[Buddha-l] Re: Greetings from Oviedo

[Joy Vriens]

Dan Lusthaus wrote:

>>There also is the alternative of a more multilateral approach,
>>where one admits one hasn't the monopoly on right view and action.

> When such options, pursue them. When those options are exhausted, more
> forceful means may be necessary.

You haven't convinced me that the forceful means used in H and N were 
necessary. But as you said in a message to Mike:

 > Such discourse can influence how people think (minds don't change that
 > often, but seeds can be crossplanted for later sprouting), and gradually
 > improve things.

The seeds have been received and can indeed sprout later. Whether it 
will improve things I don't know.

>>Everybody seems to be lost in darkness, except the USA,

> Actually that would be a very poor reading of my politics. As Lance
> suggested, both demonizing or sanctifying the US (or Muslims, or whatever)
> are extremes. That doesn't mean one turns to artificial parities -- 
> pretending something pernicious is better than it is, nor pretending
> something good is worse than it is. It means seeing things as they are,
> yathaabhuutam.

I agree with this wisdom, but the leap of faith towards belief in the 
possibility of seeing things as they are (yathaabhuutam) is too big for 
me at the moment.

> I did not vote for either Bush senior or junior, some of my
> students when I taught in Florida (I don't live there now -- thank goodness)
> thought I was a hopeless Liberal (probably similar to what Richard is
> undergoing with his current crop of students), and probably with as equal
> conviction that they were reading me correctly as some members of this list
> suspect I am a fanatical rightwing flagwaving American nationalist.

No, I see you as someone who doesn't want others to settle in easy 
generalisations (sometimes by giving other a taste of their own 
medecine). And that is a very endearing quality IMO.

> ...so he asked Buddha Har"sitaagaara, "Is the right right?"
> 
> Har"sitaagaara replied: "I do not hold that view."
> 
> "Is the left right?"
> 
> Har"sitaagaara replied: "I do not hold that view."
> 
> "Are both the right and left right?"
> 
> Har"sitaagaara replied: "I do not hold that view."
> 
> "Are neither the right nor left right?"
> 
> Har"sitaagaara replied: "Let me think about that one..."

Something tells me I desperately need the translation of that Buddha's 
name.

>>But I think Rabbi Petura was right

> I thought you would. The point of that ethical tradition is that both
> opinions are recorded, and it was not a true/false question, so they both
> provide legitimate responses. Note that Akiva does not mandate that he MUST
> drink his own water, Akiva only allows that he would not be wrong to do so.

I see your point, but how can you say that "he would not be wrong to do 
so" if he would feel guilty for it the rest of his life? Not wrong with 
regard to an absolute right or wrong, but simply wrong because it 
poisons the rest of his life.

Joy