The Seeker wrote:I have actually thought it through. But being very new to Buddhism I was seeking understanding from those of more knowledge. I hope one day to be able to understand what the teachings truly mean, and only do the best I can to do the right thing.
Kindest wishes, Dave
Fruitzilla wrote:Anybody in favour of thinking it through for yourself yet?
Fruitzilla wrote:The Seeker wrote:I have actually thought it through. But being very new to Buddhism I was seeking understanding from those of more knowledge. I hope one day to be able to understand what the teachings truly mean, and only do the best I can to do the right thing.
Kindest wishes, Dave
Good!
It seems opinions differ mostly by cultures of origin. So that would mean there are no "ultimate" answers....
\Fruitzilla wrote:Anybody in favour of thinking it through for yourself yet?
Mr. G wrote:Well duh, the title of the thread is "Military and Buddhism". Not the "Military and 17th century Elizabethan Dog Walking Ethics"
Straka wrote:
Someone also mentioned being part of a non-combatant role, but ultimately, am i not just aiding the war effort?
Mr. G wrote:Straka wrote:
Someone also mentioned being part of a non-combatant role, but ultimately, am i not just aiding the war effort?
It's not so much the non-combatant role as forming the resolution, "Even in order to save my life, I shall not kill a living being." A long time ago I saw the documentary "The Conscientious Objector" about a WW2 medic who was a Conscientious Objector and went to war without a gun and would not kill people. The stories he told were harrowing and the fact that he survived against the odds were mind-boggling. Life is short and precious. It may be best to not gamble one's life in a potential life and death situation like that. It may be better to spend one's time in Dharma study and practice.
Mr. G wrote:Hi Straka,
From the Abhidharmakosabhasyam:
When many persons are united with the intention to kill, either in
war, or in the hunt, or in banditry, who is guilty of murder, if only one of
them kills?72c-d. As soldiers, etc., concur in the realization of the same
effect, all are as guilty as the one who kills.
Having a common goal, all are guilty exactly as he who among them
kills, for all mutually incite one another, not through speech, but by the
very fact that they are united together in order to kill.
But is the person who has been constrained through force to join the
army also guilty?
Evidently so, unless he has formed the resolution, "Even in order to
save my life, I shall not kill a living being."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some other threads you may find of interest:
Military jobs: Which are less unethical?
Buddhist Military Sangha (U.S.)
Straka wrote:
Now comes the time to find a teacher!

Straka wrote:I plan on beginning here http://www.charlestontibetansociety.com/index.htm once the classes start back up again.
I live in Charleston, SC (USA), though, if you are interested in looking still.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests