When Buddhism is caught between the Abrahamic religions (the Church and Islam)

 

– by Shenali D Waduge –

An important factor has been overlooked.  Islam and the Generic Church have been pursuing world conquest and domination through control of territory and people while Judaism has pursued the goal of dominating world affairs (directly and indirectly) by controlling all world capital. All 3 religions are pursuing a historically mandated predatory global agenda but this time round the quest to conquest non-Abrahamic territories for the Church is planned to be bloodless, “legitimate” using the pan-national/international structures and “liberal” politically correct idioms while Islam proposes to use its weapon of birth and conversions and Judaism controls the wealth. That these People of the Book are destined to clash in what is said to be a clash of civilizations is unfolding before our very eyes. Where does that leave a compassionate philosophy such as Buddhism?

The power houses are distinct. The slogans are too obvious – the Church and Colonials would not give up what they enjoyed without far sight. Thus, their “weapons” became human rights slogans, liberal theories of democracy, freedom of religion, multiculturalism and individualism all based on Western Christian virtues to be applied in both international and local affairs. Slavery part of Christian colonial rule was quickly replaced by the Bretton Woods bandits in 1944 with a system of world trade monopoly (IMF and World Bank) able to devalue national currencies and further steal their wealth. IMF is in European hands while World Bank is under US control and together both steer world trade, dictate terms on how countries should enable access to natural resources and markets and if we thought slavery was over they created the slave labor deployment across continents inventing immigration.

It is also not hard to guess where the money flow prevails, where the illicit trades thrive and originate and how Abrahamic miracles can make banks collapse and recover from economic crises. The latest calls are for post-nation state (borderless states), humanitarian interventions, self-determination, open markets for free flow of capital which needless to say articulates the plan to take over non-Abrahamic territories. Religious freedoms in turn are subtle ways to push for religious conversions that only Abrahamic religions promote.

Yet, domination plots does bring clashes between Abrahamic religions themselves and we see how Islam has openly challenged Christian West that are waking up to the incursions brought about using its very norms despite the West’s War on Terror meant to arm and keep Muslims busy at loggerheads with their own. Fundamentalism began with the Abrahamic religions making monsters out of ordinary people and its curse continues.

The Hindus have been effectively euthanized and they do not seem to even identify their enemy in either format of Abrahamic faith that have torn apart India. Indian nationalism has to be led by Hindus.

The Buddhist world in comparison has been far more astute and alert and aware of the dynamics at play and the historical ramifications that contribute to the present impasse.

Clash of civilizations

Samuel Huntington spoke in 1993 about a cultural conflict based on civilization identity. Huntington separated world civilizations into 2 camps – Western civilization (European and North American) and Islamic (Arab, Turkic and Malay subdivisions). A clash running through 14 centuries.

History is witness to Persians invading Europe to conquer Greeks in the 5^thc BC. Alexander the Great of Greece attempted to conquer Asia in the 4^thc B.C. The Persians and Greeks both set up colonial empires after militarily invading nations. The Romans invaded and put up colonies in Mesopotamia, Arabia (northwest), Assyria in 2^ndc A.D. Then there were the Huns, the Goths, the Avars from Western Asia, Central Asia and China between 5^th-7^thc A.D. The Avars from China and Mongolia surrounded Constantinople in 626AD.

In 624AD Mohammed plotted against a Meccan caravan killing 70. Within 2 years from 630AD led by Mohammed, Muslims had conquered Western Arabia, southern Palestine after dozens of invasions called “Holy Wars” – Crusades were not the First Holy War. Prophet Mohammed died in 632, the new Muslim caliph Abu Bakr launched Islam. This led to  almost 1500 years of Islamic imperialism against hundreds of nations covering more territory than the British Empire (southern France to Philippines, Austria to Nigeria, Central Asia to New Guinea). Islamic law, Arabic language, Islam prevailed and whereas the West adopted Divide and Rule, the Islamists divided people as Muslims and Non-Muslims. Both Islam and the Church objective was to convert natives a goal that has not changed. Between the two they had set up laws that served their goals and objectives regardless of indigenous natives, their culture, their laws or their religion. Both stand guilty of “bloody” pursuits whether they happened 1500 years back or in the present context. History shows that natives had to either concede and convert or exit.

The examples to nullify claims of equality is shown through history – Muslim Turkey expelled 1.5m Greeks and massacred 2million Armenians, Muslim Turkey also displaced Greeks when they invaded Cyprus, Muslim Sudan has slowly conquered South Sudan virtually enslaving its Christian population, we also are aware of the plight of Christians in Nigeria, Macedonia, non-Islamic western New Guinea is now incorporated into Indonesia, Muslim Indonesia has conquered Christian East Timor and there are also examples of Muslims invading their own lands – Iraq invasion of Kuwait, Iraq invasion of Iran. Then again the reverse also happens as in the case of Serbia and Bosnia where Muslims bore the brunt,

What we see is a historical animosity between the 3 Abrahamic religions but why have they now targeted non-Abrahamic religions? If we accept that part of the wars taking place as a result of the war industry seeking to reap benefits have been specifically targeted at Muslim nations to use sectarian divides to get Muslims to kill their own, the Christian ploy has worked to perfection. But, why drag peaceful religions like Buddhism into the fold?

It is the warrior-mentality of the Abrahamic religions that have nurtured the belief that one’s objectives can be reached by hook or by crook whilst they also advocate dialogue professing their hypocrisy.

Nevertheless, it is obvious and the diplomatic innuendoes do not hide the fact that Abrahamic religions are reaching out to conquer non-Abrahamic territory and Buddhist Asia is now the target.

The next question is do the non-Abrahamic religions especially Buddhism simply wait and allow a repetition of what took place over centuries? Do they simply sit and watch Buddhist nations become converted into either Christian or Islamic ones? Are Buddhists the guilty lot for striking alarm bells simply because they want to protect their indigenous culture and ethos while allowing other religions to exist? Abrahamic religions do not realize that their domination equates to mean ONLY the prevalence of their faith giving no respect to others as history has shown – this is not the case with Buddhism. Do Abrahamic religions not realize that it is they who are the wrong-doers? Has statistics not shown that calamities have been subtly used by Christian west to enter nations through various bodies and entities and to spread their faith leading to entire coastal belts now being converted – India is the perfect example. Has Muslims who previously lived amongst natives peacefully have now suddenly created majority Muslim enclaves and attempted to turn the entire area to suit Muslims only – mosques, loudspeakers, sharia, halal labeling, animal slaughter totally insensitive to the beliefs of other cultures and religions? These factors did not exist previously. Muslims did not dress in tribal wear, their women did not cover their face from head to toe (in non-Muslim majority nations), they did not demand separate labeling of food because they purchased meat from people they knew – what is suddenly bringing on these new set of demands and habits, if it is new it cant be part of the religion of Islam?

More importantly, all the critics pointing fingers need to realize that when Buddhists are objecting to sudden changes in living habits and sudden demands being made it is not to victimize the Muslims that have been living amongst them, it is only to showcase that these new incursions are creating a bridge and it is upto them to remove that which is dividing the communities.

There are enough of examples to show how the public live in unity – where different religions are allowed to practice their faiths and where people respect the traditions that come down from generation to generation – it is when suddenly a religion tries to dominate and apply only its religious creed to the rest of the people that people begin to wonder what is going on and notice the new wave of incursions taking place. No Muslims demanded mosques in Buddhist sacred sites, no Muslims attempted to distort history, no Muslims attempted undermine the place of Buddhism that had been historically held over centuries – these factors are taking place now and this is the issue.

Buddhists do not want to take over lands or invade nations – they never have, Buddhists do not convert or celebrate conversions or even remunerate people for converting others to Buddhism – this is not the case with Abrahamic religions. Any peaceful living is obstructed when the element of conversion and the celebration of converting exists. This is why the playing field is always imbalanced and against religions like Buddhism and Hinduism.

When Buddhists of Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and the like profess fears of losing the Buddhist identity and culture it is most certainly not to exclude the existing religions of others but what cannot be ignored is that the 2 existing religions of Christianity and Islam are always seeking to either dominate through diplomacy, economy or through population and conversions. In Muslim nations in particular whatever non-Muslim natives existed has now diminished to shocking numbers – either they have had to convert to survive or they have left the country they lived in for sheer survival. Nigeria and Sudan are two good examples. Whereas, even in non-Muslim nations the Muslims have never seen a decline – their populations have increased steadily at levels exceeding that of the rest of the population – calculate that with time to be able to formulate why Britain, France, EU and other nations are likely to have Muslim majorities in decades to come and when that happens the scenario of what Nigeria is going through naturally comes to mind and people fear for their existence because there are no fatwas or Holy orders issued against others in Buddhism. Is this scenario very difficult for critics even the media to realize and empathize with?

What are the defenses against these truths – dialogue and negotiations and interfaith programs or multiculturalism do not answer or do not even wish to address this fact. So long as there is an objective to convert people or to take over nations by birth boosting it is natural that Buddhists and Hindus are likely to fear for their existence.

The obvious showdown between the Abrahamic religions is predicted – but is it really necessary. We are not living in tribal times. People are not warriors – they are educated and learned and should be acting different to how the men of the Crusades functioned. Do we really need more bloodshed in order to make one’s faith prevail – in a quest for world domination? No one needs to convert to Buddhism but in this day and age where the world does not need any more wars and conflicts and needs instead more compassion and respect for all others including all sentient beings and where diminishing natural resources means that man needs to curtail his/her inner greed for material wealth – Buddhism affords that self-journey for truth. We do not need any clash of civilization nor should people of these faiths encourage such. As eventual participants people of the Abrahamic faiths must be aware of becoming pawns and now itself decide to not be part of such a global catastrophe – in ancient times the weapons used are nothing compared to the nuclear arsenal that the countries destined to clash are in possession of. This is why the onus is on the disciples of the Abrahamic faith to not fall prey.