Anything Taken to Extremes ...

[Sukerkin]

On many occasions when the thorny topic of religion or belief in a creator deity has arisen on these fora, I have commented that Buddhism doesn't seem to suffer from the 'drive to oppress or suppress' the unbeliever and that that garnered the philosophy some respect in my eyes.

However, it would seem that even Buddhism can be taken to excess and as soon as people start to legislate with a 'faith' as a foundation then over-reaction and unreasonableness don't take long to come to the fore:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21820476

 

[FrontKick-Jab-Punch]

Interesting. I generally agree with you both about religion in general and Buddhism in particular. The religion itself is never the problem - they all basically say to play nice with everyone else - but the adherents, the people, that mess everything up. And that's all people, everywhere, although some religions certainly lend themselves more easily to these problems than others.

In the case of the BBC article, I can't tell by your post if you meant that the Englishman with the tattoo had taken things too far or that the Sri Lankan official had! I'm sure the Buddha would not have supported the Sri Lankan's anger and offense in response to a harmless piece of body art ("it is not the thing itself which has causes offense, but your estimate of it"), so he took it too far in my opinion. However, when travelling as a foreigner in someone else's country, I think it's our responsibility to not to offend others, not try and force everyone else to accept our foreign ways. So while the tattooed man did nothing wrong by our standards, its awful ethnocentric of us to think that means that nobody else ought to find it offensive either (and if they do, haha, we can say how stupid they're being).

So, as I always do, I'll quite philosophically choose the middle ground.

Now that we've got my 0.02c out of the way, what had you originally meant? And thanks for being unafraid to discuss such things - I always find them interesting!

FKJP

 

[Sukerkin]

A pleasure, FKJP.

What I was opining was the over-zealousness of the officials and how it did not seem to embody the Buddhist principles (as far as my limited understanding of those goes). Hence, why I was saying that anything taken to extremes becomes, almost as a natural law, a bad thing. Because they had the far-too-handy 'religious' stick to beat people with, the officials could push the boundaries of their powers and 'lord it over' the visitors bringing wealth to their country without repercussions - even our own Foreign Office did not stand up for the Briton being so humiliated in the linked BBC article.

I do agree about trying our best not to offend other cultures when we are on their soil but there have to be limits and a little give-and-take when it is clear that offence is not meant.

 

[jezr74]

On many occasions when the thorny topic of religion or belief in a creator deity has arisen on these fora, I have commented that Buddhism doesn't seem to suffer from the 'drive to oppress or suppress' the unbeliever and that that garnered the philosophy some respect in my eyes.

However, it would seem that even Buddhism can be taken to excess and as soon as people start to legislate with a 'faith' as a foundation then over-reaction and unreasonableness don't take long to come to the fore:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21820476

I agree Buddhism doesn't get in the line of fire very often. But it also doesn't claim creation or divinity either I believe. Is more on improving yourself and way of life rather than have some one tell you how to live. And are rather progressive compared to other religions.

Not sure what I think of the deportation due top the Tattoo. What do Catholics think when they see movies with violent gangsters having large tattoos of the virgin Mary or Christ on the cross? Do they find it offensive?

If I get to a PC, I'll try and post an example picture.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Sukerkin]

I would think that they find it offensive to have such bad associations drawn to the symbols of their faith - and I wouldn't blame them for feeling so either.

But that is not really the same sort of thing that happened to the man in the news story. He was deported just for having the tattoo of Buddha - that smacks all too much of "thou shalt have no graven images" to me.

 

[jezr74]

I would think that they find it offensive to have such bad associations drawn to the symbols of their faith - and I wouldn't blame them for feeling so either.

But that is not really the same sort of thing that happened to the man in the news story. He was deported just for having the tattoo of Buddha - that smacks all too much of "thou shalt have no graven images" to me.

Ahh yes true. I my browser only rendered the top part of the story for some reason. Didn't see that they wouldn't reason with him and he follows the Buddhist way.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[elder999]

I'm reminded of the guy who got chased through the streets of Katmandu for wearing a T-shirt. The crowd thought the image was the Dalai Lama, but it was actually Curly from the Three Stooges! :lfao; Of course, the story ended with laughs, and no one was hurt, but it could have been different....People are extreme, sometimes-about politics, about tribes, about territory, and about religion. It's kind of like guns though: doing away with them isn't going to change people violent nature, and taking away religion isn't going to take away some people's desire to factionalize, or penchant for extreme behavior.

 

[arnisador]

Buddhism is relatively inoffensive as religions go and seems to cause less trouble. It's beliefs in supernatural forces like karma etc. don't seem to have the same effect as a deity telling people what to do. They're surely not blameless but overall I always say If you must be religious, try Buddhism.

 

[jezr74]

Buddhism is relatively inoffensive as religions go and seems to cause less trouble. It's beliefs in supernatural forces like karma etc. don't seem to have the same effect as a deity telling people what to do. They're surely not blameless but overall I always say If you must be religious, try Buddhism.

They don't claim anything that can actually be tested, where others sometimes do.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[jezr74]

I'm reminded of the guy who got chased through the streets of Katmandu for wearing a T-shirt. The crowd thought the image was the Dalai Lama, but it was actually Curly from the Three Stooges! :lfao; Of course, the story ended with laughs, and no one was hurt, but it could have been different....People are extreme, sometimes-about politics, about tribes, about territory, and about religion. It's kind of like guns though: doing away with them isn't going to change people violent nature, and taking away religion isn't going to take away some people's desire to factionalize, or penchant for extreme behavior.

I nearly got a full body the first time I entered into America via LAX.

I was wearing a Cuban basketball T-Shirt, didn't actually realize, but was stuck at the customs desk for 40 minutes getting grilled.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[grumpywolfman]

Buddhism is relatively inoffensive as religions go and seems to cause less trouble. It's beliefs in supernatural forces like karma etc. don't seem to have the same effect as a deity telling people what to do. They're surely not blameless but overall I always say If you must be religious, try Buddhism.

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." ~ 2 Timothy 4:3-4 NASB

Jesus is Lord

PeaceWithGod.net

 

[jezr74]

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." ~ 2 Timothy 4:3-4 NASB

Jesus is Lord

PeaceWithGod.net

Buddha never claimed divinity if I remember correctly. He actually never wanted people to praise him as one either. It's more a philosophy than religion. Others more knowledgeable may be able confirm. Also they don't follow the bible so it's not and edited version. Not sure if that's what you were hinting towards.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Carol]

Forgive my libertarian bias; this sounds more like the state out of control than anything else.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Makalakumu]

Buddha never claimed divinity if I remember correctly. He actually never wanted people to praise him as one either. It's more a philosophy than religion.

"If you meet Buddha on the road, kill him." Lin Chi - 9th century Buddhist monk.

I love this and it pretty much sums up my feelings on religion.

That said, I am not convinced that Buddhism is any more "safe" then other religions. Buddhism has all kinds of weird sects that take all sorts of crazy vows. They chop off limbs, swear off sex, stare at walls, refuse to slap mosquitoes, and even abandon their family. The craziness may not take on the political extremism that governments can fearmonger about, but the personal, individual effects of the religion can be just as detrimental.

In the end, it's just another irrational view of the universe. It's just dogma that is easily exploited by the priest class in a society. "Try Buddhism?" Nah, I'll take reason and evidence any day...and maybe a steak too.

 

[jezr74]

"If you meet Buddha on the road, kill him." Lin Chi - 9th century Buddhist monk.

I love this and it pretty much sums up my feelings on religion.

That said, I am not convinced that Buddhism is any more "safe" then other religions. Buddhism has all kinds of weird sects that take all sorts of crazy vows. They chop off limbs, swear off sex, stare at walls, refuse to slap mosquitoes, and even abandon their family. The craziness may not take on the political extremism that governments can fearmonger about, but the personal, individual effects of the religion can be just as detrimental.

In the end, it's just another irrational view of the universe. It's just dogma that is easily exploited by the priest class in a society. "Try Buddhism?" Nah, I'll take reason and evidence any day...and maybe a steak too.

Very cool saying.

My interactions with Buddhists had always been positive. Aside from the one in New York who just wanted $20 for his temple to be built, but he was a con/beggar.

I've not heard much about their extreme side much, let alone violent content.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Makalakumu]

Very cool saying.

My interactions with Buddhists had always been positive. Aside from the one in New York who just wanted $20 for his temple to be built, but he was a con/beggar.

I've not heard much about their extreme side much, let alone violent content.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

The average run of the mill Buddhist is probably the least annoying of all flavors of religious people. Ring the bell, burn some incense, say a silent prayer, move on. It's a pretty chill faith. Still, the internal focus can be taken to the extreme, as can anything. Imagine the irate Chinese Tiger Mom chastising her children about her view of Right Action...

 

[arnisador]

Buddha never claimed divinity if I remember correctly. He actually never wanted people to praise him as one either.

That's also the modern scholarly view of the Bible, I believe--that Jesus never claimed divinity but as his group was persecuted after his death they increasingly warned their oppressors that their leader would return and exact a terrible vengeance. The superstition largely enters the Bible after the fall of the Second Temple, decades after Jesus' death, and 1 Timothy was written by someone writing in Paul's name after that (quite possibly in the second century BCE).