Monks With Guns: Discovering Buddhist Violence

[Caladan]

Monks With Guns: Discovering Buddhist Violence | RDBook | ReligionDispatches

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Buddhism has had its History with Violence. But it has be rare and localized.
The recent War in Sri Lanka and the support of Japanese nationalism before WWII is proof of this fact. Hate and War seem to be a rare addition to the nature of Buddhism.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Buddhism has had its History with Violence. But it has be rare and localized.
The recent War in Sri Lanka and the support of Japanese nationalism before WWII is proof of this fact.

Your talking primarily about Shinto here as concerning the Japanese. At least in regards to imperial Japan prior to and in WW2.

That said, there have been Buddhists recorded in history that had engaged in warfare, but never as a collaboration in way of any national war under any kind of Buddhist banner.

 

[enchanted_one1975]

From what I read in the article it seems like they have armed themselves with defense in mind. Would you really consider that to be violent? If this article had been written about members of Christianity or the Jewish faiths would you feel the same about the insinuated level of violence?

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

From what I read in the article it seems like they have armed themselves with defense in mind. Would you really consider that to be violent? If this article had been written about members of Christianity or the Jewish faiths would you feel the same about the insinuated level of violence?

Yes. I think very few people perpetrate acts of violence without thinking their violent contributions are in "defense".

 

[CoolSunshine]

Buddhist Jihad.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Your talking primarily about Shinto here as concerning the Japanese. At least in regards to imperial Japan prior to and in WW2.

That said, there have been Buddhists recorded in history that had engaged in warfare, but never as a collaboration in way of any national war under any kind of Buddhist banner.

Not true many Buddhists in Sri Lanka believe that the Lord Buddha floated to Sri Lanka on a cloud and gave them the whole country. This doctrine allowed them to discriminate against the Tamil minority. This movement was both Buddhist and nationalistic.

It is also a fact that In Japan some buddhist monasteries supported Japanese nationalism.

These facts also have taken me by surprise. Because up till recently I had the same beliefs as you do.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

From what I read in the article it seems like they have armed themselves with defense in mind. Would you really consider that to be violent? If this article had been written about members of Christianity or the Jewish faiths would you feel the same about the insinuated level of violence?

True but for some sects of Buddhism a monk should not even defend them self.

 

[enchanted_one1975]

True but for some sects of Buddhism a monk should not even defend them self.

That doesn't seem very fair, but that may be my own "fight back" attitude speaking.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Not true many Buddhists in Sri Lanka believe that the Lord Buddha floated to Sri Lanka on a cloud and gave them the whole country. This doctrine allowed them to discriminate against the Tamil minority. This movement was both Buddhist and nationalistic.

It is also a fact that In Japan some buddhist monasteries supported Japanese nationalism.

These facts also have taken me by surprise. Because up till recently I had the same beliefs as you do.

What about Sanghamitra then?Theravada Buddhist are day dreaming IMHO.Sri lankan Buddhists(sinhalese) are the ones from central India (from ancient land of Kalinga),where as the Tamils are the natives of Sri lanka from ancient era.The fight between them is entirely linguistic.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

That doesn't seem very fair, but that may be my own "fight back" attitude speaking.

Traditionally in the dharma religions to become a monk means you were dead to to society.

In the old days A Hindu Swami could not go inside or stay in the same place for more then 3 days. They were not allowed to see their family for 12 years. Many would not even touch money. They were dead to the world. The Buddhist Monk rules in India were much like this.

The idea is that if there is no self who is there to defend.

 

[enchanted_one1975]

Traditionally in the dharma religions to become a monk means you were dead to to society.

In the old days A Hindu Swami could not go inside or stay in the same place for more then 3 days. They were not allowed to see their family for 12 years. Many would not even touch money. They were dead to the world. The Buddhist Monk rules in India were much like this.

Gosh...I imagine they were not allowed to kill the afternoon on RF either?

 

[Metempsychosis]

Gosh...I imagine they were not allowed to kill the afternoon on RF either?

Funeral rites are also conducted when a person assumes monkhood .It is a overkill.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

The Buddha taught that a person can defend themselves, but that they should be careful in doing so. They shouldn't kill their attacker if they can disarm them. They shouldn't kill an oppressor if it will cause them to oppress others. Really and truly, it is best not to defend yourself, even if you'll die, because part of the Buddha's dharma is not to fear death.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Monks With Guns: Discovering Buddhist Violence

History:
The Shaolin Sect is founded in the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period by Bodhidharma, who introduced Zen Buddhism to China.[3] Bodhidharma founded the sect for Buddhist followers to practice martial arts. The aims of practising martial arts were to: improve health, uphold justice, self-defence and helping the weak. As such, Shaolin disciples were reputed to have a strong sense of morality and good mastery of Shaolin martial arts.

Love & rgds

 

[Caladan]

Excuse me ZZ, but how is this connected to the article? this article is not about martial arts.

 

[Caladan]

Hate and War seem to be a rare addition to the nature of Buddhism.

Obviously thats relative, what we perceive as scale of wars is determined by more practical factors such as geographical ones. the notion that Buddhists are alien to violence or hatred is exactly what the article discusses, as it was a method in the west to dehumanize Buddhists for a long time. Buddhist societies deal with the strife that many in the west try do avoid via adopting Buddhism, for example the Buddhist institutions in Asia have been criticised for a long time for discriminating women, or the persecution of religious minorities (Hindus, Muslims, Christians) in nations such as Bhutan, Myanmar, Cambodia and Sri Lanka.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Obviously thats relative, what we perceive as scale of wars is determined by more practical factors such as geographical ones. the notion that Buddhists are alien to violence or hatred is exactly what the article discusses, as it was a method in the west to dehumanize Buddhists for a long time.

I agree Buddhists are prone to violence,but they don't shout "Buddham Saranam gatchami" and kill others.Buddhism as such does not "fuel" intolerance through its religious doctrine.It does not say "I am only correct religion" nor does it claim to have absolute truth.

I have quoted some words of Buddha,hope this is helpful.

"Monks, if anyone spoke words which insult me, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, don't let this thing prompt you to hate, take revenge, and turn against them. If, because of this, you become angry or annoyed, then it will become an obstacle in your quest to liberate yourself, and cause you upset. However, if someone speaks insulting or false accusations about me, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, then you should state which is wrong and point out the mistake by explaining that because of this proof and that, then that is not true, or it is not like that, that kind of thing is not us, or occurring in us.".----Brahmajala Sutta

"To find out where the truth lies, you should not depend on certain things: the first is tradition. Also do not depend on hearsay, on the scriptures, on rumours. Do not decide on the good and bad only on the good reputation of a teacher, or on the appearances of things. Remember also that you do not have the means to know all the facts of truth; therefore, you should not come to the conclusion, 'My conclusion is the only true one, everything else is false'. You would become dogmatic."As the wise test gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it (on a piece of touchstone), so are you to accept my words only after examining them and not merely out of regard for me"--Buddha.

Buddhist societies deal with the strife that many in the west try do avoid via adopting Buddhism,

I think it wrong notion to convert to Buddhism in order to find peace,IMHO all religions do provide ways to deal with strife.

for example the Buddhist institutions in Asia have been criticised for a long time for discriminating women, or the persecution of religious minorities (Hindus, Muslims, Christians) in nations such as Bhutan, Myanmar, Cambodia and Sri Lanka.

I don't think Hinduism or Christianity in Myamnar, Sri lanka etc fares any better in treatment of women.I doubt whether Buddhism really concentrates on mundane doctrines like "dress to wear" etc.
It is more or less cultural.

Persecution of minorties:Islam was "far far" bloody history than all of Buddhism.The amount of intolerance shown when Islam came to the east was over the top.

I dont think Hinduism has been persecuted by Buddhism,tough there has been some minor wars.

Following from edicts of Buddhist Emperor Ashoka

All religions should reside everywhere, for all of them desire self-control and purity of heart.Whoever praises his own religion, due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought "Let me glorify my own religion," only harms his own religion. Therefore contact (between religions) is good. One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others.

 

[Caladan]

I agree Buddhists are prone to violence,but they don't shout "Buddham Saranam gatchami" and kill others.Buddhism as such does not "fuel" intolerance through its religious doctrine.It does not say "I am only correct religion" nor does it claim to have absolute truth.

Lets examine a case-study, Bhutan and Buddhist exclusivism.

Christians number 65,000 in Bhutan, [1] although the Christian faith officially does not exist. [2] Non-Buddhist religion is prohibited. [3] There is a relatively large Christian population in Southern Bhutan. [4] Gospel for Asia broadcasts in five languages reaching Bhutan. [5] There are more Protestants than Catholics in Bhutan. [6] There are thought to be about 200 Catholics in the country. [7] Territorially, Roman Catholics in Bhutan belong to Diocese of Darjeeling in India. [8] Christian house gatherings involving several families are forbidden. [9] Children of Christians are not eligible for free education. [10] Christians are asked either to leave their religion or leave the country. [11] Christians of all denominations are subject to persecution. [12] There is one single church in Bhutan.[13] Christians cannot build churches. [14] Christians are sometimes expelled from the country or lose their citizenship. [15] Conversion from Buddhism to other religions is prohibited. [16] According to the U. S. State Department's 2007 Report on International Religious Freedom no forced religious conversion has been known. [17] Bhutanese Christians Services Centre is an NGO informing on persecution of Christians in Bhutan.

Christianity in Bhutan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have quoted some words of Buddha,hope this is helpful.

Would it be helpful if I quoted Jesus to tackle strife in Christianity?

I don't think Hinduism or Christianity in Myamnar, Sri lanka etc fares any better in treatment of women.I doubt whether Buddhism really concentrates on mundane doctrines like "dress to wear" etc.
It is more or less cultural.

In this regard we can categorize almost any issue which involves any religion as 'cultural', and we might be true in some degree, but then again all religions are cultural, and they are part of a people's culture.

Persecution of minorties:Islam was "far far" bloody history than all of Buddhism.The amount of intolerance shown when Islam came to the east was over the top.

In many regards Islam had much more publicity as it came with some dramatic contact with the West, the fact that Islam is the second largest religion in the world only adds to that. although you might have a point in that Islam is involved in much strife and issues around the world, but I do not see how it relates to the topic of strife in Buddhist societies. does the fact that the Islamic world is part of many complicated issues mean that strife in other societies does not exist?

I dont think Hinduism has been persecuted by Buddhism,tough there has been some minor wars.

Lets take the Bhutan case study again:

Mahayana Buddhism is the state religion, and Hindus have been actively persecuted as a minority, including ethnic cleansing of 100,000 Hindu minorities (Lhotshampa people) who presently live as refugees in Nepal[1][2][3]
Approximately one-quarter of the population of Bhutan is ethnic Nepalese who live mainly in the south and practice Hinduism. The Shaivite, Vaishnavite, Shakta, Ganapathi, Puranic, and Vedic schools are represented among Hindus. Hindu temples exist in southern Bhutan, and Hindus practice their religion in small- to medium-sized groups.

Hinduism in Bhutan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Metempsychosis]

Lets examine a case-study, Bhutan and Buddhist exlusivism.

Christianity in Bhutan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree that this is condemnable.But it should noted that the christian missionary are VERY active in this part of the world.

Christian population in north eastern states of India adjacent to Bhutan where chrisitian missionaries are allowed to run free:
Nagaland--->90.02% are Christians.
Mizoram--->90.5% are Christians.
Meghalaya--->70.3% are Christians.

Bhutan is not much bigger than these states.Isn't it surprising that a foreign religion is so predominant there?

Would it be helpful if I quoted Jesus to tackle strife in Christianity?

I would like to see quotes from both Islam and Christianity which deal with nature of other faiths(and atheism) especially the idolatrous ones.

In this regard we can categorize almost any issue which involves any religion as 'cultural', and we might be true in some degree, but then again all religions are cultural, and they are part of a people's culture.

This is true.Intolerance is present in all religions including Buddhism.Many Buddhist countries are economically poor,that adds to their problems.

In many regards Islam had much more publicity as it came with some dramatic contact with the West, the fact that Islam is the second largest religion in the world only adds to that. although you might have a point in that Islam is involved in much strife and issues around the world, but I do not see how it relates to the topic of strife in Buddhist societies. does the fact that the Islamic world is part of many complicated issues mean that strife in other societies does not exist?

It exists for sure,otherwise they wouldn't have been so poor.

But it is Islam that brings out a lot more fundamentalists than Buddhism (atleast this what I feel).And Islam is known for anti-idolatry campaigns against other religions in the East,even before it became notorious in the West.Islam and Christianity are the only correct religions in their view,which is what makes them to preselyize.(Buddhist rulers did proselyize in ancient period,but there is no doctrine in Buddhism that explicitly mention to seek converts)

Lets take the Bhutan case study again:
Hinduism in Bhutan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes there are persecutions/war ,but not to the extant of Muslim persecution.The Bhutanese refugees are a group of people of Nepalese origin, registered in camps in eastern Nepal during the 1990s. They claim to be Bhutanese citizens forcibly expelled from Bhutan.During the 1980s, the government had become acutely conscious not just of widespread illegal immigration of people of Nepali origin into Bhutan, but also of the total lack of integration even of long-term immigrants into the political and cultural mainstream of the country.

Bhutanese refugees - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is not just a Hindu-Buddhist issue. But yes Bhutan Kings seem to be hell bent in preserving their Buddhist culture.