History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Buddhism and revolution

July 30th, 2011 · 1 Comment

Tibetan Buddhism’s Next Great Leader???
We commented on this issue yesterday at The Gurdjieff Con

I should ‘apologize’ for such a harsh critique, and, since I am not a Tibetan Buddhist, or a Buddhist, should stay out of such ‘vulgar’ attacks. Judge for yourself if the apology, however, doesn’t run very deep.

So let me just say that ‘buddhism’ has to have ‘buddhas’ at this point, to recreate it. Whether that can be done outside of India I don’t know, but the requirements for being a teacher are staggering, and attempting buddhism in the west is very difficult. Those difficulties are, however, obstacles that must be faced for a universal religion of the future. Do we want such a thing? I cannot answer the question, finally, but we need to at least consider/attempt such a thing as a virtual potential if only to expose the fakes/ideologies the social elites are going to put in the place of collapsing Axial Age religions.

The question of ideology suggests that a real buddhism has to be more than the instrument of a political elite as in Tibet, and return to its radical roots in the Axial Age when the buddhists were a revolutionary cadre bent on taking over India, succeeding for several centuries. In its wake, as it was driven from India the vampires of ‘Hinduism’ took over and we have the idiocies masking the read Indian tradition setting the definition of ‘normal’.
Thus we need to create a new left that can also embrace the religious radicalism of the real ancient buddhism, next to its socialist critique and revolution against capitalism.
We won’t here anything about that from the current Tibetan mafia, so, goodbye to all that.

Note: I should perhaps say ‘neo-brahminism’ rather than ‘hinduism’, the latter term being misleading. The real, and great, Indian tradition is not ‘hinduism’ in this usage.

Tags: General

1 response so far ↓

Leave a Comment