Apology of a Buddhist Soldier

Capt. Lawrence P. Rockwood

Around the neck of every American soldier hangs a pair of “dog tags” on a metal chain. Their purpose is to identify the name, Social Security number, blood type, and religious denomination of the owner’s mortal remains upon his or her death. On the final line of my dog tags one finds a designation many find curious: Buddhist. I am one of the few Buddhist commissioned officers in the U.S. Armed Forces not of an Asian ancestry.

Although being a Buddhist in the U.S. Army is novel, it is a novelty based on simple geography (if I were a Burmese soldier no one would comment) and the fact that the relationship between Buddhism and the profession of arms is a subject given precious little discussion in the West. I have noticed that Western students of the dharma are often quick to erect a wall separating the history of Buddhism on one hand and the history of war on the other. I can certainly appreciate why. Many individuals, especially in this post-Vietnam era, are naturally drawn to spiritual traditions that appear untainted by the injustices of war. So it only seems natural that many of my fellow Euro-American Buddhists would be uncomfortable with the suggestion that soldiers in Buddhist societies have been just as adroit in accommodating the first Buddhist precept on nonviolence as soldiers in Judeo-Christian societies have been in accommodating the Fifth Commandment.

Considering the long historical relationship between Buddhism and the profession of arms in many Asian societies, I find the alignment of Buddhism with strict pacifism somewhat presumptuous. Whereas strict pacifism rests on a categorical rejection of violence, what has come to be known as the “just war” tradition rests on the mitigation of injustice by military force. In the West, the “just war” doctrine is usually associated with Saint Augustine, the seventh century theologian who argued that war could be a means toward a just end. Unfortunately, it was not long before the Christian church was using Saint Augustine to legitimize bloodthirsty wars, starting with the Crusades.

On the other hand, it was none other than Shaku Soen Zenji, the Japanese Buddhist monk credited with first introducing Zen to the West, who came closest to articulating a Buddhist “just war” doctrine. Just ten years after his influential address to the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, he defended Japan’s participation in the Japanese-Russian War and served as a chaplain for Japanese soldiers fighting in Manchuria. In serving as a military chaplain, Shaku Soen was following a Japanese Buddhist tradition going back for centuries. In his words are strong echoes of Augustine: “War is an evil, and a great one indeed. But war against evil must be unflinchingly prosecuted until we reach the final aim.”

The history of Buddhism and the profession of arms begins, as it were, in the beginning, in the fourth century B.C.E. Before his monastic career, Prince Siddhartha was a practicing member of ancient India’s warrior caste, the Kshatriya. A century later, the great warrior-emperor Ashoka, the first Buddhist monarch, built a memorial stupa at the site of the training hall where the young prince drilled in the arts of warriorship. The various codes governing the profession of arms were already highly developed in the Buddha’s time. Some of these even included military rules of conduct with ethical guidelines limiting the use of force that resonate with current international human rights accords such as the Geneva Conventions. From the days of the great Indian epic the Mahabarata, the Kshatriya warrior class had been bound by the rules of dharmavijaya, which included the protection of civilians and those no longer capable of resistance.

The monastic rules of the Vinaya prohibited monks from direct military service, or even observing military exercises. Yet insofar as war is one of the greatest causes of human suffering, it was regarded as a legitimate concern by the Buddha. He demonstrated numerous times that he was willing to address war as a political and social reality. For instance, the Buddha stopped a great battle between his own clan, the Shakyas, and their adversaries, the Koliyans. He is recorded as advising the warrior king Yoddhajiva that death in battle was not a path to salvation and discussing with King Prasenadi of Koshala the similarities of monastic and military discipline.

Beginning with the conversion of the Indian emperor Ashoka in the third century B.C.E., a significant factor in the spread of Buddhism across Asia was the sponsorship of the dharma by the warrior class in various Asian societies, especially in societies at the height of their military prowess. However, although many kings and soldiers followed Ashoka’s example by becoming monks later in life, there are no historical examples of rulers subjecting their realms to unilateral disarmament after embracing Buddhism.

There is a very important historic distinction, however subtle, between the ethical basis for use of force in Buddhist societies as compared with those of the West. This distinction is very evident if one compares the role that Ashoka played in the spread of Buddhism with the role that the first Christian monarch, the Roman Emperor Constantine, played in the spread of Christianity. After spending the greater portions of their lives as military leaders, both emperors issued broad edicts of religious tolerance. However, whereas Constantine’s edict failed to stop the cycle of religious wars that began with his death and lasted for a thousand years, Ashoka’s edicts of nonviolence and tolerance survived him and are still influential to this day.

Ashoka’s edicts succeeded in establishing an ethical tradition that, while not outlawing war, at least did not sanction the use of aggressive military force for the sole purpose of religious proselytization. Even though Ashoka himself did not completely dismiss the use of force and even retained the death penalty in extreme cases, Mahatma Gandhi pointed to Ashoka as his predecessor in his mission of nonviolence.

In China, Buddhism reached its cultural zenith under the patronage of the T’ang, a dynasty renowned for sustaining peace and prosperity by means of efficient military strength and organization. Remarkably, one of the main threats to the security of the T’ang empire was the expansion of Tibetan military influence in the seventh and eighth centuries under the Tibetan Yarlung Dynasty, the very same dynasty that was simultaneously introducing Buddhism to Tibet. Centuries later, the Tibetans skillfully converted the aggressively warlike Mongolians to Buddhism.

In Japan the military class influenced the development of Buddhism. The samurai military class aided the Zen, Pure Land, and Nichirin schools of Buddhism in shifting the balance of power away from the older Tendai and Shingon esoteric schools. Similarly, in Southeast Asia the triumph of the Theravada school over the Mahayana traditions of Buddhism was in part due to the sponsorship and the military conquests of the eleventh-century Burmese king Anawrahta.

The relationship between Buddhism and the profession of arms has not been limited to Buddhist warriors and monarchs, however; it has also included Buddhist scholars and philosophers. In the Mahayana tradition Buddhist masters often gave advice on what they considered the ethical use of military force. For example, the great second century Indian philosopher Nagarjuna counseled his royal disciple, King Udayi, on the need for a ruler to secure his domain from the threat of banditry. At that point in history, this would have been more of a military operation than a police action. The Mahayana philosopher Asanga even argued that it is ethical to forcibly overthrow a monarch who has tortured his subjects.

Western adherents of my own Vajrayana tradition often appear to overlook the fact that there were both secular and monastic military organizations in Tibet before the Chinese invasion. The monastic soldiers, called dobdos, belonged to a special class of monks who defended the three main Gelugpa monasteries in central Tibet. Traveling in India and Nepal a few years ago, I discovered that even today Gelugpa monks serve in special, all-Tibetan, frontier forces of the Army of the Republic of India. While I do not claim to be in any position to judge the doctrinal correctness of such monastic military practices, they do point to a view of the military profession that I have not found among Buddhist practitioners and scholars in the West. Even Sulak Sivaraksa—the renowned exiled Thai Buddhist peace activist who has opposed the repressive actions of the military leadership in Thailand and criticized the support that the military has received from the Buddhist hierarchy there - has called for the creation of an international military organization comprised of a permanent international peacekeeping force.

A real danger exists when a society is not willing to address military issues. This is especially true in a democratic society, where responsibility extends to each individual citizen. Too often the false cloak of righteousness can be used to mask what is really an indifference to the suffering of others. A horrendous example of this was the peace celebrations in the United States in 1972 when, even as “our” boys were coming home, there was nothing even approaching peace in Southeast Asia. The massive genocide about to burst forth on the “killing fields” of Cambodia would soon make it evident that what we were really celebrating was the distance between us and a war in which we retracted from further responsibility.

In general, peace movements and peace initiatives too often center on the prevention of war rather than focusing on the suffering of those already caught in the hell of war. War is to peace as sickness is to health. Just as it would be unfeeling for health care professionals to work only on the prevention of illness and not its treatment, I suggest that dealing only with the prevention of war and not the conduct of war is an inadequate approach to the suffering of war. Until just recently, the indifference of our Western societies gave a green light for the conduct of a genocidal war in Bosnia. The position the West now plays in the post-cold war world reminds me of an armed man sitting in hotel room with a loaded pistol hesitating to go to the aid of a woman being murdered in the next room. The fact that he is not sure whether he should be holding a pistol does not relieve him of his immediate obligation to go to the defense of his neighbor.

In any ethical consideration of war, Buddhist or otherwise, it is critical to examine the deliberate destruction of civilian populations in modern war, despite international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions. The introduction of personal firearms - which increased the distance between combatants - was a first step toward the depersonalization of one’s enemy. Over the last century aviation and the creation of weapons of mass destruction have increased that distance so far that we can no longer even see one another. To a military operator engaging a target, aircrafts, tanks, and even cities appear as nothing more than computer-generated symbols lacking humanity or physical existence.

I am not singing a song of nostalgia for ancient warfare. Even with ethical codes such as the Kshatriyan dharmavijaya of the Buddha’s time, atrocities were far too common. However, the history of the last century testifies to the fact that passing the colors from the more aggressive and selfless warriors of the past to the more collectivized and functionary soldiers of modern times has not been an occasion for celebrating the human race.

His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, once said, “Even in warfare, it is better to be aware of the suffering of others and our own discomfort for causing them pain. Warfare is killing. It is 100 percent negative. The way it is mechanized today is even worse. Where warfare remains 'humanized,’ I mean where it remains in touch with true human feelings, it is much safer.” The Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh, who personally witnessed the horrors of Vietnam, wrote, “You cannot just separate people and say some are violent and some are not. That is why people with love, compassion, and nonviolence should be everywhere, even in the Pentagon, in order to encourage nonviolent attitudes within those we think are our enemies.” As war becomes more of a campaign against economies and societies instead of battles between armies, the truth becomes obvious that today it is the unarmed civilian who has become the primary target in military conflicts. It is now completely acceptable to sacrifice a multitude of an enemy nation’s women and children in order to save even a mere handful of our own soldiers. We are truly in a post-heroic period of military history.

In September of 1994, I landed in Haiti with the Multinational Forces sent to provide a safe and secure environment for the return of democracy. Concerned with human rights violations occurring in the proximity of U.S. forces and having realized that my superiors had no immediate plans to stop the abuses, I attempted to conduct an unauthorized survey of prisoners held in the National Penitentiary in Port-au-Prince and was court-martialed for doing it.

The Army initially tried to discount my efforts as the actions of an oddity—a Buddhist oddity—who probably should not have been serving as an intelligence officer during a military operation in the first place. I disagree. The problem was not that I tried to bring alien beliefs into the military - as if I imagined that Buddhists held a monopoly on ethics or morality. My actions were based on American military tradition and international law, which, coincidentally, complement rather than detract from the ethical principles of my spiritual faith. Thankfully, due to the support of my case by organizations such as PAX Christi (the Catholic Peace Movement), the Friends Service Committee, and Catholic Workers, and by many ministers, rabbis, priests, bishops, and nuns, the Army wisely decided to drop all references to religion in their case against me. Sentenced to dismissal from the Army rather than prison by a military court-martial last May, I am appealing my conviction for disobedience and insubordination on principles of superior international law. I will remain on active duty until the final review of my case by the Secretary of the Army and Court of Military Appeals.

The Buddha counseled his followers to accept the world as it is while at the same time using every means at our disposal to relieve the suffering of others. George Bernard Shaw said: “The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them: that’s the essence of inhumanity.” These words apply to those who hate wars, those who fight them, and those who do both.



Capt. Lawrence P. Rockwood is a decorated soldier and a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner who has served as a counterintelligence officer in the U.S. Army.

Original Article at: http://www.tricycle.com/feature/apology-a-buddhist-soldier

Win or Lose

The phrase "Buddhism is win or lose" may not sit easily with popular images of a "peaceful" Buddhist approach to life. It may even sound like an invitation to stir up conflict.
However, what this phrase describes is not confrontation between antagonistic individuals, but rather the internal spiritual struggle which is the reality of our lives. As SGI President Daisaku Ikeda says: "The universe, this world and our own lives are the stage for a ceaseless struggle between hatred and compassion, the destructive and constructive aspects of life." Our challenge, moment by moment, is to continue striving to create maximum value and to never be defeated or give up, regardless of the obstacles we may encounter.

The struggles we face might range from the apparently mundane (summoning the energy to take out the trash or write a letter to an aging relative) to the vast (campaigning to ban nuclear weapons), but the essential challenge is the same. It is to overcome our own weakness, fear or inertia in a given moment and take action for the sake of the happiness of ourselves and others.
So where does Buddhism play a role in such daily battles?
Ideally there is no separation between daily life and Buddhism. Buddhism does not exist in the realm of theory, and as Nichiren wrote: "The purpose of the appearance in this world of Shakyamuni Buddha, the lord of teachings, lies in his behavior as a human being."
Nichiren also stressed that it is victory as a human being--including both tangible achievements and moral or spiritual victories which may be invisible to others--that matters, rather than recognition in the form of promotion or reward in society. In 13th-century Japan, people's lives were utterly dependent on the decisions of their rulers or local lords, so to set one's own internal standards for success required great courage.
He wrote: "Buddhism primarily concerns itself with victory or defeat, while secular authority is based on the principle of reward and punishment. For this reason, a Buddha is looked up to as the Hero of the World..."

The value of our victory also depends on the scale of the challenge we tackle. For a champion bodybuilder to lift a heavy suitcase scarcely counts as a victory. It is only when we push ourselves beyond our limits that our success becomes meaningful to ourselves and respected by others. Living a "safe" existence in which we merely abide by society's rules is to shirk the bigger challenges involved in living in a way which both maximizes our positive, creative influence and actively tackles those forces which cause suffering and abuse.

Whether we are striving for promotion at work or encouraging a friend battling depression, in order to succeed we need courage, perseverance and the spiritual strength to withstand hardship and moments of hopelessness. Nichiren stresses that if we are fainthearted we will surely fail, and we each know how miserable it feels to be defeated by our own weakness or cowardice.

Nichiren's own life provides an example of supreme courage in the face of opposition and persecution, and the Buddhist practice he established can help us clarify our goals and also provide tools with which to reach them.
For Nichiren Buddhists, the greatest good toward which one can strive is spreading a deeper understanding of the limitless potential for courage, wisdom and compassion which exists in every individual's life--the hidden treasures collectively described as Buddhahood.
Through chanting "Nam-myoho-renge-kyo" which activates this potential, we can deepen our resolve to achieve our goals and develop the strength necessary to win over any obstacles, internal and external, which might hinder our progress. And as we see evidence of the efficacy of the combination of this strong prayer, determination and action in concrete positive results in our lives, we dare to take on bigger, broader challenges and also inspire others to tackle their problems with renewed hope of success.

In the words of SGI President Ikeda: "Buddhism concerns itself with winning. When we battle a powerful enemy, either we will triumph or we will be defeated--there is no middle ground. Battling against life's negative functions is an integral part of Buddhism. It is through victory in this struggle that we become Buddhas."

[ Courtesy July 2006 SGI Quarterly]

Dalai lama's letter to UK Buddhist Military members

I am honoured to have been invited to address members of the Buddhist community serving in the Royal Navy, the British Army and the Royal Air Force on the occasion of your annual conference.I have always admired those who are prepared to act in the defence of others for their courage and determination.

In fact, it may surprise you to know that I think that monks and soldiers, sailors and airman have more in common than at first meet the eye. Strict discipline is important to us all, we all wear uniform and we rely on the companionship and support of our comrades.Although the public may think that physical strength is what is important, I believe that what makes a good soldier, sailor or airman, just as what makes a good monk is inner strength. And inner strength depends on having a firm positive motivation. The difference lies in whether ultimately you want to ensure others well being or whether you want to wish them harm.Naturally, there are some times when we need to take what on the surface appears to be harsh or tough action, but if our motivation is good is actually non-violent in nature. On the other hand if we use sweet words and gestures to deceive, exploit and take advantage of others, our conduct may appear agreeable, while we are actually engages in quite unacceptable violence.

The ultimate purpose of Buddhism is to serve and benefit humanity; therefore I believe that what is important for Buddhists is the contribution we can make to human society according to our own ideas and values. The key to overcome suffering and ensuring happiness is inner peace. If we have that we can face difficulties with calmness and reason, while our inner happiness remains undisturbed. The teachings of love, kindness and tolerance, the conduct of non-violence as I have explained above, and specially the Buddhist theory that all things are relative are a source of that inner peace.It is my prayer that all of you may be able to do your duty and fulfil your mission in due course when that is done to return to your homes and families.

Dalai Lama16 May, 2009.

Small Efforts

SMALL incremental efforts can lead to great victory in life. The same principle applies to our struggle for kosen-rufu. One-to-one dialogue sets the giant wheel of history in motion
.THOSE who spread the Law are most noble. We must not allow ourselves to be swayed by such things as social standing or wealth. We must not be defeated by the eight winds of life’s changing fortunes. Those who succumb to them are not disciples of Nichiren Daishonin.

NICHIREN DAISHONIN wrote: “The popular proverb says that ‘one is the mother of ten thousand’.” (MW5, p112) One truly capable person who stands up resolutely can lead ten thousand people to happiness. This one determined person is the basis for all victory. It is important to find such “individuals” and foster them, while at the same time, endeavouring to become such an “individual” oneself.

JUST as a well-nourished tree grows steadily, the eyes of a person who lives in harmony with the True Law will become those of the Buddha and the Law. To put it another way, the perspective that derives from faith is identical to observations made by the Buddha himself. Therefore, it is important to view everything from the standpoint of faith. Victory will be yours if you have the fundamental attitude in your daily life.

WHETHER or not you have courage will greatly influence your happiness. If you have courage, you can become a capable person within society. You can also overcome your own weakness, and direct your life from a course of negativity and suffering towards one of happiness and virtue.

THE STORY OF OHASHI NO TARO

The shogun said: “From times past I have heard various reports regarding the power of the Lotus Sutra, and on two instances I myself have received proof of that power. The first was when my father was beheaded by the grand minister of state and lay priest.13 My misery was beyond expression. I did not know what god or Buddha to appeal to, but the nun Myoho14 of Mount Izu taught me to read the Lotus Sutra. When I had read it a thousand times, the priest Mongaku15 of Takao brought me the head of my late father and showed it to me. After that I was able not only to revenge myself on my father’s enemies, but to become the military commander of all the warriors in Japan. All of this was due solely to the power of the Lotus Sutra.

Gosho page 126

A SAGE AND AN UNENLIGHTENED MAN (I)

“We may compare these two kinds of practice to the two ways of the civil and the military used in governing a nation. There is a time when military measures should take precedence, and a time when civil measures ought to be emphasized. When the world is at peace and calm prevails within the country, then civil measures should take precedence. But when the barbarian tribes to the east, south, west, and north, fired by wild ambitions, rise up like hornets, then military measures should come first.
“Though one may understand the importance of both civil and military arts, if one does not understand the time, donning armor and taking up weapons when all countries are calm and peaceful and there is no trouble anywhere throughout the world, then one’s actions will be wrong. On the other hand, one who lays aside one’s weapons on the battlefield when enemies are marching against one’s ruler and instead takes up a writing brush and inkstone is likewise failing to act in accordance with the time.

Nichiren's gosho

In your case, you are a member of a warrior family, an evil man who day and night is involved in the business of killing. Since you have not left your household [to become a priest], but have remained a warrior to the present, by what means can you escape the three evil paths? Should you not think about this very carefully?

The heart of the Lotus Sutra is the revelation that one may attain supreme enlightenment in one’s present form without altering one’s status as an ordinary person. This means that without casting aside one’s karmic impediments one can still attain the Buddha way. Thus T’ien-t’ai said, “The other sutras only predict Buddhahood . . . for the good, but not for the evil; . . . This [Lotus] sutra predicts Buddhahood for all.”22 And Miao-lo said, “The meaning of the perfect teaching lies solely in the fact that those who oppose can be saved as well as those who follow.