| SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY |
|
Prof.
Aaron
Baba,
Special
Advicer
on Technological
Development |
Site Powered by Directorate
of Science &
Technology,
Kogi State |
Updated
November 30, 2008
VOL.
13 No. 747 WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 17 - TUESDAY SEPTEMBER
22, 2008 ISSN 1116 - 7085 N70.00 |
|
|
|
The “Tiger”
Returns to Buddhism
Tiger Woods said he has
rediscovered his childhood
religion of Buddhism and
hoped to relearn its lessons
of restraint. This was
Tiger’s “leap of faith,”
said Newsweek, his very
public religious conversion.
It is true that we witnessed
the conversion of Tiger
Woods, but it was no
voluntary conversion to an
old religion. Rather, this
was a forced conversion to
the new religion of
emotional openness and
making public one’s misery
and failing.
When Tiger Woods invoked his
religious faith during his
public apology on 19th
February 2010, he readily
acknowledged that a lot of
people would be surprised.
"People probably don't
realize it," he said, "but I
was raised a Buddhist, and I
actively practiced my faith
from childhood until I
drifted away from it in
recent years."
But Woods said his Buddhist
faith would be a key part of
his quest to put his life
back together after
revelations of his marital
infidelity, which he
admitted for the first time.
Buddhist experts said Woods'
summation of the tradition's
beliefs was accurate -- and
that his remarks likely will
bring more attention to the
faith in a week when its
highest profile leader, the
Dalai Lama, is visiting the
United States.
"I have a lot of work to do,
and I intend to dedicate
myself to doing it," Woods
said, reading a statement
from Ponte Vedra Beach,
Florida. "Part of following
this path for me is
Buddhism, which my mother
taught me at a young age."
"Buddhism teaches that a
craving of things outside us
causes an unhappy and
pointless search for
security," he continued. "It
teaches me to stop following
every impulse and to learn
restraint. Obviously, I lost
track of what I was taught."
A handful of Buddhist
scholars said Woods'
description of Buddhist
teaching was accurate.
"Woods was quite accurate,"
said Janet Gyatso, a
professor of Buddhist
studies at Harvard
University. "Craving causes
unhappiness. That's a
fundamental Buddhist idea."
He visited a Buddhist temple
with his mother each year
around his birthday, slept
near a mother-of-pearl
Buddha from his Thai
grandfather, and wore a gold
Buddha around his neck,
according to the profile.
Woods' mother, Kultilda, is
a Thai-born Buddhist.
"I like Buddhism because
it's a whole way of being
and living," Tiger Woods
told Sports Illustrated.
"It's based on discipline
and respect and personal
responsibility. I like Asian
culture better than ours
because of that."
When allegations of Woods'
infidelity began emerging
after a November 27 car
accident, Fox News Channel
host Brit Hume stirred
controversy by publicly
advising the golf pro to
become a Christian.
"He's said to be a Buddhist
-- I don't think that faith
offers the kind of
forgiveness and redemption
that is offered by the
Christian faith," Hume said.
"So my message to Tiger
would be: Tiger turn to the
Christian faith and you can
make a total recovery and be
a great example to the
world."
But Buddhist scholars say
that forgiveness and
redemption are core
components of the faith.
Some Buddhism experts said
that's what Woods appeared
to be trying to do today.
Many Buddhists applauded
Woods' statement.
Buddhism was in the
spotlight this week before
Woods' remarks, with the
Tibetan spiritual leader the
Dalai Lama a Buddhist --
meeting with President Obama
in Washington-
Buddhism is among the
world's religions, with
about 350 million adherents,
including about 1.2 million
in the United States,
according to a 2009 report
by Trinity College. The
faith began in India about
2,500 years ago.
Woods’s public apology – to
his wife, his fans, and the
media – came at the end of
months of pressure on him to
stop fantasizing that he has
any right to a private life
and to tell us everything
about that car crash in
November and his various
alleged affairs. His desire
to keep his troubles
private, including by taking
refuge on his yacht called
“Privacy,” was treated as
some kind of crime.
His former coach, Butch
Harmon, said the public
wants Woods to “stand there
in front of everybody, take
his medicine, be humble, be
embarrassed, be humiliated,
and answer the questions.”
The idea that Woods had to
be “humiliated” before he
could move on was a
recurring one. Under the
headline “Tiger Woods:
redemption lies with Oprah
Winfrey,” a British
journalist said at the end
of last year that Woods must
“ring Oprah and get on her
sofa pronto” and “share his
pain” with the public.
Experts from around the
world advised “hectored”
Woods that only by opening
up could he hope for public
forgiveness. (Why Woods
should seek my and your
forgiveness, rather than
simply his wife’s and
children’s, was never made
clear.)
The sports correspondent for
Britain’s Mail on Sunday
said in December that Woods
had “better learn the US
formula for public
redemption,” which includes
“display[ing] one’s
contrition on a very public
platform” and partaking in
the “three A’s”: “admit,
apologise, and advance.” The
idea that Woods might devise
his own formula for
resolving his personal
problems, in private rather
than on a very public
platform, was not
countenanced.
Many of the attacks on
Woods, and the demands that
he advertise his pain and
sorrow for all the world to
see, were motivated by a
strange anger toward his
well-known protection of his
privacy. A British
journalist criticized Woods
for guarding “his privacy
with legendary zeal.”
When Woods published a rare
statement on his website in
December – saying, “I am
dealing with my behavior and
personal failings behind
closed doors with my family”
– the humiliation-hungry
media was outraged. One
journalist said, “Woods’s
right to privacy has been
fatally undermined … by his
hypocrisy.” Another said,
sternly, that Woods has “no
right to privacy,” on the
basis that he is a public
sportsman and has made
advertisements and has
therefore made himself
public property.
This is a bizarre idea. Are
we saying that anyone who is
a prominent public figure –
from politicians to actors,
should have no unrevealed
life? Such an erosion of the
line between public and
private, between what we do
for a living and who we are
with our friends and family,
shows just how far the new
requirement for revealing
everything has gone.
The criticism of Woods for
zealously guarding his
private life, and for at
first refusing to do the
formulaic public mea culpa
that is now expected of
every fallen public figure,
showed what really lurked
behind the Tiger-baiting of
the past three months: fury
over a famous man’s refusal
to play by the new rules, to
adhere to the new ethos of
public emotionalism, to bow
before the altar of publicly
advertising one’s pain.
Woods was clinging, for dear
life, to the old-fashioned
idea that a clear line
should be drawn between a
man’s public life and his
private life, and the media
could not tolerate that.
Woods is famous for his iron
will in golf tournaments.
When scandal first broke, he
summoned that stubbornness.
“Personal sins should not
require press releases and
problems within a family
shouldn’t have to mean
public confessions,” Woods
wrote on his website.
But the media got their way.
Last Friday, 19 February
2010 his capitulation was
complete. After months of
being ridiculed and
attacked, Woods finally
partook in perhaps the most
widely disseminated
expression of public sorrow
of all time. The privacy
zealot was successfully
remade as an acolyte of
Oprah, his mind expunged of
the silly idea that he, or
anyone else, should have the
right to sort out his
problems “behind closed
doors.”
The forced conversion of
Tiger Woods represents
another blow to the idea of
privacy. A civilized society
should recognize the
dividing line between a
public man and his private
life, because all of us need
a private space in which we
can develop relationships
and work out who we are. The
slaying of private Tiger and
his rebirth as a public
spectacle makes defending
privacy that much harder.

Does
‘Tiger’, Owe Anybody
Explanation?
Roland Martin says Tiger
Woods should be accountable
to the public only for what
he does as a golfer, not in
his private life.
When Eldrick "Tiger" Woods
joined the ranks of
professional golf a dozen
years ago, it was via the
heralded "Hello, World" Nike
commercial. When he stepped
to the podium Friday 19
February 2010 to speak to an
assembled group of friends,
colleagues and journalists,
the world watched to see and
hear the greatest golfer of
this generation talk about
the sordid events over the
last three months that have
kept him off the golf course
and shredded his
well-cultivated image and
reputation.
The broadcast networks were
aired live by selected
media. reports with their
main anchors there to report
and comment on every word;
the cable nets will
undoubtedly have multiple
individuals ready for
instant analysis; and
millions will tune in to
hear Tiger likely apologize
and possibly say if and when
he will return to
competitive golf.
He isn't expected to take
any questions, and that has
made for an angry bunch of
columnists and commentators,
denouncing Woods for calling
a news conference to make a
statement, and not undergo
the grilling many want to
give him.
Woods hasn't even said a
word, and already he's been
called a spoiled, petulant
child who has lived in a
sheltered world of handlers
since he was 2 years old.
Some have even gone as far
as saying nothing has
changed about him and he's
showing that he is just as
selfish and self-absorbed as
ever.
Tiger, let me be as clear as
I can as to whether you owe
me or the American people an
explanation of the events
surrounding your car
accident Thanksgiving
weekend: Hell no.
I repeat: Tiger, you don't
owe me or anyone else
anything!
I'm sick of these
sanctimonious folks who are
blabbering about Woods
needing to be grilled about
his private behavior. Look,
Tiger Woods didn't cheat on
me. He's not my daddy,
brother, cousin, church
member, neighbor or friend.
He didn't let me down or
crush my view of him. He is
not and never was my role
model.
The only people he owes a
grand apology are his wife,
momma, family, maybe his
friends, and his children,
when they come of age. He
doesn't have to work hard
for me to trust him again.
|
| |
|
|