User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 81

Thread: Ask a Buddhist

  1. #51
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    This will come back around to them, @Victor. It always does.
    In the case of Japan, it already did a while ago.

  2. #52
    Senior Member Scott N Denver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    As I write, the peace loving Buddhists of Myanmar (formerly Burma) are killing, torturing, burning and driving out of their homes, the muslims of Myanmar.
    There is always a variance in people, their goals, and therefore methods. To me it would be unreasonable to expect any sizable religion to not have some group of people somewhere sometime who didn't do bad things, for example killing people. The point here is that Buddhism has had far less of it than any other major religion. And I don't think there have been any wars caused by the motivation of "spreading buddhism." Not many sizable religions can say that. more "peaceful record"

  3. #53
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kayness View Post
    Many Buddhist countries have a bloody history, but AFAIK it's never religiously motivated.
    That's true with most "religious wars".

  4. #54
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Since this thread is about Buddhism, I guess off the top of my head I could mention the Shaolin monks of China and the Yamabushi of Japan; who both were engaged in warfare at various times. Buddhism has been prominent among the Mongols, who weren't exactly the most peace-loving band of brothers. Nor were the Samurai.

    Here's some Buddhist monks undergoing military training during WWII.


    Oh yeah and don't forget that Buddha himself was a member of the Kshatriya warrior caste.

  5. #55
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default


  6. #56
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginkgo View Post
    That's what memes are pretty much lol

  7. #57
    Senior Member Scott N Denver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Since this thread is about Buddhism, I guess off the top of my head I could mention the Shaolin monks of China and the Yamabushi of Japan; who both were engaged in warfare at various times. Buddhism has been prominent among the Mongols, who weren't exactly the most peace-loving band of brothers. Nor were the Samurai.

    Here's some Buddhist monks undergoing military training during WWII.


    Oh yeah and don't forget that Buddha himself was a member of the Kshatriya warrior caste.
    I don't really see the point of all this. Were there, and are there, warrior subgroups of Buddhism? Yes absolutely. Last time I checked the shaolin buddhist monks of china weren't involved in all that many wars, and in fact there location(s?) was often used by people seeking refuge from the government of the time. Can the Knights Templar, for example, somehow claim not to have been involved in many wars? And the wars they were in, those were pretty darn religious motivated right?

    Samurai generally werent exactly monks. Some were, but in general most not so much. I am unaware of any instances in which samurai fought "to spread buddhism". I could list plenty of catholic vs protestant, christian vs muslim, or other examples where people were fighting to spread religion or to convert people to a religion by force.

    The Buddha was a kshatriya or warrior caste, so what? A number of very religious people come from warrior background, plenty of them maintain warrior backgrounds. If someone goes far in religious/meditation training you could say they "fight their inner demons, fears, etc." That is far removed from fighting or killing other people. Going back to shaolin [or Wudang for that matter] historical China was a rough place and bandits were numerous. Defense against bandits was a major motivation to study martial arts. That's the real world for you. It's not like the Buddha sent people on crusades to convert people to Buddhism or anything. I can name two major western monotheisms for whom that is not the case, and am not sure about the third. I am unfamiliar with anything in any buddhist text that reads like the violence of the old testament, for example [seriously, how much death and killing and "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live is in that thing? answer: a lot]. All three major western monotheisms recognize the old testament and assert its validity.

    Overall Buddhism has a much more peaceful history than any major western religion, and possibly any other major religion [Hinduism is hard for me to evaluate in this regard, Taoism arguably isn't a major world religion]. If you want some superpacifistic religion go look at Jainism where they sweep brooms to avoid walking on insects. Thats not a very practical way to live life, and arguably Jainism isn't a major world religion [not major 5 anyway, maybe major 10???]

    I'd be pretty shocked if ANY religion could take a country or culture at large and make them ALL peaceful non-warring non-violent people. Given large groups of people and human nature its just not very likely to happen. But, again, Buddhism has a far cleaner record than any other major world religion in this regard. Last time I checked no major Western religion comes even remotely close. THAT is the point I would like to drive home here.

  8. #58
    Senior Member Scott N Denver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,899

    Default

    I would also like to point out, for the record, that Buddhism does not have a history of executing its mystics. Neither of the two later major monotheisms can say that. Buddhism also doesnt have a history of killing people for not "believing the right things", once again unlike some (all?) the major monotheisms.

    There is a reason in history books that Buddhism is often held up as a more "peaceful" world religion, either in a general sense or in the sense thats its started less wars relating to religious beliefs or conversion. and there are reasons that history books talk about wars and conflict between religious groups in the West [and probably beyond] and gives all sorts of examples of religiously-motivated wars and list "differences in religion" as a historical cause of many conflicts. If someone wants to ignore every point that I've personally made, then go argue with the history books and the people that write them. And your gonna need a lot of luck "overlooking" things like the crusades, all sorts of protestant/catholic fighting, spreading of Islam by force, and whatever other examples are out there.

  9. #59
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott N Denver View Post
    I don't really see the point of all this.
    The basic point is that claiming Buddhists have not engaged in wars cannot really be substantiated on many levels.


    Samurai generally werent exactly monks. Some were, but in general most not so much.
    They weren't monks, no, but they still adhered to Zen Buddhism. If we want to get into examples of warrior monks in Japan, the Yamabushi and Sohei would be the place to look. Samurais weren't the only people to use arms, almost every class of feudal japan had its own military traditions.

    I am unaware of any instances in which samurai fought "to spread buddhism".
    Zen Buddhism was part of their mentality, and Zen Buddhism supposedly played a role in the later development of Japanese militarism.

    I could list plenty of catholic vs protestant, christian vs muslim, or other examples where people were fighting to spread religion or to convert people to a religion by force.
    And I could also point to the numerous nuances involved here, particularly how political factors were often the larger force in play. This was particularly true during the many "Wars of Religion" in Europe; which largely was as much about the conflict between the Holy Roman Emperors and the nobility seeking to build their own power bases. The nobility more than a few times sought to exploit theological disputes for their own gain.



    The Buddha was a kshatriya or warrior caste, so what?
    The point basically being he wasn't a peace-loving hippie many try to present him. I don't find anything wrong with him being a member of the warrior caste.

    A number of very religious people come from warrior background, plenty of them maintain warrior backgrounds. If someone goes far in religious/meditation training you could say they "fight their inner demons, fears, etc."
    Of course you could say that, since spiritual warfare always has precedence over physical warfare. That concept is pretty consistent in traditions both East and West. St. Paul talks of donning the "armour of faith", St. Benedict talked of engaging in spiritual battles, and St. Ignatius of course wrote about spiritual exercises along these lines as well.

    That is far removed from fighting or killing other people.
    Yes and no. Spiritual warfare maybe higher than physical warfare, but it can't always be seperated.

    Going back to shaolin [or Wudang for that matter] historical China was a rough place and bandits were numerous. Defense against bandits was a major motivation to study martial arts. That's the real world for you.
    Yes I'm well aware of what China was like at the time. My point is not that the Shaolin monks were wrong to study martial arts. The Templar Knights were created to protect pilgrims from harassment, to give a comparison.

    It's not like the Buddha sent people on crusades to convert people to Buddhism or anything. I can name two major western monotheisms for whom that is not the case, and am not sure about the third.
    I have my doubts whether you could argue that Asia was far more peaceful than Europe and the Middle East during a general period of 500-1500 AD.

    I am unfamiliar with anything in any buddhist text that reads like the violence of the old testament, for example [seriously, how much death and killing and "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live is in that thing? answer: a lot]. All three major western monotheisms recognize the old testament and assert its validity.
    Yes they do assert its validity, but much of the violence in the text is seen in symbolic terms, which in some ways gets back to the point you yourself brought up just above about "fighting demons". Even if these traditions did assert such texts on a literalist basis, it would be irrelevant since the archeological evidence AFAIK does not support the contention that such massacres actually occurred.

    Overall Buddhism has a much more peaceful history than any major western religion, and possibly any other major religion [Hinduism is hard for me to evaluate in this regard, Taoism arguably isn't a major world religion].
    Again, if we did a comparative study of the military histories of Europe, the Middle East, and Asia - I sincerely doubt such an assertion could possibly be made. Buddhism has its own versions of warrior monks, just as existed in the West with the Templars, Knights Hospitaller, etc. They certainly operated in relation to their particular circumstances, but there they are. To try to claim one religion is more peaceful than the other, without regard for the innumerable cultural and historical nuances involved, is largely a silly proposition in my view. It's nothing more than a piss contest.

    If you want some superpacifistic religion go look at Jainism where they sweep brooms to avoid walking on insects. Thats not a very practical way to live life, and arguably Jainism isn't a major world religion [not major 5 anyway, maybe major 10???]
    I'm not arguing in favor of a superpacifistic religion, nor am I even arguing Christianity is more peaceful than Buddhism or whatever.

    But, again, Buddhism has a far cleaner record than any other major world religion in this regard. Last time I checked no major Western religion comes even remotely close. THAT is the point I would like to drive home here.
    And the point I would like to drive home here is that this point falls apart the more one investigates. I would also like to add I have nothing against Buddhism. You seem to have plenty against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

  10. #60
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,526
    The problem is that an idealised form of Buddhism has become part of the New Age in the West.

    And of course the New Agers want to believe in Buddhism and they want us to believe in Buddhism, and they are intent in sacrificing historical accuracy in the interests of making converts.

    Let's face it - Buddhism is cool in the West, and all we have to do is close our eyes to history and sacrifice our intellectual integrity.

    So close your eyes and think of Buddha.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] Ask an INTJ
    By logan235711 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 870
    Last Post: 05-22-2015, 05:04 AM
  2. [ISTJ] Ask the ISTJ
    By RansomedbyFire in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 10-18-2008, 02:01 AM
  3. Buddhist "Mindfulness" -- Compatible with Ti?
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-13-2007, 10:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO