--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> >
> > I said only that I can live with it as Jim's OPINION.
> > That is clearly what it is, unless he's doing a Willytex
> > and saying shit he *doesn'* believe just to troll for a
> > response.
>
> No, not at all. Tibetan Buddhism IS in my opinion a failed
> tradition. Just didn't work.
>
> From the Namgyal Monastery, Institute of Buddhist Studies website:
>
> "Thousands of people in Tibet as well as elsewhere in China starved,
> were imprisoned, or were executed and thousands of people fled Tibet
> for refugee communities in the neighboring states of India, Nepal,
> and Bhutan. Thousands of monastic institutions and much of the
> cultural heritage of Tibet was destroyed or looted at this time."
And you're going to provide us with the unequivocable
documentation that all these things happening always
means that the spiritual tradition in the area is a
"failure" exactly when?
Hint: You can't. You made it up. You took Maharishi's
view on the subject ("invincible" countries) and
extrapolated from it to come up with your *own*
"definition" of what a "failed" spiritual tradition
might be.
But it's JUST YOUR OPINION, dude.
*Millions* of people in India have starved over the
ages. Tens of thousands starve there today. Many
Indians have been imprisoned, most by their own
government. Refugee communities proliferate *within*
India, for its *own* people. Much of the cultural
heritage of India has been systematically destroyed
or looted over the ages.
Why then is Hinduism *not* a "failed" spiritual
tradition?
Hey, it's *your* logic. I'm just asking you to back
it up. You won't, of course, but it's fun to ask... :-)
