[Buddha-l] Buddhism and blasphemy

[Joy Vriens]

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

> Freedom of speech strikes me as so fundamental to the running of a
> society that has chosen to be democratic (as opposed to be compelled or
> pressured from the outside to adopt democracy) that I am willing to put
> up with a lot of things that I personally find deeply offensive (such as
> the Superbowl, most video games, about 80% of commercial films and about
> 75% of what goes on in the name of organized religion).

Exactly, and I feel that freedom of speech/"blasphemy" is the only means 
to shake off the pressure to conform (or to put up with it), which you 
rightly call deeply offensive. Blasphemy and iconoclasm can be 
therapeutic in that aspect, especially in the context of organized 
religion. If those who are shocked by blasphemy could also consider it 
under that Saturnalian light, some of them would probably be less 
shocked, except if they attribute an almost absolute power to the *act* 
of "blasphemy" itself. Freedom usually is expressed and has its limits 
searched in art, in the largest sens of the word. The freedom is often 
allowed within the limits of art. But then art confronts the world with 
it. Some Buddhist works like the Teaching of Vimalakirti and some 
tantras I also see as attempts to exorcise, to shake off the rigidity 
that the approach of organized religion can have. For works like the 
life and teachings of Drukpa Kunlay I hardly see any other reason. I 
actually see the whole Buddhist enterprise as an attempt to exorcise, to 
shake off the spells that limit our mind (forgetting for the moment the 
possibility that the mind can limit us).

> The violence we are seeing with increasing regularity is disturbing and
> saddening, whether we are talking about Bush's claim that his decision
> to put in motion the invasion of Iraq was sanctioned by God, or the
> reactions of offended Muslims in Europe. This is far from saying I have
> any idea what to do about it. I don't. I think we have come to a point
> where increasing violence, like the environmental degradation of our
> planet, is almost inevitable.

Greed breeds violence and we have been living in a time where greed (in 
various forms such as advertising, competition, the virtue of winning 
etc.) is very present and less criticized than in the past where it 
still was considered a sin. But I am probably more hopeful than you. I 
feel People start to see the drawbacks of such approach and turn to 
religion or religious values, or at least they feel something of that 
order is lacking. It doesn't have to be religion, anything that doesn't 
consider greed as the axis of the world would do. On the other hand 
isn't that what religion is about?

Joy