5 ms·

I'm surprised any Buddhist is this attached to their public image.

lovich 3y ago
Thailand practices Therevadra Buddhism which is markedly different from the philosophical version that is the West’s impression of Buddhism. A decent analogy would be like another culture finding out about Christianity having the Trinity and being surprised because they thought Christians were monotheistic
- obscur 3y ago
  I don’t know how one would settle the question but I’d venture to say that Theravada is not less close to the Western impression of Buddhism than other parts of Buddhism. Additionally, many people’s ideas of Buddhism is understood through their knowledge of mindfulness which was brought to the West through Theravada to a large part.
- zoeysmithe 3y ago
  I imagine if you start merchandising with the Dalai Lama's image and you'll soon get sent a C&D. This isn't necessarily a Theravadin thing, imho. I practice Theravada and while it certainly is different than the US-style California Buddhism and the popular Mahayana traditions in the West (often with anything challenging or 'ethnic' or 'traditional' whitewashed for Westerners), the monks there are acting like I imagine monks near anywhere would. Its really offensive to portray monks as thrill-sensory seekers. In the West, if some church was suing because someone was photoshopping their congregation into sinful acts everyone here probably agree, "Yep, slander and libel is actionable. Speech sometimes has consequences." But if Buddhists do it, somehow its an issue. I think there's a bit of ugly Orientalism at play here. Westerners can sue and use the police, but "mysterious" and "stoic" Asian monks must, of course, be above that.
  - graemep 3y ago
    > In the West, if some church was suing because someone was photoshopping their congregation into sinful acts everyone here probably agree, "Yep, slander and libel is actionable. Speech sometimes has consequences." It it was clearly humorous it would not be defamatory. It could only be defamatory if it made a real person actually look like they were doing something bad. If it was all a fake, or an actor, or with completely generated faces, then no. Western countries do not have blasphemy laws, a lot of Asian countries do e.g. Theravadan Buddhist Sri Lanka: https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2020/07/sri-lankan-writer-faces-up-to-10-years-in-prison-for-hurting-religious-sentiments/ https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2020/07/sri-lankan-writer-fac... There is a genuine legal and cultural difference here.
    - anigbrowl 3y ago
      Western countries do not have blasphemy laws To be fair this is a quite recent development, on timescales measured from years to about a century; Ireland only got rid of its blasphemy laws 3 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
      - graemep 3y ago
        True, but most were abolished much earlier than that. Some countries did not enforce them, or very rarely enforced them prior to formally abolishing them. Punishments were also far milder when they were enforced. In the hundred years before blasphemy laws were abolished in the UK there were seven prosecutions, some unsuccessful, and some were private prosecutions.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - zoeysmithe 3y ago
      >Western countries do not have blasphemy laws That's arguable and the West's oppression can be subtle but real. Look at the people who suffered trying to expose the Catholic church's history of protecting pedophiles. Look at the people who suffered exposing things like Scientology or other cults. Look at people who have lost their jobs for speaking out against certain religions or religious groups or religious practices. Losing a job in the USA can be a death sentence if one can't afford health insurance. At least Thailand has socialized medicine. The state doesnt protect you from this, they tell you that under civil charges or firing if you cant afford an expensive lawyer to fight these wealthy organizations, then too bad. These laws and practices are defacto anti-blasphemy laws and just as oppressive, if not more so, than what is allowed in Thailand.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    I'm not sure your analogy holds. A specific church and congregation, yes, but western culture has plenty of depictions of generic monks, nuns, and priests in all sorts of comedic/critical contexts, from harmless fun to practicing one or other deadly sin. Good luck suing in a European or American court over 'this makes the clergy look bad.' I'm not endorsing this images, I see why people find them offensive (and Thailand already has very strict laws about injuring people's dignity, particularly the royal family). I just don't think western countries especially protect the dignity of their own religious institutions.
  - ordu 3y ago
    > But if Buddhists do it, somehow its an issue. I think there's a bit of ugly Orientalism at play here. I can say only for myself, and with me it is not Orientalism. What I knew about buddhism from our culture was awe-inspiring. They are not stupid christians o muslims, they are enlightened monks spendinv their lives sitting on top of a mountain, practicing their minds, blah-blah-blah... But at some point you hear a story that shatters the illusion. Buddhists are nothing special. For me it was a story of tourists that were imprisoned on Sri-Lanka for their frivolous treatment of a statue of Buddha. Buddhism is an opium for masses, like all other religions. This revelation comes as a disappointing surprise, and it brings buddhism down from a pedestal of the only truly sensible religion. But it doesn't make it in any way worse than Christianity or Islam. Just worse than I thought.
zoeysmithe 3y ago
If the goal of Buddhism is to send as many people to nirvana then controlling that narrative is important. Its not attachment to image, its basic practicality. The image also reflects the message so these images are spreading dishonesty about Buddhism which goes against the core tenants of right-thought and right-action. In fact, Buddhist monks would have to try to remove these images as per Buddhism. Its wrong-action and wrong-thought to knowingly allow what's essentially blasphemy and defamation against Buddhism to spread. Not to mention in Theravada, and in other forms I imagine, these are very offensive images because it turns monks into sensory seekers, which is the opposite of equanimity. This is like, say, someone posting images on a church with Jesus being friendly with Satan and engaging in various sins. Of course organized religion is a political power-base as much as anything of note in socieety, so there's always going to be a protective element to it. Theravada is the defacto state religion (the king must always be Buddhist per their constitution and the country is 93% Buddhist), thus Theravada enjoys a great level of protection. There are strong laws against religious defamation there that we don't often have in the West. Lastly, you can use the "attached" excuse for anything. "Oh Buddhists dont like it when I punch them in the face? Guess they're too attached to feeling pain free!" Its a jerks argument that only empowers anti-merit.
krapp 3y ago
Wait until you find out Christians lie, steal and bear false witness, Muslims drink alcohol, Jews work on Saturdays and Hindus eat beef. People are just people, everywhere.

Thailand practices Therevadra Buddhism which is markedly different from the philosophical version that is the West’s impression of Buddhism. A decent analogy would be like another culture finding out about Christianity having the Trinity and being surprised because they thought Christians were monotheistic

obscur 3y ago
I don’t know how one would settle the question but I’d venture to say that Theravada is not less close to the Western impression of Buddhism than other parts of Buddhism. Additionally, many people’s ideas of Buddhism is understood through their knowledge of mindfulness which was brought to the West through Theravada to a large part.
zoeysmithe 3y ago
I imagine if you start merchandising with the Dalai Lama's image and you'll soon get sent a C&D. This isn't necessarily a Theravadin thing, imho. I practice Theravada and while it certainly is different than the US-style California Buddhism and the popular Mahayana traditions in the West (often with anything challenging or 'ethnic' or 'traditional' whitewashed for Westerners), the monks there are acting like I imagine monks near anywhere would. Its really offensive to portray monks as thrill-sensory seekers. In the West, if some church was suing because someone was photoshopping their congregation into sinful acts everyone here probably agree, "Yep, slander and libel is actionable. Speech sometimes has consequences." But if Buddhists do it, somehow its an issue. I think there's a bit of ugly Orientalism at play here. Westerners can sue and use the police, but "mysterious" and "stoic" Asian monks must, of course, be above that.
- graemep 3y ago
  > In the West, if some church was suing because someone was photoshopping their congregation into sinful acts everyone here probably agree, "Yep, slander and libel is actionable. Speech sometimes has consequences." It it was clearly humorous it would not be defamatory. It could only be defamatory if it made a real person actually look like they were doing something bad. If it was all a fake, or an actor, or with completely generated faces, then no. Western countries do not have blasphemy laws, a lot of Asian countries do e.g. Theravadan Buddhist Sri Lanka: https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2020/07/sri-lankan-writer-faces-up-to-10-years-in-prison-for-hurting-religious-sentiments/ https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2020/07/sri-lankan-writer-fac... There is a genuine legal and cultural difference here.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    Western countries do not have blasphemy laws To be fair this is a quite recent development, on timescales measured from years to about a century; Ireland only got rid of its blasphemy laws 3 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
    - graemep 3y ago
      True, but most were abolished much earlier than that. Some countries did not enforce them, or very rarely enforced them prior to formally abolishing them. Punishments were also far milder when they were enforced. In the hundred years before blasphemy laws were abolished in the UK there were seven prosecutions, some unsuccessful, and some were private prosecutions.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - zoeysmithe 3y ago
    >Western countries do not have blasphemy laws That's arguable and the West's oppression can be subtle but real. Look at the people who suffered trying to expose the Catholic church's history of protecting pedophiles. Look at the people who suffered exposing things like Scientology or other cults. Look at people who have lost their jobs for speaking out against certain religions or religious groups or religious practices. Losing a job in the USA can be a death sentence if one can't afford health insurance. At least Thailand has socialized medicine. The state doesnt protect you from this, they tell you that under civil charges or firing if you cant afford an expensive lawyer to fight these wealthy organizations, then too bad. These laws and practices are defacto anti-blasphemy laws and just as oppressive, if not more so, than what is allowed in Thailand.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  I'm not sure your analogy holds. A specific church and congregation, yes, but western culture has plenty of depictions of generic monks, nuns, and priests in all sorts of comedic/critical contexts, from harmless fun to practicing one or other deadly sin. Good luck suing in a European or American court over 'this makes the clergy look bad.' I'm not endorsing this images, I see why people find them offensive (and Thailand already has very strict laws about injuring people's dignity, particularly the royal family). I just don't think western countries especially protect the dignity of their own religious institutions.
- ordu 3y ago
  > But if Buddhists do it, somehow its an issue. I think there's a bit of ugly Orientalism at play here. I can say only for myself, and with me it is not Orientalism. What I knew about buddhism from our culture was awe-inspiring. They are not stupid christians o muslims, they are enlightened monks spendinv their lives sitting on top of a mountain, practicing their minds, blah-blah-blah... But at some point you hear a story that shatters the illusion. Buddhists are nothing special. For me it was a story of tourists that were imprisoned on Sri-Lanka for their frivolous treatment of a statue of Buddha. Buddhism is an opium for masses, like all other religions. This revelation comes as a disappointing surprise, and it brings buddhism down from a pedestal of the only truly sensible religion. But it doesn't make it in any way worse than Christianity or Islam. Just worse than I thought.

zoeysmithe 3y ago

If the goal of Buddhism is to send as many people to nirvana then controlling that narrative is important. Its not attachment to image, its basic practicality. The image also reflects the message so these images are spreading dishonesty about Buddhism which goes against the core tenants of right-thought and right-action. In fact, Buddhist monks would have to try to remove these images as per Buddhism. Its wrong-action and wrong-thought to knowingly allow what's essentially blasphemy and defamation against Buddhism to spread. Not to mention in Theravada, and in other forms I imagine, these are very offensive images because it turns monks into sensory seekers, which is the opposite of equanimity. This is like, say, someone posting images on a church with Jesus being friendly with Satan and engaging in various sins. Of course organized religion is a political power-base as much as anything of note in socieety, so there's always going to be a protective element to it. Theravada is the defacto state religion (the king must always be Buddhist per their constitution and the country is 93% Buddhist), thus Theravada enjoys a great level of protection. There are strong laws against religious defamation there that we don't often have in the West. Lastly, you can use the "attached" excuse for anything. "Oh Buddhists dont like it when I punch them in the face? Guess they're too attached to feeling pain free!" Its a jerks argument that only empowers anti-merit.

krapp 3y ago

Wait until you find out Christians lie, steal and bear false witness, Muslims drink alcohol, Jews work on Saturdays and Hindus eat beef. People are just people, everywhere.