My view of Buddhism is that its core praxis isn't particularly empowering, essentially it boils down to trying dissipating the soul so that it dies permanently and this state is exalted as "Nirvana." Its similar to the Hindu's pursuit of "moksha" and being absorbed into Krishna/Christ and "the Lord", with both ideas originating around the same time. I agree with the broad sentiments of the "Buddhism Doctrine of Evil" [...], even if some details are sketchy given the original author's history of flip-flopping. Apparently there's a famous saying "If you scratch an American Buddhist, you'll find a Jew" which is telling to me. Israel's top rabbis also consider Buddhism noahide-compliant and valid for gentiles as mentioned in my documentary alongside Hinduism which is telling also. 

It's interesting that Buddhist prosecution in pre-jew China considered Buddhism equally as subversive as Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Judaism. That they were lumped together is telling. Ashoka sent Buddhist missions specifically to Aryan pagan hellenic kingdoms to "convert" them, and it's possible the Therapeuts were in part descended from the Alexandrian buddhist mission, connecting Buddhism with Christ-insanity. What complicates things is that just like how words like "Krist" had an ordinary meaning prior to being associated with the jewish rabbi of Christ, the word 'Buddha" apparently had linguistic meanings prior. Buddhism does have a mutable quality to it. Just like the Greco-Bactrians where Buddhism became intermixed with Hellenic paganism, diluting but not totally destroying it, looking at Buddhism today there are varying degrees of admixture of non-buddhist ideas that survived. Such as the various bon po ideas among some Tibetan buddhists, or say groups like Mo Pai who are technically Buddhist yet their occult teachings really are derived from an older, "sorcerer-aristocrat" ideal that struck me as far more Aryan in spirit.