[Buddha-l] Subject: the poignancy of Donald Lopez ( Franz Metcalf )

[Dan Lusthaus]

Andy,

> Maybe it is my ignorance as a student of Buddhism, but I think the entire
> eschatological tradition of apocalypse is foreign to Buddhism, or even if 
> we
> have the Age of Mappo, the idea of a religious duty to bring about the
> apocalypse is ultimately foreign to Buddhism.

To hold that view you must have some idea of what "Buddhism" is. Since 
historically Buddhism -- in pretty much all its forms -- embraced exactly 
what you wish to reject, and fairly early on in the game, there is a 
definition problem. You want to reserve the word "Buddhism," and more 
specifically the idea of what you would like "Buddhism" to represent, to a 
certain set of ideas that pretty much excludes all actual forms of Buddhism. 
Do you see a problem with this?

> of course I have objections to the importation of "just war" thinking into
> Buddhism, which I also think is foreign,

The word "importation" is misleading. It's already there, discussed and 
accepted by leading Buddhist figures such as Asanga, Bhavaviveka, Kuiji and 
Tsongkhapa. While they don't justify all out war (just strategic 
assassination, without which the Tibetan tradition believes Tibet might 
never have become Buddhist!), they do think killing Hitler would have been a 
good idea.

No one on this list has suggested that we conjure up an excuse or 
justification for Buddhist warriors, etc. On the contrary...

>but that is not really a big deal,
> since I think that it is also foreign to philosophically consistent
> Christianity (and Islam---but I could just be baiting Lusthaus, which is 
> not
> very Buddhist of me).

How much weight do Christianity or Islam put on being philosophically 
consistent? Ever heard of the Magisterium and its official Mysteries? The 
most consistent (and profound) of muslim philosophers -- Ibn Sina (Avicenna) 
and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) were pilloried by the tradition, which instead 
embraced Ghazzali and his Tahafut al-Falasifa (Incoherence of Philosophy). 
Ibn Rushd's response to Ghazzali, Tahafut al-Tahafut (The Incoherence of 
Incoherence), one of the great masterpieces of world philosophy, has always 
had a more receptive audience outside Islam. Both Tahafuts, btw, are 
available in English translation (check google or amazon). Recommended 
reading (while you are at it, you might want to explore their views on the 
permissibility of violence).

Dan the unbaited