Hmm. How how, been a long time no? Need a good headline like that to bring you in here these days. I wish i could offer you something. Coffee? sarcasm? honesty would do? You're sure? Great. Today I read the article on Daily Mirror- where a Buddhist monk had asked a commission to look in to unethical conversions. Ya, so, what I was wondering was, parungo, ("see" in Tamil), don't know if you will get angry if I tell you this........ Can I ask you out? Sorry- that wasn't for you. Ok for those of you who don't know, there is quite a lot of tension between Christians and Buddhists in the villages these days because of conversions.
Now if people are converting these people by giving them money, that is most definitely unethical, disgusting and no real Christian will think it right. but unethical or not, these people were not changed by force, like maybe in the crusades, but by their free will.
One problem is, many argue that this is destroying the culture of Sri Lanka. How is it, that the religion I believe in, as a born Sri Lankan, cannot be called Sri Lankan? It's not like Buddhism started in Sri Lanka either right?
Others say converting to Christianity is wrong, because these people are not doing it for spiritual motives, but for other reasons. If a child is born to Buddhist parents, is he a Buddhist for spiritual motives? For sure, he could be over time, but spiritual motives are not the only reason we choose religion. And it's sad. But you don't find the Buddhist priests, or even those following it, my beloved brothers and sisters, who complain about that, do you?
If we don't let people follow a religion of their choice, can we call the Muslim countries fundamentalists? Unethical conversions are wrong. What's even more wrong is not allowing someone to exercise their free will.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
where is the frre will in a child? there isn't one really. therefore children should be free from religion until they are old enough to choose. after they have enough brains to study as many as they can and if they find one they "like"or identify in, so be it. otherwise thay can b atheists etc etc...but no, parents send them to this or that temple/church/ mosque etc and the brainwashing starts. i come from a catholic country, but rejected my religion from whan i grew a brain, at 32 i turned buddhist. after 15 years of agnosticism/ it was a CHOICE. it appealed to me, it struck achord, i believe it. i dont go to temples or engage in ANY functions, buddhism should be the religion exempt from external performances par excellence. sadly it isn't in sri lanka, it's ostentatious to say the least and mixed with all kinds of utterly ridiculous superstitions/deities/et al (i.e. political and/or racist connotations)
anyway buying ppl into a religion is wrong, but POOR ppl are like children in a way, easily deceived, their poverty doesn't allow them a complete and real free will, thanks to ignorance, desperation, necessity, opportunism etc etc..you can "buy" them like you "buy" a child with candy... or on the other hand coerce them, like in fundamentalist countries, like when you threaten a child....easy really.
Hey.. I think you make some really good points here. I would love to see this in the Daily Mirror, with your permission, I could send it to the editor - under any name you like. email me - uhuoasis@gmail.com
@galle blogger - interesting.. so apparently "poor people" are an ignorant lot that can be made to believe anythin? i can feel the love...
the basis of christianity is to preach the gospel.. that is our calling.. not allowing us to preach is not allowing us to pratice our faith..
wat good does it do for a "poor person" to become a christian? and wat good does it do the christian community in general to 'bribe' ppl to become a christian? we're not in school, this isnt a race to see "who gets the most followers".. n y are they incapable of 'making a choice' as u put it?
bottom line? a person that becomes a christian for "benefits" and "candy" isn't really a christian, jus like u wouldnt be a real buddhist if u became one for convenience sake..
Btw, please let's keep hsitories out of this argument.
As all buddhists know, correct me if my prinicple is wrong, king dutugemunu killed thousands of Elara's (svaage?)subjects. this bringing him discomfort, the clergy comfort him saying this is justified by the greater good.
A point of view as ludicrous as Christianity's own dark ages, where it was manipulated. We apologise for what we did. That is not enough. Our buddhist friends, brothers hate us for it. Our apology will not make what was wrong right.
But does that give them the right to go on justifying every sort of violence, completely against the law- let alone their own philosophy?
And like i said before, if it's free will, who is to say that one person's choice is right and another's is wrong?
In advertising, is every choice that is thrown to a consumer done through ethical means?
are all advertising people none buddhist?
Am i losing the plot here?
Don't you see that when it suites you, you put on the cover of freedom of choice, as in the case of ciggerettes, and even porn, but when it doens't you bring some ugly bullshit argument to cover your won narrow minded ness, and those of our leaders?
Can you call the former crusaders evil, if you support leaders like this?
Post a Comment