[Buddha-l] Re: buddha-l Digest, Vol 32, Issue 17

[Joy Vriens]

Richard,

>Well, if David Horowitz is right, American academic institutions are filled to  
>overflowing with professors who "blame America first" and hate George W.  
>Bush.

Excellent, but why would one hate a marionet? If every country could blame itself first, there would be a lot less of chauvinism and nationalism and the world would be a better place. Hooligans would pick up the healthy exercise of mortifying themselves etc.

>It would be inexcusably rude to invite them and then hold them up to public  
>ridicule while introducing them. Shaming people in public is bad diplomacy,  
>and completely incompetent psychology. It almost guarantees a hostile  
>response in return. (In Ahmadinejad's case, it backfired. When verbally  
>abused, he responded quite graciously, even though it was apparent that his  
>feelings had been hurt by the surprise attack on his character.) 

Sure, but what psychology would you suggest we use on the generals of the Birmese junta? Doing business with them? Unacol and Total are already doing it. The UK is the second biggest investor there. And the army uses the Birmese as slaves, i.e. they put them to forced labour to work on the oil or gas pipes (I forgot). Bernard Kouchner, our new Minister of foreign affaires, the once famous French doctor of Médecins sans frontières, and accessorily ex counselor of Total, said that to withdraw Total from Birma would be a mistake, because Total could offer the employees over there slightly better conditions (they would be beaten twice as less and earn a bit more, their children could go to school) and he was sure of the domino effect of that approach. So he believes this offers hope (perhaps only that) for the Birmese people and a continuation of big business for Total and the generals. Everybody is happy.   
 
>> Giving the Dalai Lama the  
>> highest US decoration? How rude! the Chinese say. 
 
>It WOULD be rude to invite the leaders of China to the US and then shame them  
>in public. It would also be rude to be invited to China and insist on  
>praising the Dalai Lama while there. I am still recovering from the Dalai  
>Lama's rude remarks, right in front of Bush, about the importance of the US  
>taking a lead in the campaign against global warming. 

Oh but they will, as soon as it becomes a grow market.
 
>>  I am not sure about the 
>> motivations of the president of Columbia University though. 
 
>> I am not that sure, the Buddha told his students when they were behaving 
>> like jerks and idiots. 
 
>I don't recall any such instances. The Buddha told some people they had  
>misunderstood him, but he did not shame them or ridicule them or speak of  
>them as jerks and idiots. Or so I recall from what I have read. I wasn't  
>actually there. 

"Deluded men, how can you say this? This will not lead to the conversion of the unconverted" (cullavagga 5.33) "How can you say this?" in combination with "Deluded men" goes a bit further than to tell someone they have misunderstood you." There are signs of perhaps didactic impatience everywhere. 

Of course I see the pali canon as a collective writing process and the signs of impatience are probably more due to the authors who long after the Buddha's death battled against unorthodox ideas and ways that were hard to die out. There is a tone of "Haven't I/we told you over and over again..." "and yet you persist in..."

Joy