Is that because the Quran told you so?
Is Buddhism a Failure?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Is that because the Quran told you so?
Nope. No one was able to provide a counter-argument.
Just about any ideal you could name has, at one point or another, been used by some hypocrit to justify nefarious deeds.
So if you're going to reject ideals on those grounds, you aren't going to be left with many.
Thats exactly what I was pointing out to Tyler.
On an ad-hoc basis, presumably. And it wouldn't be a "system," in any useful sense of the word.
For example, when a movement manages to gain by through regression, you get all the progressive powers together, and whomp them over the head. It isn't so much a "system" as a "response."
I suppose, but we aren't trying to define "principle," but rather "religion." Which contains a component of principle, as well as one of practice, or so I thought we'd agreed.
Hold on now. A second ago, you were citing the standards as the definition of principle. But now there we're got wars being fought over which standard reflects the principle. So my objection remains: how do we figure out what the principle actually is?
Yes Yes we all know that the English under God's representative Queen liberated India and Indians all sucked on their English candies and lollies and Indians were oh so very grateful.
Neither did the Indians after they were liberated by the English who were defending them selves.
Oh do Iranians speak Farsi? HAAAHAHAHAHAAA Hahahahahahahaa .... SOTFROLMAO..... Really SAM? You meant to write Parsi. Hahahahaha....
Yup, the English not only were defending themselves they were liberating the Indians from their tyrants while spreading civilization to them. Geee just look at how Indian use flush toilets and electricity and car and trains.... yup, presents and lollies and yum yum from Jehovah's representative the Queen.
Except of course, in a hundred years, the Iranians [or then Persians] were back in the saddle [the Arabs had adopted their culture] and unlike your country of birth or country of adoption still are run by the natives [with intermittent interruptions by the Mongols and the Turks].
How did it work out for the natives at home?
How did it work out for the natives at home?
RE: Is Buddhism a Failure.
If success is making the transition from being completely and ignorantly bound to superstition, I'd say Japan, Korea, Hong Kong and China suggest that no it is not a failure. Unlike Islamic States, most Buddhist societies can make the transition from a backwards superstitious primitive way of thinking into a modern secular rational and logical one.
Parsi.... AAAAAhhhh HAAAA Hahahahahahaa.... ... Pfffffff... Parsi!!! Too funny. Lollies and Yum Yum
If success is making the transition from being completely and ignorantly bound to superstition, I'd say Japan, Korea, Hong Kong and China suggest that no it is not a failure. Unlike Islamic States, most Buddhist societies can make the transition from a backwards superstitious primitive way of thinking into a modern secular rational and logical one.
Parsi.... AAAAAhhhh HAAAA Hahahahahahaa.... ... Pfffffff... Parsi!!! Too funny. Lollies and Yum Yum
Oh just like the Indian are back in the saddle. Yum, I'm sure in a 100 years the Iraqi's will be back in the saddle. Hey, 14 million Chinese murdered, Korea split in half and millions raped, but meh.... them's back in the saddle so it's all good.Except of course, in a hundred years, the Iranians [or then Persians] were back in the saddle [the Arabs had adopted their culture] and unlike your country of birth or country of adoption still are run by the natives.
Look this is a big circle jerk we've pulled off to many times so why bother. You think murdering people in the name of Islam is fine and I don't. You said it youself: But Michael, thems were polytheists OR But Michael, thems were Arabs killing Arabs OR But Michael, thems were Arabs defending themselves against Persians OR But Michael, thems Persian were back in the saddle.
A great example of a slippery slope and why I expect Islamic countries to remain mired in their superstitious mindset never ever making the transition into modernity - UNLIKE most Buddhist societies.
So, we're answered your OP.
Done and Done.
A great example of a slippery slope and why I expect Islamic countries to remain mired in their superstitious mindset never ever making the transition into modernity - UNLIKE most Buddhist societies.
So, we're answered your OP.
Done and Done.
NOTE how easily I can say this: Killing in the name of Atheism is DEAD WRONG. Europeans were DEAD WRONG for murdering people in the name of God and stealing the land that became America. etc.... see how easy it is SAM? Atheism will NOT create a utopia. Atheism is most likely NOT ever going to make a good society as a generalized mindset - most people DO NEED superstition.
See how easy and clearly I can see the faults in my own mindset as it relates to humanity in general.
Have people used atheism to justify killing people? YES. Was it right? NO.
That's the difference SAM.
IF Buddhists can do that, then I'd say on another level they are not a failure - many I know have said exactly as much. EXACTLY as much. Again, that's the difference and one of the reasons I think, as a superstition it most likely isn't a bad one.
See how easy and clearly I can see the faults in my own mindset as it relates to humanity in general.
Have people used atheism to justify killing people? YES. Was it right? NO.
That's the difference SAM.
IF Buddhists can do that, then I'd say on another level they are not a failure - many I know have said exactly as much. EXACTLY as much. Again, that's the difference and one of the reasons I think, as a superstition it most likely isn't a bad one.
Of course, its your legacy. Fortunately, the Middle East and beyond, all the lands that are Muslim nations have no such legacy to apologise for. They did not replace any populations with "better" people.
Your apology ignores the fact that you still have the same mindset, where anyone who is "not like you" needs to be sent to re-education camps. Plus ca change...not much difference there, at the end.
The last I read most Egyptians think they are Arab - as do most people from Iraq, as do people from Lebanon. I wonder what the Kurds or the Armenians, or the many many other people who lived there prior to the Muslim crusades.
If I remembered correctly there's a bit of war in Africa where black Africans are killed by black Africans who say they are better because they are Arabs. (see below).
If I remembered correctly most Turkish Muslim think the conquest of Constantinople, a city founded by, built by and maintained by Greeks and Romans should remain Muslim and Turkish. But then again, they got rid of Arabic about 80 years ago as a means of removing Arab culture (specifically Islam as they tried to modernize, but, as Islam is a failure at modernizing it still didn't work, but, we learned it wasn't the language it was the belief that was a failure - the language is actually fine
Not to mention Faris.... Haaahahahaaa....
yeah SAM, ask the Spanish about being ruled over by Arabs. Hell, I forgot, you think the Spanish had it much better under their Muslim Masters who came into their country murdered the people who lived their, stole their stuff, smashed their moinstaries and then ruled over them - the Spanish had it better because ... the Muslims were very tolerant rulers. HAHAHAHAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaa Kind of like the English in India or the Yanks in Iraq.. yum yum good.
Note also, it isn't MY legacy. My family came from the Netherlands and migrated similarly to YOU. So stop falling for "racism" YOU have an equal legacy as me - as you migrated and lived in the USA! But I forgot, it's fine for Muslims to migrate and lived on occupied land in the USA. That's fine. Nothing like a bit of hypocrisy.
One more time, this notion of MY legacy is racist and I don't know where it developed from but it's a flawed concept. Just because I look "American" as in white doesn't mean anything. MY family is from the Netherlands and Scotland and only migrated recently. JUST like SAM, who also lives on occupied land in the USA. SAM, YOU carry equal legacy as me.
Do you still have the link for that thread? Id like to see how far we got before I had a pile of Uni work
Except ofcourse it has nothing to do with Buddhism, as you like to proclaim whenever the same argument is brought up in regards to Islam. Buddhismt doesnt add anything on the political spectrum, thats why the dominant political ideologies in Buddhist countries have always been born on the other part of the world, well, almost always.
There is a difference between murdering people and defending your country from attack. Defending your country from attack is allowed in almost all international law and it is universally acceptable whereas killing someone in cold blood isnt. Once again, you put words into SAM's mouth by saying she agrees with murder in the name of Islam. And no mention about the bloodthirsty rulers and violent conquests and wars carried out by Buddhist nations. Double standards...
Define modernity? Muslim nations have made the step to certain modernity when it comes to technology, research and finances etc. Ofcourse, you will probably say thats not because of Islam, however you give credit to Buddhism in other countries instead of saying that it is in spite of Buddhism. Double standards...
No Muslim crusades took place. There was no central religious authority commanding a unified army of Muslims to take over Egypt or Europe because it was Holy Land for the Muslims. But, as to your point, most people in England consider themselves English and or British, not Saxon or Viking or Roman. When the Arab and Muslim culture spread West, not hand in hand with any military endeavour, the people liked it and took it over. They married Arabs and Arabs and their revived culture became an integral part of that region.
Actually, thats not the reason. Once again, youre anti-Arab colours are showing through. The reasons for conflict in Sudan go, as they do with most of the conflicts on the African continent, back to colonial times. Since Wiki seems to be your favourite resource, let me quote:
Here we see that the conflicts in Darfur have their origin in the dividing of the country and forcing the people in the North and South to stay away from eachother, while helping the South to spread Christianity. When independence came, the Christians and Animists in the South wanted nothing to do with their Northern fellow countrymen, because they were infidels, so they became separatists. As a result of the fighting between the North and South, the Darfur region felt neglected and fought against the government too. What happened then? We had the North send its people to fight against the Darfur rebels. This is not about Arabs seeing themselves as superior, this is about forced separation of a country and irresponsible handover of power upon independence.
So they think that about the conquest or about the city? Whats wrong with it remaining Turkis and or Muslim? The vast majority of people there are Turkish and Muslim. Oh, I see. You want it go back to being Christian. Or Greek? Roman?
But then again, they got rid of Arabic about 80 years ago as a means of removing Arab culture (specifically Islam as they tried to modernize, but, as Islam is a failure at modernizing it still didn't work, but, we learned it wasn't the language it was the belief that was a failure - the language is actually fine
So the modernization of Turkey is a failure?
Thats so dang funny! Fact is that it was it was a Muslim who presented such a strong argument against people just like you, who see Islam as nothing but a political identity designed to conquer and destroy, and won. Dont forget to add: gave them incredible knowledge, culture, architecture, science, philosophy, medicine, schools, universities and freedom to people from other religions. Ofcourse, this was all done away with when the Spanish in the North found out that these people that had elevated Spain were in fact infidels. So they went about spreading Christianity in Spain, by forcibly converting Muslims and Jews and massacring those that didnt.
Arsalan,
Lets not get into another circle jerk.
Simply put, you think it's fine when Muslims attacked and murdered their way through the Spanish - finally set themselves up as the rulers of Spain; a country that had high-culture, literature, math and beautiful marble sculptures and cities on the ocean 1000s of year before illiterate Arabs who were at the high point of milking camels invaded during their Islamic crusades.
You think it's fine when Muslims attacked and attacked and attacked Constantinople and finally raped, murdered and looted their way through a Greco-Roman founded city. Oh, wait, I forgot, they didn't harm a flee in Spain or anywhere they just handed out candy, lollies and yum yum just like America in Iraq.
I think murdering people and stealing their stuff is wrong.
We'll agree to disagree.
Michael
Lets not get into another circle jerk.
Simply put, you think it's fine when Muslims attacked and murdered their way through the Spanish - finally set themselves up as the rulers of Spain; a country that had high-culture, literature, math and beautiful marble sculptures and cities on the ocean 1000s of year before illiterate Arabs who were at the high point of milking camels invaded during their Islamic crusades.
You think it's fine when Muslims attacked and attacked and attacked Constantinople and finally raped, murdered and looted their way through a Greco-Roman founded city. Oh, wait, I forgot, they didn't harm a flee in Spain or anywhere they just handed out candy, lollies and yum yum just like America in Iraq.
I think murdering people and stealing their stuff is wrong.
We'll agree to disagree.
Michael
Whats wrong with thinking you're Arab? Arab is a geographic and linguistic classification. The Iranians do not consider themselves Arabs, nor do the Kurds since they do not speak the language. Jews and Christians of Arab countries consider themselves Arabs. Its like everyone in America considering themselves American and speaking English. Or Hispanic.
I'm a person from a colonised country. My legacy is one of sympathy with the occupied. Not of considering other people as delusional savages. Although there are many who go the other way and adopt the prejudices of the colonisers.
Last edited:
Egypt was colonized by Arabs and you don't appear have any sympathy with them. Egyptians were murdered. Egyptian monasteries were looted. Egyptian women were raped. Children lost parents. Some people lost everything. The Greek founded and built and maintained city of Alexandria was overrun.
This is all OK for you because it was Muslims doing the colonizing.
Or you'll make up some story about how Arab Muslims didn't do anything wrong. Sure, Egyptians had lived there for 7000 years, invented the written language, were civilized for millennial, but ... meh, at this point in time what they really really really wanted was to be overrun by nomadic horsemen with no language and no civilization. :bugeye:
Oh and the reason why is because these smelly nomades rapeing their women were bringing a magical book from a magical god (even though the Qur'an was invented yet).
And its common for Arabs think of Arabs as being a "race".
"American" is a national identify like being "Egyptian".
While I agree Arab is a culture, that's not how it's seen by most Arabs.
Egypt was colonized following the Muslim crusades, the people were eventually overrun as their Arab Muslim conquerors who then proceeded to out breed them - just as happened to the Native Americans by the Europeans. Unlike the Native Americans, who are now often looked up to as caretakers of the land with a peaceful nature religion, it's not uncommon for "Coptics" to be viewed derogatorily.
I think most people understand now that it is/was wrong for Europeans to have colonized other people. Not you, you think the Muslim crusades were the pinnacle of Islamic Civilization. Something to be proud of. Many say following the blood bath there was a wondrous perfect peace where no one worked the land, everyone ate sugar that fell like manna from Gods own hands and the magical 4 righteous Caliphs ruled over the peaceful lands of camel milk and honey.
What about European Crusades? Is that something to be proud of? What about European colonization? Is that something to be proud of?
And then to top it off you have the gull to think it's JUST to tax the people who lived there for the privilege of maintaining their god damn culture! A tax that is imposed to maintain an army of colonizers?!?!
That's Justice?!?
That's Godly?!?
Talk about meat-headed bullshit.
As for Iran, I know a hell of a lot of Persians and they certainly see things very differently.
Last edited: