General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSmall boy mistakes Jersey City sand mandala for playground, destroys hours of work
Jersey City received a lesson on the impermanence of life a bit earlier than planned today, when a toddler mistook a Buddhist sand mandala for a playground this morning, smudging the center and sides and almost destroying days of painstaking work.
Three Tibetan monks have been hard at work since Monday morning on the mandala, which are created and then destroyed in a ceremony to symbolize the fleeting nature of life. That ceremony, a 2,500-year Tibetan tradition, was scheduled for later today.
The mandala, made from millions of grains of sand in various hues, was about one hour from completion.
Councilman at large Daniel Rivera was inside the rotunda when it happened, along with dozens of individuals who came to 280 Grove St. for a naturalization ceremony this morning.
Rivera said the levity in the rotunda ended as soon as the boy jumped onto the mandala.
"Everybody's heart stopped," he said.
Read More: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2014/04/small_boy_mistakes_jersey_city_sand_mandala_for_playground_destroys_hours_of_work.html
postulater
(5,075 posts)Nothing at impermanent as a little kid around sand.
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)gone, to demonstrate the tentativeness of the material world and how it really doesn't matter.
fishwax
(29,149 posts)Later in the day, after working on some finishing and repair, they tossed it in the Hudson River: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2014/04/monks_dissolve_jersey_city_mandala_throw_sand_into_hudson_river.html#incart_river
This is so fitting that the hand of a child once again reminds us of lifes fleeting nature and of the need to do good while were present, McGreevey said during the ceremony.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)phil89
(1,043 posts)I don't see how that is like the buddha.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)the start to be destroyed?
The only reason would be ego.
2naSalit
(86,650 posts)pretty callous of the child's guardian to allow the kid near it, and disrespectful. There is also timing in the process, it may have been meant to be destroyed but in a ritual...
some folks don't get that part I guess.
If you were making a special cake, say for your only daughter's wedding and some kid came in and took a swan dive into it, how would you feel? Egotistical about it?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)It's astonishing how much mayhem they can cause in a moment.
Before I had a child, I'd have been royally pissed if a kid did a swan dive in my special cake. Now... I'd laugh myself silly.
2naSalit
(86,650 posts)six in two generations, didn't need to have my own. I still think I wouldn't have been too happy regardless, I think it's a matter of respect... something I find terribly lacking in our general society these days. More so now than ever in my lifetime. It's not that there wasn't respect shown to others in the past, it wasn't so widespread and blatant though.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Thank goodness you've come down from the mountaintop to scold these troglodytes that we allow to have children these days. Gosh!
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #8)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But no matter how vigilant, some kids are always seconds from mayhem.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)Would not happen with any of them. You cam keep an eye on your kids. In a setting like this, you need to.
Sorry, parent(s) are jerks.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)There is nothing like a child to really drive home the axiom that life is what happens after you make your plans.
I bet the monks DID get the humor of it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)is exactly the point. The beauty is in the ACT of its creation. Its destruction is inevitable.
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)over the marring of a creation that was created to be destroyed.
Of course, no monks were interviewed to give their perspective. Only the 'horrified' hosts puffing their chests.
2naSalit
(86,650 posts)making such an elaborate work is such a common thing that it can be lumped into the regular fluff of the throw-away society such that an "oh well" and a chuckle is all that is warranted.
Okay if you say so.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)We only get our western spectator perspective. Nothing from the creators AT ALL. Do you not even question that?
In my experience in the Buddhist community it would be wave kid seagull whatever. impermanence is the point. It's not a spectator experience.
That the "west" wanted to see a perfect execution to a process that was never intended to be perfect is their own blindfold.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"Chodak added that the child who damaged the mandala inadvertently taught everyone the lesson its supposed to impart.
Its so beautiful and then, next thing, its gone, he said.
And that kinda sorta says it all if you ask me.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)tblue37
(65,409 posts)comment and the monks set about to repair what they could of the edges, though the center was irreparable.
So, yes, the article did say that the monks were upset when they first laid eyes not he mess.
BTW, I had 2 kids of my own and also ran a home daycare for 18 years. I frequently took several toddlers and preschoolers into grocery stores, toy stores, pet stores, libraries, parks, and various other public places, as well as across busy streets on foot (I was too poor to have a car at the time). I also took them swimming at the pool belonging to the apartment complex I lived in during the first 3 years of my daycare operation. I never had an assistant either--it was just the little ones and I.
Not once did any of my charges ever get beyond what I called my "grab-back" reach in public except when we were running around outside in a safe place. Not one ever got hurt; not one ever managed to destroy anything; not one ever ran loose to get in the way of other people (or their shopping carts when we were in stores). When I am in a public place and someone is letting his or her kid run wild, I am always disgusted--not with the kid, but with the adult who is failing to properly supervise and control the kid.
Of course, when I had my troop out and about, I was not doing anything other than minding them. If someone I knew saw me and approached me to chat, I would simply wave the person off and say, "Not now--I have my hands full!" The kids had my full attention when we were out in public.
I don't believe in yelling at kids or hitting them, either. But humans are a hierarchical species, and it is natural for people, of any age, to jockey for status and power. If a little one believes that the adult is the troop leader, the child will normally respond quite well to the adult's authority, especially if the child sees the rules as fair and as fairly (and lovingly) applied.
But if the adult has been wobbly or apologetic about his/her authority, or if he/she has been inconsistent, unkind, or unfair in wielding that authority, then the child will become intransigent, disobedient, or, at the very least, passive aggressive.
When parents have to put their kids in daycare because they have to work all day--or longer--they often feel too guilty and sad to be firm with their kids. They don't realize that some consistent firmness up front will make it so that instead of arguing and struggling with their child all the time, they will be able to truly enjoy their time together. Kids feel safer if they believe there are reasonable rules in force, as long as they believe that those rules will be applied lovingly, consistently, and fairly.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)If the monks were upset it's because they failed to recognize the difference between the symbol and the substance of the teachings. They were attached to the symbol. Thus, the Buddha came along to set them straight.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Response to KittyWampus (Reply #12)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
zonkers
(5,865 posts)I found a copy laying around and read a different random page every day. Kind of reframes my juices.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The Magistrate
(95,248 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)There is a certain something to be learned here.
I would make a terrible buddhist, but inavertantly the symbol took on the message as opposed to the message of the symbol.
Yes, the kid could be all the bad things that some mention in this thread, but really, what you said here transcends all of it.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)The monks themselves destroy these sand paintings to illustrate impermanence. The toddler got there early.
Response to scarletwoman (Reply #3)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I don't think the monks had a problem with it.
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)enigmatic
(15,021 posts)Don't get attached to the material; it's not meant to be forever.
I can give you a 1000 percent assurance that the monks understand and know this, and are laughing w/ the boy, not scolding him.
1000words
(7,051 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)suffragette
(12,232 posts)And from a post below, it looks like the monks agree.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)The official destruction ceremony will now follow the unofficial destruction ceremony.
Orrex
(63,216 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)DU thread the last time it happened http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x952841
video of previous incident
Ino
(3,366 posts)before anyone could notice.
I would like to seduce a monk someday. Is that wrong?
renate
(13,776 posts)And I would so love to truly be that mellow about impermanence. I get it intellectually, but I have a hard time being absolutely 100% okay with it emotionally.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)impermanence of the effort be it a little boy or the ocean.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The peopel least upset by those statues getting dynamited were the Buddhists. If anythingthe Taliban were just proving htem right.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)This isn't done on the beach. It's on the floor inside a building.
Did you even look at it? It's so intricate an precise you can't even breath on it.
The painting WHEN FINISHED is destroyed in a ceremony. The ceremony and the painting being completed is important. Which is why they're redoing it.
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)It was back breaking work by artisans that had to be done all over again.
How frustrating! I can't believe no one seems to appreciate what a catastrophic this was!
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)and figured it was just some multicolored simple thing that could be redone in a few minutes.
I liken it to the wedding cake analogy from another poster. Yes, a wedding cake is meant to be destroyed and eaten by the guests, but the finished cake is important as well as the ceremony of it being cut and pieces distributed. Any bride or groom would be horrified if their wedding cake was destroyed before it was seen in it's completed state and robbed of the ceremony of "destroying" it themselves.
Yes, the child shouldn't have been allowed to run around loose especially when the mother would have known there was a work of art in progress. But what irritates me more is that after her child destroyed that work of art instead of apologizing for the incident she grabbed her kid and fled. As embarrassing as it is when your kid has done something detrimental to others there's an obligation to take responsibility and at least apologize even if that's all you can do to make amends.
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)rituals without understanding are useless.
The little boy allows the point to be made so much more than the ritual destruction.
It does illuminate how most don't understand the idea trying to be made.
It doesn't matter how much work was done. work is a sunken cost and crying over it is useless.
Nothing we do will be here forever.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)in an empty church before the congregation can get there? The point of the service is that it's a ceremony having religious significance which necessitates the congregation being there to benefit from the meaning/teaching which is the point of the church service to begin with.
This is the same thing. The religious ceremony with a COMPLETED sand painting occurs before a congregation in order that THEY benefit from the meaning/teaching... which, again, is the point of the whole thing.
What point is there to a wedding cake without the completed cake? Without the ceremonial cutting of the cake by the bride and groom and distribution of pieces to the guests? Of course, everyone knows that the wedding cake is going to be destroyed, but the completed cake and the ceremony are vital to occur during the cake cutting and distribution of pieces ceremony. Any bride and groom would be rightfully pissed off if some kid sat their ass in their uncompleted wedding cake EVEN THOUGH the cake is to be destroyed as part of the ceremony. Would you seriously tell them "so what, it was going to be destroyed as part of the ceremony anyway"?
There's a deep reason why the monks are repairing the sand painting and vow to have the completed painting finished in time for the ceremony... because it MATTERS that it gets completed and the ceremony conducted with all the people present to impress on THEM the meaning/teaching. What, you thought the monks were making this sand painting exclusively for their own selves??? This is a religious ceremony requiring a completed intricate and beautiful sand painting that is displayed and then destroyed in a religious service before a lot of other people. I has no meaning without those other people, nor having the beautiful completed work of art to destroy. If it isn't fixed and completed no one will CARE that it gets destroyed causing the people to not get the meaning/teaching of the whole point to this religious teaching.
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)lunasun
(21,646 posts)DreamGypsy
(2,252 posts)... by a child, or by the child within us all.
Take your place on the Great Mandala,
As it moves through your brief circle of time.
Win or lose now, you must choose now
And if you lose, you've only wasted your life.
Or, if you prefer the better known version
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)'kids', you gotta love them!
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Castles made of sand, crumble into the sea.
WatermelonRat
(340 posts)I'd spend hours slaving over it, getting it just right, and then a big wave washes it all away.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)slips into the sea... eventually
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)GoneOffShore
(17,340 posts)Sheesh.
Throd
(7,208 posts)Even impermanence can be cut short.
DavidDvorkin
(19,480 posts)chrisa
(4,524 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)that goes down the drain.
grilled onions
(1,957 posts)Number one more people would know about the Monks and their efforts then they would have if it had a happy ending. But just as life has no guarantees their beauty and skill was shortened before its' time. We have many in life that also have their lives cut short and they were considered works of art to family and friends.
This would make a good lesson for students to compare this incident/accident to what occurs in life.
I was curious, though, was the child supervised?
tarheelsunc
(2,117 posts)The kid's guardian(s) should seriously be ashamed they allowed this to happen.
Drale
(7,932 posts)to them its not about the destination of the finished work, but the journey to get there.
Iggo
(47,558 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)Eliot Pattison's second installment of a mystery series set in Tibet - the first book was rich in Tibetan Buddhist iconography and traditions, i.e., prayer flags and mandalas, etc. It's been sitting on my bookshelf, but now that I finished this week's book, I have next week's queued.
My totally pointless contribution to this thread.
Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to Name removed (Reply #68)
hrmjustin This message was self-deleted by its author.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)If there are small children around - doesn't matter what it is - it can get knocked over/smudged/destroyed.
We used to have a big puzzle on a card table. My niece was 3 or 4 at the time. We called her "Miss Destruct-a-Puzzle."
Orrex
(63,216 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Just seems like leaving it that exposed meant they might expect young kids to play there.
Orrex
(63,216 posts)rrneck
(17,671 posts)Construction barricades aren't hard to find.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index.ssf/2014/04/3-year-old_plays_with_almost_r.html