War in Buddhism

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:43 am

boda wrote:
Paul wrote:
boda wrote:Anyway, in the scenario about fighting soldiers intent on killing a village of civilians, I'm no war expert but civilians are not usually considered a good strategic target, particularly when there are enemy soldiers in the same vicinity. That suggests that the enemy command is irrational, and apparently amoral. That being the case, it would seem reasonable to assume that if the enemy soldiers were to disobey their command to kill the village full of civilians, they would be killed themselves for desertion or dereliction of duty. In this way the enemy soldiers could be just as innocent as the civilians they were ordered to kill, yet it's "ok" to kill the enemy soldiers but not the civilians.
You're aware of the many atrocities that happened on the Eastern Front in WW2 like the Khatyn massacre, right? And that's just one of endless examples of people willingly doing things that accrue terrible karma in war - from the leaders to the commanders on the ground to the individual soldiers.
What do you suppose would have happened to any soldier who refused to follow their orders in the massacre?
They'd be shot, in the example of the Nazi SS at least. But massacres were usually given to the ideologically driven to carry out - those guys were happy to do it.

But that has very little to do with the principal we're talking about here: a person who is going to kill many due to mental poisons can be killed by a bodhisattva to save them from gaining such terrible karma. This is pretty conventional mahayana. It's an important consequence of the difference between hinayana and mahayana, i.e. rule following vs. bodhicitta motivation.
You seem to be trying to find a loophole to invalidate the whole principle. If you don't believe it you don't have to.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:12 am

On the contrary, I'm arguing that there is no loophole. Sentient beings naturally value life so, generally speaking, killing is not "ok." That's just how it is, rule or no rule, we value life.

User avatar
jundo cohen
Posts: 650
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:57 am
Contact:

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by jundo cohen » Wed Dec 23, 2015 4:14 am

If I may, I will offer some comments and resources by Buddhist teachers from a few traditions on this ...

In a 2014 essay, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, wrote:
The Buddha’s discourses give us glimpses into the tumultuous tide of the era. They tell how “men take up swords and shields, buckle on bows and quivers, and charge into battle… where they are wounded by arrows and spears, and their heads are cut off by swords… and they are splashed with boiling liquids and crushed under heavy weights” (MN 13:12–13). ... Against this backdrop of social chaos and personal disorientation, the Buddha propounded an ethic of harmlessness that rejected violence in all its forms, from its collective manifestation in armed conflict to its subtle stirrings as anger and ill will. He rested this ethic on the appeal to empathy, the ability to imagine oneself in the place of others: “All beings fear violence, all fear death. ... But while the ethic of harmlessness may have served well as a guide to personal conduct, the governance of a state presented a moral quandary, with which the texts occasionally grapple. ... In time of war, I would argue, the karmic framework can justify enlisting in the military and serving as a combatant, providing one sincerely believes the reason for fighting is to disable a dangerous aggressor and protect one’s country and its citizens. Any acts of killing that such a choice might require would certainly be regrettable as a violation of the First Precept.
http://www.inquiringmind.com/Articles/WarAndPeace.html

Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote a strong rebuttal, and then there was a back and forth of debate:
The arguments in “War and Peace: A Buddhist Perspective” by Bhikkhu Bodhi (Spring 2014) are deeply disturbing to anyone committed to living by the Dhamma. Because they muddy the waters around the issue of killing and because confusion on this issue leads to harrowing consequences
http://www.inquiringmind.com/Articles/B ... tters.html

In my own viewless view (as one Practitioner), abiding by the Precept to Preserve Life and Avoid the Taking of life, it may be necessary to take life to save other lives and to restore peace. I feel that the Suttas and Sutras offered many opinions on these questions (having been written, of course, by men of many opinions), and modern teachers are of many minds on this. However, Buddhist voices disagree.

From the opinions of Buddhist teachers from various traditions which I have read, I would say that almost all who saw the need for some response involving the taking of life saw it as a "necessary evil" ... not as a path or goal in any positive sense. Sometimes we must break a Precept to keep a Precept. And given modern warfare, most of the teachers were aware that this might include the unavoidable taking of civilian and other "non-combatant" lives in order to save a much greater number of lives.

I believe that the following responses, some by the Dalai Lama, are representative of the diversity of opinion.

http://www.tricycle.com/p/1487 (the comments which follow are also very interesting)
http://www.tricycle.com/feature/war-or- ... de-the-box
http://india.indymedia.org/en/2003/09/7833.shtml

Thich Nhat Hanh seems to be more representative of the "any violent response only leads to increased violence" opinion ...

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethi ... hanh/1843/

The Buddha also seems to have been of two minds on this. On the one hand, there are some writings in which he is framed to say that killing is never skillful.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ssage.html

On the other hand, in other Sutta he did seem to countenance a nation having an army for certain limited purposes, and its discreet use.

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma6/militarycanon.html

also (although on the following, I have some doubts about the author.

http://www.beyondthenet.net/thedway/soldier.htm (by the way, a very interesting story about the author of that piece, but I am wondering if the author had any role in the violence in Sri Lanka. Does anyone have further information: http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2007/05/13/fea06.asp )

Almost all the Buddhist teachers I can think of (including me too, for what it is worth) would say that we must also bear all the Karmic consequences of our volitional words, thoughts and acts, no matter whether we had a "reason" for killing or not.

You may kill the cat, but you still likely have to pay the price in some way.

A Tibetan teacher (Chagdud Tulku) relates this famous Jataka legend about a previous incarnation of the Buddha ...
(In a previous life, the Buddha was Captain Compassionate Heart, sailing with 500 merchants. An evil pirate, Dung Thungchen (Blackspear) appeared, threatening to kill them all. )The captain, a bodhisattva himself, saw the [pirate]'s murderous intention and realized this crime would result in eons of torment for the murderer. In his compassion, the captain was willing to take hellish torment upon himself by killing the man to prevent karmic suffering that would be infinity greater than the suffering of the murdered victims. The captain's compassion was impartial; his motivation was utterly selfless.
I am not sure about the effect of our Karma in lives to come ... but I do know that we likely will bear the effects of our actions in this life in some way. I have a friend, an ex-policeman, who had to kill someone in a perfectly necessary and justified act to save lives. Yet, my friend still carries that with him to this day.

No, taking lives is never a "good" thing.

It is important to remember too that Buddhists do not generally believe in "bad people", only in "people who do bad things" because they themselves are victims of greed, anger and ignorance within. The real evil doer is "greed anger and ignorance".

Even if one is required to act in self-defense ... of one's own life, the life of another, or to protect society as in the case of a policeman or soldier ... one should best not feel anger even if forced to use force, one should nurture peace as much as one can, avoiding violence as much as one can, using violence as little as one can even when needed.

Yes, most all flavors of Buddhism teach that, even should one be forced to break a Precept in a big or small way, one should bear the Karmic weight, reflect on having had to do so, seek as one can not to do so in the future.

The case I usually mention is that friend of mine, a Buddhist policeman, who had to kill someone in the line of duty in order to save an innocent person held hostage. It was a perfectly justified, necessary shooting. However, from that day he always felt a kind of mental scar, a heavy weight ... even though he knew he had to do the right thing. He always felt the need to bring peace into the world in some measure to make up for what he had had to do. So it is for all of us if we must reluctantly support the use of violence in order to preserve life.

Let me close with something recited by us in our Sutra Dedication ...

We dedicate our hopes and aspirations:
To all victims of war and violence and natural events
To the injured and to all families touched by these tragedies
To the healing of hatred in all countries and among all peoples
To the wisdom and compassion of our world leaders
To the peace of the world and harmony of all beings.


Gassho, J
Priest/Teacher at Treeleaf Zendo, a Soto Zen Sangha. Treeleaf Zendo was designed as an online practice place for Zen practitioners who cannot easily commute to a Zen Center due to health concerns, living in remote areas, or work, childcare and family needs, and seeks to provide Zazen sittings, retreats, discussion, interaction with a teacher, and all other activities of a Zen Buddhist Sangha, all fully online. The focus is Shikantaza "Just Sitting" Zazen as instructed by the 13th Century Japanese Master, Eihei Dogen. http://www.treeleaf.org

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Aemilius » Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:41 am

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Aemilius wrote:There is, or there was, sutta/sutra in the Sravakayana pitaka called Questions of General Simha. There the General Simha says:
"I am a soldier, O Blessed One, and I am appointed by the king to enforce his laws and to wage his wars. Does the Tathagata, who teaches kindness without end and compassion with all sufferers, permit the punishment of the criminal? ..."
It seems that this highly important sutra has disappeared from the canonical texts (?) It now exists only in the translations of Paul Carus http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/btg/btg52.htm

The question of the use of violence has been discussed in the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana sutra, for example in the chapters Four (On Long Life) and Five (On the Adamantine Body). In Chapter Five, page 49, the Tathagata says:
"... That is why I allow those who uphold the precepts to be accompanied by the whiteclad people (upasakas, non-monks) with sword and staff. Etc..."
http://www.nirvanasutra.net/convenient/ ... e_2007.pdf

Thanks for your reply.

- What do you think is the punishment of the " criminal " allowed. in case of war against a nation ?

Well we have criminals who kill and they were for short executed in Thailand.
Thailand does not support the death penalty at the moment.
That kind of crime we know as should be punished by the national law.

Also is told that a Buddhist should act not against the national law as a citizen.

But to go on war against another non Buddhist nation that is not so clear to me......

KY


At present we exist in a moderately peaceful state in our society, and we have the kind of individual freedom that makes buddhism possible. When times get just a little rough, we very quickly or some times gradually and unnoticed loose this necessary individual freedom. On the whole, as some biologists have said, population is the smallest unit that we need to consider. A population, i.e. a society of human beings, periodically gets into a state of mind where it sees an other human population as an enemy. Normally it then considers the enemy to be devoid of humanity, thus its killing doesn't constitute a crime. On the contrary it is beneficial, it is heroic and virtuous behaviour. This state of mind is an overwhelming social emotion, very hard not to be taken in by it.
Professor Rummel has a website about democides, murders by government, that have occurred in human history, http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:23 am

boda wrote:On the contrary, I'm arguing that there is no loophole. Sentient beings naturally value life so, generally speaking, killing is not "ok." That's just how it is, rule or no rule, we value life.
Of course killing is not 'OK', but it is sometimes the necessary action, as with the example of the Buddha killing the robber in order to minimise loss of life and suffering.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 5:07 pm

Paul wrote:
boda wrote:On the contrary, I'm arguing that there is no loophole. Sentient beings naturally value life so, generally speaking, killing is not "ok." That's just how it is, rule or no rule, we value life.
Of course killing is not 'OK', but it is sometimes the necessary action, as with the example of the Buddha killing the robber in order to minimise loss of life and suffering.
I entered the discussion after reading...
Jesse wrote:it's OK in 'Buddhism' to wage war or kill -- the answer is when our level of ignorance allows us to do so.
Incidentally, killing someone before they've committed a crime is considered murder.

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 5:15 pm

boda wrote:
Paul wrote:
boda wrote:On the contrary, I'm arguing that there is no loophole. Sentient beings naturally value life so, generally speaking, killing is not "ok." That's just how it is, rule or no rule, we value life.
Of course killing is not 'OK', but it is sometimes the necessary action, as with the example of the Buddha killing the robber in order to minimise loss of life and suffering.
I entered the discussion after reading...
Jesse wrote:it's OK in 'Buddhism' to wage war or kill -- the answer is when our level of ignorance allows us to do so.
Incidentally, killing someone before they've committed a crime is considered murder.
Yes. And war is not considered mass murder because of not much more than some conceptual hand-waving.

In the usual telling of the story of the Buddha it's mentioned that he's telepathic so knows exactly what the would be mass-killer was thinking. Plus there is the certainty that it was bodhichitta motivation. So ignorance (or lack of) is indeed a factor, as Jesse says. But it is clear that in the Mahayana it can be an acceptable (or least worst) course of action under certain circumstances - so it is 'OK' in that sense. For an even stronger example see Ra Lotsawa.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

Jesse
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Jesse » Wed Dec 23, 2015 8:30 pm

boda wrote:
Paul wrote:
boda wrote:On the contrary, I'm arguing that there is no loophole. Sentient beings naturally value life so, generally speaking, killing is not "ok." That's just how it is, rule or no rule, we value life.
Of course killing is not 'OK', but it is sometimes the necessary action, as with the example of the Buddha killing the robber in order to minimise loss of life and suffering.
I entered the discussion after reading...
Jesse wrote:it's OK in 'Buddhism' to wage war or kill -- the answer is when our level of ignorance allows us to do so.
Incidentally, killing someone before they've committed a crime is considered murder.
Your still making the mistake of assuming Buddhism orders us to behave in some way or another, if a war happens in your country, sometimes you simply don't have a choice whether or not you fight. Defending yourself, defending others, or even your community/homeland do not make you a bad person, or a bad Buddhist. It's the inevitable result of karma. If you believe you can't be Buddhist and kill, then none of us would be Buddhists. We kill animals every time we eat meat, everytime we step on an insect, or kill one intentionally/unintentionally.

From the perspective of Buddhism killing is killing. It's equally bad whether you kill an insect, an animal or a human being.
The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.
-Henry David Thoreau

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:09 pm

Paul wrote:
boda wrote:
Paul wrote:Of course killing is not 'OK', but it is sometimes the necessary action, as with the example of the Buddha killing the robber in order to minimise loss of life and suffering.
I entered the discussion after reading...
Jesse wrote:it's OK in 'Buddhism' to wage war or kill -- the answer is when our level of ignorance allows us to do so.
Incidentally, killing someone before they've committed a crime is considered murder.
Yes. And war is not considered mass murder because of not much more than some conceptual hand-waving.

In the usual telling of the story of the Buddha it's mentioned that he's telepathic so knows exactly what the would be mass-killer was thinking.
That's even worse. Maybe it doesn't happen to you, but it's not unusual for people to occasionally have crazy thoughts come to mind that they would never actually act on. While waiting in line at the bank someone might daydream about robbing it, for example. They might even get serious about it, but when the time comes to actually do it they may change their minds. There's a reason people are not convicted before they commit a crime.
But it is clear that in the Mahayana it can be an acceptable (or least worst) course of action under certain circumstances - so it is 'OK' in that sense.
First it's ok, then it's not ok, and now it's ok again.

Killing would be ok for a sociopath, I believe, but not for anyone else. It could be something we do in order to survive, or to protect someone else, but that doesn't make it ok.

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:28 pm

Jesse wrote:Your still making the mistake of assuming Buddhism orders us to behave in some way or another...
I'm not sure what you mean by this. How could Buddhism "order" anyone to behave in a specific way?

History has shown how some Buddhists have supported war efforts, like Daiun Sogaku Harada Rōshi in Japanese Soto Zen. He's quoted with saying such things as:
[If ordered to] march: tramp, tramp, or shoot: bang, bang. This is the manifestation of the highest Wisdom [of Enlightenment]. The unity of Zen and war of which I speak extends to the farthest reaches of the holy war [now under way].
You may be familiar with the atrocities committed by the Japanese in WW2.

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:58 pm

boda wrote:
But it is clear that in the Mahayana it can be an acceptable (or least worst) course of action under certain circumstances - so it is 'OK' in that sense.
First it's ok, then it's not ok, and now it's ok again.
It's very straightforward. In order to maintain the bodhisattva vow a bodhisattva must carry out any of the seven negative actions of mind and speech (one of which is killing) when circumstances require it to minimise or alleviate suffering. This is applicable in any circumstance, including war. That's been my point all along.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

Jesse
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Jesse » Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:39 pm

boda wrote:
Jesse wrote:Your still making the mistake of assuming Buddhism orders us to behave in some way or another...
I'm not sure what you mean by this. How could Buddhism "order" anyone to behave in a specific way?

History has shown how some Buddhists have supported war efforts, like Daiun Sogaku Harada Rōshi in Japanese Soto Zen. He's quoted with saying such things as:
[If ordered to] march: tramp, tramp, or shoot: bang, bang. This is the manifestation of the highest Wisdom [of Enlightenment]. The unity of Zen and war of which I speak extends to the farthest reaches of the holy war [now under way].
You may be familiar with the atrocities committed by the Japanese in WW2.
You are aware of what I mean. Buddhist precepts aren't rules. Are you even arguing a point anymore, or just arguing for it's own sake? Obviously that quote was made by quite a deluded person.

There is a difference between participating in a war to save yourself or save others lives, and participating because you think war is a 'manifestation of high wisdom'.

Is there a difference between fighting to prevent a madman from harming people, and fighting to take land from someone else just to make yourself/country more wealthy or to justify some philosophical/religious belief. I hope everyone can see the difference.

When Bodhisattva vows require us to break precepts, it's got to be a very extreme situation and I wouldn't recommend most people do it. Of course a good example of this is killing someone who is immanently going to kill other people. (A suicide bomber, madman with a gun, etc)
The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.
-Henry David Thoreau

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:42 pm

Paul wrote:
boda wrote:
But it is clear that in the Mahayana it can be an acceptable (or least worst) course of action under certain circumstances - so it is 'OK' in that sense.
First it's ok, then it's not ok, and now it's ok again.
It's very straightforward. In order to maintain the bodhisattva vow a bodhisattva must carry out any of the seven negative actions of mind and speech (one of which is killing) when circumstances require it to minimise or alleviate suffering. This is applicable in any circumstance, including war. That's been my point all along.
As I tried to communicate before, in war soldiers don't get to choose their targets. They are expected to follow orders. Normally soldiers kill other soldiers, and not just enemy soldiers attacking innocent civilians. Upholding the vow would require not participating in war. That is indeed very straightforward.

Upholding the vow would require not killing a potential killer. Potential killers could be subdued and rehabilitated. This would be particularly practical if you had superpowers like telepathy.

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:00 pm

Jesse wrote:You are aware of what I mean. Buddhist precepts aren't rules.
They are often referred to as training rules. Why is that a problem for you?

So imagine someone joins a Buddhist monastery and takes the vows or training rules. They subsequently break every rule daily. Is that "ok"? Are they going to be treated like nothing is wrong? What does it mean if they are treated like nothing is wrong?
Obviously that quote was made by quite a deluded person.
It was made by a Soto Zen Rōshi.
When Bodhisattva vows require us to break precepts, it's got to be a very extreme situation and I wouldn't recommend most people do it. Of course a good example of this is killing someone who is immanently going to kill other people. (A suicide bomber, madman with a gun, etc)
When armies are fighting in war each side is "immanently going to kill other people." So how exactly does the vow work in war?

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:29 pm

boda wrote:As I tried to communicate before, in war soldiers don't get to choose their targets. They are expected to follow orders. Normally soldiers kill other soldiers, and not just enemy soldiers attacking innocent civilians. Upholding the vow would require not participating in war. That is indeed very straightforward.
Given the eagerness that it has been known for soldiers to kill others it is clear that there are indeed plenty of situations where people gain the terrible karma of mass killings, both of civilians and soldiers. There are also those who order them to do so. Each one earns terrible karma.
Upholding the vow would require not killing a potential killer. Potential killers could be subdued and rehabilitated. This would be particularly practical if you had superpowers like telepathy.
The Buddha killed a potential killer before he could actually do anything, an action aided by his telepathy. The whole point of the story is that it had to be before he could acquire terribly negative karma. I can only conclude you think he did the wrong thing.

You seem to be a complete pacifist, so we'll never agree.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Paul » Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:34 pm

boda wrote:
When Bodhisattva vows require us to break precepts, it's got to be a very extreme situation and I wouldn't recommend most people do it. Of course a good example of this is killing someone who is immanently going to kill other people. (A suicide bomber, madman with a gun, etc)
When armies are fighting in war each side is "immanently going to kill other people." So how exactly does the vow work in war?
A bullet in Hitler's skull at any time after 1939 would have saved an immense amount of lives and prevented many, many millions accumulating an incredible amount of negative karma.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:40 pm

Paul wrote:
boda wrote:
When Bodhisattva vows require us to break precepts, it's got to be a very extreme situation and I wouldn't recommend most people do it. Of course a good example of this is killing someone who is immanently going to kill other people. (A suicide bomber, madman with a gun, etc)
When armies are fighting in war each side is "immanently going to kill other people." So how exactly does the vow work in war?
A bullet in Hitler's skull at any time after 1939 would have saved an immense amount of lives and prevented many, many millions accumulating an incredible amount of negative karma.
Don't really know that. For all we know it could have turned out worse if he were assassinated. Someone could have taken his position and made the war last longer than it did, producing much more suffering.

Jesse
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by Jesse » Thu Dec 24, 2015 12:21 am

boda wrote:
Jesse wrote:You are aware of what I mean. Buddhist precepts aren't rules.
They are often referred to as training rules. Why is that a problem for you?

So imagine someone joins a Buddhist monastery and takes the vows or training rules. They subsequently break every rule daily. Is that "ok"? Are they going to be treated like nothing is wrong? What does it mean if they are treated like nothing is wrong?
Obviously that quote was made by quite a deluded person.
It was made by a Soto Zen Rōshi.
When Bodhisattva vows require us to break precepts, it's got to be a very extreme situation and I wouldn't recommend most people do it. Of course a good example of this is killing someone who is immanently going to kill other people. (A suicide bomber, madman with a gun, etc)
When armies are fighting in war each side is "immanently going to kill other people." So how exactly does the vow work in war?
I've explained of this clearly before, read my previous responses. You consistently just ignore the parts you don't want to hear.
It was made by a Soto Zen Rōshi.
Doesn't mean a thing.

You're free to believe what you want, but im not going to debate something if the other party can't concede even a simple point. War sucks, it's bad karma all around, but Buddhist's are not refrained from defending themselves in war, nor from protecting their homeland from invasion from an invading force. It's up to each individual to determine if they can or will participate. Buddhism in general has no real view on it. Yes you'll claim 'no killing', and I will point out how we are all already killers (and you'll ignore my points and continue)

Done.
The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.
-Henry David Thoreau

umesh
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: Singapore

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by umesh » Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:47 am

Relax, why allow the seed of anger to blossom while discussing Dharma. All things happen for a reason and thats where acceptances come in. All we can do is just plant the seed, and let nature take it course. The time will come
Seriously i don't know what i am doing and got no idea where i am heading.

boda
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: War in Buddhism

Post by boda » Thu Dec 24, 2015 5:52 am

Jesse wrote:You consistently just ignore the parts you don't want to hear.
Not true, and I've responded to your war scenarios where soldiers only kill to protect civilians. That's not how in normally works.
It was made by a Soto Zen Rōshi.
Doesn't mean a thing.
It means exactly that there are other Buddhists beside yourself who believe killing can be "ok."
You're free to believe what you want, but im not going to debate something if the other party can't concede even a simple point.
I don't believe that killing is ok. There are training rules in Buddhism.
Buddhism in general has no real view on it. Yes you'll claim 'no killing', and I will point out how we are all already killers (and you'll ignore my points and continue)
You mean points like...
Jesse wrote:From the perspective of Buddhism killing is killing. It's equally bad whether you kill an insect, an animal or a human being.
I ignored it because it's ridiculous. Surely you can see that.

Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: thepea and 30 guests