[Buddha-l] Stanford scholar Tenzin Tethong couldbe the nextprimeminister of Tibet

[Dan Lusthaus]

Erik, with a "k", give it a rest.

> you have a funny way of argumentation. First I protest against the word
> 'justified' ... and you answer: 'it wasn't me
> that uses the word, but a newspaper'

Because you explicitly accused me of providing that word, when all I did was 
paste in a newspaper article. You are unhappy with what the Dalai Lama said, 
don't want to accept it, and so keep coming after me, like I am his 
puppetmaster.

I didn't "justify" his statement. Initially I just posted the article. When 
I mentioned that it was consistent with his prior statements so should not 
be surprising, Franz asked for more comment, to which I responded about its 
consistency. Anyone can document the history of his statements (or provide 
counterexamples if they find any). That we've had this dance already more 
than once on buddha-l should already say something.

To humor you this last time, I will respond to this silliness, but the only 
way you will get over your discomfort in the long term is to take it up with 
HHDL himself. Otherwise, who will you attack the next time HHDL makes a 
comparable statement.

>>Similar statements concerning lethal responses to events in
>> Afghanistan, etc. have been forthcoming from Tibetans, including HHDL,
[...]
> This argument is useless if you don't even mention one example,
> considering the compassion campaign the DL is famous for and the
> contradiction involved.

On the contrary, those who don't want to accept that he is saying this now 
have the onus of providing even one counterexample -- not from their 
imagining of what they think he has *meant* over the years, but from his 
actual statements. Go back through the archives and see what he said after 
9/11, after the US invasion of Afghanistan, etc. But be prepared to be 
shocked.

Incidentally what I offered was not an "argument" but a "statement". Its 
veracity lies not in its formal structure but in its adherence to facts.

> The Tibetan army was insignificant, the Tibetans stopped practically all
> warfare after the introduction of Buddhism.

Simply wrong. That's fantasy, not history.

>> 2. Nevertheless, many prefer their "saints" to be effeminized do-gooders
>> without a harsh bone or thought in their body. ...
> Wrong, your saint looks like All Bundy, most saints (the word comes from
> sanctum= holy) are like the Polar Star, unreachable beacons for
> humanity.

Until they say or do something we don't approve of. Read the beginning of 
the Brahmajala sutta (Digha Nikaya #1) for Buddha's discussion of this 
phenomenon ("little sila").


> Why don't you come up with a reference as a good scientist should? Vague
> speculations are no arguments, just mood makers.

Because I am not HHDL, and don't have to mollify your discontent with his 
statement. After you read the Brahmajala, and the sections of the vinaya 
where Buddha creates rules so as not to offend the sensibilities of the 
giving public, you should press him for some scientific references as well.

> Anyone who ever messed with tantras knows that they are full of allegory
> and metaphors. The DL should know this too, so there is no reason to
> suppose that he is expecting an apocalyptic global war like some white
> trash US Christians.

Learn the literature, and stop trying to explain it away.

People used to try to explain away the word "jihad" as just a "spiritual" 
term for "inner struggle" -- those who took it literally were accused of 
being rampant islamophobes. The actual jihadis (and there doesn't seem to be 
a muslim country today that lacks them) are laughing all the way to the bomb 
factory. Allegorizing away the stuff one is uncomfortable with is an ancient 
inuring strategy. Wears thin after awhile, once reality reintrudes.


> In this case OBL was thought be retired and no substantial threat any
> more, that he still was a little bit active (no doubt very much blown up
> in the media) was a surprise.

Only to those in the media who think that out of sight = out of mind = 
inactive. My wife always wonders what ever happened to so-and-so 
actor/actress during those stretches when they haven't appeared in public or 
have a new movie being released. Are they retired? Unemployed? Hiding? 
Shunned? And I keep telling her, it is precisely when one doesn't see them 
that they are busiest, making the movie that will be released a year or so 
down the line. When you see them on junkets promoting their "new" film, for 
them it is old business, a project they finished long ago but now are 
obligated to smile in public to get people to buy tickets, and often during 
a hiatus between working projects.
Moral: Don't follow the hype, look under the hood. If you were surprised 
that OBL was still active, pay better attention next time.


> If you are really the only one at all who remembers, but you are unable
> to state exactly what you remember, maybe you should seek medical help.
> Do you sometimes hear voices too?

Charming! Search the archives and see which of us has holes in our memory.
In the meantime, will you remember HHDL said what he said THIS time, or will 
we have to reenact this silliness again next time he says something 
comparable?

Dan