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.
Instead of killing each other, maybe people should kill their egos instead... I think that the amendment in USA that states you have the right to own a gun is something quite wrong. Coming from the UK where you can get put in prison for 15 years for owning a hand gun, I strongly reject the notion of a gun. You also have to admit that america is and the front line of pretty much all modern warfare, bringing the majority of the infantry and leading the way so to speak. I am not angry at the world as it is something impossible to change, but I really would love to go up into space and view the world for how it really is without the boarders, and see it as one thing. The world would be such a wonderful place if everybody had little-no ego, alas it will never happen
Instead of killing each other, maybe people should kill their egos instead... I think that the amendment in USA that states you have the right to own a gun is something quite wrong. Coming from the UK where you can get put in prison for 15 years for owning a hand gun, I strongly reject the notion of a gun. You also have to admit that america is and the front line of pretty much all modern warfare, bringing the majority of the infantry and leading the way so to speak. I am not angry at the world as it is something impossible to change, but I really would love to go up into space and view the world for how it really is without the boarders, and see it as one thing. The world would be such a wonderful place if everybody had little-no ego, alas it will never happen
The Second Amendment is really neither a bad thing nor a good thing. Nor is it an absolute right, it can be rescinded upon certain conditions (such as committing a felony crime). Most gun crime isn't committed by legal gun owners anyway.
I spent many years in the military, before my Buddhist practice forced me to find another occupation.
Not directly. I was a medic at a military hospital during the war.
As far as i understand you were there healing people? Why would that not be Buddhist? So you basically were putting your life at risk by being in dangerous areas to help people that were hurt as i see it, and that sounds pretty nice of you to me...
If that is considered fighting in a war, than i should correct my answer to: yes, if it involved healing people but not killing people, then i would fight in a war.
I was in a uniform and a soldier, and even medics can be ordered to pick up a gun and join the fight, if the unit is desperate enough. All the officer has to do is point to you and say, "Hey, you! You're no longer a medic. Take this gun and follow me."
Plus for every soldier with a weapon, there's a dozen men and women in uniform that must toil to put that soldier on the battlefield. We all are responsible to get the mission accomplished, even if only one man actually pulls the trigger.
I didn't pull the trigger, but make no mistake, I would have obeyed orders. I'd vowed to do so and defend the country and constitution using force if necessary. The big problem with a soldier being a Buddhist is, you have a conflicting set of vows. So when the reenlistment officer came around one year, I declined. A personal decision made for personal reasons, not an indictment of the the honorable people I worked with.
you've missed the point, tom. If |you| have the opportunity to stop someone from killing another person*, then you're just as guilty.
edit: *(and you don't)
in every day life, choosing not to stop a murder is still a choice that has resulted in murder. this gets all kinds of crazy when introducing international politics, and is probably one of the reasons why he said monks shouldn't be involved in political decision making.
In the eyes of the law, which is created by man. Me myself, I would not kill another human being if they were killing somebody else, even be it my own mother. That is where your ego comes into it, 'it's MY mother, I will be sad if MY mother is dead.' You so if you kill somebody else as they kill a person, you are not guilty of killing, violating one of the most important precepts?
also, I'm not big into these "I'm so ultimately enlightened that I don't even care for my own mother and father" routines. I've never met a teacher that didn't care dearly for their mother or father, and didn't protect them from (perceived) threats.
and yeah. I would kill someone if they were trying to kill a person I held dear. I'm willing to suffer the karmic repercussions. which will mainly be that I'd have to live with the guilt that I had killed someone.
of course I care for my other, but would I kill another human being, no. Anyway, the topic was originally directed at a war, more so in that situation I would rather be imprisoned than to fight.
''It's also you're ego when you say it's "someone else" doing the killing. '' not really, of course there is a person there killing another person, that is a given. So if I have no ego, there is no person there killing at all? I am far from enlightened, but killing an ant is something I try to avoid, a person in a war for a country that 'I' 'belong to', never.
you're doing the opposite of what buddha taught, tom. you're trying to deny where you come from, and who you belong to (family wise). Buddha never said that these things were invalid, only that they were empty. You can say there's no person killing at all, but wait until someone beats the living shit out of you. then tell me the next day if there is no person hurting.
There is a person hurting, your parents are there, and you *should* defend them, baring unusual circumstances with the relationship with you and your parents. just because the relationship is empty doesn't mean it isn't there
we do. But I'm positive that anyone that would watch their mother get her throat slit (when that person has the chance to stop it at the expense of the person who is trying to kill her)is either full of shit, or doesn't have a regular mother/child relationship.
edit; spelling
edit 2: even buddha said matricide is one of the things an enlightened person can't commit.
Really, this is one of those "what would you do if..." questions where you simply have to understand that you won't know until and unless you're in the situation. When your mind is overwhelmed by adrenalin, you simply react. You don't think, and you're not in your right mind. That reaction might bring you to dive into freezing waters to rescue a stranger. It might bring you to attack someone to stop a killing, or throw yourself between the danger and the victim. It might cause you to curl up, shaking. You can imagine what you'd like to do, but people who've been there know you're barely aware of what you're doing, usually.
Our police force and emergency responders and soldiers receive a huge amount of training to get them to respond in familiar ways even when lives are at stake. Even then, it's not always successful.
People say heros are those who kill others, In fact they are slayers of corpses nothing more, Real Heros are those who slay the inner enemy of Ignorance.
Interesting. I used to think I was a "wage-slave" but, I was actually free to leave that plantation – and did. Now I'm just a tax-slave, and I am definitely not free to leave the evil government plantation. Government's taxes go to do all kinds of entirely unethical things, including paying for Global WARmachines. So, in some ways most of us will be dealing with the karma of paying for Global Warmachines. Welcome to the machine?
I'm trying to slay the inner enemy of ignorance. Wish me luck in that battle.
They are not free in the western world, of course not. In my opinion, one is free when one is liberated from attachment and awoken. But in another sense, they are still not free as everybody is subject to capitalism and conditioned. It is a kind of silent imprisonment that many people get blinded by.
Wage slaves are better than slave labor. At least in the west, they have a choice. But too many make poor choices. Dont underestimate the power of advertising.
Dictators fall when people are no longer afraid. The revolution in Tunisia was sparked by the suicide of an unemployed graduate whose fruit stall was burnt by officials.
In Tunisia, the unlicensed fruit stall vendor had his scale confiscated by officials. A fine was issued which the young fellow refused to pay and instead immolated himself in front of the official's office.
I heard the Dali lahma feels that using guns for self-defense is acceptable. this was a second hand read,so don't quote me.I do feel that stance reasonable.
WOW! Kill them all and let God sort them out? Seems insanely blood-thirsty and nasty.
Would that include all of the innocent men, women, and children (not to mention all of the innocent animals) who are maimed and killed, who have nothing whatsoever to do with all of these war-thirsty governments (and their agents)?
You raise a great point to which I have experienced through a friend. When I lived back in England I knew a girl who moved there from iraq as her family had to flee due to what was happening there. Daily she saw things we may never see, only in movies. She had friends that got hurt, that got killed, innocent people crushed like ants, schools destroyed, and why...?? The collective ego of a corrupt government, o yea, which government isn't corrupt
In the eyes of the law, which is created by man. Me myself, I would not kill another human being if they were killing somebody else, even be it my own mother. That is where your ego comes into it, 'it's MY mother, I will be sad if MY mother is dead.' You so if you kill somebody else as they kill a person, you are not guilty of killing, violating one of the most important precepts?
Then you are VERY attached to the concept of non-violence. As much as we all like to talk about non-attachment, compassion is also a part of the teaching, as is gratitude. For me compassion trumps attachment to non-violence. To not help a person in need who is being victimized because of some idea of a moral ideal is......well selfish in the extreme IMHO. If someone needs help I would act in whatever manner would help, and I'm sorry folks....sometimes humans may need to be violent. It is a part of our evolution. Without the ability and willingness to commit an act of violence, we would not have survived as a species.
Also I simply do not believe you. I think that if anyone on this board including you came upon say, a child who was being beaten and raped, we would step in, even violently, to save the child. And if any of you would not because you think it is not a Buddhist thing to do...I don't want to know you.
When we talk about War it is a bit different than this, but actually I think there are times when war is justified. When a population is being brutalized being one of them. However differences in economic systems, or ethnicities or religion alone are not.
It would really depend on the situation. I would fight against invasion. I would have fought in the Civil War, and in World War 2. But I don't think I'd be able to fight in a Proxy war, which is what many of our American wars have been. If I was in a situation where I chose to fight, I think I would always be pushing for a resolution, or trying to find alternate ways of solving the problem. I wouldn't jump right to violence, but I'm not going to lie and say "There is no situation that could make me kill someone." I don't know if I could have done what many Tibetan's did, and managed to stay peaceful. I would probably have a violent response to watching my countrymen be shot, dragged away and tortured. I know that even the Tibetan's wanted to fight back at times, and were back and forth on the issue. The Dalai Lama was always asking them to please not resort to violence. Shutoku summed up my feelings: "compassion trumps attachment to non-violence. To not help a person in need who is being victimized because of some idea of a moral ideal is......well selfish in the extreme"
Comments
Plus for every soldier with a weapon, there's a dozen men and women in uniform that must toil to put that soldier on the battlefield. We all are responsible to get the mission accomplished, even if only one man actually pulls the trigger.
I didn't pull the trigger, but make no mistake, I would have obeyed orders. I'd vowed to do so and defend the country and constitution using force if necessary. The big problem with a soldier being a Buddhist is, you have a conflicting set of vows. So when the reenlistment officer came around one year, I declined. A personal decision made for personal reasons, not an indictment of the the honorable people I worked with.
If if there was a direct and immediate violent threat to my life or friends of mine, I'd take action.
edit: *(and you don't)
in every day life, choosing not to stop a murder is still a choice that has resulted in murder. this gets all kinds of crazy when introducing international politics, and is probably one of the reasons why he said monks shouldn't be involved in political decision making.
You so if you kill somebody else as they kill a person, you are not guilty of killing, violating one of the most important precepts?
''It's also you're ego when you say it's "someone else" doing the killing. ''
not really, of course there is a person there killing another person, that is a given. So if I have no ego, there is no person there killing at all? I am far from enlightened, but killing an ant is something I try to avoid, a person in a war for a country that 'I' 'belong to', never.
There is a person hurting, your parents are there, and you *should* defend them, baring unusual circumstances with the relationship with you and your parents. just because the relationship is empty doesn't mean it isn't there
edit; spelling
edit 2: even buddha said matricide is one of the things an enlightened person can't commit.
Our police force and emergency responders and soldiers receive a huge amount of training to get them to respond in familiar ways even when lives are at stake. Even then, it's not always successful.
P
And yes, it would probably be much different if i really were in such a situation, so yup, can't really know what i'd really do.
Government's taxes go to do all kinds of entirely unethical things, including paying for Global WARmachines. So, in some ways most of us will be dealing with the karma of paying for Global Warmachines. Welcome to the machine?
I'm trying to slay the inner enemy of ignorance. Wish me luck in that battle.
Sorry. My last post was supposed to include this.
At least in the west, they have a choice.
But too many make poor choices.
Dont underestimate the power of advertising.
Hermitwin.
Pl note that hermitwin has the copyright for this phrase.
The same copyright that Paris Hilton has for 'Cool' &
Donald trump has for 'you're fired'.
It stars Daniel Radcliffe aka Harry potter.
Its a great movie about a father, a son & war.
Seems insanely blood-thirsty and nasty.
Would that include all of the innocent men, women, and children (not to mention all of the innocent animals) who are maimed and killed, who have nothing whatsoever to do with all of these war-thirsty governments (and their agents)?
Metta to all sentient beings
As much as we all like to talk about non-attachment, compassion is also a part of the teaching, as is gratitude.
For me compassion trumps attachment to non-violence. To not help a person in need who is being victimized because of some idea of a moral ideal is......well selfish in the extreme IMHO.
If someone needs help I would act in whatever manner would help, and I'm sorry folks....sometimes humans may need to be violent. It is a part of our evolution. Without the ability and willingness to commit an act of violence, we would not have survived as a species.
Also I simply do not believe you.
I think that if anyone on this board including you came upon say, a child who was being beaten and raped, we would step in, even violently, to save the child. And if any of you would not because you think it is not a Buddhist thing to do...I don't want to know you.
When we talk about War it is a bit different than this, but actually I think there are times when war is justified. When a population is being brutalized being one of them. However differences in economic systems, or ethnicities or religion alone are not.
If I was in a situation where I chose to fight, I think I would always be pushing for a resolution, or trying to find alternate ways of solving the problem.
I wouldn't jump right to violence, but I'm not going to lie and say "There is no situation that could make me kill someone." I don't know if I could have done what many Tibetan's did, and managed to stay peaceful. I would probably have a violent response to watching my countrymen be shot, dragged away and tortured. I know that even the Tibetan's wanted to fight back at times, and were back and forth on the issue. The Dalai Lama was always asking them to please not resort to violence.
Shutoku summed up my feelings: "compassion trumps attachment to non-violence. To not help a person in need who is being victimized because of some idea of a moral ideal is......well selfish in the extreme"