[Buddha-l] As Swami goes, so goes the nation? (Dan Lusthaus and Richard P. Hayes)

[JKirkpatrick]

Dan wrote, amidst other remarks:

> I'm sadly resigned to the fact that through most of its history
Buddhism was the darling of the merchant class (capitalists and
others), with very conservative  king-supporting, powers-that-be
supporting conservative politics -- even fascistic at times --
Buddhism typically sucks up to money and 
power, and has been institutionally and ideologically structured
to do so since the Sangha was designed to be parasitic and
non-offensive to power (read the Vinaya rules on meat-eating, for
instance).

Sorry, Dan, but you are really talking about *Religion* in world
history, not just about Buddhism. Christianity, Judaism, and
Islam behaved the same way over the centuries, with the same eye
out for profit, money-making, and domination; and if domination
wasn't possible--sucking up to rulers and capitalists. Each of
these cultural institutions/traditions, as well as the various
Buddhisms, eventually developed rebels of one sort or another
(their versions of left-wing hippies), but the main chance always
toed the class marks.  It even happened to the Franciscans.

What's to be resigned about? unless one cares to resign from
history and flawed human nature. 
Me, I'd rather visit the hot springs, and meditate on feeling
warm as we endure yet another spring that, though cold, wasn't
able to stop the white, pink, and rose-mahogany-colored
crabapples from a glorious display of blossom prapanca. The
Japanese have their cherry blossoms--we have our crabapples.

Sic transit gloria mundi. (Did anyone say that in Sanskrit?)

Joanna