Tao and Wu Wei in your own life.

Wu Wei means no action. Tao is the way or way of nature. If I Lived Wu Wei and Tao i would probably be a monk somewhere beautiful. Wu Wei means no action meaning I wouldn't want put my mind in anything that wouldn't be ok. Tao is the way or the way of nature. I would live with the birds and the trees. It wouldn't work so much today because your mind is always wondering some place else. Everyone has responsiblities like jobs, children, school. Makes it hard not to take any action and live the way of nature.

Would anyone even consider Wu Wei or Tao? Please post any comments. Marcos

Lao-Tzu and Confucius

Lao-Tzu and Confucius are asked to come speak to a group of Mercy College students about religion in China. Write an interesting, spirited dialogue in which these two wise specialists dialogue with one another on the meaning of life.
Taoism and Confucianism have to be seen side-by-side as two distinct responses to the social, political and philosophical conditions of life long ago in China. Where for instance Confucianism is greatly concerned with social relations, conduct and human society, Taoism has a much more individual and mystical character, influenced a whole lot by nature. In Lao Tzu's view things were said to create "unnatural" action (wei) by shaping desires (yu). The process of learning the names (ming) used in the doctrines helped one to make distinctions between good and evil, beautiful and ugly, high and low, and "being" (yu) and "non- being" (wu), thereby shaping desires. To abandon knowledge was to abandon names, distinctions, tastes and desires. Thus spontaneous behavior (wu-wei) resulted. The Taoist philosophy can perhaps best be summed up in a quote from Chuang Tzu: "To regard the fundamental as the essence, to regard things as coarse, to regard accumulation as deficiency, and to dwell quietly alone with the spiritual and the intelligent -- herein lie the techniques of Tao of the ancients." Confucius would be mostly talking like a politician. He would talk about philosophy. He would explain one of his rules," If you governed your province well and treat your people kindly, you kingdom shall not lose any war. If you govern selfishly to your people, you kingdom will not only lose a war, but your people will break away from your kingdom." Which makes sense. No one wants to be governed wrong and still abide by the rules of the governement. He would also say a wise phrase called the golden rule that is still being used as a rule today. "A man should practice what he preaches, but a man should also preach what he practices."

Dont know if my dialogue is right? Would you guys agree or disagree with what i wrote?

More on New TSA Procedure for Screening Turbans at US Airports.

Interesting article on how screeners at Airports are no longer allowed to touch a Sikh's turban without cause or permission. Wouldn't you think the metal detectors would detect anything inside the turban?

- The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) yesterday announced a new security screening procedure that will apply to all religious head coverings at U.S. airports. The new procedures will go into effect on October 27, 2007. The new procedures, designed to detect non-metallic objects, do not allow a TSA screener to touch a Sikh's turban without cause unless the Sikh traveler gives the screener permission to do so. The change is a direct response to the concerns raised by Sikhs and Sikh organizations, including the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF), the Sikh Coalition, and UNITED SIKHS over the last two months.
The New Procedure for Detecting Non-Metallic Threat ItemsThe TSA has instituted new additional screening procedures for non-metallic threat items, like plastics or chemicals. These procedures come into effect after a traveler clears a metal detector. If a screener believes the passenger's clothing is "bulky" and may be able to hide a non-metallic threat item more easily than form-fitting clothes, the screener can do an additional screening procedure. "Bulky clothing" can include items like jackets, shoes, flowing clothing, or non-form fitting headwear.Under these procedures, a Sikh's turban will not be touched during additional screening, unless the Sikh traveler permits it.Instead, if the Transportation Security Officer (TSO) believes a Sikh's turban needs to be screened, the passenger now has three options:1. The passenger can have his/her head covering patted down in public or in private by TSA personnel;2. The passenger can pat down his/her own head covering in public or private, and then have his/her hands swabbed with a cotton cloth to check for chemical residue; or3. The passenger can opt to go through a "puffer machine," if one is available at that airport.A TSO should always offer a traveler a private area for the secondary screening of his/her religious head covering.The option of a self-pat down by a passenger will not be pro-actively offered by the TSA screener. Sikh travelers must tell the TSO that they would like to pat-down their own turbans, or must first refuse to allow a TSA screener to do the pat-down, before being told that they have the right to pat their turban themselves.A Sikh turban or other religious head covering may only be asked to be removed if the traveler wearing it does not successfully clear the additional screening after undergoing one of the three screening options.Please remember that, along with the new procedure, all travelers must still clear metal detectors. That means that if a Sikh's turban sets off an alarm while going through the metal detector and/or a metal-detecting wand, the TSO may ask to pat the turban down. If this happens, please request a private screening area for the pat-down.How Is This New Policy Any Better Than the Post-August 4th Policy?The new procedure is encouraging and addresses the Sikh community's concerns in the following ways:1. Turbans will not be listed in any TSA guidance as an item that should be subject to additional screening.2. The TSA recognized that security screeners should not be allowed to touch a Sikh's turban indiscriminately, and should seek explicit consent before doing so, if no alarm has been set off.3. By accommodating religious head coverings, the TSA has acknowledged the distinction between secular and religious garb, including the Sikh turban.4. Before the Thanksgiving 2007 travel season, all 43,000 TSA screeners will undergo the following mandatory training about Sikhs:
a. View On Common Ground: Sikh American Cultural Awareness Training for Law Enforcement. Receive copies of the Common Sikh American Head Coverings poster. SALDEF, the Sikh Coalition, and UNITED SIKHS, are encouraged by the steps the TSA is taking to fix the faulty procedure. We thank both the TSA and Department of Homeland Security for their collaborative efforts in finding a solution that guards national security and protects the civil liberties of all people of faith.Continuing ConcernsNevertheless, there are some pressing concerns about the implementation of the new procedures.To ensure national security, screeners have been given discretion on when to perform the additional screening. Some screeners could use this discretion in an inappropriate manner and single out or harass travelers of a certain national origin or religion. Sikh civil rights groups remain concerned that the new procedure could lead to religious profiling of our community. We will continue to press the TSA to collect data that demonstrates that the new procedure does not disproportionately affect any specific national origin or religious groups.In addition, even if Sikhs are not subject to disproportionate scrutiny, we are concerned about the negative perception created when a Sikh is pulled aside for additional screening. With the three options, a passenger can request the most comfortable screening method for himself/herself. We will continue to work with the TSA to minimize the humiliation that some Sikh travelers could feel when their turbans are screened.We are also concerned that, because the screening options are not being mentioned early in the additional screening process, many Sikhs may feel pressure to submit to a screener pat down even though they have a right to refuse it and pat down their turban themselves. We strongly believe that screeners should offer the option of a self-pat down at the beginning of the additional screening process.Finally, while our organizations also welcome the options for secondary screening, we recognize that the ideal solution is for the TSA to install "puffer" machines or other detection technology at all airports. This would help avoid the need for additional screening that involves the handling of religious head coverings like the Sikh turban. We will continue to press the TSA to install "puffer" machines and other detection technology in all airports.SALDEF, the Sikh Coalition, and UNITED SIKHS will continue to monitor implementation of the new procedure in the coming months. We will take all necessary action to ensure that Sikhs are not singled out for extra screening due to their religious practices.

Original article located: http://www.sikhnet.com/sikhnet/news.nsf/NewsArchive

Work to be done by October 16th

There are many fundamental or "big" questions to which all religions respond. How would Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism respond to these 3 questions?
1) What is the ultimate reality/god?
2) How can we achieve salvation?
3)What happens to us after death?

Hinduism believes in the caste system. Where everyone is born into it. Hinduism believes in one God. It also accommodates the ideas of personal and impersonal God. After death Hinduism believes in reincarnation. Only imperfect souls with impure minds haunted by unfulfilled desires reincarnate. Perfection of the soul is achieved through God-vision. If a person has not reached that perfection he/she comes back reincarnated to achieve that goal. We can achieve salvation in Hinduism by doing good and reaching nirvana. Where you have reached that perfect plateau an no longer require being reincarnated. Buddhism dominant values are: Right knowledge, aspiration, speech, behavior, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, contemplation, control of one's mind, kindness. Salvation comes by Nonattachment to the world; Follow the eight-fold path; Self-effort; Salvation is through reincarnation and working with the laws of karma. Nirvana is the highest destiny of the human spirit--a state of indescribable bliss. This is where you want to reach, the afterlife. Janism belives in nonresistance, nonattachment, honesty, renounciation of sexual pleasure, monastic ideals. Liberating the soul from matter through karma (reincarnation); this is possible only by individual effort. Like buddhism Jainism believes in nirvana, Extinction of personality or totally indescribable state. Sikhism believes are pure motives and actions; Love of spouse and family; service, humility, learning; forsaking evil company. In Sikihism salvation comes from becoming one with God. Salvation results from worship of the true name. faith, love and devotion are essential. Also believes in nirvana To reach the afterlife. Extinguishing absorption of individuality in God. There is similiarities to all religions. Out of these 4 which one do you think you would most likely practice? Least likely practice? Please post your comments. Thanks

Religious Topic for the 9th of October

HOUSES OF WORSHIP

Up in Alms: Burma's Dictators Exploit Buddhism and the Monks Fight Back


Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma's Nobel Peace Prize laureate, described the lessons she had learned from her country's Hsayadaws, its Buddhist holy teachers, in an article for a Japanese newspaper in 1996. One of them told her what it would be like to fight for democracy in Burma: "You will be attacked and reviled for engaging in honest politics, but you must persevere. Lay down an investment in dukkha [suffering] and you will gain sukha [bliss]."

Last week saw hundreds of Burma's monks investing in dukkha as they confronted the nation's military regime. At one point, a large crowd of them gathered outside Aung San Suu Kyi's house in Yangon, where she has spent 12 of the past 18 years under house arrest. She came to the gate in the pouring rain and was allowed to greet them. This single, poignant moment summed up all that was most extraordinary about the demonstrations, as well as what was most frightening to Burma's military junta.

Within a few days, scores of monks were in jail, many had been beaten, and the trickle of reports emanating from the country indicated that monasteries had been ransacked as the military hunted down the last rebellious elements.

Reports in the New Light of Myanmar, the official newspaper, blamed a few bad seeds who had infiltrated the monastic orders for inciting the protests. Pro-democracy activists have admitted to taking cover in the monasteries to avoid being jailed. But these are footnotes in a much larger tussle in Burma over the use and practice of Buddhism, which became visible to the world during the past week.

This boils down to the issue of which political ideology is a more fitting reflection of Burma's Theravada Buddhism, military dictatorship or democracy. While the answer should be obvious, the military has done all it can to tilt the balance its way.

Burma is a patchwork of ethnicities, languages and religious practices. The struggle to keep it together has been the key narrative for the successive military governments, dominated by majority ethnic Burmans, that have run the country since 1962. The military has used this struggle to justify economic and democratic deprivation. Furthermore, despite the junta's flagrant disregard for the five principles of Buddhism -- abstention from killing, stealing, engaging in sexual misconduct, lying and using intoxicants -- its members seize every chance to depict themselves as Buddhism's true guardians.

Not a week goes by without the state media reporting a general's contribution or visit to a temple. Even as Burma has slid into poverty, the government has funded lavish new temples and the rebuilding of the famous golden pagodas. The military has also built pagodas as a means of asserting ethnic Burman sovereignty in areas where other groups live and Islam or Christianity is the prevailing religion. This practice dates back to the Burmese kings who built pagodas in neighboring kingdoms as a way of establishing a lasting claim to rule.

For most of the past century, there have always been a few politically active monks. Under British rule, monks were jailed for urging the Burmese not to adopt British forms of dress and religious practice. Under military rule, monks have been at the forefront of the opposition.

The extent of the monks' role as the national conscience can be seen in the measures taken by the military to organize and co-opt the monastic orders. During the democracy protests of 1988, 600 monks were among the 10,000 people killed. In 1990, on the second anniversary of those killings, more than 7,000 monks and novices walked through Mandalay. Soldiers confronted them and opened fire, killing two. Across the country, monks responded by refusing to accept alms from members of the military or their families. By denying the military the ability to give alms, the monks were denying them the opportunity to make "merit" for their present and future lives. Monasteries were raided, hundreds of monks were arrested, and a new law was introduced placing the "sangha" -- the monastic orders -- under government regulation. Anyone setting up new orders or protesting or agitating within this new sangha framework could now be jailed for up to three years.

The military could have risked closing down the monasteries altogether, but not only are the generals frightened and superstitious, but they also use certain elements of Buddhist philosophy to justify and strengthen their position. One is "samsara," a complex idea involving the interplay of the mind and physical matter and the cycles of existence; it has come to mean a view of life as fleeting and thus not worth complaining about. Everything is impermanent and life is hard, so feeling powerless is not a consequence of a political situation, which can be changed, but an existential fact.

Another element abused by the military is "Dana," the act of giving without expecting a reward. When accused of using forced labor to build infrastructure and pagodas, the generals have said the unpaid workers are simply practicing Dana.

Since she returned to Burma in 1988, Aung San Suu Kyi has become a far more devout Buddhist than she was before. Many of her imprisoned supporters practice Buddhist meditation as a means of surviving Burma's jails. The monks, of course, know this just as well as they know the true natures of the generals who offer them tributes. Choosing between the two has put them in the center of the fight for Burma's future.

The military in this country wants to force it's might but doesn't do it all the way. I think they do this because they know that to be a good Buddhist you don't do violence. Do you think this sort of thinking can blow up in their face? Like do you think the monks will ever have enough and fight back? Please comment. Thanks Marcos

Original Article located:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119153652539049395.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

IMMIGRATION LAWS

I was intrigued by Chris blog on immigration and decided to write my own blog on this subject. I believe the way the US is coming down on the immigrants (illegal) is similar to the way we treated slave in the 1800's and how Mohandas Gandhi was treated in South Africa. We are all descendents of people who are not from this country. The way the United states is going about deporting illegal aliens is wrong. Going to someone's workplace where they are trying to make a living is wrong. The solution to this problem would be to have a bothisattva like Governor Spitzer. Who is trying to do the right things. We need give these illegal immigrants who have familes and are trying to make a living the oppurtunity to become legal here. Life is already painful for some of these immigrants (Dukha). Who some have left their wives and children and try to provide for them a decent education. The buddhist creed is 1) Take refuge in the buddha. 2) Take refuge in the dharma (duty). 3) Take refuge in the sangha (community). I believe we should stand up for these human beings who maybe weren;t born here but have a heart and soul like us. One idea would be any illegal alien with a felony criminal record be deported to his or her country. All those that are here in the US over 5 yrs and are working should become legalized through a process. I think buddha and Gandhi would aggre that what the US is doing is wrong. What do you think? Please post your answers.

Marcos