I don't think anyone wants other people to go fight and kill other people. Not with regards to wise people anyway. A wise person would never "want those things done" to begin with. The ideal would be no fighting at all. But since that is not possible, helping those people who are fighting is a compassionate thing to do.kmath wrote:After reviewing some of the old discussion, I want to ask a follow up:
Many people said they might be willing to participate in the war as a doctor or in a similar role that does not require actual fighting. So those people, do you expect others to do the fighting for you?
It just seems karmically selfish, so to speak. If you want those things done, why not just accept the consequences of doing them yourself?
Buddhism and War
Re: Buddhism and War
-
- Posts: 10184
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Buddhism and War
I broadly agree. In the event of a war should I expect others to risk their lives in order to defend me, while saying "Oh, I'm a Buddhist, I couldn't possibly take a life."kmath wrote: 1. Not killing animals but still eating the meat
3. And in this case allowing others to fight for one
It just seems karmically selfish, so to speak. If you want those things done, why not just accept the consequences of doing them yourself?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- lyndon taylor
- Posts: 1835
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
- Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
- Contact:
Re: Buddhism and War
If we didn't go to war, Saddam Hussein would be president of the USA, Oh, what, that wasn't going to happen, then why did we go to war.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
-
- Posts: 10184
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Buddhism and War
Sure, but what if the USA were invaded and you were called up to join the army and fight - would you refuse?lyndon taylor wrote:If we didn't go to war, Saddam Hussein would be president of the USA, Oh, what, that wasn't going to happen, then why did we go to war.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- lyndon taylor
- Posts: 1835
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
- Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
- Contact:
Re: Buddhism and War
yes....... The government has already told us we are being invaded, and we have to fight them with their tortillas and burritos!!!
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
Re: Buddhism and War
Spiny Norman wrote:I broadly agree. In the event of a war should I expect others to risk their lives in order to defend me, while saying "Oh, I'm a Buddhist, I couldn't possibly take a life."kmath wrote: 1. Not killing animals but still eating the meat
3. And in this case allowing others to fight for one
It just seems karmically selfish, so to speak. If you want those things done, why not just accept the consequences of doing them yourself?
Re: Buddhism and War
Hello all,
This may be of interest:
Buddhism and The Soldier
http://www.beyondthenet.net/thedway/soldier.htm
With metta,
Chris
This may be of interest:
Buddhism and The Soldier
http://www.beyondthenet.net/thedway/soldier.htm
With metta,
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
Re: Buddhism and War
cooran wrote:Hello all,
This may be of interest:
Buddhism and The Soldier
http://www.beyondthenet.net/thedway/soldier.htm
With metta,
Chris
" 'Seeha Senapathi Sutta' of Anguttara Nikaya-5 shows how, one of the army commanders named 'Seeha' went to Buddha to clarify certain doubts on the Dhamma and how the Buddha advised him without requesting him to resign from the Army or to disband the army. Having clarified his doubts on the Dhamma, Commander Seeha requested Buddha to accept him as a deciple of the Buddha. But Buddha instead of advising him to resign from the army advised thus
'Seeha, it is proper for a popular person of your status to always think and examine when attending to affairs and making decisions ' Seeha, the commander became a sotapanna (stream enterer = first fruit of the Path) having listened to the Dhamma, but remained in the army as a commander."
-- Buddhism and The Soldier
Is this right? He became a sotapanna while he was an army commander?
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17191
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Buddhism and War
Good question! According to SN 42.3 quoted on the first page of this thread, a soldier is headed for hell. But here apparently a soldier attains stream-entry? And we know that a stream-entrant cannot be headed for the lower realms. So these two suttas appear to be conflicting. Perhaps someone who knows more information or what the Commentaries say in regard to these 2 suttas, can shed some light on which is correct?kmath wrote: Is this right? He became a sotapanna while he was an army commander?
Re: Buddhism and War
From AN 5.34, Siha Sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html ), notice general Siha asked a general question about the fruits of "someone" who practices generosity (He didn't specifically ask about himself). And so the Buddha also gave an answer about the five fruits without mentioning the general's name. It's also common to see in the Nikayas that the devas in the heavenly worlds are not immuned from their past negative kamma. All the pleasures they enjoy in the heavenly world will not last forever. Then they'll fall back into the lower realms to repay their past kammic debts just like anyone else..
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17191
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Buddhism and War
But a sotapanna does not go back to the lower realms, ever.
Anguttara Nikaya book of eights (page 1135 in Bhikkhu Bodhi's recent translation)
http://awake.kiev.ua/dhamma/tipitaka/2S ... ggo-e.htmlThen The Blessed One gave a graduated sermon to the general Siha such as talking on giving gifts, virtues, heavenly bliss, the dangers of sensuality, the defiling nature of folly and vanity and the benefits of giving up. When The Blessed One knew that the mind of the general Siha was ready, tender, free from obstructions, exalted and pleased, he gave the special message of the enlightened ones such as unpleasantness, the arisisng of unpleasantness, the cessation of unpleasantness and the path leading to the cessation of unpleasantness.
Just as a pure cloth free of any impurity would take the dye evenly, in the same manner the pure stainless eye of the Teaching appeared to the general Siha seated there itself- “Whatever arisen thing has the nature of ceasing".
Anguttara Nikaya book of eights (page 1135 in Bhikkhu Bodhi's recent translation)
Re: Buddhism and War
We can't really draw too many conclusions here; we don't know whether general Sīha is actually going to war. Plenty of people in the military never see an actual battlefield. I'd guess as a Sōtapanna, if it actually came to a situation where he would either have to kill or encourage killing, he would not do it.
I think we need to be careful of generalizing too much from what little background information we get from the Suttas. For example, if you look at the Tālaputa Sutta, it's not saying that "everyone in the entertainment industry is going to hell", but something more nuanced. The Buddha tells us exactly what conditions could lead Tālaputa to a bad rebirth: a)being intoxicated and heedless himself and b)promoting intoxication and heedlessness. So, is it the case that many actors/actresses could be promoting unskillful behaviour? Probably. But are all actors/actresses being unskillful to the extent that it leads them to a bad rebirth? I don't think we can categorically say that.
It's the same issue with the military. Is the military generally a conducive place for cultivating skillful conduct? No. But we cannot make any categorical statements and ultimately it has to be considered on a case-by-case for every individual in the military.
I think we need to be careful of generalizing too much from what little background information we get from the Suttas. For example, if you look at the Tālaputa Sutta, it's not saying that "everyone in the entertainment industry is going to hell", but something more nuanced. The Buddha tells us exactly what conditions could lead Tālaputa to a bad rebirth: a)being intoxicated and heedless himself and b)promoting intoxication and heedlessness. So, is it the case that many actors/actresses could be promoting unskillful behaviour? Probably. But are all actors/actresses being unskillful to the extent that it leads them to a bad rebirth? I don't think we can categorically say that.
It's the same issue with the military. Is the military generally a conducive place for cultivating skillful conduct? No. But we cannot make any categorical statements and ultimately it has to be considered on a case-by-case for every individual in the military.
"Delighting in existence, O monks, are gods and men; they are attached to existence, they revel in existence. When the Dhamma for the cessation of existence is being preached to them, their minds do not leap towards it, do not get pleased with it, do not get settled in it, do not find confidence in it. That is how, monks, some lag behind."
- It. p 43
- It. p 43
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Buddhism and War
Being that there is nothing unwholesome in defense of self (and presumably others), Buddhists can participate in war as combatants, although I doubt that a non-buddhist army would want Buddhists in their ranks, being that the defensive action of a Buddhist is restricted by it's lack of intention to kill. A Buddhist army would be a very strange one, when compared to all other in our known history.
Last edited by greenjuice on Sat Nov 23, 2013 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Buddhism and War
greenjuice wrote: A Buddhist army would be a very strange one, when compared to all other in our known history.
But I'm not sure why you assume there is nothing "unwholesome" about self-defense. That's one of the issues being debated here.
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Buddhism and War
According to Tipitaka, there isn't.But I'm not sure why you assume there is nothing "unwholesome" about self-defense.
Vinaya rule Pacittiya 74 says that if one does violence to another out of anger, that is a pacittiya offense. Of course, if one does violence to another with the intention to kill him, and he dies, that is a breach of the first precept, regardless of the motivation.
Regarding the mentioned Pc 74 rule, Tipitaka says that if one does violence to another out of self-defense, it a non-offense, even if anger arises in one's mind.
Also, even if the attacker dies, that is not a breach of the first precept if there was no intention to kill him.