Mahayana and War

[Javierfv1212]

nevertheless your actions are supporting the war.

So is paying your taxes

Only if you are a Republican.

Kevin...

If you pay taxes in any state currently conducting military actions, you are indirectly supporting war with those taxes.

Does that mean that bodhisattvas are required to stop paying taxes? I don't think so, but that was my point, you are already in a "side", pragmatically speaking, you can do your best to help others from within that structure however.

[Virgo]

If you pay taxes in any state currently conducting military actions, you are indirectly supporting war with those taxes.

No your not. Not unless you want to.

Money is essentially a form of energy. It is fluid. That is why it is represented by the water element (also earth element).

When the government takes taxes from you, they are just taking a kind of energy. They are not saying "exactly this percentage of Javier's taxes are going to go to war", and "exactly this percentage are going to this welfare program, or that welfare program". They are just taking your taxes and then pooling them together with everyone else's taxes and putting them in their coffers. Then they are saying, "we are allotting this much to defense", and "we are allotting this much to this welfare program", "we are allotting this much to this other welfare program", etc. Your dollars are simply in the mass pool. Now if you voted for a Republican, then you can claim that some of your money is the money that went to war. If you voted as a Democrat you can claim that your money was used to support social welfare. Since money is fluid, you are not giving to any specific cause when you pay your taxes. Who you vote for has much to do with what you can claim your tax money is being spent on. I did not vote for Trump, so my portion of the tax money the gov't spends does not go to war, and does not go to building border walls, etc. This is something people need to understand, imo.

For those who are not Americans, the principle is the same. Your money basically goes to the programs you wish it does, as long as the government spends on those programs. It is based on your intention.

Kevin...

[Malcolm]

Ultimately you are correct of course, but this does not invalidate what I said, these options are open for Buddhists in wartime to help beings on a relative level.

You still did not understand. Picking sides is what causes one to go to lower realms.

What are you basing this on, if I may ask?

Also, in many cases, you don't "pick sides", a war comes to your part of the world and you just have to respond, in many cases, its impossible for someone not to be already identified with a certain ethnic or national group by merely being born in it, speaking a language, etc. If one can do good by being a medic, providing relief for others etc in a military organization, then there is nothing wrong with this.

If one keeps a mind of bodhicitta towards all beings, it doesn't matter what "side" one happens to be on really.

If you support one side in a war, you accrue all the negative karma of all people who support the killing in that war. It does not matter if you personally never fire a shot.

If you are there merely to treat the wounded of either side, that’s different.

[Malcolm]

So is paying your taxes

Only if you are a Republican.

Kevin...

If you pay taxes in any state currently conducting military actions, you are indirectly supporting war with those taxes.

No. One is obligated to follow the laws of the country in which one lives. One has to pay taxes, but one may dissent from the purpose for which they are being used.

[Virgo]

No. One is obligated to follow the laws of the country in which one lives. One has to pay taxes, but one may dissent from the purpose for which they are being used.

Right, if the government uses tax money for a purpose that you do not support, then if some of that money was yours, they are using that money against your will. Therefore, the karma is not made.

Kevin...

[Javierfv1212]

If you support one side in a war, you accrue all the negative karma of all people who support the killing in that war. It does not matter if you personally never fire a shot.

If you are there merely to treat the wounded of either side, that’s different.

That's seems awfully excessive, source?

Also, what do you mean by 'support'? If by support you mean intentionally approve of the killing being done by one side, then perhaps that would accrue bad karma, but if you mean just serving in the military for a non combat role like the ones I mention above such as medic with the sole intention of helping to relieve suffering, I don't see how that would lead to bad karma.

No. One is obligated to follow the laws of the country in which one lives. One has to pay taxes, but one may dissent from the purpose for which they are being used.

Your taxes are still being used for war, even if you don't want them to be. You aren't intentionally supporting the war, but you are supporting it materially whether you like it or not, that was my point.

[Malcolm]

That's seems awfully excessive, source?

Abhidharmakośabhaṣya, chapter 4, where the question of a soldier's karma is discussed.

Also, what do you mean by 'support'? If by support you mean intentionally approve of the killing being done by one side, then perhaps that would accrue bad karma, but if you mean just serving in the military for a non combat role like the ones I mention above such as medic with the sole intention of helping to relieve suffering, I don't see how that would lead to bad karma.

Even you are a civilian, for example, an accountant with no combat role at all, if you support a war, you also gain the same negative karma.

No. One is obligated to follow the laws of the country in which one lives. One has to pay taxes, but one may dissent from the purpose for which they are being used.

Your taxes are still being used for war, even if you don't want them to be. You aren't intentionally supporting the war, but you are supporting it materially whether you like it or not, that was my point.

Karma is volition, and what proceeds from volition. That's it.

[Virgo]

Also, what do you mean by 'support'? If by support you mean intentionally approve of the killing being done by one side, then perhaps that would accrue bad karma, but if you mean just serving in the military for a non combat role like the ones I mention above such as medic with the sole intention of helping to relieve suffering, I don't see how that would lead to bad karma.

If you do it for both sides, then you have not chosen a side and are not using your actions of body, speech, and mind, for one group to dominate over another, killing many members of the other group until they surrender (or are obliterated). IF you only do it for one side, while the actions you do in and of themselves may not be bad, they are being done is support of one side who have an intense mission of killing the other ones.

Your taxes are still being used for war, even if you don't want them to be. You aren't intentionally supporting the war, but you are supporting it materially whether you like it or not, that was my point.

For karma to be created there has to be intention.

By the way, why necro an argumentation thread that is 3 months old? Just wondering.

Kevin...

[Javierfv1212]

Karma is volition, and what proceeds from volition. That's it.

Exactly, and if your volition is to heal others in a battlefield, for example, it doesn't matter that you're technically part of an armed forces.

[Virgo]

Karma is volition, and what proceeds from volition. That's it.

Exactly, and if your volition is to heal others in a battlefield, for example, it doesn't matter that you're technically part of an armed forces.

Yes it does, unless you are doing it for both sides.

Kevin

[Malcolm]

Karma is volition, and what proceeds from volition. That's it.

Exactly, and if your volition is to heal others in a battlefield, for example, it doesn't matter that you're technically part of an armed forces.

Unless you support the side you are on, that's the point of not taking sides. That is why I said you had not understood my post.

[Javierfv1212]

Abhidharmakośabhaṣya, chapter 4, where the question of a soldier's karma is discussed.

When many persons are united with the intention to kill, either in
war, or in the hunt, or in banditry, who is guilty of murder, if only one of
them kills?
72c-d As soldiers, etc., concur in the realization of the same
effect, all are as guilty as the one who kills.
Having a common goal, all are guilty exaaly as he who among them
kills, for all mutually incite one another, not through speech, but by the
very f aa that they are united together in order to kill
But is the person who has been constrained through force to join the
army also guilty?
Evidently so, unless he has formed the resolution, "Even in order to
save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

It says united with the intent to kill but if one is not united in their intent to kill but merely wishes to heal then you are not affected by their karma. Moreover, the last part proves my point that one can be in an army and not share their karma as long as one has the resolution "Even in order to save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

[Javierfv1212]

Karma is volition, and what proceeds from volition. That's it.

Exactly, and if your volition is to heal others in a battlefield, for example, it doesn't matter that you're technically part of an armed forces.

Unless you support the side you are on, that's the point of not taking sides. That is why I said you had not understood my post.

Sure, I can agree with this, one need not "take sides" but still be part of an armed forces (due to conscription for example).

[Norwegian]

Exactly, and if your volition is to heal others in a battlefield, for example, it doesn't matter that you're technically part of an armed forces.

Unless you support the side you are on, that's the point of not taking sides. That is why I said you had not understood my post.

Sure, I can agree with this, one need not "take sides" but still be part of an armed forces (due to conscription for example).

If you're conscripted and part of an armed forces, you have to follow orders. That is inevitable.

[Malcolm]

Abhidharmakośabhaṣya, chapter 4, where the question of a soldier's karma is discussed.

When many persons are united with the intention to kill, either in
war, or in the hunt, or in banditry, who is guilty of murder, if only one of
them kills?
72c-d As soldiers, etc., concur in the realization of the same
effect, all are as guilty as the one who kills.
Having a common goal, all are guilty exaaly as he who among them
kills, for all mutually incite one another, not through speech, but by the
very f aa that they are united together in order to kill
But is the person who has been constrained through force to join the
army also guilty?
Evidently so, unless he has formed the resolution, "Even in order to
save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

It says united with the intent to kill but if one is not united in their intent to kill but merely wishes to heal then you are not affected by their karma. Moreover, the last part proves my point that one can be in an army and not share their karma as long as one has the resolution "Even in order to save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

Did you have a point to prove? In fact you agree with what I said, but instead of asking for a clarification, you took an antagonistic position. Taking sides in a war means of approving of the killing that occurs, either out of malice, greed, or ignorance.

[Virgo]

Nevermind.

Kevin...

[Javierfv1212]

Abhidharmakośabhaṣya, chapter 4, where the question of a soldier's karma is discussed.

When many persons are united with the intention to kill, either in
war, or in the hunt, or in banditry, who is guilty of murder, if only one of
them kills?
72c-d As soldiers, etc., concur in the realization of the same
effect, all are as guilty as the one who kills.
Having a common goal, all are guilty exaaly as he who among them
kills, for all mutually incite one another, not through speech, but by the
very f aa that they are united together in order to kill
But is the person who has been constrained through force to join the
army also guilty?
Evidently so, unless he has formed the resolution, "Even in order to
save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

It says united with the intent to kill but if one is not united in their intent to kill but merely wishes to heal then you are not affected by their karma. Moreover, the last part proves my point that one can be in an army and not share their karma as long as one has the resolution "Even in order to save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

Did you have a point to prove?

That you can be part of an army and keep your precepts / not be affected by their karma.

[Malcolm]

It says united with the intent to kill but if one is not united in their intent to kill but merely wishes to heal then you are not affected by their karma. Moreover, the last part proves my point that one can be in an army and not share their karma as long as one has the resolution "Even in order to save my life, I shall not kill a living being."

Did you have a point to prove?

That you can be part of an army and keep your precepts / not be affected by their karma.

Being a soldier, from the beginning, is a wrong livelihood. Beyond that, there are not many people who join an army without intending to be engaged in some form of activity that involves killing sentient beings. Even conscripts are often patriotic, and are willing to shoot where they are told to aim. Your point is an exception that proves the rule, in other words. Further, you cannot take sides in a war and maintain your precepts, it is impossible. Thus, your point is pointless.

[MiphamFan]

What if you think a historical war was a necessary evil to prevent a greater one, such as supporting the WW2 allies?

[Malcolm]

What if you think a historical war was a necessary evil to prevent a greater one, such as supporting the WW2 allies?

I refer you to the Buddha on this point.

"When a warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, his mind is already seized, debased, & misdirected by the thought: 'May these beings be struck down or slaughtered or annihilated or destroyed. May they not exist': If others then strike him down & slay him while he is thus striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the hell called the realm of those slain in battle. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When a warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb."

— SN 42.3