"Our good fortune is dependent upon the cooperation and contributions of others. Every aspect of our present well-being is due to hard work on the part of others. As we look around us at the buildings we live and work in, the roads we travel, the clothes we wear, or the food we eat, we have to acknowledge that all are provided by others. None of them would exist for us to enjoy and make use of were it not for the kindness of so many people unknown to us" ~ Dalai Lama
Is it really 'kindness' that makes people build houses and buildings in this world, or make clothes, pave roads, produce food and work in factories to construct all of the products that we use, day in and day out? Or is it because we need money, and especially those that live in the 'bodom layer' in this world in terms of pay-check, are coïncidentally also the ones that build/manufacture/produce all the items that we use, they are the ones that are really managing this reality - ask yourself, would they really do it because they are so 'kind', or because they desperately need the money, working overtime to be able to pay for their children's education, while they'd much rather spend more time at home with their family?
I am sure that we can all come to the common sense conclusion that it is because of money that houses get built, food and clothes are produced and all the shit gets done in this world for it to be able to 'function', and not because of 'kindness'.
Then, why would the Dalai Lama deliberately use the word 'kindness'?! Is it because he is some kind of spiritual prophet and he is supposed to make everything sound nicer and better and lovelier and more acceptable than it really is? Does that then mean that spirituality and religion equals 'bending the truth' or 'covering up the truth/reality' to make people feel 'spiritually enlightened', even when these 'feelings' are obviously not based on the truth/reality at all - what would you call that? A 'lie'?
Would it be safe to make the deduction that spiritual/religious leaders/figures/masters are not here to change the world, or even fix it or offer a solution for it, they're just here to make those that are able to listen to him and follow his teachings (meaning the ones that are not starving to death in this world) feel a little bit better about reality. Which pretty much means that they promote the belief that we have no power in this world and we should NEVER attempt to change it into a better world for all, we should just find some personal relief to not feel so bad anymore when looking into the eyes of the starving and suffering. Would that imply that spirituality as promulgated by the Dalai Lama can be described as 'selfishness'?
Besides selfishness, it is deceptive in nature, to present yourself as an apparent 'benevolent being' as 'the DALAI LAMA', standing in a position of power, where you are aware that millions are hanging from your lips, and to deliberately not simply tell the truth about this reality, which is in essence that millions are suffering needlessly, we're fucking up the planet with consumerism and all of it is born from the ignorance of the human and it needs to be stopped as soon as possible. The truth is that simple, a child will tell you this, because it is here in plain sight, out in the open for all to see. But the Dalai Lama will not tell us just how urgently we need to stand up and take action in this world to change it in fact, no, he will simply make us feel good about NOT taking action.
The Dalai Lama is thus the ultimate prophet of consumerism - because his religion is to make people feel good about themselves while they are destroying the planet through acting within self-interest only, so as to make sure that people will not listen to that awareness that lies DEEEP within themselves, saying 'there's something seriously fucked up going on here'.
So, why does the Dalai Lama Lie? Why does he deliberately not tell the truth? In other words, what is he afraid of? Is he afraid that he might lose his influential and powerful friends, the world leaders that welcome him with open arms? Because 'God knows' that lies and deception are what makes the world go 'round. Lies and deception is what makes people buy shit that they don't need to keep the economy going and place their trust in presidents, governments, banks and corporations that end up proving themselves very untrustworthy and disappointing. Shouldn't it actually concern us that the Dalai Lama is friends with them? Or is this also just an act of 'kindness', to prove that he can be 'friends with everyone'?
Though, SHOULD we be 'friends with everyone'? Should we simply accept reality as it is and feel good and happy about it? Should we allow the exploitation of the working class for cheap labor and products that benefit only an elite few in this world? Should we accept and allow children to be born into this world to never know/experience anything but physical pain and suffering due to starvation and hygiene problems as the result of a failed economic system that is destroying the life of the living? Should we accept and allow the animal kingdom to go extinct and to suffer immensely at the hands of profit-seeking humans that only have money on their mind and lost all and any ability to place themselves in the shoes of another? Should we accept and allow children to be brainwashed by an ineffective education system and television into becoming the most effective consumer/abuser of the planet instead of the most effective living being that honors and takes care of life on the planet? Should we accept and allow the human to create and force all life to live in hell on earth when it could be a heaven on earth?
The only thing that the Dalai Lama has brought us is the 'wisdom' of 'bending the truth' to make it seem more 'nice' and 'kind' for our self-interested desire to feel good about not taking responsibility for this world and about the atrocities that we are accepting and allowing to exist in it.
Additional Note: After posting this Blog, I received the following comment from Eleonora Gozzini, where she expands on why specifically the Dalai Lama uses the word 'kindness' in his quote. An interesting perspective and a point that I had not considered that I will place here as an addition to the blog that I had already written, as both points contain common sense and are equally valid.
"The Dalai Lama lives as a 'host' in India after fleeing Tibet during the Chinese occupation.
Everything he has had in India has been given to him for free, which is why he uses the word kindness = free, he did not have to pay for it, yet hose who built those things for Him, were making an investment into his specific brand of Bhuddism, the Tibetan One.
I read your article, maybe you can expand on this point, on the fact that even the Dalai lama is aware that unless you find 'Kind people' with 'their own self interest for the AfterLife and Karma beliefs, that work for him, who are buying themselves 'merits' (which are barely credits in the form of good deeds that usually have a monetary value) according to Bhuddist beliefs (but I am not sure the Tibetan Bhuddism support the 'merit' system, anyway many of the bhuddist that support him in India would be Indian Bhuddist and that system is in place there, the merit system).
Because he did not lie about what he said, but it's just applied to him and what HE and His Tibetan people got for Free, what about the rest of the world, why is he more deserving of the kindness of humanity than the rest, what is the pay back for those involved in the 'good deeds' to prove that there is always a pay back in our deeds for the moment and that everyone is actualy aware of how the game is played.
He is a preacher of 'acceptance', accept things as they are and make the best of it, so good the point you took on about this."
Investigate Desteni, where we are not afraid to look at and expose what is really going on in this world and to look at the pertinent question 'why is the human being not doing something about this world?!' and 'Why is humanity accepting and allowing the abuse of life?!'
3 opmerkingen:
The perpetual end game, where survival and comfort is found and never moved beyond as one has found one's survival mode. This must stop and all that is here considered to be life, and thus supported as such.
It is ease to preach goodness when there is a roof over your head and clothes and food on your back.
Heaven on earth needs no preaching of "goodness/kindness" as this is what would BE.
As long as this is being preached, that is all that is being done - peaching instead of being.
This is a personality, this is a story being told and so, a story being TOLD and a persona projected is a separation from life, an image/idea/opinion/belief that needs constant broadcast to survive.
In this system the money given perpetuates this, thus is the preaching of kindness a vampirism seeking adherents.
Is this what we really want?
Excelent blog, thanks!
You can't blame the Dalai Lama for all of the people suffering in the world. It's not his job to fix it all for us or to tell us how to live our lives or, as you said, "just how urgently we need to stand up and take action in this world". It's his job to teach by example everyday by giving freely of himself and by living his life with a pure heart of love and compassion for others, that others might see this and choose of their own will to follow the same path. That's where his true "power" and influence lies. To speak out against "consumerism" is to "fight against" the current system and against others. This is not his way, as it was not the way of the Buddha.
The Buddha taught people to take what he called "The Middle Way", the neutral path that transcends the extremes of opposing views of existence and how people think life and the world "should be". So yes, the Dalai Lama is in a position of influence over the hearts and minds of many people, but to use that power in the way that you suggest is to abuse that power and to defy everything that the Buddha stood for.
The Buddha saw that there was much suffering in the world, but he did not speak out against it. Instead he saw deeply into the true reality of suffering and taught others that suffering was an inevitable part of life for everyone. He knew that it was something that we can never escape by trying to change the world or other people in it, but rather only by looking within ourselves can we truly begin to change it for the better. All those who have approached enlightenment and have come to truly understand compassion have known this. Ghandi understood the same thing when he said to "be the change you wish to see in the world."
So, while it's true that the world seems wrong in so many ways, it is not the right or responsibility of anyone to dictate what should be in the world. Our desire to control the world around us is the very reason humanity has became so lost in the first place. In truth, we have the sole right to govern our own lives, but no more. When it comes down to it, each persons life is truly about what they do with it and about their own karma, their own experiences, their own choices and actions. Others can help along the way and we can support each other, but in the end it is all about who we allow ourselves to be in spite of it all that makes the difference.
It's true that everyone should be equal and no one should go hungry. We should all take care of each other, but the only way that will ever happen on this planet is if we all look within ourselves to see how we can become the world that we want to see. We can become angry at others who have influence in the world for not telling everyone what to do, but it is truly not their place to tell everyone what to do. It's their place to lead by example like everyone else and to allow others to be free to do as they wish with their lives.
So, you see, it's not the Dalai Lama that lies, but the lie is the one that each one of us tells ourselves when we think that our own life example isn't powerful enough to help influence the positive changes that we want to see in the world. It most certainly is and if everyone can learn to understand that and try to put it into practice everyday, then it most certainly will be.
Een reactie posten