Buddhism v Islam in Asia Fears of a new religious strife

[Vinod2070]

@Vinod2070

Hit the wrong nerve homie...guess so?

This guess is wrong. Perhaps this issue is not well covered by the curriculum.

 

[foxbat]

I am surprised that there has been no backlash against the bombing of Bodh Gaya and the Bodhi Tree, which is the world's number 1 most sacred pilgrimage site for Buddhists.

If someone had bombed the foundation stone in King Solomon's Temple, or bombed the Kabaa in Mecca, you can be sure there would be war the next day.

The degree to which a follower clings to the symbols of his religion or the extremism of his response to perceived insult to those, is directly proportional to the insecurities, prevalent in that religion.

If one truly believes in supremacy of his God, he needs to believe that the God and his symbols can not be insulted by mere mortals..

 

[Kompromat]

@Reashot Xigwin

Keep supporting the under dogs.

@Vinod2070

Yea our curriculum was spared from being 'shuddhi-fied'... I feel your hurt.... But it ain't your fault.

 

[Ayush]

@Reashot Xigwin

Keep supporting the under dogs.
@Vinod2070

Yea our curriculum was spared from being 'shuddhi-fied'... I feel your hurt.... But it ain't your fault.

Ya, it was arabised. But it ain't your fault

 

[Wholegrain]

The economist article on Thailand is pure BS.

There are Chinese Hui Muslims in Chiang Mai and Thai Muslims in the north. Thai group the Hui with Han chinese from Yunnan and call them all Chin Haw. The former Commander in Chief of the Thai Royal Army General Sonthi Boonyaratglin was a Muslim.

The insurgency in Pattani against the Thai government is purely Malay Muslim. The insurgents give their identity as Malay Muslims first, and view Thai Muslims and Chinese Muslims from Chiang Mai just as much outsiders as Thai Buddhists. They are fighting for a Malay Sultanate which previously existed in Pattani before the Thai government abolished it. The fighting has been going on for years and only Malays are doing it.

In fact there is no violence with Thai Muslims or Chinese Muslims in Chiang Mai. They have good relations with other Thai and the Thai government.

This article was written by a Chinese Muslim

Encyclopedia of Diasporas: Immigrant and Refugee Cultures Around the World ... - Google Books

Klongs-Thai Waterways & Reflections of Her People - Pamela Hamburger - Google Books

The Strange Thai Insurgents Who Like Sorcery and Get High on Cough Syrup - Jonah Blank - The Atlantic

What happened in Thailand was that there were Malay Sultanates on the Malayan Peninsula. Thailand was expansionist and declared war on them and forced them to become vassal states and tributaries to Thailand. Like the Princely States in British India were vassals to Britain. Thailand was happy with this arrangement until the British came to Malaya and started turning the Malay Sultanates into princely states and vassals of Britain. Thailand was then afraid its Malay vassals would join Britain and renounced alleigance to the Thai crown, In order to secure more land for itself, Thailand agreed to release their vassal State of Kelantan to the British while directly annexing their vassals in Pattani as a province in the Anglo Siamese Treaty to ensure that it would never escape their grip. Now Malays want the Pattani Sultanate back.

As for Buddhism for China. Chinese and Tibetan Buddhist is Mahayana Buddhism. Burmese, Thai, Laos and Cambodian Buddhism is theravada Buddhism. They are different and there is little solidarity or identification between their adherents.

As for China, ALL religions in China except protestant Christianity do not seek converts. That includes Muslims. They will welcome converts but they don't actively try to convert non Muslims. Anyone who tells you that Muslims in China try to actively convert others is lying. Mostly its foreign Muslims (like GCC Arabs) who try to convert non Muslims. Its not in the behavior of Muslims of China to seek converts and try to change other people's religion. Most conversion is done for intermarriage and even that is tiny.

 

[Vinod2070]

[MENTION=143147]@Vinod2070

Yea our curriculum was spared from being 'shuddhi-fied'... I feel your hurt.... But it ain't your fault.

Good thing you can feel something non existent.

And yes, it ain't your fault.

Anyway friend, we have made our respective points I guess. So let's move on.

 

[Roybot]

@Roybot

In both cases its its Muslims in minority in Burma and Sri Lanka, and you choose to blame Muslims for the clash, you must be a hindu.

Power to Indonesians for standing for Rohingas. You are supporting the underdogs.

When did I "blame" anyone @Aeronaut?

You are imagining things and playing the victim card, you must be a Muslim.

 

[HeinzG]

Really? I thought that Bodhgaya was famous among Buddhists.

In Sri Lanka it is famous. I think Sri Lankans are the most numerous visitors to Bodhgaya.

 

[Iggy]

Cause what happens to the Rohingya's is the onus of all ASEAN members. We haven't seen the atrocity of this like since the Rwandan genocide. That it happen when the country is about to open up. Is a stain on ASEAN reputation.

Lot of bad things happened in Myanmar much before than this... Why was that not an onus to all ASEAN countries? Why only now ASEAN and Indonesia become suddenly aware that there was a nation called Myanmar there?

 

[Developereo]

Since when did Myanmar, Thailand, Philippines become Muslim majority lands?
Muslims are a minority in all three countries. Why should Muslims rule them?

Read my post again. I didn't say these were Muslim-majority lands, but that the British (or other colonials) gave Muslim-majority lands to these kingdoms: Arakan province, southern Thailand, Southern Philippines were all Muslim-majority, but they were made part of non-Muslim countries by the colonialists.

As a matter of fact that they did not give so much.

The British gave India, the country, its existence. Before that time, India was a civilizational entity, like Europe, not a political entity (except for very brief periods).

Without the British, India as a modern country would not exist.

There is no Muslim land.. Muslim were/are invaders. Just because Muslims uproot the locals it will become Muslim land.. Pakistan, BD were Hindu land invaded by Islam. Israel was Jews land invaded by Muslims. Iran is persian land invaded by Muslims..

Again, read my post. I didn't say "Muslim lands", I said "Muslim-majority lands".

The land does not belong to an ideology, but the people living on the land adhere to certain ideologies. I won't even bother getting into the debate of "Hindu land". All non-animist religions are an imposition of one form or another. Anyone who doesn't worship trees and animal spirits has been "conquered" by a foreign ideology.

 

[HeinzG]

Well again, this is laughable.

One could talk about how the Mauryan empire started and expanded into west and central asia and they didn't do it by winning cricket matches.

By this assertion, everybody is an invader. The Europeans in the americas, Europeans in Australia.


If you hate islam, say it loud and clear, I could not care less, but don't present prejudice as an argument.

Then why the Palestinians cry about the Israeli expansion? Israeli are the invaders so Palestinians has to accept the land is belong to Zionists. Isn't it?

 

[Developereo]

Just because Muslims are majority in one tiny corner of a country doesn't mean they deserve a separate country of their own. Where does one stop? Every muslim majority district should be declared a new independent country then!

Whats so special about Muslims? Can't they co exist with others?

So muslims ruling non muslims is ok but when the tables are turned people start whining . It would be better to give up the idea of religious supremacism and self righteousness and learn to peacefully co-exist with other religions in a civilized manner befitting the 21st century.

If you make much more deeper analysis, you can see an Islamic invasion into these countries which caused imbalance in these countries for first place. You conveniently forget that for conveying your interests. Its so strange that you have never mentioned and criticized about the after affects of these invasions in your posts. Its always the "Islamic Victim complex" all around in these posts.

And there was no attack on any Islamic mosques or Muslims after the Bamiyan Buddha as well.

But I guess one day the savagery will be avenged.

We have a saying: "Bakre kim maa kab tak khair manayegi", roughly meaning how long can a goat keep her lamb safe.

There will be a payback one day and regrettably, even peaceful Muslims will bear the brunt because they failed to stop and denounce their extremists in time or even worse were their silent backers.



You overlook the rapine, savagery, slavery and genocides perpetrated by the Islmaic onvaders on people everywhere.

Those are the roots.

And there is going to be a payback.

What goes around comes around.

I know that for you "degree of force" doesn't matter. What has to happen, has to happen.



It is good to see your feelings for people who saved your ancestors from Islamic bigots when they ran to our lands escaping them.

You asked for "evidence" once that this is what the Islamic refugees always do, they turn on their kaffir saviours. You didn't have to look far for the evidence.

The nearest mirror would have done nicely.

You keep on making the demands on the kaffirs and may be that will work in the near term. The long term is another matter.

India's partition was a reward to the Muslims (especially the league clique) for being loyalists.

Yes, we are happy about it. We are rid of people we didn't want.

That doesn't mean that there will never be any justice and payback.

All these posts are conveying the same reading miscomprehension as the earlier post, so the above response applies here also.

 

[Roybot]

All these posts are conveying the same reading miscomprehension as the earlier post, so the above response applies here also.

Not they are not, you are just shying away from debate.

And Arakan is not Muslim majority.

 

[Vinod2070]

All these posts are conveying the same reading miscomprehension as the earlier post, so the above response applies here also.

No. There is complete comprehension.

But yes, you can afford to be smug about the way things are going now. You are getting away with much now for a long time and can still afford to make demands on others.

 

[Developereo]

Not they are not, you are just shying away from debate.

No. they are repeating the same reading miscomprehension.

I wrote that the colonialists made Muslim-majority lands part of non-Muslim-majority countries. That applies to all three cases.

And Arakan is not Muslim majority.

I meant the area of Rakhine state that adjoins Bangaldesh and is Muslim-majority. It was made part of Burma by the British.