Friday, October 14, 2016

Muslims for Buddhist Hell?

From FMT:

Lawyer-activist Azhar Harun, better known to us as Art Harun, has been blooming annoyed with some religious instructions, one of which pertained to actual slaughter of animals (70 live quails) at a school in Batu Caves. I won't delve into its slaughtering details - you can read the FMT article yourself.

what a quail about to be slaughtered looks like 

But what took the cream off the cake was, as Art informed us, a different religious lesson which his son encountered in the latter's private school.

That lesson was conducted by an overzealous religious teacher who showed the schoolchildren what Hell was like.

Hmmm, I wonder whether that teacher used the Malay word 'Neraka' or the Arabic word "Jahannam'. I guess with those ulamas' cringeful proclivity for all things Arab, it might have been the latter - aiyoyo, poor underused 'Neraka'.

Art told us that that religious teacher used a YouTube video to demonstrate to the schoolchildren what hell looked like.

But this had been the joke (for us non-parents - sorry Art). Art said:

“It was not even a video of a Muslim hell. It was made by a Thai Buddhist and the version of hell in the video was so gory, my son could not sleep for days.”

Art said it would have been better for religious teachers to show the meaning of religious teachings rather than practised slaughtering real live animals or using a YouTube video on a Thai's version of Hell*.

* actually in Buddhism there is no Hell or Heaven, just continuous re-births (where in each life one may have the misfortune to meet blokes like Donald Trump, Perak Mufti, Hitler, Benjamin Netanyahu, etc) until one can reach enlightenment (Nirvana)

But Art, without showing frightening scenes of Hell kau kau, the Muslim children won't be intimidated into obeying the instructions of ulamas.

for sinners who bullied or falsely accused women, wakakaka

for sinners who didn't use their heads sensibly and believed bullshit blindly
  - wakakaka

for miscellaneous sins like lying, deceiving, bullshitting, fabricating lies to harm people, and mudah-lupa-ing to deceive people


BTW, the punishments will be repeated until eternity for bullshitters who misused any god's name falsely to harm or deceive people


  1. Art should send his son to Alice Smith, then to Eton College, and then to Cambridge. Perhaps, his son could learn about Christians' heaven?

    1. don't worry about Christian heaven, but what about that Muslim religious teacher who likes Thai Buddhist Hell, wakakaka

    2. The main aim is to give an idea and glimpse of hell. It is not Buddhist Hell as a main focus.

    3. 'hasan'

      Jews, Christian and Islam are Abrahamic religions, we pray to the same one God. Thus, we go to the same one heaven and same one hell.

      Kapish Ignoramus?

    4. aiyoyo Patonah why must you blindly defend. You know that religious teacher was wrong, yet you still defend him tsk tsk. That's what I meant by blind support, especially those of PAS for a nasty cowardly person who made seditious fabrications and when the chips were down, blamed it on a woman. What a pariah.

    5. The point of contention is that Art is 'blooming annoyed' with the religious lessons that his son received from a school in Batu Caves. Why send his son there? Are there any other complains from other parents? Just change schools lah. There are soo many private non religious schools in KL. As I supposed Art is progressive and rich, why NOT then send his son to Alice Smith? Why he and perhaps you matey want to condemn Islamic schools/teachers?

    6. The idea is to asking students to think ponder, reflect and act rightfully. The idea of halal slaughtering and glimpses of hell or heaven is fundamental to Islam. Thus, the examples and practicals are vehicles for the dissemination of knowledge, thought and ideas. It is hardly likely that Islam would be against freedom of expression be it as KT expressed it Buddhist Hell.

    7. wakakaka, oh hassan oh dear me, you're one of the blind defenders. muslims should not believe in so-called buddhist religious concepts such as hell

      besides, does anyone have been to hell and back to know what it looks like?

      as I mentioned in my post, buddhists do NOT have the concept of hell - it' only thai shamanism and at times chinese, korean, vietnamese and japanese shamanism that introduced hell into buddhist belief. there are a lot of such syncretism among religions

      please lah hasan I didn't expect you to blindly defend a wrong doing

    8. islam does not restrict you from sending your children to any schools or top notch colleges and universities. but islam is against abuses and crude diplomacy, for example calling people what a pariah or kapish ignoramus!

    9. Islam is Islam, a religion to be respected. But some Muslims and some ulamas are not fit to be followers of Islam - they tell lies, bully women, harm people and even kill them

    10. From my training and experience, normally, people would turn and adopt to abuse/crude diplomacy when they lose the plot.

    11. worse would be ulamas and muftis who lie, as if they aren't afraid of Allah swt

      doesn't that make them hypocrites and not fearing god?

  2. buddhism may not share the same concept of hell, but hell is common in buddhism, i think buddhism + taoism talk hell the most among all religions, so call heaven n hell is part of rebirth (hallelujah wakaka).

    1 more, vegetarianism in buddhism is introduced by chinese, only chinese monk dun eat meat, the rest no problem. there r diff type of belief in buddhism, cant tell who is more right, but by looking at the response of 3 friend + 1 wakaka up there, human tend to believe their version is the best n correct, all others r wrong wakaka.

    my view is current pas n hadi is not inclusive at all, they r not wrong, but the impression i have is they start to sound like tuan, unbelievable sad development.

    1. you're incorrect. I spoke the truth that Buddhism has no concept of Hell

  3. Islam forbid nons to doubt their believers' actions, wakakaka.....

  4. 儒 Confucianism emphasizes benevolence. 仁 must be the guiding principle of all actions by all levels of beings.

    Taoism confronts one with nature. 道, closest match is the modern concept of Gaia, not the ancient Greek mythological definition.

    佛 Buddhism encompasses self-consciousness. Everything starts with one's mind & this must end with one's mind.

    All these 3 concepts in their most basic & true form have no god, heaven & hell, plus many others.

    All these add-ones r later creations via the infusion of shamanism, tribalistic practices & con-manism.

    1. u r talking abt the philosophy n concept, not the religion. it seem u, n kt,dun know the diff btw dog n hotdog wakaka.

    2. Every human faith has a source. All religion begins as a philosophical concept.

      儒道佛 r philosophies that have been packaged as believes, that one must not questioned as in some other religions that need no proof, just blind faith.

      So, when one is in doubt, then goes back to the source lah!

      Thus, which one is the one u r talking about??

      My understanding of the basic difference between hotdog & dog can be summarized as capitalism without lais·sez-faire, communism without the classless dream.

      Close ke?


    3. u r not wrong, but not apple to apple loh. philosophy is not science, religion is faith, philosophy is between. we shdnt compare taoism the philosophy against other religion, so the correct comparison shd be taoism the religion, the one that start during han, not chunqiu, though laozi zhuangzi become the main deities. hell is definitely part of daojiao. i think the same apply to buddhism n confucianism, all the buddhism class i attend talk abt hell. perhaps australia buddhism is diff wakaka.

    4. don't refer to chinese shamanism in buddhism or in taoism (shenism). refer to theravada buddhism (sri lanka version) - there is a temple in brickfields which published quality class buddhist books

    5. y i cant refer to mahayana version? moreover i am chinese, r u telling me yr version is more correct than mine? that said, i still want to assert buddhism regardless of theravada or mahayana talk abt hell, just that the concept is at vast diff with the religion of book. i been to brickfield temple, the funny thing is most that go there r eng ed, i realised their teaching r diff, similar to chinese school vs eng school wakaka.

    6. you can refer to mahayana buddhism, but not some confused version of mahayana buddhism which has been infused with chinese shamanism and folklore religion, because in the latter is where you get your version of hell, wakakaka

      the major difference between theravada and mahayana buddhism is the doctrine of achieving nirvana, where the former, the original version of buddhism, deems achievement of arahat-hood by the buddhist person is sufficient, while mahayana buddhism is more grand and generous (which has been why it calls itself Bigger Wheel) but quite impractical, where it considers the arahats must help everyone else achieve nirvana as required obligations for nirvana.

      there are of course more difference but what I have said in the simplest description above is the major one.

    7. Why r u arguing form over substance????

      Whether it's Confucianism, Taoism or Buddhism, or their various denominations(forms), the very basic guiding principle(substance) is still self-awareness among the followers.

      If the followers choose to utilise fear tactic, like the concept of God/hell & their associated rewards & punishments, then these followers have deviated from the original path.

      They create a nought concept known as religion, such that actions MUST be guided through fears. How could a compassionated idea BE governed by incompassionated means!

      Religion is an abomination grows out of this easy-way-out approach of the ignoramus, subsequently manipulated by the ill-intended to claim divine authority. For the ignoramus, FAITH is arrogantly proclaimed to need no proof in its idea. Otherwise it would clash head-on due to the nought concept mentioned above.

      Philosophy is a science of mind. It's a logical, truth searching approach of the unknown via inward self consciousness exploration.

      Science, as u have understood, must be based on hard physical proof to claim the knowledge underneath. It's just another tool to explore the unknown.

      So what do u mean of no apple to apple conparison?

      If u r talking about the faith form of the 儒道佛, then there is nothing to talk about. Remember, no proof required?

    8. brader, i dun know how to dabate u, a simple question, is rebirth part of buddhism, how do u prove rebirth n link it to self awareness n self enlightenment? can we talk buddhism without rebirth?

    9. if I may, in buddhism, rebirth is a consequence of inadequate good kamma. being born again (thro' rebirth) means 'hell' because one will continue to be subject to and possibly subordinated to lusts (for money, material belongings, even life, etc)

      the cycle of rebirth is called wandering in samsara

      but buddhism acknowledges that kamma is ONLY one of several forces that determine or influence rebirth. unfortunately Buddha as a teacher wa silent on other forces, instructing buddhists to focus on kamma, namely in its simplest form, cultivate good and avoid evil

      how does one prove the veracity of any religion? that's why each religion requires 'faith', not proof because proof is impossible

      but having said that, the lamas of tibet and in other cases of different religions, there have been people remembering and even proving the truth of what they remembered in their previous lives

      the aim of buddhism is to avoid rebirths, so as to be in nirvana, so i am not sure whether one can discuss the religion without the issue of rebirth

    10. "so i am not sure whether one can discuss the religion without the issue of rebirth"

      to a atheist, the answer is probably yes, to a agnostics or pseudo buddhist like me, the answer is 50/50. to a buddhist, the answer is a definitely no. so to ck, the buddhist become a ignoramus, n non / half believer like us become a real buddhist wakaka

    11. Gautama Buddha DIDNT establish Buddhism.

      He ONLY discovered a way of life to reduce human sufferings.

      The subsequent followers term that discovery Buddhism. Along the way, tambah lebih banyak doctrines that were NOT in Gautama's original teaching.

      The concept of rebirth is one such teaching.

      So, to a true follower of Gautama, yr question is irrelevant, as it's not in His teaching!

      Thus, who's the ignoramus, again?

    12. I have a better analogy.

      That Manchester imbecile has written the following;

      'By the way, in case you did not know, about a billion people have died in wars since recorded history (25% of that in China alone). So, if you think the past is not important, then think again. Yes, 5,000 years of Chinese civilisation contributed to 25% of the war casualties. Better to be uncivilised like the Malays I suppose.'

      Assuming all his numbers r correct.

      5,000 years of Chinese civilisation contributed to 25% of the war casualties in China?

      25% of a billion is 250 million.

      Over 5000 years, gives 50k people killed by wars a year in China.

      Celaka, just Nanking massacre alone in WWII, the Jap had killed many times more of the CinaBeng!

      So, that statement has a lot of bulls! & yet there r ketuanan freaks treating that statement as fact!

      The Manchester imbecile makes a bull & put it on the altar for one unthinking ketuanan freak like Salehah Sulaiman to fall out of the kitchen!

      So a 5000 years civilisation (fact), somehow contributes to 25% of war casualties since recorded history (bull), as claimed by one megalomaniac (false prophet) & treats as gospel by the ketuanan freaks (kitchen kaki), to remain bodoh sombong underneath the tempurung!

      See the analogy YET????

  5. rebirth is common in india or hinduism. i dun agree gautama never talk abt rebirth, show me the link pls. like i said, if u insist to limit the discussion to philosophy, then u r ignore the millions believers. i personally dun believe in rebirth, but unlike u, i respect others belief.

    wrt petra writes, perhaps the number on chinese is genuine, but we must understand some fact behind. in most major war, except taiping rebellion, 3 kingdom n kmt vs kmt,chinese r the victim. secondly chinese tend to record history data in a precise manner, unlike many others, n finally, chinese huge population seem to imply they do survive despite many wars, or they have relatively long history. but difficult to debate with one who spin nonstop.