Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Ceisiwr »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:18 pm
It's not wise to starve to death when the work is not done. It's simply foolish gambling.
Part of wisdom is in knowing what is wholesome and unwholesome, and choosing the wholesome.
As I pointed out, your speciality.
I'm really not going to argue about if I'm arguing for the sake of arguing any further. I think it is clear to all that the OP asked for opinions, and that I have given mine and am now responding to criticisms.
Your not a Buddha and most likely not a stream winner.
I never claimed to be either.
So you answer with more banal wrote recitation. Perhaps my expectations are too high for someone who spenfs much if the time reading and posting on line not living the dhamma in practice.
I don't find the Dhamma banal, and once again you are making claims that you can't possibly know.
A novel interpretation. However I see nowhere where mindfulness is defined as such.
Part of mindfulness is bearing in mind (sati) the teachings (dhamma) regarding what is wholesome and unwholesome.
In said scenario if you died and fell to the lower world there is no hope of stream entry.
Killing a rat to survive on an island and living the dhamma virtuously for years after would provide a very conducive chance at least.
There would be at a later time, since good virtue is what leads to a human birth. The path to awakening can possibly take many lives.
You say 'of course not' but that's exactly how you take them.
No, since I do not recognise any authority which is commanding me to obey them.
Then in that situation you would simply be a worthless fool who would let your family die and then you would die.
Well you are of course entitled to your opinion, and many in the world would agree with you. The Dhamma does go against the grain of the world, and so is open to much criticism from a worldly perspective.
There is a time for the warrior path also in self defence or defence of loved ones.
I think that is more a Hindu idea, particularly the Bhagavad Gita if I recall, than a Buddhadhamma one.
What you see, and what is is a matter of debate. The Buddha did not tell Kings they must renounce war when teaching them the dhamma.
No he did not, but neither did he approve of killing. Quite the opposite in fact.
Lay people have to use discernment in a middle ground striving to adhere to the precepts but using discernment where necessity means they may have to be broken.
It is hard to remain virtuous as a layperson, yes. Most laypeople have many attachments which cloud their judgement.
I suggest you become a monk if you want to live the ascetiic life to its full extent.
Whilst that is something I desire, for now I'm living as a layperson.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by SDC »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:31 pm
SDC wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 4:33 pm
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 8:58 am Lay followers in normal circumstances can live a 'less holy holy life' by following precepts and ethical action while engaging with the world more including sensual pleasures to an extent.
That isn't the holy life at all. That is virtuous living that may have no tenable alignment with right view.
You seem to think the holy life means only 'the life of those who have become holy' (ie stream winners). This may be one definition but it is contradictory as one has to try to establish the holy life first. Many have right view without being stream winners.
I consider the monastic community and many follower as living the holy life to varying degrees whether or not they are ariya.
If you have a view that is right and you aren’t a stream enterer than you don’t know for sure the extent to which it is right view. And if you don’t press it far enough you don’t get anything here and now. As holy as your work may have been, you didn’t gain freedom. As far as I’m concerned, an eight precept follower could be said to be living the holy life without an attainment, but not anyone still immersed is sensuality, i.e. no moderation in eating, no celibacy.
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:31 pm
SDC wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 4:33 pm
No different from what was there before war: choice. A person always has a choice...

To be clear: I am not saying to sit there and let your loved ones be killed in front of you.
So what are you saying then in tangible terms since it's not clear at all.
I’m saying that the attitude of being prepared to tend to worldly circumstances with violence is the fortification of wrong view. Even being prepared to put the world first is enough to block development. Just that preparation in itself is enough to keep things in the wrong order. A willingness to spoil the aggregate of virtue and turn away from Dhamma in order to tend to circumstances undermines clear access to right view. As much as we need food and shelter to survive (in order to practice to sotapatti), we cannot prioritize it over the behavior and work required to gain it. If the world turns on you and takes away all your options for survival, it is the work you did when things were safe and comfortable that matters, and that is what we are talking about here: what are we willing to do. What matters is how prepared you are not to move mentally, not panic and hold yourself together within virtue, sense restraint and mindfulness; within the Dhamma that we are dedicating ourselves to understanding. As counterintuitive as it sounds, if you reserve and protect and feed the type of thinking that prioritizes the world over your salvation, the wrong view will never be uprooted. Like I said in a previous post: even if you are a saint, you didn’t guarantee yourself a thing if you didn’t push the work far enough.

In short, being prepared to defend your country means you never took the freedom from suffering described by the Buddha seriously. World order and safety is truly what you valued the entire time. That is the only thing that makes you feel safe - craving sets the tone as always did. Though perhaps that is why so many people flee as refugees during war - they value not being violent or maybe just not dying. Nevertheless, many make the choice to run from violence even when it comes to their door. The vast majority don’t fight and I’m quite sure most aren’t practicing Dhamma.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 4:52 am Greetings,
SarathW wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 4:30 am This was meant for monks.
Monks or not, it's directed at the mindstate that should be held... not the acts of self-defense that should or should not be undertaken.

Metta,
Paul. :)
:goodpost:


SDC wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:33 pm In short, being prepared to defend your country means you never took the freedom from suffering described by the Buddha seriously. World order and safety is truly what you valued the entire time. That is the only thing that makes you feel safe - craving sets the tone as always did.
I find this to be a ridiculous view point. However we do hear of such extremism sometimes with the ahimsa or non-violence doctrine - Gandhi saying grotesque things like that 'the Jews should willingly and joyfully go to the gas chambers'.

It's all very silly idealism and mixing up the ascetic ideal and taking it well beyond it's range in an inappropriate way.

If we take war to be an extension of individual combat then clearly it is correct to protect oneself and loved ones from harm. This is not putting the world above the dhamma, and to say so is a serious misunderstanding. It's using judgement to prevent suffering which will occur if no action is taken.

So one defends oneself causing minimal necessary suffering.

In a war situation when faced with the wiping out of entire communities and those who support dhamma, there has to be a laity willing to fight to defend those ideals.
The Buddha did not tell Kings to relinquish their armies when he taught them the Dhamma.

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 9:39 pm
Monks are permitted to give a blow to another, desiring to escape, but intentional killing would still be an offence of defeat.
:namaste:

Indeed, the dhamma does not override basic common sense and self preservation. Even a monk can do some minor harm to prevent greater harm.
For the laity it will be different and adjusted accordingly to circumstances but following the same principle.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by SDC »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 11:16 pm
SDC wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:33 pm In short, being prepared to defend your country means you never took the freedom from suffering described by the Buddha seriously. World order and safety is truly what you valued the entire time. That is the only thing that makes you feel safe - craving sets the tone as always did.
I find this to be a ridiculous view point. However we do hear of such extremism sometimes with the ahimsa or non-violence doctrine - Gandhi saying grotesque things like that 'the Jews should willingly and joyfully go to the gas chambers'.

It's all very silly idealism and mixing up the ascetic ideal and taking it well beyond it's range in an inappropriate way.

If we take war to be an extension of individual combat then clearly it is correct to protect oneself and loved ones from harm. This is not putting the world above the dhamma, and to say so is a serious misunderstanding. It's using judgement to prevent suffering which will occur if no action is taken.

So one defends oneself causing minimal necessary suffering.

In a war situation when faced with the wiping out of entire communities and those who support dhamma, there has to be a laity willing to fight to defend those ideals.
The Buddha did not tell Kings to relinquish their armies when he taught them the Dhamma.
I don’t think you’re reading my posts fully or even attempting to understand what I’m saying. You presenting arguments I’ve already addressed multiple times - especially about advice to Kings. I’m not advocating non-action in the face of violence; I was clear on that. I’m talking about mindsets in regards to violence when there is no threat. Sorry for goading you into engaging earlier.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am
I don’t think you’re reading my posts fully or even attempting to understand what I’m saying. You presenting arguments I’ve already addressed multiple times - especially about advice to Kings. I’m not advocating non-action in the face of violence; I was clear on that. I’m talking about mindsets in regards to violence when there is no threat.
The thing is there has to be some level of preparedness when there is no threat, so as to be effective when there is.
Regarding the mindset, you would appear to be advocating then for a dispassionate and equanimous attitude towards martial training as long as greed, hate and delusion do not arise.
This is essentially how I see it and how Zen martial traditions are practiced for example.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by cappuccino »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:10 am The thing is there has to be some level of preparedness when there is no threat, so as to be effective when there is.
During the civil wars in feudal Japan, an invading army would quickly sweep into a town and take control. In one particular village, everyone fled just before the army arrived - everyone except the Zen master. Curious about this old fellow, the general went to the temple to see for himself what kind of man this master was. When he wasn't treated with the deference and submissiveness to which he was accustomed, the general burst into anger.

"You fool," he shouted as he reached for his sword, "don't you realize you are standing before a man who could run you through without blinking an eye!"

But despite the threat, the master seemed unmoved. "And do you realize," the master replied calmly, "that you are standing before a man who can be run through without blinking an eye?"
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:20 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:10 am The thing is there has to be some level of preparedness when there is no threat, so as to be effective when there is.
During the civil wars in feudal Japan, an invading army would quickly sweep into a town and take control. In one particular village, everyone fled just before the army arrived - everyone except the Zen master. Curious about this old fellow, the general went to the temple to see for himself what kind of man this master was. When he wasn't treated with the deference and submissiveness to which he was accustomed, the general burst into anger.

"You fool," he shouted as he reached for his sword, "don't you realize you are standing before a man who could run you through without blinking an eye!"

But despite the threat, the master seemed unmoved. "And do you realize," the master replied calmly, "that you are standing before a man who can be run through without blinking an eye?"
b845ba43f037dea100ba744387e45f8b.jpg
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by SDC »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:10 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am
I don’t think you’re reading my posts fully or even attempting to understand what I’m saying. You presenting arguments I’ve already addressed multiple times - especially about advice to Kings. I’m not advocating non-action in the face of violence; I was clear on that. I’m talking about mindsets in regards to violence when there is no threat.
The thing is there has to be some level of preparedness when there is no threat, so as to be effective when there is.
Regarding the mindset, you would appear to be advocating then for a dispassionate and equanimous attitude towards martial training as long as greed, hate and delusion do not arise.
This is essentially how I see it and how Zen martial traditions are practiced for example.
Zen martial arts traditions and a plethora of other romantic notions about Buddhism have almost no relationship to the themes found in the Pali suttas and I have no interest in trying to incorporate that into my understanding. As far as preparedness goes, I completely disagree with what you are saying because “when there is” something like disease and death, there is no legitimate fight to be had. You need to be prepared to have the entire experience taken from you and know that there is nothing you can do about it. The attitude of not being moved is impossible to build if you are willing to toss virtue and the direction of Dhamma whenever life doesn’t suit you.

Essentially you’re saying to maintain the appropriate fear so you are willing to take the appropriate action. That isn’t at all the sense of urgency the Buddha described. He described things far more terrifying than death as dhammacorps pointed out a few pages ago. You don’t seem to be at all afraid of those things. If you were you’d have mentioned them.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

santa100 wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:41 am
mikenz66 wrote:Thank you for posting that. That's exactly the point. It's better to put effort into developing compassion and wisdom, rather speculating about simplistic black-and-white choices. Someone acting from a position of deep calm, compassion, and wisdom has at least some chance of defusing the situation peacefully before it escalates.
Actually in real life, quite often is the case that one would have no choice but to make real, un-speculative, and very difficult black-and-white choices. The on-going events in Europe is a case in point. And also from real life experience, there's a much greater chance for some bad guy to pick on a meek dude himself and/or his mother instead of a strong dude. It's the animal kingdom's law of nature (yes, we humans are part of that too regardless of how hard we try to deny it), the predator will pick out its prey, especially the weakest among the herd, for that would ensure the highest kill rate with the least amount of effort. Now just to be clear, there's no doubt one should put effort into developing compassion, wisdom, and all the good virtues, but some anticipated/preparation physically/mentally definitely can't hurt, so that instead of: "I really don't know what I would do if someone attacked my mother in front of me", it'd be better to: "I can implement such and such countermeasures if someone attacked my mother since I've prepared and trained for it". That way there's still some chance of success even AFTER all peaceful means have been exhausted. And your mom would hopefully still be alive and thank you for it.

“He who sweats more in training bleeds less in battle.” ― George S. Patton Jr.
:goodpost:
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 5:33 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:10 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am
I don’t think you’re reading my posts fully or even attempting to understand what I’m saying. You presenting arguments I’ve already addressed multiple times - especially about advice to Kings. I’m not advocating non-action in the face of violence; I was clear on that. I’m talking about mindsets in regards to violence when there is no threat.
The thing is there has to be some level of preparedness when there is no threat, so as to be effective when there is.
Regarding the mindset, you would appear to be advocating then for a dispassionate and equanimous attitude towards martial training as long as greed, hate and delusion do not arise.
This is essentially how I see it and how Zen martial traditions are practiced for example.
Zen martial arts traditions and a plethora of other romantic notions about Buddhism have almost no relationship to the themes found in the Pali suttas and I have no interest in trying to incorporate that into my understanding.
It's a living and past expression of the issue we are discussing. It may not have been perfect but there is a clear connection to the dhamma.
Its certainly less romantic and idealistic than the notions you are putting forward.
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am As far as preparedness goes, I completely disagree with what you are saying because “when there is” something like disease and death, there is no legitimate fight to be had. You need to be prepared to have the entire experience taken from you and know that there is nothing you can do about it.
The warrior traditions are some of those that are likewise concerned with the immediacy of death. The parallels are obvious. I believe it no coincidence the Buddha was of the warrior caste.
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am The attitude of not being moved is impossible to build if you are willing to toss virtue and the direction of Dhamma whenever life doesn’t suit you.
And who has said anything of the sort?
Defending yourself and close ones from being killed is not 'tossing virtue when life doesn't suit you'. If you see it that way something is seriously wrong.
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am Essentially you’re saying to maintain the appropriate fear so you are willing to take the appropriate action. That isn’t at all the sense of urgency the Buddha described.
It's the same principle.
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am He described things far more terrifying than death as dhammacorps pointed out a few pages ago. You don’t seem to be at all afraid of those things. If you were you’d have mentioned them.
They can both co-exist and they are not mutually exclusive as you seem to think.
While I agree that the typical military mindset is filled with hate and not aligned with dhamma, practicing martial traditions meditatively is certainly possible without triggering defilement.
You yourself have said you do not support non-action in the face of violence. You just haven't accounted for what this means in practical terms and haven't incorporated such practices.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by SDC »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:05 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am As far as preparedness goes, I completely disagree with what you are saying because “when there is” something like disease and death, there is no legitimate fight to be had. You need to be prepared to have the entire experience taken from you and know that there is nothing you can do about it.
The warrior traditions are some of those that are likewise concerned with the immediacy of death. The parallels are obvious. I believe it no coincidence the Buddha was of the warrior caste.

They aren’t obvious and anyone who has spend a good deal of time with the attitude described in the suttas would understand this. You admittedly and unapologetically put forth your own unique ideas on this forum all the time, but that doesn’t give you the right to undermine what is clearly written in the texts. If you have a conflicting idea than you should own it and not try to write it into the texts where it clearly has no basis.
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:05 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am The attitude of not being moved is impossible to build if you are willing to toss virtue and the direction of Dhamma whenever life doesn’t suit you.
And who has said anything of the sort?
Defending yourself and close ones from being killed is not 'tossing virtue when life doesn't suit you'. If you see it that way something is seriously wrong.
I said “willing”. I’m not talking about the act of defense. I’m talking about the attitude that remains worldly and ignorant as a result of remaining willing to put the world first. That is the inverse order the Buddha described. If you hold to a mindset that protects that order then none of your work will uproot wrong view.
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:05 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am Essentially you’re saying to maintain the appropriate fear so you are willing to take the appropriate action. That isn’t at all the sense of urgency the Buddha described.
It's the same principle.
No it isn’t. You’re showing your cards right now. That is not at all the sense of urgency the Buddha described.
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:05 am
SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 1:33 am He described things far more terrifying than death as dhammacorps pointed out a few pages ago. You don’t seem to be at all afraid of those things. If you were you’d have mentioned them.
They can both co-exist and they are not mutually exclusive as you seem to think.
While I agree that the typical military mindset is filled with hate and not aligned with dhamma, practicing martial traditions meditatively is certainly possible without triggering defilement.
You yourself have said you do not support non-action in the face of violence. You just haven't accounted for what this means in practical terms and haven't incorporated such practices.
I never said a military mindset is filled with hate. I said the attitude keeps things in the wrong order. Any attitude that has comfort contingent on the state of circumstance is the wrong order.

I’m not sure how much more practical I can make things sound. The reason what I’m saying doesn’t resonate with you is because we want different results from the practice of Dhamma. I don’t fantasize about people coming to take what is mine and what I would “have to do” to stop them. I do enough contemplation about old age, disease and death, which I know can come at any point, then to digress into some specific fantasy about things that would displease me along the way. The Buddha taught about developing dispassion and that means reminding yourself about the things in the world that are fundamentally insignificant - using that broader perspective to no longer be passionate about them. Though I’m sure I would interfere with people who came to harm my family, I’m not at all worried about it. At all. This world is our waiting room for imminent death and either we develop the right attitude towards the truth of this cyclical situation and develop out of it or we don’t.

I guess I’m just having trouble understanding what victory means for you. I have two young children. I’ve already put my body in harm’s way to protect them. I work a very dangerous job and have put myself in dangerous spots for my coworkers. I suppose that means I’m ready for dangerous situations, but I don’t foster and fortify that attitude. I know I can handle the stress and the discomfort so I’m willing to put myself there for others. That’s really it. In fact, I think a dispassionate attitude has a person more prepared to get hurt for others than having spent time festering in fears about the world around them. Still a worldly attitude, but unless you are living alone or in a less populated area, such situations are inevitable. I guess the difference between us is that the result of my interference doesn’t have to be a certain way for the action to be considered right or meaningful. You seem to be willing to do whatever when the chips are down and I’m not. I know I’m willing to get hurt, but I don’t know how willing I am to hurt someone else. I worried about failing in Dhamma far more than I am failing in life - I’m diligent in both but there is no contest when it comes to which matters more. I think that is the difference between us.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Polar Bear »


“Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions.” My energy shall be roused up and unflagging, my mindfulness established and lucid, my body tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind immersed in samādhi. Gladly now, let fists, stones, sticks, and swords strike this body! For this is how the instructions of the Buddhas are followed.’


https://suttacentral.net/mn28/en/sujato ... ript=latin


“Sir, this is not my only incredible and amazing quality; there is another. I had an only son called Nanda who I loved dearly. The rulers forcibly abducted him on some pretext and had him executed. But I can’t recall getting upset when my boy was under arrest or being arrested, imprisoned or being put in prison, killed or being killed.”

“It’s incredible, Nanda’s Mother, it’s amazing that you purify even the arising of a thought.”

https://suttacentral.net/an7.53/en/suja ... ript=latin
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by dharmacorps »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:53 am Thank you for posting that. That's exactly the point. It's better to put effort into developing compassion and wisdom, rather speculating about simplistic black-and-white choices. Someone acting from a position of deep calm, compassion, and wisdom has at least some chance of defusing the situation peacefully before it escalates.

:heart:
Mike
Of course. I also think the story gets to the heart of an essential truth-- nobody can really predict how they would act in any situation. Plenty of tough talkers end up freezing or running for cover when a sudden tragedy strikes and gentle soft spoken types end up acting on the occasion in surprising ways. Sumedho is pointing out the only thing we can do is train our minds to be prepared to act wisely in that moment and put ego-posturing and predicting ("If they did that to me I'd do this") aside.
sunnat
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

Post by sunnat »

consider: The middle way is to train to live in the present: ‘mindfully, this happens’ and with a heart full of friendliness, compassion, equanimity, wisdom do no deliberate harm and so help others to not harm. Disarm. The wholesome gift to those inclined to do harm is to train to awaken the awareness of anicca. The wholesome way to awaken the awareness of anicca is to train to be aware of now. (your particular now, right now, not later, not before, not his hers or mine, not your imagined, pondered, constructed, grasped at now: your real now, now, and now etc ad infinitum) The rest develops according to conditions.
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Buddhist position on defending one´s nation

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

SDC wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 4:24 pm You seem to be willing to do whatever when the chips are down and I’m not. I know I’m willing to get hurt, but I don’t know how willing I am to hurt someone else. I worried about failing in Dhamma far more than I am failing in life - I’m diligent in both but there is no contest when it comes to which matters more. I think that is the difference between us.
No, I'm not and breaking precepts in the hypothetical situation when necessity dictates it (survival or protecting others when there are no other options) does not mean one is 'willing to do whatever when the chips are down'. I've noticed this is a recurrent theme of black or white thinking used as a counter argument but it isn't true.
There are always shades and the practice of virtue itself is always like this and is a work in progress. Who hasn't killed a mosquito or ant then made note to try to avoid it in future? In this way there is a progression.

Yet some of the situations we describe there is no clear cut answer other than acting dispassionately and perhaps going against the precepts to ensure greater harm is not caused. I get that you seem to think entertaining the idea is itself unskillful but that's a by product of martial training in general. I don't see it as unskillful but rather a preparation for another potential test of virtue and how one may handle it. I don't spend my time worrying about being attacked and see it as only one additional yet unlikely avenue wherebye injury or death could occur.

We are also drifting from the theme of nations to individuals although there are parallels. What is instructive is how do specific Buddhist societies behave when faced with external threat.
This takes one from the idealistic and theoretical to the practical. The dhamma is a doctrine of personal liberation yet what happens when it becomes a state or community religion? The societal factors are part of the way the dhamma is sustained in the world.

https://www.lionsroar.com/the-rise-of-militant-monks/
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Post Reply