[Buddha-l] Accuracy

[Dan Lusthaus]

Dear Richard,

> No one said or implied that you remembered inaccurately.

Thank you for that clarification.

>The point is that you remember partially. You remember what you can use to 
>denigrate another and forget the rest.

That's one way to take it. Another is that one might see implications in 
your statements that you are hesitant to own. I never denied that, when 
pushed, you have offered up qualifications to your enthusiasm for 
Ahmadinejad. Nonetheless you continue to defend him for precisely the reason 
I attributed to you, namely trash-talking the US. By your own words, they 
make you want to stand up and cheer. You don't deny that, yet you compose a 
long message titled "accuracy" designed to denigrate me. But of course, you 
don't own what you say. I think I'm not the only reader of this list who 
notices that pattern.

> Iran's claim is that it is hypocritical of the United States to have the 
> largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world and then to deny those 
> weapons to countries that its leaders have declared to be evil.

I would have expected you to be against nuclear proliferation, not for it. I 
guess all one needs to get a pass on wanting a nuclear weapon is to 
trash-talk the US and Israel.

>> As I mentioned, a book review of the Jerryson and Juergensmeyer book
>> _Buddhist Warfare_ is in the H-Net queue,
>
> That is one recent book.

A major essay in it is an English translation of an important essay on 
Buddhism and war by Paul Demieville, originally published in French, back in 
1957. We discussed these issues and this article many years ago on 
buddha-l -- Nobumi Iyanaga even provided some of his own translations of the 
Demieville article, with snippets from the buddha-l discussion

http://www.bekkoame.ne.jp/~n-iyanag/buddhism/buddhism_war.html

(you will find yours truly quoted in the exchange)

So this is nothing new, but something ignored.

The question of whether preferring a Buddhism that lacked such elements (or 
preferring a Catholicism that lacked Inquisitions, or Leftists that lacked 
anti-zionism, etc.) is a good thing is a different matter than saying that 
the historical and present reality of Buddhism is not as nonviolent as one 
would wish. You're too busy villifying me to understand that distinction, 
apparently.

>> I also have some admiration for a quality in Ahmadinejad, viz. his
>> rhetorical skill at finding supporters for his hate-speech
>
> I see no evidence that anyone on buddha-l admires anyone's hate speech

You don't recognize it as such, since you are too busy applauding.

Dan