Sherab wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:31 pm
It is the views that a religion propagates that will determine whether it is peaceful or not.
I think in general, humans are generally good. But they are also easily subjected to group-think. In that sense, nobel laurette Steven Weinbeg was correct to say that:
“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.”
A religion cannot act. Specific people do specific acts. Sometimes because of their beliefs. More often, their beliefs are used to justify the acts after they have occurred.
At the end of the day, a religion supplies the views that people can use to justify acts, whether before or after the actions.
For the justification to hold, there must be group-think.
A person or a small group must propagate that group-think.
Sherab wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:31 pm
It is the views that a religion propagates that will determine whether it is peaceful or not.
I think in general, humans are generally good. But they are also easily subjected to group-think. In that sense, nobel laurette Steven Weinbeg was correct to say that:
“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.”
Instead of 'religion', it would be more correct to say 'a strong belief' or 'a conviction'.
It is the religion that supplies the views for which the 'strong belief' or 'conviction' of individuals or groups to base their actions. If a religion has nothing in it to justify a particular act, there can be no strong belief or conviction i.e. basis for that act. Any basis for the belief or conviction would have to be from elsewhere. But here, we are talking about religion.
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2019 12:04 am
by Ceisiwr
As Buddhists we should remember that wrong views can lead to bad outcomes, and so it follow that religious ideology can lead to wholesome actions or unwholesome ones. Therefore, some religions are unwholesome and damaging whilst others are not.
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:10 am
by Kusala
sentinel wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:48 amDo you find that buddhism is a religion of peace ?I find this video soothing . All Buddhists can sit together in harmony . Different sect but same origin .
However , Muslims regard their religion Islam advocate peace too .
Mod : should this move to other category ?
Mod : please rectify the topic title , thanks .
19:00 to 21:00...this says it all...
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:46 pm
by Sherab
Kusala wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:10 am19:00 to 21:00...this says it all...
Indeed. A good person will do good things. But, sometimes, religion can get in the way and stop a good person from doing good things. To understand why that can be the case, we have to look at what the religion teaches.
I see religion like a package of viruses waiting to be activated. A religion can contain both good and bad viruses. Some religions can contain rather nasty viruses. These nasty viruses can create all sorts of problem when activated. Not only that, certain nasty viruses when activated, will deactivate all the good viruses of the same package.
Also, a religious package may have viruses that protect the package itself from being destroyed. How hardy a religious virus package is depends on the strategy of these protective viruses.
We know the Buddha himself predicted that the Dhamma will end one day. That means that the protective strategy of the Dhamma is not the most effective. In fact, the protective strategy of the Dhamma, in my personal view, is unique and not shared by other religions.
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:22 pm
by sentinel
Buddhism is a passive religion . But , Islam or Christianity is a intrusive religion . Buddhism is the best candidate for religion of peace .
Pro side of Buddhism is in rare circumstances Buddhist would start a war . Con is Buddhism will be the first in the list to become extinct . For other religions such as Islam and Christianity , they will demolish everything gets in the way hence survives in the long runs .
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:58 am
by Kusala
Lee Jay Walker of Modern Tokyo Times wrote a beautiful piece...
"Art of Japan and the two paths of Buddhism and Shintoism: Faith in the snow without Abraham"
"...the combined forces of religious faith, the bleakness of winter, and the amazing landscape illuminates the art piece because you feel dragged inside. Hence, a certain shrill of coldness is followed by deep admiration along with a yearning to feel the same certainty in this life.
Of course, the bigger picture relates to the crushing of Buddhism in history and the ongoing struggle of this faith..."
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith. But both conceptions are nothing more than Western fantasy. Revisiting the centuries of Buddhist-Muslim cooperative interaction forces us to rethink our stereotypes.
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith. But both conceptions are nothing more than Western fantasy. Revisiting the centuries of Buddhist-Muslim cooperative interaction forces us to rethink our stereotypes.
By Johan Elverskog
Thanks for the interesting article, Grigoris.
Mike
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:53 pm
by Sam Vara
Grigoris wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:24 pm
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith.
Obviously written by someone who has not spent much time here on DW
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith. But both conceptions are nothing more than Western fantasy. Revisiting the centuries of Buddhist-Muslim cooperative interaction forces us to rethink our stereotypes.
By Johan Elverskog
Its not a stereotype to say that mainstream versions of Islam are violent both historically and today. However, saying that, all stereotypes do contain a kernel of truth to them.
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith. But both conceptions are nothing more than Western fantasy. Revisiting the centuries of Buddhist-Muslim cooperative interaction forces us to rethink our stereotypes.
By Johan Elverskog
Its not a stereotype to say that mainstream versions of Islam are violent both historically and today. However, saying that, all stereotypes do contain a kernel of truth to them.
Could you please try to be a little more contradictory in your statement? I don't think you managed the 100% mark yet.
In the popular imagination, Buddhism is synonymous with introspective peace, Islam with violent blind faith. But both conceptions are nothing more than Western fantasy. Revisiting the centuries of Buddhist-Muslim cooperative interaction forces us to rethink our stereotypes.
By Johan Elverskog
Its not a stereotype to say that mainstream versions of Islam are violent both historically and today. However, saying that, all stereotypes do contain a kernel of truth to them.
Could you please try to be a little more contradictory in your statement? I don't think you managed the 100% mark yet.
Please point out the contradiction, because what i said was that it wasn’t a stereotype but even if it were all stereotypes contain a grain of truth. So, once again, where is the contradiction?
Re: Religion of peace
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:30 am
by Grigoris
Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:26 amPlease point out the contradiction, because what i said was that it wasn’t a stereotype but even if it were all stereotypes contain a grain of truth. So, once again, where is the contradiction?
You started by saying "It is not a streotype..." and then engaged in stereotyping, while lauding stereotypes.
Clearly contradictory, not to mention hypocritical.
Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:26 amPlease point out the contradiction, because what i said was that it wasn’t a stereotype but even if it were all stereotypes contain a grain of truth. So, once again, where is the contradiction?
You started by saying "It is not a streotype..." and then engaged in stereotyping, while lauding stereotypes.
Clearly contradictory, not to mention hypocritical.
Did you read the article I linked to?
Saying that mainstream versions of Islam contain violence within them isn’t a stereotype, it’s a fact. I did say that even if it were a stereotype there would still be some truth to it, which once again is a fact and not a lauding of stereotypes.
I did glance through. Seems rather irrelevant to what I am saying since I’m not claiming that Islam and it’s various forms are completely evil. What I am saying is that historically and today it is not a religion of peace. We know this from Muhammad’s acceptance of slavery and sex slaves through to the murder of homosexuals in Islamic theocracies today, both Sunni and Shia.
