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.
I think the reason there's been so much talk about the US' role in this is that (nearly) everyone posting here is American, and as US citizens we feel we have some measure of responsibility in how our government behaves abroad, and the policies it adopts. The question was asked earlier: as Buddhists committed to ahimsa, do we have a greater responsibility than the average citizen to try to influence our government's decisions, or to at least make our voices heard? Or do we just roll over and die each time the gov't declares war on someone, or some country (that's been happening with alarming frequency the last decade or so). We are not responsible for Osama, but we do question whether what our government has done in our name is right. This is natural.
Osama chose to take the actions he took. That's why there are judges and juries, and military tribunals. And I'd like to know more about his history working for the US government in Afghanistan. Yesterday I saw mention in the newspaper about how his experience there played a major role in his turning radical/militant. Perhaps the US government does have some culpability. The US has a history of paying or grooming potential leaders, only to have them go rogue at some point, eventually forcing the US to neutralize them in some way. These issues are complex.
In any case, I think as Buddhists our role is to have compassion for someone who went so far astray from spiritual principles, while also praying for those who were harmed by Bin Laden's acts, and praying for those innocents harmed by the US continued bombing raids in the Near East (and anywhere else where they may be bombing. Libya? Wherever.:crazy: )
As I posted in another thread, I liked something I saw on t.v. this morning...along the lines that we are not rejoicing that Osama was killed, we are rejoicing that a terrorist who was responsible for murdering thousands around the world is not longer walking the earth and able to continue his evil ways.
This seems to me a much wiser and more correct way to put it vinlyn, thanks.
There seems to be an ever increasing amount of “us,” and we,” and “them,” in the language. I try not to be part of it. I am not at war. I did not kill anyone.
When my daughter told me the news, my (admittedly cynical) reaction was, “Does this mean we can have some of our Freedom back? I distinctly remember being told that if we give up our Freedoms, than “the terrorists” have won.” I still remember what a terrorist is. Terrorists are people who use violence (or threats of violence) to achieve political or social goals. Hmm. Sound familiar?
As some famous person long ago observed, “War is the health of the state.” Governments are in the “business” of creating problems and then pretending to offer solutions. Governments teach authoritarian nationalism and call it “Freedom.” Empires (throughout history) always say they have some “good” reason for their imperialism.
We have been conditioned to fear. People in every country, in our earliest (and most influential) years, all around the world, since the earliest beginnings of government, have been taught, by those very governments, in schools controlled by those same governments, to fear. We must fear one thing above anything else. We are subtly told that we must always, and forever, fear the lack of governments.
Well, I ain't buying the fear anymore!
Every time I see a problem, I wonder what a government did to either cause it, or to make it worse. One usually only need to apply a little common sense to see a government's role in most problems on the planet. I refuse to vote in national (congress, senate, or president) elections, and I may even quit voting on the state level.
John and Yoko said, “War Is Over If You Want It!” War is definitely over for me. Please join us. Peace.
It now seems more likely that this was a kill mission. OBL was unarmed and alone with his wife in the bedroom. His wife was shot in the leg, probably as a mercy shot. So why didn't they also shoot OBL in the leg? Or kick him down?
Karma is inescapable. OBL WILL do time. But over the years, on the rare occasion I've thought about him, I've always felt sorry for him. So deluded, so angry, so bitter. I always thought compassionately about him, what else can you do with such a fanatic? He must be in pain to be so devoted to violence. So I think Simon was on the right track. The solution to disturbed people is to address their pain and help guide them back to wholeness. If sending him prayers helps, then maybe that's what we should do. He'll still reap the fruits of his actions, but at some point, in theory, prayers would help him get a leg up, and maybe find his way onto the right path. That's not a bad thing, is it?
Every time I see a problem, I wonder what a government did to either cause it, or to make it worse.
Good to see the conversation coming around to these points that were made earlier, but ignored. The NY Times today said that OBL developed his terrorist network and armed himself and his people with help from the US, in Afghanistan.
It also said that OBL was the only son of a servant his father married, so he wasn't accepted in the family, he was considered to be the child of a slave, and therefore also a slave. His siblings didn't accept him fully, the article implied.
I think the big news provide us with a huge opportunity to flex our compassion muscles.
As has been said, I offered my personal response to the news of the killings and it is a bar that I only set for myself.
Because I take seriously the Buddha's advice to avoid discussions on the workings of karma, I am unable (as well as unwilling) to debate whose karma 'ripened' in the slaughters of this 'war'. It may be uncomfortable to imagine but will you not even consider that Osama and his cohorts may be instruments of karma as much as 'victims', as one Israeli rabbi has suggested about the Shoah? I would add here that, as one who lost most of his family in the camps, it has taken me much reflection even to admit the possibility and is one of the reasons that I avoid the discussion.
When I was taught Metta meditation, I was taught to expand, progressively, my awareness of metta as, ultimately, including even those whom I find most repellent. It ain't easy but its fruits are sweeter than those of recoil and hatred. We have no way of seeing into Osama and the others' hearts and minds. We are in no position to judge them and, being dead, they have no day in court to face even the justice of their peers. Nor can I, from this small place I occupy in space and time, come to any conclusion about their rebirth, if such exists.
Why do I offer whatever merit there may be in my practice? Because the action of so doing serves to remind me not to hold resentment, hatred or harsh judgment in heart and mind which would be yet more taints. Better that I transform the temptation towards negative thoughts and feelings by positive action as part of my daily and moment-by-moment practice.
From the Christian point of view, I work to abandon all forms of judgment of others, as we are instructed to do, and trust in the free gift of mercy and love. To do otherwise is to place myself in the dock alongside those I dare to judge.
It is not that I do not understand the reaction of those who find it in themselves to celebrate. It is just that I cannot celebrate yet more deaths. This is a personal position and a personal statement, not one that I force on anyone else. It is a result of long reflection on the years of war in all the time I have been alive. The Buddha and Jesus' call to peace and to love are the only ways that I have found to lasting joy that transcends the pains that attend living. It fills me with sadness to see crowds waving banners gloating over deaths, be they in New York or in Tehran and I pray, too, that those who go out to do such things ultimately find that true ahimsa lies in an open heart and a clear mind of compassion for all beings - ourselves included.
I think its a very complex situation and unless youve really studied all of this its almost impossible to see the big picture. So we can all get snapshots of the story and extrapolate to make it seem like its the big picture but I think we are far from it.
Yes it's kind of like trying to find the first stone or the first cause but I think none of us are exempt from our choices and the world as it is, so in effect, we all share some responsibility
But over the years, on the rare occasion I've thought about him, I've always felt sorry for him. So deluded, so angry, so bitter. I always thought compassionately about him, what else can you do with such a fanatic? He must be in pain to be so devoted to violence. So I think Simon was on the right track.
I think the Christians got it right when they say
'There but for the Grace of God, go I'
With the same conditions, mindset, circumstances who knows couldn't we be just anyone...that person exactly
And, as Buddhism teaches, we are all not separate...And in effect we are the same heart just cycled within different conditions.
Therefore, how separate is even karma? A topic, as Simon rightly points out, would be foolish I think to speculate on. Still, I think none of what happens is separated at all and in effect, we are all 'in this together' for better or worse.
The sadness, I think, is on us only.
And for those of us whom have ones we love, well our practice can also help them.
"I will mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy." Jessica Dovey, Middle school English teacher in Kobe, Japan
"Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that." MLK Jr.
(FYI, the first line [mourn the loss...] is not attributable to MLK; it was written by J.D., who made the statement on Facebook as a preface to the MLK Jr. quote. This has been misquoted multiple times in the thread here and thousands of times across the web over the past few days.)
As has been said, I offered my personal response to the news of the killings and it is a bar that I only set for myself.
Because I take seriously the Buddha's advice to avoid discussions on the workings of karma, I am unable (as well as unwilling) to debate whose karma 'ripened' in the slaughters of this 'war'. It may be uncomfortable to imagine but will you not even consider that Osama and his cohorts may be instruments of karma as much as 'victims', as one Israeli rabbi has suggested about the Shoah? I would add here that, as one who lost most of his family in the camps, it has taken me much reflection even to admit the possibility and is one of the reasons that I avoid the discussion.
When I was taught Metta meditation, I was taught to expand, progressively, my awareness of metta as, ultimately, including even those whom I find most repellent. It ain't easy but its fruits are sweeter than those of recoil and hatred. We have no way of seeing into Osama and the others' hearts and minds. We are in no position to judge them and, being dead, they have no day in court to face even the justice of their peers. Nor can I, from this small place I occupy in space and time, come to any conclusion about their rebirth, if such exists.
Why do I offer whatever merit there may be in my practice? Because the action of so doing serves to remind me not to hold resentment, hatred or harsh judgment in heart and mind which would be yet more taints. Better that I transform the temptation towards negative thoughts and feelings by positive action as part of my daily and moment-by-moment practice.
From the Christian point of view, I work to abandon all forms of judgment of others, as we are instructed to do, and trust in the free gift of mercy and love. To do otherwise is to place myself in the dock alongside those I dare to judge.
It is not that I do not understand the reaction of those who find it in themselves to celebrate. It is just that I cannot celebrate yet more deaths. This is a personal position and a personal statement, not one that I force on anyone else. It is a result of long reflection on the years of war in all the time I have been alive. The Buddha and Jesus' call to peace and to love are the only ways that I have found to lasting joy that transcends the pains that attend living. It fills me with sadness to see crowds waving banners gloating over deaths, be they in New York or in Tehran and I pray, too, that those who go out to do such things ultimately find that true ahimsa lies in an open heart and a clear mind of compassion for all beings - ourselves included.
Thank you for explaining this, Simon: it is clear you are sincere, and there is wisdom in what you say.
Those who live by the gun die by the gun. And Osama knew that. He lived and died like a true terrorist. Even at the very end he used one of his wives as a human shield to try and take down soldiers with him. People like that are better off dead.
Comfort and celebration should go into the fact that our military and president finally delivered justice. There will always be more terrorists, but Osama was the biggest. There will also be more to replace him, but when that happens if they live by the gun they will die by the gun again.
Those who live by the gun die by the gun. And Osama knew that. He lived and died like a true terrorist. Even at the very end he used one of his wives as a human shield to try and take down soldiers with him. People like that are better off dead.
Comfort and celebration should go into the fact that our military and president finally delivered justice. There will always be more terrorists, but Osama was the biggest. There will also be more to replace him, but when that happens if they live by the gun they will die by the gun again.
Just for the sake of the discussion, often those who have never touched a gun also die by the gun.
You need to update. Osama did not use a woman as a human shield. And he used no weapon but did resist.
Just for the sake of the discussion, often those who have never touched a gun also die by the gun.
You need to update. Osama did not use a woman as a human shield. And he used no weapon but did resist.
It's interesting how news stories change so dramatically like that. I heard it on CNN that Osama used a wife as a shield. It's more respectable if he didn't, but I think the stories of that raid will keep changing slightly.
Obviously people die from guns that never touch guns because they're made to kill, but they're also meant to kill in order to defend, or for justice. So you should know what I mean when I say people who live by the gun die by the gun. It tends to hold a lot of truth that people who fight others with guns die by the gun. Osama was one of the big cats teaching his people how to kill and how to hate Westerners. It's because of that fact that his death was justified and needed.
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden.
There's plenty of lay people to argue over politics. They won't miss a few Buddhists who are too busy cultivating to get involved in this endless poisonous pool of political arguments.
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden.
There's plenty of lay people to argue over politics. They won't miss a few Buddhists who are too busy cultivating to get involved in this endless poisonous pool of political arguments.
In the end.
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden.
There's plenty of lay people to argue over politics. They won't miss a few Buddhists who are too busy cultivating to get involved in this endless poisonous pool of political arguments.
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden.
There's plenty of lay people to argue over politics. They won't miss a few Buddhists who are too busy cultivating to get involved in this endless poisonous pool of political arguments.
You know, Buddhists don't need to spend 24/7 meditating. We have lives to live. And this thread has been as much about Buddhist principles as it has been about Bin Laden. If it doesn't interest you, that's fine.
You know, Buddhists don't need to spend 24/7 meditating. We have lives to live. And this thread has been as much about Buddhist principles as it has been about Bin Laden. If it doesn't interest you, that's fine.
In the early days of the “war on terror” I heard a smart comment from an expert. She said you can not win a “war” against a strategy. The strategy of indiscriminate killing is as effective as ever.
The strategy wasn’t invented by Islamsists anyways. Now that I think of it. One iconic example of its application is the destruction of two major Japanese cities near the end of WWII. Now I don’t want to make a point against the USA and I am certainly not defending Al Qaeda.
I just wish to make the depressing point that the killing of OBL doesn’t solve one single problem. The path of indiscriminate killing will be taken by lonely people seeking attention, by religious and political fanatics and under the right circumstances by civilized countries. It will be taken again and again, because it works.
The outcome – in other words - of the “war on terror” is certain. Terror wins.
The strange thing it appears some high ranking Al Qaeda leaders are turning themselves in. This may turn out a little different than some had thought. I wonder if Bin Laden's presence kept some people fighting when they really wanted to stop.
Sorta like how Hitler being deposed would've stopped the major of the atrocities? I can see it, Allbuddha Bound. When people are inspired by an individual, and look up to that individual for leadership, there's the possibility of them losing confidence in themselves when that person is gone. It can easily go the other way though, so it's too early to call.
Those who live by the gun die by the gun. And Osama knew that. He lived and died like a true terrorist. Even at the very end he used one of his wives as a human shield to try and take down soldiers with him. People like that are better off dead.
Comfort and celebration should go into the fact that our military and president finally delivered justice. There will always be more terrorists, but Osama was the biggest. There will also be more to replace him, but when that happens if they live by the gun they will die by the gun again.
And people that kill him and wish for him to be killed, make bad karma for themselves and will suffer the consequences. The delivery of justice is often a disguised delivery for revenge, which is born of hate and ill will.
I wonder how many people on this thread are responding as "americans", and to what extent the reactions to the 9/11 attacks, or to the killing of Bin Laden, are based on the feeling of being an american.
"Dalai Lama Says Bin Laden is Worthy of Forgiveness, Bullets Seth Abramovitch — We'll never know for certain what Martin Luther King, Jr. would have said about the killing of Osama bin Laden — but luckily, we still have the 14th Dalai Lama to turn to for spiritually elevated words of pacifism and tolerance in these rootin' tootin' times. So what are those words? Well, that Bin Laden kind of had it coming.
Delivering a lecture titled, "Secular Ethics, Human Values and Society" to 3000 students at USC on Tuesday, the leader of Tibetan Buddhism said that while Bin Laden was worthy of compassion and perhaps even forgiveness, sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do.
"Forgiveness doesn't mean forget what happened. … If something is serious and it is necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures."
There's your quote! Now you can get to mangling it until it fits in comfortably with your sanctimonious world view, surround it with gifs of teddy bears and daisies, and add it to your Facebook page or family e-newsletter.
Well, it fits in with one thing I have been saying in a number of threads about a number of topics: that these issues are not as simplistic as some posters seem to believe.
"There's your quote! Now you can get to mangling it until it fits in comfortably with your sanctimonious world view, surround it with gifs of teddy bears and daisies, and add it to your Facebook page or family e-newsletter. [LAT, photo via Getty]"
Could you be more specific as to whos view is sanctimonious? Or are you not willing to back up your comments?
"There's your quote! Now you can get to mangling it until it fits in comfortably with your sanctimonious world view, surround it with gifs of teddy bears and daisies, and add it to your Facebook page or family e-newsletter. [LAT, photo via Getty]"
Could you be more specific as to whos view is sanctimonious? Or are you not willing to back up your comments?
LOL...that's what I was wondering, too! My hunch, based on his wording, is that he is partial to the "you gotta do what you gotta do in the real world" viewpoint.
Personally I neither celebrate nor morn bin Laden's death. He choose his path and unwaveringly walked that path to its end (and he must have known that is how it would end).
And while I cannot say what was in his heart at the end, I doubt he regretted taking that path, and I doubt he would have willingly been taking alive. But that's just my perception based on what I have seen, heard, and read by and about him over the years.
Osama was willing to (make others) kill innocents in order to impose his views on the world. Obama is willing to (make others) kill innocents in order to impose his views on the world.
Osama Bin Laden should have been taken alive (if possible) and been given a sentence before a judge. There is no difference between killing for one world view or another. We do not change the world by becoming our enemies.
What we say is wrong about Osama's ways is exactly what his followers can say about us.
Obama didn't have a view on the world. He had the view that he didn't want Osama to live because Osama was a terrorist who had ordered the death of civilians and declared war on the US. It probably was not possible to take alive. I agree it won't change much other than Obamas campaign in 2012 as there are plenty of crazy people willing to lead the charge of terrorism.
The strange thing it appears some high ranking Al Qaeda leaders are turning themselves in. This may turn out a little different than some had thought. I wonder if Bin Laden's presence kept some people fighting when they really wanted to stop.
This is interesting, AB. Can you tell us more? I haven't seen this in the newspapers.
I just wish to make the depressing point that the killing of OBL doesn’t solve one single problem.
Thanks, zenff. We've come full circle: this point was made back on page one at the beginning of this discussion. There are many Bin Ladens. Until the roots of the problem are addressed, there will be no national security.
The path of indiscriminate killing will be taken by lonely people seeking attention, by religious and political fanatics and under the right circumstances by civilized countries. It will be taken again and again, because it works. The outcome – in other words - of the “war on terror” is certain. Terror wins.
How can it lose, when governments engage in terror to fight terror?
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden..
Who's arguing? We're discussing, analyzing from a Buddhist perspective, examining how to apply Buddhist principles to the situation. This is what the forum is for. As someone said earlier, it's the complex and highly emotional issues like this one that really put our commitment to Buddhist principles and the precepts to the test. There are no easy answers here, that's why the discussion has continues for 4 pages. I think this is exactly what Buddhists should be discussing.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Osama was willing to (make others) kill innocents in order to impose his views on the world. Obama is willing to (make others) kill innocents in order to impose his views on the world.
Osama Bin Laden should have been taken alive (if possible) and been given a sentence before a judge. There is no difference between killing for one world view or another. We do not change the world by becoming our enemies.
What we say is wrong about Osama's ways is exactly what his followers can say about us.
I understand what you're saying, but here's where I disagree with you.
As I understand it, there are 196 countries in the world. And, to one degree or another, those 196 nations follow certain international standards of behavior. Through various world bodies (such as the U.N. and the OAS), those nations deal with each other. The leaders from President Obama to Mumar Khadaffi deal within the international community.
On the other hand, Osama Bin Laden is not a world leader who has been elected or selected in anyway whatsoever to represent a group of people. He's one of 6.8 billion individuals who have no authority to declare war (which he did, in writing) or negotiate with anyone. He follows no rules whatsoever. He represents only anarchy.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
I personally think this is describing the real world. The Buddha himself lived in the real world, just like us, and said these things about the real world. To say otherwise is almost like saying the goal is unattainable. I personally do not believe the goal is unattainable.
Argh, mobile complications. Somebody ought to watch the video entitled 'US can't accept it created Bin Laden & Al Qaeda' on the Tube and tell us what you think. Maybe even post it here for me if you wanna be really nice? Xox
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
I personally think this is describing the real world. The Buddha himself lived in the real world, just like us, and said these things about the real world. To say otherwise is almost like saying the goal is unattainable. I personally do not believe the goal is unattainable.
Making up your biography, I am trying to imagine you on American Airlines Flight 11 on September 11 with your wife and children of ages 12, 9, and a baby, and Mohammed Atta takes over the plane and tells you he is crashing it into the White House and using you and your wife and children as human bombs, and you saying, "Mohammed, thank you so much. I love you."
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
I personally think this is describing the real world. The Buddha himself lived in the real world, just like us, and said these things about the real world. To say otherwise is almost like saying the goal is unattainable. I personally do not believe the goal is unattainable.
Making up your biography, I am trying to imagine you on American Airlines Flight 11 on September 11 with your wife and children of ages 12, 9, and a baby, and Mohammed Atta takes over the plane and tells you he is crashing it into the White House and using you and your wife and children as human bombs, and you saying, "Mohammed, thank you so much. I love you."
Water buffalo toddy.
Would my mind be filled with hate and anger to the point I would want to kill him...no it would not.
>Water buffalo toddy.
I'm sorry, I don't know what that means.
0
zombiegirlbeating the drum of the lifelessin a dry wastelandVeteran
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
I personally think this is describing the real world. The Buddha himself lived in the real world, just like us, and said these things about the real world. To say otherwise is almost like saying the goal is unattainable. I personally do not believe the goal is unattainable.
i was thinking the other day that the difference between perhaps myself and some of the greatest people in history is their ability to stand behind their convictions of what they know is right. people are always telling us, "this is the way the world is, peace will never work." but the MLKs and the Gandhis and the Buddhas in the world seem to step to the beat of a different drum. even small acts... i wonder how many african americans walked to the back of the bus before Rosa Parks said, "no" i don't know about anyone else, but i frequently wish i had the courage to be the change i wished to see in the world.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe! Sutta Nipāta 2.396
Seeker, I don't think anyone disagrees that this is the ideal we should be striving for. I just think that's not the world we actually live in. It is a goal for us.
I personally think this is describing the real world. The Buddha himself lived in the real world, just like us, and said these things about the real world. To say otherwise is almost like saying the goal is unattainable. I personally do not believe the goal is unattainable.
i was thinking the other day that the difference between perhaps myself and some of the greatest people in history is their ability to stand behind their convictions of what they know is right. people are always telling us, "this is the way the world is, peace will never work." but the MLKs and the Gandhis and the Buddhas in the world seem to step to the beat of a different drum. even small acts... i wonder how many african americans walked to the back of the bus before Rosa Parks said, "no" i don't know about anyone else, but i frequently wish i had the courage to be the change i wished to see in the world.
You're so right. That's the ideal I spoke of. But keep in mind that of the three people you mentioned, two were assassinated.
@Jeffrey Obama has a specific world view, and in that world view opponents like Osama is killed. The same applied to Osama. I do not dispute that he was a criminal, but nothing is saved by doing to him what he did to others. Personally I feel indifferent about his death - I don't think it will bring that big a change. I feel happy for the people who feel that justice was served, and I feel sorry for Osamas family and friends.
@vinlyn Osama represented and led a group of individuals with a goal. He was as much a leader as any official head of states.
Anyway I won't discuss this with you any further. You have the right to celebrate and be happy. I won't take that away
I think the idea that every nutcase needs to be heard and understood is misguided. Some of you seem to ignore the fact that something called Jihad exists and that there are people out there who would want to convert people by force. When someone is at that point there is no negotiating, its an inviable situation.
Same goes with extremist Christians in the USA who want to take over the government and school system. Both should be opposed.
The analogies with Gandhi and MLK are way out there. They were fighting for equality and freedom, while here its a fight against a man who wants to mass murder civilians in the name of Islam.
Comments
Osama chose to take the actions he took. That's why there are judges and juries, and military tribunals. And I'd like to know more about his history working for the US government in Afghanistan. Yesterday I saw mention in the newspaper about how his experience there played a major role in his turning radical/militant. Perhaps the US government does have some culpability. The US has a history of paying or grooming potential leaders, only to have them go rogue at some point, eventually forcing the US to neutralize them in some way. These issues are complex.
In any case, I think as Buddhists our role is to have compassion for someone who went so far astray from spiritual principles, while also praying for those who were harmed by Bin Laden's acts, and praying for those innocents harmed by the US continued bombing raids in the Near East (and anywhere else where they may be bombing. Libya? Wherever.:crazy: )
It also said that OBL was the only son of a servant his father married, so he wasn't accepted in the family, he was considered to be the child of a slave, and therefore also a slave. His siblings didn't accept him fully, the article implied.
I think the big news provide us with a huge opportunity to flex our compassion muscles.
Because I take seriously the Buddha's advice to avoid discussions on the workings of karma, I am unable (as well as unwilling) to debate whose karma 'ripened' in the slaughters of this 'war'. It may be uncomfortable to imagine but will you not even consider that Osama and his cohorts may be instruments of karma as much as 'victims', as one Israeli rabbi has suggested about the Shoah? I would add here that, as one who lost most of his family in the camps, it has taken me much reflection even to admit the possibility and is one of the reasons that I avoid the discussion.
When I was taught Metta meditation, I was taught to expand, progressively, my awareness of metta as, ultimately, including even those whom I find most repellent. It ain't easy but its fruits are sweeter than those of recoil and hatred. We have no way of seeing into Osama and the others' hearts and minds. We are in no position to judge them and, being dead, they have no day in court to face even the justice of their peers. Nor can I, from this small place I occupy in space and time, come to any conclusion about their rebirth, if such exists.
Why do I offer whatever merit there may be in my practice? Because the action of so doing serves to remind me not to hold resentment, hatred or harsh judgment in heart and mind which would be yet more taints. Better that I transform the temptation towards negative thoughts and feelings by positive action as part of my daily and moment-by-moment practice.
From the Christian point of view, I work to abandon all forms of judgment of others, as we are instructed to do, and trust in the free gift of mercy and love. To do otherwise is to place myself in the dock alongside those I dare to judge.
It is not that I do not understand the reaction of those who find it in themselves to celebrate. It is just that I cannot celebrate yet more deaths. This is a personal position and a personal statement, not one that I force on anyone else. It is a result of long reflection on the years of war in all the time I have been alive. The Buddha and Jesus' call to peace and to love are the only ways that I have found to lasting joy that transcends the pains that attend living. It fills me with sadness to see crowds waving banners gloating over deaths, be they in New York or in Tehran and I pray, too, that those who go out to do such things ultimately find that true ahimsa lies in an open heart and a clear mind of compassion for all beings - ourselves included.
_/\_
Here is a blog entry this reminded me of:
http://bodhimindinstitute.blogspot.com/2007/11/portent-of-eagle.html
'There but for the Grace of God, go I'
With the same conditions, mindset, circumstances who knows couldn't we be just anyone...that person exactly
And, as Buddhism teaches, we are all not separate...And in effect we are the same heart just cycled within different conditions.
Therefore, how separate is even karma? A topic, as Simon rightly points out, would be foolish I think to speculate on. Still, I think none of what happens is separated at all and in effect, we are all 'in this together' for better or worse.
The sadness, I think, is on us only.
And for those of us whom have ones we love, well our practice can also help them.
FWIW
"Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that." MLK Jr.
(FYI, the first line [mourn the loss...] is not attributable to MLK; it was written by J.D., who made the statement on Facebook as a preface to the MLK Jr. quote. This has been misquoted multiple times in the thread here and thousands of times across the web over the past few days.)
BW,
Abu
Comfort and celebration should go into the fact that our military and president finally delivered justice. There will always be more terrorists, but Osama was the biggest. There will also be more to replace him, but when that happens if they live by the gun they will die by the gun again.
You need to update. Osama did not use a woman as a human shield. And he used no weapon but did resist.
Obviously people die from guns that never touch guns because they're made to kill, but they're also meant to kill in order to defend, or for justice. So you should know what I mean when I say people who live by the gun die by the gun. It tends to hold a lot of truth that people who fight others with guns die by the gun. Osama was one of the big cats teaching his people how to kill and how to hate Westerners. It's because of that fact that his death was justified and needed.
There are better things to worry about than arguing about Bin Laden.
There's plenty of lay people to argue over politics. They won't miss a few Buddhists who are too busy cultivating to get involved in this endless poisonous pool of political arguments.
The strategy of indiscriminate killing is as effective as ever.
The strategy wasn’t invented by Islamsists anyways.
Now that I think of it. One iconic example of its application is the destruction of two major Japanese cities near the end of WWII.
Now I don’t want to make a point against the USA and I am certainly not defending Al Qaeda.
I just wish to make the depressing point that the killing of OBL doesn’t solve one single problem.
The path of indiscriminate killing will be taken by lonely people seeking attention, by religious and political fanatics and under the right circumstances by civilized countries. It will be taken again and again, because it works.
The outcome – in other words - of the “war on terror” is certain. Terror wins.
"Dalai Lama Says Bin Laden is Worthy of Forgiveness, Bullets
Seth Abramovitch — We'll never know for certain what Martin Luther King, Jr. would have said about the killing of Osama bin Laden — but luckily, we still have the 14th Dalai Lama to turn to for spiritually elevated words of pacifism and tolerance in these rootin' tootin' times. So what are those words? Well, that Bin Laden kind of had it coming.
Delivering a lecture titled, "Secular Ethics, Human Values and Society" to 3000 students at USC on Tuesday, the leader of Tibetan Buddhism said that while Bin Laden was worthy of compassion and perhaps even forgiveness, sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do.
"Forgiveness doesn't mean forget what happened. … If something is serious and it is necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures."
There's your quote! Now you can get to mangling it until it fits in comfortably with your sanctimonious world view, surround it with gifs of teddy bears and daisies, and add it to your Facebook page or family e-newsletter. [LAT, photo via Getty]
http://gawker.com/#!5798813/dalai-lama-says-bin-laden-is-worthy-of-forgiveness-bullets
"
Could you be more specific as to whos view is sanctimonious? Or are you not willing to back up your comments?
And while I cannot say what was in his heart at the end, I doubt he regretted taking that path, and I doubt he would have willingly been taking alive. But that's just my perception based on what I have seen, heard, and read by and about him over the years.
As far as anything changing: time will tell.
Obama is willing to (make others) kill innocents in order to impose his views on the world.
Osama Bin Laden should have been taken alive (if possible) and been given a sentence before a judge. There is no difference between killing for one world view or another. We do not change the world by becoming our enemies.
What we say is wrong about Osama's ways is exactly what his followers can say about us.
:thumbsup:
Who's arguing? We're discussing, analyzing from a Buddhist perspective, examining how to apply Buddhist principles to the situation. This is what the forum is for. As someone said earlier, it's the complex and highly emotional issues like this one that really put our commitment to Buddhist principles and the precepts to the test. There are no easy answers here, that's why the discussion has continues for 4 pages. I think this is exactly what Buddhists should be discussing.
nor cause it to be killed,
nor should one incite any other to kill.
Do never injure any being, whether strong
or weak, in this entire universe!
Sutta Nipāta 2.396
As I understand it, there are 196 countries in the world. And, to one degree or another, those 196 nations follow certain international standards of behavior. Through various world bodies (such as the U.N. and the OAS), those nations deal with each other. The leaders from President Obama to Mumar Khadaffi deal within the international community.
On the other hand, Osama Bin Laden is not a world leader who has been elected or selected in anyway whatsoever to represent a group of people. He's one of 6.8 billion individuals who have no authority to declare war (which he did, in writing) or negotiate with anyone. He follows no rules whatsoever. He represents only anarchy.
Argh, mobile complications. Somebody ought to watch the video entitled 'US can't accept it created
Bin Laden & Al Qaeda' on the Tube and tell us what you think. Maybe even post it here for me if you wanna be really nice? Xox
Water buffalo toddy.
Would my mind be filled with hate and anger to the point I would want to kill him...no it would not.
>Water buffalo toddy.
I'm sorry, I don't know what that means.
i don't know about anyone else, but i frequently wish i had the courage to be the change i wished to see in the world.
Obama has a specific world view, and in that world view opponents like Osama is killed. The same applied to Osama.
I do not dispute that he was a criminal, but nothing is saved by doing to him what he did to others.
Personally I feel indifferent about his death - I don't think it will bring that big a change. I feel happy for the people who feel that justice was served, and I feel sorry for Osamas family and friends.
@vinlyn
Osama represented and led a group of individuals with a goal. He was as much a leader as any official head of states.
Anyway I won't discuss this with you any further. You have the right to celebrate and be happy. I won't take that away
Same goes with extremist Christians in the USA who want to take over the government and school system. Both should be opposed.
The analogies with Gandhi and MLK are way out there. They were fighting for equality and freedom, while here its a fight against a man who wants to mass murder civilians in the name of Islam.