Video: Tibetan monks’ magnificent sand painting meets young unsupervised boy
posted at 9:41 am on May 25, 2007 by Allahpundit
Preserved for posterity on surveillance video. If you’ve never seen a Buddhist sand painting (and if you’ve seen “Kundun,” you have), here’s a photo series. Meticulous, painstaking — and gone in a flash. Human beings being what they are, it’s hard to watch the clip and not feel a shameful frisson of excitement as the kid unwittingly breaks the taboo with his little tap dance.
The monks apparently weren’t too upset. Hey, they’re Buddhists. Click the image to watch.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Ironically, this happened in Kansas City…dust in the wind, dude.
James on May 25, 2007 at 9:55 AM
I do believe that in Buddhist thought there is the belief in the concept of Impermanence. (I was so going to mangle that word. Thank God for dictionaries.) They believe that everything is transitory. They would have destroyed the painting themselves.
marianpaul on May 25, 2007 at 9:58 AM
James, those guys are from Topeka.
The Monster on May 25, 2007 at 9:58 AM
(the rock band, that is)
The Monster on May 25, 2007 at 9:59 AM
Sand+Kid=What’d ya expect?
Iblis on May 25, 2007 at 10:02 AM
I said it was ironic, not spooky.
James on May 25, 2007 at 10:02 AM
A hand-shaped welt on his ass.
James on May 25, 2007 at 10:03 AM
AP Dood!
That painting was not created by the monks.
It came there by chance. The sand particles just fell there together in a perceived pretty picture….
The child simply represents Chaos.
the painting represents Creationism.
Whew! Wheres that Transcendental Command again?
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on May 25, 2007 at 10:07 AM
wow just like the picture my post wiped out my:
Transcendental /sarc Off Command!
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on May 25, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Sounds like we could use the monks in Congress to enforce existing immigration laws!
Drtuddle on May 25, 2007 at 10:12 AM
As marianpaul said earlier, the paintings are always destroyed anyway to display the truth of Impermanence. While I am sure the monks would have preferred to destroy the sand Mandala themselves, with all the proper ritualistic treatment, I’m willing to bet they weren’t too perturbed. In fact, I’d put money down that at least of few of them smiled and felt that they had learned an important lesson about the nature of impermanence and its roots in the mind of man- which develops from that of a child. It is good to know that some religions of peace really are that.
Can you imagine if that child had accidentally destroyed an Islamic piece of art? Newsweek would be spearing the “little Islamophobic facist” as we speak.
tyler999 on May 25, 2007 at 10:16 AM
“Lama Chuck Stanford”
I don’t think you should be allowed to be a Tibetan monk if you have a name like Chuck….
Privatestock on May 25, 2007 at 10:20 AM
Beat.
That.
Kid’s.
ASS.
fusionaddict on May 25, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Too bad they were Buddhist monks and not Shao-lin monks :-)
steveegg on May 25, 2007 at 10:23 AM
It should be legal for the monks to beat the kid’s parents’ asses.
And tyler, we’d be reading about the family going into hiding because of death threats.
Privatestock on May 25, 2007 at 10:23 AM
We need to put that child in charge of the federal endowment for the arts.
JayHaw Phrenzie on May 25, 2007 at 10:25 AM
What an embarrassing moment as a parent. The child looks pretty young, and at that age, I’d blame the parent, not the child.
Carin on May 25, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Bend over Grasshopper.
infidel4life on May 25, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Washed away like the sands of time…these are the Days of Our Life.
soulsirkus on May 25, 2007 at 10:31 AM
isn’t that proof that the kid is budda?
jummy on May 25, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Well, I do have to say, while I admire the monks for not being mad and feeling that it isn’t a big deal- I think the kid needs to be beaten too ;p. It does not appear to me to be an extremely young kid- like 3 or 4 years old. It’s an older child, who should know the difference between right and wrong, and the idea of “other people’s property.” And he isn’t “doing a little tap dance” innocently as the monks (no doubt being overly generous to the child) put it. The kid looks to be willfully and maliciously destroying something that he knows isn’t his- no different from the child who kicks over another’s sand castle when the builder is gone. This seems to be the kinda kid who grows up to ride around with his buddies smashing peoples mailboxes.
tyler999 on May 25, 2007 at 10:34 AM
The Mother is an IDIOT.
In the time it took the kid to destroy the sand painting he could have been kidnapped.
She is an irresponsible idiot. I bet she didn’t even tell anyone that her child did that and walked away washing her hands of it.
Does anyone know if she actually apologized or reported the incident to anyone. Or did she just slink out the door?
The Mother should be ashamed of herself.
angryamerican on May 25, 2007 at 10:39 AM
That’s crazy talk angryamerican. Nothing bad ever happens at the post office…oh…wait…
tyler999 on May 25, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Why was this kid alone long enough to do that? In a TRAIN STATION?? I agree the parent is to blame here.
Sure the pic is meant to represent impermanence, but that doesn’t excuse the little jerk.
tickleddragon on May 25, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Sudden Juvenile Syndrome.
Beauty.
Buck Turgidson on May 25, 2007 at 10:47 AM
I may be crazy, but I think the kid improved it. It went from being just another Buddhist sand painting to an impressionistic masterpiece that conveyed beauty, chaos and destruction. The kid should get a scholarship to RISD. As for his parents, that’s another story.
Dean Barnett on May 25, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Yeah- the way people want to “improve” the Bill of Rights…
tyler999 on May 25, 2007 at 10:54 AM
The proper barrier is parental control. That was an outright act of vandalism. The kid is old enough to know better.
DAT60A3 on May 25, 2007 at 10:56 AM
The parents should be held responsible. I can’t blame the kid. If was me at that age,or even me in college, I probably would have done the same thing.
vcferlita on May 25, 2007 at 10:58 AM
As much as I agree that the parents are to blame, we can’t get too carried away lest we fall into the slippery slope of “there is always someone/something else to blame.”
At what point is a person responsible for their actions apart from whatever reinforcements they have gotten of negative behavior? I find it hard to believe that at his age the kid hasn’t been told by his parents, teachers, and others to be respectful of other people’s things and treat others the way he would like to be treated. How many of us, who did bad things when we were six or seven, can honestly say we didn’t know what we were doing was wrong?
tyler999 on May 25, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Who are we to judge what’s right and wrong?
I’d say there’s a lot of grey area there.
Buck Turgidson on May 25, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Yeah, the kid is a brat and the parents should know better, but those wondering why the monks aren’t angry or admire their patience you would be surprised that they would actually be happy about what happened.
Customarily, Buddhist monks destroy the sand paintings themselves not long after completion. My daughter is a Buddhist and spent last summer interning at a monastery–even got to meet the Dali when he came to bless the newly constructed temple.
I’m pretty sure the monks simply felt the child was destined to do that and it actually would have reinforced their belief system.
Faith1 on May 25, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Like infidels thru an hourglass so go the Sands of Passion.
Alden Pyle on May 25, 2007 at 11:27 AM
BWAHAHAHAHAA!!!!
Bad Candy on May 25, 2007 at 11:37 AM
“The Sands of Ooohhmmmmmmm”
The parent is responsible and this isn’t the first time she’s left her child un-attended. If she is aware of the damge he did, and she starts watching him now, this might prevent a mulit-million dollar search for that kid one day. That’s a pretty good return on a sand painting.
csdeven on May 25, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Nice observation thanks for sharing.
Bradky on May 25, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Buddhist monks won’t get upset at all about something like this: Buddhism is all about non-attachment to illusions and overcoming ego and selfish desire. S
o you know you’ve reaaaaaally stepped over the line when a monk wants to punch you out–like they do in SE Asia where the Islamists are getting out of control.
ahem on May 25, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Psych!
The transitional, accepting nature of Buddhism (the true religion of peace) makes this less of a big deal to the Monks than us however the parents deserve the humiliation they’re getting for being so rude according to our traditions too.
Speakup on May 25, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Looks like we have a new little Dalai Lama!
DING-DING-DING!
profitsbeard on May 25, 2007 at 12:45 PM
What world are you living in? And you think a teacher would have quoted the Bible? News flash for those saying this kid is old enough, this kid is like 2 maaaybe 3. If you have a mama that doesn’t watch you in public, how much teaching do you think she does in private?
- The Cat
P.S. I wonder if there is a baby daddy in the play here; is HE ever around?
MirCat on May 25, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Quoting from http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/120315.html
Niiiice. Great way to accept responsibility there, lady.
Also, why are the news outlets referring to this as a “dance”? It appears on the video the kid is dragging his feet and deliberately kicking around the sand. A “dance” implies the sand was just getting in the way of his creative energies…. or perhaps there was dance music playing that I just couldn’t hear in the audio capture?
Dave Shay on May 25, 2007 at 1:33 PM
I can’t watch the video because I am at work and don’t know how old the kid is, but I can’t help but ask “where the heck are his parents?!”
I don’t care if it is meant to be impermanent and eventually destroyed, such behavior is rude and disrespectful, doncha think?
Bob's Kid on May 25, 2007 at 1:34 PM
Nice find Dave.
I want that Mother’s photo. She needs to be embarrassed for being such an idiot.
The fact that she is so irresponsible to leave her child like this and then not do the right thing when she realized a sand painting had been ruined is ridiculous.
Since the sand painting has absolutely no dollar value the only thing that can be done to her is to put her photo in the paper as an example of how to be a bad Mother and embarrass her.
Her child is going to be lost someday or kidnapped.
angryamerican on May 25, 2007 at 1:50 PM
The video I watched from kansascity.com shows the entire sequence from when the boy and mother first walk by to when the mother reappears and leads him away. He could’ve easily been snatched away in the time that elapsed in between his mother’s two appearances.
Dave Shay on May 25, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Unless they can assign a dollar amount to their labor that they donated. But of course it would be the monks that would have to sue, and I don’t see that happening.
I forgot to say this in regaurds to those saying it was willful distruction. When you were a two year old kid and you saw a bunch of sand on the floor would the first thought in your mind be, Oh look at that masterful blah blah blah. No, it would be, “Sand! Play!”
- The Cat
MirCat on May 25, 2007 at 2:09 PM
This is America, maybe the kid will get really fat. Fat people are hard to kidnap. Problem solved.
Privatestock on May 25, 2007 at 2:10 PM
What if the kidnapper lured him with a Twinkie and a couple of Big Macs?
Dave Shay on May 25, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Now I don’t feel so bad about my preschooler’s tantrum at the library.
Buck Turgidson on May 25, 2007 at 2:52 PM
I work just a couple blocks away from where this took place and I visit this building every few days. The paintings have already been redone and the monks were not upset. No harm.
However, the mother should be very embarrassed. I would never let my child loose in such a large crowded place.
Spacen on May 25, 2007 at 2:53 PM
“tap dancing”? looked more like a cat in a litter box to me.
RightWinged on May 25, 2007 at 3:22 PM
A deep bow to jummy.
GPE on May 25, 2007 at 4:08 PM
This has everything: lax controls on entry, asymmetric conflict, even a depopulated interior.
Kralizec on May 25, 2007 at 4:09 PM
The kid may have been listening to “Enter Sandman” by Metallica.
VikingGoneWild on May 25, 2007 at 4:33 PM
Would someone please explain to me why there are Buddhist Monks in Kansas City???? What’s the world coming to??!! What’s next, The Dalai Lama hanging out at the Greyhound station? This is a crazy, mixed-up world, man.
robblefarian on May 25, 2007 at 4:35 PM
God help us. LMAO…:)
angryamerican on May 25, 2007 at 5:16 PM
I bet the mother was on her cell phone yacking away. I am amazed how parents do not pay attention to the actions of their children these days in public places. If someone was to tell the kid in a harsh tone, how wrong he was, I am sure the parent would yell at the person who confronted the child saying ” My boy is a good boy. You have no right to yell at him”. Yes, it takes a parent to raise a child, not a community as some parents expect when letting young ones running free as they wish to, getting in unadoring people’s way. Everyone else does not think your kid is as cute as you think your kid is. Maybe the rest of us think your kid a pain in the neck.
StuLongIsland on May 25, 2007 at 6:12 PM
thoughtless parents.
Zorro on May 25, 2007 at 6:51 PM
Well DUH!
A few of you I hope never reproduce. Welt on a little kid over this…good gawd..grow up.
Highrise on May 26, 2007 at 12:18 AM