Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Which view do you agree with most (on this issue)?

Bhikkhu Bodhi
42
44%
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
53
56%
 
Total votes: 95

form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by form »

On one extreme from the sutta, the Buddha taught if one's limbs were being being sawed off, one should remains unaffected with no hatred.

I would think if the Buddha saw a predator attacking a prey like an eagle in the process of killing a pigeon, he probably may not has interfered.

On another account when someone asked him to stop a war and I think he tried, in the end the victims still were still killed by the aggressor. It was explained that the victims were fishermen in past lives previously and the aggressors were the fishes.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Buddha Vacana »

David N. Snyder wrote:The quote above includes "Always protect those who live justly" which could imply self-defense of oneself and / or others.

In the cakkavatti sihanada sutta (The Lion's Roar on the Turning of Wheel) of the long discourses of the Buddha (Digha Nikaya 26), Buddha justified the requirement of the king having an Army to provide guard, protection and security for different classes of people in the kingdom from internal and external threats. It refers to a Wheel Turning monarch named Dalhanemi, a righteous monarch of the law, conqueror of the four quarters who had established the security of his realm and was possessed of the seven treasures. Explaining the noble duties of a righteous king, Buddha also pointed out the advice given to the king in regard to his obligation to provide security for its people. He tells the king "my son, yourself depending on the Dhamma, revering it, doing homage to it, and venerating it having the Dhamma as your badge and banner, acknowledging the Dhamma as your master, you should establish guard, ward and protection according to Dhamma for your own household, your troops in the Army, your nobles and vassals, for Brahmins and householders, town and countryfolk, ascetics and Brahmins, for beasts and birds. Let no crime prevail in your kingdom."

In the Siha Sutta (Anguttara Nikaya 5.34) the Buddha gives instruction to a General named Siha. Later Siha becomes a sotappana (stream entrant). The Buddha never instructed General Siha to leave his profession in the Army.
There is nothing here whatsoever that would justify using lethal weaponry. There is counsel for rulers to take care of crime in their kingdom. It never says that the end justifies the means.

Taking this to justify violent action would be misguided imho.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Mr Man »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings thepea,
thepea wrote:Are you suggesting that Buddha took the laity aside who were military and police occupations and said ignore what I taught everyone else there are acceptions to those of you in these special fields??
I am suggesting what David said in his two excellent posts above.

Metta,
Paul. :)
David's posts are not excellent if he is trying to justify killing using the teaching of the Buddha. There is nothing in the Buddha's teaching to justify killing. David is clutching at straws.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Mr Man »

retrofuturist wrote:
thepea wrote:That there is a time and place for violent killing??
More specifically, that there is a strong utilitarian argument to kill genocidal maniacs before they kill, rape and torture swathes of innocent people.
There may be a utilitarian argument to kill genocidal maniacs but that argument is 100% removed from what was taught by the Buddha.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by binocular »

retrofuturist wrote:More specifically, that there is a strong utilitarian argument to kill genocidal maniacs before they kill, rape and torture swathes of innocent people.
How do you recognize those genocidal maniacs in advance?

Bear in mind that one person cannot accomplish much. Many people place the sole blame on Hitler, but this doesn't seem realistic at all. It's because there were at least thousands of people like Adolf Hitler who thought the same way, and this is why they could do what they did. Adolf Hitler just happened to be one of the more prominent ones.

There is much more at work and many more people involved in the development of large-scale conflict. In the end, it comes down to ordinary people being greedy and hateful on a daily basis. Removing those that seem more prominent won't change anything.

retrofuturist wrote:
thepea wrote:Killing, thinking about killing, pondering whether it is just or unjust, there is agitation in the mind.
Not necessarily. Was the Buddha perturbed by such things when speaking of them?
It's probably easy enough to talk about war and killing when one has no intention to engage in either.

swathes of innocent people
Strange to hear that from a Buddhist ...
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by binocular »

Buddha Vacana wrote:There is nothing here whatsoever that would justify using lethal weaponry. There is counsel for rulers to take care of crime in their kingdom. It never says that the end justifies the means.

Taking this to justify violent action would be misguided imho.
The way I see it, the major problem in many discusssions of this topic is that many people operate from the assumption that those who end up as victims were innocent. Which is a strange thing to hear from a Buddhist, given karma and rebirth.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Dhammanando »

binocular wrote:Removing those that seem more prominent won't change anything.
It has been known to do so.

  • For about two centuries, the hashashin specialized in assassinating their religious and political enemies. These killings were often conducted in full view of the public and often in broad daylight, so as to instill terror in their foes. Assassinations were primarily carried out with a dagger, which was sometimes tipped with poison. Due to being immensely outnumbered in enemy territory, the hashashin tended to specialize in covert operations. Hashashin would often assimilate themselves in the towns and regions of their targets and, over time, stealthily insert themselves into strategic positions. They did not always kill their targets, however, preferring at times to try to threaten an enemy into submission. This could sometimes be accomplished with a dagger and a threatening note placed on an enemy's pillow. The assassin group was indeed feared enough so that these threats were sometimes taken seriously, as in the case when Saladin, the Muslim Sultan of Egypt and Syria, made an alliance with the rebel sect in order to avoid more attempts on his life. One of these attempts involved the Assassins placing a poisoned cake on Saladin's chest as he slept, with a warning note to desist from his military exploits.
Assassins
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by thepea »

Bhante, do you support this type of actions are these actions you would recognize as skillful or are you just trying to muddy the dhamma???
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Dhammanando »

thepea wrote:Bhante, do you support this type of actions?
Well, I'm not an absolute pacifist and I think that there are sometimes occasions when the proportionalist argument for war is more compelling than any of the arguments that pacifists typically urge against it.
thepea wrote:are these actions you would recognize as skillful
As far as I know, venerables Bodhi, Thanissaro and myself are all of one mind in regarding the act of intentional killing as being always an akusala kamma. On this point there's no dispute.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by thepea »

your post suggests killing initially very violently so as to have the effect of instilling fear so future disputes can be settled without the need for killing but with a simple reminder of the level of cruality you are capable of.
Is this the position of you and your fellow monks?
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by thepea »

Also I am not suggesting pacifism, but suggesting Dhamma requires the implementation of non violent strategies to end disputes. Going to war seems to imply taking sides and creating an enemy that needs to be eliminated. It seems there is no possible winning from a viewpoint such as this.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Buddha Vacana »

Dhammanando wrote: there are sometimes occasions when the proportionalist argument for war is more compelling than any of the arguments that pacifists typically urge against it.
Bhante, may I trouble to ask for an example? I am having a hard time trying to find one.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Dhammanando »

Buddha Vacana wrote:
Dhammanando wrote: there are sometimes occasions when the proportionalist argument for war is more compelling than any of the arguments that pacifists typically urge against it.
Bhante, may I trouble to ask for an example?
No, I would prefer not to cite the example of any particular war, for (as I know from other forums) whenever this is done it always results in a long, heated and unfruitful argument about counter-factual history. Let it suffice to say that I would agree with most of the verdicts in Michael Walzer's Just and Unjust Wars.

Buddha Vacana wrote:I am having a hard time trying to find one.
It isn't so hard. To arrive at a verdict one just needs to examine any given war, asking oneself: "What would likely have ensued had it not been fought?"
I would like to close with a remark by James H. Toner, Professor of International Relations and Military Ethics at the U.S. Air War College. A number of years ago, he said, while teaching in Vermont, he was on a public affairs panel discussing just war issues. He soon discovered that he was the sole supporter of that notion and was feeling considerable hostility from his audience. An elderly man in the rear stood and said that he wanted to support his views on just war, adding that he was a classical musician. Great, thought Toner: there's one person in the room who agrees with me, and he's probably a nut. "I want to tell you," the man continued, "what is the sweetest music I have ever heard." Toner cringed. "Although I have heard wonderful music thousands of times," the man went on, "the most beautiful was the sound of U.S. Army tanks. You see, they were coming to [the death camp where I was being held as a young man], and that sound meant that I would be able to grow up."

From War and the Eclipse of Moral Reasoning
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by thepea »

Dhammanando wrote:
It isn't so hard. To arrive at a verdict one just need to examine any given war, asking oneself: "What would likely have ensued had it not been fought?"
When meditating often there arises sensations of unpleasant nature when I fight them they multiply, when I observe them equanimously I see that for some time they arise but always pass away. If meditative experience is a good premise for examination to answer your question peace would ultimately occur if these battles were not fought.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi on War and Thanissaro's rebuttal

Post by Dhammanando »

thepea wrote:your post suggests killing initially very violently so as to have the effect of instilling fear so future disputes can be settled without the need for killing but with a simple reminder of the level of cruality you are capable of.
Actually my first post to this thread wasn’t aimed at suggesting anything. It was a factual correction on a point of history.

And I don’t think you’ve got it quite right about the Assassins' method. It wasn’t that they killed “very violently” (there’s nothing especially violent about using a poison-tipped dagger) that made them feared. Rather, it was the fact that no tyrant or warlord was safe from them. No matter how well you guarded yourself, the Assassins could still find a way to get to you.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Post Reply