Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

wisdom from the barrel of an AK-47?

genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
I wrote this on my blog this morning and am too lazy to reproduce it all here. Basically, it concerns the spiritual anguish felt by Mikhail Kalashnikov, inventor of the much-used and excellent AK-47 assault rifle who died last month at 94.
"My spiritual pain is unbearable.
"I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people's lives, then can it be that I... a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?" he asked.
"The longer I live," he continued, "the more this question drills itself into my brain and the more I wonder why the Lord allowed man to have the devilish desires of envy, greed and aggression".
How many other men and women have the courage to shoulder their own responsibilities so boldly?
EvenThird
«1

Comments

  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    edited January 2014
    I know of at least a few people whos lives were saved by those guns too(police in many countries use them in hostage situations etc) . I cant see how its his fault how people use what he makes.

    I actually have an ak, its a gloriously dependable weapon. My ak has never killed a person or an animal, cause neither have i, but it has hit plenty of targets. Its such an evil piece of metal and wood that i feel like a sith lord... Muhaha ha.

    I wonder if mr. Ginsu feels guilty for all the people stabbed to death by his knives :-).
  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    edited January 2014
    @jayantha -- Right you are. But it takes some effort and courage to shoulder the personal responsibility for the evil that good things are capable of doing.
    how
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    I think Oppenheimer had some regrets....late in life.
  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    I think Oppenheimer had some regrets....late in life.
    Ditto, I believe, Mother Teresa.
    federica
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    edited January 2014
    federica said:

    I think Oppenheimer had some regrets....late in life.

    True enough, but even with nuclear weapons there is a positive side, nuclear power is clean and safe compared to other plants these days, and now they have advanced to where the plants will be actually using the waste thay they use to have to store underground.

    Nearly Every technological advancement is a double edged sword.

  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    edited January 2014
    Nearly Every technological advancement is a double edged sword.
    @jayantha -- You say "nearly." Can you name one that is not? And how about what lies outside the technological realm?

    My Zen teacher once said, "Without ego, nothing gets done." Put in less 'Buddhist' terms, "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." But don't you think there is some danger to raising up what is "good" and thereby skipping over what is "bad?" Eg. Kalashnikov's moral concerns are trumped by the good the AK-47 may arguably have done ... so we give ourselves permission of forgetaboutit when it comes to negative aspects? Is this a recipe for any sort of reliable peace or is it more a kind of slipshod absolution?

    No criticism from here ... just asking the questions.
  • ZeroZero Veteran
    genkaku said:


    I wrote this on my blog this morning and am too lazy to reproduce it all here.

    Basically, it concerns the spiritual anguish felt by Mikhail Kalashnikov, inventor of the much-used and excellent AK-47 assault rifle who died last month at 94.

    "My spiritual pain is unbearable.
    "I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people's lives, then can it be that I... a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?" he asked.
    "The longer I live," he continued, "the more this question drills itself into my brain and the more I wonder why the Lord allowed man to have the devilish desires of envy, greed and aggression".
    How many other men and women have the courage to shoulder their own responsibilities so boldly?

    I haven't found an english translation of the full russian text - would be interested to read the whole thing.
    A few things strike me on a cursory observation of the limited material.
    He started attending church at 91 and was baptised.
    His daughter (I think I read) stated he didn't attend church or live by the commandments as he was of that generation (?).
    He was a staunch soviet nationalist.
    He was proud of his creation and proud of the fatherland.
    Pre-mortem repentance is part of his faith.
    The paragraphs above made me pause... 'unsolved' after all these years... why did the Lord allow it... devilish desires...
    Doesn't personally hit me as courage or taking responsibility.
    Very interesting definition of heaven... a place to meet kalashnikov and oppenheimer.
  • ToshTosh Veteran
    I think Mikhail Kalashnikov is being too hard on himself. He didn't invent firearms, they were around a long time before him and he designed it because of a specific threat (Nazi Germany; though I know it's more complex than just that).

    And I know the motor car has killed far more people than the AK 47; should Henry Ford have tortured himself over that too?
    BhikkhuJayasara
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited January 2014
    I think he did. he hated the colour...... :D
    "Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black."
    ToshBhikkhuJayasaraanatamanDharmaMcBum
  • howhow Veteran Veteran

    @Jayantha

    I am always amazed as a Canadian (living conveniently under the geological protection of the USA) and as a Buddhist, just how fervently the gun culture is defended south of the 49th. I often make reference of the American Buddhists that I've read here on NB that espouse the righteous possession of guns, when discussing this issue with other Buddhist friends.

    I do understand the seductive appeal of having something that gives one so much control over ones domain but just how does that have anything to do the renunciation that you are about to embark on?

    I think that the fact that anything can be misused and anything can cause harm does not in itself excuse one's possession of a device only designed to cause harm.

    But I also live in a place where I do not believe that the threat against my being justifies my possession of a point and kill device.
    Perhaps if I lived where you do, I'd change my mind.

    This is not a criticize but a genuine question from someone who has walked beside many others on their way to ordination who I think would be similarly puzzled.
  • Well How, as a free-born citizen, I recognize that I ultimately have the responsibility to provide for my family and protect them from violence. I'm the first and last line of defense. I don't have a moat or a personal security detail, so the onus is on me if some drug addled burglar breaks into my house.

    There is no practical use for a broadsword or a katana, but in the modern world they are clumsy for self-defense. A gun is fairly simple to understand, and with rudimentary training, you can learn to at least shoot in the right direction.

    I hike in the mountains where there are wild beasts 4 or 5 times my size. So a large handgun is just a statement of not wanting to be mauled.

    A handgun on the nightstand is a statement of showing extreme intolerance for people visiting violence on my family.
    Theswingisyellow
  • matthewmartinmatthewmartin Amateur Bodhisattva Suburbs of Mt Meru Veteran
    edited January 2014
    Which version of Buddhism puts a premium on self defense, universal ownership of deadly force and so on?

    I think I'm familiar with the other versions, but from this forum and DharmaWheel, I get the impression that there is a variety of Buddhism where somewhere in the 10 precepts is wedged the 2nd amendment.

    Don't get me wrong-- I don't follow all the precepts-- I have kids, drink booze in moderation with food, tell white lies if it smooth out social interactions-- but I try to do that stuff conscious that I'm breaking a Buddhist rule and I have good reasons for it.

    In which form of Buddhism is a solution that entails death the default good? Is there an esoteric reading of the 1st precept that I don't understand? Was the first precept just expedient means for dim witted folk from long ago and now we are much cleverer and can effortless navigate the purported problems with killing?

  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    how said:


    @Jayantha
    8
    I am always amazed as a Canadian (living conveniently under the geological protection of the USA) and as a Buddhist, just how fervently the gun culture is defended south of the 49th. I often make reference of the American Buddhists that I've read here on NB that espouse the righteous possession of guns, when discussing this issue with other Buddhist friends.

    I do understand the seductive appeal of having something that gives one so much control over ones domain but just how does that have anything to do the renunciation that you are about to embark on?

    I think that the fact that anything can be misused and anything can cause harm does not in itself excuse one's possession of a device only designed to cause harm.

    But I also live in a place where I do not believe that the threat against my being justifies my possession of a point and kill device.
    Perhaps if I lived where you do, I'd change my mind.

    This is not a criticize but a genuine question from someone who has walked beside many others on their way to ordination who I think would be similarly puzzled.


    Why would it have anything to do with my renunciation? Stereotypes are a bitch... I have the same issues with tattoos, its still weird for me to see monks with tattoos, but thats my problem, not theirs.

    genkaku said:

    Nearly Every technological advancement is a double edged sword.
    @jayantha -- You say "nearly." Can you name one that is not? And how about what lies outside the technological realm?

    My Zen teacher once said, "Without ego, nothing gets done." Put in less 'Buddhist' terms, "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." But don't you think there is some danger to raising up what is "good" and thereby skipping over what is "bad?" Eg. Kalashnikov's moral concerns are trumped by the good the AK-47 may arguably have done ... so we give ourselves permission of forgetaboutit when it comes to negative aspects? Is this a recipe for any sort of reliable peace or is it more a kind of slipshod absolution?

    No criticism from here ... just asking the questions.


    I originally said all, but then i thought about it and figured im sure there is at least one that might not be. I have no examples but better to air on the side of caution.

    I will say that i feel that people should recognize both uses, the good and the bad, instead of just the bad. Reality is never black and white.
  • ZeroZero Veteran


    I hike in the mountains where there are wild beasts 4 or 5 times my size. So a large handgun is just a statement of not wanting to be mauled.

    A handgun on the nightstand is a statement of showing extreme intolerance for people visiting violence on my family.

    The wild beasts 4 or 5 times one's size have been pushed back into those areas where humans are more scarce.
    The proposition therefore seems to be that one then invades their territory further and to top it off, one is armed to the teeth in the event that nature takes its course.
    This to me is symptomatic of our ignorant propensity to put humans at the front of focus and then build the universe around it.

    How can anyone really argue against protection of 'family'? Multiply by 7 billion and here we are...
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    Zero said:


    I hike in the mountains where there are wild beasts 4 or 5 times my size. So a large handgun is just a statement of not wanting to be mauled.

    A handgun on the nightstand is a statement of showing extreme intolerance for people visiting violence on my family.

    The wild beasts 4 or 5 times one's size have been pushed back into those areas where humans are more scarce.
    The proposition therefore seems to be that one then invades their territory further and to top it off, one is armed to the teeth in the event that nature takes its course.
    This to me is symptomatic of our ignorant propensity to put humans at the front of focus and then build the universe around it.

    How can anyone really argue against protection of 'family'? Multiply by 7 billion and here we are...
    How does this help him survive an animal attack? Or solve any problems at all? Its not his fault that humans procreate and take land to live... so he shouldnt want he or his family to survive..oi.

    Just alot of judgement on here, but its because of background and age of most of the people.

    Listen, have i slept in the woods alone, at night, in known bear and mountain lion areas with no way to protect myself?

    Yes i have, more then once. i trust in the teachings and believe in the dhamma protecting because of my own practice and experience. I will never begrudge someone else who would rather trust a rifle on their shoulder though. I was there once myself.




  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    Jayantha said:

    how said:


    @Jayantha
    8
    I am always amazed as a Canadian (living conveniently under the geological protection of the USA) and as a Buddhist, just how fervently the gun culture is defended south of the 49th. I often make reference of the American Buddhists that I've read here on NB that espouse the righteous possession of guns, when discussing this issue with other Buddhist friends.

    I do understand the seductive appeal of having something that gives one so much control over ones domain but just how does that have anything to do the renunciation that you are about to embark on?

    I think that the fact that anything can be misused and anything can cause harm does not in itself excuse one's possession of a device only designed to cause harm.

    But I also live in a place where I do not believe that the threat against my being justifies my possession of a point and kill device.
    Perhaps if I lived where you do, I'd change my mind.

    This is not a criticize but a genuine question from someone who has walked beside many others on their way to ordination who I think would be similarly puzzled.


    Why would it have anything to do with my renunciation? Stereotypes are a bitch... I have the same issues with tattoos, its still weird for me to see monks with tattoos, but thats my problem, not theirs.

    genkaku said:

    Nearly Every technological advancement is a double edged sword.
    @jayantha -- You say "nearly." Can you name one that is not? And how about what lies outside the technological realm?

    My Zen teacher once said, "Without ego, nothing gets done." Put in less 'Buddhist' terms, "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." But don't you think there is some danger to raising up what is "good" and thereby skipping over what is "bad?" Eg. Kalashnikov's moral concerns are trumped by the good the AK-47 may arguably have done ... so we give ourselves permission of forgetaboutit when it comes to negative aspects? Is this a recipe for any sort of reliable peace or is it more a kind of slipshod absolution?

    No criticism from here ... just asking the questions.
    I originally said all, but then i thought about it and figured im sure there is at least one that might not be. I have no examples but better to air on the side of caution.

    I will say that i feel that people should recognize both uses, the good and the bad, instead of just the bad. Reality is never black and white.

    The good use of crack cocaine, for instance, is that it makes people happy. :)
    DharmaMcBum
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    I think it's good to question the results of one's actions, but intention is important. If I were him I would have wondered what lasting impact my invention has had on humanity. It shows he has a conscious and a willingness to take moral responsibility for even unintended outcomes.
  • ZeroZero Veteran
    Jayantha said:


    How does this help him survive an animal attack?

    Its not his fault that humans procreate and take land to live... so he shouldnt want he or his family to survive..oi.

    I will never begrudge someone else who would rather trust a rifle on their shoulder though. I was there once myself.

    In terms of hiking alone, surely it's a comprehensive survival solution?

    I didn't comment on that issue - Fault or not, there it is multiplied by 7 billion.

    Begrudge, no - question, yes.
  • anatamananataman Who needs a title? Where am I? Veteran
    Have you ever seen the damage a firearm or a knife can have on a living person?

    I have... and I have witnessed kids die in front of my eyes from their effect - it's not nice really, and the ripples and implications are so immense.

    Trying to stitch a hole in a heart or lung is not an easy thing to do. Especially when you as a medical professional have to cut them almost in half to reach these vital organs.

    Reality bites and it obviously bit into Kalashnikov.

    How many other people would feel the same if they knew the reality that their thoughts and could have on another being. Some do and that is how Jainism arose.

    Generalise as much as you like but regret and death is something personal. Kalashnikov has experienced both, but his legacy continues.





  • Zero, it's more often than not the bears and moose that waltz into my neighborhood. I leave them alone if they leave me alone. They have razor teeth and paws and I have no natural defenses against that. So I bring a tool as an equalizer. Nothing revolutionary about that.

    I'm afraid you'll have to be more clear about "family and 7 billion more." Do you mean to say that all humans are family and I should show no preferential treatment to my wife? Well pound sand if that's the case. I'm not worth my salt if I don't protect my family from danger. I'm not exactly sure what alternative you are promoting to using force against violent minded intruders.
  • ZeroZero Veteran


    I'm afraid you'll have to be more clear about "family and 7 billion more."

    I meant that each individual drive competes with others multiplied over the human population.
  • anatamananataman Who needs a title? Where am I? Veteran

    Zero, it's more often than not the bears and moose that waltz into my neighborhood. I leave them alone if they leave me alone. They have razor teeth and paws and I have no natural defenses against that. So I bring a tool as an equalizer. Nothing revolutionary about that.

    I'm afraid you'll have to be more clear about "family and 7 billion more." Do you mean to say that all humans are family and I should show no preferential treatment to my wife? Well pound sand if that's the case. I'm not worth my salt if I don't protect my family from danger. I'm not exactly sure what alternative you are promoting to using force against violent minded intruders.

    You obviously don't live in suburbia, and having a bear attack you is something that I would not like to see either - I've seen the effect attacks by urban foxes, and even 'pet dogs' on little children in London - again not nice.

    But it is the use of weapons on other human beings that I abhor. And they are used too frequently and freely. I have voluntarily taken part in an initiative in London educating children about gangs and gun and knife crime with the metropolitan police. The most scary thing I have found is that children as young as 9 or 10 can distinguish and name the silhouette of a machine gun or other weapon, simply because they play 'call of duty'

    http://www.codghosts.net/weapons-list/
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    He found out for himself that business in weapons is wrong livelihood. If only he could have known that before he went into that business. Could have saved himself from that anguish.
  • ZaylZayl Veteran
    @seeker242

    Well he didn't exactly choose to go into that business. He developed the rifle in order to stem off the Nazi invasion of his country, and as you know the Nazi's invaded many countries, killed millions, and that's before we even get to the concentration camps. The Russian Government then took the design and massed produced it. He came up with the design, he did not start up a company or something. It wasn't a business.

    Kalashnikov had awards and military ranks lavished upon him by the USSR because of the success of the design. But never was it really his choice for it to be so widely produced and used. It'd be like someone inventing fire and then finding out that their government burned down villages for a living.
  • Fascinating guy. The AK is really a beautiful design. I'd really like to get one of my own this year. It's really the true "apocalypse" gun.
  • howhow Veteran Veteran
    @Jayantha
    Why would it have anything to do with my renunciation?

    Because you are in a circling pattern, waiting to land into Theravada robes, while speaking of the moral neutrality of your automatic assault rifle. Perhaps crystal meth is just as morally neutral because it could be used by someone somewhere for something good.

    No niggles yet..
    OK

    The 8FP.... livelyhoods...trading or selling of weapons????
    perhaps your reasoning is that" possession is OK as long as they are not traded or sold ?

    Oh to be a fly on the wall when you ask a senior where you can store your AK.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    There is precept in our zen school, one of the minor precepts that laypersons can take. One that all the monks must take of course. It says "do not possess implements of killing". Of course that includes any kind of gun.
  • ZeroZero Veteran
    Zayl said:


    Kalashnikov had awards and military ranks lavished upon him by the USSR because of the success of the design. But never was it really his choice for it to be so widely produced and used. It'd be like someone inventing fire and then finding out that their government burned down villages for a living.

    Contrast with Dr Grigori Perelman.
    Unsung hero of maths.
  • anatamananataman Who needs a title? Where am I? Veteran
    image
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    how said:

    @Jayantha
    Why would it have anything to do with my renunciation?

    Because you are in a circling pattern, waiting to land into Theravada robes, while speaking of the moral neutrality of your automatic assault rifle. Perhaps crystal meth is just as morally neutral because it could be used by someone somewhere for something good.

    No niggles yet..
    OK

    The 8FP.... livelyhoods...trading or selling of weapons????
    perhaps your reasoning is that" possession is OK as long as they are not traded or sold ?

    Oh to be a fly on the wall when you ask a senior where you can store your AK.

    I dont have to give up my guns when i become a monk? Awesome! That means i can take my computer, video games,bluray disks, and photography equipment with me to the monastery as well! This whole renunciation thing is going to be easier then i thought......
  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    There is precept in our zen school, one of the minor precepts that laypersons can take. One that all the monks must take of course. It says "do not possess implements of killing". [emphasis added] Of course that includes any kind of gun.
    @seeker242 -- Would you care to cite the source of this admonition? I've never heard it ... which certainly doesn't prove it's not true.

    I admit to thinking that the precept as stated, if true, is ludicrous. If true, I guess I would have to have my hands removed, since I might conceivably strangle someone with them. And get my arm muscles removed, since they bring force to the hands. And feet removed since I might need to walk to the place where I strangled my victim. And brain removed since plotting the crime might be necessary.

    Precepts, as far as I can see, are offered as reminders of responsibility, not as anything someone might actually get a gold star for accomplishing. Everyone has the capacity to lie, cheat, steal, kill, etc. Whether and how they choose to exercise the capacity and to what degree ... that strikes me as being the point.
    BhikkhuJayasara
  • Well How, as a free-born citizen, I recognize that I ultimately have the responsibility to provide for my family and protect them from violence. I'm the first and last line of defense. I don't have a moat or a personal security detail, so the onus is on me if some drug addled burglar breaks into my house.

    There is no practical use for a broadsword or a katana, but in the modern world they are clumsy for self-defense. A gun is fairly simple to understand, and with rudimentary training, you can learn to at least shoot in the right direction.

    I hike in the mountains where there are wild beasts 4 or 5 times my size. So a large handgun is just a statement of not wanting to be mauled.

    A handgun on the nightstand is a statement of showing extreme intolerance for people visiting violence on my family.


    On Jan 11 you joined New Buddhist.

    On January 13 you told us to pound sand. And you like a gun on your night table because you have extreme intolerance.

    Buddhism has much to offer you. I hope you'll stay.
  • A curious and incomplete description. I am deeply drawn to the contemplative wisdom in Eastern religions, especially Buddhism and in the west, Stoicism. I grew up experiencing first hand some capricious violence from bad people. I described my intolerance as being directed towards people who would break into my house and kill my famiy. That's a healthy intolerance to have if you're in the business of living.
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    edited January 2014
    Steve_B said:

    Well How, as a free-born citizen, I recognize that I ultimately have the responsibility to provide for my family and protect them from violence. I'm the first and last line of defense. I don't have a moat or a personal security detail, so the onus is on me if some drug addled burglar breaks into my house.

    There is no practical use for a broadsword or a katana, but in the modern world they are clumsy for self-defense. A gun is fairly simple to understand, and with rudimentary training, you can learn to at least shoot in the right direction.

    I hike in the mountains where there are wild beasts 4 or 5 times my size. So a large handgun is just a statement of not wanting to be mauled.

    A handgun on the nightstand is a statement of showing extreme intolerance for people visiting violence on my family.


    On Jan 11 you joined New Buddhist.

    On January 13 you told us to pound sand. And you like a gun on your night table because you have extreme intolerance.

    Buddhism has much to offer you. I hope you'll stay.
    Yes because we Buddhists are so much more wise and full of metta here then these other people..

    Its easy to have metta and respect for someone when you agree, its much harder when an issue like this comes up where people from different backgrounds have very little chance of understanding each other without much work.

    We all have biases and we all have beliefs that we cling to to be true.. All to eventually be given up through the practice when we are ready.
    TheswingisyellowDharmaMcBumJeffrey
  • NeleNele Veteran
    genkaku said:

    I think Oppenheimer had some regrets....late in life.
    Ditto, I believe, Mother Teresa.

    And Robert Gates, in an interview for his controversial book "Duty", said he left the DoD because he could no longer make decisions that would send men and women to their deaths, due to feelings of guilt and anguish. He has requested burial in Arlington National Cemetary as well.

  • I'm fascinated by the different background and takes on the subject. I'm not some frothing at the mouth gun nut (though you may disagree). Growing up, no one I knew had one.
    When I joined the Army and moved south and then to the northwest, everyone had one. It's not unusual to see people with Dirty Harry guns on their hips where I live now. I don't give it a second thought.
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    genkaku said:


    How many other men and women have the courage to shoulder their own responsibilities so boldly?

    I wonder if the founders of Browning agonised in this way?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_Arms_Company
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    Jayantha said:


    I actually have an ak, its a gloriously dependable weapon. My ak has never killed a person or an animal, cause neither have i, but it has hit plenty of targets. Its such an evil piece of metal and wood that i feel like a sith lord... Muhaha ha.

    I used to be an army machine-gunner and automatic weapons scare the hell out of me. Even more scary is civilians having access to them ( no offence ).
  • Civilians don't have access to full auto AKs without a laborious application and fees. Believe it's called a Class II. Never appealed to me except for maybe a Tommy Gun.
  • howhow Veteran Veteran
    edited January 2014
    I think the force of the emotional charge on this subject has much to teach us all.
    The answers to it for me calls for a levels of courage that I might not possess.
    What is harmlessness and just how far are any of us willing to take it?
    What fears harmlessness enough to say Ok, I like that part of Buddhism but I am going to have to draw the line here with this part of it because it threatens Me?
    Are the arguments we foster to justify our positions, based on Dharmic exploration or our own fears of loss?
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    edited January 2014
    how said:

    I think the force of the emotional charge on tis subject has much to teach us all.
    The answers to it for me calls for a levels of courage that I might not possess.
    What is harmlessness and just how far are any of us willing to take it?
    What fears harmlessness enough to say Ok, I like that part of Buddhism but I am going to have to draw the line here with this part of it because it threatens Me?
    Are the arguments we foster to justify our positions, based on Dharmic exploration or our own fears of loss?

    I will say that in my own practice ive come to enough confidence in the dhamma to entrust my own life to harmlessness, if i die then at least i practiced non-violence. Now these feelings go away when i think about my nephew and family members. They dont have the same confidence to risk their life, nor do i feel i have the right to practice non-violence at risk of their life. If someone attacked them i cant say id be completely non-violent in their defense.... Such is the nature of attachment.

    This is why I understand Frozens stance... And i wonder how many of us self professed peace loving buddhists would not defend their family from harm in a life or death situation. There is a huge difference between being all pious on a forum compared to a real life situation.
  • matthewmartinmatthewmartin Amateur Bodhisattva Suburbs of Mt Meru Veteran
    how said:

    I think the force of the emotional charge on this subject has much to teach us all. .... What fears [...] enough to say Ok, I like that part of Buddhism but I am going to have to draw the line here with this part of it because it threatens Me? Are the arguments we foster to justify our positions, based on Dharmic exploration or our own fears of loss?

    This sort of argument can cut both ways-- I've seen in the vegetarian argument people say, "oh you're grasping at your meat" vs "oh you are grasping at your rules"

    I think at the points where the community is not at consensus and has strong feelings, it might be worthwhile to remember that everyone would react strongly to a wide category of things-- human sacrifice (say of the Aztec beating heart removal sort), torture, but especially the most brutal sort. On issues like that, we presumably all agree and if we were faced with it, or a proponent, we would and should react vigorously. Hopefully with equanimity (about how things will turn out despite our efforts) & compassion & so on, but we'd be compelled to react.
    how said:


    The answers to it for me calls for a levels of courage that I might not possess.

    The areas that seem to cause the most heat (vegetarianism, gun ownership & use) seem to be the ones that ask the most of people to change in a difficult way.

  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    edited January 2014
    Off topic, but somewhat on topic as this is the direction the discussion has gone. Is it not in the Buddhist line of thinking that when a situation is presented to you, you reflect back what is in front of you. A man is hungry I will give him food if I can, my child is crying I will hold him, some one is visiting harm upon your family, what do I do? To me my duty, my obligation, indeed the right thing to do is defend them. I would not want to kill another, in so far as I was able, I would attempt the least harmful of acts to make this person stop their actions. The totality of this world, being both beautiful and ugly, is a fact; this is the world of samsara we live in.
    BhikkhuJayasara
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    edited January 2014
    For most it's okay the state should have a monopoly on violence i.e.: be the sole keepers of weapons. Governments are the biggest killers of people historically, I mean their own people, not just nations they decide to invade. Statically you have better odds of being killed by a cop than a terrorist. What does that mean? I don't know really. It just strikes me as funny that people are okay with institutions, whose history is swimming in blood, to have all kinds of death dealing implements, but a single man or woman wanting to protect themselves or their loved ones is not okay.
    Maybe the problem in this country (USA) is cultural. We have a violent history, replete with war and suppression of others. It's maybe what we value; might makes right-a meaningless, violent society where ME is the center of the universe-could this be the problem? As far as I know the Swiss or Canadian's don't have near the firearms deaths, yet there are a plethora of guns in their societies.
    BhikkhuJayasara
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran

    For most it's okay the state should have a monopoly on violence i.e.: be the sole keepers of weapons. Governments are the biggest killers of people historically, I mean their own people, not just nations they decide to invade. Statically you have better odds of being killed by a cop than a terrorist. What does that mean? I don't know really. It just strikes me as funny that people are okay with institutions, whose history is swimming in blood, to have all kinds of death dealing implements, but a single man or woman wanting to protect themselves or their loved ones is not okay.
    Maybe the problem in this country (USA) is cultural. We have a violent history, replete with war and suppression of others. It's maybe what we value; might makes right-a meaningless, violent society where ME is the center of the universe-could this be the problem? As far as I know the Swiss or Canadian's don't have near the firearms deaths, yet there are a plethora of guns in their societies.

    Government is our friend and looks out for us and gives us stuff.. We trust it completely..... Said no sane rational person ever. :-).

    Theswingisyellow
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    @Jayantha
    I love hearing from you!
    I hope you keep in touch with us when you go forth.
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    edited January 2014

    @Jayantha
    I love hearing from you!
    I hope you keep in touch with us when you go forth.

    Perhaps i will, for the few who would care, haha. This place has been a real tool for me to practice staying out of lay life arguments like the gun thing and government, etc that pops up..ive done it successfully on many occasions, and not so much in others. The fact that my views(libertarian) are a minority on this forum(and in the world in general) has been a good thing. Its hard to not argue over our silly opinions.. This is why i got out of politics, and soon enough ill only have to worry about dhamma..sounds blissful as long as i stay away from dhamma debates ahah, humans love their disputation dont they.

    Before i leave i will post my blog and email info for people to keep in touch. Only 4 more months, unless the process of acceptance takes longer. I may have to video tape my ordination for @how to see if he can spot an ak-47 in the background ;-) ahaha.
    Theswingisyellow
  • DharmaMcBumDharmaMcBum Spacebus Wheelman York, UK Veteran
    edited January 2014
    Look! Look! what's that? Why, it's my tuppence worth into this one... I read in a book from the NKT (I think) section of Buddhism regarding harm and killing. Possibly their book called Introduction to Buddhism (feel free to correct, point, mock and laugh or not) that the Buddha was on a ship once upon a time. He foresaw that one man aboard the vessel would kill the others. So he killed him (poisoned?) The reasoning being that by this one act he would save many lives so the karma would balance out.


  • Don't get me wrong-- I don't follow all the precepts-- I have kids, drink booze in moderation with food, tell white lies if it smooth out social interactions-- but I try to do that stuff conscious that I'm breaking a Buddhist rule and I have good reasons for it.

    It strikes me as strange that people in this thread are admitting that they casually break Buddhist codes when it comes to 'casual' vices, while patting themselves on the back for not defending themselves with violence - all this really suggests to me is that you presently enjoy the privilege of living in a relatively safe area in which you're not forced to make a choice about whether or not to defend yourself. When it comes to the immediate safety of one's family, abstract, moralistic notions of 'renunciation' tend to seem shallow and even narcissistic, unless one is actually a monk.

    I don't particularly like guns, and I don't own any at the present. I did in the past, however. After someone tried to break through my old apartment's front door with obviously violent intentions, I realized that I was inadequately prepared to defend my loved ones. So I bought a gun. I was totally willing to use to it to take the health or life of a predatory aggressor in order to preserve the health and lives of my family members.

    Samsaric? Indeed. Choosing life over death, or to preserve a loved one rather than lose them, is the rawest expression of samsaric life. It's also the most understandable.
    BhikkhuJayasaraDharmaMcBumTheswingisyellow
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Madhu said:



    It strikes me as strange that people in this thread are admitting that they casually break Buddhist codes when it comes to 'casual' vices, while patting themselves on the back for not defending themselves with violence - all this really suggests to me is that you presently enjoy the privilege of living in a relatively safe area in which you're not forced to make a choice about whether or not to defend yourself. When it comes to the immediate safety of one's family, abstract, moralistic notions of 'renunciation' tend to seem shallow and even narcissistic, unless one is actually a monk.

    ...

    Madhu, it's very common for posters in this forum to pooh pooh the "Buddhist codes" - and/or - Precepts that don't interest them, while being harsh with others who pooh pooh the "Buddhist codes" - and/or - Precepts they believe in. And, some of those same posters criticize others for cherry-picking. This forum has its share of hypocrisy, including some -- from time to time -- from me.

    BhikkhuJayasaraanataman
Sign In or Register to comment.