(November 27, 2016 at 4:44 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Different sects of Buddhism have conducted violent and deadly mob actions against each other, for example in South Korea, and Myanmar. where buddhists vastly outnumber muslims, socially, politically and economically absolutely dominant and in no discernible danger from islam, as again in Aung Sun Sui kyi's Myanmar, buddhists mobs are conducting violent pogroms against minority muslims.
If that's the case then imo they're only superficially Buddhists or Buddhism is the lesser influence in some hybrid ideology. Nothing about Buddhism teaches that violence is acceptable, and meditation practice is all about 'not-attachment' to conscious states such as anger... the main cause of violence. Buddhists are fallible just like everyone else but the aim is non-attachment. That said, I don't know anything about how Buddhism is practiced in a religious context. In the western world people who are interested in it basically have to go all in, learning about it and practicing it as a monk would. But in foreign climes if it's the case that there are followers that defer to the monks and basically treat monasteries as churches to go to for guidance, then it might make more sense. In other words, I don't know to what extent the - for want of a better word - peasants in poor Buddhist countries practice the teachings of Buddhism. A monk living in a monastery has time and a peaceful environment to practice meditation all day long if they want, but not everybody has that luxury. So basically what I'm saying is if these mobs you speak of treat Buddhist monks as a higher authority to refer to, but do not actually meditate themselves in the sense of aiming to attain Nirvana... the state of complete non-attachment, then I could understand them not fully understanding the Buddhist message, but if they do meditate and practice it as monks would, I can't see any way that they could consider mob violence acceptable.
