[HN Gopher] The only Buddhist region in Europe
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The only Buddhist region in Europe
        
       Author : janandonly
       Score  : 151 points
       Date   : 2021-05-26 10:03 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.dw.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.dw.com)
        
       | wesleywt wrote:
       | I love how their home page has the Doge meme.
        
         | Black101 wrote:
         | was it an ad? I dont see it...
        
       | qwerty456127 wrote:
       | It seems weird Buddhism is such a minor religion in Europe while
       | it is so rational, based on individual experience (rather than
       | belief) gained through reproducible applied self-regulation
       | techniques, backed by neuroscience and explained with consistent
       | philosophical logic.
        
         | ksec wrote:
         | >Buddhism is such a minor religion
         | 
         | I guess there are group of people who believe in Buddhism as
         | philosophy rather than religion. Although comparatively
         | speaking still very minor.
        
         | cscurmudgeon wrote:
         | > consistent philosophical logic
         | 
         | Agree on the rest, but not sure about that. Buddhism is well
         | known for inconsistencies.
         | 
         | https://scholarworks.smith.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...
         | 
         | I feel poetic inconsistencies/contradictions are the ancient
         | world's equivalent of clickbait.
        
         | rthomas6 wrote:
         | Western/secular Buddhism popularized in the west is generally
         | not the same as Buddhism practiced in Buddhist countries. The
         | actual Buddhist religion teachings can include, depending on
         | the branch:
         | 
         | - Hell and heaven realms where you can get reincarnated into if
         | you've lived an especially bad or good life
         | 
         | - Various gods and demons
         | 
         | - A timeline spanning trillions of years and hundreds of
         | Buddhas
         | 
         | - "Celestial Buddhas" that came from space
         | 
         | - Enlightenment is now impossible in this world because it's
         | too corrupt. If you chant enough, this or that Buddha will
         | reincarnate you into their personal realm where you can become
         | enlightened.
         | 
         | The majority of Buddhists in the world believe and teach these
         | things. The modern secular western Buddhist community is sort
         | of like a Theravada-lite in my opinion. Theravada already
         | doesn't have a lot of the above, but they do have
         | reincarnation, different realms, magic powers, etc. In the west
         | the Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path are emphasized
         | while chanting, ritual, etc. as well as supernatural beliefs
         | are downplayed.
         | 
         | So when you say that Buddhism is rational and consistent,
         | you're referring to a westernized version of it. In my opinion,
         | what Siddhartha Gautama actually taught, or at least what early
         | Buddhism seems to have been, is somewhat close to the pared-
         | down westernized version of Buddhism, just in a Hindu context
         | and belief system due to the time and location of the
         | teachings. But this set of teachings is NOT the same as the
         | religion of Buddhism as practiced by most Buddhists.
         | 
         | All that being said, something real is in the core teachings.
         | You don't have to take anyone's word for it. You don't have to
         | have faith in anything. Just learn to look inside, and see for
         | yourself.
        
           | tralarpa wrote:
           | The same also happened with Daoism. The West took the
           | philosophical part and ignored for many years the cultural
           | aspects, belief system, and worshipping rituals (i.e., the
           | religion) behind it. Until some scientists pointed out (quite
           | recently actually, if I remember correctly) that you cannot
           | just do that.
           | 
           | I don't know much about Daoism and Buddhism, but I know a guy
           | who compliments people in the West who claim to be Daoists on
           | their excellent Chinese. Most of them don't get the joke (it
           | seems many important texts have never been translated).
           | 
           | Concerning Buddhism, don't certain sub-branches of Zen
           | buddhism come quite close to the Western "no magic" version?
        
             | rthomas6 wrote:
             | I am not super familiar with Zen, but my understanding is
             | "yes, sort of". Zen come from Mahayana path and I believe
             | it retains those teachings and cosmology, but it's not as
             | central. Looking at it on Wikipedia, it looks like Zen is
             | all about teaching enlightenment with very little
             | importance placed on much else, so in that regard, yes.
        
           | qwerty456127 wrote:
           | > Hell and heaven realms where you can get reincarnated into
           | if you've lived an especially bad or good life
           | 
           | The hells (there are many cold hot and cold hells) and
           | heavens and other realms of the dharmaic cosmology are
           | important metaphors making a lot of
           | philosophical/psychological sense. You can easily tell where
           | are you supposed to reincarnate if you are sufficiently self-
           | aware. Once you practice enough you can become more or less
           | free from the tendencies of your mind which are meant to put
           | you there or there and this will improve your overall health,
           | mood and productivity. You can even realize that you already
           | are living in particular realm actually despite living in the
           | same world everybody else is from the physical point of view.
           | 
           | > Enlightenment is now impossible in this world because it's
           | too corrupt. If you chant enough, this or that Buddha will
           | reincarnate you into their personal realm where you can
           | become enlightened.
           | 
           | Also makes sense: it indeed is very hard (if at all possible)
           | to become completely free from how your neural system is
           | preconditioned to react to what happens around. And if you
           | feel bad about this you better chant than panic or do
           | unpleasant things other religions followers might believe
           | they should to do.
           | 
           | Also, no matter how much mythology does Buddhism contain,
           | that comes packed with very practical and objective goodies,
           | readily available to everybody interested. Buddhists would
           | teach you to maintain mental health and wouldn't label you a
           | heretic if you ignore parts of the teachings or interpret
           | them your own way (unless you start propagating your
           | unorthodox views too aggressively). Isn't this nice?
        
           | pradn wrote:
           | In addition, Buddhism monasticism in at least the first
           | millennium and a half of its life was simultaneously
           | cloistered off from the laypeople, but also very much of it -
           | individual monks owned and invested property and so did the
           | monasteries themselves. Buddhism did not glorify poverty for
           | laypeople - instead the idea was to be wealthy and support
           | the monastics. That's why Buddhism was so popular among
           | merchants, who spread it from India into Afghanistan, and
           | through the Silk Road on to China. (A sea route south-east
           | was also taken at the same time.)
           | 
           | In first millennium China, Buddhist monasteries owned up to
           | 20% of the country's land. Enormous tracts of forest were cut
           | down to supply the wood to build monasteries, temples,
           | towers, and more. Buddhist monasteries even owned slaves to
           | work their lands.
           | 
           | For much of this period, certificates of Buddhist monk-hood
           | were sold by the state or sub-state actors like dukes and
           | princesses to quickly raise money. These certificates got one
           | out of forced labor, which was often used to build Buddhist
           | structures. (Forced labor was a common state inducement for
           | all sorts of reasons in this time.) The explosion of "monks"
           | led to crackdowns, stripping those who couldn't recite sutras
           | or hadn't shaved their head of their privilege. Those with
           | certificates were often exempt from certain taxes, though
           | this privilege was only certain for those at imperial
           | monasteries.
           | 
           | Sources:
           | 
           | "Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History From the
           | Fifth to the Tenth Centuries" By Jacques Gernet
           | 
           | "The Buddha's Footprint: An Environmental History of Asia" By
           | Johan Elverskog
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | In reading the pali cannon I was struck by how the society
           | the buddha lived in seemed so tolerant of different religions
           | and thought. he was a bramin, he was an ascetic, he was able
           | to leave and join these groups freely without suffering any
           | consequences, and it didn't seem like others particularly
           | cared if he were a bramin or an ascetic or following the
           | teachings of some other holy man. Everyone he studied under
           | basically levels with him that they are on the same quest,
           | looking for a decent philosophy to subscribe to, sampling the
           | field in the process and trying different things, engaging in
           | discussions with people of different ideas. It read almost
           | like the situation in western countries today, where people
           | might try out different churches or take classes covering
           | different religions freely, without societal judgement, or
           | even have no strong religious convictions at all. The
           | teachings described are basically cognitive behavioral
           | therapy, but framed in the philosophical language they were
           | using back then which was theological. It almost reads like
           | the budhha was a depressed person in existential crisis until
           | he had his moment of enlightenment, and the other teachers
           | and followers he met along the way were similarly depressed
           | people looking for a treatment in a world where there wasn't
           | one.
        
         | brink wrote:
         | As a child I had a subconscious assumption that Christianity
         | wasn't rational, and maintained that view into my mid-twenties.
         | Thankfully, I had the drive to do research on it, and an open
         | enough mind to accept it, because I was ready to reject
         | Christianity completely for a short period. I know this view
         | isn't popular, but today, I see Christianity as the most
         | rational philosophy/religion out there.
         | 
         | I think it's been wrongfully misconstrued as irrational by
         | people who don't really understand the religion, inside and
         | out.
        
           | qwerty456127 wrote:
           | > I think it's been wrongfully misconstrued as irrational by
           | people who don't really understand the religion, inside and
           | out.
           | 
           | You mean by 99.9% of the people. I have no doubt there is
           | everything one may need to get enlightened in Christianity
           | also but Christians have seemingly done amazing job obscuring
           | that.
        
           | boxed wrote:
           | You don't need to know much about it. Christians believe in a
           | god. That's open and shut right there.
        
             | rsynnott wrote:
             | I mean, these days, at least in Europe, quite a lot of
             | people who identify as Christians _don't_, or certainly not
             | a personal god.
        
             | collias wrote:
             | Belief in a god in itself is not really that irrational.
             | 
             | Even secular thoughts like simulation theory agree in some
             | sort of force that is outside of the material space-time
             | universe we exist in.
        
             | tengbretson wrote:
             | I don't think the belief in creation by God requires any
             | more leaps of faith than a belief in other cosmologies,
             | such as the big bang, etc.
        
               | andredz wrote:
               | What do you mean by other cosmologies?
               | 
               | "Belief in creation by God" is not mutually exclusive
               | with believing that the Big Bang model correctly
               | describes the structure and evolution of the universe.
               | Belief in creation by God is not another option among an
               | array of cosmological models, since it is not even a
               | scientific model.
               | 
               | Anyway, I'm trying to understand what you mean my there
               | not being a difference in leaps of faith required...
               | 
               | "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and
               | assurance about what we do not see. [...] By faith we
               | understand that the universe was formed at God's command,
               | so that what is seen was not made out of what was
               | visible."
               | 
               | Perhaps there are scientists that depend on a certain
               | model not being proven incorrect for their own research
               | to be viable, then, they might hope for something that
               | they do not see. If (<- not biconditional ;p) that model
               | stands on a solid basis they might even have confidence
               | and some assurance about its truth. Is this somewhat what
               | you mean?
               | 
               | In any case, I don't think that believing that a certain
               | cosmological model is correct requires someone to be
               | confident with regards to it. The currently predominant
               | model might not be 100% right and that's perfectly fine.
               | Thus, "belief in other cosmologies" might not require one
               | to have faith while the verse quoted above states that it
               | is through faith that someone understands that God is
               | behind the creation.
               | 
               | (Unless you want to say that confidence in the scientific
               | method is required for belief in a scientific model, but
               | then, confidence in history (or God!) might be required
               | on the other side as well, and so on).
               | 
               | Then, at least 1 more leap of faith is required, wouldn't
               | you say? I'm not sure, tbh. :-)
               | 
               | But then, faith being involved in a process is not
               | necessarily wrong (nor necessarily good).
        
               | skywal_l wrote:
               | The big bang is a scientific hypothesis. You don't have
               | to believe in it. You can accept it because it was
               | proven, reject because it was disproven or suspend your
               | judgement in between.
        
               | DataGata wrote:
               | The Big Bang has physical evidence for its existence that
               | you can personally verify.
        
               | tengbretson wrote:
               | If I hypothesize that a blue Honda Civic was the origin
               | of space, time and the known universe, physical evidence
               | that blue Honda Civics exist does absolutely nothing to
               | confirm or refute my hypothesis.
        
               | biztos wrote:
               | Yes, but in practice who follows it to that level of
               | detail?
               | 
               | From a layperson's point of view, are the astrophysicists
               | that much different than a priestly caste?
               | 
               | I believe the physicists, but I don't think that by
               | itself makes me a particularly rigorous thinker. In the
               | ancient world I probably would have believed the priests,
               | because it was what made sense to people.
               | 
               | And for better or for worse we have lots of evidence that
               | people can reject science and still enjoy its benefits.
               | It's not like refusing to believe in the Big Bang gets
               | you blacklisted from using rockets or microchips, or
               | rejecting evolution means you can't get vaccinated.
        
               | skywal_l wrote:
               | > From a layperson's point of view, are the
               | astrophysicists that much different than a priestly
               | caste?
               | 
               | I have yet to see an astrophysicists burn you on a cross
               | because you don't "believe" in the big bang.
        
           | x3iv130f wrote:
           | Christians have always been 1/3 scholar, 1/3 philosopher, and
           | 1/3 priest.
           | 
           | The premise of Christianity is "revelation". That a higher
           | power revealed knowledge to humans that is not knowable by
           | any other means.
           | 
           | That there is revealed knowledge has meant that Christians
           | spend much of their time thinking about and working out the
           | implications of their revealed knowledge and trying to fit it
           | into the rest of the world.
           | 
           | How rational you find Christianity depends on willing you are
           | to accept it's premise. If you are then it is completely
           | rational. If you aren't then it is nothing but castles built
           | in the clouds.
        
             | tom_mellior wrote:
             | What knowledge would that be? At least in these
             | Catholicism-dominated parts, that knowledge seems to look
             | something like "you better watch it because you're a sinner
             | and might end up burning in hell, except that Jesus saved
             | you because he loves you, but for some reason despite being
             | saved you are _still_ a sinner and might end up burning in
             | hell ". You kind of sound like that's not the premise you
             | mean.
        
               | cryptochamorro wrote:
               | The whole "Catholic guilt" thing is of often pointed to
               | as some whacky vehicle of control, which is a total
               | mischaracterization of what that perspective is meant to
               | do.
               | 
               | Many religions and philosophers understand the idea that
               | humans are not basically good people. They are generally
               | self centered and not sacrificial. So to say that
               | Catholicism or Christianity is strange for placing
               | emphasis on our "fallenness" is a little unfair IMHO.
               | 
               | The daily struggle of a Christian is to strive to rid
               | one's self of their sinful desires (selfish / evil) and
               | live as Christ commands. This a continual process, and
               | one that cannot be stopped. If one just "gets tired" of
               | being a Christian, and lives differently, then they are
               | in danger of losing their salvation.
               | 
               | I only go into this detail to illustrate that there is
               | more to "Catholic guilt" than a flippant "critique".
        
               | wirrbel wrote:
               | The roman branch of christianity (from which Roman
               | Catholicism and protestantism arise) are hugely
               | influenced by lawyers and roman law, which emphasises
               | sinning and punishment a lot. If you are a sinner your
               | priest is a parole officer.
               | 
               | The eastern christianity still recognises sin, but treats
               | it more like a disease, the priest is more of a doctor.
               | 
               | I find this more appealing from a philosophical point of
               | view, yet I lack any reason to believe.
        
             | thrww20210329 wrote:
             | More people should know about the apparitions that have
             | taken place in Catholicism:
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_apparition
             | 
             | These apparitions provide a lot of revealed knowledge which
             | is not in the Bible necessarily.
        
           | tomcooks wrote:
           | Could you explain what's rational about Christianity?
           | Moreover, do you refer to a specific branch or Christianity
           | as a whole?
        
             | cyberbanjo wrote:
             | On that subject the blog undivided looking touches on using
             | applied history and theology to rationalize Christianity.
             | It appeals to my sense of mrationality at least.
             | 
             | http://www.wall.org/~aron/blog/
        
               | andredz wrote:
               | I would recommend that blog as well; it is among my
               | favorite places on the internet. Aron's writings have had
               | a huge and very positive impact in my life.
        
               | bnralt wrote:
               | I took a look at that blog, but it doesn't seem
               | historical at all to me (for example, I can't think of
               | any historian that dates the synoptics to before 70 AD).
               | I also can't say I'm a fan of the way he treats other
               | denominations of Christianity as non-Christian religions.
               | 
               | For a good historical look at Christianity, I'd recommend
               | people look into the Religions of the Ancient
               | Mediterranean podcast, the NT Pod podcast, or, for the
               | old testament, the writings of Mark S. Smith (you can
               | also find lectures of his on Youtube).
        
           | BitwiseFool wrote:
           | Speaking as an Atheist, Christianity gets a very bad rap from
           | popular culture and because of the fact that so many people
           | in the west know about it's core tenets but they only have a
           | casual understanding of the theology. And thus, it's much
           | more readily criticized.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | It is rational to say that creature won. It is not rational
           | to worship it out of love, which Christians began doing.
           | Whatever it is, it does not act in the interest of mankind.
        
         | biztos wrote:
         | Plenty -- most? -- forms of Buddhism also have tons of
         | mysticism, gods, reincarnation, and other stuff that would have
         | to compete with Europe's other religious traditions.
         | 
         | What you're saying is sort of like reducing Christianity to
         | "love thy neighbor" and wondering why that didn't catch on
         | wherever people are nice.
         | 
         | I'm in a Buddhist country right now, and I really dig it, and
         | I'm learning all kinds of awesome things about how people live
         | -- but I'm not sure I'd say the locals are more _rational_ than
         | the Europeans. Nor would I say the Europeans are necessarily
         | more rational than anybody else... maybe  "performative
         | rationalism" would be a good term?
        
         | foxyv wrote:
         | A lot of secular buddhists tend to identify as humanists
         | instead. It's a very popular saying: "Don't use buddhism to
         | become a buddhist. Use buddhism to become a better whatever you
         | are."
        
         | today20201014 wrote:
         | Perhaps people experience cognitive dissonance when reconciling
         | the things that you mentioned with beliefs about reincarnation
         | _?
         | 
         | _ I am relying on a rather common and uninformed understanding
         | of Buddhism here, so I may be way off base.
         | 
         | EDIT: I had to look it up, but I guess European culture has
         | contained some sort of belief in reincarnation (Plato's
         | Republic, Book X / Myth of Er). I don't suppose this belief has
         | much traction anymore, despite the strong influence of Plato
         | (or Greek philosophy in general) on Christianity.
        
           | boxed wrote:
           | It's not reinkarnation. It's rebirth. Buddhism explicitly
           | rejects the idea of a soul so reinkarnation would be very
           | strange. Rebirth is something else that can be difficult to
           | explain...
        
           | qwerty456127 wrote:
           | > Perhaps people experience cognitive dissonance when
           | reconciling the things that you mentioned with beliefs about
           | reincarnation?
           | 
           | Reincarnation was the only thing to come into my mind when I
           | heard "buddhism" when I was a schoolboy. I had zero idea of
           | what else is Buddhism about back then. Later, as I learnt
           | more I found out (or came to an opinion) "reincarnation"
           | itself is a fairly unimportant concept. Perhaps it is only
           | there to attract/repel public and to be another target for
           | becoming indifferent to as you progress.
           | 
           | It may also be beneficial to imagine you being reincarnated
           | in a particular realm of existence and contemplating what you
           | would experience. Imagine you are going to heaven where you
           | are going to live millennia never forgetting... that you are
           | going to hell after that, inevitably, like for real, and try
           | to come in peace with that. That would be an exercise.
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | Have you been to Europe? Many countries there masquerade as the
         | developed nations seen in Northwest and Central Europe, while
         | actually unaffiliated countries around the world aspire to be
         | seen as developed.
         | 
         | A lot of irrational things happen at the cultural and state
         | level in Europe, with an iron thumb of redundancy keeping those
         | silly states in check.
        
         | yakshaving_jgt wrote:
         | > Buddhism ... is so rational ... and explained with consistent
         | philosophical logic.
         | 
         | Are you sure? Perhaps you ought to read about Sokushinbutsu[0].
         | 
         | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokushinbutsu
        
           | qwerty456127 wrote:
           | I can recognize no problem in this. To me this seems a
           | particularly rational way to die once you feel it's time to.
           | Dying the traditionally western way - suddenly, following
           | disability and sickness, seems way more scary.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | est wrote:
       | Fun fact: Lenin's grandma is from Kalmykia and have Mongol origin
        
         | MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
         | Well that explains the death tolls
        
           | dang wrote:
           | If you continue to post unsubstantive and/or flamebait
           | comments like this one and
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27285538, we're going to
           | have to ban you.
           | 
           | If you wouldn't mind reviewing
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking
           | to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.
        
       | hangonhn wrote:
       | Tangentially related, there is a Greek influence on Buddhism in
       | East Asia because Buddhism arrived in China via the Greek
       | Bactrian kingdom. The Buddha as depicted in East Asia is wearing
       | Greek robes and there are elements of Greek philosophy in
       | Buddhism as practiced in East Asia.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
        
         | contingencies wrote:
         | Surprised this is the top thread and unchallenged.
         | 
         |  _Buddhism arrived in China via the Greek Bactrian kingdom_
         | 
         | {{citation-needed}}. Buddhism arrived in the geographic region
         | currently encompassed by the modern Chinese state via multiple
         | routes over more than a thousand years including innumerable
         | exchanges through the overall Tarim Basin (Xinjiang) or "silk
         | road" area via modern Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan but
         | also via Tibet and by sea through Southeast Asia (Myanmar,
         | Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and probably some sporadic oceanic
         | contact with South Asia and Buddhist kingdoms in Indonesia).
         | Tajikistan in particular is only slightly archaeologically
         | investigated to date owing to its remote location, poor
         | infrastructure, geopolitical challenges and IIRC the use of
         | mines during 20th century military conflicts. In short, like
         | any other set of ideas it probably arrived in waves of
         | migration, monkly pilgrimages, exchanges, and instances of
         | official diplomacy. There are records of Buddhism being
         | preached to China by the geographically proximal Yuezhi people
         | as early as 2BCE. Classical Chinese history teaches that
         | Buddhism "came to China" in 67CE. Hellenistic artistic styles
         | are, to my knowledge, never mentioned.
         | 
         |  _Buddha as depicted in East Asia is wearing Greek robes_
         | 
         | The robes are not Greek, they are Buddhist. Buddhism was
         | established in the sixth century BCE. We can read that in
         | Buddhist tradition monks are only allowed a robe and a begging
         | bowl, and that the historical Buddha also set forth a tradition
         | that discouraged iconography as improper worship of likeness
         | (idolatry). This may be because Buddha composed his philosophy
         | in reaction to the prevailing religious environment, where he
         | had previously partaken in such habits which were and remain
         | deeply culturally entrenched.
         | 
         | In short, Greco-Buddhist art is influential because it is, in a
         | sense, the first major period with any voluminous production of
         | "Buddhist art" (a notion decidedly _not Buddhist_ ), and in any
         | event, the Hellenistic style robes primarily only affects
         | Mahayana art, and the modern geographical scope of China also
         | encompasses an endemic Vajrayana philosophy, Theravada, and
         | Tibetan. Even within Mahayana artistic tradition in China, I
         | don't see how a cursory inspection of - for example - robes
         | depicted at
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Buddhist_sculpture or
         | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Buddhist_sculptu...
         | could conclude they're all Greek-influenced. Such a claim is
         | tenuous at best.
         | 
         |  _there are elements of Greek philosophy in Buddhism as
         | practiced in East Asia._
         | 
         | I have never heard anyone make this claim. If we flip the
         | claim, as Buddhist _jataka_ tales are known to Christianity,
         | the reverse could also be said:  "elements of Indian philosophy
         | in Christianity as practiced in Europe". Such a statement,
         | outside of tangential academic arguments, is broadly untrue.
        
           | hangonhn wrote:
           | My apologies for the mistakes in my statement. You seen to
           | know much, much about this topic than me; thank you for
           | adding the nuances this complex topic. My comment was based
           | on my recollection of what I saw at the San Francisco Museum
           | of Asian Arts and some of the descriptions I read there about
           | the various pieces. In all likelihood, my recollection was
           | either incorrect and/or incomplete. I cited the Wikipedia
           | article because it seems to reflect similar ideas as my
           | recollection and also in case anyone else found the topic as
           | fascinating as I did.
           | 
           | I'm past the window for editing my original comment but if
           | the mods don't mind, it would be great to qualify my original
           | comment with the response.
        
             | contingencies wrote:
             | No worries happy to share. FYI I spent most of my 20s and
             | early 30s traveling with an interest in this topic so have
             | visited most museums out there (including SF) as well as
             | many historic sites (including the white horse temple, most
             | major Buddhist sculptural sites in China, remote border
             | areas, various ancient sites in SEA, etc.). It is a true
             | shame that the historic depth of cultural exchange that
             | evidently occurred in these regions is seemingly being
             | systemically oppressed from the popular and academic record
             | due to modern-day geopolitical concerns.
             | 
             | Most people have never heard of, for example,
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanzhao
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srivijaya
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_S%C6%A1n
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajall_Shams_al-Din_Omar
             | (forbear of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He )
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paduka_Pahala
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanzhou#History etc.
             | 
             | After traveling broadly my biggest recommendation is to
             | visit the _Museum of World Religions_ in Taipei, Taiwan. It
             | 's a real gem.
        
         | tombh wrote:
         | Indeed, before the Greeks The Buddha would most commonly only
         | be depicted by his absence, an empty chair or foot prints most
         | famously. It's amazing that the iconography of a religion so
         | ancient and "exotic" is so significantly shaped by European
         | culture.
        
           | routerl wrote:
           | > It's amazing that the iconography of a religion so ancient
           | and "exotic" is so significantly shaped by European culture.
           | 
           | It's more an instance of convergence and mutual influence.
           | Hellenistic philosophy (read: immediately after Socrates)
           | went down a few different lines. The one with the largest
           | influence in the West was the Academic line, concerned with
           | empirical observations and theory making.
           | 
           | But another major line was about how to live well, and
           | focused primarily on ethics and the virtues. Today, the most
           | well known school in this line is Stoicism, and this approach
           | to philosophy really has a lot of overlap with Buddhism. The
           | Bactrians were extremely well primed to be receptive of some
           | "wisdom from the East" (like the type Pythagoras was supposed
           | to have received) that covered a lot of the same topics as
           | Hellenistic philosophy.
           | 
           | By the time Buddhism was meaningfully re-introduced to
           | European academics (starting around the 17th century, but
           | culminating with Schopenhaur in the 19th), several writers
           | once again remarked on the similarities between the
           | Hellenistic and Buddhist traditions.
        
             | skywal_l wrote:
             | Even the "live well" philosophies were heavily influenced
             | by India. Democritus, the father of antique materialism
             | which lead to Epicurus and Lucretius was heavily influenced
             | by gymnosophists when he traveled to India.
             | 
             | Realized this when I was talking about it with an Indian
             | Colleague and when I mention the principals of materialism
             | she immediately recognized elements of her own religion.
        
               | jbay808 wrote:
               | I never realized that Democritus traveled to India. What
               | an amazing journey that must have been.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | Hellenism is not a strictly European culture. Most of the
           | hellenic world population lived in Africa or the middle east.
           | These were much larger population centers than cities greece,
           | italy, or anywhere else in the European Mediterranean at the
           | time.
        
       | Archelaos wrote:
       | I always find it quite embarrassing when right-wing politicians
       | here in Germany come up with this or that does not belong to
       | Europe. In all cases this only shows their geographical and
       | historical ignorance. Kalmykia is a good example. Most of these
       | politicians have never understood that Buddism has been part of
       | Europe for centuries. My favorite example, however, is that they
       | mostly do not know that we have had a permanent Muslim settlement
       | in Europe since the Middle Ages, which is on the same latitude as
       | Edinburgh and Copenhagen: the territory of the former Khanate of
       | Kazan.[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanate_of_Kazan
        
         | Grustaf wrote:
         | Kazan is a pretty weak argument for thinking Arab immigration
         | into Northern Europe in the 2000s would go smoothly.
        
         | MomoXenosaga wrote:
         | Does it matter? Germany is a secular state religion is
         | irrelevant.
        
           | michael1999 wrote:
           | That is not my understanding.
           | 
           | https://www.dw.com/en/the-opaque-financing-of-germanys-
           | churc...
        
           | tomcooks wrote:
           | Seems to matter to said politicians, exclusively during PR
           | campaigning.
        
           | hulitu wrote:
           | Well, it is not. The catolic church has a lot of economic and
           | political power in Germany.
        
             | MomoXenosaga wrote:
             | Your religion has no impact on your citizenship or rights.
             | It's what sets Europe apart and that's what should make
             | right wing extremists proud not Christian heritage.
        
             | publicola1990 wrote:
             | More than the Protestants?
        
               | himlion wrote:
               | They are way more fractured. the Catholic Church is one
               | mega entity.
        
               | cygx wrote:
               | _> They are way more fractured_
               | 
               | In Germany, to a far lesser degree than eg the US. Cf htt
               | ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Church_in_Germany
        
           | oytis wrote:
           | Not quite. Church tax in one matter. Also Muslim women
           | wearing headscarfs are discriminated in access to certain
           | positions in government service e.g. at school, at courts
           | etc.
           | 
           | UPD And also we have Bavaria :)
        
             | anoncake wrote:
             | Muslim headscarves are banned because we're a secular state
             | and the state has to be neutral in religious matters. The
             | Christian Democratic Union would never discriminate on the
             | basis of religion.
             | 
             | There is a cross in every classroom because the previous
             | sentence was an obvious lie.
        
               | rat87 wrote:
               | That's the opposite of neutrality
               | 
               | True neutrality/freedom of religion would let people make
               | personal choices about religous clothing. I'm not
               | surprised that France has something so ridiculous but I'm
               | somewhat disappointed that Germany would also fail to
               | understand this
        
               | anoncake wrote:
               | I think you misunderstood me. Of course it's the opposite
               | of neutrality -- that's merely a fig leaf because
               | Christianity isn't _officially_ the state religion so
               | conservative politicians cannot directly ban headscarves
               | for being unchristian.
        
         | fogihujy wrote:
         | > this or that does not belong to Europe
         | 
         | People who're upset about people abandoning old traditions in
         | favour of imported ones should probably aim their ire at their
         | own grandparents, for embracing U.S. and British rock'n'roll
         | culture, rather than local traditions.
         | 
         | It's not like the majority stopped going to church because
         | someone else built a mosque.
         | 
         | Also, we need to get history back as an major part of the
         | curriculum - societies start doing dumb stuff when they forget
         | their own past.
        
         | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
         | While Kalmyk Buddhism is geographically in Europe, it is in a
         | very peripheral part of the continent with virtually no impact
         | on European culture in general. So, it is still reasonable to
         | claim that Buddhism is something foreign to Europe. After all,
         | Buddhism only began to have a real impact culturally in the
         | 19th century with translated literature coming from India and
         | East Asia, not Kalmykia.
         | 
         | With regard to Islam in geographical Europe, yes there is
         | Tatarstan (and bits of adjacent regions), but Muscovy conquered
         | that Muslim power in the mid 16th century and subsequently made
         | it very clear that while Islam exists there, it is only at the
         | mercy of Christian rulers. Historically, during the tsarist era
         | Muslims were forbidden from trying to convert the Christian
         | population.
         | 
         | Perhaps a better example of "Muslims have been in Europe for a
         | long time" (excepting Ottoman converts, as they are seen as
         | forced conversions/uninvited guests/traitors by nationalist
         | demagogues) would be those Tatars (same name as the Kazan
         | Tatars but not closely related) who settled in the Polish-
         | Lithuanian Commonwealth, but again their impact on the
         | surrounding culture was minuscule, and ultimately they
         | assimilated into the Slavic-speaking Christian population.
        
         | febeling wrote:
         | To call that bend on the Volga where Kazan is located Europe
         | shows how much you need to stretch the facts to support that
         | view. Citing Bosnia might have helped your point better, I
         | guess.
        
           | Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
           | I checked it out on a map, it looks like it's on this side of
           | the Urals by a pretty good margin, so I don't see how it's at
           | all a stretch.
        
             | Grustaf wrote:
             | If someone talks about "Europe" they are not referring to
             | "anything west of the Urals", they mean Germany, France
             | etc, possibly Hungary, Slovakia etc or, if they are feeling
             | generous, Ukraine and Belarus.
             | 
             | It has never happened that two people were chatting about
             | "European culture and values" and had the khanate of Kazan
             | in mind.
        
               | michael1999 wrote:
               | Isn't that exactly the point? There is a geographic
               | Europe which is much larger and more diverse than NATO
               | Europe, the EU, or Christian Europe like to admit.
        
               | Grustaf wrote:
               | What is the point about that? Nobody is worried about
               | "geographic Europe", people care about actual Europe, not
               | some technical term.
               | 
               | If someone is worried that Arab Muslims, or for that
               | matter Arab Christians, will not assimilate into European
               | culture and are incompatible with European values, how is
               | it even remotely relevant that there is a tiny federal
               | subject in what is technically European Russia where
               | there's a lot of Muslims?
               | 
               | Only someone entirely unfamiliar with Europe would think
               | this makes any difference. If you want to talk about
               | Islam, focus instead on Bosnia, in the heart of Europe.
               | While definitely not without their issues, comparing
               | Bosniaks and Assyrians show that culture is more relevant
               | than religion when it comes to integration.
        
               | michael1999 wrote:
               | What is "actual" Europe? Who gets to decide?
               | 
               | Consider Russia: are they, or are they not "European"? Is
               | the Orthodox Church European?
               | 
               | That you think the answer is so simple, or that anyone
               | who thinks differently is "nobody" is part of why it is
               | so unsettled.
        
               | Grustaf wrote:
               | It's not a simple question, that's not the point.
               | 
               | I happen to be Orthodox, and having lived in Russia I can
               | say that the answer varies depending on context. Most of
               | the time Europe is the "other". European standard means
               | high quality, "My brother works in Europe", a "European
               | car" etc. Even when contrasting Russia with very exotic
               | cultures most people wouldn't see Russia as part of
               | Europe, they just say "Japan is different from Russia",
               | not "from Europe". And I'm not sure it's a very
               | meaningful question either.
               | 
               | What is clear is that there are very few cases where
               | people would consider Kazan European. I haven't been
               | there, but I highly doubt they feel very European, in any
               | sense. And there are exactly 0 cases where anyone ever
               | would find it _representative_ of "Europe", and that is
               | what we are discussing here.
               | 
               | It simply doesn't make sense to say "There are Muslims in
               | Kazan and that is technically Europe so anyone objecting
               | to Arab Muslims in Munich is wrong". That's just a silly
               | argument.
               | 
               | I've also lived in Jordan and I can tell you that Muslims
               | there don't feel any particular connection with those in
               | Kazan. Circassians may perhaps feel differently, I don't
               | know.
        
               | Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
               | I just think the conventional definition of Europe makes
               | sense. Narrower definitions are too ephemeral for my
               | taste, with countries constantly being absorbed into and
               | breaking out of empires as they wax and wane, whereas the
               | Ural mountains aren't going anywhere soon.
               | 
               | That said, to address the point that started the
               | discussion, I think it's just silly to use "there exists
               | some Muslim country somewhere else" as some kind of
               | gotcha against German critics of Islam. The Ottomans were
               | milling around Vienna for a long time, that's a whole lot
               | closer than either Bosnia or Kazan.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | If I use the term "Europe" I mean the usual definition of
               | the continent of Europe which is pretty much "everything
               | west of the Urals".
               | 
               | As far as I'm concerned, Moscow is in Europe.
        
               | Grustaf wrote:
               | You're not from Europe I presume?
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | Scotland, so yes I am.
        
           | cmrdporcupine wrote:
           | How about this, then: the region we're talking about is right
           | in the homeland of the Yamnaya people, AKA the people who
           | spoke Proto-Indo-European, and the ancestors of all
           | Europeans. ("region between the Southern Bug, Dniester, and
           | Ural rivers" as per WP)
           | 
           | In terms of genetics, the R1b haplogroup spread from that
           | region, and is the most common haplogroup among modern
           | Europeans.
           | 
           | So, if you're European or European-descended, many of your
           | ancestors lived there a few thousand years ago. And the
           | language you just wrote in traces its ancestry back to that
           | region (as does German)
           | 
           | EDIT: The point of what I wrote is just that the ethno-
           | linguistic composition of regions is very fluid, and drawing
           | lines around a region and saying "this is what German is" (or
           | whatever) is just a dumb exercise when you put it in
           | historical context. (My own ancestors include many in Alsace,
           | so I'm keenly aware of this -- what's "French"? what's
           | "German"?). Essentialism is dumb.
        
         | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
         | All this is because humans prefer to generalize rather than be
         | precise and this applies to both left and right.
         | 
         | Right, because Islam is an old religion and has been a part of
         | Europe (and other continents) for centuries; these native
         | Muslim communities are in general well-integrated and have a
         | rich history; they have nothing to do with ISIS-style
         | extremism. There are peaceful Muslim communities often react
         | immediately when a crime is committed in the name of their
         | religion.
         | 
         | Left, because "all cultures are equal" it's a convenient lie t
         | with no connection to reality. There are toxic, terrible
         | cultures where some members mutilate others, for example.
         | Sometimes these atrocities are related to religion, sometimes
         | not. Whether we allow some of these customs to take root in
         | Western societies should be a matter of public debate, not a
         | political decision that future generations will have to deal
         | with.
        
           | ainiriand wrote:
           | When you say that all cultures are equal is a lie, do you
           | mean that there are cultures that are better than others?
           | Maybe you mean that there are certain aspects of some
           | cultures that are worth abandoning and some others worth
           | preserving. Do you think there is nothing left to improve in
           | Western culture?
        
             | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
             | > When you say that all cultures are equal is a lie, do you
             | mean that there are cultures that are better than others?
             | Maybe you mean that there are certain aspects of some
             | cultures that are worth abandoning and some others worth
             | preserving.
             | 
             | Yes, I mean both. There are some cultures with a strong
             | aspect of physical violence that is almost a defining
             | factor (for the members of these groups). Taken together,
             | these aspects sometimes far outweigh the positive ones.
             | 
             | > Do you think there is nothing left to improve in Western
             | culture?
             | 
             | There is a _lot_ to learn from. A bigger concern is that
             | Western culture and related values are extremely invasive
             | and try to dominate all other cultures so there is less and
             | less of originality left with everything getting
             | westernized. But we must not be afraid of criticizing these
             | aspects of _any_ culture that involve violence against
             | others (this could be anyone - outsiders, other tribes,
             | family members of given gender etc.).
        
             | hulitu wrote:
             | A cherry culture is definitely better than a potato
             | culture. Between humans however as a philosopher once said:
             | The worm that he thinks is the better between his kind will
             | suddenly became man.
        
         | tomcooks wrote:
         | If you want to have fun with right-wing politicians that
         | blabber about "our Christian roots", just ask them how they
         | feel about Christianity being a subset of Judaism.
        
         | intricatedetail wrote:
         | Some people love gatekeeping, on both left and right spectrum.
         | Power is a drug and this gives them a kick.
        
           | browningstreet wrote:
           | Yeah, it's never about politicians' "ignorance" or lack of
           | knowledge. That's irrelevant. It's about their assertion and
           | what alignments it creates with their base. Constantly
           | correcting these kind of assertions without addressing what
           | they're doing just adds to the noise.
        
         | ainiriand wrote:
         | It is also worth noting that the Iberian peninsula where it is
         | now Spain was an Arab region for 800 some years. The Spanish
         | language is full of words with Arab roots and Arab culture is
         | everywhere in Spain.
         | 
         | It is funny to see the right wing politics trying to preserve
         | this national Spanish heritage that they came up with.
        
           | bpodgursky wrote:
           | I wouldn't say the Iberian peninsula was Arab. There was
           | never a major population displacement; it was controlled by
           | Arabs, but the population wasn't.
        
           | beaconstudios wrote:
           | Andalusia/Al-Andalus is probably not the best counter-
           | example, as it became Islamic through an invasion. Also, much
           | of Andalusia was actually Berber (from northern Africa) as
           | well as Arabic.
        
         | selimthegrim wrote:
         | To say nothing of the Lipka Tatars
        
         | bcatanzaro wrote:
         | Bashkortostan is also part of Europe and very Muslim.
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkortostan
         | 
         | Not to mention the Muslim Balkans.
         | 
         | I bet there are many other examples.
        
       | ardit33 wrote:
       | Clickbait article. That's not really South East Europe though,
       | but more far east, in the Asian border. Barely Europe.
       | 
       | Southeast Europe is usually thought to be Greece, Albania,
       | Croatia and the rest of the Balkan countries.
        
         | tom_mellior wrote:
         | You're right that there is a well-established term "Southeast
         | Europe" to refer to the countries you mention:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Europe
         | 
         | But there is also the fact that Europe continues far to the
         | east of those parts, so there is another southeast corner
         | somewhere else.
        
       | u9rptDjqLl0Pdcz wrote:
       | Also of interest is the Mari Native Religion which is practiced
       | in the Mari El Republic of Russia[0]. I believe this is the only
       | example of an indigenous religion surviving with continued
       | practice into the modern day. RT made a documentary about it[1].
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mari_Native_Religion
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ_2kpTJvj0
        
         | boxed wrote:
         | Hinduism? Seems like a pretty big one to forget :)
        
           | throwaway894345 wrote:
           | Is Hinduism indigenous? Wasn't that a product of Aryan
           | migrations from the north? (genuine question: what
           | constitutes "indigenous"? if one native american tribe drives
           | out another in a particular region, is the conquering tribe
           | still indigenous? What about cases where people mix to become
           | a new people? Is it correct to say that the Irish, British,
           | Germans, Italians, etc are indigenous Europeans?)
        
             | yowlingcat wrote:
             | > Wasn't that a product of Aryan migrations from the north?
             | 
             | I know this isn't a great answer, but "yes and no" -- it is
             | certainly true that the Proto-Indo-Europeans brought with
             | them Rigvedic religion. But that religion itself was
             | syncretized with other beliefs across Central Asia and
             | South Asia over quite a long period of time. While it is
             | often dramatized as a "violent" invasion (no doubt
             | reminiscent of later "violent" "Aryan" invasions), the
             | truth is more bland, which is that the nomadic Indo-Aryans
             | and their ancestors had a rich level of cultural exchange
             | with more settled civilizations. Some of it by the sword,
             | but some of it otherwise.
        
               | throwaway894345 wrote:
               | Yeah, which I guess beckons my other question: what makes
               | something indigenous considering how frequently changes
               | are produced gradually by cultural exchange, gradual
               | migrations, etc?
        
               | yowlingcat wrote:
               | It's a great question, and I'm inclined to ask the same
               | one. My answer is that indigeneity is somewhat of a red
               | herring. Empires have existed for as long as changes have
               | been produced gradually by cultural exchange and gradual
               | migrations as you point out, so the boundary between
               | indigenous and not seems porous to me.
        
           | u9rptDjqLl0Pdcz wrote:
           | I meant to specify within Europe but it seems I missed typing
           | it when I posted my comment.
        
         | throwaway894345 wrote:
         | What about the Sami?
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_shamanism
         | 
         | Pretty sure they are indigenous and I would think their
         | religion would qualify as an "indigenous religion"?
        
           | u9rptDjqLl0Pdcz wrote:
           | Has that been continuously practiced? Other wikipedia pages
           | [0][1] on the Sami suggest that they were all converted to
           | Christianity by the end of the 18th century. There are people
           | who practice Norse paganism today but that is a reconstructed
           | faith based on old writings rather than a surviving religion.
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_the_S%C
           | 3%A...
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1mi_people#Religion
        
             | throwaway894345 wrote:
             | It's unclear to me. The wikipedia article doesn't say, but
             | it seems to refer to it in the present tense as though it
             | is still practiced. I would hope if it died out and was
             | then reconstructed, the entry would mention as much. Here's
             | an article linked to in the entry, which I don't have time
             | to read, but sounds promising:
             | 
             | The Decline of the Sami People's Indigenous Religion http:/
             | /www.laits.utexas.edu/sami/diehtu/siida/christian/decl...
        
               | shkkmo wrote:
               | The Sami Religion was influenced by but not identical
               | with Norse mythology. It appears to have been extinct for
               | the last couple hundred yeats after facing a significant
               | ongoing persecution and conversion.
        
         | FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
         | Uh.. how about Judaism in Israel?
        
         | enriquto wrote:
         | what about judaism or christianism, aren't they "indigenous" ?
         | what do you mean exactly by indigenous?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | KingMob wrote:
         | Perhaps in Europe, but globally, I can think of plenty of
         | others off the top of my head: the various religions of Native
         | Americans/First Nations peoples, the beliefs of Aboriginal
         | people in Australia, even Japanese Shinto probably qualifies.
        
           | dkarl wrote:
           | Maybe shamanism in Korea and Siberia as well.
        
           | u9rptDjqLl0Pdcz wrote:
           | Yes, I meant to say in Europe.
        
           | MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
           | Shinto is an offshoot if Buddhism.
        
             | snambi wrote:
             | not true. Shinto predates Buddhism.
        
             | bavent wrote:
             | Shinto was in Japan before Buddhism. Zen took on a little
             | bit of Shinto when it came over as Cha'an from China. In
             | most Zen temples, there are a few statues of Shinto
             | deities, but neither is an offshoot of the other.
        
       | elros wrote:
       | Bald has been there couple of years ago, that's when I first
       | heard about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_eA_c_Yts
        
         | string wrote:
         | Just a friendly heads up: I used to be a huge fan of this YT
         | channel until I saw some pretty damning evidence that the guy
         | is a predatory sex tourist/pick up artist. I really enjoyed the
         | content (the editing is a breath of fresh air on YT), but
         | ultimately unsubbed and stopped watching. I'd encourage others
         | to look into it and make your own judgement, of course.
        
           | scanny wrote:
           | Thanks for the pointer, and what I read here: https://www.red
           | dit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/judnlm... from a child
           | comment. Won't be watching anything out of that channel
           | again.
        
           | slakrems wrote:
           | He travels around the world to sleep with women. What exactly
           | is wrong with that?
        
           | mettamage wrote:
           | I know many pick up artists that are in a long-term
           | relationship. The group that call themselves pick up artist
           | is too heterogeneous to describe them as people that have ill
           | intentions.
           | 
           | People that don't know about hackers assign similar ill
           | intentions to hackers, much in the same way as pick up
           | artists.
           | 
           | But at HN we know that a hacker (criminal) is not a hacker
           | (curious techie). The same goes for pick up artists
           | (womanizers that are systematic about it with questionable
           | ethics). You have a lot more pick up artists (men not being
           | able to find relationships for years and deciding to fix that
           | problem).
           | 
           | Both groups have members in them that do stupid and/or
           | criminal things which is unfortunate.
        
             | 8fGTBjZxBcHq wrote:
             | No dude they are not the same. PUA stuff came out of a
             | deeply misogynist internet subculture with close ties and
             | many overlaps with far right activists, "red pill"
             | violence, and ethnonationalism.
             | 
             | Plus it's just inherently manipulative and gross. I know no
             | one on HN likes to hear a value judgement but seriously go
             | take a look. And I'm sure someone will jump in with like
             | "but it's not manipulation just acknowledging reality/it's
             | empowering for shy nerds/whatever" and ok sure sure sure
             | but no.
        
               | mettamage wrote:
               | > I know no one on HN likes to hear a value judgement
               | 
               | I get it. When identity, sex and romance are concerned
               | then emotions in oneself can run high. I definitely see
               | it in my own comments. I feel closely to 3 groups which
               | are: pick up artists, hackers and feminists. I am not
               | alone in this, though definitely not a "majority".
               | Whenever any of them are blanket statement attacked
               | without any nuance, I offer a different perspective. I
               | mostly have this with feminism since the idea of a pick
               | up artist isn't used that often in Europe.
               | 
               | > Go take a look.
               | 
               | I did:
               | 
               | * Double Your Dating (the page on humor is cool,
               | "attraction is not a choice", don't remember anything
               | else)
               | 
               | * Juggler Method (learned about disqualification -- aka
               | not taking things too seriously but then more
               | methodically -- and statement of intent -- aka answering
               | "why are you talking to me?" <-- and answering that
               | truthfully and respectfully)
               | 
               | * Mystery Method (high level overview, peacocking and
               | getting yourself in a sociable mood, discarded the rest
               | -- no negging, no routines, Mystery Method is tricky, I
               | had to read this very critically since he seems a bit
               | deluded and IMO most people that read this book read it
               | in the wrong way and start to become negging routine
               | people. IMO, not a good thing. When I read this book I
               | followed a course on ethics because being sharp on that
               | subject is required.)
               | 
               | * Pickup 101 (lots of playfulness and improv)
               | 
               | * RSD (mostly Tim's stuff, which is high energy
               | optimistic positivity, didn't connect with the rest,
               | Tyler seems too "Cartman-like" to me)
               | 
               | Communities I've been part of:
               | 
               | * Almost all Dutch communities (had friendships with some
               | of the members, mostly spiritual or super down to earth
               | types)
               | 
               | * I've been to the 21 Convention in Stockholm (in 2008,
               | which was the time where this was an active thing in my
               | life)
               | 
               | That's the stuff I connected with. I read much more stuff
               | that I didn't connect with. Some companies are deeply
               | misogynist, but the participants aren't (well some are).
               | The participants are the majority of the whole culture, a
               | culture that's mostly silent (and a few loud people that
               | then goes on to have all the media portrayals).
               | 
               | I've seen a few things happen in people their development
               | path:
               | 
               | * Some people become misogynistic while they weren't at
               | first
               | 
               | * Some people came in misogynistic and "sharpen their
               | ways"
               | 
               | * Some people become spiritual (a subset even celibate),
               | because they realize it's not about finding love and so
               | on
               | 
               | * Some people develop a lot of hobbies and start to learn
               | how to enjoy life (I love this group, you can tell they
               | get a lot out of it)
               | 
               | * Some people find a relationship
               | 
               | * And finally there are some people that are still stuck
               | with their old problem after years
               | 
               | I have no numbers, but to insinuate that most pick up
               | artists are misogynistic requires that you've been in the
               | seduction community and spoke to all kinds of people from
               | all walks of life that did not take the center stage and
               | did not appear in the media. Because it's those people
               | that make up the 99% of the culture.
               | 
               | > many overlaps with far right activists, "red pill"
               | violence, and ethnonationalism.
               | 
               | Another thing: US and EU differ. My perspective is EU, I
               | make no claims about the US since I only know the "media
               | side" from there. And yea, that's not a great side to
               | see.
               | 
               | > Plus it's just inherently manipulative and gross.
               | 
               | No it's not. Before I did this, I was too serious with
               | people. I still am. Now I am aware of it and can account
               | for that. This means that people have more positive
               | experiences with me. Moreover, it taught me more about
               | empathy from an emotional point of view (through
               | meditation, the most life changing thing I've
               | experienced). Being optimistic, being positive,
               | empathetic and doing meditation all came because I took a
               | few pages from the pick up artist playbook. There's a lot
               | in their playbook, these were the most important things
               | that I took from it. I do agree that there are
               | gross/manipulative ideas in there. I did my best to
               | filter those out. I see a lot of men do that (and
               | unfortunately also a sizeable group that didn't and
               | straight up got culted into some pickup company's
               | philosophy).
               | 
               | In other words: it depends, it's more nuanced, it's not
               | inherently anything because reality is more complex than
               | that.
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | Regardless of all that, the allegations (a rape trial,
               | getting a hitchhiker to perform sex acts on him for $6
               | under the threat of being left in the middle of nowhere,
               | among so many others) are pretty horrendous, no?
               | 
               | https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/jud
               | nlm...
        
               | mettamage wrote:
               | Yes they are. I wish no one would have to experience
               | that. It scars people for life.
               | 
               | Slightly off topic, but this is even more so the case
               | when children have to watch the abuse (due to living in a
               | small house). Some kids will never be able to develop
               | normally.
               | 
               | Source: I knew a lot of broken kids when I was their age.
        
           | sumedh wrote:
           | What is the evidence?
        
             | abyssin wrote:
             | This post convinced me: https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBal
             | drDossier/comments/judnlm...
        
             | Wouter33 wrote:
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/judnl
             | m...
        
           | pydry wrote:
           | What specifically?
        
           | trainsplanes wrote:
           | Whenever I see this man mentioned, I always see a comment
           | saying, "This man travels AND has sex!"
           | 
           | It's about as surprising as someone visiting Amsterdam and
           | having the audacity to smoke weed or single guys doing what
           | single guys do when they visit SE Asia.
        
             | cmrdporcupine wrote:
             | Gross, man -- he actually brags about raping/coercing
             | girls.
             | 
             | "Oh, you'd like a taster? Well how about the time when
             | Vorkuta boasts of forcing a young hitchhiker to give him a
             | blowjob in exchange for $6. On the threat that if she did
             | not comply he might leave her in the middle of nowhere as
             | they were travelling alone in a car on some deserted
             | highway somewhere in the FSU. You can only imagine how
             | scared she must have been."
             | 
             | From the previously linked: https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAn
             | dBaldrDossier/comments/judnlm...
        
               | slakrems wrote:
               | I have a different definition of "rape" seeing it thrown
               | around so often. If a man can talk a woman into sex
               | without blackmail, that's fair game and to be honest I
               | respect him for it. It's the main thing I want o do in
               | life, sleep with as many women as possible.
        
               | trainsplanes wrote:
               | People post a lot of wild stories on forums and places
               | like reddit. Oftentimes they exaggerate or make up crazy
               | events. It's not enough to push me to go after them.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | There's two possibilities:
               | 
               | (1) He's a proud rapist who is actively legitimizing and
               | normalizing rape.
               | 
               | (2) He thinks its cool to pretend to be a rapist and
               | normalize rape, even though he isn't himself a rapist.
               | 
               | While there's a big difference if you are, say,
               | prosecuting rape, both are reasonable grounds on which
               | someone might decide not to support a creator's output.
        
               | slakrems wrote:
               | Neither if your scenarios are accurate. He is a sweet
               | taker that convinces women to sleep with him, there is no
               | coercion or force. Honestly, I respect how much of a good
               | time he is having.
        
           | Quarrelsome wrote:
           | also worth noting that some people go _well_ out of their way
           | to express this point of view. There's even a subreddit
           | dedicated to it (and at least once upon it was 'busy'). My
           | issue is that it gives the impression that someone has a lot
           | of free time and a serious axe to grind.
           | 
           | Nothing he is accused of is illegal, it may be reprehensible
           | but I don't demand moral consistency of those that entertain
           | me, just adherence to the social contract of law.
        
             | abyssin wrote:
             | I'm not too surprised people spend time to express this
             | point of view. I loved his channel but there was always
             | something that felt a little off for me. One evening I
             | launched a Google search wondering if I was the only one
             | and found the subreddit. I stopped watching afterwards.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | > I stopped watching afterwards.
               | 
               | Do you realise if you want to be morally consistent like
               | that then the only limiting factor is your ignorance? By
               | that I mean its likely A LOT of the content you currently
               | consume or products you use/buy are unethical in some way
               | but you just don't know they are.
               | 
               | I'd like to suggest that if you're not trying to fog-bust
               | your ignorance by personally auditing all your supply
               | chains actively then that is also ethically inconsistent.
               | To permit your own ignorance suggests that its more about
               | how people perceive you to be supporting unethical brands
               | (once the lack of ethics becomes clear) as opposed to one
               | actually caring about the ethics. I'd suggest your
               | phrasing here backs that up.
               | 
               | Idk, that's just too exhausting a mentality for me to
               | handle tbh. I don't think its my job to force everyone in
               | the world to conform to my precise standards, I think
               | there's value in being able to trade with those I
               | wouldn't consider friend.
               | 
               | I mean lets spin it another way, you think the people
               | Bald meets in his videos are all "good people"? A lot of
               | them likely have issues in one way or another but we can
               | celebrate that they're friendly and hospitable and that
               | Bald is going out there and showing us that part of the
               | world which we typically wouldn't see. Lets not forget
               | that its likely that Bald is probably one of the more
               | progressive individuals in his videos. I think that
               | context matters a bit.
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | How does choosing not to watch someone's channel "force"
               | people to conform to your beliefs? I don't get it.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | It doesn't sorry, I rather mean that one is forcing a
               | personal sense of morality on one's supply chain, that
               | isn't necessarily a bad thing. But what is bad is that
               | one only drops what is advertised to them as being bad
               | which makes one think it was never about the sense of
               | morality in the first place.
               | 
               | The implication being that every single supply chain is
               | bad (e.g. cobalt mining in DRC) but we conveniently just
               | don't uncover everything because we'd have to drop too
               | much. We're terrified (to an extent) to accept the
               | negative impact our existence has in this world so pursue
               | a dream of moral purity to escape that harrowing reality.
               | 
               | Bald is a sex tourist so we'll never watch his channel
               | but where is our cobalt mined from? As long as we don't
               | know (our ignorance gives us plausible deniability) we
               | can keep buying products that indirectly kill children
               | while still showing everyone how good we are by not
               | watching Bald's content. I think there's a hypocrisy here
               | because I think relatively speaking Bald is acceptable
               | but to purge him and just permit the rest (because the
               | subjects are more boring or more distant) I think is
               | bullshit.
        
               | shigawire wrote:
               | I pretty much have to use a phone.i don't have to watch a
               | creepy sex tourist on YouTube - so I choose not to.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | My issue with that stance is that effectively its saying
               | that you'll be ethical when its _convenient_ but when its
               | inconvenient you'll be unethical.
        
               | string wrote:
               | I readily accept that the reality is harrowing, but I
               | don't agree that just sharing information about some
               | potentially immoral thing is anything like the pursuit of
               | some state of moral purity. Is it not better that
               | individuals try to make supposed moral decisions where
               | possible, even if they ultimately fall short?
               | 
               | It seems that in order to function one must come to terms
               | with the fact that existence is a moral balancing act and
               | that we all do immoral things. I accept that I own many
               | things that likely caused others suffering. I have had a
               | fascination with the DRC for a number of years and am
               | acutely aware of what goes on there, yet I bought a new
               | phone last year and a laptop the year before that. I
               | accept the hypocrisy. But I am still glad people share
               | information about what happens there. Whilst most of us
               | will ignore it, some person or people better than me may
               | be able to use that information to enact some positive
               | change. At least the conversation can occur.
               | 
               | It is also a harsh reality that the less abstracted the
               | situation, the easier it is for humans to face up to
               | their own sense of morality. For whatever reason having
               | intimate knowledge of a person is more impactful than
               | hearing that an item you purchased was manufactured using
               | some material that was mined by a nameless individual
               | thousands of miles away. Right or wrong, we attach more
               | weight to our judgements of others when a more direct
               | connection can be made. It seems to me unrealistic to
               | ignore that humans operate in this way.
               | 
               | Ultimately the intention of my original comment was not
               | to tell people what to do, nor to judge, nor to
               | demonstrate virtue. I was just sharing information so
               | others could also make an informed decision. I chose not
               | to watch his channel based on my own personal moral
               | compass and my own boundaries of inconvenience.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | I'm with you there, I just wish people had this level of
               | energy in regards to things like having Saudi Arabia as
               | an ally. We take the zero effort to stop watching this
               | Youtuber but when we're at the pump we're mostly not
               | thinking about the suffering of women in Saudi Arabia.
               | You're right that there's this metric of distance that
               | appears to matter in these calculations.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > Nothing he is accused of is illegal
             | 
             | Sex in which "consent" is derived through a combination of
             | cash payment and coercive threats is illegal on at least
             | one and often two independent bases in most jurisdictions.
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | Pretty sure rape is illegal in most jurisdictions.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | he isn't accused of rape, he's accused of sex tourism and
               | general misogyny.
        
               | cmrdporcupine wrote:
               | No, he's accused of non-consensual sex.
        
               | Quarrelsome wrote:
               | well that's new. When I was reading the subreddit it was
               | only about questionable posts he (allegedly) made in some
               | pick up forum like a decade prior about offering women
               | money for sex.
        
         | apples_oranges wrote:
         | off topic, but people keep mentioning youtubers here in a way
         | that makes me wonder: Hm, should I know that channel? Am I
         | completely out of the loop?
        
           | zmix wrote:
           | Yes, it would be more helpful, if they would not talk about
           | these Youtuber's as they'd be our next door buddies but be a
           | more explicit: The Guy's channel is named "Bald and
           | Bankrupt", he is from the UK and travels a lot, which he
           | documents on Youtube. The link to the video is:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_eA_c_Yts
        
           | TigeriusKirk wrote:
           | I dunno, but I was hoping the comments on the story would
           | offer some insight into the region. But half of them are
           | gossip about some random youtuber who went there once.
        
         | DoingIsLearning wrote:
         | On thing that really surprised me watching his channel is just
         | how empty all these periphery russian republics appear to be.
         | 
         | I understand that there is economic struggle as in many other
         | parts of the world. But I was really surprised by the general
         | lack of actual people against the large swaths of land.
        
           | burntoutfire wrote:
           | Afaik it's either due to climate (too cold or not enough
           | rainfall) or soil not very conducive for farming (which is
           | the case for Siberia). Populations explode in arable areas,
           | which in Russia means mostly the European side.
        
           | ajb wrote:
           | Russia's population is half that of the US, in twice the land
           | area
        
             | brudgers wrote:
             | And a lot of the US is pretty sparsely populated.
        
             | eigenket wrote:
             | Also the US has five times the population of the UK, and 40
             | times the area.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | And its not like the UK has a uniform population density
               | internally - we have a greater area of peat bogs than
               | built up areas:
               | 
               | https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/land-cover-atlas-
               | uk-1.74...
        
             | enkid wrote:
             | And ~80% of that lives on the ~20% of land in Europe,
             | making the rest of Russia very sparsely populated.
        
           | yorwba wrote:
           | Most of the planet is sparsely populated:
           | http://www.luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/
        
             | KingMob wrote:
             | And the population of the solar system is heavily
             | concentrated on just one planet.
        
       | siraben wrote:
       | The title should correct the spelling to "Buddhist" from
       | "Buddist"
       | 
       | EDIT: now it has been corrected, thank you!
        
       | askesum wrote:
       | What's the big deal:"a piece of Asia on the European continent",
       | Europe and Asia are two parts of one continent, Eurasia
        
         | jefurii wrote:
         | I'm not that knowledgeable about that part of the world, but I
         | think the surrounding countries are mostly either Eastern
         | Orthodox Christian or Muslim.
        
         | 01100011 wrote:
         | I can't help but think that the whole distinction between
         | Europe and Asia is based on European pride and racism. It
         | definitely makes sense to divide them from a cultural
         | perspective, but a geological one? Come on.
        
         | tomcooks wrote:
         | I believe that this separation has more to do with the main
         | religion in those two areas, which are very important in the
         | context of this article.
        
         | m_mueller wrote:
         | agreed, and even more sensible would be to just think in
         | regions. Bosporus, Black Sea and the Mediterranean are natural
         | boundaries for the European region, the Himalayas are the
         | natural boundaries between East/Central and South Asia, the
         | Saharan / Arabian / Afghan and Kazakh deserts and steppes are
         | natural boundaries of the Middle East / North African region.
         | Whenever a civilization has tried to cross over from one of
         | those regions into the other, big world events ensued.
        
         | tompccs wrote:
         | The Ural mountains divide Europe from Asia. It can also be
         | argued that the division of Europe from the Mid East (East Med)
         | is between Christianity and Islam.
        
       | helsinkiandrew wrote:
       | Headline on the page is "The only Buddhist region in Europe"
        
         | pilsetnieks wrote:
         | I don't quite get why "country" in the title here is in quotes
         | - even though not an independent state, it's a country the same
         | way Wales or Scotland is a country.
        
           | qwerty456127 wrote:
           | I wish this could be shown higher. Sadly they have already
           | replaced "country" with "region" despite it in fact is a
           | country like Scotland is (or at least a state like California
           | is).
           | 
           | By the way Tatarstan, another country in the Russian
           | Federation even is officially a "sovereign state integrated
           | with Russia". There even are such things as citizenship and
           | constitution of Tatarstan.
        
           | marto1 wrote:
           | That's correct. The respublika(republic) in question -
           | Kalmykia, is part of the Russian *federation*.
        
       | Grammrr wrote:
       | Kalmykia is really hot and has camels. People are usually shocked
       | to know about this region of Russia
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-26 23:01 UTC)