[Buddha-l] Re: Buddhist pacifism

[Tom Troughton]

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:58:01 +0200, Joy Vriens wrote:

>Richard P. Hayes wrote:
>> On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 17:21 +0200, Joy Vriens wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Also I consider "pacifism" or non-violence if you prefer an essential 
>>>and even constitutional part of Buddhism (even though it is more 
>>>pronounced in Jainism). Without it, I wouldn't recognise it as Buddhism.
>> 
>> 
>> I agree. As the saying goes "There are things I would die for, but there
>> is nothing I would kill for." If the price to pay in defending non-
>> violence is my own death, so be it. And if Buddhism is eliminated by
>> aggressors, I'd rather see it perish that way that to perish by
>> defending itself in a way that is a betrayal of its own basic
>> principles.
>
>My turn to agree.
>In which case something else will turn up instead because the appeal and 
>the need for peace, inner and outer, will never dissappear. In the same 
>way, I don't want democracy and freedom to defend "themselves" against 
>aggressors  through means that are antidemocratic and anti-freedom. They 
>would then perhaps win all battles but loose the war. The real 
>battlefield is the defense of one's democracy and freedom.

If I understand you both well, you would let loved ones suffer rather
than damage your own purity. Is this typical of Buddhist moral
thinking?

Best wishes,

Tom