Buddhism and War

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by kmath »

Spiny Norman wrote:
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?
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."
:thumbsup:
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

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 ---
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by kmath »

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?
User avatar
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

Post by DNS »

kmath wrote: Is this right? He became a sotapanna while he was an army commander?
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?
santa100
Posts: 6814
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by santa100 »

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..
User avatar
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

Post by DNS »

But a sotapanna does not go back to the lower realms, ever.
Then 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".
http://awake.kiev.ua/dhamma/tipitaka/2S ... ggo-e.html

Anguttara Nikaya book of eights (page 1135 in Bhikkhu Bodhi's recent translation)
rohana
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:43 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by rohana »

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.
"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
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by greenjuice »

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.
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by kmath »

greenjuice wrote: A Buddhist army would be a very strange one, when compared to all other in our known history.
:jumping:

But I'm not sure why you assume there is nothing "unwholesome" about self-defense. That's one of the issues being debated here.
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by greenjuice »

But I'm not sure why you assume there is nothing "unwholesome" about self-defense.
According to Tipitaka, there isn't.

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.
hermitwin
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:35 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by hermitwin »

Everyone has a role to play.
Do you do every thing your self ?

My gardener keeps the garden, my taxi driver drives the car.

It would be too idealistic to expect everyone to do the same things or not to do certain things .

There will always be butchers and soldiers regardless of what you do.

Choose your role and play it well.
If I keep 5 precepts, I don’t kill animals, but I still eat meat.

It is not about passing the buck but accepting the reality of the world we live in.

Would I prefer a world where no animals are killed for meat and there is no need for soldiers?
YES.

Is that going to happen ?
NO.


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?

I don't like the trend I see in Buddhism that allows for "passing the karmic buck" onto other people. For instance,

1. Not killing animals but still eating the meat
2. Monks asking lay people to cut into seeds, dig soil, etc.
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?
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by kmath »

greenjuice wrote:
But I'm not sure why you assume there is nothing "unwholesome" about self-defense.
According to Tipitaka, there isn't.

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.

Touche greenjuice, touche.

However, is true that because an action is allowable by Vinaya, it is therefore wholesome?
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by greenjuice »

If one is a Theravadin, then it follows that one accepts the Tipitaka as correct.
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by Modus.Ponens »

kmath wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:
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?
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."
:thumbsup:
Once you start realising how deep in samsara crap you are, how far the way out is and, especialy, how nobody else around you have any clue of this, you won't even think of going to war to change this world. This world is unchangeable, unless there's a spiritual revolution. I can't see that happening in the near future. So, sorry folks, but I'm not going to compromise my golden opportunity in order to kill others to try making the world a better place _ which I think is a bizarre idea to begin with.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Buddhism and War

Post by Modus.Ponens »

kmath wrote:
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?
It's very important to consider that most of the endings of the suttas in the Agamas don't mention this one or that one geting to stream entry or to arahatship. Please correct me if I'm wrong, sutta experts, so my memory doesn't misinform other people. So this general attaining sotapanna may be devoid of truth.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
Post Reply