East vs West

[iloveatomickitten]

I feel that one of the problems with marxism is that it has become entrenched with attacking the capitalist views and every issue is far more political that moral. The common good of all is the ultimate goal of communism but I feel it has now become lost.
The easten philosphies work on a much smaller and personal levels and rather than aiming to change soceity its self aims to "enlighten" the idividual. Certainly this is a better appoach to bettering society than the present one. Simply educating people of facts will not change them as a person, they need a whole new philosophy to life. Even though the eastern philosophies are usually in the format of a religion such as toaism you do not need to believe in the finner points of the religion such as ying/yang.
It seems perhaps a little out of place on this site but I would like your opinions on what i have just stated.

[SonofRage]

The demonization of Communist by capitalist propaganda is definitely a problem. One of the good things about the Green Party is that they are helping to bring many socialist and anarchist ideas into the mainstream without using the S-word to scare people off.

I hope that as the memory of the Soviet Union fades, the misconceptions about socialism and communism will fade along with it.

As for your question, I think Buddhism is something that is growing in popularity and shares some socialist values. The Dalai Lama has often referred to himself as being "half Buddhist, half Marxist."

[fallenmonk]

actually there are divisions within the buddhist world. while the theravada buddhists do endorse enlightenment thru individual practice the mahayana school believes in enlightening the masses and uses sutras as a type of propaganda. you are right though, eastern thought does offer a favorable alternative to our current cultural vacuum.

sonofrage, is that true of the Dalai Lama? not that i'm doubting you, i've just never heard that quote and it's interesting.

[Hampton]

He said, "I am not anti-China. I am a
half-Buddhist, half-Marxist. I am a socialist." When
questioned about his view over the Iraqi war, he said,
"Non-violence may take a long time but it is the right
approach. Suppression is the cause of another problem.
It is too early to comment on the result of the war."

Sizourse (http://www.tibet.ca/wtnarchive/2003/4/10_2.html)

[Monty Cantsin]

I believe that we are creatures of our environment, so we are not who are through birth but developed. Socrates said "It is easier to read a larger image than the smaller one, so we read the larger image to better understand the small". But that works in both ways. There needs to be a cultural change before anything can happen. People need to start caring about the state of our society. Seeing that you’re talking about eastern philosophies there needs to be a balance between focus not just on the state as a whole but on the individual as the smaller elements.

[IHP]

sutras as a type of propaganda."

How so? Sutras are not a necessary part of Buddhist path to enlightenment. That is, in Zen teachings anyway.

[fallenmonk]

IHP,

perhaps i phrased that poorly, but the idea i mean to express is that some sutras are parables conveying the use of upaya, rhetoric intended to start men on the path to enlightenment. the burning house and vimalakirti sutra for example. The idea being that men are stubborn and simple and will only change when threatened with retribution for their misdeeds.

thanks Hampton

[Pete]

I hope you do not mind me moving towards Hinduism, which I am more at rights to speak of then Buddhism.

Hinduism goes directly against leftism in a few points. First of all the Vedas, Upanisads, and entire Mahabharta support the system of Varna (lit. Colour), or caste. The outright support of discrimination based on birth does not fit into the linear view of history required for a marxist world view, as we see history as a progression, not an endless circle of death and birth (that is unless you reach moksha and escape samsara), which is a second point of contestation. Also their are three paths, or yogas (or margas), to reach enlightenment. These are bhakti (devotion), karma (action), and gnana (knowledge). The bhakti yoga goes against the areligious aspect of marxism, as it is the devotion of oneself to a istadevita (said ishtadevita). The karma yoga demands obediance to ones dharma (sacred duty is a common translation) which is tied into ones caste. For example a ksatriya's (warrior) dharma is to fight battles, and by doing so they collect good dharma (in the Gita, this is one of Krsna's (said Krishna) arguements to get Arjuna to fight his cousins), but if you do someone else's dharma you get bad karma. Some other deeds, such as not murdering, get you bad karma regardless, and likewise some good deeds get you good karma regardless. All karma matters for a higher birth in the cycle of redeath known as samsara. In some way, which I only understand by connecting the karma and bhakti yogas, you can obtain moksha by dedicating your actions to your istadevita, but only if you do your own dharma (svadharma). The gnana yoga is what one usually thinks of when you hear the word 'yoga.' This is the path of those who meditate and try to reach an infinity with nirguna (no characteristics) brahman. They tend to do no work and torture themselves physically to achieve moksha. As you can imagine, what I just mentioned, more or less, goes against leftism in general and marxism in specific.

A few points can also fit into marxism. In hinduism everyone has a soul, or atman (buddhism teaches anatman, or no soul). Atman is brahman, which is the ultimate reality or everything. In this sense the hindus accept that we are all equal. In the Gita Krsna says that the wise see the brahmin (priest), untouchable, kstatriya, dog, and the one who eats the dog as equals, although that is limited to the successful members of the gnana yoga it seems in my studies. This concept also contrasts with marxism, as it is not matieralistic and refers heavily to the equality of everyones immortal, undying soul (atman).

To say which is superior is up to your own interpretation. I enjoy studying hinduism as it is a deeply philosophical religion on many levels, unlike say Judaism which is dogmatic and fear-based (in my studies atleast). Hinduism, though, is also very active (sacrafices ect...see the Vedas), devotional, and classist, obviously unacceptal from a marxist view point.

If I made any mistakes, please correct me, but I am more or less sure that I have been accurate.

-Pete

(back to essay wrting :angry: )