The Dalai Lama's hidden past

[celticfire]

The Dalai Lama's hidden past (http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1996/248/248p23.htm)

Comment by Norm Dixon

Most solidarity and environmental groups supporting the Tibetan people's cause have not questioned the Dalai Lama's role in Tibetan history or addressed what it would mean for the Tibetan people if the Dalai Lama and his coterie returned to power.


A 1995 document distributed by the Dalai Lama's Office of Tibet aggressively states that ``China tries to justify its occupation and repressive rule of Tibet by pretending that it `liberated' Tibetan society from `medieval feudal serfdom' and `slavery'. Beijing trots out this myth to counter every international pressure to review its repressive policies in Tibet.'' It then coyly concedes: ``Traditional Tibetan society was by no means perfect ... However, it was not as bad as China would have us believe.''

Was this a myth? Tibet's Buddhist monastic nobility controlled all land on behalf of the ``gods''. They monopolised the country's wealth by exacting tribute and labour services from peasants and herders. This system was similar to how the medieval Catholic Church exploited peasants in feudal Europe.

Tibetan peasants and herders had little personal freedom. Without the permission of the priests, or lamas, they could not do anything. They were considered appendages to the monastery. The peasantry lived in dire poverty while enormous wealth accumulated in the monasteries and in the Dalai Lama's palace in Lhasa.

In 1956 the Dalai Lama, fearing that the Chinese government would soon move on Lhasa, issued an appeal for gold and jewels to construct another throne for himself. This, he argued, would help rid Tibet of ``bad omens''. One hundred and twenty tons were collected. When the Dalai Lama fled to India in 1959, he was preceded by more than 60 tons of treasure.

Romantic notions about the ``peaceful'' and ``harmonious'' nature of Tibetan Buddhist monastic life should be tested against reality. The Lithang Monastery in eastern Tibet was where a major rebellion against Chinese rule erupted in 1956. Beijing tried to levy taxes on its trade and wealth. The monastery housed 5000 monks and operated 113 ``satellite'' monasteries, all supported by the labour of the peasants.

Chris Mullin, writing in the Far Eastern Economic Review in 1975, described Lithang's monks as ``not monks in the Western sense ... many were involved in private trade; some carried guns and spent much of their time violently feuding with rival monasteries. One former citizen describes Lithang as `like the Wild West'.''

The Tibetan ``government'' in Lhasa was composed of lamas selected for their religious piety. At the head of this theocracy was the Dalai Lama. The concepts democracy, human rights or universal education were unknown.

The Dalai Lama and the majority of the elite agreed to give away Tibet's de facto independence in 1950 once they were assured by Beijing their exploitative system would be maintained. Nine years later, only when they felt their privileges were threatened, did they revolt. Suddenly the words ``democracy'' and ``human rights'' entered the vocabulary of the government-in-exile, operating out of Dharamsala in India ever since.

Dharamsala and the Dalai Lama's commitment to democracy seems weak. An Office of Tibet document claims ``soon after His Holiness the Dalai Lama's arrival in India, he re-established the Tibetan Government in exile, based on modern democratic principles''. Yet it took more than 30 years for an Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies to be directly elected from among the 130,000 exiles. Of 46 assembly members, only 30 are elected. The other 16 are appointed by religious authorities or directly by the Dalai Lama.

All assembly decisions must be approved by the Dalai Lama, whose sole claim to the status of head of state is that he has been selected by the gods. The separation of church and state is yet to be recognised by the Dalai Lama as a ``modern democratic principle''.

The right-wing nature of the Dalai Lama and the government-in-exile was further exposed by its relationship with the US CIA. The Dalai Lama concealed the CIA's role in the 1959 uprising until 1975.

Between 1956 and 1972 the CIA armed and trained Tibetan guerillas. The Dalai Lama's brothers acted as intermediaries. Before the 1959 uprising, the CIA parachuted arms and trained guerillas into eastern Tibet. The Dalai Lama maintained radio contact with the CIA during his 1959 escape to India.

Even the Dalai Lama's commitment to allowing the Tibetan people a genuine act of self-determination is debatable. Without consultation with the Tibetan people, the Dalai Lama openly abandoned his movement's demand for independence in 1987. This shift was first communicated to Beijing secretly in 1984. The Dalai Lama's proposals now amount to calling for negotiations with Beijing to allow him and his exiled government to resume administrative power in an ``autonomous'', albeit larger, Tibet. The Dalai Lama's call for international pressure on Beijing seeks only to achieve this.

There are indications that a younger generation of exiled Tibetans is now questioning the traditional leadership. In Dharamsala, the New Internationalist reported recently, young Tibetans have criticised the abandonment of the demand for independence and the Dalai Lama's rejection of armed struggle. They openly question the influence of religion, saying it holds back the struggle. Some have received death threats for challenging the old guard. Several recently-arrived refugees were elected to the Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies.

The Tibetan people deserve the right to national self-determination. However, supporting their struggle should not mean that we uncritically support the self-proclaimed leadership of the Dalai Lama and his compromised ``government-in-exile''. Their commitment to human rights, democracy and support for genuine self-determination can only be judged from their actions and their willingness to tell the truth.

=============================================

I also reccomend:

The True Story of Maoist Revolution in Tibet (http://www.rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tib-in.htm) by Mike Ely


The people lived with constant cold and hunger. Serfs endlessly gathered scarce wood for their masters. But their own huts were only heated by small cooking fires of yak dung. Before the revolution there was no electricity in Tibet. The darkness was only lit by flickering yak-butter lamps.

[Comrade Marcel]

China and Tibet

· Did China invade Tibet?

· Is Tibet an Occupied Nation?

· Is China destroying Tibet's culture?

· What was life like in Tibet before the Revolution?

· Was the Dalai Lama a CIA agent?

· Could there be a Socialist Tibet independent of China?

· What is the correct line to take?

· China and the National question



*Please try to read at least the first (1) writing from "Tibet Before and After the Revolution"



Tibet Before and After the Revolution

1. *Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth by Michael Parenti - http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

2. Tibet before the Chinese Revolution - http://www.lalkar.demon.co.uk/issues/conte...2000/tibet.html (http://www.lalkar.demon.co.uk/issues/contents/jan2000/tibet.html)

3. Tibet builds socialism - http://www.lalkar.demon.co.uk/issues/conte...2000/tibet.html (http://www.lalkar.demon.co.uk/issues/contents/mar2000/tibet.html)



Tibet now: Against Dengist Capitalism and for a "socialist Tibet"

1. Maoist Internationalist Movement: "What about Tibet?" - http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/faq/tibet.html



Maoist view of Tibet

1. Great changes in Tibet (1972 Pamphlet printed by the Chinese government under Mao) - http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/countrie.../tibet1972.html (http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/countries/china/tibet1972.html)

2. Mao Tse-tung: ON THE POLICIES FOR OUR WORK IN TIBET -- DIRECTIVE OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CHINA - http://www.marx2mao.com/Mao/WT52.html



Deng Xiaoping on Tibet:

1. CHINA'S POLICY, BASED ON THE EQUALITY OF NATIONALITIES, IS TO ACCELERATE DEVELOPMENT IN TIBET - http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/dengxp/v...text/c1780.html (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/dengxp/vol3/text/c1780.html)

2. FOR THE GREAT UNITY OF THE ENTIRE CHINESE NATION - http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/dengxp/v...text/c1530.html (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/dengxp/vol3/text/c1530.html)



CIA Dalai Lama links:

1. The Dalai C.I.A. Lama - http://rwor.org/a/v20/980-89/985/tibet.htm

2. CIA ran Tibet contras since 1959 - http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat...73/ciatibeh.htm (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6173/ciatibeh.htm)



Extra readings:

1. The True Story of Maoist Revolution in Tibet by Mike Ely (in 6 parts) - http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tib-in.htm



Reference:

1. China, Tibet and Chinese nation - http://www.index-china.com/index-english/Tibet-s.html

[tatu]

Chinese visit greeted by protests

Tuesday, 8 November 2005, 12:37 GMT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4416574.stm

Chinese president Hu Jintao and his wife have arrived in Britain for a three-day state visit amid protests.

The couple will stay at Buckingham Palace and Mr Hu will visit 10 Downing Street for talks with Tony Blair.

The pair are due to be formally greeted by the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh on Horse Guards Parade.

Hundreds of human rights protesters lined the area outside the Palace ahead of the arrival procession, with mounted officers among the police presence.

The message we want Tony Blair to deliver tomorrow is that Hu Jintao should meet the Dalai Lama

Alison Reynolds
Free Tibet Campaign

Opponents of Chinese rule in Tibet shouted slogans and carried banners, while a number of pro-Chinese government supporters also lined The Mall ahead of the Mr Hu's arrival on Tuesday.

Director of the Free Tibet Campaign Alison Reynolds said she hoped the demonstration would send a strong message to the visiting president.

She said with an estimated 100 protesters gathered, that the turn-out was great.

"The point is, he gets to see the Tibetan flag, which is banned in China and Tibet.

"The message we want Tony Blair to deliver tomorrow is that Hu Jintao should meet the Dalai Lama.

"Tony Blair certainly has the influence, but whether he chooses to exercise it ... we sincerely hope our presence in the next couple of days will send a strong message."

We live in a free, democratic country.... Of course people are perfectly free to say whatever they want to say

She also said she wanted to see much greater progress on human rights in Tibet, especially because of the Beijing Olympics in 2008.

"Those games are going to be tarnished if there isn't substantial progress," she told BBC Five Live.

The prime minister earlier said protests over China's human rights records would be free to go ahead.


Speaking during his monthly press conference on Monday, Mr Blair said: "People are perfectly entitled to wear Free Tibet T-shirts or anything else.

Economic links

It comes after complaints about heavy handed policing of human rights protests during a 1999 visit by Mr Hu's predecessor Jiang Zemin to London.

Police lawyers later admitted officers acted unlawfully by confiscating protesters' flags and banners.

Mr Blair told journalists discussions with Mr Hu would focus on the growing economic links between the two countries as well as international security issues and climate change.

During their stay, the presidential couple will attend a banquet in the presence of the Queen at Buckingham Palace and visit an exhibition of Chinese art at the Royal Academy of Arts in London.

[celticfire]

Actually, under the capitalist-revisionist CCP now, I fully endorse an independent Tibet - but not a return to the horrific Budhist-fuedalism.

[tatu]

Chinese visit greeted by protests

Protesters have greeted Chinese president Hu Jintao and his wife as they arrived for a three-day UK visit.

The pair were ceremonially greeted by the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh on Horse Guards Parade, central London.

Hundreds of human rights protesters and Chinese government supporters lined the area as they entered Buckingham Palace in the royal carriage.

The couple will stay at the palace and Mr Hu will visit 10 Downing Street for talks with Tony Blair.


"The message we want Tony Blair to deliver tomorrow is that Hu Jintao should meet the Dalai Lama"
Alison Reynolds
Free Tibet Campaign


As the state procession made its way up the Mall the Queen looked out on protesters against Chinese rule in Tibet who started chanting loudly and waving banners.

As the state coach passed, Mr Hu waved enthusiastically to his own supporters who were collected on the opposite side of the road to the protest.

Free Tibet campaigners shouted "shame on you, Mr Hu" while members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement, banned in China, largely stood in silence.

'Loud jeers'

BBC News website reporter Dominic Casciani said that, after the procession had passed, police officers apprehended a single man, who had begun to wave a pro-China flag in the middle of the Tibet campaigners.

He was taken away to loud jeers, our correspondent said.

Earlier, the Queen, dressed in a red overcoat, greeted Mr Hu and his wife with lengthy handshakes on Horse Guards Parade.

Prince Philip and Mr Hu inspected the 1st Battalion Irish Guards while the Queen chatted to his wife Liu Yongqing through an interpreter.

The prime minister, Home Secretary Charles Clarke and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw joined the dignitaries on the parade ground.

Director of the Free Tibet Campaign Alison Reynolds said she hoped the demonstration would send a strong message to the visiting president.

"The point is, he gets to see the Tibetan flag, which is banned in China and Tibet.

"The message we want Tony Blair to deliver tomorrow is that Hu Jintao should meet the Dalai Lama.

"Tony Blair certainly has the influence, but whether he chooses to exercise it ... we sincerely hope our presence in the next couple of days will send a strong message."

'Renounce position'

The president was formerly party chief in Tibet where he declared martial law over protests by separatists.

Last week he urged the Dalai Lama to "renounce his Tibetan independence proposition".

The prime minister earlier said protests over China's human rights records would be free to go ahead.

Mr Blair told journalists discussions with Mr Hu would focus on the growing economic links between the two countries as well as international security issues and climate change.

During their stay, the presidential couple will attend a banquet in the presence of the Queen at Buckingham Palace and visit an exhibition of Chinese art at the Royal Academy of Arts in London.

The president and his wife are also due to fly to Germany and Spain for state visits there.

US President George Bush is due to visit Beijing later in the year.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/4416574.stm

Published: 2005/11/08 15:01:19 GMT

© BBC MMV

[Scars]

It's good to see that some other people actually recognise the TRUE history of Tibet- not this romantic 'free tibet!' shit that is a linch-pin of trendy leftism.

[PrideoftheProletariat]

Wow, this has really opened my eyes as to what Tibet really vwas like under the rule of the Dalai Lama.

[DisIllusion]

Wow, this has really opened my eyes as to what Tibet really vwas like under the rule of the Dalai Lama.

Yeah, it's never good to have a country run under a religion.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 12:32 AM
Actually, under the capitalist-revisionist CCP now, I fully endorse an independent Tibet - but not a return to the horrific Budhist-fuedalism.
I do too, but not as a independant nation. But a Tibet which is independent of revisionist China, and claims to be the heir of the real CCP pre 1976. This implies reunification with China when proleteriat control is regained.

[martingale]

Tibet will never become an independent nation. If Tibet ever breaks away from China, it will become a US client state, allowing the US military to set up military bases along the Chinese border and threatening China.

The Dalai Lama has always been a willing pawn of US imperialism. If he ever comes to power in Tibet, he will be more than willing to help the US in containing and destabilizing China. It is no wonder that some of his most ardent supporters in the US are the most reactionary elements of the US ruling class (e.g. Jesse Helms).

For all his reputation as a champion of human rights among some naive "leftists", he has never leveled a word of criticism against that war criminal George W. Bush. He also stated that US intervention in Korea and Vietnam were morally justified. As for the US aggression against Iraq, the Dalai Lama offered this opinion: only history will tell whether it was the correct thing to do. In other words, the invasion of a sovereign country is justified if the outcome turns out to be favorable to US imperialism.

[Commie Rat]

Did the chinese CCP sellout as soon as Mao left office or did they have at least a few puppet leaders before allowing the 'free' market ?

[Scars]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 11 2005, 10:32 AM
Did the chinese CCP sellout as soon as Mao left office or did they have at least a few puppet leaders before allowing the 'free' market ?
There was the 'Gang of Four' after Mao, but then there was a sort of internal coup that resulted in Deng eventually taking power.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 11 2005, 09:32 PM
Did the chinese CCP sellout as soon as Mao left office or did they have at least a few puppet leaders before allowing the 'free' market ?
It's a complex situation.

Mao just didn't leave office. What happened was during the great leap forward many errors occurred and original goals were not reached. This made many people side with moderates and go against Mao. So it was during Mao's time moderates (revisionist) began to take power. To reclaim the Party, Mao launched the cultural revolution as a way for people outside the party to reclaim the party.

Mao also had analysised what happen in the USSR with Krushchevs reforms, so he had alot of knowledge about revisionist. This made him available to call out against moderates and expose them as revisionist.

So it wasn't the CCP selling out after Mao died, what happen was there was a battle for CCP leadership, and the Maoist lost out.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

You idiots act like Buddhism is synonymous with serfdom and feudalism, it is exactly the opposite.

[Punk Rocker]

You idiots act like Buddhism is synonymous with serfdom and feudalism, it is exactly the opposite.

Hell yeah. Those 4,000 slaves the Dalai Lama owned were definatley not being oppressed by feudalism. They were free and equal slaves! Tibet's chains of theocracy that Mao broke weren't serfdom at all.

I have some respect for Buddhism as an idea, it's a much better religion than Christianity or Judaism. If Buddhism stands for freedom and equality, then the Lamas really fucked it up. If it stands for the way Tibet was before the Chinese Revolution, then I'm against it.

One thing to remember here is after he was kicked out, the Dalai Lama realized how feudalism was bad, and he wrote and ode to Mao and asked to join the CCP.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Originally posted by Punk [email protected] 26 2005, 05:16 AM

You idiots act like Buddhism is synonymous with serfdom and feudalism, it is exactly the opposite.

Hell yeah. Those 4,000 slaves the Dalai Lama owned were definatley not being oppressed by feudalism. They were free and equal slaves! Tibet's chains of theocracy that Mao broke weren't serfdom at all.

I have some respect for Buddhism as an idea, it's a much better religion than Christianity or Judaism. If Buddhism stands for freedom and equality, then the Lamas really fucked it up. If it stands for the way Tibet was before the Chinese Revolution, then I'm against it.

One thing to remember here is after he was kicked out, the Dalai Lama realized how feudalism was bad, and he wrote and ode to Mao and asked to join the CCP.
Lamas in Tibet used their authority on Buddhism(or what they said was buddhism) to gain control over the population. Is American Fundamentalism the same thing as Christianity? No, neither is Feudalism.

Yes, remember that the Dalai Lama was extremely young when he became the Dalai Lama. He was a young, new, Lama who was called to rule over an entire country. We must look at it with historical context also.. Many other countries had slavery or some form of discrimination at this time also. The Dalai Lama was just a kid. We'll never know if he would've reformed Tibet for the better.

[celticfire]

LA GUERRA OLVIDADA: Well you have kind of an off but still valid point. Buddhism was actually very revolution during its creation, and various Buddhists have played very progressive roles in history, especially during the Vietnam war. But they've also played very reactionary roles too, for example a lot Zen Buddhists joined the Imperialists in Japan to fight the allies.

It's a complex issue. Even many Christians have played progressive roles in history, but again Christianity as a whole is principally a Anglo-Saxon oppressor religion.

Here is a good piece on Buddhism and dialectics, its by a Trotskyist (I am a Maoist) but its still good and very Marxist:

Buddhism and dialectics (http://www.marxist.com/indian-islamic-philosophy-dialectics.htm)


The period of the 6th century B.C. in India was a turbulent one. The primitive communal system was collapsing and being replaced by class society, the cleavage of society into rich and poor and the rise of an oppressive state. Such periods in human history are inevitably characterised by a crisis of ideology, and the birth of new schools of philosophy, politics and religion. Siddhartha Gotama, known to his followers as the Buddha (the Enlightened One) was the founder of just such a radical school of thought that developed as a reaction to the ossified form of the old Vedic philosophy

Born about 563 B.C., the son of a nobleman, Siddhartha is typical of the type of person who breaks away from the upper class and begins to reflect the protests and aspirations of the common people in a revolutionary period. Until he was 29 years old, he lived the sheltered life of a typical prince, with every luxury he could desire. According to legend, he saw a vision (the "Four Signs") which jolted him out of his complacency. He saw in rapid succession a very feeble old man, a hideous leper, a funeral, and a venerable ascetic monk. He began to think about old age, disease, and death, and decided to follow the way of the monk. For six years he led an ascetic life of renunciation, but finally, while meditating under a tree, he concluded that the solution was not withdrawal from the world, but rather a practical life of compassion for suffering humanity.

Buddhism is often thought to be a religion, and indeed over the centuries it has adopted the outward appearance of a religion. This is ironic, because the Buddha himself was opposed to religion. He rejected the authority of the Vedas and refused to set up any alternative creed. The old Brahman religion, with its rigid division of society into castes, its complicated rites and sacrifices to the gods, was becoming widely discredited. By contrast, Siddhartha's doctrine was direct and simple and eagerly accepted by the masses. He considered religious ceremonies as a waste of time and theological beliefs as mere superstition. In place of religious beliefs and religious ceremonies, the Buddha advocated a life devoted to universal compassion and brotherhood.

He taught that it was possible to gain liberation from suffering, not by changing society or fighting to dominate nature, but by withdrawing from life, seeking to gain moral perfection and submerging oneself in nirvana. Through such a life one might reach the ultimate goal, Nirvana, a state in which all living things are free from pain and sorrow. It is generally supposed that because Nirvana can be reached by meditation, Buddhism teaches a withdrawal from the real world. But this is debatable. A Buddhist might reply that the goal of Nirvana is not to be sought for oneself alone. It is regarded as a unity of the individual self with the universal self in which all things take part. Through living a life of compassion and love for all, a person achieves the liberation from selfish cravings sought by the ascetic and a serenity and satisfaction that are more fulfilling than anything obtained by indulgence in pleasure until everything that exists in the universe has attained Nirvana.

However, leaving aside the accusation that Buddhism involves a passive element, whereby men and women learn to accept their lot instead of struggling actively to change it, Buddhism, in its origins, undoubtedly contained an important critical and revolutionary element. Buddha denied the existence of god as the creator of the world. He rejected the teachings of the Vedas. He accepted the old idea of the cycle of births and deaths (sansara) and retribution (karma), but here it has a different sense. It meant that reincarnation depended, not on a man's caste, or on what rituals and sacrifices he performed, but only on his good or bad actions. In the realm of ethics, Buddhism advocated a morality based on selflessness and compassion for suffering humanity. The Buddha told his followers to think for themselves and take responsibility for their own future. The revolutionary implications of this idea, and its appeal to the masses at this time, is self-evident.

The new doctrine was argued in a highly consistent and logical way in the 2nd century A.D. by Nagarjuna, whose rationalism became the basis for the development of Buddhist logic. In common with the great idealist thinkers of the West, Nagarjuna, in defence of a false idealist theory (here carried to the extreme of a denial of the reality of the world) nevertheless pushed the development of logic and dialectics forward. The logic of Buddhism was later developed by other notable thinkers such as Dignaga and Dharmakirti (500-700 A.D.). This laid the basis for later idealist schools such as Madhyamaka, Vijnanavada, Tantric Buddhism and Zen Buddhism.

However, the character of the new movement gradually changed. In the first period (the 3rd century to the 1st century B.C.) the Buddha's idea of salvation was based on the idea that the world and human personality constitute a stream of elements of matter and consciousness (the dharmas) which constantly replaced each other. The road to salvation lay in not disturbing the dharmas. But in the early centuries A.D. Buddhism was transformed. Before this Buddha was only a revered teacher. Now he became deified, and salvation had to be sought through the favour of the deity, by the constant repetition of the sacred sutras (scriptures). In this way, Buddhism was turned into its opposite. This new version of Buddhism (Mahayana) was radically different from the original version (Hinayana) taught by the Buddha himself. The latter taught that the material and psychical dharmas were real, whereas the doctrine of Mahayana maintains, not only the dharmas, but the whole world, is unreal.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Japanese Buddhists are wackos. That is universally known in the lay community. Remember it was the Vietnamese Buddhist Monks who hid VietCong soldiers to help them fight against American imperialism.

Buddhism is a communal way of life aligned with modern Communist ideology. Anyone who says different (aka western hippy "Buddhists") are lying.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

WHOA!

NO RELIGION will ever be "aligned with" communist ideology!

Communism is based on a scientific, materialist understanding -- something to which superstition is counterposed.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by LA GUERRA [email protected] 26 2005, 05:16 PM
Japanese Buddhists are wackos. That is universally known in the lay community. Remember it was the Vietnamese Buddhist Monks who hid VietCong soldiers to help them fight against American imperialism.

Buddhism is a communal way of life aligned with modern Communist ideology. Anyone who says different (aka western hippy "Buddhists") are lying.
The veitnamese monks did this because they too wanted national liberation. Same as how the Islamic resistance is helpfull in Iraq.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Originally posted by Hiero+Nov 26 2005, 08:27 AM--> (Hiero @ Nov 26 2005, 08:27 AM)
Originally posted by LA GUERRA [email protected] 26 2005, 05:16 PM
Japanese Buddhists are wackos. That is universally known in the lay community. Remember it was the Vietnamese Buddhist Monks who hid VietCong soldiers to help them fight against American imperialism.

Buddhism is a communal way of life aligned with modern Communist ideology. Anyone who says different (aka western hippy "Buddhists") are lying.
The veitnamese monks did this because they too wanted national liberation. Same as how the Islamic resistance is helpfull in Iraq. [/b]
Thanks for the worthless post.

[email protected] 26 2005, 08:02 AM
WHOA!

NO RELIGION will ever be "aligned with" communist ideology!

Communism is based on a scientific, materialist understanding -- something to which superstition is counterposed.
Well, it is. Get a deeper understanding of what Buddhism actually says and is based on if you would like to talk again.

[Hiero]

Thanks for the worthless post.

What was worthless about it?


Well, it is. Get a deeper understanding of what Buddhism actually says and is based on if you would like to talk again.

Get a full undersstanding about Communism.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 03:21 AM


What was worthless about it?

Guess.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by LA GUERRA OLVIDADA+Nov 27 2005, 05:15 PM--> (LA GUERRA OLVIDADA @ Nov 27 2005, 05:15 PM)
[email protected] 27 2005, 03:21 AM


What was worthless about it?

Guess. [/b]
Your a fucking a idiot.

[KGB5097]

If your going to make an argument against Tibet and the Dalai Lama I suggest looking into Tibets support of Nazi Germany during the second world war.

Not to say that Buddhism is bad, its not even a theistic religion. Its all about personal activity, not even worship of any gods. As Communist/Socialists I don't see why any of us have a problem with Buddhism...

[celticfire]

KGB5097: First of all, communists are atheists so any and all religion isn't something we should uncritically accept. That being said, read what I posted above about the history of Buddhism. We don't attack religions and force people to give them up, that would be wrong; but we struggle with them to see the world objectively and in a scientific way.

And the Tibetan form of Buddhism does recognize gods, the Dalai Lama being the highest incarnation being the human embodied highest god. So this deserves criticism. Zen and other forms are agnostic, and the Buddha himself never answered the question when asked if there was a god.

We need to support progressive Buddhists like the ones during Vietnam; not the reactionary ruling classes like Tibet. See the difference?