The jihadists — on this occasion theÂ Indian MujahadeenÂ — are at it again. On a Sunday in July nine bombs went off in Buddhism’s most sacred place,Â Bodh GayaÂ in India. The jihadists said the bombing was in retaliation for the Buddhists resisting jihad in Myanmar. This would be the equivalent of bombing the Wailing Wall, St. Paul’s Cathedral, Bethlehem or the Kabbah. But, since Buddhists are the least political of all religions, the media barely noticed.
Â In other news:
The Sri Lankan government has ordered a mosque be relocated after Buddhist monks threatened to demolish it because they said the 50-year-old structure had been built illegally in an area sacred to Buddhists.
This jihad attack may have long term consequences for jihad, due to favorable attitudes toward and perceptions of Buddhists, and who Buddhists are. Buddhism is the pet religion of the media, Leftists, Progressives and Liberals, and even those who are right of center find it hard to dislike Buddhism. Buddhism is truly the religion of peace, not like that other “religion of peace” with the jihad doctrine and 1400 years of conquest.
But the Left and Liberals are also the apologists for Islam, and one of the ways apologists deny the brutality of Islam is to attack its victims as somehow deserving of the jihadist attacks. When Christians are killed every week by jihadists, the leftist types justify it because of the Crusades and other wars by nations that are primarily Christian. When 30 Christian children are murdered in Nigeria, it is considered payback for the Crusades. (The Crusades lasted for 300 years and the last one was 800 years ago.) And any Jews killed are payback for the purported Israeli persecution of the so-called Palestinians. Put another way, the apologists for Islam figure that most of those who are killed in jihad deserve it.
So, the apologists for Islam are in a quandary. Jihad is hurting Buddhists, but it would be bigoted to complain about it. The denial machine is set to spin — those jihadists were not real Muslims or else they were just a few crazies.
A second problem for the apologists is their theory that if Muslims are treated right, they won’t be violent. This is the “treat the Palestinians right and they will do right” theory of dealing with Islam. This gets expanded to the theory that all Islamic violence is due to how the Palestinians are treated. Well, bombing Buddhists in India has no connection to Palestine.
Many Buddhists are absolute pacifists who hold to the “if you do good, good will come to you” school of politics. The problem is that such Buddhists usually cannot figure out why Muslims believe that being a Buddhist is evil. They may be ignorant of Islamic doctrine that says that the only good that can come out of a Buddhist is submission to Islam.
Buddhist doctrine holds that we need both compassion and wisdom. But the wisdom aspect does not seem to be highlighted when theÂ Dalai LamaÂ says that the attacks are “very sad” while noting that it could be an act of a “few individuals” and “shouldn’t be considered something serious.”
If the Dalai Lama would pick up the clue phone, he would hear this: “Hello, the Buddhism that you practice, Vajrayana Buddhism, came from the Swat Valley in Afghanistan and where is Buddhism now? It has been annihilated from Afghanistan by jihadists. That same doctrine of jihad is annihilating Buddhists in Thailand today. Is that sad enough for you?” Jihad seeks to annihilate all religions in the territory that Muslims enter. And that should be considered as something serious.
But bombing Bodh Gaya has a down side for the jihadists. A few of the usual apologists may decide that if jihad means bombing Buddhists, then maybe, just maybe, there is something fundamentally wrong with Islam. Islam’s apologists have a lot more trouble in justifying the justice of jihad against Buddhists since the jihad is against their own political alliance.
So bombing Buddhists may be a tactical victory, but it could a long-term strategic error but, only if the Buddhists and the apologists pay attention to murder of their own.