Well according to the sign on the door, its for:Tell me WTF, given the purpose of this forum (as repeated above), why do YOU post here? Do you have expensive tastes, a lavish lifestyles, or an appetite for upscale entertainment? Or do you just like to kick shit on the floor?
"Glamour, elegance, and sophistication. That's what it's all about here in ECCIE's newest forum which caters to those with expensive tastes, lavish lifestyles, and an appetite for upscale entertainment."
If you just want a sandbox to throw shit, there are plenty of other forums better suited to that. Originally Posted by pjorourke
- pjorourke
- 03-13-2011, 07:13 PM
- NinaBrooke
- 03-13-2011, 07:23 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karmaand here is another link on how derogatory karma is : http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/256021
I'll accept this as my version of the word. Originally Posted by SR Only
and if you look closer you will find the statements of Dalai Lama in exactly that wikipedia entry if i am not completely wrong.
Because that was exactly what i was posting in some other thread already. About believing in Karma. In Germany and Austria we have books on how that new agey beliefs actually can relate to fascism and racism. I once had a great english resource as well. Will post , i just can`t find it anymore. It was too long ago that i set myself apart with that.
The critic in short was that if people believe in Karma they actually tend to numb themselves on acting politically correct or helping causes, because it`s easy to believe it will all even out eventually. It was a criticism of the general new age movement and how people are lacking the criticism and activism politically and stepping up for oppressed minorities.
But accusing me with my background (hello? I am austrian, left wing, have jewish background and ex BF .......) is a bit strange. It should have been obvious from previous posts in said thread where i wrote that statement about Jesus and Jews that i am NOT an antisemit. So one wrong line that cut short some doubts should not have been so outrageously strange to understand. Especially not for all the new agers out there.
Dalai Lama - ring a bell? I was pointing out what HE said. And he is a Karma believer and it is a huge discussion within jewish people (yes the ones that are actually friends of mine, relatives and ex boyfriends) that this new age crap is per se antisemitic.
THE BIG FAT QUESTION was on how something like Karma explains the holocaust and jewish people were offended by it. So i do find Karma antisemitic and no one that is jewish (at least not the ones i know ) would actually believe in something like KARMA. It makes them angry.
That was what i was trying to point out. So - i hope it is clear now and we can move on.
Given the posts i have already written in the same thread its strange to assume anyone would believe that I could be antisemitic - other than someone who frequently proofs to not be able to READ thouroughly enough to grasp the meaning. There were a lot of people who did not completely misunderstand my intention in that thread.
I think IF we are to discuss Antisemitism then we have to start where it hurts - and that is new agey believe like Karma. Oh hell yeah i know its fashionable and hip hop . But we can start right there. No need to discuss my statements and cry wolf. :-) I give it right back to the sender of the accusatory statements. Go figure.
Good nite :-)
PS: from someone who writes on other threads statements like "that no one can be forced to do anything they don`t want" i find it beyond my intelligence to take the criticism of antisemitism serious. ..... Its below my level of education .... having been abused for more than 10 years. And given the fact that Jews were in concentration camps. And people get raped and such....so they did that all of free will?? Hello??
- pjorourke
- 03-13-2011, 07:29 PM
I really don't give a damn what side you are arguing. It was irrelevant and reopening a thread that was already locked.
- Marcus Aurelius
- 03-13-2011, 07:47 PM
The antisemitism topic is dead. The antisemitism related to karma topic is dead.
However this thread still has life.
However this thread still has life.
- Guest083011
- 03-13-2011, 07:50 PM
The antisemitism topic is dead. The antisemitism related to karma topic is dead.Word! (sorry PJ had to steal your line)
However this thread still has life. Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius
- NinaBrooke
- 03-13-2011, 07:53 PM
here the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_in_Buddhism
and here the explanation :
I will actually post another thread for this, i find it to be interesting. Just now too lazy and going to bed.
(which is actually a lie - i am having another cybersex session...)
so here comes my argument on why i don`t let anyone that believes in Karma let accuse me of antisemitism. I play the ball right back. Ping Pong.....:-)
so here we go:
"Modern interpretations and controversies
[edit]Karma theory & social justice
Since the exposure of the West to Buddhism, some western commentators and Buddhists have taken exception to aspects of karma theory, and have proposed revisions of various kinds. These proposals fall under the rubric of Buddhist modernism.[90] As one scholar writes, "Some modern Buddhist thinkers appear largely to have abandoned traditional views of karma and rebirth in light of the contemporary transformation of the conception of interdependence," preferring instead to align karma purely with contemporary ideas of causality.[91] One scholar writes, "it is perhaps possible to say that both Buddhism and Buddhist ethics may be better off without the karmic-rebirth factor to deal with."[92] Often these critical writers have backgrounds in Zen and/or Engaged Buddhism.
The "primary critique" of the Buddhist doctrine of karma is that some feel "karma may be socially and politically disempowering in its cultural effect, that without intending to do this, karma may in fact support social passivity or acquiescence in the face of oppression of various kinds."[93] Dale S. Wright, a scholar specializing in Zen Buddhism, has proposed that the doctrine be reformulated for modern people, "separated from elements of supernatural thinking," so that karma is asserted to condition only personal qualities and dispositions rather than rebirth and external occurrences.[94]
One scholar and Zen practitioner, David Loy, echoes these remarks. He writes, "what are we going to do about karma? There's no point in pretending that karma hasn't become a problem for contemporary Buddhism . .Buddhism can fit quite nicely into modern ways of understanding. But not traditional views of karma."[95] Loy argues that the traditional view of karma is "fundamentalism" which Buddhism must "outgrow."[96]
Loy argues that the idea of accumulating merit too easily becomes "spirtitual materialism," a view echoed by other Buddhist modernists,[97] and further that
Karma has been used to rationalize racism, caste, economic oppression, birth handicaps and everything else. Taken literally, karma justifies the authority of political elites, who therefore must deserve their wealth and power, and the subordination of those who have neither. It provides the perfect theodicy: if there is an infallible cause-and-effect relationship between one's actions and one's fate, there is no need to work toward social justice, because it's already built into the moral fabric of the universe. In fact, if there is no undeserved suffering, there is really no evil that we need to struggle against. It will all balance out in the end.[98]
While some strands of later Buddhist thought did attribute all experience to past karma, the early texts explicitly did not, and in particular state that caste is not determined by karma.[99]
Loy goes on to argue that the view that suffering such as that undergone by Holocaust victims could be attributed in part to the karmic ripenings of those victims is "fundamentalism, which blames the victims and rationalizes their horrific fate," and that this is "something no longer to be tolerated quietly. It is time for modern Buddhists and modern Buddhism to outgrow it" by revising or discarding the teachings on karma.[100] Other scholars have argued, however, that the teachings on karma do not encourage judgment and blame, given that the victims were not the same people who committed the acts, but rather were just part of the same mindstream-continuum with the past actors,[101] and that the teachings on karma instead provide "a thoroughly satisfying explanation for suffering and loss" in which believers take comfort.[102]
The question of the Holocaust also occurs in the Jew in the Lotus: A Poet's Re-Discovery of Jewish Identity in Buddhist India, which describes a group of Jewish religious leaders who meet with the Dalai Lama. They ask one of the Dalai Lama's party, a Buddhist scholar named Geshe Sonam Rinchen, if the Holocaust would be attributed to past karma in the traditional Buddhist view, and he affirms that it would. The author is "shocked and a little outraged," because, like Loy, he felt it "sounded like blaming the victim."[103]
Many modern Buddhists such as Thich Naht Hanh prefer to suggest the "dispersion of karmic responsibility into the social system," such that "moral responsibility is decentered from the solitary individual and spread throughout the entire social system," reflecting the left-wing politics of Engaged Buddhism.[104]"
and here the explanation :
I will actually post another thread for this, i find it to be interesting. Just now too lazy and going to bed.
(which is actually a lie - i am having another cybersex session...)
so here comes my argument on why i don`t let anyone that believes in Karma let accuse me of antisemitism. I play the ball right back. Ping Pong.....:-)
so here we go:
"Modern interpretations and controversies
[edit]Karma theory & social justice
Since the exposure of the West to Buddhism, some western commentators and Buddhists have taken exception to aspects of karma theory, and have proposed revisions of various kinds. These proposals fall under the rubric of Buddhist modernism.[90] As one scholar writes, "Some modern Buddhist thinkers appear largely to have abandoned traditional views of karma and rebirth in light of the contemporary transformation of the conception of interdependence," preferring instead to align karma purely with contemporary ideas of causality.[91] One scholar writes, "it is perhaps possible to say that both Buddhism and Buddhist ethics may be better off without the karmic-rebirth factor to deal with."[92] Often these critical writers have backgrounds in Zen and/or Engaged Buddhism.
The "primary critique" of the Buddhist doctrine of karma is that some feel "karma may be socially and politically disempowering in its cultural effect, that without intending to do this, karma may in fact support social passivity or acquiescence in the face of oppression of various kinds."[93] Dale S. Wright, a scholar specializing in Zen Buddhism, has proposed that the doctrine be reformulated for modern people, "separated from elements of supernatural thinking," so that karma is asserted to condition only personal qualities and dispositions rather than rebirth and external occurrences.[94]
One scholar and Zen practitioner, David Loy, echoes these remarks. He writes, "what are we going to do about karma? There's no point in pretending that karma hasn't become a problem for contemporary Buddhism . .Buddhism can fit quite nicely into modern ways of understanding. But not traditional views of karma."[95] Loy argues that the traditional view of karma is "fundamentalism" which Buddhism must "outgrow."[96]
Loy argues that the idea of accumulating merit too easily becomes "spirtitual materialism," a view echoed by other Buddhist modernists,[97] and further that
Karma has been used to rationalize racism, caste, economic oppression, birth handicaps and everything else. Taken literally, karma justifies the authority of political elites, who therefore must deserve their wealth and power, and the subordination of those who have neither. It provides the perfect theodicy: if there is an infallible cause-and-effect relationship between one's actions and one's fate, there is no need to work toward social justice, because it's already built into the moral fabric of the universe. In fact, if there is no undeserved suffering, there is really no evil that we need to struggle against. It will all balance out in the end.[98]
While some strands of later Buddhist thought did attribute all experience to past karma, the early texts explicitly did not, and in particular state that caste is not determined by karma.[99]
Loy goes on to argue that the view that suffering such as that undergone by Holocaust victims could be attributed in part to the karmic ripenings of those victims is "fundamentalism, which blames the victims and rationalizes their horrific fate," and that this is "something no longer to be tolerated quietly. It is time for modern Buddhists and modern Buddhism to outgrow it" by revising or discarding the teachings on karma.[100] Other scholars have argued, however, that the teachings on karma do not encourage judgment and blame, given that the victims were not the same people who committed the acts, but rather were just part of the same mindstream-continuum with the past actors,[101] and that the teachings on karma instead provide "a thoroughly satisfying explanation for suffering and loss" in which believers take comfort.[102]
The question of the Holocaust also occurs in the Jew in the Lotus: A Poet's Re-Discovery of Jewish Identity in Buddhist India, which describes a group of Jewish religious leaders who meet with the Dalai Lama. They ask one of the Dalai Lama's party, a Buddhist scholar named Geshe Sonam Rinchen, if the Holocaust would be attributed to past karma in the traditional Buddhist view, and he affirms that it would. The author is "shocked and a little outraged," because, like Loy, he felt it "sounded like blaming the victim."[103]
Many modern Buddhists such as Thich Naht Hanh prefer to suggest the "dispersion of karmic responsibility into the social system," such that "moral responsibility is decentered from the solitary individual and spread throughout the entire social system," reflecting the left-wing politics of Engaged Buddhism.[104]"
- pjorourke
- 03-13-2011, 07:53 PM
No problem. As long as you realize I hold the trademark (although London disputes this.)
- NinaBrooke
- 03-13-2011, 07:54 PM
The antisemitism topic is dead. The antisemitism related to karma topic is dead.oh yes but its ok that someone who beliefs in Karma accuses me of being antisemitic? And i have no right to defend myself because threads get closed?
However this thread still has life. Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius
hello?
- London Rayne
- 03-13-2011, 07:55 PM
No problem. As long as you realize I hold the trademark (although London disputes this.) Originally Posted by pjorourkeIt is MINE!!! Deal with it Lawyer boy!
- Mazomaniac
- 03-13-2011, 07:56 PM
So for me anyone who believes in Karma is much rather an antisemit. Originally Posted by ninasastriAs a Buddhist - although admittedly one who does not accept the metaphysical aspects of karma and rebirth - I'll step up here and see if I can clarify this murky situation.
The concept of karma in the Buddhist tradition is typically understood by westerners as the equivalent of "fate". Westerners see the concept of karma as controlling everything that happens to you in life. It's just not that way in the eyes of a Buddhist.
There is no "fate" in Buddhism in the way that westerners use the word. The concept of karma is way, way more complicated than the simplistic idea of fate. Karma does not control your path in life, it only enhances it. Good karma makes your path in life easier and bad karma makes it harder. Your previous good actions are recognized by others who respond to them in kind and your previous bad actions are recognized by others who respond to them in kind but karma alone does not predetermine your path.
This does not mean, however, that evil people are going to recognize your good karma and reward you for it. Evil is blind to all things except itself. Good karma may help you find a gentler and more fulfilling path in life, but it's not a talisman against evil.
Both "good" and "bad" people went to the camps. Buddhist karma theory says that the good would have suffered a little less because they may have benefited from their previous good actions. Perhaps these people were rewarded by the comfort of friends or just the knowledge that they lived their life well before this evil was visited on them. The same theory tells us that "bad" people may have had a harder time in their struggles. Perhaps they were shunned by their fellow prisoners or wallowed in their regret for past evils they had themselves done to others.
What karma doesn't say is that either of these groups were fated to have such tremendous evil brought down upon them. The day-to-day happenings of your life just aren't within the concept of karmic result. Karma is just one little piece that creates the puzzle of existence.
So saying karma = antisemitism by definition is a logical fallacy. You're making that mistake because you're mapping the western concepts of fate and predetermination onto the eastern concept of karma. There's actually no direct connection between those concepts. Karma is just one of things that affects your current existence. It's not the all-powerful controlling force as westerns often see it.
My teacher has a nice way of talking about karma. He says: "You sit in the shade of your own tree. Karma is the seed that grew the tree. Grow a good tree and you'll have shade to rest in each day. Grow a poor tree and you'll just sit in the sun."
Cheers,
Mazo.
- pjorourke
- 03-13-2011, 07:57 PM
It is MINE!!! Deal with it Lawyer boy! Originally Posted by London RayneWait your turn short stuff. The lawyers are off explaining to Nina and Mazo the concept of "closed".
- discreetgent
- 03-13-2011, 08:02 PM
Wait your turn short stuff. The lawyers are off explaining to Nina and Mazo the concept of "closed". Originally Posted by pjorourkePerhaps they should explain that it precludes opening another thread.
- London Rayne
- 03-13-2011, 08:02 PM
Wait your turn short stuff. The lawyers are off explaining to Nina and Mazo the concept of "closed". Originally Posted by pjorourkeEven I caught that one this time. Well, things are a bit biased over here so I always get a second opinion from admin. when in doubt. Would hate to think some mods are picking faves and points were not dispersed evenly lol.
What was "this" thread about again?
- Mazomaniac
- 03-13-2011, 08:04 PM
Wait your turn short stuff. The lawyers are off explaining to Nina and Mazo the concept of "closed". Originally Posted by pjorourkeMazo was too busy typing to sense MA's presence.
- Mazomaniac
- 03-13-2011, 08:05 PM