Is Buddhism the least hated tradition?

[Carcano]

Around here that is.

Hinduism is generally regarded as silly idolatry, the caste system is archaic and racist...but who has anything derogatory to say about Buddhism and Buddhists???

Maybe its just that its unfamiliar, or that it embodies no missionary zeal to threaten and condemn a world that doesnt want salvation?

 

[Michael]

Hinduism is generally regarded as silly idolatry, the caste system is archaic and racist...but who has anything derogatory to say about Buddhism and Buddhists???

There is this thread: Monk vs Monk


Buddhism is generally well regarded by most people. Even fundamental Christians, who of course accept Buddhists will burn in Hell if they don't accept Jesus, acknowledge the beleif system is peaceful.

IMO because most monotheists regard Buddhists as so peaceful they usually attack the beleif using some other angle - something that they can fit with their world view and yet denigrate a more enlightened and thus peaceful beleif.

Classic example:
Buddhism is a Philosophy and not a "real" religion. Early Buddhists were not religious and modern day Buddhists in some way are practicing a corrupted form of the original teachings of Buddha.


Monotheism is by it's very nature an intolerant beleif.
Quite literally it can be summed up as: my beleif in God is right yours is wrong. In the thread I posted one person refused to even acknowledge the possibility could even exist that her beleif in God was wrong and Buddhism was correct. Whereas a Buddhist Priest have told me just the opposite. They may be wrong and another beleif correct.

See the difference?

Faced with the reality of the situation, that being that Buddhists are in general much much much more peaceful than monotheists, they simply attack the Buddhists beleif itself.

Michael

 

[lightgigantic]

There is this thread: Monk vs Monk


Buddhism is generally well regarded by most people. Even fundamental Christians, who of course accept Buddhists will burn in Hell if they don't accept Jesus, acknowledge the beleif system is peaceful.

IMO because most monotheists regard Buddhists as so peaceful they usually attack the beleif using some other angle - something that they can fit with their world view and yet denigrate a more enlightened and thus peaceful beleif.

Classic example:
Buddhism is a Philosophy and not a "real" religion. Early Buddhists were not religious and modern day Buddhists in some way are practicing a corrupted form of the original teachings of Buddha.


Monotheism is by it's very nature an intolerant beleif.
Quite literally it can be summed up as: my beleif in God is right yours is wrong. In the thread I posted one person refused to even acknowledge the possibility could even exist that her beleif in God was wrong and Buddhism was correct. Whereas a Buddhist Priest have told me just the opposite. They may be wrong and another beleif correct.

See the difference?

Faced with the reality of the situation, that being that Buddhists are in general much much much more peaceful than monotheists, they simply attack the Buddhists beleif itself.

Michael

there is only one successful option for peace - the successful performance of religious principles - IOW it doesn't matter what one gives lip service too ("I believe in jesus/god/allah/karma/jainism/etc) - what does matter is how one acts (since that is what ultimately affects our ability to be peaceful).

To say that Buddhism is the least hated seems to indicate that the Buddhist populations of the world are simply not very prominent on the international monetary scene (and hence their lack of "action" is interpreted as "peaceful") - to say the least, shinto buddhism provided an array of highly disparaged practices during WW2 - once again, this is not integral to buddhism, but integral to the difficulty that a conditioned soul has to properly practice religious principles, particularly when they have a bit of money jangling in their pockets

 

[Carcano]

Faced with the reality of the situation, that being that Buddhists are in general much much much more peaceful than monotheists, they simply attack the Buddhists beleif itself.

At its most extreme Ive heard of Christians protesting the teaching of Yoga in public schools because they believe it will lead to the worship of Hindu gods.

And that Buddha was merely a man deceived by Satan to lead the Asian contingent of humanity away from the true Hebrew God.

 

[Michael]

To say that Buddhism is the least hated seems to indicate that the Buddhist populations of the world are simply not very prominent on the international monetary scene (and hence their lack of "action" is interpreted as "peaceful")

Well I guess we'll see how things turn with a rising Asia. Koreans and Japanese have a lot of money and most are Buddhists.

And that Buddha was merely a man deceived by Satan to lead the Asian contingent of humanity away from the true Hebrew God.

Which is a lot different than Buddhists view of Christianity. Jesus was an enlightened person.

 

[Carcano]

to say the least, shinto buddhism

No such thing there...Shinto and Buddhism are vastly different traditions with different geographical origins.

 

[Hapsburg]

Although, one can apply Buddhist philosophy and teachings to traditional Shinto theology and metaphysics. The Japanese had done that for centuries before the Meiji Constitution banned the practice in the mid-1870s. Hell, it had to be a significant occurrence, and disruptive enough to Imperial authority, for it to be constitutionally made verboten.

 

[VitalOne]

Around here that is.

Hinduism is generally regarded as silly idolatry, the caste system is archaic and racist...but who has anything derogatory to say about Buddhism and Buddhists???

Maybe its just that its unfamiliar, or that it embodies no missionary zeal to threaten and condemn a world that doesnt want salvation?

Well I'm not sure, I'd say Taoism is the least hated, Gautama Buddha says in the pali canons if you don't believe in him you'll go to hell....the reason why Westerners like Buddhism and think its great is because of the hippie Alan Watts who perverted Buddhism into what he desired for his own personal gains.....

 

[S.A.M.]

Around here that is.

Hinduism is generally regarded as silly idolatry, the caste system is archaic and racist...but who has anything derogatory to say about Buddhism and Buddhists???

Maybe its just that its unfamiliar, or that it embodies no missionary zeal to threaten and condemn a world that doesnt want salvation?

Westerners know very little about Buddhism apart from the monks.

There is plenty, from the violence in Sri Lanka to the pedophilia in the monks to the skinning alive of the Tibetan Bonpos to the destruction of mosques and churches in Burma


Most people associate Buddhism with yoga and meditation, although these are Hindu practices. Few associate it with taekwondo; in Asia, though, the image of a Buddhist monk is accompanied by his knowledge of some form of martial arts. .

 

[Why?]

There are many atheists on this site, who if not for their disbelief, probably would have been Christians. Hence, they tend to gravitate toward hating Jesus.

 

[Carcano]

Well I'm not sure, I'd say Taoism is the least hated, Gautama Buddha says in the pali canons if you don't believe in him you'll go to hell....the reason why Westerners like Buddhism and think its great is because of the hippie Alan Watts who perverted Buddhism into what he desired for his own personal gains.....

What is different about the teaching of Alan Watts, as compared to the teaching of traditional Zen Buddhism in Japan?

 

[VitalOne]

What is different about the teaching of Alan Watts, as compared to the teaching of traditional Zen Buddhism in Japan?

Well LOTS, but basically Alan Watts tries to take all the supernatural/mystical sounding things out of Zen Buddhism, even though Zen Buddhism is like Mahayana Buddhism and has some of the most mystical/supernatural sounding aspects to it, also Alan Watts portrays Buddhism as atheistic or non-theistic when it is neither...

 

[Medicine*Woman]

There are many atheists on this site, who if not for their disbelief, probably would have been Christians. Hence, they tend to gravitate toward hating Jesus.

*************
M*W: How arrogant and absurd of you! Atheism is not a feud between "them and us!" It's not an "either-or" situation. There are probably many atheists who came from no religion whatsoever. It makes sense to say that the stronger atheists are the ones who came from christianity, like myself.

It is not possible for atheists to hate a mythological figure. Actually, it's not logical for anyone to hate a fictional character such as Jesus.

BTW 75% of the worldwide population is NOT christian.

 

[S.A.M.]

e.g. Buddhist exclusivist philosophy is an essential part of the Buddha's teachings. However, this is very rarely encountered in the milk and water version of Buddhism in the West, which is promoted for the "rational individual"

Although Buddhism promotes compassion and respect for all living things it is incorrect to say that Buddhists do not believe people can be wrong in their views about the world. For example, the Buddha taught that the Hindu view of the caste system should be rejected, as well as the religious beliefs which supported it, because he believed it led to people being treated badly (for more information see Buddhism and Racial Equality). He also taught that a person needed to become Enlightened so that they would stop being reborn and live correctly in the world (for more information see The Buddha: A Brief Introduction). Thus, the Buddha believed that unless people followed the Dharma (true teachings), as taught by the Buddha and lived in the Sangha (Buddhist community), a person would always be trapped in Samsara.

Sinhalese fears of being culturally 'swamped' both spurred and were reinforced by a Sinhala Buddhist revival in the second half of the 19th century. This revival reasserted a world view through which many Sinhalese perceived themselves a people of manifest destiny, invested by Lord Buddha with the responsibility of protecting the Dhammadeepa, the 'island of the just', the ancient home of pristine Buddhist society. Tamils had long regarded both themselves and the Sinhalese as founding peoples of Ceylonese culture and history. The Buddhist revival forcefully repudiated this view; Ceylon was the Dhammadeepa and no more. It also sanctified the gradual emergence of an exclusivist consciousness among some Sinhalese politicians.

The struggle between the Sinhalese and Tamils has been going on for decades, essentially set off by the exclusivist policies of the Ceylonese Buddhists.

Sri Lankan Government Finds Support From Buddhist Monks

SRI LANKA: Pro-War Monks Turn Peace Rally Into Fracas

They even went so far as to adopt Nazi ideas of race:

In the 1930s Aryan racial superiority propagated by the Nazis in Germany, was echoed in Ceylon through Don David Hewavitharane who changed his name to Anagarika Dharmapala. Others like Munidasa Kumarathunga (writer), Piyadasa Sirisena(editor: Sinhala Jathiya), A. E. Goonesinghc (trade union leader and publisher of Viraya), followed the footsteps of Anagarika Dharmapala.

The origin of the Sinhalese people was traced to the Aryan race and they were elevated to a "master race" by these "historians". People other than Sinhala Buddhists were called as "infidels of a degraded race" and "unbelievers and men of evil life". Sinhala Buddhists were called upon to unite under one flag and to wage a holy war under a leader equal to that of Hitler's calibre, against the non Buddhists.

"The Sinhalese are a unique race in as much as they can boast that they have no slave blood in them and never were conquered either by pagan Tamils or European vandals...the Sinhalese stand as the representatives of Aryan civilisation," Anagarika Dharmapala said

The racist policies of Hitler and Mussolini were well received and emulated by local (Sinhala) leaders during this time.

"We are one blood and one nation. We are a chosen people. The Buddha said that his religion would last for 5000 years. That means that we as the custodians of that religion shall last as long".

Though Buddha’s visit to Ceylon is described in Mahavamsa, Dipavamsa, and Vamsatthappakasini, each account varies in certain respects. However all three allege that the Yakkhas, the original inhabitants of the island. were harassed and tormented by Buddha who forced them to flee. According to Vamsatthappakasini

"Buddha used his supernatural powers to harass the Yakkhas with eleven different types of afflictions. Torrential rains and hurricanes descended on them. They were pelted with showers of stones, weapons, burning embers, hot ashes and mud. Cold and humid winds, storms, and darkness torment and terrify them".

Buddha was said to have been "victorious over enemies", and in another story as "jina" or "conqueror". To quote from Mahavamsa

"Lanka was known to the Conqueror as a place where his doctrine should shine in glory and from Lanka filled with Yakkhas, the Yakkhas must (first) be driven forth," so that Lanka would be a "fit dwelling place for men''.

Pujavaliya, a prose work of the 13th Century, says

"This island belongs to the Buddha himself, it is like a treasury filled with the Three Gems. Therefore the residence of wrong believers in this island will never be permanent, just as the residence of the Yakkhas of old was not permanent".

Here non Buddhists are referred to as wrong believers. The actions attributed to Buddha are now taken as a precedent to justify the continuing myth of racial superiority from Duttagamunu to Chandrika Bandaranaike.

http://www.tamilnation.org/tamileelam/fundamentalism/hindutemples.htm

 

[Exhumed]

Around here that is.

Hinduism is generally regarded as silly idolatry, the caste system is archaic and racist...but who has anything derogatory to say about Buddhism and Buddhists???

I don't know about elsewhere, but in the US they find a lot of images of Hinduism humorous, I think. Particularly Ganesha and deities with many arms. I'm not sure why that's important or focused on, but that's the vibe I get.. It's funny that the majority of Christians find a deity with an elephant's head unrealistic.

Too bad imo, I find Hinduism really interesting. The Bhagavad Gita had philosophy and advice for self-improvement. Things interesting to think about, as opposed to just being a bunch of rules, which is how the bible largely seemed to me.

 

[Carcano]

Well LOTS, but basically Alan Watts tries to take all the supernatural/mystical sounding things out of Zen Buddhism, even though Zen Buddhism is like Mahayana Buddhism and has some of the most mystical/supernatural sounding aspects to it, also Alan Watts portrays Buddhism as atheistic or non-theistic when it is neither...

Ok, but dont you mean spiritual instead of theistic.

Traditional Buddhism is not theistic, but it does admit a spiritual reality.

As opposed to the materialistic 'mind science' approach you seem to be addressing in popular western ideas of Buddhism.

What you call 'Hippie Buddhism'.

 

[S.A.M.]

Many Westerners also think Buddhism follows from Siddartha.

Traditionally this is not the belief:

Buddhists do not consider Siddhartha Gautama to have been the only Buddha. The Pali Canon refers to many previous ones (see List of the 28 Buddhas), while the Mahayana tradition additionally has many Buddhas of celestial, rather than historical, origin (see Amitabha or Vairocana as examples). A common Buddhist belief across all Buddhism is that the next Buddha will be one named Maitreya

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha

Unlike other religions, for example, Buddhists do not believe in charity, because Buddhism is about escaping the travails of life, not making them better.

In traditional Buddhism you don't hear much talk about love, joy, and romance. That is because the essence of traditional Buddhism is to keep one's focus on suffering and death. This constant remembrance of the negative is supposed to help one become detached from life and thus attain the ultimate freedom of nirvana. The word "compassion" is used by traditional Buddhists repetitiously and unconsciously. Buddhist monks are sometimes taught to visualize sick and starving people and then feel "compassion" for their suffering.

Why develop a cure for a disease if nature is just going to come up with a new disease sooner or latter to take its place? Aging, decay, and death are always on the Buddhist's mind, so why bother fighting a futile battle against the inevitable physical collapse?

The attitude to suffering is embodied in the four noble truths of Buddhism

http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/fourtruths.html

However, as you can see from the Dalai Lama's tastes, very few monks today believe in suffering for enlightenment.

 

[S.A.M.]

I don't know about elsewhere, but in the US they find a lot of images of Hinduism humorous, I think. Particularly Ganesha and deities with many arms. I'm not sure why that's important or focused on, but that's the vibe I get.. It's funny that the majority of Christians find a deity with an elephant's head unrealistic.

Too bad imo, I find Hinduism really interesting. The Bhagavad Gita had philosophy and advice for self-improvement. Things interesting to think about, as opposed to just being a bunch of rules, which is how the bible largely seemed to me.

If you like the Bhagavad Gita, you should also dip into the Vedas and read the Mahabharata

 

[Carcano]

Why develop a cure for a disease if nature is just going to come up with a new disease sooner or latter to take its place? Aging, decay, and death are always on the Buddhist's mind, so why bother fighting a futile battle against the inevitable physical collapse?

You see this esp in south-east asian Theravada Buddhism, but its not about dwelling on mortality in an attempt to become physically immortal, rather to transcend mortality through enlightenment of the spirit.

 

[Exhumed]

If you like the Bhagavad Gita, you should also dip into the Vedas and read the Mahabharata

Yeah, I definitely want to.