[estelle]

Element.

What of the lay followers? What of those who do not spend their entire lives for peace, etc. Monks were sheltered, and still are. But everyone else is not. By the way, that seems more about the mind, the parable said nothing of defending themselves from having their limbs slowly sawed, their flesh slowly cut away, then their bones sawed at, the dust of those bones mixing into the blood and flesh, and finally their limbs pulled off, probably snapped off the body. Nothing out of the mouths of those monks, but pitiful screams for the pain to stop. There is no thought, thought is impossible, there is only the pain. See how gruesome that is? Do you honestly think a Monk was told to just take that? Or did you mean to show that it all ends with the mind? Because I do not see a Wise and logical teacher telling a person to take something like that.

[MidwestMadman]

What of the lay followers?

yes, it is quite a gruesome simile (which is why i kept it to the monks)

[truportodfa]

I think they had Buddhist warrior monks or Buddhist Samurai in ancient Japan, didn't they ?

I'm from Japan. A certain Buddhist sect united people to rebel against the government with military means in the 15th-16th centuries (civil war era). There might have been other military events justified by Buddhists, but I do not think that their ideas relate to our time.

[SaLifHoq]

Thanks Element, I knew there was more than one simile and teaching on this.

Bodhisvasti, this and other teachings give these examples as a lesson in attachment.
When one is willing to give up this body then they are not attached to it.
Violence is never an unintentional action, which also signifies attachment to something/someone.

*EDIT*
Also whats to say that it isn't Karmic effect that this situation happened?
And this could be the situation to create positive Karma by NOT being violent.

With Metta

[Kt-viagra]

I also practiced a martial art, so I often thought about use of the techniques I was learning in light of Buddhism. The school where I practiced emphasized philosophy (based on Zen) and they had a short lecture in every class. All skills were developed strictly in response to the attacker's movement, just to cause enough pain to subdue the attacker. In addition to physical skills, we had to pass "written" exams to advance.

I still do not know, however, how I will react if someone tries to kill me. Fear would be so overwhelming that loving kindness or compassion would recede into a hidden corner of my mind. I would just do whatever I could to protect myself and my family, and run away. This is my current spiritual level.

Someday, I hope I can stop an angry elephant with the power of my compassion.

[rozettasmolanov]

Thanks Element, I knew there was more than one simile and teaching on this.

Bodhisvasti, this and other teachings give these examples as a lesson in attachment.
When one is willing to give up this body then they are not attached to it.
Violence is never an unintentional action, which also signifies attachment to something/someone.

*EDIT*
Also whats to say that it isn't Karmic effect that this situation happened?
And this could be the situation to create positive Karma by NOT being violent.

With Metta

Okay. Sure. Violence is never an unintentional act. What of self defense? And unless the Monk did something to someone to have them do that to them, there is no such thing as a magical Karma that keeps the universe balanced, etc. Only an actual cause followed by an actual effect.

To say you cannot use physical force to defend yourself, that it is immoral, or bad karma, is to kill Buddhism. It really is. You don't defend yourself, or another, using physical force, for self defense, then you may as well say to every non-Buddhist, "Please. Go ahead, kill me. Rape my wife. And steal my possessions."

See how illogical and irrational that is? Try living in the slums of a city with that perception. Buddhism is meant for every day life, not just for those who have it great. To say violence, or self defense, is never justifiable is to kill/harm buddhism, yourself, and your family. It is a wrong view, taken out of context of the Suttas. The Buddha never had to physically defend himself, but he was a master of martial arts, so had the time come that a youngling was being hurt, and it was only him there to help that child, he would have used those skills. Otherwise, he would have been a coward.

[arrasleds]

And just to add to that. Why don't you tell your local law enforcement that it is not okay for them to protect you using physical violence, or to kill anyone who might be trying to kill your family.

Tell the local law enforcement, should your family be kidnapped, to not use any violent means at all to defend your family. You see, it goes both ways. You CAN'T say you won't use it, then ALLOW it by another. That is intentional harming/killing, because you are of full knowledge of it.

[irresseni]

Hi CompassionGiver, stopping an angry elephant would be a feat of compassion for sure. Quite a good analogy too.

I don't think anyone wouldn't have fear in the situation. The animal instinct (as we are mammals) to survive would surely kick in.
The "fight or flight" as it is called. If you can't win then run.

With Metta

[scoussysows]

You CAN'T say you won't use it, then ALLOW it by another. That is intentional harming/killing, because you are of full knowledge of it How do I control someone else's actions?
If I don't approve of an action, than that is my view. I have my views just as you have yours. I am to control your views if I think you have wrong view? You are ALLOWED to have your views and opinions, also your actions are your actions not mine or anyone else to control. Bringing Law Enforcement into this is a moot point.
They do what a society deems correct by the "laws" of that society.


With Metta

[conurgenceDen]

No, no. I am saying that you can't say there is no 'justifiable' violence, then allow it by another to protect you and your family. To allow it by another, with full knowledge, with the ability to STOP it, is your Karma as well as theirs.

Law enforcement is not a moot point. We are talking about self defense, and wether it is ever justifiable to use violence, by that I mean physical harm and/or killing, to defend yourself and your family. You can't say it is never justified, then allow someone else to defend you. That makes you a hypocrite.

[12ZHeWZa]

Yes we are discussing self defense. Is Law Enforcement self defense?
Did the Buddhist Monks fight the Chinese when they invaded Tibet? No, they fled the country or remained in seclusion and let others fight.
Are you saying they were hypocrites?

With Metta

[duceswild]

You believe we can survive without law enforcement? You know it's the law enforcement that keeps you safe to this day, yes? Or are you really that blind as to why you are so safe and secure right now?

Did those same monks tell their people that violence is never justified? Because if they did. Then yeah, they absolutely were hypocrites. They hid, ran, and never went to the forefront of the battlefield to help the sick and injured. Yeah, they were hypocrites. They ran to protect their lives, when even without violence they could have stayed to ease the suffering of their people, help the sick and injured, been there for them. But they didn't. They ran, like rats, to let their people suffer alone.

It goes both ways, my friend. Both ways.

[Stoottnoiciek]

Imagine a country comprised only of hard liner pacifists. They will never use violence, even in self defense, even when it is the only option left.

Now, imagine that country surviving without the military of the United Nations.

Hard to imagine, isn't it.

[sleelverrex]

You believe we can survive without law enforcement? You know it's the law enforcement that keeps you safe to this day, yes? Or are you really that blind as to why you are so safe and secure right now? For starters I have not insulted you in any way, I am not "blind". In the county I live we rely on each other, you can call 911 and maybe see an officer in an hour or so. I should stress maybe.

I'm sorry you consider His Holiness the Dali Lama a hypocrite. As well as hundreds of Gurus, Lamas, Monks and Nuns who fled or were captured and tortured for NOT fighting or involving themselves in the situation.
For that you compare them to rats.


With Metta

[allachakb]

It would be great actually. But it is never possible until all are Enlightened,

Besides with so many wanting to join a military, which is intention to kill no matter the "excuse" one gives, there will never be peace.
People have attachments, so there will always be a "reason" to take from another or to impose their views/opinions on others.

With Metta

[uncoosesoge]

So you rely on eachother. Great. And I wasn't insulting you. I'll show you why you are being 'blind' to the justifyable violence of every day life.

Your wife is being attacked, your not home, but your neighbor comes over and uses violence to stop the attacker. You are saying his violence was unjustified.

Your child is out looking to buy some candy at the store, a pedophile tries to snatch him up, a neighbor is forced to use violence to pry him lose from the mans hands. You are saying he was not justified in using his violence.

Your not under the rule of another country, because soldiers are there, prepared to use violence to protect you and the rest of your people. But you are saying their violence is never justified.

Right now, because of violence, you are not a muslim (Ever read about their constant expansion into europe until they were stopped?). Because of violence, we are not under Nazi rule. Because of the threat of violence, your country is free of chaos, non-stop crime. Because of violence, the thief is hesitant to come into your home. Because of violence, you exist. I can go on, and on, and on, and on.

You still believe violence is never justified?



Have you read the history of the oppression to the Tibetan people by their Monks? The Dalai Lama took money from the CIA for years. The Monks enslaved the people as if they were serfs. Harsh punishments, given by those monks, for petty crimes, every day.

The Dalai Lama was a young boy, and pretty much a figure head under the other monks who supervised him, at the time of the invasion.

[Irravepem]

Because of those young men joining your military. Because of that military. You are safe from outside rule.

Yeah, politics are not perfect. But there will ALWAYS be a military, and ALWAYS be law enforcement. Both of which use violence to keep you and your people safe.

[Tumarimmicdak]

Yes I have read the history. But not 100% were that way. But as you say they were hypocrites and compared them to rats non the less.

You justify violence in many ways, that is your view. I do not justify violence, that is my view.
One must do what one has to, that I haven't disputed.
And please show me where even in your replies, law enforcement, has been involved?

As to the military being somewhere else protecting the country I live in. They wouldn't have to be there if the US didn't decide to impose their view on how they will protect the world.

You do have a flare for the the worst possible scenario in most of your posts. Yes these situations do happen, that is not in question. But they don't happen every minute of everyday in every location one is in.
Who's to say they will ever happen to a person?


With Metta

[ordercigsnick]

The United States is not perfect, as every other country. We are not talking about politics, but facts...

Fact is, your not living in a chaotic country right now, because of local law enforcement who are ready to use violence to protect the people. I want you to go to that local law enforcement, and tell them they are not justified to exist, because of who they are. Who is the local law enforcement? Men and women who, every day, are prepared for the worst, prepared to use violence to protect you and everyone else.


If you have ever, or are prepared to, call law enforcement for help in a violent situation, and do not justify violence at all, your a hypocrite.

Let me ask you something, bud.

Do you believe that the violence used by law enforcement in your country, when given no other option by the offender, is not justified?

[bely832new]

Did the Buddha beat the crap out of Angulimala to get him to change his ways? I left my home town for a couple of years about fifteen years ago when I came back I found some old friends who I used to smoke weed with had got into doing heroin. One time I went to see them and a heroin dealer was bullying them over a debt, I beat the crap out of the guy - it didn't stop him selling heroin, it didn't stop my friend and his wife from doing heroin and it didn't make me feel any better either. Your miiltary may protect you from outside rule but is what it does to the minds of its soldiers in terms of the psychological dehumanisation of a perceived enemy and the mental health problems of those who have seen combat worth it?

I lived on the streets in London - a good 30% of the homeless people I met were combat veterans who had served in Northern Ireland - most had mental health problems and alcoholism.

Go out and commit a serious act of violence in the defence of something you care about and then come back and tell yourself it was justified. It doesn't work and unless your either a very special person or a sociopath you'll be living with a life sentence.