I've read about Harun Yahya's book entitled 'Islam and Buddhism'. In this book, I find many incorrect things he mentioned about Buddhism in his way to preach the truth of Islam. I decided to answer his claims about Buddhism Chapter by Chapter. It is best if you own the book too. So that you can refer and make sure I'm not taking anything out of context.
Buddhism: An Idolatrous Religion?Idolatrous. From the topic that I've read in Harun Yahya's book 'Islam & Buddhism', I have already know that he haven't know about Buddhism yet. Idolatrous. He included Buddha's history in this book, why don't he list out every actions Buddha made? I look upon this as unfair. This is untrue of Buddhism. Buddha lived in an age where hierachical Hindu ruled India. Buddha denied idol worshipping. He was born a Hindu, but he denied the way that people in India worshipped idols. If Buddha denied idol worshipping, why would Harun Yahya say Buddhism is an 'idolatrous' and 'superstitious' religion? By the way, in which basis does he said Buddhism was superstitous? Buddhism is an agnostic religion, which focused more on self and not worship. How superstitious is that?
Those 'idols' Harun shown in his book aren't actually idols. They are not prayed at. Putting hands together and kneeling in front of the statues is simply a form of respect. To clarify this, Buddha once said that he is not a supreme being and does not deserve worship. Right before he died. You may search that up on Yahoo. For further clarification, if we can put flowers and ornaments on the statue of a politician or on the floor when we mourn the death of our loved ones (like in the aftermath of WTC bombing), why not kneeling in front of a statue of person whose opinion brought benefit to the world? Maybe people from other religion say that kneeling in front of something means worshipping, but different cultures mean different things. In India, citizens used to kneel in front of the king. That doesn't mean worship in India. On the other hand, citizens kneel in front of Pharaoh and call him God. This is why religion from that region of area forbids people kneeling in front other beings. Cultural differences could bring forth religion misunderstandings too.
Buddhism's Erroneous Belief?Harun Yahya had said in his book that Buddha preaches orally and do not write texts. In Buddhism, whether if the text or word passed down on generation, it doesn't matter. Because it is not a word of God. Buddha himself clarified that. So he can't call Buddha a liar. Because Buddha did not claim himself as God or whatsoever.
Later in this chapter, Harun Yahya contradicts himself with an article saying Buddhism is an atheistic religion. Even though it's an atheistic religion, he said, Buddhism believes in life after death without intellect or scientific support. Well, this is funny, I saw a research on a group of psychiatric performing a research on hypnotising a patient to know their previous life. Their result was astounding. I do not dare to say that it was true because it might be the Devil's work.... I don't know.
Harun Yahya said that Karma applies on Buddhists only. I reject that opinion because Karma is not about a human reincarnates as rat. It's simply about 'what you sow is what you reap'. This is a concept. So people can expand this 'Wheel of Karma' as big as they wanted. Just as how people portray their Heaven to be, whether it is symbolic or not. (To clarify, whether 'the flow of honey river' is really in heaven or just a symbolic portrayal of Heaven, which Muslim scholars are still debating about)
An Oppresive, Enslaving Religion?Harun said in this article that a Buddhist attempt to nullify all human desires is another aspect of its narrow philosophy. Checkmate, you might think? Nope, Castling. Because I believe Islam urges its followers to eliminate nafsu (desires) as a way to get closer to God too. Narrow philosophy? I'd be careful to use that word, especially if it might insult a religion I loved very much. Harun said that Buddha restricted his followers from wondering about how life came into being. However, he has not proven why Buddhists keep themselves from asking questions like where they're from, how the universe and living things came to be. Can he be so sure that Buddha RESTRICTED his follower from wondering? If so, what is he doing under the Bodhi tree if not finding the Cause of All Things? Then why does Buddha said that it is okay for a Buddhist to convert to other religion? There is usually only one Castling is allowed in a Chess game, but in this case, it's already two. He compared Buddhism with Islam, saying that Islam does not suppress its follower's desires or to endure pain and suffering. Inversely, he meant that Buddhism teaches its followers to hunger themselves and make themselves suffer. Is that true? In Buddhism, it is free for its followers to choose to be a monk or a nun. Buddhists can have families, have sex, and child as long as it is not abusive. Being a monk or a nun that begs for food and money have its own morality too. It provokes charity and kindness. It is quite the same as paying Zakat, only it is by choice. Monks and nun used a part of the charity to share with the orphans and open up a cheap vegetarian food outlet (in Malaysia, with RM 2, you get a big bowl of rice and vegetables, I've been there once). And the profit of their sale on vegetarian food will be donated to the Buddhist Temple or orphanage. This is the Buddhist society. And those charities is not limited to only Buddhists, it is applied to every person from every religion. In Malaysia, there are also such society. I've been to their society no less than a month ago.
Buddhists even open up a free clinic to treat everyone who can't afford medical treatments without charging money. And from who do you think those money came from? I've been to the clinic. There are Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists doing their medical checkup over there. Buddhism does not promote suffering as a way of truth, but telling his followers the truth that desires can bring forth suffering. I believe my muslim friends agree with this too. Buddhist monks are jobless, you might say... But Buddhist monks do have a job that is very righteous which is to bring life to other poor beings. This practises has already been portrayed by Buddha himself.
It amused me though, when Harun once again contradicts himself by saying Buddhism is a Pagan religion which worships idol later in the chapter. I'll stay silent on this matter because I believe I have already mentioned it.
Creation of idols in Japan such as Avalokiteshvara, is practised by only a few Chinese and Japanese people. The idol is clearly the portrayal of their culture. Bear in mind that Japanese religion is called Shintoisme, not Buddhism. Personally, I think Harun Yahya himself laid an 'attack' on Buddhism because he watched the comedy series 'Journey To The West'. Its all fiction. Even the directors mentioned that. They are no monkey god or a pig god. Besides, they portrayed Buddha with Chinese cultures. Buddha is from India.
End word.I would like to apologize to my muslim brothers and sister if I offended you. If you think there is a phrase which offended you, please do tell me so that I could rephrase that sentence. By writing this blog, I am not trying to say which religion is false or right. What I am trying to point out here is the injustice and unjust way Mr. Harun Yahya used to preach Islam. Islam and Buddhism has been both my favourite religion that I most enjoyed studying. Harun Yahya have so much to contradict in this book. There's one muslim scholar named Zakir Naik mentioned about Buddha in his preaching, and I find it most harmony and a true way to bring forth the religion of Islam towards the non-muslims. You should search for Zakir Naik in youtube if you have never heard of him. He is one of my most respectable person after Prophet Muhammad, Buddha, and Jesus Christ. However,Harun Yahya had really done a good job in answering atheists' query on the Theory of Evolution. Kudos. He succeeded in putting many people back in the path of faith.
_of_Copy_of_Poppet%5B1%5D.jpg)
I believe the Quran did not ask its followers to say things above. If those 'disbelievers' should talk crap of Islam, answer them in an appropriate manner. Don't say things that a terrorist said. Because a true muslim is not a terrorist. Quran is infallible, and you can answer every query they have posted without name-calling and cursing. Personally, the last red sentence pissed me off because the guy even used God's name to curse.
So, to counter insults:
1) Answer without name-calling.
2) Back yourself up with evidences and scriptures.
3) Do not try to find fault in their religion, this leads to prejudism.
4) Boycott is condemned in every religion, especially in Islam, the religion of peace. Don't boycott.
5) One insult could lead to ten more of them coming back at you. Don't insult, explain.
6) Strip away personal judgements when trying to compare religion. This leads to misintrepetation.
The reason I include this one in my blog because I think the morality of most muslims is descending since Islam teaches them morality and peacefulness in almost every page of Quran. You may add more points or suggestion if you want and stay peaceful.