Posted on 07/11/2010 9:09:05 PM PDT by Lorianne
The Dalai Lama has sent a message of support for Armed Forces Day, which is next Saturday. In it, he writes of his admiration for the military. That is perhaps not so surprising. As he explains, there are many parallels between being a monk and being a soldier – the need for discipline, companionship, and inner strength.
But his support will take some of his western admirers by surprise, not least when it comes to his thoughts on non-violence.
Attitudes towards violence in Buddhism are enormously complex. There are some traditions that argue aggression, and killing in particular, is always wrong. But there are others which argue that killing can be good, when executed by a spiritually skilled practitioner who can do so with the right motivation. Tibetan Buddhism falls squarely into the latter tradition, and previous incarnations of the Dalai Lama have been such practitioners. The 13th, for example, modernised the Tibetan army.
What the present Dalai Lama argues, in his message of support, is that violence and non-violence are not always what they seem. "Sweet words" can be violent, he explains, when they intend harm. Conversely, "harsh and tough action" can be non-violent when it aims at the wellbeing of others. In short, violence – "harsh and tough action" – can be attitudinally non-violent. So what should we make of that?
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
You got to hold it sideways homes, like this. That way you get more respect.
Thank you for this article. I, myself, have noted these tenets in studies of Buddhism.
I was introduced to Buddhism by a twin sister team of Kagyus in Athens, GA. It was the kind of nuance shown in this article, and the teachings about revulsion and attachment that I credit for the opening of my mind to conservative viewpoints and my eventual conversion to sanity aka Conservatism. I’m Catholic now (attachment to the first two Commandments that I just couldn’t shake ;)) but still have a great deal of respect for Buddhism. I think it really paved the way for my faith in Christ actually.
Oh brother...such stupidity! I guess if the Dalai Lama said to kill all those responsible for our problems, you would go forth and obey... What a bunch of idiots! Are you believers nuts or just stupid! Want to say more, but common sense prevails...
ping
He’s right. Non-violence is not the path to peace if your enemy is an aggressor with no qualms about being brutal. Faced with a brutal aggressor, the pacifist is in league with brutality.
Kind of works together with the principal of non-aggression that a lot of libertarian espouse.
Very true. In Buddhism actions are seen more from the POV of being beneficial or negative for those affected by the consequences rather than from a rigid "this is right and that is wrong" POV. Being sweet and nice is not beneficial if you are appeasing a tyrant. Being violent is not negative if you are defending someone's life.
Yes, I say, let the enemy kill us and lets just get along.. I just can’t understand why anyone would question that...
What a bunch of idiotic people we have he on this site...
Long live the “current” Dalai Lama, of course, it is temporary, but who cares...
These views are not the views of FreeRepublic or any of it's members, affiliates, trolls, or newbies.
All such views will get you flamed and condemned to hell for all eternity
Come on... I know there are lots of people who would love to respond to my sacrilege... Come on, give it your best, give us your let’s just get along speech! You do live in a different world so let us her your “peaceful” statements...
I’d say that all who disagree should move to the Southern border.
Sounds like the Lama should stop burning incense.
That makes a lot of sense to me. My teacher has bluntly said that it is impossible to really practice the Dharma with a liberal's mindset. There are no "victims" in the Dharma.
What common sense?
Yep! I notice there are no respondents to my angry charge. Guess they are not that peaceful...
Your teacher has it right. I’ve been a Buddhist for 40 years; my main teacher was a Karma Kagu abbot. Once I listened to a sappy hippy rhapsodising to the abbot about a walk he had taken under sunlit trees and how the play of sunlight and shadow on the fallen leaves at his feet had transported him to a wondrous place. The abbot then calmly asked him how he would have felt if he had stepped in dogshit while transported to his other world.
I also heard the abbot once tell a neer-do-well to “get a job”, as rudely and as forcefully as the “Big” Lebowski tells “the Dude” to “Do what your parents did, get a job, Sir!”
Despite Buddhism being beset everywhere with the sappiest of fawning zombie liberals, none of these people have the remotest clue what the Dharma is all about. If any of them ever really “got it” they would be shocked to the very core of their existence.
As you put it so succinctly, there truly are NO victims in the Dharma. In fact it is the most rigorous and uncompromising way of seeing the truth that I have ever come in contact with.
Guess they are not that peaceful...
Who and what are you talking about?
Just those that think that the Dalai Lama will save them from all the violence... Just ignorant thinking to me...
Sorry, but people who think like that are living in a world all to their own.
You have been a practitioner for a long time. La jyalo! 12 years for me.
Despite Buddhism being beset everywhere with the sappiest of fawning zombie liberals, none of these people have the remotest clue what the Dharma is all about.
I asked about that once. The answer was so simple as to be obvious. The Dharma is medicine for those who need it. Who is more in need of medicine for the mind than a liberal? Of course no one is forced to take it even though it doesn't do much just sitting in the medicine cabinet.
Some people might consider it ignorance to assign the exact opposite meaning to what someone had said. ;-)
Ah, yes they might... except this is exactly what the believers here in the wonderful Dalai Lama think. You do have to understand that stupid is stupid (ala Forest Gump).
I haven’t seen a single person say that. Including the Dalai Lama who was quoted as saying just the opposite in the article.
Right... Peace on Earth... Long live the good! Evil be banished!.. What else do you want to hear?
Please, this kind of worship is no better than those in the 60’s that painted flowers on their autos and spread their fingers in peace whenever they could. Just a lot of crap!
He can be for peace all he wants, but it is not going to happen in my lifetime!
I don’t know what the heck you’re talking about. The Dalai Lama didn’t say anything remotely like that and neither has anyone on this thread.
Call it my antagonism against this kind of people worship. This does get my dander up - don’t understand why people will put other people on a totem pole and worship them. Oh well, people do need their gods, even though it is an idol or just another human being..
No need to apologize to me for that statement. That's my thinking to a tee.
There are no gods in Buddhism and no one worships people. You are misinformed.
Heh, okay, no more talk about your Dalai Lama then okay? Works for me...
Buddhists do NOT worship the Dalai Lama. Those fawning individuals that you are referring to haven't the slightest clue what Buddhism or the Dalai Lama are all about, to say nothing of LongChenpa or the inestimable Milarepa, or any of today's brilliant teachers, NONE of whom are advocating worship of people - ANY people.
I think you have Al Gore and the Dalai Lama confused.
Well, it’s nice to see you coming out for your cause... I expect that there will be no more mention of the Dalai Lama in the future... Let’s see just how that works out...hah.
After all, he is just a man and of no significance...
Sorry, you gave it away there.. He is significant to you and why I have no idea... Just another individual in a lonely place (due to politics)...
There is no ‘cause.’ Just cause and effect. lol
The thing people don’t get is that buddhism is not so ultra-ahimsa (non-violence) as it’s predecessor religion: Jainism. The Jains take non-violence to an extreme, having no animal products and aiming not to even harm insects or bacteria.
That is one of the best things said tonight! Yes, and it does depend only upon your reaction. Not anybody else...
That is what Buddhism is. That is all that Buddhism is.
Heh, well okay, no more talk about the Dalai Lama... That works for me... Do your own thing - of course that could be very negative ya know... Just what stops you from doing bad things?
Heh... You may have a point...
The certainty that the consequences will be bad and inevitable. That informs my choices.
Well, that means that you believe in something other than Buddhism and the Dalai Lama doesn’t it? You are making my point with every post...
I think “Do your own thing.” is not an accurate description of buddhist philosophy.
Like a previous poster, buddhism was the beginning of my way to becoming a Christian. I think it’s not too great a stretch to compare the buddhist world view with the Christian concept of Natural Law.
While I understand what you are saying... Buddhism and Christianity are not mixable... Actually, they seem to be contrary to each other... Not sure how you came to God through Buddhism, but I guess maybe that was just a stepping stone to reality...
That is Buddhism. I already said what I thought about the Dalai Lama.
Okay... You will not admit the obvious...so I will quit.
You have yet to say what your point is.
What would the obvious be? Do you have trouble just saying what you think?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.