What is the theological out for acts of violence in Buddhism?

...

You can't sleep next to a rabid dog.

pic related

1/2

Defend the dharma against mudslide terror.

2/2

does anybody know of any work that deals with the relation between buddhism, violence, and the state? or something like that?

Buddhist are non-violent by nature
Only dirty mudslims are annoying enough to manage to piss them off
youtube.com/watch?v=GtAl9zJ3t-M

Islam is a cancer

It's almost as though it's beneficial to influence foreign elections but not beneficial to have your own elections influenced. A shocking suggestion, I know.

"If we do not stop these people their will be none of us left and no one can then achieve enlightenment."

"Defending yourself isnt bad, you cannot in all earnesty feel safe lying next to a rabid dog."

america is proud of doing such things and does it regularily, but they cant comprehend it possibly happening to them

america was a mistake

>What is the theological out for acts of violence in Buddhism?
Kalachakra Tantra's apocalypse involves a planet-wide war with Islam.

If you lived near muslims you'd want them all dead too.

Southeast Asian here

It has nothing to do with Buddhist teachings. It's simply nationalism.

You could say it is the Buddhist fight for self-preservation (which is not a Buddhist ide) but it's natural for a religion/group to fight back when almost threatens with extinction

Buddhism was huge in Asia but after Islam and Communism it's only a majority in a few places.

To make it worse the brown rohingyas overbreed and don't contribute or assimilate. They rape convert our Buddhist women and are vermin to society. No body no matter the religion would want them there

>~t. Smim Htaw Buddhaketi

There is no actual theological rationale for it strictly speaking. The argument I usually see (particularly from the extremist monks like your pic) is that if they don't purge the Muslims now they'll become just another Muslim state like much of Southeast Asia

Well there's a difference between disliking an act and being unable to comprehend it.

When engaged in a war there's always the possibility that you will lose, that doesn't mean you're any less distraught when it happens.

Besides Times isn't a good representation of the US imo.

A) Our enemies are so spiritually stunted, it is not immoral to destroy them. It is no more immoral than swatting a mosquito or ousting some other pest from our home.

B) Our enemies present such a danger that it would be morally reprehensible not to fight them, for every moment they exist more evils are done unto the people around them.

Same justifications japanese buddhist monks used to fight in the civil wars. I'd imagine it's similar.

>IT WAS ISLAM'S FAULT HURRHURR
Fuck off.

Myanmar is such a dictatorial shithole every minority they have is fucking rebelling.

There's a reason why they're the awkward children of ASEAN meetings here. It's like talking to North Korea.

>IT WAS ISLAM'S FAULT OBV HURRHURR
Fuck off.

Myanmar is such a dictatorial shithole every minority they have is fucking rebelling.

There's a reason why they're the awkward children of ASEAN meetings here. It's like talking to North Korea.

Some places have called for genocide

>ethnic nationalism in the guise of religion

>see? burmese were fighting against eachother, that means that you should accept illegal muslim stoneage immigrants from another country!!!!

Muh conflicts, muslims are the good boys

To be fair their population increase could be from more rohingya crossing the border.

t. Abdul Muhammad

That was a lot of Shinto too though

State religion during WW2 was Shinto. If you were a Buddhist and you didn't revere the state Shinto god/emperors/divine figures/religious ceremonies, then you and your buddhist temple would be banned/shutdown.

The few buddhist did try to disobey and their leaders were imprisoned, the temples closed/etc.

>america is proud of doing such things
Only neocons and rednecks.

youtube.com/watch?v=qvEBaAiy5b4

I'm fine with Bengalis Out, but this is poor pasta.

Is that what a peer reviewed journal looks like?

So how are you going to deal with the Rohingya then?

Bangladesh refuses to accept them since many of them were born in Myanmar. And committing full-on genocide against them would probably result in sanctions and UN peacekeepers.

Aren't they being genocided already?

Sorta, but it hasn't reached Rwanda-tier levels yet

>mudshits invade country
>begin allahu snackbaring and exploding
>take measures to solve the problem
>putting them down is really the most humain way of dealing with it

That is not the situation at all.

Besides, marginalising and violating an established community of hundreds of years in the bone-headed way that they are doing is only asking for trouble.

It works for Israel

People from another country with another culture are invading a buddhism majority country and are not afraid to rape the populace into submission.

>stop lying! you can't proove that they are illegal there!
>where is your (((peer reviewed)) diversity journal? You know the one that says that diversity is good?

It's genocide (for the Burmese) if they stay too. Muslims just want to do Muslim things like demographic warfare and establish a monoculture in countries that aren't their own.