Buddhist instigated violence in Myanmar

[CapnAwesome]

[Cinjin]

There's just something about the religions of the world that turns people into fucktards bent on forcing others to believe in their chosen ideals.

It seems obvious to me that if you have to kill other people in order to validate and promote your own views, that you may not have much of a leg to stand on in the first place. That being said, they're all guilty as shit; it's just that it's the Buddhists that happened to make the news this time.




It's no wonder god doesn't show his face on this planet. We'd have to be a giant inter-galactic embarrassment by now.

[CapnAwesome]

I really believe that religion separates people more than it brings them together. No matter what Buddhism says about people all being part of some cosmic consciousness, it really just becomes another reason to hate 'the other'.

[Garuda]

Those buddhists aren't following the Buddha, and those monks are being complete hypocrits. The whole point of Buddhism is peace, and theyre being a horrific dissapointment. I'ts not the philosophy that compels them to do this, but the fact that humans fight when they don't agree. This has happens in about every theme of thought that has arisen in human history, blame it on the hypocrit not the philosophy.

[Angrboda]

I thought the whole point of Buddhism was the cessation of suffering.

[Jackalope]

I thought the whole point of Buddhism was the cessation of suffering.

Well yeah, and waging war is certainly a path to cessation of suffering, leastwise for those of them that ya kill.

[Anomalocaris]

[CapnAwesome]

It is fair to ask if the buddhists in myanmar were all secular but otherwise of comparable social-economic circumstances, and all the muslims were just as they were, whether that would genuinely significantly reduce the chance of similar outbursts occurring against Muslims would occur.

I think it's possible that nothing would change, it's also possible the situation would also be better. For one, if everyone was secular you certainly wouldn't have monks leading attacks. No central leadership to tell a mob what to do. We just don't know enough with the hypothetical. What we do know is that being Buddhist certainly isn't making the situation any better.

[Anomalocaris]

Rabble rousers need not have trappings of any religion to incite violence. It is not clear in this case if Buddhism made it better or not. If the Buddhists were Hindus things might be much worse.

If one were to point out an example where Buddhism clearly traded with grossly false reputation, it would be the misty image of the Dali lama and Tibetain Buddhism that is prevalent in the west. This image is as at odds as is possible to imagine with the reality of the tibetian Buddhist theocratic regimes of the Dali lama which would have been thoroughly distinguished by its oppressive, brutal, iniquitous and thoroughly dehumanizing nature even by the mideveal standard of religious oppression.

But in this case in here it is not clearly whether the influence of Buddhism was in fact a worse one than any genuinely likely alternative.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Those buddhists aren't following the Buddha, and those monks are being complete hypocrits. The whole point of Buddhism is peace, and theyre being a horrific dissapointment. I'ts not the philosophy that compels them to do this, but the fact that humans fight when they don't agree. This has happens in about every theme of thought that has arisen in human history, blame it on the hypocrit not the philosophy.

I agree. At least from my understanding, the tenets of Buddhism are pretty clear-cut and non-contradictory compared to the cluster-fuck contradictions contained in the abrahamic religions. The execution of it is what seems to be flawed. Then again, I haven't really bothered to study actual Buddhist writings, so I could be wrong.