[Buddha-l] Karen Armstrong was in Boise last night

[Chan Fu]

On 10/7/05, Chan Fu <chanfu at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/5/05, jkirk <jkirk at spro.net> wrote:
> > Posted by Joanna
> >
> > She's the author of _The Battle for God_, about the causes of the rise of
> > fundamentalism world-wide. She was invited to Ketchum ID in September, when
> > the Dalai Lama was here, to moderate an interfaith discussion after his
> > public talks.
> >
> > "It was her first meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader, and it left a
> > strong impression.
> > 'We were in the presence of a very holy man, completely without ego," she
> > said. "We really should all lighten up a bit because so much of our
> > pomposity comes from egotism and a sense of our own righteousness.'"
> >
> > >From a local article and interview with her, see
> > http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051002/NEWS04/510020314&SearchID=73222442394537
>
> May I assume this is a quotation?
>
> May I answer conversationally, in the interest of art?
>
> > What is your next project?
> >
> > I've got a new book coming out in the spring. It's a history of the Axial
> > Age, a period from 900 to 200 B.C., when all the world's major religions
> > came into being at much the same time.
>
> "Major religions"? Perhaps you meant "modern organized religions".
> Certainly the Inca, the Aztec, the Egyptian religions were as
> "major" as religion could get, at the time.
> Needless to say, I've missed a few, but let's continue...
>
> > It shows what the religions have in common, how profoundly similar they are,
> > right across the board, how none of them are particularly interested in
> > doctrines or beliefs or metaphysics. They're interested in behavior and,
> > above all, they emphasize the importance of compassion and nonviolence.
>
> Well, perhaps people suddenly discovered that humanism
> was more important than myth and belief? Why attribute
> such a thing to religion, rather than human maturity?
>
> > The book is also a kind of critique of the way we are religious today,
> > because very often people like Buddha or Jesus would be rather astonished at
> > the kind of religions that are going on in their name. This is the kind of
> > religiosity, for example, that they wanted to get rid of.
>
> Jesus is in heaven and Buddha is dead - this is an argument from
> personification and projection. I invite anyone to prove motives
> or intentions from such sources.
>
> > I'm trying very hard to be optimistic because it's very dangerous to be
> > pessimistic. Pessimism and despair lead to nihilistic terrorism. We must
> > keep optimistic. It's very hard, but we have to keep optimistic. The
> > alternative is unthinkable.
>
> Buddhism accepts what happens. It's neither optimistic nor
> pessimistic. Nature - the universe of which we are part - makes
> no determination one way or the other. Nature is a Buddhist.
> WOW! "Pessimism and despair lead to nihilistic terrorism"
> this sounds something like the creationist's claim that accepting
> evolution leads to godlessness and thence to immorality (as if
> morality were inscribed in star formations).
>
> > Increasingly now, more groups are going to have powers of destruction that
> > were previously the preserve only of the nation-states (political units of
> > organization). Nineteen men with box cutters and penknives brought the
> > United States to its knees. It's only a matter of time before one of these
> > groups gets a nuclear weapon. This is catastrophic. We have got to sort
> > these problems out.
>
> A long time ago, the Mongol empire, and many empires after
> that, held the same sway and influence. In fact, they conquered
> the known world many times over. The 911 terrorists brought
> nothing to it's knees. We will do that ourselves, through fear,
> paranoia and retreat from our own principles. Thinking that *WE*
> (yes, that's the imperial WE) have the answer is about as
> Buddhistically stupid as I can imagine.
>
> Your book, Ms. Armstrong,  is nothing but an appeal to religion, an
> empty injunction of humanity and a search for a father figure.
> You should consider your own actions and decisions, your own
> understanding, your own ga-ga-ism.  Surely you know that there
> is indeed a principle of survival, and that it actually applies. Surely
> you know that the universe doesn't give a damn what you think.

Right on, Jo!
Dunno how I missed reading that one...

It seems the new (sigh!) strategy from the RR (not Rolls Royce,
the gurus own all of them) is to link morality with their hallucinations
in the rather obvious "no religion; no ,morality" ploy.

Sam Harris' book will no doubt occupy a warm spot in many
Christian fireplaces this winter. 'Specially since it's cheaper than gas...
http://www.samharris.org/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/there-is-no-god-and-you-_b_8459.html

Personally, I'm heating the house with free bibles from hotel rooms.