Expert: Justin Choo - 2/14/2009

Question
Hi Mr. Choo,
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been under house arrest most of the time (19 years) since she ran and won the prime minister position in Burma in 1990.  However, the military government did not recognize the election, and she is, in essence, powerless, as are those who are pro-democracy.  I have read your comments on self-defense, and they are consistent with my interpretation of Theraveda Buddhism.

If one can always expect to receive in return what has been dealt out(at least individually), would a violent overthrow of the military government in Burma, even for the greater good of the Burmese people, mean that each individual who participated in the overthrow receive violence in return (at least some time in this or the next life)?  If so, would the violence be returned collectively or individually?  Would it be proper for those individuals to sacrifice their futures for the greater good of the country?  If so, then the violence may not return to affect the people in the new democratic government.

Please forgive the length of my narrative and questions.  We were given an extra credit assignment in our Buddhism class at the university.  I was not satisfied with just providing a biography of Suu Kyi.  If she is a Theraveda Buddhist, it would explain why she has not advocated violent overthrow of the present government (which is very admirable).  However, that being the case, then she and her pro-democracy Buddhists may never get the opportunity to live in a free country.
Thank you for your patience, and please forgive me for looking at this issue through the eyes of a western person.

Dana Teasley

Answer
Hi Dana,

As they say, politics and religion don't mix.

In a peaceful environment, it is very easy to practise Buddhism, or any religion for that matter.  However, if one is in a country which witnesses aggression, repression and termination, then one has to weigh the facts.  To many, your question is a "controversial" one.  To me it is not.  It is a matter of choice.  Many will agree that it is a great sacrifice of compassion if one is to die for the good of others.  What about if one is to die fighting for the freedom of existence while killing some of the oppressors in the process?  Kamma works in mysterious ways, but surely and definitely.  Killing is unwholesome per se, for whatever good reasons.  So the big questions : "Is it for the greater good? Is it inevitable that such drastic action need be taken?  Is there no other option left?"

Take China for example.  If not for Chairman Mao, China will not be what it is today.  Again this is "controversial" depending on which side you are with.  But let's analyse the historical facts of China at that time.  Then the choice is clear.  Another example is Germany during the 2nd world war.  Was there any option left?

During the recent demonstrations even by monks against the evil Myanmar regime, many good Buddhists encouraged the radiation of metta (thoughts of goodwill) towards the evil warlords.  Any positive results??

Sometimes the evil forces are so overwhelmingly devastating that a little metta would not do.  It would have to take equally devastating measures to suppress such aggression.  So are we willing to succumb to bad retributions for taking "unwholesome" measures for the "greater good"?

The choice is yours.

Sounds very unBuddhistic!!  But very realistic!!

Regards,

Justin Choo.


[I like to invite you to visit my blog:]
http://lifeislikethat999.blogspot.com/

[And these sites by Rev. Dhammika:]
http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/
http://www.buddhismatoz.com/