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.
Are Buddhist's too passive to start something like a necessary revolution? tyrannical gov't
Focus on what you are doing in the now, be kind and so forth, eradicate delusions and resist desire.
I understand that...
I understand while having desire mental liberation is beyond ones comprehension, I have been to higher states of awareness and back...
which will get you a long way, that is in a stable environment... I cannot know whether or not reincarnation exists, I do not know and cannot say for certain what is beyond this life therefore I am hesitant to have faith in such things as being reborn in to hell realms and so forth...though....
I do know what is going on in this life, and that is an immense amount of greed, and I have an ever growing distrust in the people who are in control in my country...
I once looked up what to do upon having a flea problem and someone had said that death is an inevitable although should be avoided when possible,
I cannot pick up each flea individually and toss it out the window, if not treated they will continue to grow in number, eventually forcing more beings to die as a pose to me taking care of the problem now to assure i have killed the least amount of living things...
Can violence ever be justified, if not? then what... i shall practice peace and erase the root of evil from within myself, which is passive in the grand scheme, and although noble it is giving heartless oppressors the room they need to continue their evil deeds, I have respect for the people who have responded to my other discussion posts, salute to you and this website, can i get some ideas on this topic from you all?????
I understand that...
I understand while having desire mental liberation is beyond ones comprehension, I have been to higher states of awareness and back...
which will get you a long way, that is in a stable environment... I cannot know whether or not reincarnation exists, I do not know and cannot say for certain what is beyond this life therefore I am hesitant to have faith in such things as being reborn in to hell realms and so forth...though....
I do know what is going on in this life, and that is an immense amount of greed, and I have an ever growing distrust in the people who are in control in my country...
I once looked up what to do upon having a flea problem and someone had said that death is an inevitable although should be avoided when possible,
I cannot pick up each flea individually and toss it out the window, if not treated they will continue to grow in number, eventually forcing more beings to die as a pose to me taking care of the problem now to assure i have killed the least amount of living things...
Can violence ever be justified, if not? then what... i shall practice peace and erase the root of evil from within myself, which is passive in the grand scheme, and although noble it is giving heartless oppressors the room they need to continue their evil deeds, I have respect for the people who have responded to my other discussion posts, salute to you and this website, can i get some ideas on this topic from you all?????
0
Comments
You don't meet violence, hatred and bad deeds, with more violence, hatred and bad deeds. You really can only change yourself, but, upon changing yourself others come along with you on the journey if you are willing to share that with them.
Actions have consequences. The brutal dictator is sowing the karmic seeds of a violent overthrow with each political prisoner he tortures in a secret location. Non-violent protest only works when the population at large has a say in the official response. Most people can sympathize with the powerless because we feel that way sometimes in our own lives. But, if a small group of people have all the power, they are happy to commit genocide if need be to keep that power. Mass graves around the world are a testament to the uselessness of non-violence when faced with that sort of response.
The French or Russian Revolution?
Communist Revolution in China?
Libyan, Egyptian, Syrian revolts.
Saffron Revolution in Myanmar involving violence done by others to oneself. Maybe it did achieve something but was it worth it putting oneself in harms way? More importantly did it lead to freedom from greed, hatred and delusion.
IMO, using violence to end violence is merely reenforcing violence.
Ever heard of "Relative Political Pacifism?" It was an term invented by Bertrand Russell to explain his reasoning to support WWII, but he was an pacifist.
"War was always a great evil, but in some particularly extreme circumstances, it may be the lesser of two evils."
It is only possible to see the situation that requires violence when one is fully accepting what is happening in that moment (feelings, emotions, thoughts, sensations...) while not acting on any of it.
This of course will not offer any divine protection, justification, rationalization or whatever thing you might cling to to hide from the part of you that is the aggressor. In such a situation, you are fully prepared to face consequences, which may be extremely painful to bear - both emotionally of physically.
I don't claim to know what is right and wrong when it comes to a brutal dictator that kills millions of people. Perhaps it is rooted in our lack of action before it arrives at such a state. Perhaps we need to improve community, across the globe. Perhaps at this stage in our development, violence is the only answer. Perhaps pacifism is only limited by our willingness to fall back on violence.
What I do know is that when war comes up... there are a lot of less than skillful people who see an opportunity to make a profit. This is why America has been in so many wars over the years... we are have an industrial-military-complex. Use genocide as an excuse to take us into war... use war as a glorification of "good" actions... garner support from the ignorant public....There are a number of horrible genocides happening right now, so where are the wars to stop them? My guess is, if they don't have something worth having (money, oil, strategic locations, etc), then they aren't worth fighting (at least the US).
I would like to know your take on my original question: Is the use of violence a long term solution to end suffering? Does a brutal regime justify spawning a culture of glorified war and violence?
I think so, yes, on both accounts. First, what would the world be like if the Nazi's had never been stopped? Would there be more or less suffering in the world than there is today? We certainly have experienced different forms of suffering in the world that came about after WWII, but in many cases we can opt out of that suffering and make different choices, better choices. If the Nazi's controlled the world we would not be able to make those choices. They would be made for us, or we'd be killed.
Second, I think the culture created by letting brutal regimes retain control and spread their vicious cultures, is worse than one in which violence and war are glorified, such as much of our world today. It certainly isn't a good place for humanity to be, but there is still hope for a way out. If our world were filled with Husseins and Quaddafis and Mubareks and Hitlers and Bin Ladens, there would be less truth to be had, less love to give and receive. Our world right now certainly isn't a perfect place, but in many places you can still choose to make your life what it is without being tortured or killed over it. Of course one day I hope all places have that freedom, but at least it exists. If no one ever took a stand against terror, there would be far fewer of those places.
Is it safe to say that you believe there is skillful violence?
I'll have to think longer about whether it is skillful.
There are a million nonviolent methods before us. Sabotaging vehicles, sit-ins, boycotting schooling, boycotting certain goods, strikes, etc. etc., many nonviolent (nonviolent against beings--perhaps, though, violent against machinery, lol) methods have been used by cultures in the past, as a form of resistance.
There is a long, long way to go with these more extreme, nonviolent methods before any violent method could be said to be justified. The problem is, sabotaging vehicles will result in reprisals. But violence against the Chinese soldiers would result in as many (or worse) reprisals. Personally I think it may be time to consider industrial sabotage, that type of thing.
But if that seems to be going too far, there are even less-extreme cultural initiatives that can have effect--refusing to speak Chinese, refusing to send your child to a Chinese school, etc. The problem, again, is reprisals.
And that's the rub--when the Chinese bombed the monasteries and towns, did the monks have the right to fight back? Did the townspeople?
If a PLA soldier has a rifle aimed at you, do you have the right to return fire? Or just flee? I think the Buddhist explanation is, always, "Only if you have no other choice."
Hitler and his war machine was brutal. We were fighting a war between fascism and democracy. What would be worse? Living under a brutal, but orderly fascist state or a good, but chaotic state?
Buddha said you could defend yourself if attacked, but not with the intention to kill.
For me, you hit the nail on the head with that first statement. "God is on our side" is a common expression that points to this. I don't/can't know exactly what Hitler was thinking when he started his rampage in Europe, but I can't help but believe that he felt it was for a good cause (however misguided this was). Minus those who have reach sufficient wisdom, we are all prisoner of our perspectives, and as such we will inevitably make a decision with incomplete information with our assumptions filling the gaps. Our ego will tell us we know enough to make a decision, but who are we kidding?
He may not be the best person to quote... or maybe he is: from Wikipedia:
Need some oil, but another nation has it? Take it from them or establish a coup to give you a good deal. (Example: Iraq, Libyan civil war, & 1953 Iranian coup d'état.)
Got this guy who goes on the radio spewing information that you do like or leaking information? Kill him or torture him in prison. (Example: Samir Khan, Bradley Manning, & Julian Assange.)
Could have been an peaceful chance for stopping Hitler? Nope, so war was the last option to stop his campaign.
I have heard it told that in a Mahayana suttras there is a story about Buddha's, or a Buddha, performing some violent related act of valor thereby achieving merit. Although if I were put in some situation where I had the choice of fighting valiantly for justice or running away... it be a tursiop.
Let me give you an example. As you walk around Bangkok it is not unusual to see amputees begging on the streets. After a while, while living there long enough to get to know a couple of them, I found out that many of them are the result of industrial accidents. They will say, "Mai pben rai". And the factories (etc.) never really get held responsible...so little progress is made on work safety.
The first time I really thought about "mai pben rai" was when I was having a discussion with a Thai person and was watching them frantically try to say something meaningful without actually disagreeing with me. I realized that, to them, not making me lose faith was their prime concern...not having an honest conversation.
It's sort of the idea about not sweating the small stuff. But, not all in life is "small stuff". It has infected their political and national life in such a way that it greatly prevents the solving of national problems.