Buddhists versus Muslims in Myanmar

[DarkNightOfNoSoul]

This is shocking, I thought Buddhism was about non-violence?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10812171

"The unrest seemed to be a reaction to the June 3 lynching of 10 Muslims by a crowd of 300 Buddhists. The lynch mob was apparently provoked by leaflets discussing the rape and murder last month of a Buddhist girl, allegedly by three Muslim men."

So is anger always considered unskillful by Buddhists? Most people I know consider that anger and aggression can be justified in some situations; for example, a mother defending her child from attack, or a situation in which a more powerful person must be prevented from harming a weaker person.

The way I understand it, if you allow yourself to get angry (especially when it's "justified" anger) there is always the danger of taking it too far and perhaps ending in murder (and "crimes of passion" sometimes earn less punitive sentences in courts of law).

In certain situations, strong action may need to be taken to defend yourself or someone else, but the motivation should not be anger, but compassion. Is that right?

Comments?

[Mango]

Well, I think knowing what Buddhism is and then trying to become a Buddhist is different from being Buddhist because one's parents/grand parents were Buddhists.

[Andrew]

In countries where there is nothing even resembling a fair justice system, you have a few choices; run, stand up to them and/or die. Sometimes not even a choice, just those 3, in that order.

they are people , there is no such thing as a 'buddhist' or 'muslim' -these are just words which have stolen being from real beings..



   

[Stefan]

So is anger always considered unskillful by Buddhists? Most people I know consider that anger and aggression can be justified in some situations; for example, a mother defending her child from attack, or a situation in which a more powerful person must be prevented from harming a weaker person.

Defense is not the same as aggression or anger. Shaolin know this: to perform the best possible fighting moves you need to abstain from anger, you need to be equanimous.

As for "buddhist" mobs ... well, how come that "christian" people are not always selfless and loving? In "buddhistic" countries there are the same stupid greedy aggressive ignorant people as anywhere else. Calling yourself "Buddhist" and performing "buddhistic" rituals is easy. I tend to call myself "the marvellous omannobazong!!!", so what? 

In certain situations, strong action may need to be taken to defend yourself or someone else, but the motivation should not be anger, but compassion. Is that right?

Yes.

[DarkNightOfNoSoul]

Thanks for your thoughful replies.

I do find that when people ask me about Buddhist philosophy/way of life, one of the things they find the hardest to grasp is that anger is not helpful or productive under any circumstances - especially in situations where it seems that anger is justified. Even the "nicest" people seem to think aggression and violence are OK in certain situations. I guess that's one of the reasons the world is such a mess. 

[Matthew]

DNOS,

Anger is not in itself unskilful. Anger just happens. Becoming your anger, letting your anger become you is unskilful.

Not all Buddhism is the same. It is a rainbow religion ranging from those who go to temple a few times a year to earn merit, whilst cheating on their wives, etc. etc. ...  to the modern westernised Buddhism that is emerging as one of the strongest driving forces in the understanding of Dhamma.

Matthew