Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
Tibet under the Dalai Lamas: Tales of Slavery, Torture and Serfdom
February 1, 2009
9:57 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
126sp_Permalink sp_Print

And remember, it is you who chose to come to this thread so dont tell me I'm the one trying to get negative attention.

February 1, 2009
10:15 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
127sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tools of the 'Peaceful' and 'Compassionate' Dalai Lamas: Eye Gouging, Pulling Out of Tongues and Mutilation:

T he Tibetan serfs were something more than superstitious victims, blind to their own oppression. As we have seen, some ran away; others openly resisted, sometimes suffering dire consequences. In feudal Tibet, torture and mutilation--including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation--were favored punishments inflicted upon thieves, and runaway or resistant serfs. Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: “When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion.” Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then “left to God” in the freezing night to die. “The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking,” concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet. ( Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth , by Michael Parenti)

 

February 2, 2009
3:56 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
128sp_Permalink sp_Print

1-Feb-09

"I left out all the steps? I included all those steps in step 1."

Yes - you highlighted and amply demonstrated for all to see your complete ignorance of the highly selective and heavily biased procedures when you lumped all the previous steps into one piece of waffle that you called step 1. You confirmed your own ignorance when you wrote:

"1. Boys go through some sort of selection process."

If you cannot see your own lack of understanding here then you are far more obtuse than I originally thought.

This selection process of which you seem to understand nothing is highly selective and far from a random selection.

Since the outcome in terms of the critical criteria of being Bodhisattvas of the highest level is a foregone conclusion, selection from one of three equally qualified people is hardly a random selection process. If the level of enlightenment of each candidate were not equal the choice would be obvious and therefore there would be no need for a 'draw' to establish a fair selection.

You seem to be mischeivously trying to deliberately obscure and to remove from the focus of the reader the purpose of selecting the reincarnated birth of the highest, most enlightened master for the position of Dalai Lama.

You were trying to pathetically make the case that the Dalai Lama is not a reincarnation of a great master/bodhisattva because the candidate is randomly selected from amongst the population by some form of unbiassed selection, therein throwing the credibility of the wisdom and compassion of the selected Dalai Lama into question. This was your point in focussing on this Goldern urn in the first place. Bad choice - you bombed out badly. The selection process is far from random. Any first year Statistics 101 student would laugh at your mathematical misunderstandings.

Your devious, deceitful way of discrediting a great man is now exposed for the world to see.

February 2, 2009
9:38 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
129sp_Permalink sp_Print

>> selection from one of three equally qualified people is hardly a random selection process.

It is, when you draw lots from a fishbowl.

>> If the level of enlightenment of each candidate were not equal the choice would be obvious and therefore there would be no need for a 'draw' to establish a fair selection.

Each of the candidates is unique and different. They're not identical. Thats why I mentioned the example of the 3 CEO's. Do you see anyone drawing lots to determine which of a few qualified candidates should be CEO?

>> Any first year Statistics 101 student would laugh at your mathematical misunderstandings.

Have you taken any courses in probability?

Let me give you a simple example: people in a certain city have all went through stringest testing to prove that they are the rightful winners of a $1 billion prize. 5 people top the results and they all have similiar scores and the test managers cannot decide who the award should go to. They put the names of the 5 people in a fishbowl and take one name out. Was the winner not chosen randomly?

February 2, 2009
9:42 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
130sp_Permalink sp_Print

For a person who believes that a 2 year old boy can be a reincarnation of the Dalai Lala, your understanding of simple maths and probability is not surprising. Lets ask the question to a maths expert because you're repeating your arguments. How do you want to word the question? Let me know. I'll think up of some wording later in the day. We wont tell them that they're talking about the Dalai Lama so as not to introduce any negative or positive bias.

So yea, maybe you'll listen to a professor.

February 2, 2009
3:03 pm
Avatar
truthBtold
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
131sp_Permalink sp_Print

Hey - I say - what about DNA?

It can be done to prove ancestry lines.

Personally, I just don't get this whole "Dali Lama" thing.

I've tried.

I actually agree with alot of it.

Know what I have a problem with?

It's 'holier than thou' deliverence.

Kind of has a real self-rightous spin to my mind and heart.

NOT coming from a place of REAL humility - but rather a pseudo-humilty of sorts.

I can TELL the difference.

Just my take anyways.

February 2, 2009
5:52 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
132sp_Permalink sp_Print

truthBtold.

Thanks for your most welcome post.

On the 2-Feb-09 you wrote:

"It's 'holier than thou' deliverence."

Feeling "Holier than thou." is usually based upon spiritual pride. The Dalai Lama is just as aware of this trap as any great master would be. After all pride is one of the three 'poisons' mentioned by the Buddha.

I think the Dalai Lama would be very concerned to hear that you think that way about him. I feel sure that he would be more careful in future interviews sought from him by journalists to present a more humble stance just in case he projected this false image of himself. He often says: "I am just a simple monk." I believe that is how he sees himself. The funny thing is that the more we become present to the here and now and the less we become preoccupied with self, the less we seem to care about self-image, prestige, fame and fortune. I think that the Dalai lama just sees himself as doing his job in serving his fellow human beings by carrying the Buddha's teachings to others who want it. Buddhists never go 'door knocking' like some other religions do. I found that you have to seek them out if you want to hear what they have to say. Please note that I am not technically a Buddhist. I think the Dalai Lama would probably frown upon much of what I write.

February 2, 2009
6:38 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
133sp_Permalink sp_Print

TbT, you can say all that again! I'm glad I'm not alone in seeing what this is for. Thats exactly what it is.

>> Kind of has a real self-rightous spin to my mind and heart.

>> NOT coming from a place of REAL humility - but rather a pseudo-humilty of sorts.

>> I can TELL the difference.

February 2, 2009
6:54 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
134sp_Permalink sp_Print

G_g.

You wrote:

"Lets ask the question to a maths expert because you're repeating your arguments. How do you want to word the question? Let me know."

Let us say someone select three coins of the same known denomination, say three dimes, from a huge pot of coins of all denominations. Is that clear so far?

Then put all three dimes in a small container. Blindfold someone and ask them to pull out just one of the three coins from the small container.

Through that whole process would the coin, the dime, picked from the small container be a random selection of a coin from the original huge pot of all denominations of coins???

Ask your professor that question!

February 2, 2009
7:16 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
135sp_Permalink sp_Print

There are two parts of the process. The first part is:

>> Let us say someone select three coins of the same known denomination, say three dimes, from a huge pot of coins of all denominations. Is that clear so far?

Thats not a random process because you've manually selected the dimes. So thats like like selecting the few boys from the whole male population. Now you have 3 dimes, or say, 3 Dalai Lama boys.

Now comes the 2nd part: selecting one dime from those 3 through the container blindfolded:

>> Then put all three dimes in a small container. Blindfold someone and ask them to pull out just one of the three coins from the small container.

That is a random process.

February 4, 2009
2:08 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
136sp_Permalink sp_Print

">> Then put all three dimes in a small container. Blindfold someone and ask them to pull out just one of the three coins from the small container.

That is a random process."

Wrong - it is not a random process because the outcome is known in advance. The outcome is predictable therefore the process is not randomized. A dime(i.e. a Bodhisattva - the objective, remember?) will be drawn from the container every time.

Even if this very infrequently used, tie-breaking part of the selection process were random, then the first part - a very non-random and biased major component and often the only part - determines the overall non-random nature of the overall process.

Were you bullshitting again? When are you going to present this excellent example of mine to your professor for his adjudication?

Or did you think by creating this deception that you would some how not have to exhibit more of your own ignorance of statistical mathematical processes?

February 4, 2009
8:04 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
137sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez

>> A dime(i.e. a Bodhisattva - the objective, remember?) will be drawn from the container every time.

You cannoy say that the objects are identical. Even those Dimes are not identical. Each will have a unique pattern of scratches on it and the arrangement of the atoms will be different. In the case of these humans (Bodhisattvas), the differences ofcourse are even more marked. Each of the Bodhisattva is unique.

Are you saying that each of the 3 Bodhisattvas are identical to begin with? Why do they even have a draw then if they are completely identical?

They are human beings. They're not identical. If we had 3 red marbles in the bag, the color of the marble is predictable but if they are of different sizes, the size of marble drawn is unpredictable.

You have to prove to me that the Bodhisattvas are completely identical. I will take it to the professor after we are done on this question.

>> Were you bullshitting again?

No, it was you who was pissing on the Dalai Lama's bald head. If you want to be talked to nicely, talk nicely to others as well and behave in a little more mature manner and keep your temper under control. You're over 60 and look at the state of your emotional health. I'm half your age and I have to tell you to behave yourself. And then I have to explain Maths and Probability to you as well.

Anyway. Once again, you have to prove to me that the Bodhisattvas are completely identical. If they were identical, as I said: it wouldnt make sense to even make a draw. They should just pick the first boy standing near them.

February 4, 2009
9:42 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
138sp_Permalink sp_Print

Here's something pretty cool that I just realized. Check it out:

1. The real reincarnation of the Dalai Lama can only be in one human being.

2. This means, out of those 3 boys, only one is the real reincarnation of the Dalai Lama. The other two are not.

3. The probability of selecting the correct Dalai Lama through the Urn method is 1/3 or, 33%.

It is very likely that for atleast one of the three times (10th, 11th and 12th) the Dalai Lama was selected, atleast one of those were not the real reincarnation of the Dalai Lama.

Is this easy to follow?

February 4, 2009
8:22 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
139sp_Permalink sp_Print

Guest_guest

"TEMPEST IN A GOLDEN URN
By ANTHONY SPAETH.;MEENAKSHI GANGULY/NEW DELHI AND MIA TURNER/BEIJING Monday, Dec. 11, 1995

IN THE WEAK LIGHT OF DAWN ONE morning last week, hundreds of Buddhist monks gathered at the Jokhang temple in Lhasa to select a new Panchen Lama, the second highest religious leader in Tibet. Traditional yak-butter lamps glowed as three ivory markers were placed inside a golden urn. Each marker was inscribed with the name of a Tibetan boy identified, during a six-year search, as a possible incarnation of the 10th Panchen Lama, who died in 1989. The urn was turned several times, and then a senior monk withdrew a marker bearing the name of Gyaincain Norbu, 6, who was quickly ushered into the room in golden robes and a yellow silk hat. Norbu was hailed by the monks and by a man dressed incongruously in a Western-style suit: Luo Gan, a senior Chinese official dispatched to oversee the ceremony. Luo later bent forward, shook the boy's hand and said, "Love the country and study hard."

Norbu looked frightened, as well he should. With the turn of a golden urn and a handshake, he became a central figure in what promises to be a long and bitter war between Tibet and a communist government determined to retain control of the troublesome province, right up to choosing its top religious leaders. For six years, China had insisted on its authority to select the Panchen Lama. But in May, following ancient Tibetan custom and practices, the Dalai Lama announced that he had chosen six-year-old Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the new Panchen Lama. Officials in Beijing were enraged, and soon thereafter, Nyima disappeared from his home village along with his parents, prompting accusations of a Chinese kidnapping. The communist government declared the Dalai Lama's choice invalid and proceeded with its own selection via the golden-urn method, which some Tibetans claim is used only when all other divinations fail.

China denies having abducted the Dalai Lama's golden child but has started a propaganda campaign against him, saying his family was "notorious among their neighbors" and the boy himself once drowned a dog, which the official Xinhua news agency proclaims is "a heinous crime in the eyes of the Buddha." Such assertions are unlikely to sway Tibetans to Beijing's choice.

By selecting its own Panchen Lama, China seeks not only to reassert its power over Tibet but also to control the education of the boy, who will one day lead the search for the new Dalai Lama, Tibet's God-King, when the current one passes on. From exile in India, the Dalai Lama reaffirmed his choice and insisted, "My recognition of the Panchen Lama's reincarnation cannot be changed." He may have been recalling the words of his own predecessor, who before his death in 1933 gave this warning: "Unless we guard our own country, it will now happen that the Dalai and Panchen Lamas, the Father and the Son, and all the revered holders of the Faith, will disappear and become nameless."

--By Anthony Spaeth. Reported by Meenakshi Ganguly/New Delhi and Mia Turner/Beijing"

Is this the kind of government you want governing you? If you think so highly of their behavior that you push their odious propaganda barrow at every whim, why don't you move to Communist China? Why did you run away from Pakistan to the US? wasn't it to escape oppression? Now you want to foster it in the US by putting down a very compassionate and wise human being?

February 4, 2009
9:06 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
140sp_Permalink sp_Print

You ignored my question, mah friend.

And there you go, doing your favourite ad homininem again, lolll. It makes me laugh and you were laughing too when you wrote that. I know you now.

Well, look: I had actually already posted this article above. What problem do you have with China resorting to the Golden Urn method? Its a historically established method approved by Tibetans used on the selection of the 10th, 11th and 12th Dalai Lamas. China is not innocent, we know that. I believe they have not treated the Tibetan people ideally as well. The Chinese government is not innocent. There's a lot of controversy about them. The way they arrested Freedom of speech on the bloggers and the internet is just one example. However, thats not the topic here.

Do I have to post my questions again?

- You have to prove to me that the BodhiShitvas are completely identical.

- What do you think of the Golden Urn Conundrum I pointed out above? In that very typical scenario, the probability of the real Dalai Lama reincarnation is 33% in the case of 3 Dalai Lama elected BodyShitvas. The probability falls to 16.7% if there are 6 boys to choose from. If thats the probability, there are good chances the real Dalai Lamas was not elected during those 10th, 11th and 12th elections.

It seems you just ignored this conundrum and it just zipped past your head but you're an electrical engineer and you shouldnt have problems understanding this simple probability scenario.

Sometimes though it takes you some time to think of a response so I'll give you some time, its alright. You take your time for now. I'll come back to the Golden Urn Conundrum later again.

February 4, 2009
9:08 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
141sp_Permalink sp_Print

oops sorry, typos:

In that very typical scenario, the probability of the real Dalai Lama reincarnation being elected to power using the Golden Urn method is 33% in the case of 3 Dalai Lama elected BodyShitvas.

February 4, 2009
11:08 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
142sp_Permalink sp_Print

guest_guest
4-Feb-09

"You ignored my question, mah friend."

Oh dear ... the pot calling the kettle black?

You ignored mine. I repeat it for your convenience:

"Were you bullshitting again? When are you going to present this excellent example of mine to your professor for his adjudication?"

February 4, 2009
11:11 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
143sp_Permalink sp_Print

And you ignored this very important question too.

"Is this the kind of government you want governing you? If you think so highly of their behavior that you push their odious propaganda barrow at every whim, why don't you move to Communist China? Why did you run away from Pakistan to the US? wasn't it to escape oppression? Now you want to foster it in the US by putting down a very compassionate and wise human being?"

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, boyo!

February 4, 2009
11:27 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
144sp_Permalink sp_Print

G.F.Y., "Boyo" yourself, Tez. Give a little respect to earn a little respect.

Well look who is avoiding questions with asking more questions and those too - irrelevant.

>> When are you going to present this excellent example of mine to your professor for his adjudication?

What would you do with the answer except ignore it like you've ignored what you saw here?

If you're genuinely interested in seeing the answer then tell me: Do you have any specific wording I should use for the question, or can I ask anything?

February 4, 2009
11:39 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
145sp_Permalink sp_Print

Remember again, the BodhiShitvas are not identical. They are distinct unique people with unique personalities, as is every other human being. The decisions they would take as Dalai Lamas later in life and the words they would use in their speech would all be different - that would be obvious to even a second grader.

February 5, 2009
7:38 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
146sp_Permalink sp_Print

Misogyny under the Dalai Lamas

Born Female–Proof of Past Sins?

The Dalai Lama writes, “In Tibet there was no special discrimination against women.” The Dalai Lama's authorized biographer Robert Hicks argues that Tibetan women were content with their status and “influenced their husbands.” But in Tibet, being born a woman was considered a punishment for “impious” (sinful) behavior in a previous life. The word for “woman” in old Tibet, kiemen , meant “inferior birth.” Women were told to pray, “May I reject a feminine body and be reborn a male one.”

Lamaist superstition associated women with evil and sin. It was said “among ten women you'll find nine devils.” Anything women touched was considered tainted–so all kinds of taboos were placed on women. Women were forbidden to handle medicine. Han Suyin reports, “No woman was allowed to touch a lama's belongings, nor could she raise a wall, or ‘the wall will fall.'… A widow was a despicable being, already a devil. No woman was allowed to use iron instruments or touch iron. Religion forbade her to lift her eyes above the knee of a man, as serfs and slaves were not allowed to life the eyes upon the face of the nobles or great lamas.”

Monks of the major sects of Tibetan Buddhism rejected sexual intimacy (or even contact) with women, as part of their plan to be holy. Before the revolution, no woman had ever set foot in most monasteries or the palaces of the Dalai Lama.

There are reports of women being burned for giving birth to twins and for practicing the pre-Buddhist traditional religion (called Bon). Twins were considered proof that a woman had mated with an evil spirit. The rituals and folk medicine of Bon were considered “witchcraft.” Like in other feudal societies, upperclass women were sold into arranged marriages. Custom allowed a husband to cut off the tip of his wife's nose if he discovered she had slept with someone else. The patriarchal practices included polygyny, where a wealthy man could have many wives; and polyandry, where in land-poor noble families one woman was forced to be wife to several brothers.

Among the lower classes, family life was similar to slavery in the U.S. South. (See The Life of a Tibetan Slave .) Serfs could not marry or leave the estate without the master's permission. Masters transferred serfs from one estate to another at will, breaking up serf families forever. Rape of women serfs was common–under the ulag system, a lord could demand “temporary wives.”

(Full article: The true face of the Dalai Lama)

 

February 5, 2009
9:24 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
147sp_Permalink sp_Print

guest_guest
4-Feb-09

"G.F.Y., "Boyo" yourself, Tez. Give a little respect to earn a little respect."

No need to get so angry. You know you are wrong. It is so much easier for you to just admit it. Losing your cool won't help.

February 5, 2009
11:14 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
148sp_Permalink sp_Print

You were the one getting angry. Lets look at what you said before again:

>> Were you bullshitting again? When are you going to present this excellent example of mine to your professor for his adjudication?

Well. Uptil now I have educated you about the random nature of the election of the Dalai Lamas. You should be thankful to me.

Look at what the poor women in Tibet were told to pray:

“May I reject a feminine body and be reborn a male one.”

How sad and tragic.

February 6, 2009
3:55 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
149sp_Permalink sp_Print

"You were the one getting angry."

I don't think soooooo ... Cool down. Just because you can't get your way there is no need to spit your dummy. Or is there????

February 6, 2009
7:58 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
150sp_Permalink sp_Print

Lets be a little more mature and not worry about things like loosing our cool. We're not that important. Lets remember how the women of Tibet were treated. They were told to pray:

“May I reject a feminine body and be reborn a male one.”

Its a verified quote by the way from Tom Grunfeld's book, The Making of Modern Tibet

There's so much more material to talk about here, but lets take a moment to remember this prayer.

I also see you didnt respond at all to the Golden Urn Conundrum. Thankfully I dont have any beliefs at all that are controversial. You sure have a tough time defending what you believe in.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 349
Currently Online:
28
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 111020
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38570
Posts: 714311
Newest Members:
cosmo789, bravelassie, Chloe12, future life, austinjacob, Hadity1
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2020 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer | Do Not Sell My Personal Information