Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[martinuzz]

In Birma, the Buddhist spiritual leader has declared the muslim minority of the country, the Rohingya people, who have lived there for centuries, as 'illegal immigrants', who must be locked away in camps awaiting deportation, and claims violence against them is justified.
He says "muslims, with their polygamy, breed so fast that if we do not get rid of them we will get a new IS in Birma."
The past few weeks mass graves have been discovered in the jungle near the border with Thailand, with hundreds of dead Rohingya, including many woman and children.
Footage has come to the Human Rights Watch, showing Rohingiya people being beaten to death by a mob with bamboo sticks, while the police stand beside it watching, doing nothing.

So much for Buddhism being peaceful, but we kinda knew that already.

Even Noble Peace Prize winner and Birmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi is not willing to speak up against, or give any comment on the killings. It is presumed she dares not do so, in fear of losing votes for the next election. The Dalai Llama has called upon her, to take a stand against the violence.

[Frumple]

... religious leader incites violence contrary to the explicit teachings of the religion, news at... never, I think.

The history of buddhism isn't the most peaceful, though, no. That's what happens when believers start getting involved with governing powers, generally. The religion itself is about the most explicit anti-violence one among the larger groups. S'not really any nuance to (what's generally listed as) the first precept, unlike the big two's anti-killing stuff.

[Yoink]

The thread title would be a good name for a metal song.

[Owlbread]

The Japanese were responsible for the worst atrocities of WW2 and a great number of the perpetrators were Buddhist. In Sri Lanka the Buddhist Sinhalas are currently brutally oppressing the Hindu Tamils, in the last few years using rape camps, summary executions and a variety of human rights violations to prevent any future uprisings. During the war with the LTTE they were intentionally shelling hospitals to kill as many Tamil civilians as possible. Tamil Eelam looks a lot like 1990s Bosnia now.

I've noticed that in debates about religion people tend to criticise Christianity and Islam and then end up saying something daft like "I hate all religions, they're destructive, divisive forces,Buddhism excepted". Buddhism is just like any other religion and I wish misinformed people would stop giving it a free pass, it's really lazy thinking.

[RedKing]

Point of order: majority of Japanese soldiers WWII were predominantly Shintoist. Yes, they were simultaneously Buddhists in most cases, but Shinto was the dominant factor.

No argument though with Buddhism's history of political violence in Asia.

[Loud Whispers]

In Birma

Burma

the Buddhist spiritual leader has declared the muslim minority of the country, the Rohingya people, who have lived there for centuries, as 'illegal immigrants', who must be locked away in camps awaiting deportation, and claims violence against them is justified.

Some have lived for centuries, some have lived there since the British Empire, some are from Bangladesh. Who is or is not an illegal immigrant is unclear, as they are all categorically being denied citizenship. Indonesia has also claimed that the majority of boat refugees are actually Bangladeshi labourers. Pastebin if you can't get paste paywall.

A sizable number of mujahideen were present and concentrated in the province of Arakan, Burma. There were many Muslim Rebels in Rakhine State of Burma in 1946—a year after achieving Independence. Mir Kashem was the leader of the group known as "Mujahids", a group that consisted primarily of immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh. This particular movement was crushed by the Burmese Army in 1950s. Mir Kashem himself was assassinated in Cox's Bazar. This movement under Kashem collapsed after his death and his followers surrendered. When asked about their race, they called themselves as "Rohingyas". They were much more active before the 1962 coup d'etat by General Ne Win. Ne Win carried out some military operations targeting them over a period of two decades. The prominent one was "Operation King Dragon" which took place in 1978; as a result, many Muslims in the region fled to neighboring Bangladesh as refugees. Nevertheless, the Burmese mujahideen remained active within the remote areas of Arakan. Their associations with Bangladeshi mujahideen were significant but they have extended their networks to the international level and countries such as Pakistan, Malaysia, et al., during the recent years. They collect donations, and receive religious military training outside of Burma.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen#Burma

They've even declared their own little Islamic Republic in Burma, which I'm sure is just a swell place. Also looking up ethnic conflicts in Burma and civil war, not only does fighting with Islamists, Rohingya and the Burmese continue, but there's even conflict with their chinese minorities that has affected hundreds of thousands.

He says "muslims, with their polygamy, breed so fast that if we do not get rid of them we will get a new IS in Birma."

Ha, he's decades late, Burma's already got Al Qaeda. Hell, does anyone remember when I was posting twitter feeds from ISIS supporters (where there was a shit ton of ISIS cakes, that was hilarious) and I got really confused when there was that one guy waving the ISIS flag in the ruins of some great southeast asian city? I thought he must've been an Indonesian on holiday in Cambodia or something, but you never bloody know these days who's just baking jihad cakes or who's out for skulls.

The past few weeks mass graves have been discovered in the jungle near the border with Thailand, with hundreds of dead Rohingya, including many woman and children.

*Mass graves caused by human traffickers.

Footage has come to the Human Rights Watch, showing Rohingiya people being beaten to death by a mob with bamboo sticks, while the police stand beside it watching, doing nothing.
So much for Buddhism being peaceful, but we kinda knew that already.

Meanwhile across the border in Bangladesh critics of islam are hacked to death with machetes, apostates hacked to death with machetes (though I believe the most recent case only had a woman being slapped by an imam while she and her family were exiled - progress) and within Burma itself Buddhist women are gang raped and murdered with machetes, all by muslims. Have this gem from the guardian too regarding Bangladesh: Shah Ahmad Shafi, who heads Hefazat-e-Islam, the country's largest radical Islamic movement, at his instigation over 500,000 demonstrators clogged the streets of Dhaka on 5 May, demanding the application of 13 measures, including a ban on mixing of men and women in public places, the removal of sculptures and demands for the former wording of the constitution to be reinstated, affirming "absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah". About 50 people were killed in clashes with police and several leaders were arrested. Since then Hefazat has avoided the media, for fear of reprisals. The government is extremely wary of a movement that has steadily gathered strength since its launch three years ago.

So much for Islam being peaceful, but we kinda knew that already.

Isn't that such a helpful statement? I can see how it really contributed much to this discussion. We're at fedora the explorer tipping point.

Even Noble Peace Prize winner and Birmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi is not willing to speak up against, or give any comment on the killings. It is presumed she dares not do so, in fear of losing votes for the next election. The Dalai Llama has called upon her, to take a stand against the violence.

Guardian on the Dalai Llama and Aung San Suu Kyi.

The Japanese were responsible for the worst atrocities of WW2 and a great number of the perpetrators were Buddhist. In Sri Lanka the Buddhist Sinhalas are currently brutally oppressing the Hindu Tamils, in the last few years using rape camps, summary executions and a variety of human rights violations to prevent any future uprisings. During the war with the LTTE they were intentionally shelling hospitals to kill as many Tamil civilians as possible. Tamil Eelam looks a lot like 1990s Bosnia now.
I've noticed that in debates about religion people tend to criticise Christianity and Islam and then end up saying something daft like "I hate all religions, they're destructive, divisive forces,Buddhism excepted". Buddhism is just like any other religion and I wish misinformed people would stop giving it a free pass, it's really lazy thinking.

In all fairness the reason why people give Buddhism a free pass is because only Jainism enshrines the principle of non-violence above all else more, with perhaps only that one people who got genocided by the Maoris being even more non-violent (as they went extinct based off of that principle). There's no Buddhist text justifying slavery or killing, and their holy figures do crazy shit like allowing themselves to be eaten by a tiger to save the tiger's life. This fable of feeding the tiger with one's own sacrifice is a brilliant contrast to what Wimala Biwuntha, used the tiger imagery for; likeing Muslims to a tiger who enters an ill-defended house to snatch away its occupants. And in other news, it's ok to crucify your enemies because of Jesus.
When the Japanese and what the Burmese are doing what they're doing right now, Buddhism becomes synonymous with being Nippon or being Burmese, and they do the equivalent of an Abrahamic follower breaking all the commandments and pissing Moses off. There's something funny about watching an interview of an ex-IRA soldier asking in what he specifically believes in in regards to Christianity, with his beliefs basically describing Protestantism down to the T; it's not about the philosophy, it's synonymous with the ethnic identity. Hell, even the Yuros are beginning to see Muslims as their own race. Look at what happens when a Rohingya converts to another religion; if it's not Buddhism, they're not Burmese. Then they're fucked because they can't even return to the Rohingya, because the convert is not muslim, no longer Rohingya and is an apostate. Again, religion synonymous with ethnicity. Or perhaps a better term would be identity. You get the idea. The fracture is exploited for the government's security. It should come as no surprise that monk Wirathu, who was once imprisoned by the junta, is now supported by members of the new government as he is removing a threat to them on their western borders.

Ultimately nothing will get done. The Burmese government doesn't even treat its own citizens any better, allowing children to be sold for bags of rice. It's apt to bring up the Japanese, who didn't sign the Geneva Convention before WWII because it would've demanded that they treat their prisoners better than their own soldiers. With a government like that you're two steps behind helping the group of others when you're still hurting your own. And that's even if you forget all the blood spilt built up and rebels, soldiers and terrorists running amok through the populations of Burma. The world cannot be split between innocent victims and guilty oppressors. The cynical view that everyone is guilty of something is a much more accurate world view, because everyone is guilty of something. I remember the large numbers of people both here and without who were urging military intervention in Syria, supporting the arming of rebels in Syria in order to stop their massacre by Assad's security forces... Ignoring prior learned experience in regards to arming fundamentalists or common sense in arming fighters eating people's hearts. What I'm saying is, Western media is too often focused with creating victim narratives because that's easy for western minds to comprehend. Armenian genocide, Holocaust, Holodomor, everything's easy when it's black and white. It is not. It never is. Everyone is wrong and the whole world has plucked an eye for an eye to blindness.

[Tiruin]

[...]
He says "muslims, with their polygamy, breed so fast that if we do not get rid of them we will get a new IS in Birma."[...]

Err, they're seriously heavily generalizing a people and slapping a negative label on them to justify things?

_{I haven't updated myself with world news as of late.}

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Buddhism isn't anti-violence, it's pro-social order. Sometimes these overlap. Sometimes...

[wobbly]

It is in it's more mystic or monastical forms. I think people are quick to confuse Buddhist monks with lay-buddhists or devotional forms of buddhism with other forms. Or forget that while the catholic church has a clear head of it's hierarchy, Buddhism doesn't. Or that Zen is very unlike pure-land & neither are much like the old-fashion Indian tradition etc. etc.

[Loud Whispers]

Buddhism isn't anti-violence, it's pro-social order. Sometimes these overlap. Sometimes...

The principle of ahimsa is not "do not murder" it's "do not cause harm." That sounds pretty anti-violence to me.

And because this is the closest thing to a religion thread right now, have this. Thought the sony leaks were jokes when they identified left-wing students as threats to Israel who needed to be neutralized with their resources? There's a database collating "radicals" of anti-zionism now, to halt any chance of them being employed by affiliated companies. That doesn't sound dodgy at all, no sir not at all...

[Eagleon]

In any case, it's much more important to talk about people rather than books when considering the actions of people. People can rationalize literally anything to themselves when there's fear involved. They don't need a religion to do so, they can even realize they're in the wrong at the time. Philosophy usually has a very small part to play in hurting someone else. Using their philosophy as a bludgeon when they do something terrible is a bit like scolding a child for his table manners after he pulled the cat's tail.

[Vilanat]

Buddhism isn't anti-violence, it's pro-social order. Sometimes these overlap. Sometimes...

The principle of ahimsa is not "do not murder" it's "do not cause harm." That sounds pretty anti-violence to me.

And because this is the closest thing to a religion thread right now, have this. Thought the sony leaks were jokes when they identified left-wing students as threats to Israel who needed to be neutralized with their resources? There's a database collating "radicals" of anti-zionism now, to halt any chance of them being employed by affiliated companies. That doesn't sound dodgy at all, no sir not at all...

There needs to be lists that also collect people who publicly support groups that are anti-gays/anti-abortions/racist and/or pro ISIS/Al-qaeda/Boko Haram/Hamas. it would be perfectly legal since those people are publicly and willingly expose themselves by advocating their cause.

[Loud Whispers]

Buddhism isn't anti-violence, it's pro-social order. Sometimes these overlap. Sometimes...

The principle of ahimsa is not "do not murder" it's "do not cause harm." That sounds pretty anti-violence to me.

And because this is the closest thing to a religion thread right now, have this. Thought the sony leaks were jokes when they identified left-wing students as threats to Israel who needed to be neutralized with their resources? There's a database collating "radicals" of anti-zionism now, to halt any chance of them being employed by affiliated companies. That doesn't sound dodgy at all, no sir not at all...

There needs to be lists that also collect people who publicly support groups that are anti-gays/anti-abortions/racist and/or pro ISIS/Al-qaeda/Boko Haram/Hamas. it would be perfectly legal since those people are publicly and willingly expose themselves by advocating their cause.

That's interesting. Could you explain why you believe these lists are a good idea? I cannot for the life of me see these as more than merely yet more tools to push society in an ever increasingly authoritarian direction where one thought, one ideology is allowed. I'm reminded of communist blacklists.

[Vilanat]

It's not about forbidding ideologies, its about accounting responsibility to those who advocate ideologies. i, for example, would welcome it if a certain corporation/corporations put on a list and decides it no longer wants to hire people who advocate pro-abortions or equal gay rights. i am risking not getting hired there for something i think well worth it. advocating ISIS and not taking the responsibility for the effect such a support has (and it has a tremendous effect) is simply hypocrisy. it might lead to people actually taking the time to study what is it they are advocating.

[Arx]

(for the life of me I cannot remember the proper name, but I know it starts with an R).

Roma.

And because this is the closest thing to a religion thread right now

Apart from the one hundred and thirty-eight page long one on the second page of the forum (which I think you missed the start of).



The discussion around this looks interesting. PTW.