Why is Buddhism so attractive to westerners?

[Demosthenes]

No way. The biggest redlight district ever was in Roma, hence the name, -- a civilisation that thrived on selling women. I mean that was what made it so popular, -- If you could make a bit of money, you could buy a pad in Rome, buy a few slavegirls, and do what you want with them till you died. No-one would question that a citizen had the right to rape his slaves if he wanted to. It wasn't even frowned upon.

The reason christianity ended up so uptight about sex and so strict in saying sex was only permissible in marriage was because it was reacting against the commodification of women that was basic to the whole of Roman civilisation.

eta. Rome wasn't known as the great whore for no reason.

 

[isitme]

butchersapron = you waded in with a point about how buddhism was applied in tibet and now you are picking everyone up on how they are arguing with you and you started the argument

the OP is why is buddhism appealing to westeners, the whole thing from india to japan to indonesia etc. not why tibet is an appealing cause for westeners

ok, I just reread it again, sorry butchers

I think that the reason that your criticisms of tibet got such a bad response on this thread were because tibet is a sort of anomaly. The discussion was more focused on the philosophy of buddhism than buddhism as a means of government. I wouldn't imagine there would be more than a handful of people who view a tibetan style government as desirable

to discuss the actions of the Dalai Lama and his 'council' draws the discussion away from the interesting part of the discussion imo. You could also level a shitload of criticism against the government of Sri Lanka since they adopted Buddhism as their national religion as one of many measures to alienate the Tamil people, but it is a bit of a red herring in my view. I don't see either as a poor reflection of Buddhism, I see them as an abuse of it. In the same way that I don't see Hezballah or Hamas as a reflection of Islam

 

[isitme]

No way. The biggest redlight district ever was in Roma, hence the name, -- a civilisation that thrived on selling women. I mean that was what made it so popular, -- If you could make a bit of money, you could buy a pad in Rome, buy a few slavegirls, and do what you want with them till you died. No-one would question that a citizen had the right to rape his slaves if he wanted to. It wasn't even frowned upon.

The reason christianity ended up so uptight about sex and so strict in saying sex was only permissible in marriage was because it was reacting against the commodification of women that was basic to the whole of Roman civilisation.

eta. Rome wasn't known as the great whore for no reason.

I think we are going off onto a different discussion here

But I do think you are oversimplifying it a bit, I know that Rome was famous (and still is) for excess and orgies and so on, but I think that was due to the nature of the Roman Empire, I mean Rome wasn't typical of Roman civilisation, and you still get people who have sex with their slaves, but it isnt' and never was the norm

edit: maybe we should start another thread about pre christian sexuality, would be interesting

 

[Demosthenes]

Don't really know what to say to that.

Except.. the jews never approved of slavery, and never enslaved their own people or people of other races.

That's why ultimately roman civilisation and the nation of Israel were on a collision course.

The Roman Empire was so commercial in its view of sex that it's quite understandable that christianity developed the strict morality it still has about sex, because it was trying to reconnect sex with love in a civilisation in which the connection had been more or less completely lost.

 

[isitme]

Don't really know what to say to that.

Except.. the jews never approved of slavery, and never enslaved their own people or people of other races.

That's why ultimately roman civilisation and the nation of Israel were on a collision course.

The Roman Empire was so commercial in its view of sex that it's quite understandable that christianity developed the strict morality it still has about sex, because it was trying to reconnect sex with love in a civilisation in which the connection had been more or less completely lost.

hmmmm I dunno.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Except.. the jews never approved of slavery, and never enslaved their own people or people of other races.

Er, the Bible is packed with references to and laws about Jews taking slaves, for a start, both Hebrew and foreign.

 

[kabbes]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Buddism *isn't* popular in the west. It's a really niche, minority religion at best.

You mean that lots of people have some vague sympathy towards some of its tenets, but that is a long, long way from saying that Buddism itself is popular.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The stone age. ?
Before we figured out that having sex makes babies. ?
Before civilisation anyway.
(that's not to say that there wasn't any suffering before civilisation, but there was a general in-tune-ness and goodness to life then, people loved people, because, why not?)

Oh, the Garden of Eden.

Personally, I'm not sure what sort of outlook Neanderthals etc had toward life. I don't know if they were happy and in tune with nature, or morose as fuck every time it rained or got cold, or there was no mastodon around and they went hungry.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It's like Native Americans. We think that pre contact, they were all in tune. They were probably more in tune than us, but that doesn't mean it was a bed of roses.

Amongst local tribes, some were 'master tribes', some were 'slave tribes'. As in, they were slaves.

I suspect that your feeling of oneness is lessened if you're a slave to some other tribe.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The reason christianity ended up so uptight about sex and so strict in saying sex was only permissible in marriage was because it was reacting against the commodification of women that was basic to the whole of Roman civilisation.

So, St. Augustine had nothing to do with it then?

 

[CUMBRIANDRAGON]

Because its the realisation we only give a fuck about ourselves

 

[Idaho]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Buddism *isn't* popular in the west. It's a really niche, minority religion at best.

You mean that lots of people have some vague sympathy towards some of its tenets, but that is a long, long way from saying that Buddism itself is popular.

Definately. It hardly has any practitioners, and most people haven't got a clue about it.

 

[Fruitloop]

So, St. Augustine had nothing to do with it then?

The Romans started it.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Other than destroying quite a few monasteries, installing an authoritarian regime, imprisoning thousands, forcing many to flee, destroying the land for resources and killing 400,000+ people you mean?

But overall is it worse than the regime before?

And 400,000 is way out. At most it was about 80,000 at a time when the Han Chinese were dying in much greater numbers due to the same policies...

There's no doubt that the Cultural Revolution saw unbelievable atrocities in both China Proper and Tibet, but now?

 

[Cid]

But overall is it worse than the regime before?

Is the regime now worse than the regime then? No, probably not - but that would be an absolutely ridiculous comparison to make anyway.

And 400,000 is way out. At most it was about 80,000 at a time when the Han Chinese were dying in much greater numbers due to the same policies...

Govt in exile puts it at 1.2 million, either way it's a pretty big number.

There's no doubt that the Cultural Revolution saw unbelievable atrocities in both China Proper and Tibet, but now?

Now it's a resource farm and a military base.

 

[Cid]

Don't really know what to say to that.

Except.. the jews never approved of slavery, and never enslaved their own people or people of other races.

That's why ultimately roman civilisation and the nation of Israel were on a collision course.

The Roman Empire was so commercial in its view of sex that it's quite understandable that christianity developed the strict morality it still has about sex, because it was trying to reconnect sex with love in a civilisation in which the connection had been more or less completely lost.

Ummm... Sex outside of marriage was positively encouraged for most of the middle ages.

 

[camouflage]

I know a little bit about Buddhism, as in I know the basic philosophy and history of it, and although I'm not religious it sort of appeals to me. I have a lot of problems with the way Buddhism functions as an organised religion, but the actual philosophy I don't have any problem with at all, whereas Christianity, Islam, Sikhism etc despite being based on good ideas come across as a load of bollocks

I would never out and out reject it the way I would with other religions, especially Christianity and Islam.

I don't think this view is uncommon at all, look at the amount of people who support the Free Tibet campaign despite how shit it would have been to live in Tibet under the Dalai Lama compared with how it is under Chinese rule

Is this due to ignorance ofWesteners? Yoda? Or is Buddhism a more complete philosphy?

thoughts?

I disagree with the premis that buddism is more popular among Westerners, where it is popular however I would say it's down to ignorance and Yoda. I don't see Westerners as particularly interested in rational ideas.

 

[hp66]

Excuse my ignorance but what's yoda?

 

[Cid]

Excuse my ignorance but what's yoda?

 

[isitme]

it's a good question tho, what is yoda?

 

[Cid]

Wrong question you ask, seek to find out what you are, not Yoda, mmm?

 

[rover07]

Was Yoda a buddhist? He looks a bit like Buddha...

 

[Cid]

Well yes, pretty much... When the Jedi master the whole spirit apparition thing Yoda periodically returns. On one occasion, a long, long time after the Empire, he makes it to earth and spreads his teachings. I suppose Buddhism is Yodaist Jedi rather than Yoda being Buddhist though.


- Cidharta Gautama

e2a: <sigh> never post drunk.

 

[gnoriac]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Buddism *isn't* popular in the west. It's a really niche, minority religion at best.

You mean that lots of people have some vague sympathy towards some of its tenets, but that is a long, long way from saying that Buddism itself is popular.

Quite agree, but our appeal's definitely growing. The ideas remain very alien in the west, and as such can be difficult to take on board, especially with our Judaeo-Christian background colouring our ideas of religion.

I haven't had much time to read the whole thread but some of the posts have shown some misunderstandings about what Buddhism's really about.

Anyone who's genuinely interested might like to listen to this,
a bit of William Woolard's (former Tomorrow's World presenter for those of us old enough to remember and someone I used to practise with in my days in London) book, The Reluctant Buddhist. Most of what he says here is true of all forms of Buddhism though some of it relates only to Mahayana, and perhaps isn't necessarily so true of offshoots like Tibetan or Zen.