[Buddha-l] Re: Buddhist pacifism

[Kate]

Hi Richard,

> I'm sure you've already done so, but I think one of the best sites for
> basic information on the kinds of questions your are asking is
> www.accesstoinsight.org.

Thanks for this link.  I hadn't joined this already as I didn't know of its
existence.  I'm not doing any sort of Buddhist course as such so I don't
know the various sources available.

> As for you analysis of self-defense or exterminating termites, the
> intention to get rid of pests is a kind of aversion and is therefore
> potentially unwholesome. More wholesome is the intention to get rid of
> greed, hatred and delusion, wherever it occurs. Termites are not greedy.
> They are just making a living, the same as you. As for an assailant (or
> a terrorist), there is nothing unwholesome in neutralizing his hatred
> and other harmful states. It is much less wholesome to harm him.

Sorry for the lame example.  It was the best I could come up with on a
Sunday morning.  Why do you consider getting rid of pests a kind of aversion
rather than prudent or wise?  I agree that termites are just doing what
termites do but wouldn't it be considered wise to stop them from doing so.
The act is done to save the house, not to kill the termites.

I agree it is unwholesome to harm an assailant which is why any reaction
should be as non-violent as possible.  I can't remember the details but I
recall reading a Buddhist tale in which a murderer was terrorising a town.
Everyone agreed that something should be done about him yet everyone was too
worried about burning in hell if they killed the murderer.  Finally one man
came forward and said that for the sake of the others he would do the deed
and risk the consequences.  As it turned out, his act didn't attract karma
vipaka after all.  His willingness to kill and go to hell to protect others
negated his having to go to hell.  Wouldn't this apply to anyone who is
forced to act in defence?  I thought this tale was illustrating the Buddhist
take on such matters.

Kate