I didn't get through it all (lack of time), but I think the author has a very different understanding of Buddhism than I do. He clearly misunderstands the "hatred can only be overcome by love" by thinking "love" equals "pacifism", which is simplistic and misguided.
Buddhism is not about passivity and pacifism at all costs. It's perfectly fine to defend oneself or enforce the rule of law; those are required elements of human society.
On the other hand, while it might be ultimately necessary to use violence to defend oneself and enforce the rule of law, those should still be methods of last resort; the goal should be a society where violence is not necessary for any purpose, including self-defense and policing. Of course, that's a utopian ideal that isn't likely to happen in this world...
But understanding and love -- which of course includes the "tough love" of enforcing lawfulness and defending oneself -- remains the only way that hatred might ever be successfully addressed, at least IMO.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-09-04 01:44 am (UTC)Buddhism is not about passivity and pacifism at all costs. It's perfectly fine to defend oneself or enforce the rule of law; those are required elements of human society.
On the other hand, while it might be ultimately necessary to use violence to defend oneself and enforce the rule of law, those should still be methods of last resort; the goal should be a society where violence is not necessary for any purpose, including self-defense and policing. Of course, that's a utopian ideal that isn't likely to happen in this world...
But understanding and love -- which of course includes the "tough love" of enforcing lawfulness and defending oneself -- remains the only way that hatred might ever be successfully addressed, at least IMO.