African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the West

Alleviating worldly suffering along the way.

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby LastLegend » Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:54 am

Huseng wrote:
One admirable feature that many western Buddhist organizations have is democracy and transparency. The decision making processes are decided by members. Even if you're a new guy you have a voice and the right to be heard out as much as the senior members. You also have the right to disagree and voice disapproval (it might not be appreciated, but it is your right nevertheless). This does not really exist in most of Asia. Usually the upper echelons of clergy decide things and everyone is expected to fold their hands and follow along.

In terms of management this has some advantages, but the huge disadvantage is a lack of perspective and planning from the actual ground level. The lowly people are unlikely to have their issues really appreciated. So in a religious organization you might end up with senior administrators with grand ideas that don't reflect what the common people really want or need, and so things decline and nobody understands why.

In a democratic model where the young and old both have equal voice and feel comfortable expressing and promoting their own ideas, an organization will be directed by collective concerns rather the vision of a few people who might be divorced from the reality most of the membership face.

Actually this is probably the greatest problem facing Buddhist organizations around Asia. Elderly clergy who have no idea what younger generations are thinking and doing. They might let a youth group have their own activities, but that's not letting them actively participate in the decision making process (in many places I imagine they would think twenty something year old kids are too inexperienced and immature to be trusted with such responsibilities).

Nevertheless, I believe if youth were given power and a voice in decision making processes, then organizations could address the needs and concerns of younger generations and not fall into decline.


Buddha's teaching of wisdom is to recognize truth from false. If a teacher is wise, and you listen to him, you will do well. If a teacher is a not wise, and you listen to him, you will not benefit. So it varies from case to case. Also, being democratic and opinionated has its drawbacks. That is, too many opinions will not unify (Obama versus Republicans for example); too many personal needs to be satisfied. ONE MIND/Opinion is appropriate in this case. Is peace not ONE MIND? But that is not to say democracy and transparency don't have any values of its own. It's good for everyday decision making. But it is useless for, let say people who are on the same level of understanding. If you have many masters of the same level in a room, you would have One OPINION/MIND. It's also true that all Buddhas have ONE OPINION...Sure, you can say this put Asians in a passive position, but being passive is not the same as being stupid. And it takes endurance and patience to be passive. To be reactive when necessary, but to do it all the time when it does not meet our personal preferences is only feeding selfishness...that's not Zen training where the master would strip off your personal preferences and opinions for example. I hope you see Asian culture is collective while Western Culture is individualistic. Asians who grow up in Western countries often experience the conflict between the two cultures. Collective Asian cultures also attract Mahayana, and it is the reason why Mahayana has been sticking because being collective is in line with the idea of compassion.

I feel like most Western scholars do not have a deep understanding of Asian cultures and histories. Asian cultures have been thriving thousands of years and have gone through many trials and errors. It is really sad that many Asians and the world as a whole today chase Western ideals and forget their own backgrounds or have little understanding of it.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2013
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Chi Wai » Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:30 am

In case you don't know, the American race and skin color based cultural identities and stereotypes belong to the first stage of Skandha. :) They are all false forms. Of course, in America, racism has been institutionalized--racism and stereotypes have been condoned by laws and legislations--(think of South Africa) for over 100 years. We are talking about over 3 generations of Americans who have been conditioned to conceptualize people's racial and ethnic identity based on the color of their skins. You can clearly see the amount of suffering this false consciousness can produce in the American society. If you are white and American and can not clearly see this obvious stage of Skandha, I am afraid you aren't going to reach any degree of Samadhi at all.
Chi Wai
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:08 pm

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Chi Wai » Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:36 am

LastLegend wrote:
Huseng wrote:
One admirable feature that many western Buddhist organizations have is democracy and transparency. The decision making processes are decided by members. Even if you're a new guy you have a voice and the right to be heard out as much as the senior members. You also have the right to disagree and voice disapproval (it might not be appreciated, but it is your right nevertheless). This does not really exist in most of Asia. Usually the upper echelons of clergy decide things and everyone is expected to fold their hands and follow along.

In terms of management this has some advantages, but the huge disadvantage is a lack of perspective and planning from the actual ground level. The lowly people are unlikely to have their issues really appreciated. So in a religious organization you might end up with senior administrators with grand ideas that don't reflect what the common people really want or need, and so things decline and nobody understands why.

In a democratic model where the young and old both have equal voice and feel comfortable expressing and promoting their own ideas, an organization will be directed by collective concerns rather the vision of a few people who might be divorced from the reality most of the membership face.

Actually this is probably the greatest problem facing Buddhist organizations around Asia. Elderly clergy who have no idea what younger generations are thinking and doing. They might let a youth group have their own activities, but that's not letting them actively participate in the decision making process (in many places I imagine they would think twenty something year old kids are too inexperienced and immature to be trusted with such responsibilities).

Nevertheless, I believe if youth were given power and a voice in decision making processes, then organizations could address the needs and concerns of younger generations and not fall into decline.


Buddha's teaching of wisdom is to recognize truth from false. If a teacher is wise, and you listen to him, you will do well. If a teacher is a not wise, and you listen to him, you will not benefit. So it varies from case to case. Also, being democratic and opinionated has its drawbacks. That is, too many opinions will not unify (Obama versus Republicans for example); too many personal needs to be satisfied. ONE MIND/Opinion is appropriate in this case. Is peace not ONE MIND? But that is not to say democracy and transparency don't have any values of its own. It's good for everyday decision making. But it is useless for, let say people who are on the same level of understanding. If you have many masters of the same level in a room, you would have One OPINION/MIND. It's also true that all Buddhas have ONE OPINION...Sure, you can say this put Asians in a passive position, but being passive is not the same as being stupid. And it takes endurance and patience to be passive. To be reactive when necessary, but to do it all the time when it does not meet our personal preferences is only feeding selfishness...that's not Zen training where the master would strip off your personal preferences and opinions for example. I hope you see Asian culture is collective while Western Culture is individualistic. Asians who grow up in Western countries often experience the conflict between the two cultures. Collective Asian cultures also attract Mahayana, and it is the reason why Mahayana has been sticking because being collective is in line with the idea of compassion.

I feel like most Western scholars do not have a deep understanding of Asian cultures and histories. Asian cultures have been thriving thousands of years and have gone through many trials and errors. It is really sad that many Asians and the world as a whole today chase Western ideals and forget their own backgrounds or have little understanding of it.



BTW, I generally don't like these generic terms about "West" and "Asian." For me, there is the American West. Then, there is Europe, which is far from homogenous. Just look at the current Euro crisis. Europe or European only exists as an idea. In reality, each European nation has its own unique national identity. Same with Asia, just look how much China is pissing off at Japan over some islands.
Chi Wai
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:08 pm

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby ocean_waves » Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:52 am

Johnny Dangerous wrote:Being comfortable around different cultures and types of people only happens by exposure, there is no theory or doctrine that can help that,...


I think people become comfortable around different cultures and types when they truly let go of their attachment to the five skandas and the false sense of self that we tend to cling to. The many different ways that we identify ourselves become the very reason we feel justified in treating each other "different or indifferently". Letting go of the self and learning to develop our compassion for others is what allows us to be comfortable, not only with other but with ourselves as well.

Of course there is something that can help this, the Buddhadhamma, understanding the Four Noble truths and practicing the Noble Eightfold path.

JKhedrup wrote:Many of the methods used in anti-racism training in Canada are meant to challenge privilege and give people an idea of what it is like to walk in the shoes of a disenfranchised visible minority.

Perhaps the ´Blue Eyed Brown Eyed´ excercises of Jane Elliott that are used as the basis for some of these methods are exactly the kind of shake up upper class Buddhist communities would find transformative. Fascinating watching but not for the feint of heart

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqv9k3jbtYU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf2LB0IG1xo

Personally I think the method is brilliant and I benefitted from it but certainly on the surface it doesn´t seem Buddhist. But the realities is brings to the surface can lead to a Buddhist like transformation.


Wow! Thank you for these links. I think what she does has great value. America practiced institutionalized racism for over 400 years, in which it conditioned the overall mindset of its citizenry, black and white. The seeds of racism have been planted deeply in the American psyche and remain capable of blooming at any moment. We all see the fruits from time to time. Embracing the suffering caused by racism so that we may transform it is often more painful for whites than it is for blacks.

Practicing the dhamma allows us to wake up from the dreams and illusions, the mistaken beliefs, false sense of selves... the myth of racism and see that they are empty.

gregkavarnos wrote:I believe that what is important, apart from the analysis about the underlying racism inherent in almost any society I care to think of (and this links into this racism) is whether one feels a sense of community with fellow practitioners or not. I believe a lot of western "Buddhists", being disenfranchised from mainstream culture, turn to Buddhism for a sense of community (rather than a driving need for enlightenment or, in the case of "ethnic Buddhists", cultural habit). Minorities, already disenfranchised from mainstream culture find this sense of community amongst themselves anyway on the basis of shared cultural and/or physical characteristics.

Buddhism, in the west (apart from "ethnic Buddhism"), is a subculture, or even counterculture, rather than a naturally existing cultural entity. I think that people from ethnic minorities may turn to Buddhism (in the west) if they feel alienated from their own cultural group, but will find it difficult to enter existing western Buddhist groups since the people that establish these groups (being mainly white and middle class) carry with them the racist habits of mainstream culture and society.

The covert, or underlying, racism of Buddhist groups in the west cannot (easily) be overcome if the overt racism in mainstream society is not (effectively) dealt with. Buddhist groups are, after all, just microcosms of the society they exist in.

This is based on my personal experiences growing up as the offspring of Greek emigrants in New Zealand (where we were not "white" enough to be part of the ruling elite and not "black" enough to be a part of the indigenous community) and Australia. In Australia, for example, I was always considered too Greek and, now living in Greece, I am always considered not Greek enough.

In terms of the Greek sangha? Well, a large proportion of the sangha are the offsprings of Greek emigrants, and/or middle-class as hell, and/or from counter/sub-cultural groups. What a surprise, right?


:good: Excellent points! I think that the fact that the same individual can be "too black" in one instance and "not black enough" in another demonstrates the emptiness of race as a reality, and the ridiculousness of it as a logical mental formation.

My personal practice, in the lineage of Thich Nhat Hanh, is a mix of Theravada and Mahayana, I have also recently introduced some Vajrayana practice, in the lineage of Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche. Although I see many benefits in the "forms" of my practice I do not "cling" to any of them, and I am prone to study ALL traditions of "awakening" [ie. Tantra, Sufism, Kabbalah, Shaivism]. It is the experience of our true nature that brings enlightenment, not the experience of this or that tradition. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form... black is white, white is black... male is female, female is male. :namaste:
"True seeing is called transcendence;
False seeing is worldliness:
Set aside both right and wrong,
And the nature of enlightenment is clear."
User avatar
ocean_waves
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:35 pm
Location: Hartford, CT [USA]

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Indrajala » Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:29 pm

LastLegend wrote:ONE MIND/Opinion is appropriate in this case. Is peace not ONE MIND?


That sounds like cult thinking to me.

Actually you see that in some traditions of Buddhism where "harmony of views" is expected and even enforced. It isn't that hard to achieve either if you just ensure peer pressure makes everyone conform.

It might superficially appear to be sustainable, but if the leadership who dictates what constitutes "the right opinion" is inept, then everyone following them just likewise follow along and things go to hell in a hand basket.




But it is useless for, let say people who are on the same level of understanding. If you have many masters of the same level in a room, you would have One OPINION/MIND.



I don't believe this is the case at all. What you're proposing here is highly speculative and idealistic. Most people would be polite when sitting down in a formal discussion, and might not criticize anyone (especially in a culture where criticism is an unforgivable insult) though they'd be thinking something else.

In the real world differences of opinion can be expected. In any case, we can't quantify someone's "level" as a "master" in the real world.



Sure, you can say this put Asians in a passive position, but being passive is not the same as being stupid.



Being passive often allows inept people into leadership positions who just screw everything up. Democracy has plenty of faults, but at least in a proper democratic model everyone can and should express their opinions and criticism of leadership, and also enact procedures to remove them from their seats of authority when necessary. If the leadership wants to keep their position they better lead well lest they face the wrath of their underlings.




And it takes endurance and patience to be passive. To be reactive when necessary, but to do it all the time when it does not meet our personal preferences is only feeding selfishness...that's not Zen training where the master would strip off your personal preferences and opinions for example.



Again, the soul crushing ideals of subverting your own interests to the collective group ideals as envisioned by a few people at the top (who may or may not really possess wisdom and compassion) is not going to appeal to everyone. It doesn't appeal to me. I find such ideas downright medieval and frightening. I don't think liberation is achieved by disengaging one's critical thinking apparatus. In fact, I'm of the opinion that being an autonomous individual with intense critical thinking abilities is necessary, at least for people like me who have pathological problems with authority.

Keep in mind if the Buddha just let someone strip him of personal preferences and opinions, he might not have achieved liberation. He rejected what he thought was not conducive to liberation. He did not achieve liberation by letting someone strip him of personal preferences and opinions. What you're proposing here is basically a cult mentality where liberation is promised via surrendering oneself, mentally and spiritually, to an authority figure.

I don't roll like that.
Flower Ornament Depository (Blog)
Indrajāla's Contemplations (Blog)
Exploring Classical Chinese (Blog)
Dharma Depository (Site)

"Hui gives me no assistance. There is nothing that I say in which he does not delight." -Confucius
User avatar
Indrajala
 
Posts: 5863
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Nepal

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Rakshasa » Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:08 pm

Buddhism primarily developed amongst the Austro-Asiatics (Australoid race) who formed the largest racial make up of Indian society in 500BC to 0 AD. Of course, it also equally developed amongst the Caucasians of North Western India and the Mongoloids. Initially Buddhism faced resistance from the first Caucasian group in India (Aryans) but eventually many of them were influenced by Buddhism too. So the color of skin has nothing to do with Buddhism. Anyone can follow it. I believe there are sermons of Buddha in which he discusses caste system (which was initially devised to separate groups in a hierarchy based on the color of the skin) and he declares that all the humans form one single species unlike in the case of animals where we can find different species and even sub-species. This is remarkable because even in the medieval times when the Europeans (Caucasians) encountered other races, they were misled into considering the other colored humans as separate species. Buddha was clear in declaring that the humans do not even form sub-species. Like in Tigers, there are Bengal Tigers, Amur Tigers, Indo-Chinese, Sumatran Tigers etc. Humans do not even form sub species. This attests the depth of knowledge of the Buddha. There are indications in Pali Suttas that Buddha changed the color of his skin according to the land he visited to spread his teachings.
User avatar
Rakshasa
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:16 pm

Rakshasa wrote:Buddhism primarily developed amongst the Austro-Asiatics (Australoid race) who formed the largest racial make up of Indian society in 500BC to 0 AD. Of course, it also equally developed amongst the Caucasians of North Western India and the Mongoloids. Initially Buddhism faced resistance from the first Caucasian group in India (Aryans) but eventually many of them were influenced by Buddhism too.
Source?
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9273
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby LastLegend » Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:25 pm

Huseng wrote:
LastLegend wrote:ONE MIND/Opinion is appropriate in this case. Is peace not ONE MIND?


That sounds like cult thinking to me.

Actually you see that in some traditions of Buddhism where "harmony of views" is expected and even enforced. It isn't that hard to achieve either if you just ensure peer pressure makes everyone conform.

It might superficially appear to be sustainable, but if the leadership who dictates what constitutes "the right opinion" is inept, then everyone following them just likewise follow along and things go to hell in a hand basket.




But it is useless for, let say people who are on the same level of understanding. If you have many masters of the same level in a room, you would have One OPINION/MIND.



I don't believe this is the case at all. What you're proposing here is highly speculative and idealistic. Most people would be polite when sitting down in a formal discussion, and might not criticize anyone (especially in a culture where criticism is an unforgivable insult) though they'd be thinking something else.

In the real world differences of opinion can be expected. In any case, we can't quantify someone's "level" as a "master" in the real world.



Sure, you can say this put Asians in a passive position, but being passive is not the same as being stupid.



Being passive often allows inept people into leadership positions who just screw everything up. Democracy has plenty of faults, but at least in a proper democratic model everyone can and should express their opinions and criticism of leadership, and also enact procedures to remove them from their seats of authority when necessary. If the leadership wants to keep their position they better lead well lest they face the wrath of their underlings.




And it takes endurance and patience to be passive. To be reactive when necessary, but to do it all the time when it does not meet our personal preferences is only feeding selfishness...that's not Zen training where the master would strip off your personal preferences and opinions for example.



Again, the soul crushing ideals of subverting your own interests to the collective group ideals as envisioned by a few people at the top (who may or may not really possess wisdom and compassion) is not going to appeal to everyone. It doesn't appeal to me. I find such ideas downright medieval and frightening. I don't think liberation is achieved by disengaging one's critical thinking apparatus. In fact, I'm of the opinion that being an autonomous individual with intense critical thinking abilities is necessary, at least for people like me who have pathological problems with authority.

Keep in mind if the Buddha just let someone strip him of personal preferences and opinions, he might not have achieved liberation. He rejected what he thought was not conducive to liberation. He did not achieve liberation by letting someone strip him of personal preferences and opinions. What you're proposing here is basically a cult mentality where liberation is promised via surrendering oneself, mentally and spiritually, to an authority figure.

I don't roll like that.



I will keep this brief. Being passive is relative to being reactive. But it's not being passive if one really understands the wisdom behind it. If you can't tell a wise teacher from an unwise teacher, then that is your false. But even when you find a wise teacher, as a Westerner, you would not submit yourself to him either and still hold fast to your beliefs and personal preferences. Clearly, your view reflects where you are coming from. Your perspective shows a lack of deep understanding for Asian thinking and Buddhism as a path involving a special relationship between teacher and student. The fault does not lie in being collective, but it lies in human. If a person submits to another person blindly, then he lacks of wisdom. Asians are taught to pay attention to Zhi or wisdom (智). Today, Asians could careless about wisdom, they care about money, powers, and material possessions as does the whole world.

Asians are not docile. Vietnamese are not docile. Vietnam fought many wars. They speak out against the Communist government also. But the government always find means to suppress them. Same with China. Also poverty plays a factor. But this is for another topic.

Roll however you want, but if you don't grow up in an Asian culture, you will not understand.

Tobes said, "understanding takes time." I sincerely believe this.
Last edited by LastLegend on Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2013
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Rakshasa » Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:47 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Rakshasa wrote:Buddhism primarily developed amongst the Austro-Asiatics (Australoid race) who formed the largest racial make up of Indian society in 500BC to 0 AD. Of course, it also equally developed amongst the Caucasians of North Western India and the Mongoloids. Initially Buddhism faced resistance from the first Caucasian group in India (Aryans) but eventually many of them were influenced by Buddhism too.
Source?



A Brahmin once called Buddha a menial outcast, do you realize that? And Brahmins were Aryans (Caucasians) who were worshipers of Devas, as opposed to the worshipers of Asuras/Ahuras in Iran (who eventually also came to India and became "Parsi" community after Iran become Muslim). The Caucasians in India today come from various sources : Indo-Aryans (Brahmins mostly), Indo-Scythians (Jats, Gujjars etc), Indo-Greeks (Marwaris etc), White and Black Hunas (Rajpoots etc). But most of these communities (Indo-Scythians, Indo-Greeks, etc) did not exist at the time of Buddha. The only Caucasians in the time of Buddha were the Indo-Aryans, whom he encountered in the North western India. Besides, you do realize that most of South India was unknown during Buddha's time? If you look at South India and East India, most of the people are not Caucsians. Its just like in the South America, where you found many tribes, some of which were very remote and primitive, but some others (like Aztecs, Mayans etc) which were very civilized and lived in urban settlements. Similarly, in India, most of the population has the base as the Australoids, and some of them are still identified as tribes in remote regions of Chhattisgarh, but many of them lived in urban dwellings. There is no single historical source, but it is pretty evident.


PS: Even Buddha was not necessarily a Caucasian. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=FCFC ... &q&f=false
User avatar
Rakshasa
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:01 pm

Rakshasa wrote:A Brahmin once called Buddha a menial outcast, do you realize that? And Brahmins were Aryans (Caucasians) who were worshipers of Devas, as opposed to the worshipers of Asuras/Ahuras in Iran (who eventually also came to India and became "Parsi" community after Iran become Muslim). The Caucasians in India today come from various sources : Indo-Aryans (Brahmins mostly), Indo-Scythians (Jats, Gujjars etc), Indo-Greeks (Marwaris etc), White and Black Hunas (Rajpoots etc). But most of these communities (Indo-Scythians, Indo-Greeks, etc) did not exist at the time of Buddha. The only Caucasians in the time of Buddha were the Indo-Aryans, whom he encountered in the North western India. Besides, you do realize that most of South India was unknown during Buddha's time? If you look at South India and East India, most of the people are not Caucsians. Its just like in the South America, where you found many tribes, some of which were very remote and primitive, but some others (like Aztecs, Mayans etc) which were very civilized and lived in urban settlements. Similarly, in India, most of the population has the base as the Australoids, and some of them are still identified as tribes in remote regions of Chhattisgarh, but many of them lived in urban dwellings. There is no single historical source, but it is pretty evident.
I didn't ask for a single historical, source but a source for this theory.
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9273
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Rakshasa » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:22 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Rakshasa wrote:A Brahmin once called Buddha a menial outcast, do you realize that? And Brahmins were Aryans (Caucasians) who were worshipers of Devas, as opposed to the worshipers of Asuras/Ahuras in Iran (who eventually also came to India and became "Parsi" community after Iran become Muslim). The Caucasians in India today come from various sources : Indo-Aryans (Brahmins mostly), Indo-Scythians (Jats, Gujjars etc), Indo-Greeks (Marwaris etc), White and Black Hunas (Rajpoots etc). But most of these communities (Indo-Scythians, Indo-Greeks, etc) did not exist at the time of Buddha. The only Caucasians in the time of Buddha were the Indo-Aryans, whom he encountered in the North western India. Besides, you do realize that most of South India was unknown during Buddha's time? If you look at South India and East India, most of the people are not Caucsians. Its just like in the South America, where you found many tribes, some of which were very remote and primitive, but some others (like Aztecs, Mayans etc) which were very civilized and lived in urban settlements. Similarly, in India, most of the population has the base as the Australoids, and some of them are still identified as tribes in remote regions of Chhattisgarh, but many of them lived in urban dwellings. There is no single historical source, but it is pretty evident.
I didn't ask for a single historical, source but a source for this theory.



Britishers concluded that most of the Indians are Caucasians - which could be true - but they were wrong in inferring that all the Caucasians of Aryan origins. Many of the Caucasoid groups came after Buddha in fact. And the first Indians who adopted Buddhism were Austro-Asiatics (like the Sri Lankans). For example, Nagas were a group known to have adopted Buddhism, as is evident even from Jatakas. They were opposed to Aryans (Caucasians).Most of the other Caucasian groups, like the Indo-Scythians and White Hunas, which form majority of the "upper caste" Hindus today, came much after Buddha's parinirvana. I am not saying that Buddhism did not have influence as far as Greece - it did - but the first people to adopt Buddhism were Austro-Asiatics who were called "Nagas/Rakshasas/Asuras etc" in the Aryan literature.
User avatar
Rakshasa
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby LastLegend » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:28 pm

I learned from a geography class that the Aryan migrated to India in 1100 B.C. Buddha was born prior to that, so.
Correct me if I am wrong.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2013
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Rakshasa » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:36 pm

LastLegend wrote:I learned from a geography class that the Aryan migrated to India in 1100 B.C. Buddha was born prior to that, so.
Correct me if I am wrong.


Aryans probably migrated in 1100 BC but they did not settle even in 1/4th part of what is India today. And Buddha was born at around 500 BC. Even in Buddha's time, places below (south of) Ujjain (somewhere in today's Central India /Madhya Pradesh State) was unknown to him.
User avatar
Rakshasa
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby LastLegend » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:44 pm

So then Buddha was born after the immigration of the Aryan?
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2013
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:48 pm

You still have not provided the source of this theory.
Besides, you do realize that most of South India was unknown during Buddha's time?
I find this kind of hard to believe. The Valimki Ramayana, for example (a fifth to fourth century text, ie concurrent with Buddhas lifetime), details incursions into Southern India by the Sri Lankan King Ravana and invasion and conquest of Sri Lanka by King Rama (with the help of Hanuman) and King Ramas killing of King Vali. The epic is staged in locations from the north of India down to the south (all the way down to Sri Lanka). So it is unlikely that Southern India was still "unknown" during the Buddhas time. Unless, of course, some of the settings were later additions to the original text.
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9273
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Rakshasa » Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:58 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:You still have not provided the source of this theory.



Read the link to google books I posted in my post on Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:47 pm
User avatar
Rakshasa
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:15 pm

That's a little outdated isn't it?
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9273
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Chi Wai » Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:43 am

Rakshasa wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:
Rakshasa wrote:A Brahmin once called Buddha a menial outcast, do you realize that? And Brahmins were Aryans (Caucasians) who were worshipers of Devas, as opposed to the worshipers of Asuras/Ahuras in Iran (who eventually also came to India and became "Parsi" community after Iran become Muslim). The Caucasians in India today come from various sources : Indo-Aryans (Brahmins mostly), Indo-Scythians (Jats, Gujjars etc), Indo-Greeks (Marwaris etc), White and Black Hunas (Rajpoots etc). But most of these communities (Indo-Scythians, Indo-Greeks, etc) did not exist at the time of Buddha. The only Caucasians in the time of Buddha were the Indo-Aryans, whom he encountered in the North western India. Besides, you do realize that most of South India was unknown during Buddha's time? If you look at South India and East India, most of the people are not Caucsians. Its just like in the South America, where you found many tribes, some of which were very remote and primitive, but some others (like Aztecs, Mayans etc) which were very civilized and lived in urban settlements. Similarly, in India, most of the population has the base as the Australoids, and some of them are still identified as tribes in remote regions of Chhattisgarh, but many of them lived in urban dwellings. There is no single historical source, but it is pretty evident.
I didn't ask for a single historical, source but a source for this theory.



Britishers concluded that most of the Indians are Caucasians - which could be true - but they were wrong in inferring that all the Caucasians of Aryan origins. Many of the Caucasoid groups came after Buddha in fact. And the first Indians who adopted Buddhism were Austro-Asiatics (like the Sri Lankans). For example, Nagas were a group known to have adopted Buddhism, as is evident even from Jatakas. They were opposed to Aryans (Caucasians).Most of the other Caucasian groups, like the Indo-Scythians and White Hunas, which form majority of the "upper caste" Hindus today, came much after Buddha's parinirvana. I am not saying that Buddhism did not have influence as far as Greece - it did - but the first people to adopt Buddhism were Austro-Asiatics who were called "Nagas/Rakshasas/Asuras etc" in the Aryan literature.



I still not seeing the point of this the so-called theory. We are talking about the space Buddha or the Aryan, the alien race. The Aryan is not Caucasian. I mean, Hinduism and Buddhism flourished in the East. Not in Europe. What happened?
Chi Wai
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:08 pm

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby Indrajala » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:13 pm

Chi Wai wrote:I still not seeing the point of this the so-called theory. We are talking about the space Buddha or the Aryan, the alien race. The Aryan is not Caucasian. I mean, Hinduism and Buddhism flourished in the East. Not in Europe. What happened?


In 224 CE the Sasanians made Zoroastrianism the official religion of their empire and Buddhists and Hindus were no longer tolerated. The inscriptions of the priest Kartīr reveal this. Hence the westward spread of Buddhism was halted.
Flower Ornament Depository (Blog)
Indrajāla's Contemplations (Blog)
Exploring Classical Chinese (Blog)
Dharma Depository (Site)

"Hui gives me no assistance. There is nothing that I say in which he does not delight." -Confucius
User avatar
Indrajala
 
Posts: 5863
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Nepal

Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W

Postby ocean_waves » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:34 pm

this dhamma we refer to as "buddhism" has only one form... emptiness!!! :rolleye:
"True seeing is called transcendence;
False seeing is worldliness:
Set aside both right and wrong,
And the nature of enlightenment is clear."
User avatar
ocean_waves
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:35 pm
Location: Hartford, CT [USA]

PreviousNext

Return to Engaged Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

>