Thinking Aloud : Myth of Buddhist non-violence — Razi Azmi

gokussj9

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,096
Likes
1,387
Country flag
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

In a world filled with hate and violence on account of religion, race, ethnicity, etc, Buddhists are no exception, despite their contrary image

Buddhism is almost
universally regarded as synonymous with peace, tolerance and non-violence. On the other hand, so strong and widespread is the perception of Muslims as the source of intolerance and violence in this world that people seem to overlook not just the past but also the present when it comes to judging all the rest, and not just Buddhists.

One wonders whether the recent pogroms against Muslims in Myanmar (Burma) and the totally unwarranted anti-Muslim hysteria in Sri Lanka will have any effect on these perceptions. Truth be told, neither the Buddhist scriptures nor Buddhist history is free of violence. In a world filled with hate and violence on account of religion, race, ethnicity, etc, Buddhists are no exception, despite their contrary image.

A 2009 book Buddhist Warfare, by Michael Jerryson and Mark Juergensmeyer, is introduced in these words: "Though traditionally regarded as a peaceful religion, Buddhism has a dark side. On multiple occasions over the past 15 centuries, Buddhist leaders have sanctioned violence, and even war. The eight essays in this book...show that Buddhist organisations have used religious images and rhetoric to support military conquest throughout history."

In the Nirvana Sutra, the Buddha is said to have killed some Hindus (Brahmins) in one of his past lives because they insulted the Buddhist sutras (scriptures). "When I heard the Brahmins slandering the 'vaipulya sutras', I put them to death on the spot."

Professor Paul Damieville is quoted by Danios (Loonwatch.com - "The Mooslims, they're heeere!") as writing that Buddhists justify killing infidels (icchantika) for a number of reasons, one being pity. Bizarrely also called 'compassionate killing', its supposed aim is "to help [them] avoid the punishment they had accrued by committing evil deeds while continuously slandering Buddhism."

Another reason is defence of the Buddhist faith. "When the dharma is threatened, it is necessary to ruthlessly fight against the forces of evil." The Nirvana Sutra is unambiguous on this subject: "The [true] follower of the Mahayana is not the one who observes the five precepts, but the one who uses the sword, bow, arrow, and battle ax to protect the monks who uphold the precepts and who are pure."

Putting unbelievers to death carries no sin and is not bad karma. According to Demieville, the Buddha says in the Nirvana Sutra that the status of the infidel is lower than that of ants. "One may well kill an ant and earn sin for doing harm, but there is no sin for killing an icchantika." Besides, killing can in any event be excused if it is done by the right person, especially a 'dharma-protecting king'.

Danios concludes: "Buddhist Warfare provides many other examples of the theological justifications for waging war and killing, but these shall suffice us for now. They provide the religious basis for Buddhist holy war: (1) Killing those who slander Buddhism as a necessity; (2) Anyone who rejects Buddhism is by default slandering it; (3) Killing infidels carries no sin; (4) In fact, it is not really killing at all."

Seen in this light, the current anti-Muslim hate campaign and violence in Myanmar seems not to be the exception, but rather in line with both Buddhist scripture and history. According to a BBC report by Alan Strathern, it is spearheaded by the '969 group', led by a monk, Ashin Wirathu, who was jailed in 2003 for inciting religious hatred and released in 2012.

The initial anti-Muslim rioting occurred in the western state of Rakhine, targeting the Rohingyas, who are accused of being foreigners on account of their Bengali origins, even though they and their forefathers were born in Burma and they have always lived there. It has now spread to central Myanmar, close to the largest city and the former capital, Yangon.

The rioting in Rakhine followed an alleged rape. In a subsequent incident in central Burma, rioting resulted from an argument between the Muslim owner of a gold shop and an ethnic Burmese customer. In the latest incident, a Muslim girl on a bicycle colliding with a monk led to rioting. It seems that anti-Muslim pogroms can happen in Myanmar virtually at the drop of a hat. These incidents have resulted in hundreds of Muslims killed, many hundreds of houses torched and thousands turned into refugees. All this happened while the police just stood and watched.

In Sri Lanka, the issue of halal slaughter has suddenly been turned into a national crisis. Led by monks, members of the Bodu Bala Sena (the Buddhist Brigade) have been holding rallies calling for direct action and the boycotting of Muslim businesses. Objection to the size of Muslim families is thrown in for good measure.

In any list of countries where coups have been endemic, Thailand will rank high. According to one count, it had have 11 'successful and nine 'unsuccessful' coups in the 20th century. One such coup was accompanied by the Massacre of October 6, 1976, in which student and other protesters were attacked by the military, "shot, beaten and their bodies mutilated." Hundreds were killed.

In 1999, hundreds of Buddhist monks in South Korea staged a pitched battle over control of the country's richest monastic order. According to the BBC correspondent, Andrew Wood, ""the fight is not about theology, it is about power and money. They are struggling for control of the temple complex, which is headquarters to the largest order of Buddhist monasticism in South Korea. The sect claims around 10 million followers." It was the second major clash between Chogye monks in nine months. Thai and Cambodian troops have repeatedly fought over control of the 900-year-old Preah Vihear temple on their border.

Given the general perception of Buddhists as the 'nice guys' of this world (no prizes for guessing who the 'bad guys' are!), I conclude with Professor Michael Jerryson's disclaimer: "Our intention is not to argue that Buddhists are angry, violent people — but rather that Buddhists are people, and thus share the same human spectrum of emotions, which includes the penchant for violence."
Any Buddhist member to verify this Paki's claims?

@Tshering22, @HeinzGud
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dovah

Untermensch
Senior Member
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
5,614
Likes
6,793
Country flag
In the Nirvana Sutra, the Buddha is said to have killed some Hindus (Brahmins) in one of his past lives because they insulted the Buddhist sutras (scriptures). "When I heard the Brahmins slandering the 'vaipulya sutras', I put them to death on the spot."
I don't know much about Buddhism but how can Gautam Buddha kill people for insulting Buddhist Scirptures in his past life when he himself founded Buddhism?
 

gokussj9

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,096
Likes
1,387
Country flag
Buddhism is non-violent indeed and the monks should follow Buddha's path of non violence. But that does not mean Buddhists have to tolerate the crouching of Islam on it's territory.
What about the details he discusses in the article?
Does Buddhism also has the concept of Infidels? AFAIK, the whole
Dharmic fold does not have the concept of believers and non-believers thereby preventing
them from halaaling others.
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,231
Country flag
Even a innocent looking non-violent cow can kill you with it's horns if you try to hurt her.

Anyway since the source of the article is Paki don't give much importance to it.
 

HeinzGud

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
2,558
Likes
1,070
Country flag
I don't know much about Buddhism but how can Gautam Buddha kill people for insulting Buddhist Scirptures in his past life when he himself founded Buddhism?
Nirvana sutra AFAIK is from Mahayana canon. Mahayana canon elevate Buddha to a supernatural god status. So there are lot of misguiding stories of Buddha in Mahayana canon.

However if you want to learn true words and deeds of Buddha read the sutta pitakaya. Sutta Pitaka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

HeinzGud

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
2,558
Likes
1,070
Country flag
What about the details he discusses in the article?
Buddhism does not encourage war of killing of living beings at any cost. There fore the writers comments on Buddhism in heavily biased to picture Buddhism is similar or worse than Islam.

However I cannot comment on about the Mahayana texts because I'm a Pali canon follower.

Does Buddhism also has the concept of Infidels? AFAIK, the whole
No it does not.
 

Iamanidiot

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
5,325
Likes
1,504
Buddhism does not encourage war of killing of living beings at any cost. There fore the writers comments on Buddhism in heavily biased to picture Buddhism is similar or worse than Islam.

However I cannot comment on about the Mahayana texts because I'm a Pali canon follower.



No it does not.
The Pali Cannon is the TRUE Buddha teaching right.
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
What about the Heart Sutra ?
 

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
Buddhism does not encourage war of killing of living beings at any cost. Therefore the writers comments on Buddhism in heavily biased to picture Buddhism is similar or worse than Islam.
Hmm. Probably some people don't want Indian sub continent's muslims to move on from the Rohingya experience.
They want to needle the wounds or create them if they're not there.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
I don't know much about Buddhism but how can Gautam Buddha kill people for insulting Buddhist Scirptures in his past life when he himself founded Buddhism?
This is historical sense from a sober man like you but genuine buddhists do not consider buddha to be founder but rather a chain in line of several buddhas.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
Buddhism does not encourage war of killing of living beings at any cost. There fore the writers comments on Buddhism in heavily biased to picture Buddhism is similar or worse than Islam.
Because it is religion of monks.

the buddhist kings of burma have been as bad as islamic invaders for people of assam.


the atrocities commited by buddhists in Assam are very horrible.

the buddhists of burma, thailand always killed civilians in any conflict.

In Assam, 30 percent of people were killed by burman buddhists which translates to one million.

( please note that it had religious dimension too as buddhists specifically attacked Brahmins and made them eat beef.)
 

Das ka das

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
895
Likes
456
Because it is religion of monks.

the buddhist kings of burma have been as bad as islamic invaders for people of assam.


the atrocities commited by buddhists in Assam are very horrible.

the buddhists of burma, thailand always killed civilians in any conflict.

In Assam, 30 percent of people were killed by burman buddhists which translates to one million.

( please note that it had religious dimension too as buddhists specifically attacked Brahmins and made them eat beef.)
Sources please? 1 million dead by Buddhists in Asom?
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
Sources please? 1 million dead by Buddhists in Asom?
It is after long time that I am replying to your post.

There are countless histories of Asom by assamese historians and please refer to two burmese invasions of asom.


it is not available online but wiki tells us that it was very devastating for asom.



as someone who is interested in history ( thakur sahib) , i tried to guess population of asom in 1826 at time of burmese invasion.

I found that it must be 3 million at the least and since most of historians are agreed that asom lost one third of population in that raid by buddhists, one million figure is not very inaccurate.


ofcourse, my numbers are not precise but they are historical and very much nearer to the closest one can arrive at.



BTW, you must be knowing that asom defied the mighty mughals many times but could not resist the british even faintly which is only because of those two burmese invasions.



If my bhaiyya pushyamitra has not changed much, I hope you endorse that mongoloid race is more prone to genocides in comparison to Indians with same cultural milieu.

this is from wiki

..in attacking the house of a rich man, would tie him with ropes and then set fire to his body. Some they flayed alive, others they burnt in oil and others again they drove in crowds to village Naamghars or prayer-houses, which they then set on fire... It was dangerous for a beautiful woman to meet a Burmese even on the public road. Brahmans were made to carry loads of beef, pork and wine. The Gosains were robbed of all their possessions. Fathers of damsels whom the Burmese took as wives rose speedily to affluence and power.




Do you not find similarity with islamic marauders?
 

HeinzGud

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
2,558
Likes
1,070
Country flag
Hmm. Probably some people don't want Indian sub continent's muslims to move on from the Rohingya experience.
They want to needle the wounds or create them if they're not there.
Muslims (in SL specially) think that Buddhist countries are easy prays because we are more tolerant.
 

HeinzGud

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
2,558
Likes
1,070
Country flag
Because it is religion of monks.
What do you mean by th

the buddhist kings of burma have been as bad as islamic invaders for people of assam.

the atrocities commited by buddhists in Assam are very horrible.

the buddhists of burma, thailand always killed civilians in any conflict.

In Assam, 30 percent of people were killed by burman buddhists which translates to one million.

( please note that it had religious dimension too as buddhists specifically attacked Brahmins and made them eat beef.)
Well what you talks about human mindset here. We as human beings are violent when it comes to politics and our survival. It got nothing to do with Buddhism. It's all about politics.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
What do you mean by th
I meant that buddhism is incomplete religion ( sorry if i hurt you but it is time to bell the cat as i really feel frustrated when people criticise hinduism with vituperative language but hide buddhism faults and exaggerate its importance in indian history and also allege that hinduism destroyed buddhism all of which are false things )


Buddhism was product of a frustrated prince who founded a doctrine all of which were based on leaving the homes and nothing more.



Buddhism is religion of peace and non violence ( i have seen tibetans enjoying meat more than the hindus ) not because it is superior in this context but simply because it was meant for a parasitic class that thrived in monastries built by labour of toiling masses, employing slaves for upkeep and hence could afford to do so.



when you are free of social responsibilities, you can beat any amount of bush on ethics and may look good.


buddhism has no dharmasastra or arthasastra much less kamasutra.

buddhism is world denying religion and hence its non violence approach is nothing special.


Hinduism has policy for war as well as it promotes non violence so it is much more complete than buddhism.



Well what you talks about human mindset here. We as human beings are violent when it comes to politics and our survival. It got nothing to do with Buddhism. It's all about politics.
It might have been understandable if the ordinary people were killed or temples looted for wealth but why did the burmese buddhists do this

.
Brahmans were made to carry loads of beef, pork and wine

this proves that it was specific work of baudh bhikshus who directed their venom against brahmins.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,264
Country flag
See, in a nutshell, we are taught to abhor unprovoked violence. Which means that we will try ALL the methods possible to avoid a conflict. It can be requesting, negotiating, giving something else in exchange to avoid a conflict and when all this fails, only then resort to sheer force.

We are taught never to initiate a violent confrontation as it is disrespectful and immature. But always ruthlessly defend ourselves when attacked.

Unfortunately, over a period of years we have become associated with shameless rear-kissing and people think that if someone is a Buddhist he or she will not "dare" to attack.

Muslims in Myanmar thought the same which is why the Buddhists over there had to bust their myth when they attacked monasteries in the name of jihad. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top