-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Tibetan Monk sets himself on fire as protest
- Thread starter Randy Cavitts
- Start date
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Not so much. I am no longer a supporter of the Dalai Lama. My first thought was, "Yeah. That will work."
I'm sure the Chinese (Han) are deeply impressed.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
It sounds silly to me. It's like a Christian turning a gun on themselves because people say Jesus wasn't God.
Invisible Pink Unicorn
Member
I don't see it that way. If someone doesn't believe that Jesus is God, they're not exactly oppressing a Christian. Not being a Christian is well, sort of like not having a coin collection - you just don't believe.
I actually think he's very brave. He sacrificed himself and his mortal body for his people and what he believes in. He sends a powerful message to the Chinese government that, burning himself is better than the hell that the Chinese have created, as if to say that they can kill his people, they can oppress them, but they will never make Tibet Chinese.
While self-immolation shouldn't exactly be encouraged (since in the end it leaves less people available to fight for Tibet's freedom), what he did was in no way wrong and shouldn't be condemned either.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
I'm more interested in the Dalai Lama's future itself. He has stated that if the situation in Tibet doesn't end in his lifetime, he will be reborn in a free country. That sounds interesting.
Marble
Rolling Marble
I think that, if violence happens altogether, I have more respect for people who kill themselves - and only themselves - than for those who kill others (or themselves with others).
Why not?
Randy Cavitts
Member
So you think that suicide bombings are morally justified if they're fighting for what they believe in, then?
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
Killing for a cause is never justifiable. Dying for one is.
etherealascension
Secular Buddhist Humanist
Monks have done this because they were oppressed. Not too many religious groups were driven from their homeland and not many religious leaders were exiled from their temple, so there isn't really a fair comparison here. Self-immolation has been practiced numerous times. I don't see it as a form of protest or a means to stand up against anyone, it's a practice saying "I refuse to deal with this ************."
EDIT: some people hit the nail on the head. Dying for a cause is noble, killing for one is not. Example: a japanese samurai, if dishonored, would kill himself by disembowelment, seppuku. He wouldn't try to fight his way out, he would rather die.
EDIT: some people hit the nail on the head. Dying for a cause is noble, killing for one is not. Example: a japanese samurai, if dishonored, would kill himself by disembowelment, seppuku. He wouldn't try to fight his way out, he would rather die.
Last edited:
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Not just oppressed, but tortured and humiliated in ways that would make the Spanish Inquisition jealous.
Setting himself on fire probably didn't seem that bad compared to what the Chinese have done to them.
Invisible Pink Unicorn
Member
I have friends who have been to Tibet. They were there, as paying tourists, and the Chinese police raided the hotel in the middle of the night, demanding that the people hand over cameras, camcorders, and cell phones. They were fully armed with machine guns. Anybody with a non-Chinese passport was rounded up and taken to the airport, some of them not even allowed to pack a suitcase, and in various states of undress. They were flown out on the next cargo plane out, probably barred from entering Tibet for life, without even being charged with a crime.
If this is how they treat tourists (TOURISTS, for crying out loud - who have paid thousands of dollars to be there), I can't imagine what they would do to the local monks who are fighting to get their country back which has been occupied by the brutal Chinese army.
If this is how they treat tourists (TOURISTS, for crying out loud - who have paid thousands of dollars to be there), I can't imagine what they would do to the local monks who are fighting to get their country back which has been occupied by the brutal Chinese army.
Last edited:
etherealascension
Secular Buddhist Humanist
Very true. The Chinese government acted horribly when it came to the monks of Tibet. I'm sure we don't even know everything that happened to most of those monks, but I'd be willing to bet some of it bordered on concentration camp-esque treatment. The worst part is that these things were done without reason. Buddhist monks are peaceful and calm and those in Tibet were no exception. It was bad enough to kick them out of their home, but the treatment they received was awful. I'd set myself on fire too.
Randy Cavitts
Member
10 People Burn to Death in Tibet Riots | China Digital Times (CDT)
They weren't too peaceful in 2008 when they rioted through the streets and nearly burnt Lhasa to the ground.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I imagine that it's quite convenient when your opponents dispose of themselves.
Me Myself
Back to my username
If that is true, kudos o.0
Invisible Pink Unicorn
Member
10 People Burn to Death in Tibet Riots | China Digital Times (CDT)
They weren't too peaceful in 2008 when they rioted through the streets and nearly burnt Lhasa to the ground.
Usha Haley: China's Fifty Cent Party for Internet Propaganda
E. Nato Difficile
Active Member
And would this monk's method of ridding the world of injustice have brought about the end of the Third Reich, pray tell? As abhorrent as I find war, I'd have to be a fool to argue that the Allied invasion of Europe was unjustified.
But the principle behind pacifist protests such as this monk's is that the pacifist won't oppose injustice, he just wants to influence people who will. The entire dynamic depends on the existence of people who aren't pacifists, and who will actively fight to bring about necessary change.
-Nato
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
Non-violence and pacifism aren't the same thing. I suggest Kurlansky The History of a Dangerous Idea if you are interested in a rebuttal of that old Nazi chestnut. Although you seem to have backed yourself into a corner before you've had the chance to consider it
And would this monk's method of ridding the world of injustice have brought about the end of the Third Reich, pray tell? As abhorrent as I find war, I'd have to be a fool to argue that the Allied invasion of Europe was unjustified.
But the principle behind pacifist protests such as this monk's is that the pacifist won't oppose injustice, he just wants to influence people who will. The entire dynamic depends on the existence of people who aren't pacifists, and who will actively fight to bring about necessary change.
-Nato
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I think it's a waste of a human life, which could be better spent ACTIVELY working for the causes the person is passionate about.
Don't get me wrong - I am sympathetic to his cause. I just think there are better ways to accomplish things.
I'm all for self sacrifice and heroism, but suicide? Nope.
Don't get me wrong - I am sympathetic to his cause. I just think there are better ways to accomplish things.
I'm all for self sacrifice and heroism, but suicide? Nope.
E. Nato Difficile
Active Member
stephenw,
Instead of giving me a reading assignment, you should address the point I was trying to make. You stated that it's never justifiable to kill, and I think that's a tad simplistic.
I didn't say this monk's protest was idiotic or unjustifiable, all I did was demonstrate that it's part of a dynamic that depends on the existence of people that aren't so convinced that it's unjustifiable to use deadly force to achieve their aims.
-Nato
Instead of giving me a reading assignment, you should address the point I was trying to make. You stated that it's never justifiable to kill, and I think that's a tad simplistic.
I didn't say this monk's protest was idiotic or unjustifiable, all I did was demonstrate that it's part of a dynamic that depends on the existence of people that aren't so convinced that it's unjustifiable to use deadly force to achieve their aims.
-Nato