatred and will to destroy, or else studied indifferent silence when someone else does the jog, e.g. the Chinese.
In any case, the degenerate culture of Marxist China is not much of a substitute for the culture of all these terrible Tibetans.
More generally, Tibetan Buddhism is a mystery. After the destruction of the Buddhist project in India, over a millennium of work, the remmants of the Sangha were desperate, and sought refuge in the Himilayas.
One is left with the suspicion (clearly recorded in plain sight) that the operatives of Buddhism performed a ‘take over’ job on Tibet, and constructed a refuge for what was left of their hopes, and an ark for Buddhism teachings.
There is something indecipherably strange about Tibetan Buddhism: you see endless bodhissatvas, but no Buddhas, an immense treasure of teachings and practices, as if stored for the ages, to be released back into the world in some future age (like ours!).
There seems a loss of innocence in the Tibetan Buddhist world. One always suspects politicians and their tactics, but how else could it have been after the destruction of so many hopes. In any case, the different character of this late result, as James notes, is the result of historical chaotification and the efforts to change gears in a new environment….
The Tibetan Buddhism that we see is only the tip of the ice berg: most of it is invisible to the public, and always has been. And the hidden part has fallen into a kind of spiritual power politics that would be astounding if it were made public.
James said,
March 30, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Actually, the issue is even more terrifying. Skinner’s comments indicate that even Kant would be considered taboo.
nemo said,
March 30, 2009 at 8:57 pm
It is strange, but Kant was a funny kind of ‘atheist’ who concealed himself behind the recreation of a kind of theism, or Spinozism in his ethical system, the divine as the spirit of ethics, or something…
This is too much for most secularists.
It is a pity that for this reason so many secularists and/or atheists miss the chance to learn from kant’s critical system.