format_quote Originally Posted by
AntiKarateKid
Lately I have been noticing the full extent of misinformation spread about Islam these days. Various other " religious" forums have been denouncing us Muslims and violent and bloodthirsty and Buddhists as the angels of the world. I don't know why they can't get it through their heads that religious textx have always been hijacked by extremists throughout the ages. More importantly, Buddhism is NOT an exception. An interesting article debunking the myth that Buddhism is impervious to contortion for violent extremists is shown in this very interesting article.
http://www.mandala.hr/5/baran.html
What are your opinions brothers and sisters? I have no problem with Buddhists as people but of course we have our differences in philosophical ways.
Your first point is a little sloppy in that you claim Buddhism is no exception to the hi-jacking of
texts by extremists. There is nothing in that article that suggests same, and it is an accusation you would be very hard pushed to support with facts should you try. Your second is a little sloppy in that it refers to 'violent extremists' which is only true as far as the majority of the population of Japan at those times would also have been 'violent extremists'. The people concerned were Zen Buddhists, but they were also products of a very specific nationality, culture and time.
There are clearly issues here the first of which, just as with Islam, is the need to disentangle cultural and political factors from religious ones. The particular variety of Buddhism we are talking about, Japanese Zen, is no more representative of 'Buddhism' as a whole than any other and indeed far less so than many. In recent years it has had far more publicity than the number of practitioners really justifies (particularly in the 'hippy culture' era, principly due to it's adoption in the West as potentially far more 'quick and easy' approach to 'enlightenment').. although even Zen adherents do not confuse the Zen experience of
satori with the final understanding of a Buddha or Arhat.
As to the people named even masters are
not Buddhas, and like all human beings are far from perfect.. and in this case I admit to finding that lack of 'perfection' and that great Buddhist essential, compassion, disturbing to say the least (I also find it reassuring it is being openly questioned and examined in the book and at that site). But it should be remembered that Zen came from China, remains relatively strong there (all things considered since 1949) and in Korea, and it is the citizens of those countries that suffered most at the hands of the Japanese. Or in other words, that particular militarism was unique to Japan, and was not found in notable Chinese or Korean Buddhist figures, and was and is not found in the West. Indeed, the "Statement of Repentance" suggests it is no longer found in Japan. That is also true of the population as a whole, but in terms of 'extremism' it should be pointed out that those Zen Buddhists have been rather faster to 'repent' than the Japanese authorities.
Again, as with Islam, producing a counter-example is not difficult. The Tibetan exiles have a 'cause' of a nature that would promote violent 'resistance' (a.k.a. terrorism) in many cultures; the Chinese occupation of Tibet is far more pervasive than the Israel occupation(s) of the West Bank and Gaza, for example. Yet, following the Dalai Lama - probably the world's most prominent 'man of peace', they pursue that cause using totally non-violent means despite sometimes intense provocation. Tibetan Buddhism is far more dependent on texts than Zen, incidently.. indeed one distinctive feature of Zen is that it barely uses them.
Lastly, at the risk of straying slightly off topic, I strongly recommend one particular book, Ikeda and Tehranian's
Global Civilization: A Buddhist - Islamic Dialogue, British Academic Press, ISBN 1 86064 810 X, to anyone with a serious interest in comparing the two religions. Both authors are 'peace activists' and, despite the publisher, it's an 'easy' and non-technical read.