That argument can be applied to just about any ostensibly religious conflict in history, including the Crusades. Religion has never been more than a fig leaf for economically and politically motivated rebellion, land grabs and/or scramble for new markets.
Given the centralized and authoritarian nature of East Asian governments, Buddhism may not have been needed as a tool as often for those particular types of conflicts, but it has provided excellent leverage for existing state organizations to further oppress the masses. What better way to keep the poor in their place, then to guilt trip them into believing they must have done something to deserve it in a “past life”?
Thanks for all the contributions here. I think we can say that Buddhism has not been as violent, historically, as Islam or Christianity, but it’s had its moments, and Rahula was naive suggesting otherwise.
On the uncritical acceptance of religion in formal religious studies: honestly, the study of religion is, if anything, more contentious than most other fields engaged with the same rigor. Some undergraduate survey courses may be soft-pedaled in the extreme, but that is a rhetorical device to get young students interested and avoid offending folks who will not listen if their hackles are up. Once one gets beyond the survey level (and Rahula’s book absolutely is a survey), those folks can get vicious.
So in other words, nobody is being killed for the simple reason that they’re not Buddhist. If it’s happening, then it’s more complex than that. Thanks, that answers the question.
Except the 125,000 Muslims who are. But hey, given that existence is suffering and the ultimate goal of life is a form of death that completely negates your being, they’re really doing them a favor, right?
Which ones? Is anyone being forced to convert at swordpoint with their lives being spared if they convert? Is anyone’s life being spared because they mouthed a conversion? Is anyone quoting scripture claiming that Buddha says it’s okay to kill people? I’m just trying to understand here. Because if it isn’t, these are just two groups of people who found reasons to kill each other as people often do, and religion is just another group marker like skin color or language or whatever. It has nothing to do with the actual beliefs and everything to do with how tribalism overcomes those beliefs.
But hey, argue like you’re not 12 years old. Do you have a cite for anyone using Buddha’s teachings to justify killing someone, or is it more likely that you just kind of fabricated out of desperation?
Sorry about your morally abhorrent, anti-life beliefs and the stark light being thrown on them by your co-religionists engineering a genocide. Try not to let the cognitive dissonance give you too much of a migraine.
Now I know you are engaging in awesome religious logic of “we know these guys aren’t The Real Buddhists because The Real Buddhists don’t kill people, therefore this can’t be an example of The Real Buddhists killing people.” To those of thus who don’t believe in fairy tales about hungry ghosts and reincarnation and hells with multiple levels and all the other nonsense that Buddhists believe that is no more rational or moral than what Western religions are into, this is what it is.
Why, the better way than that is the Euro-Christian way: Guilt-trip them into believing that they will deserve and get something better in a “future life,” if only they will accept and embrace and repent of (but never rebel against!) the guilt!
Hey, what did the Buddhist say to the hot-dog vendor?
Do not go by revelation;
Do not go by tradition;
Do not go by hearsay;
Do not go on the authority of sacred texts;
Do not go on the grounds of pure logic;
Do not go by a view that seems rational;
Do not go by reflecting on mere appearances;
Do not go along with a considered view because you agree with it;
Do not go along on the grounds that the person is competent;
Do not go along because “the recluse is our teacher.”
Kalamas, when you yourselves know: These things are unwholesome, these things are blameworthy; these things are censured by the wise; and when undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill, abandon them…
Kalamas, when you know for yourselves: These are wholesome; these things are not blameworthy; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness, having undertaken them, abide in them.
Oh, and, sweet-pickle relish and sauerkraut, please.
