Again by way of the Rev. Danny -- at USA Today, Boston University professor Stephen Prothero writes an excellent column on the recent Tiger Woods public apology. The entire column is worth reading, but here is the last paragraph:
In calling Woods to Christ in January, Brit Hume imagined that there was only one way to fall, and only one way to be redeemed. In his statement on Friday, Woods intimated that he fell not because he wandered away from Christ but because he wandered away from the Buddha. Equally important, he suggested that the way forward, at least for him, is through the teachings of a man who, two-and-a-half millennia ago, sat down beneath a Bodhi tree in north India and saw through the illusions of endlessly craving after the next new thing. You don't need to be a Buddhist to say "Amen" (or "Om") to that.
It's so nice to see something intelligent about Buddhism in a national publication.
The article was wonderful, the comments on it revealing: focus on the issues of learning and moving on? Or focus on the sex scandal? There are lessons that can be learned from considering other people’s mistakes and paths, and considering how they might apply to our own lives. Interesting to see ourselves reflected in those comments condemning or understanding Tiger within his situation.
…. passing over Bodhgayga now ….. (the dakinis has been offering instruction in some of the more advanced maneuvers)
I just read the article which was pleasantly surprising in its neutrality in explaining just what Buddhism is.
Then I read the comments….. and closed the tab in frustration five minutes later. It’s a shame that the internet seems to bring out the fundies (in any religion but in this case Christianity). What a shame the majority of posters do not appear to practise what they preach :/
Addendum:
I suppose in posting what I just did, I too am guilty of not practising what I preach as I SHOULD be looking at this from a point of compassion, not judging
Sorry
The column was great, I was actually amazed. But of course I continued to read the comments and was a little stunned that people would say the things they did only a few lines away from where the article said we need to be more open and tolerant.
Then again I completely understand why there is this hang up with Christians and the Buddhist philosophy. From a Christian point of view, to win at this game of life you need to do two things: Be a good person and believe in God. If you screw up the first step you can state what you did and vow to never be bad again. From a Buddhist point of view the rules of the game are the same, however we don’t see the requirement of belief in God to be as important as being a good person. Our reasoning of not begin a “sinner” is only different from Christians’ in the fact that we see why “being bad” causes problems. Christians, on the other hand, seek those who say that it is wrong.
With the belief in God being our only major difference, will there ever really be an peace in the world? Mortals say you need to have the two requirements but if the Christian God is all loving and accepting, shouldn’t being a good person, regardless of the reason, be enough? If there are “Pearly Gates”, am I really going to be turned away even though I sought to make the world a better place just because I didn’t say “I believe in you”?
this was a gr8 piece. americans are no only ignorant of the chrisitan faith but of other faiths as well. glad to see there are still people who think in america.