Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseThe lesson Just War Theory, Holy War and Passive Resistance explained the Just War rules that came from Christian thinkers: a just cause, proper authority, right intention, last resort and proportionate force. Buddhism has no such theory. No Buddhist scripture sets out the rules for a "just" war. Buddhists have to work out their view from other teachings.
Key terms:
The first precept asks Buddhists not to harm living beings. War means killing, and it is driven by greed, hatred and delusion. Right livelihood is also against war, because the Buddha taught that trading in weapons is a wrong way to earn a living. So the arms trade is wrong too. Many Buddhists therefore say that war can never be fully right.
Some Buddhists, and some Buddhist rulers in history, have accepted war to defend the people from attack. They argue that a ruler has a duty to protect the innocent, and that doing nothing could let even more suffering happen. They say that force should be a last resort, kept to the minimum, and used with no hatred in the mind.
So Buddhists agree that killing is unskilful, but they do not all agree about what to do when a country is attacked. This is why the exam asks for different points of view. Emperor Ashoka, mentioned in Ultimate Reality in Buddhism: Do Gods Matter?, is often cited as a ruler who turned away from conquest and tried to rule by Buddhist values.
Majjhima Nikaya 9 is the discourse on right view. In it the monk Sariputta, one of the Buddha's chief followers, explains what it means to see things rightly. Part of it is about skilful and unskilful actions.
Applied to war, this means that killing is unskilful. It comes from hatred and delusion, and it plants seeds of more suffering. A person with right view sees this and tries to act from non-hatred and understanding instead. Right view is the first part of the Noble Eightfold Path.
A simile compares one thing to another to make a point. In Majjhima Nikaya 21 the Buddha tells his monks that even if bandits were to cut them limb by limb with a two-handled saw, anyone who let hatred arise in their mind would not be following his teaching. He asks his followers to train themselves to keep their minds calm, to speak no evil words, and to stay full of compassion and loving kindness, even towards the attacker.
The point is that hatred is never justified, even under the worst attack. Buddhists use it to teach that anger harms the angry person most, and that a follower should answer cruelty with compassion. It is a very high standard, and many Buddhists admit that it is hard to live up to.
Buddhism has no teaching of holy war. Killing for a religion goes against the first precept, so Buddhists see fighting in the name of Buddhism as a misuse of the faith.
Weapons of mass destruction kill huge numbers of people, most of them ordinary people. This goes against the first precept and against karuna. Many Buddhist leaders, including the Dalai Lama, have called for a world without nuclear weapons.
Terrorism harms innocent people to spread fear. Buddhists see it as unskilful, driven by hatred and delusion. Like other violence, it is wrong, even when its supporters say they have a good cause.
Saying that Buddhism has a Just War theory, or that all Buddhists are pacifists. The scriptures set out no Just War rules, and Buddhists hold different views on defence. Mixing up the two suttas: Majjhima Nikaya 9 is about skilful and unskilful actions, and Majjhima Nikaya 21 is the simile of the saw. Forgetting to name the teaching, such as the first precept, when a question says "Choose one religion".
(a) Identify three weapons or methods of fighting that could cause mass destruction or fear. [3 marks]
(b) Choose one religion. Outline two teachings of this religion that are against war. [4 marks]
(c) Choose one religion. Explain why there are different attitudes to war among followers of this religion. [6 marks]
(d) "A country should never go to war."
Evaluate this statement, showing you have considered different points of view. In your answer you should refer to at least one religion. [12 marks]
(a) 1. Nuclear weapons (1). 2. Biological or chemical weapons (1). 3. Terrorism, such as bombing a crowd (1).
(b) The first precept asks Buddhists not to harm living beings (1), so killing in war is against Buddhist teaching (1). In the simile of the saw the Buddha taught that his followers should not let hatred arise, even if attacked (1), because hatred is one of the roots of unskilful action (1).
(c) Buddhist scripture has no Just War theory, so Buddhists work out their own views (1). Many Buddhists say war is wrong because it breaks the first precept and is caused by greed, hatred and delusion (1). Right livelihood, which warns against trading in weapons, also points against war (1). Other Buddhists, and some Buddhist rulers, accept defensive war because a ruler has a duty to protect the innocent (1). They argue that doing nothing could cause more suffering, so force may be used as a last resort (1). Even they say that fighting must be done without hatred, as the simile of the saw teaches (1).
(d) Plan. For: the first precept says do not harm living beings; war kills innocent people and comes from greed, hatred and delusion; Majjhima Nikaya 21 says hatred is never right, even under attack; modern weapons can cause mass destruction. Against: some Buddhists and Buddhist rulers have accepted defensive war to protect people; Just War theory (from Christian thinkers) allows war as a last resort for a just cause; humanists and others may say that allowing aggression to go unchecked causes more harm. Conclusion: "never" is a very strong word. Buddhists would say war should be avoided in almost every case, but because they disagree about defence, it is hard to say it can never be right. The strongest conclusion weighs the duty to protect against the harm war causes.
In part (c), "different attitudes" means you must give two sides within Buddhism, not just one. Name a teaching for each side, then use "because" to explain it.