Newtown Shootings

If you wish to partake in casual "off-topic" discussion amongst spiritual friends, please do so in the Lounge at Dhamma Wheel Engaged.
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by LonesomeYogurt » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:13 am

David N. Snyder wrote:The Buddha allowed kings (governments) to have armies to defend the kingdom and deter enemies. Obviously for monastics they are not allowed to possess weapons of any kind, but in the implied references, lay people are allowed to defend themselves.
He also said that the soldiers in those armies will go to Hell if they act to kill.

Self-defense is certainly acceptable so long as one does not intend to kill; it is hard, however, for me to think that those who own guns of any kind for protection are capable or even interested in making sure that one's actions do not result in the death of an aggressor.
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Cittasanto » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:40 am

daverupa wrote:
Ben wrote:
Alex123 wrote:Killing or hurting for self defense is still killing or hurting. It appears that it is still negative kamma.
Sounds a bit Jain to me Alex.
According to the Buddha, kamma is intention.
I think the Vinaya specifically mentions two things - anger and intent to kill - when it says what must be absent in order for a monk to return blows without incurring a violation.

(Perhaps enlightened movie martial artists are an example of this ideal run amok.)
This would depend on the situation. doing it jokingly could still incure a violation although I am not sure, in some situations.
however the advise on self defence would not fall under this particular pacittia I am thinking of.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:57 am

Ben wrote:
Alex123 wrote:And lets think, if one can kill someone without thinking about it, how "wholesome" is that?
This is the dhamma of the Niganthas
Doesn't the word "kill" inply intent?

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:59 am

Im not sure - Is anyone trying to use the teachings of the Buddha as justification for gun ownership?

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23045
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:14 am

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Alex123 wrote: "Here, student, some woman or man is a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. If, on the dissolution of the body, after death, instead of his reappearing in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, he comes to the human state, he is short-lived wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to short life, that is to say, to be a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings.
MN135

Any comments on the above?
The text is not talking about self defense.

Killing or hurting for self defense is still killing or hurting. It appears that it is still negative kamma.
So, you will just let the person kill you or kill others, even though you could stop it? Also, keep in mind the Buddha's definition of kamma.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Cittasanto » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:29 am

Mr Man wrote:
Ben wrote:
Alex123 wrote:And lets think, if one can kill someone without thinking about it, how "wholesome" is that?
This is the dhamma of the Niganthas
Doesn't the word "kill" inply intent?
to a degree yes, but you do not have to have the intent to kill for a death to be kammically unwholesome. as an example, cutting corners with equiptment, unsafe use, or being careless could kill someone, yet killing is not the intention, so to say that has no kammic effect would both be correct and incorrect as the effect/end result does effect the outcome, yet it is the intention which matters most.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:32 am

tiltbillings wrote:
Alex123 wrote:

Killing or hurting for self defense is still killing or hurting. It appears that it is still negative kamma.
So, you will just let the person kill you or kill others, even though you could stop it? Also, keep in mind the Buddhia's definition of kamma.
So you would intervene with potentialy lethal force? Why the hypothetical points?

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23045
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:35 am

Mr Man wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Alex123 wrote:

Killing or hurting for self defense is still killing or hurting. It appears that it is still negative kamma.
So, you will just let the person kill you or kill others, even though you could stop it? Also, keep in mind the Buddha's definition of kamma.
So you would intervene with potentialy lethal force? Why the hypothetical points?
One would intervene with the force nercessary to the situation.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:46 am

Cittasanto wrote:
Mr Man wrote: Doesn't the word "kill" inply intent?
to a degree yes, but you do not have to have the intent to kill for a death to be kammically unwholesome. as an example, cutting corners with equiptment, unsafe use, or being careless could kill someone, yet killing is not the intention, so to say that has no kammic effect would both be correct and incorrect as the effect/end result does effect the outcome, yet it is the intention which matters most.
Maybe from a doctrinal point of view you are correct Cittasanto (i'm not sure though). When people cause death through negligence there is still definite karmic consequence just possibly not the Karmic consequence of the intention to kill. Personally I don't look at karma in such a legalistic way (in terms of Vinaya/precepts it would be different). The karmic consequence could be devastating.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23045
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:50 am

Mr Man wrote: The karmic consequence could be devastating.
So, you would stand there and do nothing and die, or do nothing and let others die. Again, keep in mind the Buddha's definition of kamma.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:52 am

tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote:
So you would intervene with potentialy lethal force? Why the hypothetical points?
One would intervene with the force nercessary to the situation.
And would you prepare yourself in advance for this hypothetical situation? Would you "stand-your-ground"?

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23045
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:53 am

Mr Man wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote:
So you would intervene with potentialy lethal force? Why the hypothetical points?
One would intervene with the force nercessary to the situation.
And would you prepare yourself in advance for this hypothetical situation? Would you "stand-your-ground"?
Why should I answer your questions when you do not answer mine?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3430
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by Mr Man » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:55 am

tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote: The karmic consequence could be devastating.
So, you would stand there and do nothing and die, or do nothing and let others die. Again, keep in mind the Buddha's definition of kamma.
That comment was in relation to causing death through negligence.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23045
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:00 am

Mr Man wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote:
So you would intervene with potentialy lethal force? Why the hypothetical points?
One would intervene with the force nercessary to the situation.
And would you prepare yourself in advance for this hypothetical situation? Would you "stand-your-ground"?
Would you?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
imagemarie
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: Newtown Shootings

Post by imagemarie » Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:13 am

Think: Happy, at rest, may all beings be happy at heart. Whatever beings there may be, weak or strong, without exception, long, large, middling, short, subtle, blatant, seen & unseen, near & far, born & seeking birth: May all beings be happy at heart. Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. As a mother would risk her life to protect her child, her only child, even so should one cultivate a limitless heart with regard to all beings. With good will for the entire cosmos, cultivate a limitless heart: Above, below, & all around, unobstructed, without enmity or hate. Whether standing, walking, sitting, or lying down, as long as one is alert, one should be resolved on this mindfulness. This is called a sublime abiding here & now. Not taken with views, but virtuous & consummate in vision, having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, one never again will lie in the womb.

Think. But be prepared for the unknown and hypothetical "nutjob" who might attack and threaten that which is most dear to you.
Be prepared for ALL eventualities. Establish yourself with the means to put him away.For good if necessary. You have the right to bear arms. With a limitless heart.

:toilet: :(

:anjali:

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests