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.
Buddhists are Pacifists, right?
Hi everyone. I think I read somewhere that Buddhists do not believe in harming other beings and so they are pacifists. Is this correct? Would a Buddhist be allowed to serve in a non-combative position in the military?
0
Comments
But did you ever consider why no matter what you're going into the military for, you undergo basic combat training first? If they really need you, it doesn't matter what you're there for; they'll put a gun in your hand and expect you to use it.
The military exist to protect nations. The Buddha taught karma (action & results) is intention.
So yes. They could.
Okay but combat training would not be considered unethical since there is no actual killing involved, right?
If you go into the military thinking to yourself "I won't kill anyone", then you've already made the choice to disobey orders if it comes to that and to face the consequences.
Oh okay. I get the point now.
Ah okay. Thanks!
Start off at the beginning. Buddhists do not believe in harming other beings. Why might they believe this? What are the benefits of not harming others? What are the negative effects of harming others?
Think back to the last time you wanted to harm someone ... even if it was just an unkind word thrown at someone. Did you feel at peace or were you roiled up inside? Did you respond to your wish to be treated with respect, or were you free from the control of needing to be treated such-and-such a way? Did you improve your relationship with that person by your unkind words? Did you earn good merit by practicing patience with others, thereby increasing your positive karma and the likelihood that you would react with patience in the future? Or did you strengthen the imprint/habit of reacting with anger and self-cherishing, thereby increasing your negative karma, self-cherishing, and the likelihood that you would react with anger in the future?
If you look at how this operates inside you in your own life, then you start to understand why Buddhists do not believe in harming other beings. Becoming a better Buddhist is a matter of practice, of re-training and modifying what we do and how we look at ourselves and others and the situations we find ourselves in. If we cultivate loving-kindness, this is inconsistent with self-attachment and anger.
Good points have been raised about joining the military and what will be expected from one. However, my teacher, a monk who entered the Dalai Lama's monastery at age 12, was later assigned chaplain duties in the Tibetan Army in India for a while. Apparently, there are conditions under which a Buddhist can be in the military!
Ah okay. So if my way of thinking is correct, it would be okay to join the military if you joined with the intention of helping others in some positive way but it would not be okay to join the military with the intention of going out and killing the enemy? I guess, as in all situations, one must learn to weigh the good and the bad karma and choose the one that produces more good karma than bad karma, right?
but remember that the Militia is a chain-of-command thing. In one way or another, there is a point, perhaps, where you may have to deal with the association of killing.
Look, the best person to ask would be a member here, called 'Bushinoki'. He's in the Army, but I think he's in the medical corps, or involved purely in admin. I should pay more attention....
But I know several Buddhists involved in the military, so it's a question of remembering who's who and who does what......!!
Know that Intention is all. Your Intention is to NOT kill or harm other sentient beings, as a Buddhist.
But Buddhism does not condemn self-defence, even though it advocates pacifism.
Ah okay. Thanks!
In regards to self-defense, what exactly is allowed concerning it? Would shooting a home intruder be okay?
Personally, I'd try to 'shoot to maim' but sometimes, you don't have time to react in that way.
Intention is all.
yes, killing has Kammic consequences.
Intentional killing has more negative kamma than non-intentional killing.
Ah okay. That makes sense. Thanks!
"I am killing him to prevent him from killing other people and getting bad Karma. May he have an auspicious rebirth!"
Ever heard of the japanese sohei and the chinese shaolin? What about the wars Tibet got into?
Sinhalese Buddhism has a lot of 'holy war' histories against the tamil hindu minority.
Shooting to maim works great in the movies, but it isn't necessarily realistic. Police, for example, are trained that if you must shoot then you shoot to kill. They are trained to aim for the center of mass: ie the torso. Aiming for, say, the leg or the arm means a much higher likelihood of missing the target and not only not stopping them, but potentially hitting an innocent bystander.
It depends on who you ask, but I'd say that the Buddha wouldn't be against non-combative positions in the military per se. However, the Buddha, much like the Jains, stressed the principle of ahimsa or harmlessness. The main purpose of warfare is to kill others, and the Buddha was clearly of the opinion that killing rarely benefits anyone, if ever.
Buddhist don't have to be pacifists, and many of the Buddha's lay-followers were kings who actively engaged in warfare, but pacifism is definitely inline with the first precept and the principle of ahimsa. I suggest checking out Thanissaro Bhikkhu's essay "Getting the Message" for one perspective.
That's a bit of an oversimplification. I can speak from my own experience in the USAF - there's no way short of the airbase I was on being overrun by invading hordes that I'd ever have been asked to wield a gun or harm anyone. There are loads of jobs in the military that have virtually no possibility of putting one in the position of taking a life.
Personally, I think if someone were to enter military service in a role such as a medic, nurse, physician, chaplain, etc, and the intention behind it was to serve others while at the same time fulfilling a civic obligation to serve one's country, then there's nothing wrong with it. If your intention is to be a lean, mean killing machine, then there might be a little problem in squaring that with your Buddhist practice.
Peace
Mtns
The military is an institution that basically helps the politicians in power to keep their control
Maybe someone should tell that to Costa Rica, which abolished its military in 1948.
this comment is beneath you and i love it!
Not really. The closest I ever came to killing anything in the US Air Force was putting a few holes in a paper target on the pistol range, and that was when I was a cadet. Nobody ever asked me to pick up a weapon after that. I killed a few brain cells, but that was my own doing
For a karmic act to be complete there must be premeditation, the act itself and rejoceing after the act. So that if you are forced into a situation where someone dies at your hand you will not bear the full weight of the act.
One must also consideer the karma of the person comiting an act that would cause the use of deadly force.
Buddha teaches non-violence. But there are a few hundred million Buddhists,
some of them are soldiers, butchers etc. Are they real Buddhists?
Some monks in Sri Lanka support the war against the Tamils!
The military is so boring nowadays that there bombed the earth for nothing and without realization that it causes much damages to the earth and its environment. In fact, there is a united nation that they can sit down to discuss and make friendship last, instead of manufacturing bombs. The budget of all military spent on bombs in the world should be brought together and work out a constructive developmental package to build lasting harmony and joys, such as teething issue on poverty, water, agriculture and electricity infrastructure as well as climate warming:p
Right livelihood means that one should earn one's living in a righteous way and that wealth should be gained legally and peacefully. The Buddha mentions four specific activities that harm other beings and that one should avoid for this reason: 1. dealing in weapons, 2. dealing in living beings (including raising animals for slaughter as well as slave trade and prostitution), 3. working in meat production and butchery, and 4. selling intoxicants and poisons, such as alcohol and drugs. Furthermore any other occupation that would violate the principles of right speech and right action should be avoided.
So, as I read this, it is not okay to engage in an occupation that supports or facilitates murder, which any position in the military does to some extent. Even the individual who never holds a gun or sees the front line still takes actions that lead to death, same as with the politician who votes for war. So goes it for supporters of war as well, which I've been in the past. Each cog in the wheel keeps the wheel moving, with death, destruction and violence as the result.
I think I'd say, and this is naive I know, that war and violence are not ever the solution. The simply beget more war, more violence and more death. So, to support this cycle even in administrative ways is to support it's perpetuation and it's ends. To me this extends to my own personal protection. While I think that personal protection is reasonable, when no other means is necessary, I also think that to kill another or enact violence towards them is more likely a result of our own attachment to our bodies, our lives and our "self" and less to our desire to rid the world of evil. But that is a can of worms that is best opened in another thread, I think.
In this opinion I mean no disrespect to those who protect my freedoms. I respect and appreciate their sacrifice and know that many service members do their part out of good intentions. Their efforts and intentions often save lives and protect the innocent. And intentions do matter but in this case I don't believe they offer absolution either.
My two cents, as it were.