tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post8081304490742005182..comments2024-03-27T02:13:58.088-07:00Comments on Integral Options Cafe: Speedlinking 4/6/07william harrymanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06981478282688361274noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-5594796837751505592007-04-09T04:58:00.000-07:002007-04-09T04:58:00.000-07:00Hi Bill,With regard to the article on Buddhism tha...Hi Bill,<BR/><BR/>With regard to the article on Buddhism that I linked to, you write:<BR/><BR/><I>My sense is that the article is attempting to justify the US war on terror by saying, "if Buddhists do it, then it must be OK." Faulty logic since much of the US military efforts abroad have little or nothing to do with al Qaeda.</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think anything other than a plain reading is required. What the article "attempts to justify" isn't anything sneaky or back door. In fact, the article thesis is stated up front:<BR/><BR/><I>Can an ethical follower of Tibetan Buddhism kill someone in order to save the Dalai Lama? Or in order to fight religious totalitarianism in general?<BR/><BR/>Absolutely yes. Although some Westerners imagine that the Dalai Lama is an absolute pacifist, the teachings of the present Dalai Lama and of his predecessor, as well as the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism, all legitimize the use of deadly force against killers and would-be tyrants.</I><BR/><BR/>I would bet money that some people, many people, think Buddhism categorically non-violent. The point is simple: they aren't. Which, I think, is interesting.<BR/><BR/>take care,<BR/>mdMDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14406714360307184822noreply@blogger.com