[Buddha-l] Buddhism & War: Use of Force and Justifications

[Dan Lusthaus]

So much fun to be sparring in public again. Let's not frighten the
onlookers.

However,

> > It is very instructive to keep in mind the genesis of those books.
>
> Oh boy! Dan is about to give us an example of the genetic fallacy.

On the contrary what I provided was the "pertinent nonfallacy." Why and how
Victoria came to write those books was directly on topic.

(To save
> you all a trip to the Wikipedia, the genetic fallacy consists in trying to
> dismiss an argument by discussing not its actual substance but its
origins.
> It is akin to the ad hominem, which Dan also uses with admirable
regularity.)

Actually the only one using an ad hominem in this exchange is you, since I
was never guilty of what you are charging me with, but you are accusing me
of something by which I am to be dismissed, sans evidence. My evidence? What
you said above.


> >Think about that: he was expressely forbidden
> > to protest war AS A BUDDHIST.
>
> That's not the moral I get from the story you tell.

I didn't realize the years have dulled your senses to that degree. A Soto
monk represents the institution, so his actions in public reflect the
institution, and he acts as a Buddhist par excellence.

> Zen teachers have discouraged their students from participating in
> demonstrations while wearing the garb of monks. It's not in a monk's job
> description to farm, do physical work, run for public office, vote in
secular
> elections or protest for or against governmental policies.

On which planet do those policies apply. "A day of no work [i.e., farming,
clerical activity, physical activity, cavorting with local officials and
even acting as one] is a day of no food." The participation and support of
the govt and the military during WW II by the Soto establishment was second
to none. So those disclaimers are disingenous.

For a completely different understanding of what a monk is and ought to be,
read the autobiography of Empty Cloud, a Chinese monk who lived well into
his 100s, and more than once put his life on the line to bring peace to
hostile situations -- even when he had to assume official roles to do it.
Like night and day to his Japanese contemporaries.

>But unless your
> claim is that nobody but a monk is a Buddhist, there is no merit to the
> conclusion you are trying to foist off on us.

Now who's playing the silly sophist?

Dan