[Buddha-l] Subject: the poignancy of Donald Lopez

[Curt Steinmetz]

J Whalen-Bridge wrote:
> Curt Steinmetz, your attack on Michael Jerryson’s book is
> unnecessarily nasty.  This language drips with sarcasm:  “In a recent
> article he wrote for religionispatches.org, Jerryson tells the
> cockle-warming story his own personal journey from clueless dupe to
> righteous debunker.”  You gave a link, and I turned to the webpage.
> Monks who carry guns under their robes contradict the general spirit
> of Buddhism and vinaya rules, and it is a perfectly good subject for
> an academic study.  Perhaps Michael Jerryson, in the fullness of time,
> will become more savagely ironic, but for the moment he appears to
> have chosen an interesting and timely subject.  Instead of focusing so
> much on scoring points, you might want to let your responses settle a
> bit before firing off angry, not-very-thoughtful emails that aren’t
> very accurate.  For example, you accuse Jerryson of naively assuming
> monks and nuns should just be victims and not attempt to be safe, but
> that’s not what the page you’ve linked your complaints to suggest.
> “The constant fear and violence took a toll on them.” If someone has
> worked hard for six years on a challenging subject of general
> interest, I’d say s/he warrants a better response than what you’ve
> given.
> John W-B
>   

Jerryson accuses the Dalai Lama, Walpola Rahula and D.T. Suzuki of 
spearheading a century long campaign of "Buddhist propaganda". The 
extreme stupidity of such a claim requires a strong response. No one 
should be left with the impression that there is a serious point to what 
he is saying, over which reasonable people might politely and 
respectfully disagree.

Over 12 years ago Matthew Kosuta produced a detailed study of "The 
Military in the Pali Canon" (which is nowhere mentioned, even in a 
footnote, in Jerryson's book). In the conclusion of that study Kosuta 
states that based on the Pali Canon (as close as we can get to the 
"original" teachings of the historical Buddha) Buddhist teachings have 
always recognized "that, in a mundane perspective, the military is ever 
present, of high prestige, and even necessary in some circumstances for 
the protection of Buddhism."

If one actually read what Walpola Rahula wrote one will find that while 
he does claim that Buddhism is thoroughly pacifistic, he consistently 
blurs the distinction between simple tolerance and understanding with an 
absolute pacifist position. In other words, Rahula's writings on 
nonviolence reflect exactly the same "apparent contradiction" that 
Kosuta finds throughout the Pali Canon. Rahula also frequently praises 
Asoka, who, as everyone knows, only renounced conquest, but never 
disbanded his armies altogether.

In other words, there was nothing deceptive or "propagandistic" about 
whatever contradictions there might have been in Rahula's position on 
non-violence, and this is easily discoverable by anyone with access to 
google.

The Dalai Lama is another, very different case. Anyone with the 
slightest interest in the history of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism knows 
that it has never been a pacifist religion, and the Dalai Lama has never 
made any such claim. Many Tibetan Buddhists, including high ranking 
Lamas, completely reject His Holiness' pacifism, including the late 
Taktster Rinpoche (the Dalai Lama's oldest brother) who helped organize 
armed resistance to the Chinese in the 1950's and 60's.

As for D.T. Suzuki, what kind of a moron would claim that the great 
champion of Samarai Zen tried to fool westerners into believing that 
Buddhists do not believe in the right to self-defense?

Curt

P.S. Matthew Kosuta's study, based on his Master's Thesis, is online here:
http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma6/militarycanon.html


> ------------------------------
>   
>>>>> ject: [Buddha-l] the poignancy of Donald Lopez
>>>>>           
> .To: Buddhist discussion forum <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
> .Message-ID: <4B539336.1040204 at cola.iges.org>
> .Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> .Michael Jerryson claims to have been victimized by a sinister fraud
> .perpetrated by Walpola Rahula, the Dalai Lama and D.T. Suzuki, who
> .shamelessly sought to convince him, indeed, the whole world, of the lie
> .that Buddhism is a "religion of peace." Worse, these fiends  were not
> ..alone in their "very successful ... propaganda", and "As Donald S. Lopez.
> .Jr. and others have poignantly shown, academics quickly followed suit,
> .so that by the 1960s U.S popular culture no longer depicted Buddhist
> .traditions as primitive, but as mystical."
> .	Ah, the poignancy. It gets to ya, doesn't it?
> .In a recent article he wrote for religionispatches.org, Jerryson tells
> .the cockle-warming story his own personal journey from clueless dupe to
> .righteous debunker. His eyes were opened when he traveled to Thailand in
> .2006 to an area where deadly attacks on Buddhists by Islamic Jihadists
> .had been taking place. Jerryson had gone there hoping to be an
> .eyewitness to the miraculous power of Buddhist "peacemaking". But
> .Jerryson discovered that instead of inviting the terrorists to
> .participate in small group discussions of the writings of Riane Eisler
> .and Karen Armstrong, that Thai Buddhists were actually -- horrors --
> .defending themselves!!
> .	Jerryson was not intimidated by the prospect of taking on the Dalai Lama
> .and his propaganda machine. He had seen the truth, and it had set him
> .free. Now the world must know!
> .On the off chance that there is a single person who actually takes
> .Jerryson seriously (and, apparently, there are) I offer the opening
> .sentence of the book that "has consumed much of the last six years of my
> .life":
> .	"It is a well known fact that the first of all commandments of the
> .Buddhist creed is 'Thou shalt not kill'".
> .Curt
> .	P.S. Jerryson's article at religiondispatches.org is here:
> .http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/rdbook/2158/monks_with_guns%3A_discovering_buddhist_violence
> .------------------------------
> ..
>
>