Terrorism A Buddhist Response -- By Ven. Omalpe Sobhita Thero(Religious Advisor, Bodhiraja Buddhist Society)

Buddhism does not support terrorism

Five years after 911, the horrors of terrorism continue to haunt the world while the war against terrorism intensifies. Whatever the causes, religious, ethnic or ideological, terrorism is an evil, marked by malice and fear. It involves the gross violation of human rights, senseless killing of innocent lives and social disorder. Terrorism cannot be condoned by any religion which emphasizes non-violence and peace. The first of the five precepts (panca sila) observed by Buddhists states:

"Panatipata veramani sikhapaddam samadiyami""I refrain from the taking of all lives."

The Buddha said: All are afraid of the rod. Of death all are afraid. Having made oneself the example, One should neither slay nor cause to slay.

Buddhism does not glorify war. Neither does it encourage Buddhists to sacrifice their lives for their beliefs. In fact, those who go to battle thinking that they are doing their country or religion honour are misled.

"When a warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, his mind is already seized, debased, & misdirected by the thought: 'May these beings be struck down or slaughtered or annihilated or destroyed. May they not exist.' If others then strike him down & slay him while he is thus striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the hell called the realm of those slain in battle. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When a warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb." Yodhajiva Sutta

There is little argument that terrorism is not supportable in Buddhism. But what about the war against terrorism which has drawn as much criticism, especially when some governments themselves are carrying out gross violations of human rights. What is the Buddhist response as this too involves violence and the killing of lives?

Buddhism does not support war against terrorism

The idea of revenge - an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth- is rejected in Buddhism. Instead, the Buddha teaches tolerance, compassion and forgiveness. The Buddha said,

"In those who harbor such thoughts as, "He abused me, he struck me, he overcame me,he robbed me," hatred never ceases... In those who do not harbor such thoughts, hatred will cease."

"Hatred never ceases through hatred in this world; through love alone they cease. This is an eternal law." Dhammapada

From this, we may say that from the Buddhist perspective, both terrorism and the war against terror are morally wrong. But what happens when there is no room for reason, when all efforts to seek peaceful resolutions fail and when retaliation by force is the only option? In this instance, what do we base our judgment of what is right or wrong?

Use of force - right or wrong?

In our everyday life, the use of force is sometimes necessary in varying degrees. We may punish a child who misbehaves or shoot a mad dog attacking people in the street. Under difficult circumstances, police or army has to use force to stop a hijacker from blowing up a plane or a man running amok with a gun in a school, or even to save a woman intent on jumping off the top of a building with her baby in hand.

The intention behind such use of force is a selfless one; they are carried out with no hatred or ill will but for the welfare of the others and many. Many people would consider them as commendable.

So what about the ruler or government who engages in military action as a last resort with the intention of safeguarding his people and nation? In the Agganna Sutta, the king is said to be Great Elect because he is elected by the people as a whole (mahajana-sammato); his power is vested by the people and his duty is to serve the people. He should be "indignant at that whereat one should rightly be indignant, censure that which should rightly be censured, banish him who deserves to be banished."

The protection of the citizens and territory from external and internal threats is one of the foremost duties of a government as told to King Katthiya in the Cakkavathi Sihananda Sutta. A ruler must fulfill 4 duties:

1. To provide righteous care, ward and protection to all citizens, including the people of all professional classes, religious teachers and the army.

2. To ensure that there is no crime.

3. To take care of the economic well being of the people.

4. To enforce policies which are based on righteous principles and the leaders are to act in consultation with enlightened religious teachers and philosophers in decision making.

The Buddha was well - versed in state and warfare. He was in frequent consultations with many kings and princes who sought his advice. Nowhere in his teachings did he applaud or honour war because both victory and defeat bring undesirable effects.

"Victory brings forth hatred. The defeated lie in grief. The one who is calm and of pacified mind puts aside both victory and defeat and lies in comfort." Sangama Sutta

However, one can find in the Jataka stories, recounts of the past lives of the Buddha, that suggest fighting back is acceptable. In the Vaddha Sukara Jataka (No. 283), a herd of boars were terrorized by a ferocious tiger which killed many in their group. To defend themselves, the boars banded together and retaliated, thus killing the tiger and his master who was living as an ascetic in a cave. Witnessing this, the Bodhisattva who was a deity dwelling in the forest expressed Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! in approval.

In the Upayakausalya Sutra of the Mahayana texts, the Buddha killed a man to keep him from killing others and suffering the consequences in hell. As a result, the man was reborn in one of the realms of heaven.

Any action taken for the welfare of the many can be considered "bahujana hitaya". In our response to the war on terrorism, we ought to consider the motives behind it and the means employed. The problem is that in the real world, the line between black and white is often not so clear.