By now it is old news. Sharon Stone, the spread legs, ditzy, self proclaimed 150 IQ actress made a major faux pas. No, actually what she did was infer that
Ok….WTF may suffice as a reaction.
One of my major pet peeves would have to be idiot celebrities vocalizing any of their thoughts. Any and all thoughts really, especially on matters such as these.
Yes, yes, there is free speech and all that but common please do us all a favour you borderline brain dead celebrities and just shut up. I know that there is poverty in Africa and even here—in fact I think I realize it more than you do, I also know that you are trying out Buddhism as a trendy religion, after dappling in some other ancient eastern belief that you think is brand new, and that you just rearranged your house a la Feng Shui or have finished reading ‘The Secret’ or whatever the new crazy Oprah book is, but please….shut up.
I doubt that Ms. Stone even fully understands what the political situation with
To name a few: (these are approximations…)
- Approximately 70,000 people have died
- Thousands of which were children, many at school at the time
- Over 350,000 injured
- About 18.000 missing
- And more homeless than we can think of.
(Go to BBC news for updates and exact numbers)
Now shall we look at the definition of what Karma is:
Karma, from Sanskrit “act, action, performance” is the concept of “action” in Indic religions understood as that which causes the entire cycle of cause and effect. Essentially what goes around comes around.
This notion is not solely Buddhist or Hindu, the ‘Golden Rule’ of ‘do unto others as you want done unto you’ is found in many religions. The exact idea of Karma however, in the manner of which most people understand it, is that one is responsible for what happens to ones life based upon their own actions.
So, therefore it must not be the Chinese government doing many evils…according to Sharon Stone’s logic, it must have also been the children too.
I also heard on the news that many Chinese shop owners were hurt and even killed by Tibetan protestors….does that now mean we will see the Dali Lama and his people suffer in an earthquake or similar natural disaster? I think not.
For one if something is truly based on cause and effect than only the CAUSERS would suffer. But that is not what I see happening around the world.
If karma existed we would all be in trouble. Moreover, if Karma in the delusional celebrity and North American fad obsessed way existed we would all be royally screwed. Would you or I suffer for Stephen Harper or Mike Harris’ dumb decisions? Would the actions of parliament affect the kids in the local preschool? Aside from cuts to funding and such, no.
Ms. Stone apologized. Yeah I think she is smart enough to at least do that. But she is not the point. Idiots like her make similar large claims everyday. I.e. according to Pat Robertson and others
All terrorists, celebrities, fundamentalists just STOP talking. If there was justice in the way you see it your mouths would supernaturally be sewed shut.
The God I know does not work that way. But this is not me telling anyone what to believe. If Stone’s karma was real Washington D.C and nearly EVERY other capital in the whole freaking world would be a lot more scared. So do not misquote eastern philosophy, or the Old Testament and think you are saying anything we want to hear, or has not been said before.
Peace.
Posts
7 comments:
I'm not sure if it warrants counter-arguing against your points, considering this is an in-the-heat-of-the-moment rant, but talks about his Darfur campaign/role as UN ambassador whenever given the chance - and it's not like he needs more money or fame.
Angelina Jolie has adopted kids, and seems more busy globe-trotting to learn about and spread word on various causes. She's met and worked with Queen Rania of Jordan, who has a reputation for being an activist for many issues, including women's rights, and she's anything but "brain dead". She's considered a celebrity - in fact, she's probably the most internationally well-known Middle Eastern women. Is her activism useless because she's a celebrity? Sure, if you consider women's rights in the Mid East to be a trivial issue (Contrary to what 95% of the world thinks, Iraq has never and never will - unless the wrong people go into power or the US government decides to push legislation for laws that stifle women's rights, for the sake of justifying one of their initial motives to invade the country in the first place - liberate the women... I'm thinking countries like Afghanistan - which, I know, is changing - but especially Saudi Arabia.)
What about Richard Branson's humanitarian initiatives? And, although he gets shit on a lot, Bono's work is undeniably influential, at least to the layperson who decides to take up a cause. Even if a single man's suggestions falls on deaf ears in the political arena, spreading the awareness to many others is just as important, if not more. Change happens when large numbers demand a change, because, frankly, it's the minority versus an angry majority as opposed to the minority versus one man's thoughts. Martin Luther King Jr. wouldn't be as iconic as he is if it weren't for the thousands who put his words into action.
My point is: celebrities, especially in an age where more people are concerned about who's dating who in la-la land than who's killing who and why halfway across the world, are vital to spreading the message because people listen to them (for better or worse.) I'm not saying that they're better equipped to solve the world's problems but they have the mic and podium and they might as well use it to encourage those who really can induce change - us - to go ahead and do so.
In Sharon Stone's defense, Scientology, of which she was a part in the early 90's, is deeply rooted in fundamental eastern practices shared by most Eastern traditions, so for her to gravitate towards a purer spiritual practice and away from the sci-fi trappings of Hubbard's religion, is natural. Even though it was under a different name, she's essentially, presumably, been following a spiritual practice for at least 13 years or so.
Karma isn't just some exterior result or effect of a similar cause taken by the causer. It's more psychological than anything. Example: If you lie, cheat, and steal (cause), and was brought up with typical decent moral values (another cause), then chances are those immoral actions will trouble your conscience (effect). That's one way to look at it, and it applies to every aspect of our lives.
Stone's example of the hurricanes as a result of mistreating the Tibetans is too mystical to be taken seriously for anyone who hasn't embraced the meditative way of life, but what about the hurricanes happening as a result of China's huge carbon footprint? It seems pretty obvious to everyone now that if you pollute the environment, mother nature will come back and bite you in the ass.
"So, therefore it must not be the Chinese government doing many evils…according to Sharon Stone’s logic, it must have also been the children too."
You're assuming that children can't commit any wrongdoings... they may not be aware of the implications of their actions, but working the mines all day or taking up causes for environmentally-unfriendly forms of economic development will still destabilize the environment.
"I also heard on the news that many Chinese shop owners were hurt and even killed by Tibetan protestors….does that now mean we will see the Dali Lama and his people suffer in an earthquake or similar natural disaster? I think not."
You're interpreting karma too literally. Hurricanes might not kill them but a gunshot to the head by an enraged relative of the shop owner weeks, months, maybe years later will. If a complete stranger, completely unrelated to the hurricane event or the victims involved, comes along and kills one of those Tibetan protesters, you can argue that somewhere along his/her world line (the sequence of events in the history of that person) they made a mistake in some action that eventually leads to, however indirectly, the stranger killing them.
Anyway... I can go on. Again, I apologize for "deconstructing" your argument if it was only an unrefined rant.
Blame U of T.
My reply....will be short unlike yours you wordy bastard :P
...and it will be on the main page
Wow, that was wordy - and I totally messed up a statement at that! Serves me right...
I meant to say that unlike what most people think, the women in Iraq have never been subjugated, nor, if the populous is left to its own devices, will they ever be.
Neither here nor there...
I'm one long-winded mofo.
Thanks Alex. Sharon Stone's comments incensed me when I read them in the paper but I didn't have the brainpower to respond at length.
Yeah, yeah, charity...but I find all these rich white celebrities' jetsetting and adopting and what not to be kind of patronizing. They tend to make the people they speak for invisible, and erase their agency -- they're just hordes of unfortunates who need to be "saved".
And re: Moe's comments, even if someone is complicit in wrongdoing (which we all are, no?), they certainly don't deserve to be caught up in a terrible natural disaster.
Actually Sharon Stone was quite correct about the earthquake being caused by China's bad karma as a nation. Burma also has plenty has plenty of bad karma.
See more info on group karma at http://www.sentforlife.com/karma.html
*shocked and appalled*
Post a Comment