A Conversation for Pacifism

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 1

Vintermann (VnnMint's updated name)


Looking for a little advice on my first article. Should I extend it? If so, any suggestions?

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 2

Will Of God

Buddists generally practise non-violent action, but have no problem with violent reaction. Unlike the Amish who (most of them anyway) practise complete pacifism.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 3

Vintermann (VnnMint's updated name)

An Amish who does not practice complete pacifism will face sanctions. They're even stricter on that than other mennonites or quakers.

I got from the encyclopedia britannica that Buddha demanded strict pacifism from his followers. If some buddhists would like to inform me on this topic then feel free.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 4

Will Of God

I will take the classic (if media enhanced) example of teaching monks self-defense.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 5

Gnomon - time to move on

This is an interesting article.

Your heading "Overview" seems to be wrong. Change it to "Origins of Pacifism".

Then add a section at the end called "Pacifism Today". Include in this section mention of the Amish community, the conscientious objectors to war such as Bertrand Russell, and perhaps finish by mentioning that neutral countries like Switzerland and Ireland are not pacifist. Although they refuse to fight in anybody else's wars, they have their own defense forces to be used if anybody attacks them.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 6


Hi, nice subject but for me it seems just a nice start. Surely there is so much more to be said.


A583021 - Pacifism

Post 7

Dr Hell

Nice topic but the entry left me wanting more.

Apropos: Shouldn't it be 'The Buddha said that...' (with the darticle 'the') instead of 'Buddha said that...'... I mean: Buddha is not the guy's name, Buddha is his 'Enlighted condition'. Just asking.

Oh, another thought just surprised my brain! As I see this entry, it is quite focussed on the religious aspects of pacifism. Pacifism, though, can be fairly independent from religion. (Would you call Indians pacifistic? Not the Incas. But what about the Australian Aborigenes?) What about militant pacifists? What about Greenpeace?

Hmmmm.... Just thoughts.



A583021 - Pacifism

Post 8

Monsignore Pizzafunghi Bosselese

typo: there's one 'chuch' and many 'millitary' which should read 'military'.

Apart from the suggestions above there's also Jehova's Witnesses which might be worth to be mentioned.

MnnVint, please don't get that wrong!. It's *your* entry and suggestions from others (Scouts or not) are just suggestions. But at least a comment from you would be in order smiley - winkeye

Bossel (Scout)

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 9

Sea Change

typo: Jainism is describes as 'syncreisitic' I think you mean syncretistic.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 10

Vintermann (VnnMint's updated name)

Thanks for the typo warning. The Jehova's witnesses yes, I know very little about their pacifistic beliefs. I used to think that they just refused to participate in war because they consider all worldy governments totally corrupted by the devil, but I'm not so sure. The only ones I've spoken with on the issue seemed to have much the same basis for not going into the army as me, but I don't know if that's an official policy.

I'll look into it.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 11


You may think this flippant, but see http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A600085 for a take on pacifism in personal situations. I wrote it before I'd read this...


A583021 - Pacifism

Post 12

Martin Harper

Perhaps worth mentioning that some countries have an option of either doing conscription in the army, or doing time with the 'Peace Corps' or what have you. I too would like to see something about non-religious pacifism, and the links to Martin Luther King's non-violent protests.

Also might be worth mentioning the problems with the 'peace tax' idea - namely that since people get the benefits from a standing army, they ought to contribute to it. Benefits like military intervention in times of national crisis {foot and mouth disease in the UK}, protection from invading countries and terrorists, and keeping world peace vaguelly intact.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 13


Nice article, you might want to add the fact that military service is a dying idea, most standing armies would prefer not to have it as it is an enormous drain on resources.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 14

Vintermann (VnnMint's updated name)

Hi, thanks for a lot of good tips, I try to write in as many of them as I can. Lucinda, the objections you raise to peace tax could equally reasonably be applied to conscientous objection itself, but I take the point that I was perhaps a bit too subjective on that topic. I'll try to do something about it.
Oh, a question (this is probably in some help file somewhere, but right now it's easier to ask than to go dig it up. Hope it's OK.):
Can I link to (other) articles that aren't accepted into the guide yet? I linked to "The ultimate martial art", which I though was very good

Tip to scouts, perhaps?

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 15

Monsignore Pizzafunghi Bosselese

You can link to any entry, of course! If the entry you're linking to isn't recommended at the time a SubEd is working at yours then the link might be deleted from the Sub's copy, but not from your original smiley - smiley

I'm using the following method if referencing a recommended entry (not yet the case here, anyway): in GuideML the link looks like this

The 'recommended' bit is ignored by the server because of the blank in between, hence the link works. And the SubEd will see the GuideML and hopefully goes out to check whether there's a copy (with the final A-number) around.

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 16


Thanks for the link, I've returned the favour! smiley - cheers

A quick addition to the above: if both entries get recommended any time close together, and one or both of us keeps an eye on both of them, we can let the respective subeds know the link just needs to be updated, rather than removed (Edited Guide versions of your entries get a new number, and you keep the original entry with the original number).


A583021 - Pacifism

Post 17


This doesn't seem like a bad time to mention that I like and appreciate this entry quite a lot. I don't see any problems, content-wise. Stylistically, I think that Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, should be capitalized.

Unless you mind, I'm going to link to this entry from A630604 - War - The Card Game, which I just wrote.

Thanks MnnVint! smiley - ok

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 18


nice article smiley - smiley
a slight typo on the last line: virtally should be 'virtually" I think...

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 19

Lentilla (Keeper of Non-Sequiturs)

A583021 - Pacifism

Post 20


Good, and very timely, article. I just have a suggestion or two that may assist, -- or obfuscate, depending on your perspective smiley - winkeye

'Buddha demanded from his followers absolute abstention from any act of violence toward our fellow creatures.'

Imagine the scene --

Buddha, 'I demand that you lot stop whacking one another, or I'll whack you!'
Followers, 'Get bent!'

It may be a tiny thing, but it seems to me demanding is a somewhat non-Buddha behavior.

As an alternative, may I suggest you rephrase along the lines of: 'Buddha was one of the first to teach benevolence and non-violence towards all sentient beings'

'At the core of eastern non-violent ideology lies the belief in reincarnation and karma. According to these teachings, what you do in this life will come back to you in later lives.'

There are eastern religions that teach the dogma of karma/reincarnation, and many people throughout the world believe in it, but it is not the core of ~all~ eastern ideologies or 'esoteric' teachings.

The primary texts of Buddhism, such as the Lankavatara, and the Diamond Sutras, state clearly that the separate self is an illusion, and that personal karma/reincarnation is also illusory.

For example, here is a brief exerpt from the Diamond Sutra, in which Buddha is conversing with an old friend during the famous convocation of which the Sutra is a historical record:

Buddha said: Subhuti, what do you think? Does an adept who is subject to only one more rebirth say within himself -- I obtain the fruit of a Once-to-be-reborn?
Subhuti said: No, World-honored One. Wherefore? Because "Once-to-be-reborn" is merely a name. There is no passing away nor coming into existence. He who realizes this is called "Once-to-be-reborn."

A simple rephrasing: 'At the core of many eastern non-violent ideologies lies the belief in reincarnation and karma. According to these teachings, what you do in this life will come back to you in later lives.'

The central teaching of many other eastern, and western, mystics, sages and masters could perhaps be found in the words of Huang Po, a zen master of the ninth century:

'Gautama Buddha silently transmitted to Mahakasyapa the doctrine that the One Mind, which is the substance of all things, is co-extensive with the Void and fills the entire world of phenomena. All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists.'

So, in a very real sense whatever injury one does to another, one also does to oneself. This would be a practical basis for pacifism.

smiley - zen
smiley - peacedove

Key: Complain about this post