Ars Regendi Simulation Forum

Full Version: Aum Shinrikyo - Real (hardcore) Terrorists
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I just spent some time on one of my hobbies and when I did a bit of research into WMDs, mindcontrol and alternative uses of medical substances, I came accross Aum Shinrikyo

I have never heard of that group before - little titian was more interested in disney cartoons back when they have been all over the media. The main terrorist groups I have grown up with were Al-Qaida and the Taliban - Middle East religious extremists who love the romantic ideals of being united with fellow men fighting alone against the all-powerful evil. Men who love and adore the simplicity of a religous life, who keep masculine spirits high in their ideals and who have apparentely absolutely no sense of beard-care (i know that everybody has their own taste in fashion but seriously, just look at it. I bet eating Spaghetti becomes a nightmare with such a thing Glotz).

Ok, I also heard a bit of the IRA but they were perceived more like a bunch of football hooligans who got bored with just representing a club and then simply teamed up and supported Cub Ireland.


The wikipedia article gives a nice overview about Aum Shinrikyo.
I am sure that there are many youngsters like me who never heard of them, so here's an even shorter overview:

Aum Shrinrikyo emerged from a yoga class in the 1980s which got bored with stretching legs and practicing new ways of engaging in auto-erotic practices, so that they thought that it would be a nice change once in a while if they formed a religous cult and became a bit more hardcore.
Within a couple of years the group grew intensely around its visions of a new form of humanity created by science - there are quite a lot similarites to Team Galactic (Pokemon fans know what I'm talking about).
Whilst having some fun with common leisure-time activities like sect meetings, swallowing LSD at some occasions and running in the Japanese elections, they build up production facilities for chemical weapons of mass destruction (such as VX (to day Aum is the only organisation known to have ever actually used that agent) and seratin nerve gas), bought anthrax and ebola cultures from Zaire, invited some Russians to the party who brought a Mi-17 helicopter (nuclear bombs were apparentely sold out at the time), murdered some personae non gratae and stockpiled a few million in cash.

So far nothing unusual - apart from smoking and boozing in side streets just the sort of stuff you would expect some teenagers with too much time and too little parenting to do whilst skipping class.
We don't blame them for that; young people do stupid stuff when they get bored.

But stuff got a bit more serious once Aum decided to extend its reach into the affairs of the public transportation system by planting Seratin all over the place.
Several people died, a couple of hundred were harmed.


Those of you who are older will surely remember Aum Shinrikyo.
Can you share your memories with us? What do you remember? How was it possible, that high quality smart-mastermind terrorism reality was taken over by some long-bearded wannabe troublemakers?


PS: Maybe such terrorism can be built into AR with some tasks and random events?
In my childhood I heard on “Radio Liberty” at least one broadcast about them. If I remember correctly, some representative of organization has participated in that broadcast, and they even aired the record of some speech of Shoko Asahara.

It was in early 90s, definitely before they became known as terrorists, because in that broadcast they were represented like nice Buddhist/New age movement. I had good impression about them. I have no idea about what could provoke them on such insane actions.

GadTheHero

I remember the Sarin gas attack in the subways of Tokyo from the mid-90s, but haven't heard of any other major attacks since then. They seem to be under close surveillance by now. They might not have been a long-term success, because they don't operate out of territories without much governmental control. (On the other hand, 1970s terror groups like the Italian Red Brigades and the RAF managed longer campaigns in industrialised countries...)
Buddhism is as vile an opiate as Christianity and Islam. This is obvious to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of its history and real world manifestations.

BaktoMakhno Wrote:
Buddhism is as vile an opiate as Christianity and Islam. This is obvious to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of its history and real world manifestations.

Chu Hsi found Buddhist principles to be darkening and deluding the original mind as well as destroying human relations. Still like with all religions there are variations of them, some are more destructive than others.

Rising Phoenix

Helsworth Wrote:

BaktoMakhno Wrote:
Buddhism is as vile an opiate as Christianity and Islam. This is obvious to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of its history and real world manifestations.

Chu Hsi found Buddhist principles to be darkening and deluding the original mind as well as destroying human relations. Still like with all religions there are variations of them, some are more destructive than others.

And better do not say the word 'Buddhist' around Hindus. Many believe Buddhism is a cheap rip-off of their religion... Hehe

Honestly, all religions have some good things. However as they are institutionalized and become organized, the leadership becomes less interested in theology and more in the adquicision of luxuries.

Rising Phoenix Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:

BaktoMakhno Wrote:
Buddhism is as vile an opiate as Christianity and Islam. This is obvious to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of its history and real world manifestations.

Chu Hsi found Buddhist principles to be darkening and deluding the original mind as well as destroying human relations. Still like with all religions there are variations of them, some are more destructive than others.

And better do not say the word 'Buddhist' around Hindus. Many believe Buddhism is a cheap rip-off of their religion... Hehe

Honestly, all religions have some good things. However as they are institutionalized and become organized, the leadership becomes less interested in theology and more in the adquicision of luxuries.

Hehe I would understand the hindu on this one. It's really kind of funny since Buddha was an aristocrat who's father only exposed him to wealth and well being and when he finally got out and saw the real world, how labor was, how people looked like, how they were dressed, what they ate etc, he had a shock and concluded that life is only suffering and basically all souls should escape the hell of samsara.

BaktoMakhno Wrote:
Buddhism is as vile an opiate as Christianity and Islam. This is obvious to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of its history and real world manifestations.

Every ideology, religious or otherwise, is an opiate. It does not automatically mean that it cannot have positive effect on individuals or societies. I tend to believe that in modern societies religion as an institute is an anachronism. But historically Buddhism less often was used for justification of wars than Christianity and Islam, so it can be said that it was not as vile as them.

Rising Phoenix Wrote:
And better do not say the word 'Buddhist' around Hindus. Many believe Buddhism is a cheap rip-off of their religion... Hehe

Buddhism differs from Hinduism more than Christianity and Islam differ from Judaism. Among big traditional religions it is the only truly anthropocentric religion. Humans are considered not only to be superior to animals, but also superior to gods (at least potentially), because only humans are able to become Buddhas.
Plus Buddhism is free from conception of castes.

Rising Phoenix

Helsworth Wrote:
Hehe I would understand the hindu on this one. It's really kind of funny since Buddha was an aristocrat who's father only exposed him to wealth and well being and when he finally got out and saw the real world, how labor was, how people looked like, how they were dressed, what they ate etc, he had a shock and concluded that life is only suffering and basically all souls should escape the hell of samsara.

Exactly. Rather than devising a way to bring prosperity to everyone, he wanted everyone to escape poverty. This is why I can not agree with Buddhism -- I believe it is possible to bring prosperity to everyone through technology.

Mind if I ask, what particular elements Chu Hsi criticized of Buddhism? I am aware of the Hindu perspective (basically that Buddhism takes the meditation ideas, changes the purposes, and throws away the Vedic texts while also kicking out God ("Supreme Being") from the picture), but the Confucian perspective is unknown to me.

@Lord Alexander
Shamanism, animism and animatism did a lot less killing, but it did a lot less for technological progress.
@Rising Pheonix
By the thirteenth century, "China had what was probably the most sophisticated agriculture in the world, India being the only conceivable rival." (Elvin)
Chu Hsi rejects the transmigration of souls

Quote:
Buddhists say that when a person dies they become a ghost, and the ghost becomes a person. If so, then throughout the world there certainly are a lot of comings and goings without any transformation or creations from anything else. There certainly is no Principle in this. (Further Reflections, 13:12)

To someone who said that Buddhists combine Confucian concern with human affairs and life with concern for ghosts and death, Chu responded:

Quote:
I say that I don't know whether these matters of humans and ghosts and life and death are one thing, or two things. If they are one thing, then talking about human affairs and the principle of life already certainly includes such matters as death and ghosts and spirits. We need not combine them in order for them to be combined. If you have to make a separate category then there will be a desire to have a division between beginning and end, and between the living and the dead. (Further Reflections, 13:25)


Such references to immortality are repeatedly joined with warnings against succumbing to a selfish notion of "preparing to get into Heaven" while actually ignoring the often difficult task of following God's will in this life. "If you don't cultivate this life but you cultivate the next life—why?" (Further Reflections, 13:30) To do so is to mistake death for life, and to thus fail in this life and also fail to achieve everlasting life: "I am afraid the Buddhists will only love the true nature after death. Isn't their intention egoistic and self-interested?..." (Fu 52)

The Zen Buddhists claim to believe in the continued life of the soul after death, but their notion of this is one of escape from the thoughts, desires, and mental activity of this world—in fact, they teach their students to attempt to achieve this state of death-like nothingness as their highest goal. Chu counters this by addressing the eternal, negentropic process of the Creation as the necessary location of man's concentration both in life and in death:

The creative transformation of heaven and earth is likened to a great furnace, in which human and non-human beings never cease to grow and re-grow. This points to the principle of reality, and we need not worry about the cessation of the creative transformation. Now, Buddhists see it as a vast, vacuous and quiet thing, and mistake the "awareness or consciousness" posterior to death of human and non-human beings to be the principle of reality. Isn't this wrong?

Now, what our Confucian sages and worthies call "to go back in fulfillment and die in peace" is none other than not to miss the Principle of Heaven man has received, so that he can die without any regret or shame. (Fu, 51)

Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's