Merle, That was what they did when American Indians and Australian aborigines were invaded. How would they like? Anthony
________________________________ From: Merle Lester <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2012, 15:04 Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: THE BASIC TEACHING OF BUDDHA bill..it's not nationalism as such it's culture...we all have a "right" to be who we are...imposing another way of being on another is invasion...all must be respected...how would you like it if i flew over to your house said right i'm staying and started making the rules...eh?merle Mike, I disliked the Dalai Lama's attempts at being both a political and religious leader - especially if a Buddhist. (Like I said before he actually was/is not a Buddhist but a 'Lamaist' (one who follows Lamaism). I guess you could stretch that into being a sub-set or sect of Buddhism but for me that's a bridge too far. Of course that's coming from someone who doesn't see 'zen' as exclusively as sub-set or sect of Buddhism.) Nationalism is nationalism for me. I don't see how it makes any difference if you're the larger or smaller nation. It's all problematic. I see the Chinese trying to drag a province of their country into the 21st century by trying to dispel and unseat a superstition-based theocracy that kept the vast majority of their people living in serfdom and ignorance. As a political leader the Dalai Lama has every right to resist this. As a religious leader I think his responsibility was to tend to his people's religious needs, not support and even fuel their attachments (nationalism). These two roles did not mesh well, IMO. I think now that he's relinquished his political role I might be able to warm up to him - maybe. As long as he doesn't keep encouraging his people and his clergy to continue seditious acts - like self-immolation. What's up with that? ...Bill! --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > Wow, haven't been on the net for a few days and too many posts to catch up > on, so I've skim read thru them. My apologies if I don't immediately respond > to posts specifically addressed to me. I'd like to address this post tho. > > > Bill!. I notice you've always had this almost pathological hatred of the > Dalai lama and I've never understood why. Your view of him is completely at > odds with mine, and considering we usually hold similar views, I'm baffled as > to why. I see a man who says there shouldn't be hatred directed at the > colonising Chinese, that he's not calling for an independent Tibet, but that > it should have some autonomy, and who exudes Happiness even tho he's seen his > land, people and culture decimated by outside political forces (remembering > too that the west did nothing about the invasion of Tibet for decades). > What's not to like about the man? > > Also, I think there's a big difference regarding views on nationalism if > you're from a powerful state compared to one which is politically and/or > culturally threatened by a more powerful neighbour. Should we in Wales just > "accept" that our language and traditions our being eroded by English > dominance? Should Native Americans and Australians just "accept" their > position brought about by colonising powers? > > > Personally, I think a lot of the criticism directed to the Dalai Lama comes > from western cynicism and is not a true reflection of the man himself. > > Mike > > Ps I lived in Yangzhou (between Shanghai and Nanjing) for several months > teaching English. I liked China and the Chinese, but I don't understand how > you could say that Tibet is China. It's like saying the Aborigines in Western > Australia (who didn't see a white man for another 50 years) automatically > became British subjects in the act of planting a Union Flag on the Sydney > foreshore. > > > > ________________________________ > From: Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> > To: "mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com"; <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Monday, 17 September 2012, 10:41 > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: THE BASIC TEACHING OF BUDDHA > > >  > > >  I disagree...merle > > >  > Merle, > > If you've been to China you've been to Tibet. Tibet is part of China...Bill! > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > >  anthony ... i am estonian...i know the ropes > >  the tibetans want to rule their own section... so what...?.... why > > cannot they?...there are many minorities in china... > >  been to china anthony? > > been to tibet? > > merle > >  > > Merle, > >  > > No way China will give up the strategically important Tibet. Estonians are > > a completely different race than Russians. But Tibetans are from the same > > language family as the Han Chinese. What they do is only simplify the > > pronunciation from 'rdzogt tschen' to 'dzog chen'. > >  > > Anthony > > > > From: Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> > > To: "mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com"; > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > Sent: Sunday, 16 September 2012, 15:23 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: THE BASIC TEACHING OF BUDDHA > > > > > >  > > > > > >  have you been to china bill!..i have been 3 times...the han chinese are > > the majority > > > > .. why are you attacking the Dalai lama?///// i know about tibet and the > > oppressive feudal regime...however i think you'd have to actually go to > > tibet to witness what is going on...the han chinese are flooding tibet...is > > that good?...estonia my home country was invaded by the russians in world > > war 2 and thanks to the allies the russians were "given " the baltic > > states...so estonia was governed by the kremlin and the russians flooded > > into estonia... since independence it is madatory that one can speak > > estonian in order to claim estonian citizenship( the russians would not > > learn the language..and the official language when the russians were in > > power was russian...it's not fun bill!..being overlorded by another > > country...so i say if the tibet wish to run their own country...then they > > should do so and change to modernise through that not have it imposed upon > > them by the han chinese... merle > > > > > >  > > Bill!, > >  > > Your remarks and quotes will make the great zombie lying in Tiananmen > > Square happy. But he would say, 'not enough, what I did dwarfs them'. > >  > > Anthony > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Saturday, 15 September 2012, 10:00 > > Subject: [Zen] Re: THE BASIC TEACHING OF BUDDHA > > > > > > > > > > WOMAN LIKE CATTLE (and a lot of other information) > > > > "Tibetan Buddhism has a legacy of violence, hypocrisy, sexism, > > institutional sexual abuse, homophobia and religious rule by a dictator > > said to be a living god (the Dalai Lama) - all so the idle monk lifestyle > > could be supported by a feudal system of peasants who gave over half their > > labor/possessions. Although Chinese rule has been oppressive for the ruling > > Lamaist class and its defenders, is there ANY evidence to suggest that > > going back to rule of a feudal God-King would be better than the current > > system? Has ANY dictator ever ruled to the benefit of "his" people?" > > Source - http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/277073.shtml > > > > I hope these will suffice as 'evidence' of my opinions.  There are lots > > and lots of other sites and you can find them yourself by Binging > > or Goggling. > > > > ...Bill! > > >
