Buddhists killing Muslims in Myanmar

Post Reply New Topic

Beautiful Dreamer, wake unto me.

Welcome to the real world. Now I know our side will win.

ruveyn

What side is are you referring to? The side of the Klingons?

Last edited by pokerface on 09 Apr 2013, 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

The people in robes doing this should be ashamed of themselves. If a buddhist monk kills a person he is automaticaly no longer a monk. If a buddhist monk orders someone to kill he is automaticaly no longer a monk. If a buddhist monk even speaks of the advantages of death and a person commits suicide or murder as a result, the monk is automaticaly no longer a monk. These are all parts of the first rule for (theravada) monks. Therefor, those in robes supporting the killing are not buddhist monks; they have no right to wear the robes.

The lay buddhists doing this should be ashamed of themselves. The 5 basic precepts a buddhist has to follow has as first rule not to kill. Not even animals, let alone people. Generosity and morality is the absolutely most basic thing a buddhist must follow to thread the buddhist path. These "buddhists" who go to the temple to offer incense to the Buddha statues, but do nothing else are disgracing this beautiful religion.

But I'll not let the muslims escape. Wherever there are muslims, there is trouble. Radical muslims are a pest and they have to be dealt with (through non violent means).

Finaly, to those who criticise buddhism, I defy you to find a single canonical scripture suporting violence in the thousands and thousands of discourses atributed to the historical Buddha. Good luck with that! That is the difference between islam and buddhism. Radical muslims are following the footsteps of the wicked Mo the molester. The violent buddhists are nothing but violent people who happen to call themselves buddhists but don't follow the Buddha's teachings.

^^

Great idea.

Add in: anyone who preaches killing the heathen infidel is no longer a cleric or imam.

This is an idea that is 2500 years old. The monks follow more than 200 rules of conduct and 4 of them have as effect the automatic expulsion from the community of monks.

But it would be indeed a great idea to apply to the imams.

That's what happens when people first begin to believe that they are greater than their own religion ... they acquire a form of selective blindness to their own sins, while going ape-shirt over the sins of others.

Islamic scripture advocates subjugating and killing non-Muslims. How do you get away from that?

My point is that people espousing their own religion gets them into trouble where it is violent, because the violence is inherent in the religious scriptures themselves.

It would be the same if Christian hate-preachers directly quoted from the Bible (and these versus had a higher stature than the peaceful verses) in order to back their point up.

In the case of Buddhism, violence does not seem to be inherent in the religion in the same way as it is with some other ideologies. They're still scummers, mind.

You don't, and we can't really put up with it either no matter what kinds of pretzel knots certain people are willing to tie themselves into in the name of 'diversity'.

If I understand correctly, you are saying that I think that I am greater than my own religion. That is pure nonsense. I know plenty of buddhists who are much more well trained in morality than me. Not to mention that I'm not trained in concentration (the next step) and even less in wisdom (the final step)! I do my best to follow the precepts. I'm a mere begginer compared to a lot of buddhists I know.

If you can't find a justification for your criticism of buddhism, then don't continue to argue with other things you know nothing about. I have defied any critics of buddhism to find support to violence in the cannonical scriptures atributed to the historical Buddha. You have presented no such examples.

But I'll save you the trouble and tell you the 3 things with which buddhism could be atacked based on their scriptures atributed to the historical Buddha:

1- The verse from the Dhammapada which says something like "kil mother, kill father, kill brother (...,)". The commentary explains the context in which this phrase supposedly happened and the meaning of this verse. Mother, father and brother are symbolic words for negative emotions, if I recall correctly. If they weren't it would be a clear contradiction with the numerous times the Buddha says that there are 5 actions that guarantie hell and two of them are killing your mother and killing your father, not to mention the even more numerous times the Buddha says that you should not kill under any circumstance.

2- The Jataka Tales: it's the stories of the previous lives of the Buddha. There is mentioned that the Buddha-to-be previously killed in order to save a large number of people. However, what the Buddha taught was the way to attain enlightenment, and said that there was no higher goal in life than attaining the state he has attained.

3- The conversation the Buddha aledgedly had with a king. The king asked him if he could have an army. The Buddha aledgely said that the king could have an army but only for defense, never to atack.

These are the instances in the thousands and thousands of pages of (theravada) buddhist scriptures where something is said that could be used to distort the message of the Buddha. All of them are of doubtful historicity, but even so I quoted them.

Any criticisms you want to make?

This is all that I needed to conclude you are being a hypocrite. You repeatedly say that not all muslims are bad people, etc. etc. But all buddhists are scummers?

The mask falls (at least it's the first time I see it).

Yes, all Buddhists are scummers. The peaceful, kind, tolerant, easy-going bastards. Burn them all!

(Yes, it was phrased very poorly. I'm on about the violent Buddhists in Burma and Sri Lanka, obv.)

You understand incorrectly. I am referring to religionists in general, and to no one in particular. Once individuals begin to believe that they are themselves greater than the rules they believe in, then they become the self-appointed adjudicators of those rules - in other words, they enforce the law, yet they are above the law (in their own minds, at least), and the law no longer applies to them.

Thus we end up with Christian Crusaders and Inquisitors, Islamic Jihadists, Jewish Zionists, Hindu Thugees, and Buddhist mobs - all claiming that their religion is THE religion of peace, and then torturing and murdering anyone who doesn't believe those claims.

That's very surprising (and horrible)........I don't think I've seen a single other news story about Buddhists , in modern times, perpetrating violence against members of another religion. They are normally a very peaceful lot.

There have also been conflicts between Buddhists and Moslems in Southern Thailand.

People are animals; Religion is just an excuse.