That his name was 'Colonel Karuna' meaning 'compassion' is ironic considering his actions but it cannot be denied he was probably the biggest single factor in ending the bloodshed. So perhaps compassion or karuna of some form did win out in the end.
Interesting. Never thought of this before.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 12:28 am
Can a Buddhist become a soldier?
I don't remember what sutta it was, but I do remember reading one where the Buddha said something along the lines that the definition of a Buddhist was someone who had taken refuge in the Triple Gem, and a practicing Buddhist was one who practiced the Five Precepts. (This may not be exactly what he said, but what I recall was along those lines.)
Curiously, though soldier is not specifically mentioned in Right/Wrong Livelihood, a prohibition against making weapons is. So I have always taken this to mean that one should not work for the DOD, so I have always declined jobs requiring a Security Clearance, even though I'm pretty sure I could easily get one.
May all beings, in or out of the womb, be well, happy and peaceful.
tharpa wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 11:55 pm
Curiously, though soldier is not specifically mentioned in Right/Wrong Livelihood, a prohibition against making weapons is. So I have always taken this to mean that one should not work for the DOD, so I have always declined jobs requiring a Security Clearance, even though I'm pretty sure I could easily get one.
You don't have to go that far. There're lots of diverse areas within DoD. As long as one involves in programs that work on defensive capabilities (reconnaissance, signal intelligence, electronic/radar defense, composite armour, etc...) instead of offensive, that should be fine.
SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 12:28 am
Can a Buddhist become a soldier?
Of course, just think of Myanmar people. Myanmar society is a buddhist society. Myanmar military recruits a lot of soldiers who even kill their own people.
Perhaps the question should be "is it appropriate and not violating the Noble Eightfold Path when a Buddhist become a soldier.
That depends on what your religious leader is said to have said about "Noble Eightfold Path" in the context of lay folks and what he is said to have said in the context of following or resisting the directives of the head of a nation/state in case of a non-democratic regime or in the context of following or resisting the regulations in case of democratic nations/states.
tharpa wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 11:55 pm
I don't remember what sutta it was, but I do remember reading one where the Buddha said something along the lines that the definition of a Buddhist was someone who had taken refuge in the Triple Gem, and a practicing Buddhist was one who practiced the Five Precepts. (This may not be exactly what he said, but what I recall was along those lines.)
I don't think the Buddha specifically states that this is the definition but it's kind of implied and has become a common method for defining a Buddhist as one who takes refuge in the triple gem. One can be a Buddhist, but still violate precepts; it would make one a bad Buddhist, but still a Buddhist (see: No true Scotsman).
In the Suttas, there is General Siha (who was a general in the military) but still attained stream-entry.
And then there is Samyutta Nikaya 42.3 which states that soldiers go to lower realms.
The seeming contradiction could be that perhaps General Siha did not personally kill anyone on the battlefield.
tharpa wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 11:55 pm
I don't remember what sutta it was, but I do remember reading one where the Buddha said something along the lines that the definition of a Buddhist was someone who had taken refuge in the Triple Gem, and a practicing Buddhist was one who practiced the Five Precepts. (This may not be exactly what he said, but what I recall was along those lines.)
I don't think the Buddha specifically states that this is the definition but it's kind of implied and has become a common method for defining a Buddhist as one who takes refuge in the triple gem. One can be a Buddhist, but still violate precepts; it would make one a bad Buddhist, but still a Buddhist (see: No true Scotsman).
“When, Mahānāma, one has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Saṅgha, in that way one is a lay follower.”
“In what way, Bhante, is a lay follower virtuous?”
“When, Mahānāma, a lay follower abstains from the destruction of life, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, from false speech, and from liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness, in that way a lay follower is virtuous.”
Of course, just think of Myanmar people. Myanmar society is a buddhist society. Myanmar military recruits a lot of soldiers who even kill their own people.
Perhaps the question should be "is it appropriate and not violating the Noble Eightfold Path when a Buddhist become a soldier.
That depends on what your religious leader is said to have said about "Noble Eightfold Path" in the context of lay folks and what he is said to have said in the context of following or resisting the directives of the head of a nation/state in case of a non-democratic regime or in the context of following or resisting the regulations in case of democratic nations/states.
Having said that I won't become a buddhist because buddhist doctrine is far from taking a position in favour of democratic values.
SteRo wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:47 am
Having said that I won't become a buddhist because buddhist doctrine is far from taking a position in favour of democratic values.
Which is a kind of ridiculous verbal expression because there aren't any values in the first place. So? After all I seem to believe in the superiority of the culture that has formed my self. Thus a buddhist believer cannot become a soldier but a non-believer can become a soldier of any kind of regime.
