[Buddha-l] Re: Greetings from Oviedo

[Joy Vriens]

Benito Carral wrote:

>>If  I  look at a victim of Bali or Hiroshima, victims
>>of  intended  actions  purposely  committed  by other
>>humans, I don't see a difference. They probably won't
>>either. The only ethical decision I can make, is that
>>never  will  I  participate  in either action or will
>>allow it to be carried out in my name.

>    I  agree. As far as I know, the Old Indian guy taugh
> us   not   to   kill  any  sentient  being  and  didn't
> differentiate  between  "good" and "bad" individuals in
> this  respect.

But apart from the Old Guy (thera pudgala?) telling us to do so in order 
to be a good Buddhist, it is also IMO an obligation that comes with the 
self-attributed task of wanting to spread enlightened values. Already if 
one adheres to values like democracy, freedom, human rights, habeas 
corpus etc. one imposes them on oneself, before even considering 
imposing them on others. Wanting to impose them on others, one needs to 
be exemplary. That means that even if others resort to killing 
innocents, we should refrain from it, because otherwise it would 
banalize the act of killing innocents and somehow ratify it. The 
acceptance of "collateral damage" shows that Mappo is already there.

Also if we judge terrorists for purposely targeting innocents in order 
to obtain a better world as they conceive it, then why shouldn't we 
judge ourselves for purposely sacrifying innocents in order to create a 
better world as we conceive it? If we say that the objective is worth it 
(=the sacrifice of innocents), then we are no better than the terrorists 
in that respect. There are no doubt a couple of fallacies in my 
reasoning, but that's how I see it and I am open to being shown that I 
am wrong. Especially if we can thus avoid Mappo.

Don't get me wrong, I am not defending terrorism, I am not equating 
terrorism and democratic states. Terrorists despise enlightened values 
and blindly follow only their own interests, which they want to realise 
through terror. They are unprepared to take into account the interests 
of others. They are at the other extreme of the enlightened values that 
are those of the West. But in order to avoid Mappo it is our task to 
stick as much as possible to our values and not use methods that can 
hardly be distinguished from those of terrorists.

>  Having  said that, I must admit that if
> someone  would  try  to  kill someone from my family, I
> would  not  hesitate  a  second  in using the necessary
> counter-force. It seems that I'm irremediably caught in
> samsara,  so  I  will  try  to use this knowledge in an
> useful way.

I have never been confronted with that situation. I have never met 
someone who was confronted with it either. But I have seen it used a lot 
by those who want to make us accept that it is acceptable to kill in 
that case and thereby making us accept that killing in general is 
acceptable. Once that resistance is broken, the gate top Mappo is wide 
open.