Iran confiscates Buddha statues to stop promotion of Buddhism

reply to post by LightAssassin

I'm curious, though, why they were even able to buy the statues in the first place? Strange.

Don't know.

....but Buddhism has existed in 'Iran' since 5/6th Century.

Iranian.com/history/buddhism

reply to post by FlyersFan


I think many are missing the point in regards to thes statues...


A koan:

When Nansen came back from the bathhouse, he saw the monk in charge of the bath stoking the fire. Nansen asked, “What are you doing?” The monk answered, “I am making the bathwater warm.” Nansen said, “Don't forget to invite the water buffalo to take a bath.” The monk said “Hai!” [“Yes!”] In the evening, the monk came to Nansen's quarters. Nansen asked, “What's up?” The monk said, “Venerable Water Buffalo, the bath is ready.” Nansen asked, “Did you bring a leash or not?” The monk had no reply. When the Master [Joshu] came later to greet Nansen, Nansen mentioned what had happened. The Master said, “I have something to say.” Nansen said, “Fine, but have you brought a leash with you?” The Master dashed forward and grabbed Nansen by the nose. Nansen remarked, “Okay, but it is too coarse!”

Zen Master Joshu

reply to post by purplemer


What reason do you have to believe it's Zen Buddhism in Iran?

Genuine question.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


5th/6th Century BCE!!! An important distinction.

Nevertheless, it is now not recognised and therefore by law cannot be practiced, but people can still hold their beliefs in it.

And I don't agree with it but it is their clearly stated law, and the people of that country should first and foremost be abiding by the law of that country.

reply to post by purplemer


'Nansen asked 'What's up?'

Really....he actually said 'What's up?'....how profound?

reply to post by LightAssassin

5th/6th Century BCE!!! An important distinction.

I linked the article with that info. Apologies for leaving it out..

My only point was, Buddhism has been there a long time. It was in response to your specific question "why would the statues be there in the first place".

reply to post by LightAssassin

nd the people of that country should first and foremost be abiding by the law of that country.

Perhaps. That's one way to approach it

There is always revolution in the face of tyrannical oppression.

Not condoning one or the other. Just that both are options for The People.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


It's hardly tyrannical if it's law....

Tyrannical would be if it's law and the government goes against their own laws.

The problem with revolution, as seen in Iran in 1953 and the current Arab spring, is that it seems more of a vehicle for the ulterior motives of another country/organisation rather than a vehicle for the freedoms of people.

It seems then, and now, US dollars can buy you groups of revolutionaries to dispense with.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


I had no idea Buddhism was around that long ago in the Middle East. I feel it deserves more credit, especially given that Zoroastrianism is recognised.

edit: I didn't realise Zoroastrianism was Ancient Iran's religion....so again I can understand why Buddhism is excluded.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
There is always revolution in the face of tyrannical oppression.

Yes, thats why they had a revolution in 1979.. Only in this day and age, I don't see the Iranian government starving their people like the Western backed Shah did for 26 years.

reply to post by LightAssassin

I didn't realize Zoroastrianism was Ancient Iran's religion....so again I can understand why Buddhism is excluded.

It's understandable.

That doesn't make it morally sound.

Essentially.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Practicing it is excluded, not believing in it.

They don't have to be mutually exclusive.

I honestly think this is a big song and dance about nothing. Saudi Arabia is far worse and yet Iran cops the mainstream assault because Iran doesn't pander to the West's desires.

reply to post by LightAssassin

Practicing it is excluded, not believing in it.

Only because it's impossible to address the latter If they could "prevent the spread of Buddhism" via thought, I am fairly sure they would.

It's still religious persecution. Is it not? Still wrong in the spirit of religious tolerance. All I am saying is I understand it, but laws are not inherently good. In that they are impervious from being immoral. So sure it might be in-line with their Laws. I don't know. I feel religious freedom is morally superior to banning the practice of a religion. If the Iranian People are okay with this then so be it. I am just voicing my opinion.

I honestly think this is a big song and dance about nothing. Saudi Arabia is far worse

Saudi Arabia being worse doesn't negate it being an issue though.

I am interested in what you said though. I know little about this stuff. How is Saudi Arabia worse?

Originally posted by LightAssassin
[I find it laughable that you, this whole time, argue against Iran oppressing Buddhism....yet when you finally bother to read the LAWS of the country you discover that Buddhism isn't a recognised religion in Iran.

I find it laughable that you, this whole time, that you don't understand buddhism, even when it has been explained on this thread. It's a belief system. The laws protect people from being 'molested' .. it protects those that belong to religions it doesn't recognize from being 'molested'.

As for your jab that I 'finally bothered to read the laws' ... ... I knew them from the start of this thread. So your petty inference is out of place.

ignorance and fear are the tools of tyrants and religions, they depend on them for control.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Article 13 does not recognise Buddhism as a religion and therefore I do not see how Religious freedoms are being suppressed by the confiscation of Buddhas...... From a religious perspective, Article 14 is only following up on 13 and doesn't recognise Buddhism as a religion.

Article 14 (and 23) says that non-muslims will not be molested .. not harrassed.
'Cleansing' buddhist statues from Tehran is molesting non muslims.
Heck .. it's even molesting muslims just because the government doesn't
like how they decorate inside their houses.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
I didn't say Islam was a race.. And you failed when you started this thread because you cannot accept that other countries do follow their religion whether you like it or not.

EPIC FAIL. You most certainly DID say Islam was a race.
That is exactly what you said when you came up with this load ....

Originally posted by DarknStormy
all we seem to have here are racists who cannot respect the laws and religious views of another culture.

Don't try to weasle out of it. No one was discussing skin color .. only religion and law.


ON THE TOPIC -
1 - I posted the laws of the country.
2 - I posted the facts that the laws are being broken .. both the law itself and the spirit of the law.
3 - People outside of Iran have freedom of speech and can discuss this and not sweep it under the rug.
4 - Recognizing that the government of Iran isn't following it's own rules and is harrassing the citizens of Tehran doesn't mean that Iran is being singled out to be picked on. ALL the countries of the world get the same treatment here. Everyone gets examined. No country is special and gets excluded.
5 - ADULTS should be able to discuss this without resorting to hurling ignorance at others .. ie deflection attemps by calling others 'racists' or 'laughable' or other childish off topic things.

This is a very simple topic - Iran confiscates buddha statues to stop promotion of buddhism. The laws are simple. The action by the government of Iran is simple. The harrassment of the citizens of Tehran is self evident. The paranoia of the Iranian government is there for all to see.

reply to post by DarknStormy

Stop being so simple minded. I'm all for women wearing what they want but you cannot say that some of the clothing doesn't pull emotional strings in men which then could lead to criminal acts in some cases?

I can only assume you are talking about rape and uhhhh no. I don't blame the victim. A man can control his sexual urges, if he cannot then he deserves to be locked in a cage. Why would you want to punish women for something a man does? Talk about backwards thinking.

So the government are responsible for Sexual assault now?

When did I ever mention the government? Sexual assault involves the individuals involved.

.. I'm trying to work out why Muslims would use this dress code and from what I can gather, its to take a mans temptation, lust away..

.

I'll say it again.... If a man cannot control his sexual urges he should be locked in a cage. He is a danger to all women and maybe even men.

I wonder how high the divorce rate is in Iran compared to Western countries?

Who cares? If people want to get divorced they should be able to. Freedom and happiness.

Your country may be free but it doesn't mean it is solving the problems that arise.

So you think rape doesn't happen in Iran?

reply to post by mideast

Muhammad's (pbuh) first step was to destroy the idols which were stored in Kaba (the cube which Muslims circle around.) He did what ecactly other prophets would have done in that place.

So , Iranian govt is stopping people from worshiping idols

People should be able to worship whatever they want. I can't believe someone actually wants to force people to be a certain religion. Shameful.

And those who have problem with that , would have problem with Moses who destroyed the golden cow statue.

I do have a problem with Moses doing that. He was a tyrannical bully. If they wanted to worship the calf he should have let them.

Freedom of religion......

reply to post by DarknStormy

I wouldn't worry about it buddy, all we seem to have here are racists who cannot respect the laws and religious views of another culture.

The culture? Pretty sure we're sticking up for the Iranians that want to decorate their houses with Buddha statues. The tyrannical government is trying to interfere with their culture and take it away. You're the one not respecting the people of Iran.

I'm sorry but um, I'm never going to stick up for totalitarianism and human rights abuses all in the name of "culture".