Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Look Eastward

This was written in July-August:

Since when did it become acceptable to allow an entire nation (culture, language) to be eaten by another? That's exactly what's happening in Tibet. The Dalai Lama said recently that, in a matter of a few decades, Tibet will cease to exist. I believe him. The nation that's the home of Buddhism needs to be preserved. Buddhism doesn't have a conquering history. Many Buddhists don't even consider it a religion, since it's really a way of being, feeling, doing; rather than the psychotic routine of "praising" or "worshipping" (idolatry) or giving mere lip service. Point is that Buddhism is a very huge portion of the (truly) human identity, and the loss of the home (or by far the primary home) of it would be a tragedy beyond what words can express.

Before anyone accuses me of venting the old "Free Tibet" argument, I'm not convinced that Tibet has to be its own completely independent nation in order to ensure its preservation. It seems the Han (Mandarin-speaking Chinese) government could simply give Tibet special status; much like Quebec has in Canada. They need to back off, cease (or drastically slow) development, restrict migration. Otherwise of course I have no problem with Tibet being a mixture of Tibetans and ethnic Han and whomever else. So it looks like we need to move away from the old idea of a "free Tibet" to simply saving Tibet.

Knowing Tibet has a history of very conservative, fairly brutal theocracy, I'm all for whatever checks and balances that would prevent such theocracies (and all kinds of pathocracy) from ever happening anywhere. However, there's not much of a chance of Tibet returning to its past in that ugly respect. The (current) Dalai Lama is a very secular education-oriented man. Since Buddhism as a whole has never been involved with conquest or major political power like certain particularly psychotic (Abrahamic) religions today, its home needs to be preserved... If all Jerusalem, with all its historical contents, were nuked to dust today, there would be more (poetic and actual) justice than if Tibet/Tibetans were to be lost to the Han, IMO. (Yes, I'm really not a violent person. It's just hyperbole for emphasis).

There are only a few types or groups of folks who are in a position to patiently sit back and watch and pity all the various psychoses and pathos that constitute the system we know too well. Everyone else on planet Earth is either Abrahamic (Jewish, Christian or Muslim) or Satanic or Abrahamic/Satanic-enabling. Keep in mind that the person in whichever group obviously has to have enough basic goodness/morality in order to qualify. An organizational name or other identification label doesn't automatically qualify someone. It's all about deeds, doing, being; not words or beliefs.

Basically, the (at least) sufficiently-innocent ones are exclusively: 1. Buddhists, Hindus, Hare Krishnas and other faiths of the Eastern persuasion, 2. pagans (not to be confused Satanists or others who dare call themselves pagan), and 3., for lack of a better term, freethinkers. There are no others who qualify. Eveyone else bears all the responsibility for the Hell they (or you) exclusively have created, allowed and continue to uphold.

India is easily the world's example of our times. Though, like everywhere, it's far from a paradise there, they happen to have a thriving democracy - by far the world's biggest - and, what a concept, they're simply not screwing with anyone like the psychotic/pathological/pathetic Abrahamics and their enablers. Anything military or nuclear weapons-related that India is involved in is strictly in defense against the Abrahamic psychos next door (Pakistan). Are we starting to see the pattern, the commonality yet? Monotheism, period, is the root of the current sociological mess.

Those of the Eastern faiths and other aforementioned innocents simply don't have anything resembling a foreign policy or anything that pokes its nose (or too intrusively) in others' business. No others on Earth qualify. India in particular should be proud. (7-16)

Yes, I realize the inevitably big changes to come are all about people; not religions or any one of them. I believe many or most of the people I sometimes label as enablers of (militant or militant enough) monotheists are really good folks who are simply trapped in a bad system. IMO the one true spritual path doesn't need and mustn't have a name. (7-18)

Interestingly enough, very shortly after the last edit of this entry, Bush made the "sweetheart" nuclear technology deal with India that's outraged many; obviously including me. It just goes to show that no government of today - particularly of the more powerful large nations - is truly representative of its people... And there have been very recent reports of Tibetans in China being arrested for calling for the Dalai Lama's return. Coincidence? I think not; at least in the metaphysical energy sense. (8-6)

No comments: