Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 2726
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by LuckyR » March 24th, 2018, 4:04 pm

Spectrum wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 3:36 am
LuckyR wrote:
March 23rd, 2018, 11:33 am


Again, what you are saying passes the "sounds logical" test, yet has probably no actual evidence to back it up. Even if I stipulate that your analysis is 100% correct (which is definitely 100% unproven), what practical steps do you propose to bring about this "prevention"? Especially since it IS proven that evil recruiters can and have used anti-Islam rhetoric effectively in their recruitment efforts.
I believe the first strategy to convey the facts [supported by evidences and justifications] to all Muslims that the Quran as core of Islam is inherently evil and will influenced a potential pool of evil prone Muslims [300 millions i.e. appx 20%] to commit terrible evils and violence.

As expected there will be loads of resistance from hardcore Muslims in facing those facts and thus the authorities must be very persistent in getting the facts across to all people.
Re this, the political correct authorities must go.

Another strategy is to explain the psychology of theism, i.e. the fundamental reason of religion is due to psychology - the existential crisis - and not that a God pre-existed and is awaiting humans to believe in God. This will also face resistance.

The above a various relevant strategies which can be taken at present.

However in the longer run what is most critical is humanity must work toward finding alternatives without side effect and are fool proof to replace theistic religions in dealing with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

Why I am optimistic with the above is, at present there are already non-theistic religions dealing with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis without the idea of God and holy texts from a God plus there is no evil baggage attached to them.
What we can do is to remove the religious elements from these methods and repackaged them with improved elements to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
Here is where your commentary starts to stray from "sounds logical". Anyone with a modicum of experience will recognize that your acknowledgement of "resistance" to your proposal is in fact a whitewash of the fact that recruiters (who can already sway the impressionable with online diatribes) would be able to ramp up their successful efforts in the face of your proposals.
"As usual... it depends."

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » March 24th, 2018, 11:54 pm

LuckyR wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 4:04 pm
Spectrum wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 3:36 am

I believe the first strategy to convey the facts [supported by evidences and justifications] to all Muslims that the Quran as core of Islam is inherently evil and will influenced a potential pool of evil prone Muslims [300 millions i.e. appx 20%] to commit terrible evils and violence.

As expected there will be loads of resistance from hardcore Muslims in facing those facts and thus the authorities must be very persistent in getting the facts across to all people.
Re this, the political correct authorities must go.

Another strategy is to explain the psychology of theism, i.e. the fundamental reason of religion is due to psychology - the existential crisis - and not that a God pre-existed and is awaiting humans to believe in God. This will also face resistance.

The above a various relevant strategies which can be taken at present.

However in the longer run what is most critical is humanity must work toward finding alternatives without side effect and are fool proof to replace theistic religions in dealing with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

Why I am optimistic with the above is, at present there are already non-theistic religions dealing with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis without the idea of God and holy texts from a God plus there is no evil baggage attached to them.
What we can do is to remove the religious elements from these methods and repackaged them with improved elements to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
Here is where your commentary starts to stray from "sounds logical". Anyone with a modicum of experience will recognize that your acknowledgement of "resistance" to your proposal is in fact a whitewash of the fact that recruiters (who can already sway the impressionable with online diatribes) would be able to ramp up their successful efforts in the face of your proposals.
I acknowledge there will be "resistance" but obviously a critical part of the solution will be to loosen and dissolve such resistance.

At present there are no Islamic authorities nor the ignorant non-Islamic authorities acknowledging the Quran-core of Islam is factually & inherently evil.
The task is to get ALL the authorities to recognize that FACT [as justified*], i.e. the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil.
* preferably proven in the International Court.

If there is a universal consensus the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil in the future [not now], the recruiters if they still exist will not have any influence on the vulnerables.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 2726
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by LuckyR » March 26th, 2018, 3:50 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 11:54 pm
LuckyR wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 4:04 pm


Here is where your commentary starts to stray from "sounds logical". Anyone with a modicum of experience will recognize that your acknowledgement of "resistance" to your proposal is in fact a whitewash of the fact that recruiters (who can already sway the impressionable with online diatribes) would be able to ramp up their successful efforts in the face of your proposals.
I acknowledge there will be "resistance" but obviously a critical part of the solution will be to loosen and dissolve such resistance.

At present there are no Islamic authorities nor the ignorant non-Islamic authorities acknowledging the Quran-core of Islam is factually & inherently evil.
The task is to get ALL the authorities to recognize that FACT [as justified*], i.e. the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil.
* preferably proven in the International Court.

If there is a universal consensus the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil in the future [not now], the recruiters if they still exist will not have any influence on the vulnerables.
You are truly a dreamer if your solution rests on ALL of the Islamic authorities denouncing Islam.
"As usual... it depends."

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 163
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Karpel Tunnel » April 8th, 2018, 10:55 am

Buddhism posits the inevitability of suffering and encourages a non-political, this body connected process to reduce suffering.
Buddhism denies the existence of the self, that really there is simply a disembodied consciousness that is suffering and will suffer and no individuals in fact exist or persist through time.
Buddhism supports class separations - very clearly in Tibetan Buddhism
Buddhism has life denying elements, since it is implicitly judgmental of emotions.
In practice Buddhism often is ascetic, radically controlling, encouraging dominance by masters, even to the extent of ritual physical violence - see Zen master to practitioner relations.

While explicitly suggesting compassion, the above indirectly contribute to a devaluation of individuals, politics and to not dealing with societal problems. Sometimes this even plays out in violence as rule type forms of Buddhism, which could be found in militaristic Japan, in Thailand in reaction to Malay independence movements and certainly in Myanmar where totalitarianism and Buddhism have sycretically merged.

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » April 9th, 2018, 12:34 am

LuckyR wrote:
March 26th, 2018, 3:50 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 24th, 2018, 11:54 pm
I acknowledge there will be "resistance" but obviously a critical part of the solution will be to loosen and dissolve such resistance.

At present there are no Islamic authorities nor the ignorant non-Islamic authorities acknowledging the Quran-core of Islam is factually & inherently evil.
The task is to get ALL the authorities to recognize that FACT [as justified*], i.e. the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil.
* preferably proven in the International Court.

If there is a universal consensus the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil in the future [not now], the recruiters if they still exist will not have any influence on the vulnerables.
You are truly a dreamer if your solution rests on ALL of the Islamic authorities denouncing Islam.
Not dreaming but merely optimistic based on fact of various human trends of optimism and the realization of various optimistic speculations.

Did the average human being, say 100 years ago believe ALL nations will ban Chattel Slavery legally? But at present Chattel Slavery is illegal in ALL Nations.

Did the average human being, say 500 years ago believe the Earth orbit the Sun or the Earth was round? Then, note the existing knowledge of the above.

The point with Islam like all theistic religions, is it is based on a lie, illusion and an impossibility of God existing as real. Besides the evil elements in the Quran is SO obvious!
Since the truth will always prevail, it is a matter of time ALL the authorities will recognize that FACT [as justified*], i.e. the Quran-core of Islam [a great part of it] is factually & inherently evil.
Once a critical mass is reached, the rest will follow suit easily.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » April 9th, 2018, 12:58 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
April 8th, 2018, 10:55 am
Buddhism posits the inevitability of suffering and encourages a non-political, this body connected process to reduce suffering.
Buddhism denies the existence of the self, that really there is simply a disembodied consciousness that is suffering and will suffer and no individuals in fact exist or persist through time.
Buddhism supports class separations - very clearly in Tibetan Buddhism
Buddhism has life denying elements, since it is implicitly judgmental of emotions.
In practice Buddhism often is ascetic, radically controlling, encouraging dominance by masters, even to the extent of ritual physical violence - see Zen master to practitioner relations.

While explicitly suggesting compassion, the above indirectly contribute to a devaluation of individuals, politics and to not dealing with societal problems. Sometimes this even plays out in violence as rule type forms of Buddhism, which could be found in militaristic Japan, in Thailand in reaction to Malay independence movements and certainly in Myanmar where totalitarianism and Buddhism have sycretically merged.
I agree what you stated above are practiced by SOME Buddhists.
But the problem with the above views is you are not separating 'Buddhism' and 'Buddhists.'

The fact is, DNA wise ALL humans has the potential to commit evil acts. A percentile [say 20%] are unfortunately born with an active evil tendency to commit evil acts.

If there are 500 million Buddhists around the world, there will be 100 million Buddhists who born with and thus inherently has an active evil tendency. These evil prone 'Buddhists' will commit all sorts of evil acts when triggered by various evil stimuli or by themselves.

The question is whether those Buddhists who commit evil acts are triggered by any evil element from Buddhism, the religion.
The fact is there are no LEADING evil elements within any Buddhism's text that sanction nor condone committing evil acts on non-believers. We do not hear of evil Buddhists quoting from Buddhist texts nor shouting Buddha-u-Akbar in justifying their evil acts.

Thus there is nothing negative with Buddhism per se.
What Buddhism promotes is absolute goodness and positiveness.

One point is Buddhism proper is a bit too advanced for the average person since it emerged and even at present. This is why the average person and even some serious monks are not able to adapt fully to Buddhism-proper. This is the reason why at present Buddhism-proper is compromised in many ways.

Buddhism proper do not condone asceticism, do not encouraging praying to idols of Buddha with all sort of offerings, joss-sticks, etc. but Buddhism has room to accomodate variations from its core principles to suit the current psychological state of the believers. Being purely non-theistic, certain Buddhist sects even rely on the idea of a God [not the Abrahamic sort].

Buddhism has the self-confidence its core principles will prevail in time and such a trend is ongoing at present.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 163
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Karpel Tunnel » April 9th, 2018, 3:54 am

Spectrum wrote:
April 9th, 2018, 12:58 am
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
April 8th, 2018, 10:55 am
Buddhism posits the inevitability of suffering and encourages a non-political, this body connected process to reduce suffering.
Buddhism denies the existence of the self, that really there is simply a disembodied consciousness that is suffering and will suffer and no individuals in fact exist or persist through time.
Buddhism supports class separations - very clearly in Tibetan Buddhism
Buddhism has life denying elements, since it is implicitly judgmental of emotions.
In practice Buddhism often is ascetic, radically controlling, encouraging dominance by masters, even to the extent of ritual physical violence - see Zen master to practitioner relations.

While explicitly suggesting compassion, the above indirectly contribute to a devaluation of individuals, politics and to not dealing with societal problems. Sometimes this even plays out in violence as rule type forms of Buddhism, which could be found in militaristic Japan, in Thailand in reaction to Malay independence movements and certainly in Myanmar where totalitarianism and Buddhism have sycretically merged.
I agree what you stated above are practiced by SOME Buddhists.
But the problem with the above views is you are not separating 'Buddhism' and 'Buddhists.'
I may or may not have presented a convincing enough argument, but it is hard to see how you could have missed that I specifically focused on dehumanizing ideas in Buddhism because these will have side effects that can lead to violence.

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » April 9th, 2018, 11:30 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
April 9th, 2018, 3:54 am
Spectrum wrote:
April 9th, 2018, 12:58 am
I agree what you stated above are practiced by SOME Buddhists.
But the problem with the above views is you are not separating 'Buddhism' and 'Buddhists.'
I may or may not have presented a convincing enough argument, but it is hard to see how you could have missed that I specifically focused on dehumanizing ideas in Buddhism because these will have side effects that can lead to violence.
The central ethos of Buddhism is the Middle-Way and optimality within one's present constraints.

There are no ideas within Buddhism that are dehumanizing.
Buddhism per se did not condone a class-system nor asceticism.
No-self in Buddhism in one perspective is full of self in another perspective.
Even when Buddhism promote compassion, it is not blind compassion nor altruism but rather they should be calculated and weighed within the Middle-Way before action is taken.

The negatives from Buddhists are based on Buddhism-proper but the deviations are committed by the inherent human nature of the Buddhists as typical human beings.

In contrast note the following within the Qur-an;
  • 2:216. Warfare [l-qitālu] is ordained [kutiba: prescribed] for you [Muslims], though it is hateful unto you [Muslims]; but it may happen that ye [Muslims] hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.
The term [l-qitālu] connote very strong sense of aggression in relation to killing opponents.
The above is merely one verse but that are hundreds near direct and thousands indirect verses that support the above aggression within the Qur-an.

But the point is this, not the difference, there are no such leading verses in Buddhism's texts at all.

Many apologists will insist the above evil and violent verse [and the tons of others] must be read within context.

The problem within the Qur-an and Islam is, question of context is SO loose which only Allah can decide the final say. But Allah is non-existent, an illusion and an impossibility to appear to decide for Muslims on Earth.
Thus no one on Earth can decide for and judge on those Muslims who interpret the verses literally in the context they believe is the intended one. This is how evil laden Muslims created this load of evil and violence e.g.

Image

and nothing can be done to force those Muslims involved to do 'good' instead.
So as long as Islam exists, the above evils and violence will be committed by those SOME evil prone Muslims.

The above contrast is necessary to show where Buddhism per se stands.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 163
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Karpel Tunnel » April 10th, 2018, 2:18 am

Spectrum wrote:
April 9th, 2018, 11:30 pm
There are no ideas within Buddhism that are dehumanizing.
I disagree. The practices intend one to disengage the emotions from action. We simply notice the emotions (and thoughts) but disconnect them from what we do. This is anti-human, since we, as social mammals, will naturally be motivated by the emotions - and express them in sound. Buddhism in universal practice demands that we restrain ourselves, control ourselves, dampen our emotional expression. This can be seen in temples in the East and West.
Buddhism per se did not condone a class-system nor asceticism.
No-self in Buddhism in one perspective is full of self in another perspective.
Buddhism denies the existence of self that continues through time. Buddhism certainly intends an emotional asceticism.
The negatives from Buddhists are based on Buddhism-proper but the deviations are committed by the inherent human nature of the Buddhists as typical human beings.
Whereas I see them as side effects of the denials of our very existence and our natural relationship with our emotions and bodies. When we analyze a set of beliefs, we do not have to take them simply at face value. What are the side effects of not believing in the persistent self? What are the side effects of telling people to exert tremendous restraint on how they move and how they express emotions? What happens when the neo-cortex divorces itself from the limbic system? Something that seems to be saying nice things, can lead to all sorts of atrocities, precisely because when you teach people to hate what is natural in themselves, they will hate it in others.
In contrast note the following within the Qur-an;
  • 2:216. Warfare [l-qitālu] is ordained [kutiba: prescribed] for you [Muslims], though it is hateful unto you [Muslims]; but it may happen that ye [Muslims] hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.
The term [l-qitālu] connote very strong sense of aggression in relation to killing opponents.
The above is merely one verse but that are hundreds near direct and thousands indirect verses that support the above aggression within the Qur-an.
Yes, the Koran is very problematic.
Thus no one on Earth can decide for and judge on those Muslims who interpret the verses literally in the context they believe is the intended one. This is how evil laden Muslims created this load of evil and violence e.g.
Of course we can judge them. And in your philosophy you cannot judge us for doing so.

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » April 10th, 2018, 4:06 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
April 10th, 2018, 2:18 am
Spectrum wrote:
April 9th, 2018, 11:30 pm
There are no ideas within Buddhism that are dehumanizing.
I disagree. The practices intend one to disengage the emotions from action. We simply notice the emotions (and thoughts) but disconnect them from what we do. This is anti-human, since we, as social mammals, will naturally be motivated by the emotions - and express them in sound. Buddhism in universal practice demands that we restrain ourselves, control ourselves, dampen our emotional expression. This can be seen in temples in the East and West.
You got this very wrong.

Buddhism proper do not view and expect emotions to be disengaged from actions. This is an impossible expectation anyway, less we are robots.
If say, emotions are like a vehicle facing down a slope, Buddhism endeavor to install very effective brakes so that we can drive down the slope effectively rather than without brakes or ineffective brakes where one's emotion run loose.

Here is something similar to what Buddhism is about re emotions;
  • Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy. -Aristotle
Buddhism per se did not condone a class-system nor asceticism.
No-self in Buddhism in one perspective is full of self in another perspective.
Buddhism denies the existence of self that continues through time. Buddhism certainly intends an emotional asceticism.
Buddhism denies a self [a soul] that continue to exists after physical death and that is for good reasons. Such a belief in a illusory self generates expectations, cravings and thus sufferings leading to the loads of religious related evils and violence driven by such a belief.

Buddhism promotes optimal interaction of the individual with the self, with society and the environment within one's lifetime.
The negatives from Buddhists are based on Buddhism-proper but the deviations are committed by the inherent human nature of the Buddhists as typical human beings.
Whereas I see them as side effects of the denials of our very existence and our natural relationship with our emotions and bodies. When we analyze a set of beliefs, we do not have to take them simply at face value. What are the side effects of not believing in the persistent self? What are the side effects of telling people to exert tremendous restraint on how they move and how they express emotions? What happens when the neo-cortex divorces itself from the limbic system? Something that seems to be saying nice things, can lead to all sorts of atrocities, precisely because when you teach people to hate what is natural in themselves, they will hate it in others.
I agree there are Buddhists [some] who go into the extreme of asceticism and isolate themselves from society, but as I had stated that is not in accordance with the principles of Buddhism proper.

But note this ultimate of Buddhism proper;

Image

After enlightenment, one engages and interacts with the World more optimally.
In this case the neo-cortex work in effective alignment with the limbic, the rest of the brain and body.
Thus no one on Earth can decide for and judge on those Muslims who interpret the verses literally in the context they believe is the intended one. This is how evil laden Muslims created this load of evil and violence e.g.
Of course we can judge them. And in your philosophy you cannot judge us for doing so.
Anyone can judge anyone but you cannot enforce your judgment on anyone.

What is most critical is reality, i.e.
If you walk into Taliban territory now, you will be killed by Islamists because based on their religious texts [containing evil elements] which they believe, it is their divine duty to kill you. Your judging them will not prevent them from killing you. It is the same with the truck-jihadists who mowed down non-Muslims for the reason they are non-believers thus a threat.

However, if the said religious texts are identified as evil and ideology 'disinfected' - the religion is eliminated, then there will be no basis for anyone to commit evils and violence in the name of that religion.

So the driving criteria in this case is the religious texts with evil laden elements which compel believers to kill non-believers.

The texts of Buddhism proper do not have leading evil laden elements, therefore we cannot blame Buddhism proper for the evils and violence by some evil prone human beings who happened to be Buddhists by birth or other means.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Fanman » April 10th, 2018, 5:43 pm

Buddhism may not expressly advocate harm to others like Islam, but the fact that some of it's adherents are violent may indicate that there are aspects within the doctrine that are causing violence as a side-effect, or that it's peaceful tenets are not efficacious. I think that altering the natural state of human beings, such as the integral idea of self, could have negative or unpredictable side-effects.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Spectrum
Posts: 4893
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Spectrum » April 10th, 2018, 11:26 pm

Fanman wrote:
April 10th, 2018, 5:43 pm
Buddhism may not expressly advocate harm to others like Islam, but the fact that some of it's adherents are violent may indicate that there are aspects within the doctrine that are causing violence as a side-effect, or that it's peaceful tenets are not efficacious. I think that altering the natural state of human beings, such as the integral idea of self, could have negative or unpredictable side-effects.
Note the following elements involved on this issue, i.e.
  • 1. ALL humans has inherent potential for evil, SOME with active evil tendency.
    2. The core principles and details in the religious texts [doctrines] of the religion
    3. Other factors, social, political, anthropological, etc.
As I had stated Buddhism proper do not have any leading evil laden elements that inspire its followers to commit evils and violence. There are no other aspects within Buddhism per se, i.e. its 'doctrine' that will trigger Buddhists to be violent.
If there are other aspects, then we should be seeing Buddhists being violent and committing all sorts of evil acts all over the world on a regular basis.

The other aspects that you mentioned are likely to be from social, political, anthropological, etc. reasons depending on the specific locations and environment, thus nothing to do with Buddhism itself.
In the case of Myanmar, the proximate reasons why SOME 'Buddhists' committed evils and violence were actually instigated by actual violence by Islamists [inspired by their religion] and the sense of terror generated therefrom. This is the reason why SOME evil prone Buddhists were attacking only Muslims and not Christians, Jains & other believers.

Another reason why there are Buddhists in Tibet, Myanma, Sri Lanka who committed evil acts is because these countries are Buddhist majority countries where 90+% are Buddhists by birth. As I had stated elsewhere appx 20% of any population are unfortunately born with an active evil tendency [10 million in the case of Myanmmar]. Because their evil tendency is stronger than the religious advocacy to do good, it is very likely these evil prone will end up committing evil acts regardless they are labeled as Buddhists.

There are Buddhists who raped, murdered and committed other evil acts, but these acts has nothing to do with Buddhism per se, rather it is driven and activated by their own human lusts with a lack of impulse control which is the same with Christians and other religionists.

The concept of non-self within Buddhism is not an issue in this case. The concept of non-self when practiced properly will lead to an enlightened progressive person. Where there is a misinterpretation of this concept and practiced wrongly, then it could lead to asceticism and escapism. Those who has wrongly delved into asceticism and escapism would be the least likely to be bothered by others regardless of whether they are Muslims or otherwise. They will not be joining groups of evil prone Buddhists in committing evil acts.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 163
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Karpel Tunnel » April 11th, 2018, 12:07 am

Spectrum wrote:
April 10th, 2018, 4:06 am
You got this very wrong.

Buddhism proper do not view and expect emotions to be disengaged from actions. This is an impossible expectation anyway, less we are robots.
My estimation comes from years of experience with both Eastern and Western Buddhist and time spent in temples and longer term interactions with them. It is clearly present in talks by teachers and in the culture of the temples and in the simplest meditation instructions and other heuristics presented in the various sects of the religion.
If say, emotions are like a vehicle facing down a slope, Buddhism endeavor to install very effective brakes so that we can drive down the slope effectively rather than without brakes or ineffective brakes where one's emotion run loose.
No, there are very specific injunctions to disidentify with emotions and in practice not to express them. And while Buddhists are not like robots, they tend to express much less emotion than other people.

Here is something similar to what Buddhism is about re emotions;
  • Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy. -Aristotle
To me Aristotle's thoughts on emotion are not relevant.
Buddhism denies a self [a soul] that continue to exists after physical death and that is for good reasons. Such a belief in a illusory self generates expectations, cravings and thus sufferings leading to the loads of religious related evils and violence driven by such a belief.
Buddhism ALSO denies a soul continuing past death, but it denies, as I said, the persistent self, even in this lifetime. The self is considered illusory, a labeling of an ongoing process as if it was a thing. There is no continued identity in Buddhism.
Buddhism promotes optimal interaction of the individual with the self, with society and the environment within one's lifetime.
Perhaps you find it optimal, I see it as having life hating characteristics.
I agree there are Buddhists [some] who go into the extreme of asceticism and isolate themselves from society, but as I had stated that is not in accordance with the principles of Buddhism proper.
Standard practice is to disidentify with the emotions, and in practice to judge others for not doing this. Bodies are generally very controlled and relatively affectless. So called positive emotions are allowed, but within limits.
After enlightenment, one engages and interacts with the World more optimally.
In this case the neo-cortex work in effective alignment with the limbic, the rest of the brain and body.
Optimal according to your value judgments, but not mine and not most people's. The neo-cortex has disidentifies with the limbic system which it considers the root of all problems- desire is pathologized along with the emotions in Buddhism.
Of course we can judge them. And in your philosophy you cannot judge us for doing so.
Anyone can judge anyone but you cannot enforce your judgment on anyone.
So you acknowledge that we can judge them. The enforcement issue is not relevant. I can enforce my judgment in my personal life in which I would deny their right to judge emotions and deny the assumptions they have about the nature of reality and me (as one example of humanity).
What is most critical is reality, i.e.
If you walk into Taliban territory now, you will be killed by Islamists because based on their religious texts [containing evil elements] which they believe, it is their divine duty to kill you. Your judging them will not prevent them from killing you. It is the same with the truck-jihadists who mowed down non-Muslims for the reason they are non-believers thus a threat.
You seem to be conflating judging with other kinds of acts. And the problems with the Taliban are not relevant to the problems with Buddhism. I would also like to point out that Buddhism is abusive to the practitioners also - as is Islam.
The texts of Buddhism proper do not have leading evil laden elements, therefore we cannot blame Buddhism proper for the evils and violence by some evil prone human beings who happened to be Buddhists by birth or other means.
I disagree. Buddhism denies the reality of a self that persists through time (not just one that survives death. This reduces the value of life. Buddhism judges many natural facets of the social mammalian human brain and nature as toxic: this includes emotions and desires. It presses people to be less emotional, to disidentify with their emotions and desires (and thoughts). Regardless of how they eat, drink, smoke and other possible areas of asceticism, they are pressed into asceticism in relation to natural facets of human nature: emotions and desires. Reality is simply this overarching conscious process. Bad experiences are seen as Karmic. IOW if something terrible is happening to you, it is to break down the ego and/or to redress past instances where 'you' the conglomeration of patterns that is not a self, did the same thing you are suffering to someone else. Buddhism presses against trying to solve problems at a societal level - though some Buddhists go against this, sometimes positively sometimes violently.

It has strong life denying facets and this no doubt plays a factor in violence, but also in NOT helping people and certainly causes self-damage. It is a pernicious system, albeit more subtly so than Islam.

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 163
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Karpel Tunnel » April 11th, 2018, 12:10 am

Fanman wrote:
April 10th, 2018, 5:43 pm
Buddhism may not expressly advocate harm to others like Islam, but the fact that some of it's adherents are violent may indicate that there are aspects within the doctrine that are causing violence as a side-effect, or that it's peaceful tenets are not efficacious. I think that altering the natural state of human beings, such as the integral idea of self, could have negative or unpredictable side-effects.
Yes, it is damaging directly on the practitioner. It is life denying. The views around karma and suffering are dehumanizing. It judges many facets of the social mammal, especially limbic system stuff like emotions and desires. I would call it a form of self-hate, though I realize that it presents all this as compassionate and a solution to suffering.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Buddhists and Buddhism Evil??

Post by Fanman » April 11th, 2018, 4:20 am

Karpel Tunnel,

IMV, the resolution to suffering is to identify the areas of life that are causing us suffering and attempt to reduce, alleviate or remove them from one's life if possible. And if we can't do so on our own, then to seek professional help in doing so. Denying or attempting to reprogram / reclassify actual human nature as Buddhism does seems like an extreme solution to me, and one that could lead to dissociation. I think that the human psyche is result of nature which makes the self, emotions and desire intrinsic / integral to our species, which is denoted by their attachment to the limbic system. So if we seek to eliminate these aspects from our psyche it is in effect dehumanising. I don't have any experience with Buddhism, but from the outside it seems like a “mind-hack”, I don't mean that it is crude in saying that, but it is a doctrine that completely alters the way that a person perceives themselves and their surroundings, having a drastic effect on normal cognition, and I'm not sure if that can be called a positive thing.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Post Reply