Best Of

While I know that a lot of Buddhists are vegetarian or vegan, I would recommend that anyone interested in the topic read books like "The Light Eaters" by Zoe Schlanger and tell me afterwards that plants aren't sentient - that is - being aware that they are alive and participating in life in ways we didn't previously comprehend. I see and experience it when spending time with plants and trees as well.

The newer science around plants has led me to believe that we can only be mindful and reverent about how, when, and why we take life to support our own. We can no longer defend being vegetarian/vegan as being less harmful because solely because they are lower on the sentient chain than we believe animals to be. That means that for any of us to survive, we are taking life. There is no way to avoid that.

I grew up hunting and fishing. As I mentioned before it supplements our family's food and kept us off welfare. As an animal lover from the time I was a small child, it wasn't the easiest part of life for me. But I would rather own my own karma, if needed, for taking the lives I take to sustain my own than to pass it off to someone else and pretend like it's not happening. I know so many people who are anti-hunting but who buy factory-farmed meat from the store. The disconnection is incredible to me. At least if I hunt or fish, I am owning that. And the animal lived a free life up to that point. I am not passing the buck onto the rancher or the butcher for my own survival.

Currently, we buy most of our meat locally from sustainable small, family-owned farms that we've visited. I just don't have it in me to hunt. But I think it's still, in a way, a "cowardly" way out of being accountable for my meat eating. Sometimes I would rather hunt and fish. I just don't have time. If I am going to eat meat, I'd rather be responsible for taking it and for the responsibility, reverence, and humility in doing so. I will never be a vegetarian. I do eat a lot of plants, and grow many fruits, veggies, and herbs. But I respect them no less. It's not really any easier for me to weed the garden than to kill a bug, knowing what I do now about plants.

I know this seems off topic 😂 but as a sometimes practicing Buddhist, I'd rather own the gun (or the garden shears) and own the responsibility to the lives I take to sustain myself than to pass it onto someone else. Animals or plants.

@person said:
I would argue that martial arts isn't going to be much help for a middle aged man trying to defend his family in a home break in against several young men. Or a woman for that matter. To be able to successfully defend yourself or others against several people you'd have to be incredibly good at martial arts.

First, a scenario where you're a lone protector facing a roving gang bent on violence seems more rooted in movies than day-to-day Western life. A more common scenario is for a homeowner to shoot an "intruder" (sometimes simply a door-knocker) who presented no real threat because they panic and have a gun. Everyone wants to believe they are the hero of their story when they're mostly just contributing to dire statistics.

If a roving gang bent on violence enters your home forcibly with weapons and you draw a gun yourself, I don't think you're going to leave there alive, and my sense is the gun is diminishing your odds, not improving them. You'd be better off ringing your neighbor or police and chucking your phone at their head while you run.

A cursor grasp of self-defense via martial arts would quickly give you tools to free yourself from a physical encounter and run. If your goal is to win, agreed, martial arts is not a practical tool for that in a short timeframe, not least because your desire to win is precisely what's going to get you seriously injured or killed.

The most important thing that training in martial arts will teach you isn't how to "take down multiple attackers" (though I practice it), it's how to not panic, not be overwhelmed, make good decisions instinctively, and slowly find the difference between protecting family and protecting ego. In nearly any emergency, your most powerful weapon will be remembering to breathe before choosing a course of action.

I can think of several technicalities by which I could own or rent a gun without feeling like I was violating any tenets of Buddhism — I enjoy skeet shooting and target practice is fun (provided your target isn't encouraging violence) in a number of other contexts. I've shot black powder, traditional rifles, and high-power BB guns during my time in the Scouts and genuinely enjoyed all those experiences. That said, I do not pursue them, because I don't like them enough to tempt risks.

I guess I would say this: If you jump to buying a gun "for protection" and you haven't done any other work — whether that's community building, ego investigation, studying alternatives, or yes even trying martial arts — then no, it isn't terribly Buddhist, because you're prioritizing violence & ego uncritically. That said, I'm not much of a "rules" person about beliefs, so how much effort you must put into those things before moving forward is a question I respectfully return to sender for their own reflection based on the context they know best. 🙃

@person said:
I separate my political views from my Buddhist views. One works at the societal/cultural level and the other at the personal level. What works for one level may conflict with the other.

I don’t think it’s really possible to separate the two. If one’s Buddhist values are based on compassion and the wish to relieve suffering, then they naturally influence how we see the world and respond to injustice. Our personal ethics can’t be neatly divided from the social and political realities around us, they’re part of the same practice.

@Fosdick said:
Heh heh. Be comforted in this - if you kill one fly, squash one cockroach, none of the others will mourn or suffer because of it.

In the case of the dead roach, other roaches will feast on it. It is in their nature, gregarious and omnivorous. They are part of Mother Nature's recycling team.

I don’t see any shaming going on. If someone feels ashamed, I think they need to apply the self reflection to that.
I think the teachings or their Teacher do the actual dictation/advising… We just having a round table here.
IMO…The question as in “should” means is it in our teachings? I intentionally said …errr…I dunno about the ‘should’ part..bec don’t let me tell you…read for yourself, by all means…you find out what your teachings/guidelines speak to you. I agreed with parts of the previous thread bec I think teachings were discussed.
If the OP was Should Buddhist own a fly swatter? No.
I think the intent is pretty obvious. I intend to kill a fly if one is bothering me. The teachings I have read, advise against that. Not bec I’ll be punished in hell, but bec of the state of mind it fosters or can lead to. Also, the consequences it could bring.
Do I feel shamed or ashamed or pressured by owning a fly swatter? No.
If I begin to feel shame…or the constant need to defend having one…it’s time to look inside and see what’s going on with those thoughts and decide if it’s time to let it go. Am I willing and able, at this time, to deal with the consequences/Karma of killing flies? Right now I am. Full stop.
I’m sure there are plenty of Buddhist that would judge me for having a swatter, and hell, even doing pest control, like I judge the Buddhist who have a gun. Par for the course.

Heh heh. Be comforted in this - if you kill one fly, squash one cockroach, none of the others will mourn or suffer because of it.

It is not true that guns have no purpose other than killing. Nonetheless, that's certainly why they were invented, and arguably remains their primary use. To not own weapons would seem to be a logical sub-precept, and was probably considered as such by Gautama, since his people, the Sakyas, followed his teachings and owned no weapons.

Shunryu Suzuki has said that we follow the precepts but are not bound by them. I would interpret this to mean that the precepts do not unburden us from the responsibility of making our own decisions. Life is complex, no generalization can be valid in every set of circumstances. But yes, I will concede that Buddhists should not own guns - that seems just as valid as any other generalization. Perhaps we shouldn't own fly swatters either.

Guns are made for (and quite effective at) killing. Obviously not within the Buddhist teachings. Obviously that is except to those who cultivate a blind spot, and guard it with a “don’t lecture me “ shield. You might come around to a more peaceful view, but I suspect you won’t achieve it in the current lifetime.

@Shoshin1 said:
Thus have I heard and found to be true:

There is not much that one cannot justify if one puts one’s mind to it. If one enjoys doing something and is told that it is unethical, one will look for ways to make it seem more ethical, to give oneself, or those who share the same unethical practice, peace of mind.

So it is with those who own guns, for they tell themselves it is for sport, for safety, or for freedom, while overlooking that the weapon they cherish was made for the taking of sentient life. Then they start to say, but a knife kills, and so the justification continues, forgetting that knives were made to carve and create, while guns were made to destroy.

Then some might say, who am I to judge another who chooses to own a gun, all the while continuing to justify something unethical. Some people justify killing, but if those carrying out the killing are not liked by them, then that is a different story.

This no doubt will make some uncomfortable, but Buddhism and Dharma practice can make one feel uncomfortable when facing one’s own shortcomings, reminding us that the hardest truth to face is often the one about ourselves. And I’ve been there and done that on more than one occasion.

Ethics and judgmentalism aren't the same thing.

...It is very difficult to convert these strongly held viewpoints and opinions. One reason is that it gives us a sense of superiority to look at others and judge them. We know the way things should be, whether it is the behavior of other people, the way the world is, or how we should be. It is helpful to look at this critical mind and see how it feels and where it brings us. It never brings us to real happiness and joy, nor real peace and contentment...

...We can view our opinions as being reality and believing in their truth. But all opinions are based on only a partial view and we can never know everything. This means that we can never know when we will see something that we were previously unaware of. This new insight can completely change the way we view and judge something. This also means whenever we are certain of our opinions or judgments, we can still be wrong. It does not mean we ignore the judgmental mind; it means we should not let that faculty of judging and discriminating dominate us. We want to approach everything in our life with an open mind that recognizes that we could be wrong. The mind of Buddhist training is not obsessed with being right or being perfect...

...Rev. Master Jiyu used to like saying “if we look with the eyes of a Buddha, we will see the heart of a Buddha.“ The eyes of a Buddha sees everything as clean and immaculate. The only thing getting in the way of us viewing the world with the eyes of a Buddha is the mind that condemns and judges. The mind of meditation and the practice of the Buddhist Precepts soften our harsh judgments and strong opinions and helps our heart and mind to be more open and see everything with more acceptance and compassion...

https://berkeleybuddhistpriory.org/2020/02/27/judging-and-criticizing/

While ethics and judgmentalism are not strictly identical, they are often intertwined in practice. Ethical reasoning involves making judgments about right and wrong, and when applied rigidly or without empathy, it can easily slip into judgmentalism.

Distinguishing between principled critique and unkind condemnation is important, but insisting that ethics is entirely separate from being judgmental overlooks how moral standards are inevitably experienced and enforced in social contexts.