Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Did Buddha say we have the right to bare arm....ie AK47
I recently watched the Film 'Gandhi' with my partner Federica, His gentle, thougtful and totally 'Pacifist' approach to gaining independence was, and still is, one of the most magnificent and inspiring actions taken by a man in history. He stated that "I am prepared to die for my beliefs, but I am not prepared to kill for them".
Gandhi was a Hindu and as with any other major Religion that I can think of including 'Buddhism', took the vow To Not Kill as sacrosanct!...However in the end he had no protection against the Bullet and the Gun.
I am not Gandhi.....I am not Jesus.....I am not Mohammed.....I am not Brahma.....I am not Buddha......I am an ordinary MAN with all of the frailities and weaknesses that are inherent in most of us. Therefore in summary, what I am saying is that ' I am not prepared to die, or let my family die because of my beliefs'!....If this makes me any less of a 'Buddhist or makes me any less of a man than the aforementioned people, then I am guilty as charged!
If I or Federica was attacked or faced a major assault I would KILL in self- defence using any manner of means - including a FIREARM - if necessary. If there are any Members of this Sangha who would not do so under any circumstances then I apologise for not including you in my earlier list.... !
I would be delighted to contemplate a world without arms or guns of any kind. I cannot imagine anyone of this forum would desire differently. But if I woke up in the night, and found someone in my house, threatening me and mine, I would not hesitate to take any action that I deemed necessary to safeguard the lives of the people I love.
Remember, I was in the Military Police for quite some time, so I had the privilege of learning how to diffuse a potentially dangerous situation wherever possible. I would obviously try to assess the situation, and react accordingly... If I could diffuse the matter, and ensure nobody got hurt, I'd obviously choose that route -
I don't own a gun - but if all I had was a baseball bat, and no other options - I'd use it!
Clearly, some of my fellow forum members live in a far more violent and gun-oriented society than I. I am therefore unprepared, having read all the contributions, to condemn, judge or criticise their points of view.
neither would I ever presume to criticise their opinions, or say that this contradicts their beliefs.... In Buddhism, remember, everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions, and has to accept the consequences thereof.... Who am I to stipulate whether they are right or wrong?
Federica is well aware of my stance on this subject. She is one of the most docile, peaceful and non-agressive people I know. But she accepts me for who I am and for what I believe.
If a Manufacturer of 'Meat' Pies can label them as such with a mere 40-50% meat content, surely I can still call myself 'Buddhist' if I don't manage to be 100%, and have a crusty exterior?
I am in no doubt you are within you civil rights to protect your loved ones and I will defend a you should you ever need to use them. I am pointing out than in the event of some low life criminal breaking in and compromising your privicy and safety, I think you might have more of a chance of beating 10 tonnes of s**t out of him if he was not carrying a gun.
For him not to carry a gun would mean that his supply is none existent.
If the criminal can walk into a store an purchase a fire arm in the same way you can mean's it is you that is at risk. Clearly you are not a risk to yourself.
My disagreement with Hunt4life is partly over the state's resonsibily to in citizens. If the state enfore a ban on fire arms and police enforce that ban with a proactive zero tolerance campaign it will mean you have more chance of sleeping safely in your bed at night.
I hope with all my heart that you or your wife never face such an encounter.
As for Buddhist trade descriptions I thought it was left to self determination.
HH
HH, I have choosen to live in an area where it is more likely 'Statistically' of me winning the lottery than encountering an armed person in my home (trust me I have yet to win anything). I know that what you are saying makes sense in that, if no-one had access to firearms then the situation would not arise. Don't get me wrong - both Simonthepilgrim and you have declared a totally 'Pacifist' nature in your universal revulsion of weapons of any kind used to kill. I admire and totally respect your viewpoint and accept that if people like you guys did not exist there would be no realistic possibility of unilateral disarmament. However, how can I justifiably demand of someone the right to NOT defend themselves?
I have already confessed my astonishment at the availabity of AK47's albeit restricted to single shot (on advice) in the USA. HH, I would love to sit down and share a drink with you and I am sure that we probably have more in common than you realise. Maybe you are right and a zero tolerance to the purchase or ownership of firearms would work, for me the only model that I can relate to is 'Prohibition' which clearly did not work.
Perhaps if we met in the flesh we would actually get on quite well, or perhaps not, perhaps we would have one big arguement and never talk again! (I think we could manage to be civil:))
But on here, it is important to be dignified and select one's words carefully; I will confess to finding life, politics, religion.....stressful, but I do my best.
Keep yourself Well......
PS I have interrupted my favourite programme to post this....I must like you!!
It's not the lotto programme is it ? You are right about one thing if we sat down over a beer I am sure there is lot's of common ground there. Nowing my run of luck recently one of us would fall victim to a freak drive by shooting. I had a similar disagreement over fireworks. This time I was arguing over the common man's right to hold his own display and the freedom to buy fire works over the counter. That night I had been asked to switch on the christmas lights in the town where I live. At the point of my PA where I wish everone safe journey home a stray pirotechnic blow's up in my face. Luckily just burning my eye brow and a little hair. The crowd thought it was part of the act. True story.
Anyway neither of us are going to move on this and I say this with respect it's only a discussion website.........it's not as if one of us holds the launch codes for the UN Nuclear missle programme is it.
I am not Gandhi.....I am not Jesus.....I am not Mohammed.....I am not Brahma.....I am not Buddha......I am an ordinary MAN with all of the frailities and weaknesses that are inherent in most of us. Therefore in summary, what I am saying is that ' I am not prepared to die, or let my family die because of my beliefs'!....If this makes me any less of a 'Buddhist or makes me any less of a man than the aforementioned people, then I am guilty as charged!
If you're so ordinary, Abraham, why do you have that Arch-typical name, that awesome avatar of a "giant" almost blocking out the sun, and such a gorgeous, wonderful woman?
This is a hard subject, and I just wanted to insert some levity.
May Your Luck Hold Out So That
Bliss Will Always Precede You,
Your Going Forth Be Littered Behind With Potent Seeds of Bliss,
And Your Very Name Be Bliss!
We are starting to have some serious problems here in Canada regarding gun crime. It is a complex issue that has been on my mind for a long time. I would like to add a few points.
First, and foremost, I don't think the Buddha would consider any home invader "a low life".
LovingKindness extends to all, without exception. Even the "low life" of whom you speak, HH, has Buddha nature and values his own life. We are that "low life", too. All of us. We either have been, or will be. If born into a different environment and under a different set of circumstances, he is you, you are he, we are one and we are all together. So to speak. The Buddha would ask you to thank that "low life" for giving you the opportunity to practice compassion, understanding and patience. (Not while he's in the middle of robbing you. The Buddha was practical. lol). Interestingly, the Buddha also said that one should never sacrifice one's own well being for that of another.
Secondly, I must respectfully disagree with this statement; "If the state enfore a ban on fire arms and police enforce that ban with a proactive zero tolerance campaign it will mean you have more chance of sleeping safely in your bed at night." legislation has no effect whatsoever on serious gun crime. Criminals (who could be ourselves, don't forget) do not obtain guns over the counter. They are bought illegally on the street. A state enforced ban would be worse than useless under the present circumstances. Remember Prohibition.
And finally, in my humble oppinion, I believe the Buddha might suggest that education and the development of compassion and lovingkindness in all children might go a long way in preventing the horrific outcomes we are facing in society today. Gun violence is a social issue.
The right to bear arms is, at the same time, a ridiculously archaic idea and a very timely one. But it can't be solved from the top down, but from the bottom up. Nor can it be solved overnight. It has to be addressed at the ground level with education that enlightens all children of the reality of our inter- dependence. This is also our chance to practice patience.
I feel the fear in your posts. You are dividing the world up into "us" and "them", aren't you? I think you may find that if you practice compassion for "them", your fear will change. They are us, and we are them. There is no difference. That is what reality is.
I fear that you may be right, Brigid, and that legislation would have to be imposed with draconian measures. Once a population has been armed, it is extremely difficult to disarm them. History gives many examples: Scotland after the '45, Ireland and, most recently, Afghanistan.
My pastor and Buddhist got together for tea and they often talked about the present situation in Tibet. It is just too bad that wonderful people of Tibet suffered immensively. My Buddhist teacher said the Dalai Lama before this one had warned the council of Tibet about possible Chinese invasion.
He also requested British help which was right over in India, he was requesting advices and logistic helps that would include three foot divisions of soldiers. These soldiers would be placed strategically along mountain passes where the Chinese foot soldiers would be attacking from.
What the Dalai Lama got were rejections from the council as the council was embracing "peace" and they were hoping that by chanting mystical mantra, the Chinese army would not attack. We know the result of that indecision today. Buddhist master said that Buddha said that one duty of a king is to see the nation wealth be distributed equally among the citizen so to minimize or potentially ridding robbers in the land. The second duty of a king is to protect his country and his people from foreign invasions.
The Buddha sees demons for what they are, sometime one can not appease them other than to kill them.
It is lamentable what the Chinese did to Tibet, and they will have this guilt forever. Bad enough what happened mid-20th century, but the Cultural Revolution brought still further decimation of Tibetan culture. For myself, I can blame no one for bearing anger on this awful issue.
It's curious that we call weapons "arms," that is "extensions" of what our anatomical arms would do: namely, protect ourselves from those bearing blunt force against us.
_________________________
I've noticed NB logging me out sometimes - but not at others. Don't know why that is.
I just use it for a lesson - things are sometimes what they seem - and at other times... not.
Just think of being "logged in" as another sign of impermanence...
—buddhafoot
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited February 2006
The Dalai Lama has admitted that the mistake Tibet made was to have turned down the offer of joining the United Nations, after WWII, and that therefore, when Tibet was in need of International support, the UN was unable to break with Political and International protocol, and to offer assistance.
The Dalai Lama was never, and has never seen himself as, a King. he straddled the rôles of Political and Religious leader of his country, but there are other Lamas in the Tibetan Lineage whom he perceives to be as important and as vital to Tibetan Buddhism as he himself has been.
The situation in Tibet is still utterly deplorable, and the platitudes uttered continually by the Chinese, and - more deplorably still - accepted by other World Powers, are lame, inadequate and unacceptable excuses, which should be addressed and confronted.
The opportunity to bring the weight of World opinion to finally bear upon the Chinese Government, is about to be handed to us on a platter -
Let's not forget what is supposed to be happening in a mere 2 years' time.
What a great post. You taught me so much about the historical atmosphere of this issue and, really, what must be done now. What, (at the risk of exposing my ignorance), is happening in two years? Is it a UN vote?
Brigid
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited February 2006
2008 sees the Olympic Games being held in China.
the Olympic Games is supposed to represent the Brotherhood of Man, and the engagement of competition in the spirt of True Sportsmanship: -
"THE OLYMPIC CREED
Pierre de Coubertin got the idea for this phrase from a speech given by Bishop Ethelbert Talbot at a service for Olympic champions during the 1908 Olympic Games. The Olympic Creed reads:
"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well."
The creed and motto are meant to spur the athletes to embrace the Olympic spirit...."
When you consider China's continued record with regard to their attitude to Tibet, the whole idea of granting them the control and responsibility of hosting the Olympic Games in 2008 is breathtakingly inappropraite, to say the VERY least - !
What political point or action, different countries will take, remains to be seen... and it also remains to be seen whether anyone has the courage to put principle over profit and personal reward, and to implement a boycott....
Perhaps we should remember, too, that the purpose of the Greek Olympic games was to establish a period of non-warfare between the city-states.
In 2008, as in 2004, the Games will be dominated by nations who are at war. It would be a seriously diminished Games if only nations at peace were to take part!!!
I believe the US boycotted some Olympics on the 80's.
I felt bad for the US athletes who had trained for years just to miss the opportunity to compete due to politics and warmongers.
-bf
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited February 2006
Well, just from my angle - and I must emphasise the 'my'...
If someone said to me:
"Look, if you boycott the games, you might - JUST MIGHT - have an effect on a country which has no regard whatsoever for the rights of some, to live freely and harmoniously, and may well convince it to finally address the major issue of imprisonment, torture, child sterilisation compulsory abortion and indoctrination.... it may save the lives of countless thousands who have been incarcerated and dominated now for sixty years...
Or, on the other hand, you could win a gold medal. Which would you rather do?"
Comments
Bushinoki,I am generalising. This is not a personal remark.
Gandhi was a Hindu and as with any other major Religion that I can think of including 'Buddhism', took the vow To Not Kill as sacrosanct!...However in the end he had no protection against the Bullet and the Gun.
I am not Gandhi.....I am not Jesus.....I am not Mohammed.....I am not Brahma.....I am not Buddha......I am an ordinary MAN with all of the frailities and weaknesses that are inherent in most of us. Therefore in summary, what I am saying is that ' I am not prepared to die, or let my family die because of my beliefs'!....If this makes me any less of a 'Buddhist or makes me any less of a man than the aforementioned people, then I am guilty as charged!
If I or Federica was attacked or faced a major assault I would KILL in self- defence using any manner of means - including a FIREARM - if necessary. If there are any Members of this Sangha who would not do so under any circumstances then I apologise for not including you in my earlier list.... !
I would be delighted to contemplate a world without arms or guns of any kind. I cannot imagine anyone of this forum would desire differently. But if I woke up in the night, and found someone in my house, threatening me and mine, I would not hesitate to take any action that I deemed necessary to safeguard the lives of the people I love.
Remember, I was in the Military Police for quite some time, so I had the privilege of learning how to diffuse a potentially dangerous situation wherever possible. I would obviously try to assess the situation, and react accordingly... If I could diffuse the matter, and ensure nobody got hurt, I'd obviously choose that route -
I don't own a gun - but if all I had was a baseball bat, and no other options - I'd use it!
Clearly, some of my fellow forum members live in a far more violent and gun-oriented society than I. I am therefore unprepared, having read all the contributions, to condemn, judge or criticise their points of view.
neither would I ever presume to criticise their opinions, or say that this contradicts their beliefs.... In Buddhism, remember, everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions, and has to accept the consequences thereof.... Who am I to stipulate whether they are right or wrong?
Federica is well aware of my stance on this subject. She is one of the most docile, peaceful and non-agressive people I know. But she accepts me for who I am and for what I believe.
If a Manufacturer of 'Meat' Pies can label them as such with a mere 40-50% meat content, surely I can still call myself 'Buddhist' if I don't manage to be 100%, and have a crusty exterior?
Does this answer your question, HH?
For him not to carry a gun would mean that his supply is none existent.
If the criminal can walk into a store an purchase a fire arm in the same way you can mean's it is you that is at risk. Clearly you are not a risk to yourself.
My disagreement with Hunt4life is partly over the state's resonsibily to in citizens. If the state enfore a ban on fire arms and police enforce that ban with a proactive zero tolerance campaign it will mean you have more chance of sleeping safely in your bed at night.
I hope with all my heart that you or your wife never face such an encounter.
As for Buddhist trade descriptions I thought it was left to self determination.
HH
I have already confessed my astonishment at the availabity of AK47's albeit restricted to single shot (on advice) in the USA. HH, I would love to sit down and share a drink with you and I am sure that we probably have more in common than you realise. Maybe you are right and a zero tolerance to the purchase or ownership of firearms would work, for me the only model that I can relate to is 'Prohibition' which clearly did not work.
Perhaps if we met in the flesh we would actually get on quite well, or perhaps not, perhaps we would have one big arguement and never talk again! (I think we could manage to be civil:))
But on here, it is important to be dignified and select one's words carefully; I will confess to finding life, politics, religion.....stressful, but I do my best.
Keep yourself Well......
PS I have interrupted my favourite programme to post this....I must like you!!
Anyway neither of us are going to move on this and I say this with respect it's only a discussion website.........it's not as if one of us holds the launch codes for the UN Nuclear missle programme is it.
If you're so ordinary, Abraham, why do you have that Arch-typical name, that awesome avatar of a "giant" almost blocking out the sun, and such a gorgeous, wonderful woman?
This is a hard subject, and I just wanted to insert some levity.
May Your Luck Hold Out So That
Bliss Will Always Precede You,
Your Going Forth Be Littered Behind With Potent Seeds of Bliss,
And Your Very Name Be Bliss!
First, and foremost, I don't think the Buddha would consider any home invader "a low life".
LovingKindness extends to all, without exception. Even the "low life" of whom you speak, HH, has Buddha nature and values his own life. We are that "low life", too. All of us. We either have been, or will be. If born into a different environment and under a different set of circumstances, he is you, you are he, we are one and we are all together. So to speak. The Buddha would ask you to thank that "low life" for giving you the opportunity to practice compassion, understanding and patience. (Not while he's in the middle of robbing you. The Buddha was practical. lol). Interestingly, the Buddha also said that one should never sacrifice one's own well being for that of another.
Secondly, I must respectfully disagree with this statement; "If the state enfore a ban on fire arms and police enforce that ban with a proactive zero tolerance campaign it will mean you have more chance of sleeping safely in your bed at night." legislation has no effect whatsoever on serious gun crime. Criminals (who could be ourselves, don't forget) do not obtain guns over the counter. They are bought illegally on the street. A state enforced ban would be worse than useless under the present circumstances. Remember Prohibition.
And finally, in my humble oppinion, I believe the Buddha might suggest that education and the development of compassion and lovingkindness in all children might go a long way in preventing the horrific outcomes we are facing in society today. Gun violence is a social issue.
The right to bear arms is, at the same time, a ridiculously archaic idea and a very timely one. But it can't be solved from the top down, but from the bottom up. Nor can it be solved overnight. It has to be addressed at the ground level with education that enlightens all children of the reality of our inter- dependence. This is also our chance to practice patience.
I feel the fear in your posts. You are dividing the world up into "us" and "them", aren't you? I think you may find that if you practice compassion for "them", your fear will change. They are us, and we are them. There is no difference. That is what reality is.
In lovingkindness,
Brigid.
He also requested British help which was right over in India, he was requesting advices and logistic helps that would include three foot divisions of soldiers. These soldiers would be placed strategically along mountain passes where the Chinese foot soldiers would be attacking from.
What the Dalai Lama got were rejections from the council as the council was embracing "peace" and they were hoping that by chanting mystical mantra, the Chinese army would not attack. We know the result of that indecision today. Buddhist master said that Buddha said that one duty of a king is to see the nation wealth be distributed equally among the citizen so to minimize or potentially ridding robbers in the land. The second duty of a king is to protect his country and his people from foreign invasions.
The Buddha sees demons for what they are, sometime one can not appease them other than to kill them.
Hallelujah
M Bolden
It's curious that we call weapons "arms," that is "extensions" of what our anatomical arms would do: namely, protect ourselves from those bearing blunt force against us.
I just use it for a lesson - things are sometimes what they seem - and at other times... not.
Just think of being "logged in" as another sign of impermanence...
—buddhafoot
The Dalai Lama was never, and has never seen himself as, a King. he straddled the rôles of Political and Religious leader of his country, but there are other Lamas in the Tibetan Lineage whom he perceives to be as important and as vital to Tibetan Buddhism as he himself has been.
The situation in Tibet is still utterly deplorable, and the platitudes uttered continually by the Chinese, and - more deplorably still - accepted by other World Powers, are lame, inadequate and unacceptable excuses, which should be addressed and confronted.
The opportunity to bring the weight of World opinion to finally bear upon the Chinese Government, is about to be handed to us on a platter -
Let's not forget what is supposed to be happening in a mere 2 years' time.
What a great post. You taught me so much about the historical atmosphere of this issue and, really, what must be done now. What, (at the risk of exposing my ignorance), is happening in two years? Is it a UN vote?
Brigid
the Olympic Games is supposed to represent the Brotherhood of Man, and the engagement of competition in the spirt of True Sportsmanship: -
"THE OLYMPIC CREED
Pierre de Coubertin got the idea for this phrase from a speech given by Bishop Ethelbert Talbot at a service for Olympic champions during the 1908 Olympic Games. The Olympic Creed reads:
"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well."
The creed and motto are meant to spur the athletes to embrace the Olympic spirit...."
http://www.mapsofworld.com/olympic-trivia/olympic-motto.html
When you consider China's continued record with regard to their attitude to Tibet, the whole idea of granting them the control and responsibility of hosting the Olympic Games in 2008 is breathtakingly inappropraite, to say the VERY least - !
What political point or action, different countries will take, remains to be seen... and it also remains to be seen whether anyone has the courage to put principle over profit and personal reward, and to implement a boycott....
Brigid
In 2008, as in 2004, the Games will be dominated by nations who are at war. It would be a seriously diminished Games if only nations at peace were to take part!!!
I felt bad for the US athletes who had trained for years just to miss the opportunity to compete due to politics and warmongers.
-bf
If someone said to me:
"Look, if you boycott the games, you might - JUST MIGHT - have an effect on a country which has no regard whatsoever for the rights of some, to live freely and harmoniously, and may well convince it to finally address the major issue of imprisonment, torture, child sterilisation compulsory abortion and indoctrination.... it may save the lives of countless thousands who have been incarcerated and dominated now for sixty years...
Or, on the other hand, you could win a gold medal. Which would you rather do?"
......I'd know what my choice would be.