vasubandhu at earthlink.net
Tue Jun 15 11:27:29 MDT 2010
> 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
(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,
>> 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.
More information about the buddha-l