DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Ancient World
*****************************************************
#Post#: 25937--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: SirGalahad Date: April 13, 2024, 10:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]My appreciation for Mahayana is significantly pragmatic,
as I believe it is much easier to interpret with political
applications in mind. This is to be expected, as Mahayana sutras
often addressed individuals in positions of power[/quote]
and
[quote]If you think you can come up with a convincing political
application of Theravada, by all means go ahead![/quote]
I took this to mean that you prefer Theravada in terms of actual
teachings, but that Mahayana Buddhists are easier to rally on a
pragmatic level for the reason that you mentioned. But maybe I
misunderstood
#Post#: 25939--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 13, 2024, 11:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"you prefer Theravada in terms of actual teachings"
I'm not sure where you got this impression from. Even on the
main site, I said:
[quote]Only the Chan (cognate with Zen) monasteries which grew
all their own food on their own land (unlike traditional
Buddhist monasteries which relied on alms) were able to maintain
intellectual independence[/quote]
All Theravada monasteries rely on alms whereas at least some
Mahayana (Chan) monasteries do not, so Mahayana gets a higher
rating on this count.
(If you can successfully convince some Theravada monasteries to
grow their own food, I would be happy to re-evaluate.)
#Post#: 25972--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: SirGalahad Date: April 15, 2024, 6:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I feel like it’s hard to square our endorsement of hatred for
enemies with the Buddhist texts, which instruct the opposite: to
remove hatred and ill will, even towards bad people. One of the
most famous quotes passed around is (from the Dhammapada)
“Hatred cannot cease through hatred. It can only cease through
non-hatred”.
I personally am still trying to figure out what I think of
hatred, and whether (if at all) it should ever be accepted as an
emotion for me to feel. You don’t necessarily need to feel
hatred towards your enemies to fight against them. Although I
think there’s a potential latent danger in destroying all
feelings of hatred as a Buddhist monk might do, since you’re
more likely to forget WHY evil needs to be opposed or fought
against in the first place. That hatred is, if anything, a
reminder
Also, I feel like the Buddhist concept of karma disincentives
people from carrying out our version of ahimsa. From what I’ve
gathered from the Pali Canon, karma is an amoral force, and
isn’t supposed to necessarily be “fair” (one of the many reasons
why Buddhists want to transcend samsara in the first place). So
you might be in a situation where you logically deduce that
ending someone’s life is the best option, even a justifiable one
on a theoretical level, but the act of killing always puts you
in a bad mind state and accrues negative karma. So if you want
to carry out ahimsa, then you must be prepared to make a karmic
sacrifice and (likely) end up suffering in one of the hell
realms when you’re reborn
This conception of “karmic sacrifice” is probably how a lot of
Buddhists justified participating in wars (including purely
defensive ones). I’m not saying that the law of karma is wrong
or doesn’t exist. I think it’s likely that the universe really
DOES work this way. But I think it might sow doubt in a lot of
people. Because if you’re about to carry out ahimsa KNOWING that
you’ll suffer immensely for it and be tortured in the next life,
then you’re obviously going to be a lot more hesitant than
someone who follows a religion or philosophy where karma isn’t
really a concept. Granted, the Buddhist hell realms are
temporary, but you’re still supposedly there for a long time
before being reborn again
#Post#: 25975--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 15, 2024, 7:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"hatred"
This is a mistranslation:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvesha
[quote]Dvesha (Sanskrit: द्वेष,
IAST: dveṣa; Pali: 𑀤𑁄𑀲, romanized:
dosa; Tibetan: zhe sdang) is a Buddhist and Hindu term that is
translated as "hate, aversion".[1][2][3][/quote]
Aversion is a better translation. Aversion motivates pushing
away (making it someone else's problem) whereas hatred motivates
proactively chasing down (for the sake of destroying). It is
therefore aversion which is selfish, and hatred which is
selfless. Given that the whole point of Buddhism is to remove
the self/non-self distinction, it is aversion which is poisonous
to this pursuit, whereas hatred is consistent with it.
#Post#: 25977--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: SirGalahad Date: April 15, 2024, 9:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It appears that the verse in question isn’t referring to
dveṣa/dosa, as in one of the Three Poisons. The verse in
question uses the word “vera” instead, which also means hatred:
HTML https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/v/vera/
The original quote below:
[quote] “Akkocchi maṁ, avadhi maṁ, ajini maṁ,
ahāsi me”,
“He abused me, he struck at me, he overcame me, he robbed me,”
ye taṁ na upanayhanti veraṁ tesūpasammati. [4]
those who do not bear ill-will towards this their hatred is
appeased.
Na hi verena verāni sammantīdha kudācanaṁ,
For not by hatred do hatreds cease at any time in this place,
averena ca sammanti, esa dhammo sanantano. [5]
they only cease with non-hatred, this truth is (surely)
eternal.[/quote]
Note that you’re specifically instructed to do this, even if the
person actually did wrong against you. I feel like the Buddha
just didn’t really care about justice or retribution. He only
really seemed to care about eliminating suffering in the victims
of samsara, and helping them to leave as quickly as possible
#Post#: 25978--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 15, 2024, 10:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]For not by hatred do hatreds cease[/quote]
This makes no sense in the context of the initial actions:
[quote]“He abused me, he struck at me, he overcame me, he robbed
me,”[/quote]
These are not actions of hatred, but actions of domination. (As
I always say, bullies never hate their victims.) Therefore if
the teaching is to not seek to dominate in reaction to being
dominated, I would agree, and would interpret the above quote as
actually meaning such.
From your link:
[quote]vera：[nt．] enmity； hatred．
[/quote]
I suggest enmity is the better translation, specifically in the
sense of rivalry (with its inherent egotism and hence
reinforcement of self/non-self distinction), which fits my
point.
False Leftists calling racist crimes "hate crimes" does not mean
the racists are in fact motivated by hatred either (they are
not). We have to take mainstream translations involving the word
"hatred" in general with the same scepticism as we take the term
"hate crime".
#Post#: 25980--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 16, 2024, 12:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Let me illustrate the difference between hatred (good) and vera
(bad) using a simple example. If X initiated violence against Y
and Y decides to retaliate, but before being able to do so X is
already killed by Z, if X felt hatred towards Y, X will be
grateful towards Z (because Z gave X what X deserved), but if X
felt vera towards Y, X will redirect the vera towards Z (because
Z denied Y the chance for victory over X*).
(* This is a frequent wuxia trope.)
#Post#: 28505--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: SirGalahad Date: November 6, 2024, 11:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@90sRetroFan What are your thoughts on this sutta?
HTML https://suttacentral.net/mn21/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=sidebyside&reference=none¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin
This is a particularly famous one in Buddhist circles, because
it describes how, even when being sawed limb from limb by
bandits, a monk should have and extend thoughts of loving
kindness towards the bandits. I’ve provided a link that includes
the English and Pali side-by-side, to avoid discrepancies in
translation.
“Mettā” (loving-kindness) and “dosa” (already covered in
our earlier discussion) are the main keywords here. The only
thing I would point to as a major discrepancy caused by the
translation is “anyone who had a malevolent thought”, which
should really be something more like “anyone who’s mind was
corrupted”, if we translate the Pali more directly. But the
“heart of love”/loving-kindess portion of the translation
appears to be accurate to the Pali
#Post#: 28509--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 6, 2024, 6:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"even when being sawed limb from limb by bandits, a monk should
have and extend thoughts of loving kindness towards the
bandits."
This is a good example of why I did not understand your
presumption that I would prefer Theravada back here:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/buddhism/msg25939/#msg25939
It is no coincidence that combat training is not included in the
curriculum of Theravada monks but have often been included in
that of Mahayana monks:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaolin_kung_fu
[quote]Historical discoveries indicate that, even before the
establishment of Shaolin temple, monks had been armed and also
practiced martial arts.[2]
...
The oldest evidence of Shaolin participation in combat is a
stele from 728 that attests to two occasions: a defense of the
monastery from bandits around 610 and their role in the defeat
of Wang Shichong at the Battle of Hulao in 621.
...
Stele and documentary evidence shows the monks historically
worshiped the Bodhisattva Vajrapani's "Kinnara King" form
...
On 21 July 1553, 120 warrior monks led by the Shaolin monk
Tianyuan defeated a group of pirates and chased the survivors
over ten days and twenty miles.[14] The pirates suffered over
one hundred casualties and the monks only four.[14][/quote]
#Post#: 29538--------------------------------------------------
Re: Buddhism
By: rp Date: March 11, 2025, 5:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://x.com/Yaduvam/status/1899490209462653025?t=L046PyTIOPIPg-Yj_NQhpA&s=19
[Quote]
Territories "conquered by Dhamma" according to the Major Rock
Edict No.13 of Ashoka the Great (260–218 BCE)
[img width=1280
height=705]
HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GlxYRjfWgAAUJA9?format=jpg&name=large[/img]
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page