Dear Buddha,
Hate to break it to you. Your attempt to make nonviolence
the nature of things has failed miserably so far. This makes me wonder the
merit of your enlightenment and purpose of your preaching. Now the Buddhist of
the world- the converts of your ideology- may unite against me and say
"you misunderstand or fail to understand what Buddhism is". You see
right there is where I have my problem. I would say you require certain kind of
mind- should say sufficiently sophisticated or better still confused mind- to understand
the ideology, probably the way you wanted. For all others what left is few
stories and preaching monks who mostly are not Buddhist- I hope you agree.
There is two type of problem. Firstly, your stories and
examples are harmless. But these monks on the other hand are not. People like
me know how not to take these stories seriously. Life function the way it does because
no one reads into them. As such, the first problem- I was referring to- was the
so called ‘monks in the Buddhist temples’, who just knows the stories and believe
that they know more beyond. This is a dangerous problem left by you. I am sad
to say, for the esteem intellectuality people hold you on for, you should have
seen this bit coming. I am sure among your students there may have been few who
would have said "violent act is nonviolence and it killed so and so in
search of justice". At that point, Buddha
you should have stopped preaching nonviolence. It would have been vice.
The second problem is the so called educated kind. You see
they don't stop at being Buddhist, the way it should have been. They take up a
mission of spreading enlightenment. I don't know how it was in your days, I can
tell you seed of conflicts can be traced back to these people. Firstly, someone
after you have told the world how this nonviolence of yours can be used to
fight. Can you imagine that? They call it Ghandiam. Let me tell you, this is
how all it starts. First there is a conflict. It may be that rich buggers are side
lined in education to create an opportunity for poor. Or blacks are given
concession to do better. Often one ethnicity or religion to another have
conflict because understandably there is difference. it's usually could be like
majority of the people - note my word majority- may get bit pushy towards
minority in the matters of worldly possessions- land and property. Majority
rules. Mind you law of nature is majority should rule. Whatever it may be,
conflict is a conflict whether it's between individuals or between groups of
individuals. I call these conflicts positive change for peaceful future. Let it
be let the week dither and thither. Your educated, enlighten fellows,
regardless of affiliated religions (some don't know they are Buddhist) are the
ones first blows the conflict to irreversible cause. They resist using words
like rights- human rights. I don't think you differentiated between human and
animal rights much- and freedom. This goes all the way to right to self-determine.
That to me, Mr Siddhartha -can I call you that? - is the epitome of the
misconception.
There couldn't be better example to contradict with essence
of your nonviolence. Why should there be such boundaries. There is no stopping
this concept. Once a country has it. Then a community demands it. Once the
community has it then the sect or group that even be formed for this purpose
may demand it. At the end every individual would want it. We know then what
will happen. We are back to the conflict of my rights vs yours- what rights and
what not? It's a virus. I say kill and be killed if the next generation will
have less cause of killing and be killed. transcending beyond personal identity
and boundaries is what you stood by, you have no choice but agree with me.
Here is an idea. You could have worked out a way to
eliminate inequality. Glass of water. Fist full of rice. Why - every objective
thing is subjective to relative importance. Could you have given us measure for
misery and suffering that could have universally used by humanity to understand
and respond? I cast doubt on you? I see you are a beggar. You may have made the
princely life a former one but with infinite supply of people who rushed to
fill the kalasam. Every other day we come across suffering. Killings and
injustice. But it's OK. We are able to express. Those who suffer express it better,
albeit too sadly. we miss it. How can we? The fact is man is always a slave to
something or other. War, politics- nothing has changed and yet everything has.
That picture came on the paper. The one with my aunt on it.
There is one final defence for you. You may argue that only
reason for teaching was Brahma Saganpati, convinced you to teach. I ask you by the
very nature of that you must clearly accept, Brahma and his likes who are left
on this earth can be more persuasive than you.
What would Buddha say if he come across Mohamed.
Comments
Post a Comment