transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 19, 2024 17:40:41 GMT
About ”prosélytisme ”, excuse my french, that notion was born out of political struggle in the XIXth . Not religious. When it comes to our own actions, we tend to speak of apostolate, evangelism or preaching. In fact, the latter terms are borrowed from the Christian vocabulary, while the word proselytism belongs to the secular vocabulary and is applied to various fields, be they political, philosophical or religious. Anyone pretending Bouddhism does not preach is wrong. I lived in East Asia : they do not pretend contrarywise. And I do not need wikipedia to tell me about Nichiren. Zen Child tale, the story of Renki. Or how to break spirits and people. Basically the answear is to tie them to a tree and let them shout their desire for freedom off their top untill they stop ”fretting” and are ready to obey. Other name for that is constraint and torture. An oldie but à goodie. And while we are talking about nonsense, and yes, dear Novastar6 I mean you, we are over twenty years in the XXI in some calendars. There is power, engines, machines, human ressources, grain, water... And yet sometime’people die of Hunger and illness . Does it make sense? You have senses. You use them or you don’t. But sense can’t be forged, dear. Add So I have a suggestion for you. There must be à bouddhist shrine near the place where you live. Put on a pair of trousers, comb your hair*, get outside, go and ask THEM about how bouddha’s teachings went from India to east Asia,far east, Europe, america, all around the word. You may meet some sweet people on your way. Listen to them, please. (*If you do want not to comb the hair and go naked, could you please post à selfie ? )
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 19, 2024 23:29:33 GMT
About ”prosélytisme ”, excuse my french, that notion was born out of political struggle in the XIXth . Not religious. When it comes to our own actions, we tend to speak of apostolate, evangelism or preaching. In fact, the latter terms are borrowed from the Christian vocabulary, while the word proselytism belongs to the secular vocabulary and is applied to various fields, be they political, philosophical or religious. Anyone pretending Bouddhism does not preach is wrong. I lived in East Asia : they do not pretend contrarywise. And I do not need wikipedia to tell me about Nichiren. Zen Child tale, the story of Renki. Or how to break spirits and people. Basically the answear is to tie them to a tree and let them shout their desire for freedom off their top untill they stop ”fretting” and are ready to obey. Other name for that is constraint and torture. An oldie but à goodie. And while we are talking about nonsense, and yes, dear Novastar6 I mean you, we are over twenty years in the XXI in some calendars. There is power, engines, machines, human ressources, grain, water... And yet sometime’people die of Hunter and illness . Does it make sense? You have senses. You use them or you don’t. But sense can’t be forged, dear. Thanks for backing me up, transfuged. Very interesting information about the word 'Proselyte.' Even the word 'Missonary,' while coined by Christians, is in actual fact, historically new. Missionary
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2024 1:10:19 GMT
You seem to be unable to separate the notion of 'teaching' from that of 'proselytization' or 'conversion'. I suspect the refusal to make the distinction is deliberate on your part, but I will post these links that may help explain the real difference between the two in religious culture: bahaitext.info/btxt.asp?buk=adv&tgt=16:1+3&wds=~dbahai-library.com/uhj_proselytizing_development_covenant#:~:text=It%20is%20a%20significant%20difference,someone%20to%20change%20his%20Faith. The bedrock difference between the two is well summarized in this statement: It is a significant difference and, in some countries where teaching a religion is permitted, but proselytizing is forbidden, the distinction is made in the law of the land. Proselytizing implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith.
Buddhism does not now and has never engaged in this practice; Christianity historically, and to some extent into the present era, does. Christian missionary work is often firmly grounded in proselytization (it's pretty much the chief aim of the missionary philosophy): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism#:~:text=Most%20self%2Ddescribed%20Christian%20groups,sometimes%20other%20variants%20of%20Christianity). I might note that Judaism also forbids proselytization, but exists throughout the world; so to claim Buddhism would have never strayed beyond the confines of India without it is patently nonsensical. No, you seem to be unable to realize that whether you call it 'teaching,' or 'proselytization' or 'conversion,' it is still going to other cultures to give them your own spirituality or philosophy. Now, it is worth noting that one of the differences between Buddhism & Christianity is with Buddhism, there is no problem with following more than one religion, whereas with Christianity, there is. Now I admit, some of the ways in which Christians can & do try to spread Christianity can be very obnoxious, & even Christ Himself Condemned proselytizing (St. Matthew chapter 23, verse 15). So how one goes about sharing or teaching the faith is just as important - if not more important - than simply doing it. Judaism - like Hinduism - is a tribal religion. Part of the reason that they do not proselytize is because it became lethal for them to do in during much of their 2,000 year exile from Israel. That said, while they reject proselytizing, they believe that Gentiles should follow the 7 Laws of Noah, & one of those Laws is to worship Only One God. Noahidism Chabad Lubavitch has outreach programmes for other Jewish groups throughout the world, & the Orthodox Jewish community in Hungary, is currently angry with them, for their outreach programmes in their country. Save Hungarian OrthodoxyProselytization and teaching are two different things. You can try to end-run around that basic fact, but it doesn't change. Proselytization involves force/pressuring; teaching does not. Buddhists do not attempt to force their religion onto other cultures. Judaism does not attempt to force itself onto other cultures. Christianity has and continues to attempt to force itself on other cultures, often--as you note--in quite obnoxious ways, and often with quite unhappy results. Which returns us to the bottom line: Christians (despite their own central figure admonishing against it) proselytize; no other major religion, other than Islam (whose rules on proselytization are rather tricky) does.
|
|
jimmyboy
Sophomore
@jimmyboy
Posts: 149
Likes: 50
|
Post by jimmyboy on Feb 20, 2024 1:19:41 GMT
It's interesting nobody answered my question So if priests and nuns could have gay sex and abortions, why can't the rest of us?
Some people here took this topic off the rails rather quickly!!!
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 20, 2024 2:53:09 GMT
It's interesting nobody answered my question So if priests and nuns could have gay sex and abortions, why can't the rest of us? Some people here took this topic off the rails rather quickly!!!Who said that they could have these? These are quite serious sins for these people to commit.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 20, 2024 2:55:03 GMT
No, you seem to be unable to realize that whether you call it 'teaching,' or 'proselytization' or 'conversion,' it is still going to other cultures to give them your own spirituality or philosophy. Now, it is worth noting that one of the differences between Buddhism & Christianity is with Buddhism, there is no problem with following more than one religion, whereas with Christianity, there is. Now I admit, some of the ways in which Christians can & do try to spread Christianity can be very obnoxious, & even Christ Himself Condemned proselytizing (St. Matthew chapter 23, verse 15). So how one goes about sharing or teaching the faith is just as important - if not more important - than simply doing it. Judaism - like Hinduism - is a tribal religion. Part of the reason that they do not proselytize is because it became lethal for them to do in during much of their 2,000 year exile from Israel. That said, while they reject proselytizing, they believe that Gentiles should follow the 7 Laws of Noah, & one of those Laws is to worship Only One God. Noahidism Chabad Lubavitch has outreach programmes for other Jewish groups throughout the world, & the Orthodox Jewish community in Hungary, is currently angry with them, for their outreach programmes in their country. Save Hungarian OrthodoxyProselytization and teaching are two different things. You can try to end-run around that basic fact, but it doesn't change. Proselytization involves force/pressuring; teaching does not. Buddhists do not attempt to force their religion onto other cultures. Judaism does not attempt to force itself onto other cultures. Christianity has and continues to attempt to force itself on other cultures, often--as you note--in quite obnoxious ways, and often with quite unhappy results. Which returns us to the bottom line: Christians (despite their own central figure admonishing against it) proselytize; no other major religion, other than Islam (whose rules on proselytization are rather tricky) does. Did you miss transfuged's post? Buddhists have spread their beliefs to other cultures. Just as Christians have; just as Muslims have.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2024 12:37:22 GMT
Proselytization and teaching are two different things. You can try to end-run around that basic fact, but it doesn't change. Proselytization involves force/pressuring; teaching does not. Buddhists do not attempt to force their religion onto other cultures. Judaism does not attempt to force itself onto other cultures. Christianity has and continues to attempt to force itself on other cultures, often--as you note--in quite obnoxious ways, and often with quite unhappy results. Which returns us to the bottom line: Christians (despite their own central figure admonishing against it) proselytize; no other major religion, other than Islam (whose rules on proselytization are rather tricky) does. Did you miss transfuged 's post? Buddhists have spread their beliefs to other cultures. Just as Christians have; just as Muslims have. I don't read transfuged's posts as they're too migraine-producing to attempt to decipher. (I also suspect he/she is trying to insinuate they've undergone some manner of torture at the hands of Buddhists somewhere, but declines to give any specifics.) But the spread of beliefs to other cultures is not the same as the proselytization of beliefs. As cultures connect, cultural artifacts, including religious beliefs, will as a matter of course spread in the wake of those connections. Proselytization involves the direct targeting of a specific culture (which may not have had prior contact with the proselytizer's), carrying the deliberate intent of bringing pressure to bear on changing or at least heavily and unduly influencing the target culture's religious beliefs. Again, this is a major and ongoing sin of Christianity's; historically Buddhists have not been guilty of this, nor has there been any historically wide-spread incidence of it in the Islamic faith, even taking into account the major expansions of Arabic Islam in the early Common Era. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#:~:text=Societal%20Islamization%20has%20historically%20occurred,%2C%20South%20Asia%20(in%20Afghanistan%2C
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2024 12:44:31 GMT
It's interesting nobody answered my question So if priests and nuns could have gay sex and abortions, why can't the rest of us? Some people here took this topic off the rails rather quickly!!!The answer to that is that the RCC is a society created and manned by fallible, corrupt humans. And it shares all those fallible and corrupt traits, while hiding behind an aegis of godly infallibility that it indoctrinates its members to not question. As history continues to show, the RCC has been successful beyond wildest dreams in succeeding at this; which, to its devotees, stands as de facto proof of its' special sanction by God. Simple answer: There's no good reason why the rest of us can't. So don't let superstition convince you otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 20, 2024 12:51:01 GMT
Did you miss transfuged 's post? Buddhists have spread their beliefs to other cultures. Just as Christians have; just as Muslims have. I don't read transfuged's posts as they're too migraine-producing to attempt to decipher. But the spread of beliefs to other cultures is not the same as the proselytization of beliefs. As cultures connect, cultural artifacts, including religious beliefs, will as a matter of course spread in the wake of those connections. Proselytization involves the direct targeting of a specific culture (which may not have had prior contact with the proselytizer's), carrying the deliberate intent of bringing pressure to bear on changing or at least heavily and unduly influencing the target culture's religious beliefs. Again, this is a major and ongoing sin of Christianity's; Buddhists have not been guilty of this, nor has there been any historically wide-spread incidence of it in the Islamic faith, even taking into account the major expansions of Arabic Islam in the early Common Era. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#:~:text=Societal%20Islamization%20has%20historically%20occurred,%2C%20South%20Asia%20(in%20Afghanistan%2C transfuged: Yes it is. To travel to other places in order to "Teach" one's spiritual beliefs is exactly what missionaries do. Incidentally, in the case of Native American/First Nations' people, they were still able to follow the Christian faith in traditional Native American/First Nations' cultural way of living.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2024 13:09:14 GMT
I don't read transfuged's posts as they're too migraine-producing to attempt to decipher. But the spread of beliefs to other cultures is not the same as the proselytization of beliefs. As cultures connect, cultural artifacts, including religious beliefs, will as a matter of course spread in the wake of those connections. Proselytization involves the direct targeting of a specific culture (which may not have had prior contact with the proselytizer's), carrying the deliberate intent of bringing pressure to bear on changing or at least heavily and unduly influencing the target culture's religious beliefs. Again, this is a major and ongoing sin of Christianity's; Buddhists have not been guilty of this, nor has there been any historically wide-spread incidence of it in the Islamic faith, even taking into account the major expansions of Arabic Islam in the early Common Era. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#:~:text=Societal%20Islamization%20has%20historically%20occurred,%2C%20South%20Asia%20(in%20Afghanistan%2C transfuged : Yes it is. To travel to other places in order to "Teach" one's spiritual beliefs is exactly what missionaries do. Incidentally, in the case of Native American/First Nations' people, they were still able to follow the Christian faith in traditional Native American/First Nations' cultural way of living. You will adamantly refuse to see the real and essential difference between teaching and proselytization, and to recognize that Christian missionaries are frequently guilty of the latter. That's a necessary belief to cling to in order to persuade oneself that no matter what the RCC condones, it's correct in doing so. And one of the things it condoned was the wreaking of cultural havoc on a marginalized people who had little choice in complying with the dominant cultural beliefs being pressed on them, which did indeed cause harm. Sometimes the damage has been more happily mitigated: www.mprnews.org/story/2013/11/13/american-indians-balance-native-customs-with-christianityBut more frequently it historically has not. And the harm done to Native peoples by these schools is still ongoing: www.pioneer.org/blogs/compass-stories/the-great-evil-christianity-the-bible-and-the-native-american-genocide/indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_residential_school_system/#:~:text=Survivors%20recall%20being%20beaten%20and,a%20shockingly%20high%20death%20toll. The residential schools heavily contributed to educational, social, financial and health disparities between Indigenous Peoples and the rest of Canada, and these impacts have been intergenerational. Despite the efforts of the residential school system and those who created and maintained it, Indigenous Peoples largely escaped complete assimilation and continue to work to regain what was lost, while also seeking justice for years of wrongdoing; including from the Canadian government, the churches, and the individuals responsible for specific cases of abuse. (Source: indigenous foundations.arts.ubc.ca)BTW, I suspect that transfuged may be engaging in some manner of special pleading, insofar as I get the sense that he or she is trying to insinuate that they underwent some manner of torture at the hands of Buddhists somewhere; but until he or she is a bit more generous with information regarding this, it's difficult to know what to make of this person's posts.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 20, 2024 13:22:38 GMT
transfuged : Yes it is. To travel to other places in order to "Teach" one's spiritual beliefs is exactly what missionaries do. Incidentally, in the case of Native American/First Nations' people, they were still able to follow the Christian faith in traditional Native American/First Nations' cultural way of living. You will adamantly refuse to see the real and essential difference between teaching and proselytization, and to recognize that Christian missionaries are frequently guilty of the latter. That's a necessary belief to cling to in order to persuade oneself that no matter what the RCC condones, it's correct in doing so. And one of the things it condoned was the wreaking of cultural havoc on a marginalized people who had little choice in complying with the dominant cultural beliefs being pressed on them, which did indeed cause harm. Sometimes the damage has been more happily mitigated: www.mprnews.org/story/2013/11/13/american-indians-balance-native-customs-with-christianityBut more frequently it historically has not. And the harm done to Native peoples by these schools is still ongoing: www.pioneer.org/blogs/compass-stories/the-great-evil-christianity-the-bible-and-the-native-american-genocide/indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_residential_school_system/#:~:text=Survivors%20recall%20being%20beaten%20and,a%20shockingly%20high%20death%20toll. The residential schools heavily contributed to educational, social, financial and health disparities between Indigenous Peoples and the rest of Canada, and these impacts have been intergenerational. Despite the efforts of the residential school system and those who created and maintained it, Indigenous Peoples largely escaped complete assimilation and continue to work to regain what was lost, while also seeking justice for years of wrongdoing; including from the Canadian government, the churches, and the individuals responsible for specific cases of abuse. (Source: indigenous foundations.arts.ubc.ca)BTW, I suspect that transfuged may be engaging in some manner of special pleading, insofar as I get the sense that he or she is trying to insinuate that they underwent some manner of torture at the hands of Buddhists somewhere; but until he or she is a bit more generous with information regarding this, it's difficult to know what to make of this person's posts. Were There Ever Buddhist Missionaries?
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2024 13:26:49 GMT
You will adamantly refuse to see the real and essential difference between teaching and proselytization, and to recognize that Christian missionaries are frequently guilty of the latter. That's a necessary belief to cling to in order to persuade oneself that no matter what the RCC condones, it's correct in doing so. And one of the things it condoned was the wreaking of cultural havoc on a marginalized people who had little choice in complying with the dominant cultural beliefs being pressed on them, which did indeed cause harm. Sometimes the damage has been more happily mitigated: www.mprnews.org/story/2013/11/13/american-indians-balance-native-customs-with-christianityBut more frequently it historically has not. And the harm done to Native peoples by these schools is still ongoing: www.pioneer.org/blogs/compass-stories/the-great-evil-christianity-the-bible-and-the-native-american-genocide/indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_residential_school_system/#:~:text=Survivors%20recall%20being%20beaten%20and,a%20shockingly%20high%20death%20toll. The residential schools heavily contributed to educational, social, financial and health disparities between Indigenous Peoples and the rest of Canada, and these impacts have been intergenerational. Despite the efforts of the residential school system and those who created and maintained it, Indigenous Peoples largely escaped complete assimilation and continue to work to regain what was lost, while also seeking justice for years of wrongdoing; including from the Canadian government, the churches, and the individuals responsible for specific cases of abuse. (Source: indigenous foundations.arts.ubc.ca)BTW, I suspect that transfuged may be engaging in some manner of special pleading, insofar as I get the sense that he or she is trying to insinuate that they underwent some manner of torture at the hands of Buddhists somewhere; but until he or she is a bit more generous with information regarding this, it's difficult to know what to make of this person's posts. Were There Ever Buddhist Missionaries?You're quoting from Quora, which is hardly an academic or reliable source for information; and even there, most of the answers given don't support your attempt to contend that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 20, 2024 19:00:02 GMT
You're quoting from Quora, which is hardly an academic or reliable source for information; and even there, most of the answers given don't support your attempt to contend that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems.Where did I say that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems? Nowhere did I say that. I said that Buddhists "would have also come to the new world to spread their beliefs amongst the Natives," just as the Christians did, & just as the Muslims would have done. "Anyone pretending Bouddhism does not preach is wrong. I lived in East Asia : they do not pretend contrarywise. And I do not need wikipedia to tell me about Nichiren." -Transfuged.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 21, 2024 7:35:28 GMT
Novastar6 School can’t teach things about politics before university grades, here. The law forbids it. (Legal rules, not the law per se). Teaching is not different from what you pretend it is. Not sorry for sore head. Don’t believe it. Hugs, anyway.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 21, 2024 7:47:26 GMT
Novastar6 From the bbc Wirathu: Myanmar military releases firebrand Buddhist monk
Published
7 September 2021
IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
Image caption,
The firebrand monk is known for his pro-military views
Myanmar's military junta has released controversial Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu, known for his nationalist and anti-Muslim rhetoric.
He had previously been charged for sedition against the civilian government, which has since been deposed in a February military coup.
The firebrand monk is known for his pro-military views.
He has been dubbed the "Buddhist Bin Laden" over his speeches targeting Muslims, particularly the Rohingya.
Who is Wirathu, Myanmar's vitriolic monk?Myanmar coup: What is happening and why?
In recent years he had appeared at pro-military rallies delivering nationalist speeches and criticising then-leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy government.
In 2019 he was charged with inciting "hate and contempt" against the civilian government.
Wirathu then went on the run, before surrendering to authorities in November last year. He had been awaiting trial since then.
On Monday the military government said that all charges against him had been dropped, but did not give any reasons.
It added that he was seeking treatment in a military hospital. Wirathu's medical condition is not known.
'Face of Buddhist terror'
Wirathu has been accused of stoking violence against Muslims and the Rohingya in Myanmar, and was one of the most prominent faces of the 969 movement - a Buddhist nationalist movement which calls on Buddhists to shop, sell property and marry within their own religion.
At the height of his popularity, he had tens of thousands of followers online watching his sermons on social media or attending his rallies.
He was catapulted into the public view for his speeches in 2012, when deadly violence broke out in Rakhine state between Muslims, mainly Rohingya, and Buddhists.
What you need to know about the Rohingya crisis
The following year, Time magazine put him on their front cover with the headline: The Face of Buddhist Terror?
In 2017 he was banned from preaching for one year by Myanmar's highest Buddhist authority, and in 2018, Facebook wiped his page over hate speech.
Myanmar, a country of around 54 million, has Buddhism as its main religion
Washing the hands of potential sore head claims. 💕
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 21, 2024 7:49:54 GMT
Novastar6 From amnesty.org Nearly one million Rohingya refugees are living in threadbare camps in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, after they fled their homes in Myanmar due to the military’s crimes against humanity – which are currently the subject of a case under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide at the International Court of Justice.
Now, COVID-19 has exacerbated the conditions of the Rohingya in the camps. Many Rohingya refugees struggle to access healthcare due to language barriers, ill-treatment from some medical staffs and lack of access to information about availability of healthcare services in the camps.
Women in the camps told Amnesty International that their husbands, aggrieved by the loss of opportunity to work, put pressure on them to bring in money, and were violent towards the women in the household.
More than 100 Rohingya refugees have been allegedly killed in extrajudicial executions between August 2017 and July 2020, according to Odhikar, a Bangladeshi human rights organization.
Rohingya refugees and humanitarian workers have said that barbed-wire fences around the camps have created further obstruction in their movement and response to crisis such as fire incidents in the camps. Thousands of Rohingya men, women and children have been relocated to Bhashan Char, a remote silt island at the Bay of Bengal. Many refugees told Amnesty International that they relocated to the island more out of compulsion rather than a choice. Authorities plan to relocate 100,000 Rohingya refugees to the island.
The future of nearly half a million Rohingya children hangs in the balance with limited access to an accredited and certified education. With no place to call their home, no livelihood opportunities to secure a future for them, hundreds of Rohingya men, women and children, take dangerous recourse to boat journeys in the sea to go to neighbouring countries every year during the break from monsoon season between October and June.
For decades, the Rohingyas in Myanmar have been denied their rights to nationality, freedom of movement and access to services including education, employment and healthcare. By promoting and protecting their human rights and dignity, the Bangladeshi government and the international community can empower the Rohingya community to claim their rights. That can only happen when they are given a voice in the decisions that affect them.
Sign the petition to urge Bangladesh’s government and the international community to:
Ensure the participation of Rohingya refugees in the decisions that affect them in order to protect their human rights.
Petitions are currently addressed to the governments of Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Indonesia and the United States.
Not going to ask if and when you signed the petition.
💋
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 21, 2024 7:58:06 GMT
Is your faith in this church still strong as it was 15 years ago? When Sinead O'Connor ripped up the picture of the pope in 92, her career plummeted. Now people are realizing why she did it; there emerged many founded allegations of molestation in the years that followed. In the last few years there have been stories coming out of Canada about the residential school scandal. Basically, the government felt it was a good idea the "improve" Native aboriginals lives by seizing them from their parents and put them in schools run by various religious orders. The church leaders then took advantage of the kids in their charge by sexually and physically abusing them. Gay and straight sexual abuse took place. Some pregnancies no doubt happened and they were conveniently covered up. The priests and nuns were never charged or disciplined for this, even though the higher ups knew about this. So if priests and nuns could have gay sex and abortions, why can't the rest of us? The government of Canada never ordered schools to abuse children. They can’t find a record of such à policy. Individuals broke the law. Laws do not change because an individual break it/them. They would never stop changing the law if they would change it for every single break.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 961
Likes: 310
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 21, 2024 8:00:55 GMT
MS o’connor voice was wonderfull. If her career was harmed, she is due at last balancing. Not changes in the law. If the law is wrong, it is wrong for every citizen in the place.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 21, 2024 12:15:01 GMT
You're quoting from Quora, which is hardly an academic or reliable source for information; and even there, most of the answers given don't support your attempt to contend that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems.Where did I say that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems? Nowhere did I say that. I said that Buddhists "would have also come to the new world to spread their beliefs amongst the Natives," just as the Christians did, & just as the Muslims would have done. "Anyone pretending Bouddhism does not preach is wrong. I lived in East Asia : they do not pretend contrarywise. And I do not need wikipedia to tell me about Nichiren." -Transfuged. Buddhism is certainly far older than Christianity, so your claim that Native conversions to Buddhism didn't occur because Christians 'beat them to it' makes no sense on a chronological level. You repeatedly insist that proselytization (which is force driven by definition) and teaching are one and the same--they aren't--so they'd have done nothing different from what the Christians did, if they had arrived first according to your history. Wrong. Mainstream Buddhism, Tranfuged notwithstanding, doesn't proselytize and doesn't condone forced conversion (which is generally the chief end aim of proselytization). Christianity has a long history of doing both. The first White settlers in the New World sought to forcibly convert the Native peoples they encountered; only when they found that wasn't working out so well for them did they desist (somewhat) from the practice. www.bridgew.edu/sites/bridgew/files/2020-07/English-intensify-efforts-to-convert.pdfwww.muwekma.org/blog/2022/august/a-new-spotlight-on-native-americans-forced-conversion-to-christianity.htmlNeedless to say, aggressive drives to conquer land made for a large impetus behind much of this, and the Church certainly didn't frown on that. Don't really see why you're quoting Transfuged as an authority on any of this. Referencing Nichiren Buddhism is all well and good, but it's a subset that originated in 13th century Japan and doesn't represent the majority of Buddhist teaching or philosophy; and certainly has no applicability as per proselytization and forced conversion of New World Native peoples. If he or she has suffered at the hands of Nichiren zealots, I'm sorry to hear about it; but to be frank, until this person decides to stop playing coy about whatever antecedents they're speaking from, I don't give a lot of weight to what they have to say on any of this. www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/subdivisions/nichiren_1.shtml#:~:text=in%20the%20UK.-,Nichiren%20Buddhism%20differs%20from%20other%20schools%20of%20Buddhism%20in%20focusing,taking%20responsibility%20for%20improving%20themselves.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 21, 2024 15:55:12 GMT
Where did I say that Buddhists engaged in force-driven proselytization in an attempt to subdue and bend a native culture to its belief systems? Nowhere did I say that. I said that Buddhists "would have also come to the new world to spread their beliefs amongst the Natives," just as the Christians did, & just as the Muslims would have done. "Anyone pretending Bouddhism does not preach is wrong. I lived in East Asia : they do not pretend contrarywise. And I do not need wikipedia to tell me about Nichiren." -Transfuged. Buddhism is certainly far older than Christianity, so your claim that Native conversions to Buddhism didn't occur because Christians 'beat them to it' makes no sense on a chronological level. You repeatedly insist that proselytization (which is force driven by definition) and teaching are one and the same--they aren't--so they'd have done nothing different from what the Christians did, if they had arrived first according to your history. Wrong. Mainstream Buddhism, Tranfuged notwithstanding, doesn't proselytize and doesn't condone forced conversion (which is generally the chief end aim of proselytization). Christianity has a long history of doing both. The first White settlers in the New World sought to forcibly convert the Native peoples they encountered; only when they found that wasn't working out so well for them did they desist (somewhat) from the practice. www.bridgew.edu/sites/bridgew/files/2020-07/English-intensify-efforts-to-convert.pdfwww.muwekma.org/blog/2022/august/a-new-spotlight-on-native-americans-forced-conversion-to-christianity.htmlNeedless to say, aggressive drives to conquer land made for a large impetus behind much of this, and the Church certainly didn't frown on that. Don't really see why you're quoting Transfuged as an authority on any of this. Referencing Nichiren Buddhism is all well and good, but it's a subset that originated in 13th century Japan and doesn't represent the majority of Buddhist teaching or philosophy; and certainly has no applicability as per proselytization and forced conversion of New World Native peoples. If he or she has suffered at the hands of Nichiren zealots, I'm sorry to hear about it; but to be frank, until this person decides to stop playing coy about whatever antecedents they're speaking from, I don't give a lot of weight to what they have to say on any of this. www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/subdivisions/nichiren_1.shtml#:~:text=in%20the%20UK.-,Nichiren%20Buddhism%20differs%20from%20other%20schools%20of%20Buddhism%20in%20focusing,taking%20responsibility%20for%20improving%20themselves. I know that Buddhism is older than Christianity. While there have been the odd explorer in ancient times, who made their way to what we now refer to as the Americas, such as the Vikings, etc., the official revelation of these vast lands came after Columbus arrived here. Christian missionaries decided to come to preach the Gospel to these peoples. That is what I meant when I mentioned Christians beating Buddhists (as well as Muslims, etc) to it. With Buddhism, one does not have to abandon old beliefs. However, in some cases, Buddhist fanatics do persecute other religious groups, as in the case in Myanmar, where they persecute Rohingya Muslims & Chin Christians. Myanmar Christians Being Forced To Convert To Buddhism
Buddhists also persecuted the indigenous religion of Tibet - Bon - when Buddhism was first spread there. Buddhists vs Bonpos
|
|