Enlightenment, and that only Enlightenment can abolish War.
The dreary old trick of comparing the enlightened condition of Buddhists, Hindus`, or the Wheredehekowie religion with the pathetic condition of Christians, Moslems, and Jewish practices is not hitting (let alone aiming) at the right target. Neither is comparing the virtues of one Montheistic religion over another.
Both Eastern and Western religious thought and philosophy contain the wisdom that is not so much the form as it is the unique individuals that rise head and shoulders to cause a glimpse of what is the ineffible and the cure. The wise are found, if one is looking with clear eyesight, in every race, creed, and culture as God is not nearly as repressive as mankinds prejudice.
The wise are not a Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, Christian, or Jewish. The wise are of a cosmic and universal religion that shines beyond all the pettiness and endless bickering of temporary positioning.
Fighting has never been a habit strictly confined to Christians; nor have wars been entirely unknown outside Christendom. It may be that certain hermits or holy men, both eastern and western, have individually abandoned war. But we are not talking about abandoning war, but about abolishing war. In what sense have Christians failed, in which Buddhists have not equally failed? In what respect is Buddhism or Hinduism, which has looked on at all the Asiatic fighting for thousands of years, any more successful than Christianity, that has barely looked on for two thousand? I do not think the thing is any real discredit either to Buddhism or Christianity, for anybody who is really "enlightened" about history and human nature. But if we are to be told about ten times a week by every newspaper and noisy talker that Christianity has failed to do anything because it has failed to stop fighting, what are we to say of the chances of the Chinese gentleman of stopping it in Europe with a new religion, when he could not stop it in Asia with an old one?
It is no disgrace to Christianity, it is no disgrace to any great religion, that its counsels of perfection have not made every single person perfect. If after centuries a disparity is still found between its ideal and its followers, it only means that the religion still maintains the ideal, and the followers still need it. But it is not a thing at which a philosopher in his five wits has any reason to be surprised. As a matter of fact, it would be much more reasonable to use this taunt against the irreligious who use it than against the religious against whom it is used.
-- G.K. Chesterton
Buddhism, like the other great faiths, has not always lived up to its principles - there are numerous examples of Buddhists engaging in violence and even war.
* in the 14th century Buddhist fighters led the uprising that evicted the Mongols from China
* in Japan, Buddhist monks trained Samurai warriors in meditation that made them better fighters
* In the twentieth century Japanese Zen masters wrote in support of Japan's wars of aggression. For example, Sawaki Kodo (1880–1965) wrote this in 1942:
"It is just to punish those who disturb the public order. Whether one kills or does not kill, the precept forbidding killing [is preserved]. It is the precept forbidding killing that wields the sword. It is the precept that throws the bomb."
* In Sri Lanka the 20th century civil war between the mostly Buddhist Sinhalese majority and the Hindu Tamil minority has cost 50,000 lives.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/war/buddhism.shtml
Undoubtedly, this sort of sneer would be quite as unjust to Buddhism as to Monotheism. The ideal of Buddha might still be the best for men, even if millions of men continued to prefer what is lower than the best.
The truth is, that all such ideas of abolishing this and that and the wherefores, among the misunderstandings and temptations of mankind shows an essential ignorance of the very nature of mankind. It does not allow for the thousands of inconsistencies, dilemmas, contradicions, delusions, desperate remedies, and divided allegiances of Mankind.
This is, as H.L Mencken said: "To put your faith in the illogical belief in the improbable."
To insist on the improbability of beauty, grace, and transcendance of ignorance is to pull the veil over our own eyes and then complain the world is ugly. No solution found in the improbable eh?
Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan - a Muslim pacifist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Abdul_Gaffar_Khan
There are wise found, not by creating preconceived frameworks of superiority but by being aware of what is transpiring with clarity.
Here is a list of writings from some of the greatest minds of true heart felt Islam:
http://www.omphaloskepsis.com/collection/
What profound wisdom is found in those writings defies all of our preconceived ideas of Truth being found in only one way.
Enlightenment, and only enlightenment will cure the ills of humanity.
Of course, what do Christians know?
