Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Contrary to popular belief there are violent Sutras in Buddhism
For instance:
The Buddha…said…”When I recall the past, I remember that I was the king of a great state…My name was Senyo, and I loved and venerated the Mahayana sutras…When I heard the Brahmins slandering the vaipulya sutras, I put them to death on the spot. Good men, as a result of that action, I never thereafter fell into hell. O good man! When we accept and defend the Mahayana sutras, we possess innumerable virtues.” [3]
Like Islam it takes an evil minded person to come to the conclusion that Buddhism promotes violence. But like Islam it's scriptures do contain verses that can be considered violent to those that do not comprehend the purpose.
If one understands Islam they will understand that those "alleged" violent verses actually promote non-violence.
I am well aware of these few 'needles in the haystack' verses relating to Buddha's past lives but not his present life which is focused on compassion to all sentient beings.
That is why I bolded "leading" evil laden verses.
In contrast note the many thousands of evil laden elements in the Quran -the main central text of Islam.
In addition those verses are in some sort of stories and not part of the main doctrine of Buddhism.
There are no incidents of any Mahayanist Buddhist every quoting those very rare evil elements to justify their violence at all.
There were Buddhist monks who encouraged and went on the rampage to commit evils and violence in Myanmar. Note however those monks in Myanmar were Theravadian monks and not Mahayana monks. It is like Sunni versus Shia in Islam. The above evil laden elements you quote refer to Mahayana Sutras and not Theravada Sutras.
In addition, Buddhism has an overriding pacifist ethos which will easily override the few rare evil laden elements from some insignificant Sutra which do not form the main core of Buddhism.
I am well aware of these few 'needles in the haystack' verses relating to Buddha's past lives but not his present life which is focused on compassion to all sentient beings.
That is why I bolded "leading" evil laden verses.
In contrast note the many thousands of evil laden elements in the Quran -the main central text of Islam.
In addition those verses are in some sort of stories and not part of the main doctrine of Buddhism.
There are no incidents of any Mahayanist Buddhist every quoting those very rare evil elements to justify their violence at all.
There were Buddhist monks who encouraged and went on the rampage to commit evils and violence in Myanmar. Note however those monks in Myanmar were Theravadian monks and not Mahayana monks. It is like Sunni versus Shia in Islam. The above evil laden elements you quote refer to Mahayana Sutras and not Theravada Sutras.
In addition, Buddhism has an overriding pacifist ethos which will easily override the few rare evil laden elements from some insignificant Sutra which do not form the main core of Buddhism.
You will also find that the Qur'an also has "an overriding pacifist ethos which will easily override the few rare evil laden elements from some insignificant Surat which do not form the main core of Islam".
The Surat which are mistaken by some as being "evil laden" actually condemn evil and do not foster it. The problem comes when one sees them as a stand alone command.
American history is filled with many evil actions but that does not imply American history books promote evil.
That is sheer hate against EVERY MUSLIM. Only an extremely hateful person will sterotype EVERY Muslim in such way.
I think his statement is pretty clear. He is referring to the recorded acts of Muhammad. The man who is supposed to be the "ideal man" and example for Muslims. Are you saying that there are Muslims that condemn Muhammad for his acts?
I think his statement is pretty clear. He is referring to the recorded acts of Muhammad. The man who is supposed to be the "ideal man" and example for Muslims. Are you saying that there are Muslims that condemn Muhammad for his acts?
Muhammad(saws) never committed an evil or unjust act. those that believe such have no comprehension of the Qur'an or what the Authenticated and reliable Ahadith say
You will also find that the Qur'an also has "an overriding pacifist ethos which will easily override the few rare evil laden elements from some insignificant Surat which do not form the main core of Islam".
The Surat which are mistaken by some as being "evil laden" actually condemn evil and do not foster it. The problem comes when one sees them as a stand alone command.
American history is filled with many evil actions but that does not imply American history books promote evil.
And this must be why no Muslims are mass raping girls and women in western countries, and rioting, and committing terrorism, and demanding special rights, and destroying towns and clogging roads during prayer and forcing their way into homes and stealing, and slaughtering other Muslims by the MILLIONS, and mass murdering non-Muslims, and screwing children, and inbreeding, and destroying precious artifacts......Oh, wait!!!......
And this must be why no Muslims are mass raping girls and women in western countries, and rioting, and committing terrorism, and demanding special rights, and destroying towns and clogging roads during prayer and forcing their way into homes and stealing, and slaughtering other Muslims by the MILLIONS, and mass murdering non-Muslims, and screwing children, and inbreeding, and destroying precious artifacts......Oh, wait!!!......
and what does that prove? Only that we all are individuals. They is no indication ALL Muslims are violent or even a Majority. Each and every one of us is different, we individually are accountable for our actions. Islam is not a group, organization or even an organized religion we are individuals that Submit to God(swt) in the manner we our self believe to be the proper manner. No person of group represents all Muslims.
People of all types call them self Muslim. Good, bad, ugly, indifferent, the whole spectrum of human characteristics. There is no joining Islam, or any required initiation, there is no authoritative central leader, there is no ordained clergy nor even any"Membership" requirements as there is no membership. The only thing we all have in common is we all claim to be Muslim. We do not even have agreement over what it means to be a Muslim. We ourself do not know who is a Muslim, we only can know who claims to be Muslim.
and what does that prove? Only that we all are individuals. They is no indication ALL Muslims are violent or even a Majority. Each and every one of us is different, we individually are accountable for our actions. Islam is not a group, organization or even an organized religion we are individuals that Submit to God(swt) in the manner we our self believe to be the proper manner. No person of group represents all Muslims.
People of all types call them self Muslim. Good, bad, ugly, indifferent, the whole spectrum of human characteristics. There is no joining Islam, or any required initiation, there is no authoritative central leader, there is no ordained clergy nor even any"Membership" requirements as there is no membership. The only thing we all have in common is we all claim to be Muslim. We do not even have agreement over what it means to be a Muslim. We ourself do not know who is a Muslim, we only can know who claims to be Muslim.
Islam is an evil, sick ideology. Good people do not choose to follow an evil ideology. If there were lots of moral Muslims, what is happening in Europe would not be happening and this would not have happened:
Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:
United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%
Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.
My wife's Native American ancestors will be glad to tell you what happened as the White Christian population increased in the Americas. Almost total genocide with most of the survivors becoming Twinkies. (Brown on the outside, white on the inside)
Sad fact of the reality of life as any group grows within a community, the Majority suffers. Has nothing to do with religion.
In my life time I heard the same being said about Blacks, Porto Ricans, Mexicans, Italians, Vietnamese, Jews, Catholics, and now Muslims.
You will also find that the Qur'an also has "an overriding pacifist ethos which will easily override the few rare evil laden elements from some insignificant Surat which do not form the main core of Islam".
The Surat which are mistaken by some as being "evil laden" actually condemn evil and do not foster it. The problem comes when one sees them as a stand alone command.
American history is filled with many evil actions but that does not imply American history books promote evil.
You are denying the tons of evil elements in the Quran.
I have personally listed more than 55% of the 6,236 verses contained some degree of evil laden elements.
The Quran do not have an overriding pacifist ethos.
Where there is an overriding ethos, there should not be any buts and ifs at all.
In the NT, Jesus stated 'Love your enemies' 'give the other cheeks' without 'buts' and "ifs."
In the Quran, Allah sanction 'fighting', 'killing' 'beheading' of non-Muslims if Islam or Muslims are under threat. This is not an overriding nor unconditional ruling.
The problem with the terms representing 'under threat' are very dualistic [two truths] which give way for SOME evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence under the sanction of Allah.
This problem is compounded by the point there is no central authority nor can any one be the final arbiter of the Quranic verses other than Allah on Judgment Day. Meanwhile SOME evil prone Muslims will be committing terrible evils and violence with the confidence Allah will reward them for complying with the terms and conditions of the covenant with Allah.
Muhammad(saws) never committed an evil or unjust act. those that believe such have no comprehension of the Qur'an or what the Authenticated and reliable Ahadith say
This is a denial for psychological and emotional reasons.
For those who recognized the Ahadiths and Sira, there are full of stories where Muhammad committed evils, violence and unjust acts. Juju has given the various references from the Ahadiths.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
