Wisdom Quarterly Occupy Los Angeles has cooperated with police requests on where to squat and what space to leave open. Amazingly, things have remained peaceful. Usually, the LAPD is eager to riot, arrest, and brutalize. Fellow at work forces in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other places that feel the Arab Spring resonate with the American Fall. The police see to it because the motto of a police state is "We don't want to have to tell you twice." You have no rights -- unless you assert them. What gets into Little Eichmanns/Officer Cartmans? It is a different view of the world from that side of the line, where punitive, obedient, conservative, oppression, and (often) hypocrisy rules. Many officers are ex-military or active-reserve agents of the state. They are trained to humiliate, brutalize, and kill civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Northern Africa, and in other secret "kinetic actions." They take that training into American society saying, "I fought in Afghanistan for your free speech, so the h*ll if I'm going to stand here and let you mouth off!" Officer, isn't that a contradiction? "You will respect my authority!" Deploy pepper spray, baton, Taser, tear gas, less-than-lethal projectile shotgun, disorienting EMF emitter, microwaves, semi-automatic handgun, automatic weapons, water canons at will. Why? It is because, as we learn from an observation by the Dead Kennedys, "Police can riot all that they please."
Diverse issues invite diverse solutions at Occupy LA; clip from "Hippie Infestation."
*Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: "Allowance is made for 'fair use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."
Is racist white supremacy behind "Aryan" claims, a term Goebbels, Himmler, and Hitler appropriated from India and so abused that the term can probably never be redeemed?
According to the blog Aryan Buddhism, "Theravada [the earliest existing form of Buddhism] is Materialism, not Buddhism." What then is Buddhism? It is what the blog calls "Aryan Buddhism."
In contradiction to the suttic doctrine of Buddhism, Theravada negates a substratum of autonomy [‘natho’ KN 2.380] apart from corporeal, psycho-physical existence as per its own Abhidhamma which contradicts: [SN 2.17] “Nonbeing (asat, natthiti [views of either sabbamnatthi ‘the all is ultimately not’ (atomism), and sabbam puthuttan ‘the all is merely composite (atoms) [SN 2.77],” both are heresies of Annihilationism. By positing only ephemeral matter without an animating autonomous but inchoate (unmediated) foundation (citta/mind), emancipation/illumination becomes empirical, external, and worldly; therein positing a humanistic dogma where merit making and superficial piety are the highest obtainable absolute.
The hyperinflated language only undermines what is being said. The "suttic doctrine" means the sutras or discourses (Sutta Pitaka). These are the conventional teachings of the Buddha. They differ from the higher or ultimate teachings (Abhidhamma Pitaka). One speaks conventionally of a "self," "soul," or "ego." The Buddha is frequently seen trying to disabuse a very spiritual Indian audience of this common view. Understanding the doctrine of "not-self" (anatta) is crucial to enlightenment.
Therefore, the early Buddhists compiled the Abhidharma texts that speak in absolute and ultimate terms. There is no self. What is there then? Ultimately speaking there are particles (kalapas, the characteristics of form) and mind (cittas, consciousness moments).
Five Aggregates Another approach is to explain "being" as Five Aggregates of Clinging: There is form (body, kalapas), feeling (sensation), perception (recognition), volition (mental formations, the most important of which is intention), and consciousness (cittas and cetasikas, mental factors). What we refer to as myself, yourself, an essential entity undergoing rebirth is not real in the ultimate sense [it certainly is in the conventional sense] is always in terms of the aggregates of existence. We speak of "my body, my feelings...my awareness." But if we were to look closely -- with a mind purified by "right concentration" (which the Buddha defines as a mind capable of entering the first four absorptions, jhanas, at will) -- we would not find an autonomous, independent self.
Dependent Origination We would find the other approach to explain being, namely, Dependent Origination. Our sense of self, these physical and mental aggregates (materiality and mentality) are dependent. They all arise depending on conditions. This is directly observable, directly knowable, directly open to verification. Of course, verification to our scientific culture means empirical-impersonal "data." What Buddhism, particularly the ancient meditative traditions of Theravada Buddhism, is concerned with is personal empirical "experience."
There is no dogma, nothing to take on blind faith. But that does not keep the blog from lambasting the great American scholar-monk, Bhikkhu Bodhi. Liberation is an experience. Unfortunately, for many Buddhism has become a religion to identify with rather than what the Buddha set out -- a path to practice. There is a verifiable-faith (saddha), confidence or conviction, in those who have seen this Dharma, namely the Buddha and the enlightened or aryan ("noble," "accomplished," "attained") Sangha.
Bhikkhu Bodhi (Theravada’s mouthpiece) makes implication (unfounded) that there are “mundane aggregates” as opposed to ‘supermundane’ aggregates in addition to a non-Suttic dogmatic claim that “…there is implication that there are aggregates which are anasava (taintless)”; this however is not supported by any means scripturally [SN 3.48 Footnote #65 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; Wisdom Publ. p. 1060].
The Commentaries It should be noted that Bhikkhu Bodhi rarely speculates in his translations. What he commonly does is reference and bring forward Buddhist commentarial literature, most of which has not been translated widely disseminated. If there is an implication and it is noted as such, one would do well to look at the source material, the ancient commentaries, rather than at the modern messenger.
In this way, one is easily able to follow the thread teased out over centuries. Commentarial work is not fiat (as in currency, military) -- the whimsical dictate of some authority or a specious theory constructed by an idiosyncratic commentator.
It follows a principle laid down by the Buddha, reconciling the texts regarded as authentic scripture handed down by oral tradition. That principle is laid out as a means of testing claims: Does it accord with the rest of the teaching? Question it, examine it, investigate it. Do not simply accept it on authority or dismiss it out of hand.
The Buddha declares that only through practicing in accord with the Dharma can enlightenment be realized. This teaching is distinguished from those of other religions and philosophies through its unique rejection of all doctrines of self.
Neither one monk, even a great scholar, nor one discourse can speak for an entire tradition. Theravada is rich, varied, and complex. It is a consistent view worked out by countless experiencers, redactors, and writers. It is revered by lay people and practiced by the wise who set out to see for themselves. Since the time of the Buddha it has been that there are two ways of showing reverence, adoring and practicing. The Buddha praises practice, for the one who practice is really the only one showing honor, regard, and reverence.
The only thing within sutta which is said to be “taintless” (anasava) and “without clinging” (anupadaya) is the mind (citta): [DN 2.35, MN 1.501, MN 3.20, SN 3.45, SN 4.48, SN 5.24, AN 1.240, AN 2.155, AN 3.354, AN 4.126, SN 5.233, etc.]. [AN 1.198] “The non-clinging mind (citta) which is liberated.” [MN 3.72] “And what is the Aryan taintless supranormal path? The Aryan-mind (citta), the Aryan path endowed with the taintless mind (citta).” Engaging in a Self-negation paradox and both admitting to emancipation (vimutta) but not that which obtains it, either in quantification or qualification, Theravada contradicts every tenet of Buddhism itself as found in sutta
Not to speak unkindly or uncharitably, but are the thinkers over at the Aryan Buddhism blog silly? We have to presume that they are sincere. But is their main issue the old and already settled argument between two forms of speaking? There is conventional language and ultimate (paramattha). For one lacking understanding, words seem to be contradicting one another. So the first question that has to be asked is, Are we speaking in the conventional or ultimate sense? Conventional vs. Ultimate Truth Conventionally, there IS a "self." We must improve ourselves, develop ourselves, examine ourselves, behave ourselves, help ourselves, and help others to become free of suffering and experience nirvana. But what is the nature of this "self"?
Ultimately speaking, it is empty. That is to say, it is not what it seems. What does it seem? It seems permanent. It seems capable of satisfaction. It seems personal.
But systematic meditative examination (supported by absorption) and guided by mindfulness (particularly Dependent Origination exercises) reveals that this "self" we take for granted and consider unquestionable is in fact radically impermanent (passing away at every moment both physically and mentally and in terms of the rise and fall of breath so "spiritually" but it is re-arising, not identical to what it was before, but more or less the same so that there is enough continuity to cause us to thoughtlessly and painfully cling to it components).
It is distressing.
It is impersonal -- merely a collection of aggregates dependently originated from causes that can be traced back.The causes are impersonal; the resultants are impersonal; only are assumptions and language treat it as utterly personal, the most personal thing in the world, and not components but a compact of some kind, a soul).
This is exactly what the Buddha was trying to point out as the missing understanding that leads to enlightenment and liberation from all suffering. There is, ultimately speaking, no self. The things we call a "self" are not-self. They are impersonal and devoid of a permanent-pleasant-personal animating principle. It may be impossible to believe, but it is verifiable.
And that verification is wholesome, liberating, and leads to enlightenment. The wrong view held by Vedic Brahmanism (and essentially every other religion/spiritual philosophy in the world) is that there is an eternal "soul" or that one is merely material and exists now to be annihilated at death. Both are mistaken views.
Yes, BOTH are mistaken views. Buddhism is the Middle Path that avoids these two extremes. These views are not mistaken because the Buddha spent so much time and exerted so much effort to establish people in the right view of selflessness (anatta).
They are mistaken and anyone who attains even the first stage of enlightenment (stream entry) is perfectly convinced of that, has verified it, has experienced it. Life and our existence is not what it seems! The whole of Theravada Buddhism promotes this understanding -- but only if one can take the first baby step in distinguishing two forms of speaking, conventional truth and ultimate truth.
Physics and Psychology Examples The distinction is easy today. Most educated people will have heard of Newton and Newtonian physics as distinct from Quantum physics. Newtons laws -- which may or may not be true but are taken as such and used as the basis for ordinary or classical mechanics. These are the "physical laws" of how physical things operate at the level of things. So from a Newtonian view a solid table is a solid.
But, ultimately, from a Quantum perspective, that "solid" is mostly empty space. A solid table is not a solid. Contradiction! Contradiction? There is no contradiction at all. It certainly appears solid, but by definition and experiment, it is revealed to have far more space than solidity, the space being the gap between atomic particles and subatomic particles. Newtonian axioms do not apply, the math does not work, at the atomic level. When things are that small, at the level of quanta, a whole new physics, a whole new math is needed to describe and predict movement.
To give a psychological example, we may be asked to explain our motives. And we may say what we honestly think is motivating us. But an experiment reveals that we are mistaken; we are, in fact, being motivated by something else. For instance, why is a commercial effective? Why do we choose to buy something being advertised? We choose it because it is a value, we have rationally examined it as necessary or useful for us, and that decision is in line with our ethical standards, rights? Not a chance. If this were the case, commercials to be effective would talk about the ingredients and remain logical.
Effective commercials are appeals to emotion, status, irrationality. Since caveman days, women -- which have nothing to do with the item being sold -- help sell things by simply associating them with it. Today a bikini-clad beauty sits on the hood of a car as she once sat next to a wheel. If we were being rational and unemotional, this appeal would not work. It would insult us and help us see that we are being manipulated. Things appear one way, but experience reveals they are quite another. No matter what we believe, the truth is the truth. And a delusion shall not set anyone free.
...in addition to the fact that the implication that one may obtain freedom from both transmigration and suffering without positing a non-khandhic nexus for that same liberation cannot be so, either scripturaly (sic) or philosophically: [MN 1.140] “Even though I proclaim things thusly, followers, and I point out things thusly, there are recluses and brahmins who falsely, vainly, and slanderously proclaim of me: ‘The recluse Gotama is an anti-foundationalist (venayika) who preaches the annihilation (ucchedavada) of an existing being (satta) and the oblivion (vibhava) of an existing being’.” [SN 3.30] “The satta escapes the five aggregates.” [MN 1.140] “Both formerly and now, I teach nothing but suffering’s origin and its subjugation.” The Theravada “aggregates only” heresy is found only in their 3rd century invention known as the Abhidhamma, which post-dates Buddhism’s suttas by 700+ years. [SN 3.31]
So it is good to settle the issue so easily. The Abhidharma is derived from the discourses and says the same thing -- but in ultimate terms. Just as the Buddha shows that, although we think/feel certain there is a self, soul, or ego that carries on or dies [ceases to exist] at death, BOTH views are wrong. Both are mistaken. Something carries on -- there is life after death, there is rebirth, there is the result of karma. But what carries on is not identical to what was even a moment before. We (the clung-to idea of ourselves in relation to the aggregates of clinging, whether in them, apart from them, enmeshed in them, independent of them)
“Him who finds any delight in the Five Aggregates is not one who is freed of suffering [unsatisfactoriness].” [SN-A 1.194] “Suffering is none other than the Five Aggregates.” For Theravada to posit only nama-rupa/psycho-physicality and it becoming somehow ‘purified’ is not only refuted in Buddhist sutta but is the praise of evil itself by proxy: [SN 3.195] “What venerable is Mara/Evil (‘Satan’)? The Five Aggregates are Mara.” [SN 3.195] “What venerable is the dharma of Mara/Evil (maradhamma)? The Five Aggregates are the dharma of Mara (Bhikkhu Bodhi glosses the word 'dhamma' here with 'subject to' as a dodge to the bare facts).” [SN 3.195-196] “What venerable lacks permanence, is suffering, is not the Soul? The Five Aggregates are anicca, dukkha, and anatta [impermanent, unsatisfactory, and impersonal].” The mere notion of somehow purifying phenomena resulting in some form of empirical and nominal perfection is negated by the very Buddhist path (magga) itself: [SN 3.61] “The Aryan Eightfold Path is for making cessation of the Five Aggregates.” The quickest way to destroy any follower in debate of this evil dogma ‘Satanism/Mara-ism’, i.e. Theravada, is to posit the question as to what they admit to other than the Five Aggregates themselves. They cannot say kamma (karma), for there cannot be karma without a karmin (carrier of said karma);
Going from silliness to nonsense, from Buddhism back to pre-Buddhist Vedic Brahmanism (as sometimes happens in Mahayana), the blog runs counter to the Buddha's teaching saying karma needs a karmin (a carrier of karma). There is a transmission of influence, but no being, no soul, no self. There is a continuity of process, but no being, no soul, no self. There are ever-changing conditional elements, particles, and moments, but no being, no soul, no self. The distinction is language, conventional versus ultimate.
In a conventional sense, there is a self, a carrier (or at least an inheritor of the results) of karma, those profitable and unprofitable deeds engaged in that bear their result. Could the Aryan Buddhism blog really be suggesting there is a self, as Mahayana suggests and as Vedic Brahmanism (as commemorated in modern Hinduism) asserts without hesitation?
nor will they admit to anything other than the aggregates themselves, which is materialism/atomism itself by definition:
Of course, Theravada does not assert that the Five Aggregates are real in an ultimate sense. They are fleeting, distressing, and empty. They lead to clinging, are themselves what is ultimately clung to, and they themselves do the clinging. There is no being asserted without reference to them. That does not make them real. Kalapas and cittas are empty. Not only do they not constitute a "self" (as in a living being), they do not constitute themselves. They bear their own nature, but that nature is conditional, fleeting, distressing, empty. A particle (kalapa) has characteristics; a particle is not the characteristics themselves. A particle, therefore, depends on characteristics. It is dependently arisen, impermanent, unpleasant, empty.
What is real? Nirvana is real. Nirvana alone is the "unconditioned element." All other elements (dhatu) are conditioned. Theravada does not assert the ultimate reality of anything but nirvana. It is true that particles and moments are what is really behind the phenomenal world we see and experience.
But they themselves do not constitute a reality that can be relied on. They are radically transient, suffering, and devoid of identity (empty, not-self, impersonal). Nothing comes into being, nothing goes out of being, other than ignorance. Suffering is based on ignorance; other than that, everything is okay right now.
“Materialism: (1) A proposition about the existent or the real: that only matter (q.v.) is existent or real; that matter is the primordial or fundamental constituent of the universe/atomism; that only sensible entities, processes, or content are existent or real; that the universe is not governed by intelligence, purpose, or final causes; that everything is strictly caused by material (inanimate, non-mental, or having certain elementary physical powers) processes or entities (mechanism); that mental entities, processes, or events (though existent) are caused solely by material entities.” [Dictionary of Philosophy; edited by D.D. Runes. Philosophical Library of N.Y. cpyrt: 1942; Philosophical Library Inc.]
To accuse Theravada of being Materialism, then to define Materialism using a non-Buddhist source when the Buddha defined the term and a Buddhist source could therefore have been used, is disingenuous. The entire argument seems based on the misunderstandings of early European and British translators of Buddhist texts who did not practice or penetrate the teaching. They therefore mistook the conventional for the ultimate. After all this time, this blog can do no better than quote outdated/refuted sources?
On countless occasions Theravada doctrine rejects Materialism, which ends in Annihilationism, just as it rejects Eternalism that posits the existence of an eternal soul, which is exactly what the Buddha and the commentators were explaining as ultimately nonexistent. Something may exist. But it does not constitute a self. It is not real. It is not worth clinging to. It is not personal.
In admitting to contingent, consubstantial, and causally composite phenomena alone,...
Which Theravada Buddhism does not do.
the Theravada become ensnared in emancipation and Witness paradoxes,...
Which Theravada does not become.
become ensnared in mediation and differentiation closed loops of the Knower of knowing, and the Seer of the seen, not to mention running contrary to the entire corpus of anti-experiential (sensory) sutta doctrine wherein the inchoate mind imbued with nescience is the axis-mundi of liberation, which when made choate (sic) [fully developed?] by jhanas and wisdom, is said: [DN2-Att. 2.479] “the light (joti) within one’s mind (citta) is the very Soul (atta).” [SN 3.25] “The Five Aggregates are indeed the burden [1st Noble Truth], the pudgala [ordinary, uninstructed worldling] is the burden carrier [the sufferer]. When taking up the burden, this (designates) suffering in the world [2nd Noble Truth], laying down the burden is blissful [3rd Noble Truth]. Having laid down the weighty burden (aggregates), and without having taken up another burden; (the pudgala) has extracted clinging and its root, this is the eternal Soul, utter Purification.” Theravada itself is a heretical remnant of a failed 3rd century Indian sect of Atomism/Materialism: “Sarvastivada: The doctrine (vada) of Hinayana [not][Theravada] Buddhism according to which "all is" [phenomena comprise totality, and is ultimately not] (sarvam asti), or all is real, that which was, currently is, and will be but now is, potentially.” [-- K.F.L.,. Dictionary of Philosophy; edited by D.D. Runes. Philosophical Library of N.Y. cpyrt: 1942; Philosophical Library Inc.].
"Lesser Vehicle" (Hinayana) is a pejorative word hurled at various defunct sects like the Sarvastivada. This term was only used by another sect that formed centuries after the Buddha and posited itself as the "Greater Vehicle" (Mahayana). Such terms are not appropriate now and do not refer to Theravada ("The Teaching of the Elders," the enlightened disciples of the Buddha). But here Theravada is being negatively compared with a defunct school.
One has to wonder what is being asserted. There is a self? All that the Buddha said -- so unpopular and unfathomable but exactly needing to be understood and penetrated in order to stop clinging and be liberated from ignorance and suffering -- is being rejected? The Buddha says there is a soul, and the soul goes on to a happy heaven called Nirvana? This is certainly a popular view. We can call that heaven the "Pure Land." We can get there by devotion and vows. We can live forever (even though we cannot live for two consecutive moments) and call ourselves Vedic Brahmins or Christians. What would be the difference?
Is it very nice if people have a sincere misunderstanding of the Awakened One's (Buddha's) profound teachings (Dharma). But it is offensive to find argument for argument's sake or to hear someone decry others' sacred beliefs or, worse, to see someone assert the superiority of one race (say, the Caucasian) over another (say, the Asian). We are not personally familiar with the "Aryan Buddhism" blog's founder. We can only hope that we have mistaken his states with his traits.
"Life is Beautiful" (La Vita è Bella)
Old Fashion Racism? Two continents meets and are separated by the Caucasus Mountains. Why would latter-day racists be ashamed of Buddhism but proud of "Aryan Buddhism."
The Buddha was aryan (a "noble one," which meant a warrior-caste royal but came to mean noble in the sense of accomplished, enlightened, purified by actions not birth). He was very likely Central Asian (not Nepalese). Central Asians (such as Afghans, Iranians, Tajiks) look white, live near the Caucasus. But they have golden skin and are more Asian than European. The Buddha went East toward South and Southeast Asia (not West toward Greece, Turkey, and Israel, not south toward Egypt, not north toward Russia or Sumeria). He was culturally "Indian" only because India was culturally dominant in his adjacent country (the Land or Province of the Shakya clan).
The Buddha was not a racist. He did not assert the superiority of any race over another. His eyes were blue, his skin golden. The Nazi/German use of the word "aryan" makes us at Wisdom Quarterly ashamed. Discovering the Buddha's Central Asian roots holds out the hope of uniting Caucasians (Whites or Pinks) and Asians (Yellows). The darkness of many Indians, then as now, holds out the hope of fully including Africans (Blacks). The very-very early appearance of Buddhism in America as well as the similarity of non-East Indian "Indians" (with Siberian, Tibetan, Mongolian roots) means Browns and Reds are included. We have the whole rainbow brotherhood of humans. Of course, the colors are only a stand-in reference to genetic "race" we, like the Nazis, imagine is a real or scientific delineator of human beings. "Race" is not a scientific term. But it is a real cultural phenomenon that gives us racism. There are cultural, national, sociological, complexion, and appearance differences, which are more individual than familial (phenotype vs. genotype), and people make mountains out of these mole hills.
As American Buddhists (speaking on behalf of everyone at Wisdom Quarterly without exception), we reject the racism of our Judeo-Christian roots, our European ancestry, our drunken fathers and scared mothers, our xenophobic CIA-sponsored US propaganda TV and "news." We embrace all living beings and accept everyone whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist. The Buddha's message has nothing to do with "race" or exclusion. All are capable of eventual enlightenment and liberation. Many are capable of it right now in this very life! No one is doomed. It is our mission to freely spread the liberating teachings to all with the eyes to see, ears to hear, heart to feel, mind to comprehend, and body to touch. Truth is truth for everyone. Believe as you like, but the ultimate Truth remains the same. And it is that truth that sets us free.
One can be assured, despite all citations to the contrary against Theravada nihilism,...
Nihilism, like Annihilationism, is a wrong view Theravada clearly rejects.
that original Buddhism did not become popular by espousing the ultimate non-existence of beings in any sense of the term,...
That is true. Buddhism gained in popularity by the Buddha's skillful means in addressing all problems. Buddhism does not limit itself to nirvana or heaven, to worldly problems or metaphysical issues. The Buddha helped everyone -- including his enemies. He condemned no one, even if he admonished some for tarnishing the message or the Sangha who are meant to preserve the teaching for the benefit of the many now and in the future.
but that him, the fool (puthujjana), has suffered “many rounds of birth/death” due to mistaking his Soul, his Self (atta) for that (phenomena) which was not-Self (anatta). Surely “Gotama the great physician” who aimed to “point out the path to freedom” was not Dr. Kevorkian who taught the end of the sufferer himself, but rather the subjugation (nirodha) of suffering’s source (tanha, desire, syn. avijja, nescience, ignorance). These are the teachings, this is Buddhism as it was; not Theravada with its suicidal ‘nothingism,’ its absolute negation of the sufferer himself, this pessimistic nihilism which the wise guffaw, and which attracts only the most ignorant and pathetic sorts of whom most would be deemed ‘clinically depressed/suicidal’ individuals caught in a world of materialism they see no escape from. -Copyright 2003 Aryasatvan
Maybe there is hope for the "Aryan Buddhism" blog. Surely Theravada could seem that way to someone who does not meditate or who does not reflect on the teachings, but merely ponders them and hammers out views by reasoning as it occurs to him. Is the author of the blog "Aryasatvan"? Are all the swastikas on the site just good luck charms with no Nazi, German, European, white supremacist connotations? We hope so. Theravada is deep. Theravada is the Middle Way. Mahayana has much to teach even if it takes a different approach. There is no irreconcilable teaching between the two main schools of thought. Few, very few, people are dogmatic scholars of either tradition. The followers follow the cues of the scholars. If the scholars fight and are full of venom, then surely the followers will bear a grudge and go at it like Protestants and Catholics. That is not the case today, and there is no reason for it to be.
Aryasatvan, "Aryan Buddhism" blog, readers, love. The answer to all questions -- as Gary from Against the Stream quotes Father Boyle -- "The answer to all questions is compassion."
Let meditation be everyone's measure of how well s/he is understanding and practicing the Buddha's twin message of wisdom and compassion.
The US has a list of Americans that the country can now murder abroad if they are fraternizing with any group labelled a "terrorist" organization. Paul Craig Roberts says it is another sign the US has become a police state (RussiaToday).
Police are ramping up their nationwide crackdown on illegal lemonade stand enterprises. "We were not aware of how the lemonade was made, who made the lemonade, of what the lemonade was made with," says Midway, GA police chief.
No crime is too small to pick at, even if the real motive for enforcing it is something altogether different. Selling milk in its natural state? SWAT operation. Collecting cans to make ends meet in a flawed economy intent on seeing more and more Americans destitute? Prison time. Crime, protesting, volunteering? Police will not stand for it.
Military "service" (to ensure corporate free trade worldwide), TSA, riot policing (to ensure domestic docility), night watchperson guarding -- if you can find an opening. Has the USA become a police state already?
July 15, 2011 – Three girls trying to raise money to go to a waterpark thought that a lemonade stand would do the trick. But then they met the long arm of the...
Aug. 21, 2011 – Selling lemonade is not a crime, but selling it on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol is, which is why, police say, three people were arrested Saturday...
The Boy Mir - a decade in Bamiyan, Afghanistan, possibly the real Kapilavastu
Following the international hit "The Boy who Plays on the Buddhas of Bamiyan," THE BOY MIR will cover not one year but ten. It will track the cheeky, enthusiastic Mir from a childish 8-year-old to a fully grown adult. Over that decade, it will be a journey into early adulthood in one of the toughest places on Earth, a journey that mirrors the current and vitally important story of Afghanistan.
"A fascinating peek at everyday rural Afghan life" - Denis Harvey, Variety.
"Surprising, fascinating and fulfilling…An unforgettable portrait of a boy and a country" - Ron Sutton, IDA Documentary Magazine
History of Sid Where was the Buddha Siddhartha Gautama from? He was from Kapilavastu. Where is that? No one knows for sure, or they may know but modern politics gets in the way of saying.
What race was he? He was Shakyan. What is that? He lived on the northwestern frontier of ancient India. What race would that be today? No one knows for sure, or they perfectly well know but modern politics gets in the way of saying.
Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal is willing to say. Of course, we only have facts, informed opinions, and the ancient texts to go on. We certainly do not have the support of the Nepal tourist council, corrupt British scholars (now deceased), or popular opinion.
The Buddhas of Bamiyan and the Boy Mir -- rural Afghanistan was once a cosmopolitan crossroads due to travelers along the Silk Road.
It is perhaps best to start with the standard interpretation of the story: Siddhartha Gautama, the Shakyan prince, was born in the Terai of southern Nepal, just outside of India, in a lush park named Lumbini. His mother was on the way to her ancestral home (Devadaha) to give birth as is the custom in India, a few miles from Kapilavastu. But birth pangs arose in the park, and Siddhartha was born under a Sal tree while she stood holding a branch.
(This detail is important because, as Wisdom Quarterly has pointed out elsewhere, it mirrors or perhaps was the origin of the mythology of the Salabhanjika, the tree beautiful tree nymph of Indian lore). Siddhartha grew up in relative splendor, being prepared to rule the territory of Kapilavastu. He had a white pony named Kanthaka. He was married to his cousin Yasodhara at 16. He liked sports -- archery, horseback riding, and his studies, enjoying the equivalent of a college education fit for a future king, which taught him all the arts, sciences, and agrarian business skills he would need to govern.
He had blue eyes, wavy black hair, was very handsome and relatively tall. He had fair skin, like all the Shakyans, which he described as "golden." Race then is not as it is now. At that time there were three colors of skin: black, brown, and golden.
Race -- a controversial topic today -- has always been a socially constructed category, not the naturally occurring one we imagine. UC Berkeley professor Tim White, like other scientists, dismisses "race" as a useless category that does not signify anything scientifically useful. It is so unreliable a measure -- particularly in terms of phenotypes but also nearly useless in terms of genotypes -- that physical anthropology has no use for it. Dr. White was one of the co-discoverers of humanity's African ancestor Lucy.
Of course, we do consider race extremely important. So cultural anthropology has to recognize it. But what the field recognizes is that various human groups use it differently. Most people on Earth today do not hold the American view of four major races, which are clear and distinct (by color, geographical origin, and of course temperament and innate capacity for such things as intelligence and fitness to rule over others).
In short we are racist; that is, American culture (and the imperial British, German, and European cultures it is based on) is racist. Most Americans would never admit to bias. Indeed, most of us are not aware of our biases or the deep-seated reasons for them.
That's why it's always good to know some racists: Nothing brings out our own small and cumulative bias into the sharp relief of neo-Nazis, white supremacists, Norwegian terrorists, and Southern Christian fundamentalists (to be fair, not all of them).
Most of the rest of the world categorizes one into a race group based on appearance. So full blooded siblings in the same nuclear family (from the same parents) are considered different races as determined by their appearance or phenotype. Americans do this, too, until we have more information -- accent, surname, national origin, religion, creed, what other family members look like...
Brazil and Cuba are excellent examples of cultures that go based on personal appearance. It is not that one in other parts of the world is presumed to be of one "race" until all the information is gathered. One is that race and will continue to be in spite of other mitigating information. Race is fluid, but for us it is very stiff. In the past we Americans were more racist than we are now. Any trace of another race in the bloodline made one that other race.
So being a tall, Nordic blond with 1/16th "Negro" (essentially, non-white since Negroes were not limited to Africans) made one black). We were borderline on the subject of racial "purity," and pedigree was imperative. That is not to say that we were alone in this. Bloodlines have always meant a great deal to the ruling class (royals), as our closeted German forbears attest.
Was the Buddha Caucasian?
What is "white"? The Buddha was Shakyan. What does this mean? It means he was Central Asian. Are Central Asians "white"? No, they are a melding of Asian and Caucasian, sometimes called Eurasian.
What does it mean to be Caucasian? It literally means descended from the peoples of the Caucuses mountain region -- an extraordinary region. It is extraordinary partly because it is part of the Himalayan range but mostly because it separates Asia from Europe.
From an American perspective, many of those people would seem to be white. But clearly their faces have Asiatic features. Their skin, hair, and eye color might get them labelled white, but their heritage and geographical origin would do to the Buddha what was done to Christ: It makes them geopolitically Middle Eastern. (Thanks to the CIA definition of the changing political climate).
BBC documentary: Jesus was Buddhist monk
Jesus was from the Middle East? Jesus was probably black -- from northern Africa, a meeting place of continents, growing up in Egypt and traveling like a Bedouin -- at least according to the Bible, namely, Saint John of Patmos. (But as Bible-loving, Judeo-Christian Americans, we ignore that part of the Book of Revelations, obviously a late inclusion into the canon).
There are fascinating theories that Jesusand his mysterious forbears were pharoahs. (See Jesus in the House of the Pharoahs, Jesus Last of the Pharoahs). That is certainly not the history we are taught in Sunday School, but then history is a socially-constructed phenomenon, not a hard science. Our favorite theory -- which meets history's gold standard, written documentation -- is that Jesus (called Issa in India and the Islamic world) was a Buddhist monk as suggested by the British Broadcasting Corporation, hardly a biased, Buddhist news source.
Imagine the implications -- the creator of the universe is Black, Buddhist, and ever so compassionate. Of course, these are just human-historical constructs that can be deconstructed. Would humans really bend history to suit themselves? Of course we would. It has been happening to Christianity since at least the Roman Empire got its hands on the Christian Church and its official history-keeping duties. The truth never stood a chance of becoming common knowledge.
Why bring up Jesus? He is regarded as the most famous human who ever lived. The Buddha lived at least five centuries earlier, and has lived on in history five centuries longer. The Buddha was for much of that time the most important human who ever lived. He is called the Prince of Peace and the Light of Asia, but this disguises how influential he was to the Caucasus region of Central Asia. Christians, not to be outdone, call Jesus the Prince of Peace and the Light of the World. If Jesus had studied Buddhism and been ordained a monk in Hemis Gompa, Ladakh, India/Tibet, as is documented in writing by the Buddhist monks in that region, might his teacher not be deserving of more recognition? Long before either the Buddha or the Christ, surely Mithra (another Central Asian figure) was the most famous human who ever lived. And eventually Mohammed will be. If a popularity contest were the equivalent of truth, we vote for another Middle Easterner Gilgamesh/Bilgames (of Sumeria). The shamans, the pharoahs, Krishna, the whole Adamic "race" of humans has had its "most important human" along with its "gods" (devas, asuras, and brahmas). And while there was probably no actual Adam or Eve (and let's not forget Lilith), it's easier to talk about the group through the figurehead of a single man and woman, which has the largely ignored benefit of making us all brothers and sisters, just as Lucy makes us all cousins.
What a place to be from!
It is brilliant that the Bodhisattva (buddha-to-be) was born between continents. And we would extend that same compliment to Jesus. Whereas the Buddha links Asia and Europe, Christ links Africa and Europe. But we see what "Christians" have done in the name of white supremacy. They have taken a black figure and made him white.
If Buddhism continues to enjoy the same widespread influence and adoption in the West that was seen in the East, he too will almost certainly be converted into a "white" man.
He is already considered an Indo-Aryan (not in the sense the Nazis appropriated and made infamous thanks to the history they constructed for themselves using Madame Blavatsky's material, a Russian mystic who understood that the Buddha was essentially if not technically Russian. For the USSR once extended throughout most of Central Asia. Siberia has a long Buddhist history.
Anna Reid traveled the length and breadth of Siberia -- 1/12th of the world’s land surface, larger than the United States and Western Europe combined -- to tell the story of its people. Drawing on sources ranging from folktales to KGB reports, and on interviews with shamans and Buddhist monks [shramans] in The Shaman’s Coat, a unique and intrepid travel chronicle.
Ancient Persia (now Iran, which means Aryan), Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan are just a few of the ancient outposts the Dharma reached and influenced, creating the strangest and nicest of all Islamic hybrids, Sufism. But the USSR failed to win its second most important conquest -- the incorporation of Afghanistan -- assuming its most important conquest would have been to conquer the West. But, surely, Russia is the "West," too? Russians are "white," except for the formerly Central Asian colonies that reverted to nonwhite status.
Archeology, history, and Buddhist texts suggest the Buddha was Afghani. Of course, there was no such thing as "Afghanistan." And centuries later when Islamic and Arabian hordes conquered the area, the Dharma that once prospered and meant so much all along the Silk Route was rubbed out of the fabric of daily life.
Are Middle Easterners white? They certainly look like it. But many in Southern Europe have a hard time getting into the exclusive club. Were ancients Greeks white? Was Nefertiti white? "White" has no hard and fast meaning. So the answer is, They are white when it suits the powers that be to call them white in recognition of their magnificent accomplishments.
Ancient Greece -- such as the Indo-Greek empire of Bactria (Balkh) -- was Buddhist before Buddhism caught on in China. But certainly Greece is the fount of the West? Is it only a coincidence that the ancient land of the Shakyans (also spelled Sakyans) is on the map as Sakala, Sakae, and Sakastan (modern Afghanistan, nowhere near Nepal).
Kapisa, Kapilavastu? Sakala, Sakyan territory? Sakastan, the extent of Sakyan territory? Sakae reaching toward Tajikistan? Were the Sakas the Sakyas (pronounced Shakyas) gone unrecognized because British history by Fuhrer says the Sakyas lived in Nepal? The Shakyan clan's rule ended with the conquest of the Buddha's extended family who remained in the world by an angry relative retaliating after finding out he was half-slave, half-Sakyan. The Buddha explained that even his interventions were not enough to overcome the force of a rare instance of collective karma ripening for his father's clan.
Whites and Europeans consider Greece the fountainhead of science, art, empire. Buddhist contributions to our history have not been credited to the Buddha, but to Greek philosophers influenced by Indian travelers and the Dharma that reinvigorated greater India after the ancient Vedic civilizations had fallen into obscurity.
Aryan Invasion theories are another topic entirely, but suffice it to say that who the original Aryans were would surprise many. They were not Nordic tribes coming down from Germany and Austria to teach the subcontinent enlightenment and advanced technology 5,000 years ago as Hitler, Goebbels, and Dr. Mengele might have suggested. (Nazis were adept at spin doctoring, taking parts of spiritualism and mysticism, namely Blavatsky's and the Theosophists, and fashioning them to meet their own ends. It is tantalizing to realize that the Nazis did not lose WW II, as is commonly suggested in the new propaganda that supplanted the old.
The NAZI mentality is alive and well in many of the countries that welcomed war criminals to secretly exploit their scientific advancements in clandestine services, intercontinental rocket technology, the development of nuclear bombs, and space travel. Not only America's now defunct OSS, but NASA, the CIA, Pentagon, Moussad, ISI, KGB, and above all the British Mi6 (SIS), who seem to have been secretly ruling the world since inheriting the empire from Rome.
Afghanistan is Russia's "Vietnam." Or as they say in the former USSR, the Vietnam War is America's Afghanistan. Just as we inherited Vietnam (and secret wars on Laos and Cambodia) from imperial France, we inherited our troubles in Afghanistan from the British (Anglo-Afghan wars) and a longstanding CIA/Russian conflict.
This is strange because now Afghanistan is America's Afghanistan, having lasted longer and cost so much that our society may never recover -- unless the incredible conclusions of the following report are true:
UFO discovered in Afghan cave's time well
It is hard to say what makes Afghanistan so important -- but the fact that it is important, strategic, and intractable is explained by Fitzgerald & Gould (invisblehistory.com). A more remarkable tale comes from the arena of exopolitics and an alleged vimana (ancient Indian spacecraft) caught in a "time well" there.
Why else would the world's leaders go into the Afghan war zone? But is the world ready for "disclosure" about ancient astronauts (Indian devas and Zoroastrian asuras), extraterrestrial weapons systems, and the real history of the planet our rulers have held back? The war in heaven (space) rages on, as explained by Steven Quayle on Coast to Coast.
In conclusion, the Buddha was Central Asian, a frontier Indian. For ancient India was not actually a country with certain borders. It was a collection of 16 maha-janapadas ("great footholds of the tribes" or "territories of powerful family clans"). Kapilavastu was in Afghanistan, in the confluence of Caucasian and South Asian cultures.
Durand or Zero Line border between Afghanistan and Pakistan (in red). The blue area represents the predominant Pashtun and Baloch areas.
Until recently, Pakistan was Gandhara, India. The exiting British made it so. They also drew a "zero line" (Durand) separating what we call Afghanistan from what we now call India, whose borders remain in dispute. Neither China, nor Pakistan, nor Tajikistan (prompted byfasura the Kremlin) are ready to yield to India, which was once a superpower.
Scientists have created more than 150 human-animal hybrid embryos in British laboratories. The hybrids have been produced secretively over the past three years by researchers looking into possible cures for a wide range of diseases. The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare "Planet of the Apes" scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far. More
There must be some kind of mistake. These kinds of things don't happen. This is impossible; the alleles don't match up. It would be cloning gone wrong. It would be unethical to meld human consciousness with animal forms and create Humanzees like Oliver or Bigfoot giants Frankenstein-style. "Project Nim" is one thing, but surely this cannot be. What's today, April 1st? It must be a Rupert Murdoch distraction from a reputable London paper. Just because Dr. Joseph Mengele came to see the Reservation schools Native Americans and Indigenous Canadians were imprisoned, molested, and experimented on, that doesn't mean they were hybridized or part of the Nazi plan to genetically manipulate and conduct vivisection studies. Humbug.
The Space Shuttle's last hurrah as seen through the atmosphere (nasa.gov)
A secret shadow government has suppressed advanced technology that it is repeatedly caught with but denies -- NASA insider Richard C. Hoagland (enterprisemission.com) exposes the startling connections between topics too hard to believe: US government secrecy, cover ups, official extraterrestrial contact, ancient monuments on nearby planets, moons, and asteroids, clandestine operations subverting our veneer of civil rights, NAZIs, CIA, CNN, and the complicity of the mainstream news. (Thank you, Rupert Murdoch and Fox News corporation's "Black Ops").
NASA Mars missions may have more occult than scientific motivations. On July 4th, 1997, NASA's "Pathfinder" touched down. Richard C. Hoagland was the first to point out that with its pronounced tetrahedral design and distinctive solar panels forming equilateral triangles, Pathfinder chose a landing site in Ares Vallis located at 19.5 degrees north latitude as seen above (The Mars Mystery, p. 136). NASA's secret work on Mars is also exposed by GoroAdachi.com/Etemenanki.
Officer Cartman: "You will respect my authority!" (Runescaper443*)
Occupy Los Angeles has cooperated with police requests on where to squat and what space to leave open. Amazingly, things have remained peaceful. Usually, the LAPD is eager to riot, arrest, and brutalize. Fellow at work forces in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other places that feel the Arab Spring resonate with the American Fall. The police see to it because the motto of a police state is "We don't want to have to tell you twice." You have no rights -- unless you assert them. What gets into Little Eichmanns/Officer Cartmans? It is a different view of the world from that side of the line, where punitive, obedient, conservative, oppression, and (often) hypocrisy rules. Many officers are ex-military or active-reserve agents of the state. They are trained to humiliate, brutalize, and kill civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Northern Africa, and in other secret "kinetic actions." They take that training into American society saying, "I fought in Afghanistan for your free speech, so the h*ll if I'm going to stand here and let you mouth off!" Officer, isn't that a contradiction? "You will respect my authority!" Deploy pepper spray, baton, Taser, tear gas, less-than-lethal projectile shotgun, disorienting EMF emitter, microwaves, semi-automatic handgun, automatic weapons, water canons at will. Why? It is because, as we learn from an observation by the Dead Kennedys, "Police can riot all that they please."
Occupy Los Angeles has cooperated with police requests on where to squat and what space to leave open. Amazingly, things have remained peaceful. Usually, the LAPD is eager to riot, arrest, and brutalize. Fellow at work forces in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other places that feel the Arab Spring resonate with the American Fall. The police see to it because the motto of a police state is "We don't want to have to tell you twice." You have no rights -- unless you assert them. What gets into Little Eichmanns/Officer Cartmans? It is a different view of the world from that side of the line, where punitive, obedient, conservative, oppression, and (often) hypocrisy rules. Many officers are ex-military or active-reserve agents of the state. They are trained to humiliate, brutalize, and kill civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Northern Africa, and in other secret "kinetic actions." They take that training into American society saying, "I fought in Afghanistan for your free speech, so the h*ll if I'm going to stand here and let you mouth off!" Officer, isn't that a contradiction? "You will respect my authority!" Deploy pepper spray, baton, Taser, tear gas, less-than-lethal projectile shotgun, disorienting EMF emitter, microwaves, semi-automatic handgun, automatic weapons, water canons at will. Why? It is because, as we learn from an observation by the Dead Kennedys, "Police can riot all that they please."
Diverse issues invite diverse solutions at Occupy LA; clip from "Hippie Infestation."
