This morning I thought that it would be good to talk about our undeclared war in the Balkans and give people a chance to express whatever they need to express. And I think people want to know, what is a Buddhist point of view? Everyone needs to take some kind of stance, but the issues are so confusing. Every time you decide to take a stance over here, there's the opposite. reason to take a stance over here.

[01:01]

So this is one of the most confusing and difficult issues facing, I think, all of us. There's a lot of criticism and doubts and wondering about What are the real reasons for this kind of military behavior, interfering, so-called interference? Is it political? Is it financial? Is it military? All of these reasons are there and whether it's any one of those particular reasons that is dominant is hard to pinpoint.

[02:09]

Everyone has their particular issue that they hold on to and say, this is the reason. And it's very hard to get an overall view because not only are the reasons complicated but just knowing the region and the personalities and the various ethnic squabbles and quarrels and who's who and all of this combined is like all the pressures of the world are concentrated in this little area. all the quarrels and reasons and contentions that are going on in the world are concentrated in this one little area as a microcosm. So who can untangle this tangle?

[03:14]

That's a big question. Who can untangle this tangle? Who can separate all the parts out and really look at this thing in its totality? That's what we're faced with. Alexander untied the Gordian knot with his sword. You know the story of Alexander. When he came to a certain place in Central Asia, they presented him with this puzzle, a knot that no one else had been able to untie called the Gordian Knot. And they said, can you untie this knot? And he said yes. He drew out his sword and he cut it in half. I don't know what the solution is for this particular problem.

[04:25]

When I think we shouldn't do anything, then I see the other side, which is if you don't do something, you're just watching mayhem and not and you feel helpless. And if you do something, you're creating more mayhem. Like throwing gasoline on a fire, which is sort of what happened. It's a big tragedy. In the Dhammapada, which is the oldest, probably the oldest book of Buddhist sayings. It begins with presumably Buddhist words, but probably not.

[05:35]

But this is a very well-known fundamental aspect of Buddhist understanding. All that we are is the result of what we have thought. It is founded on our thoughts. It is made up of our thoughts. If a person speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows that person as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the wagon. All that we are is the result of what we have thought. It is founded on our thoughts. It is made up of our thoughts. If a person speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows that person like a shadow that never leaves that person. And then, this is a kind of generic quote. He abused me. He beat me. He defeated me.

[06:39]

He robbed me. In those who harbor such thoughts, hatred will never cease. He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me. In those who do not harbor such thoughts, hatred will cease. For never does hatred cease by hatred here below. Hatred ceases by love, and this is an eternal law. The world does not know that we must all come to an end here, but those who know their quarrels cease at once. And then, do not speak harshly to anybody. Those who are broken, I'm sorry, those who are spoken to will answer you in the same way. Angry speech breeds trouble, and you will receive blow for blow. So, this is the basic Buddhist stance, that first to understand that the way we think is the way we act, and our actions follow our thoughts, and we live in this world of a dream, and then we act out our dreams.

[08:09]

most people who crave power are very insecure. And this insecurity exacts a toll on everyone around an insecure person. This is why it's so important to really understand who we are and what we really need, and to find our, what Kadagiri Oshii used to call, religious security. Not security in religion, but spiritual security, or true security, knowing that we will die and feeling secure. in that understanding. And knowing what we need and what we don't need

[09:38]

Insecurity breeds greediness. Insecurity breeds greediness, aggressiveness, and it's a delusion. So a person who is free of greed, ill will and delusion, it tends more toward pacifism and unity and bringing people together rather than disunity and divisiveness. So in our effort to bring all people together and see humanity as one whole and everyone as our brothers and sisters, it means that we're dedicated to nonviolence.

[10:53]

But there are times when it's necessary to intervene in some way. The first precept is don't kill, don't take life. But there are times when one has to take life. One is always taking life at any rate. The precept has three levels. First level is don't take life. That's literal. Don't kill anything. That's a very literal kind of understanding and we should pay attention to that. Be very careful. The higher level is that there is no birth and death.

[12:06]

nothing can be killed. But that understanding has to be, that's the top, has to be fit with the bottom that you should not kill anything. Doesn't mean that you can kill things just because nothing can be killed. And the middle way is you should In every situation, you should respond to what the situation calls for. When you see someone attacking your friend with a knife, what will you do? Even though you are a pacifist, what will you do? When you see someone holding a gun at your friend's head, what will you do?

[13:13]

There are many things you can do, but sometimes you have to intervene, and you may end up killing someone. So it's very difficult to make a decision sometimes based on our belief system or on our beliefs. And doing everything exactly in accord with what we believe in, sometimes we have to do something that we wouldn't ordinarily do. So if you apply this to what is happening in Europe. Before the Second World War, millions of people were being killed in Europe, slaughtered, in exactly the same way that it's happening now.

[14:26]

Not exactly, but close. So, do you let that happen? We're not. We can say, that's none of our business. You know, it's over there. It's like, let them fight it out, you know. But the world is one place. It wasn't too long ago that wars could happen someplace else and didn't affect us, seemingly. But now, everything is too interconnected. And when something happens in one place, it affects all of us. People say, well, it's in our national interest to do something, which, or it's not in our national interest to do something.

[15:32]

That's a very phony reason for doing something. If it's in the moral and ethical interest of the world to do something, then we should do it. Shouldn't have anything to do with our national interest. That's a kind of lame excuse, that's just self-interest. So is this in our national interest or is it really something, is it in the interest of humanity? If we have no selfish motive then we can make a decision more easily. But if it's simply based on self-interest, then it's a shaky motive.

[16:37]

So what is it? We don't know. All of these things are intertwined with each other. So, I invite your comments. I mean, I think one of the troubling aspects of this is who is intervening? Who is what? Who is intervening? Who is intervening? The government is intervening, the United States government, which hardly has a record for humanitarian intervention. presented to us. We are confronted with images, because America has a divinity of its suffering, similar suffering, greater suffering, in other parts of the world, which we don't see, because it's selected what we see.

[17:51]

So, I mean, I'm confused about what a source for of what to do, but I'm not confused that the U.S. government is hardly the arbiter of when to act humanitarily. I mean, we've aided countries that have done very similar things to other people. I do not trust the entity that goes in for humanitarian Yeah, so it's hard to trust the reasons. It's hard to trust the actor when this actor acts. It's hard to trust their... Oh boy, this is a big subject, isn't it? I think it's important to look at where the money goes, and I think self-interest is very important.

[19:00]

And those who may not be so interested in what's traditionally considered self-interest, how we should acknowledge our self-interest, even if it's righteousness, moral righteousness, and be careful of that. And also look at the the weapons sales that took place in the past that we support. And also look at, this is a particular interest of mine, our foreign aid funding, where we fund, in a stingy fashion, some very important non-governmental organizations that are helping refugees. And that it may be that if there is a moral self-interest that we push our government to fund those people on the ground who do help refugees, who do promote basic health and education, and whether that would help prevent future conflict, I don't know.

[20:14]

But there are some things that we can be clear about that are helpful. It may not be a solution, but it may be a long-term help. I don't know that we have an answer. I think that living with this discomfort is very important. We don't have one answer. I was interested to hear you say that you think that even under Buddhist principles intervention sometimes is necessary. I agree with you. I had come to that conclusion myself that when confronted with really evil people or really evil acts, it is necessary to take a stand and I think that I don't buy the idea that

[21:21]

We can't tell the difference between what's evil and what's garden variety. Authoritarianism, I think we can. And I think that, like it or not, this country has the responsibility of acting because it is the only remaining country with the power to do it. And it's kind of like being the one in the family that has to take responsibility and make decisions you may not like, but that's what your role is, but you have to do it. Like it or not, that's the role of this country. The problem is it takes an incredible amount of moral clarity to do that and it takes a lot of advanced thinking and it seems pretty clear in this situation that there were times to do something and to speak out and to take a stand. Seven, eight years ago when Milosevic first came on the scene and all of those Europeans who lived through this century, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that this guy is really going to be a major problem.

[22:34]

And there was so much dithering around, people being unwilling to take responsibility. In some defense, the Germans did have all of those problems with reunification, and they're of course very scared about intervening because of their past history, which leaves the British and the French and us. It seems like we've come, the pendulum's swung too far one way to the point where we're afraid of doing the wrong thing or afraid of doing something unpopular, so we don't act. But we do have to realize that the world is different now. And we do have to intervene. We have to find ways, but we have to think enough in advance and have the proper kind of military, unfortunately, so that you can sort of think strategically in the sensu, art of war sense, of picking your battles and knowing when is the right time to act and not waiting until the only thing you can do is something horrible.

[23:39]

And I think those of us who have been anti-war and all of that need to think a lot about this so that we can be supportive of the proper kind of intervention so that interventions can happen soon enough that they aren't this kind of last minute desperate act. But that requires a lot of rethinking of a lot of things on our part and not being real knee-jerk in fighting the last war. Well, yes, we let things go on so far until something has to happen. But the two aspects, one is courage. You know, courage is thought of as something that it takes to be In a war, a soldier has to have courage, but they also have their weapons.

[24:46]

But a pacifist also has to have courage. If you're not going to do something, then you have to have the courage to be vulnerable. to whatever it is that you're standing up for. Otherwise, you're just simply withdrawing. So I think that one has to make a decision. Are you going to be on this side or on this side? And if you are on the side of being a so-called pacifist, then you have to have the courage take whatever comes from that or whatever results from that. Well, I don't want to answer that question exactly, but when you start comparing and then you say, well, why should we do this when we didn't do that?

[26:12]

That kind of comparison is not productive. Why don't we do a lot of things? Why don't we do a lot of things? I would venture to say that the government of this country has more feeling of relationship with Europe and understanding how that works. Nobody understands how Africa works. Even the Africans don't understand how Africa works. That's like, whew, you know? It's just too mind-boggling to step into.

[27:19]

That's my feeling about it. When these things happen, they're tribal. I mean, that is exactly what's going on right now in Europe is tribal. I couldn't help but compare our reaction to Saddam Hussein. And I couldn't help think that it had a lot to do with the underpinnings of racism. And so it is a mess, and I don't believe it's going to stop there.

[29:23]

I believe that this is just the beginning of similar conflicts all over the world, and that it's not only the beginning, but the continuation. Because, as the lady pointed out, there's a choice about what to do. about the other stuff, because it is one world. And until we look at it that way, it's going to continue. The whole thing that's happening in the Middle East is a tribal thing. It just keeps going on, because we have our ethnic, this whole thing about ethnic Albanians. I can't understand that label, ethnic Albanians. Why not ethnic Serbs? They were all there in that part of the world together what is happening now, what has been happening that we've been trying to ignore, and what is going to escalate.

[30:29]

And we've been focusing on that in our own country, trying to have dialogue about racism and why, you know, we can't coexist and allow each other to be who we are, instead of trying to perform the way we want people to look and to behave. And that's why we can't accept each other, because this whole thing about, I know I'm going on here, I agree, we do have to compare, but it's all based on tribal rivalries all over the world, it's very true.

[31:31]

When I said not compare, it doesn't help in that particular instance. I don't mean we should never compare, but it's very complicated. When I try to think of it, it's so complicated, so complex. You have to put yourself in the position of what would I do if I were there? Would I be willing to take a life? saying, U.S.

[33:05]

imperialism out of Vietnam. However, do not uncritically support the Viet Cong because they are a Stalinist group. So I've been teased for years about that kind of thing. But then I imagine if I was to go out and protest this bombing, which in part I'm tempted to do, I'd need a 50-foot banner. Why are we the one superpower? Why is my tax money going to the military? Why is Star Wars? I mean, I have a 50-foot banner, and I'd be laughed at again, but that's my position.

[34:05]

I think, as has been alluded to, the problem goes back so far that Alexander, for example, but the knot is so wound that it's impossible to tell. I found myself sort of generally supporting the idea of taking out military installations because the idea of sitting and, you know, waiting five years until we have the Holocaust all over again. What would have happened in 1937, 38? I have a friend who is about as much of a pacifist as I've ever met, except that he then went and tried to set up a children's war relief program in Croatia about five years ago, and came back and was very much in favor of military intervention, because he saw firsthand what was really going on there.

[35:22]

By the same token, I wonder You know, recently the NATO troops have been going in and helping set up refugee camps and doing that and then getting antsy or bored or figuring this isn't what I'm here to do. Which kind of makes me wonder, well, what are you there to do? I think the military culture is that give somebody a shovel or a pick or something to build a refugee camp, they're not quite sure what to do, give them a gun. That's what they're trained for. When the effort really should be towards a humanitarian sort of goal. What is wrong with having, and what better protection than having NATO troops sitting with the refugees, setting up their camps? So I kind of wonder, in this military culture, how is it that you end up, you feel more effective with a gun rather than actually doing something to help the people that you're supposed to be defending?

[36:37]

Well, guns are the easy way out. And there's always somebody there waiting to supply you with one. People who don't even have enough to eat. could easily get a gun. But see, that's my martial arts background. I guess one comment I want to make also about your comment about power is I think power gets a bad rap. There's nothing wrong with power. But what is power? Well, let me put it this way, as my martial arts instructor put it, that what if we took all the energy that we put into war and put it into peace? Oh, I see. Power is neither good nor bad, it's just what's done with it. Yeah, but when we say power, what we mean is power to dominate. Right, but then that's not power, that's, in my definition of it.

[37:47]

Yeah. Okay. Betty? I'm very uncomfortable with the whole war issue primarily because I was a history major and European history major. And the French and the English have always gone into other countries and created problems. They've sent in their spies, they've sent in their diplomats, they've got hostilities, or gone in and used basic hostilities between countries. And so this problem in Albania really is an extension of the past. and the reasons that the English, the French, and maybe the Germans, but they're a little bit beyond there, their goals, their domination needs. And what I think needs to be examined is, why is it the West feels we need to dominate everybody? And why do we, as products of the West, feel we need to dominate everybody?

[38:47]

I think we understood the diplomacy of domination and really examined our feelings around that. they might come to some solution as to what the real solution is going to be. One reason is that in business, if you don't expand, you'd lose. If you don't have order, you can't have business. That's right, so you create order, a certain order, and you keep expanding because if you don't keep expanding, and the dominant one is king of the mountain. That's the way it works. I'm sorry. Yeah, of course. Right. That's right, insecurity and fear. Otherwise, we just give everything away to everybody else. In our ideal world, everybody gives away everything to everybody else, and then it solves all our problems.

[40:04]

But that's not the way it's working, I'm sorry. But we have to keep putting that idea out into the world. The Germans are going to have elections soon, and they want to appear compassionate yet strong, and we're going to have elections soon. Yeah.

[41:11]

Rebecca. I think we have something that makes it harder for us as a nation, if you want to speak in those terms, and that is that we have not been bombed here. We have not lived through that. And we have a curious focus Yes, we do have that optimism. It's one thing to have that optimism when nothing happens to you, and another thing to have it when you get crushed, and then you have to come out of that crushed

[42:22]

this with optimism, that's called being tempered. So, that may happen. Jerry? but innocent Albanian or innocent Serbs are in the way. And also the kind of difference in policy depending on where the atrocities are happening. It seems to me that if we want a consistent policy that says preserve life, sometimes that may mean that we have to intervene. you need to have a value of human life, and every human life needs to be valued.

[43:33]

And so when we make these decisions, and it's not just as easy as saying, well, we're going to intervene or not intervene, it's how we intervene. Sitting in a ship far, far away and sending missiles that kill a lot of innocent people, to me, is as much of a problem. So it's not only as simple as saying we need to intervene, it's how. And I don't know the answer, but that's what I think. Yeah. Well, I think that it's really clear to me that, as Sue mentioned, that the refugee issue, it's very clear that that has to be addressed through shelter and medicine.

[44:42]

Now, the intervention, Now, after 600 years, or however much some space or some reflective area for people in this country to work with them.

[45:55]

But yeah, at some point to be able to negotiate with him. So there's a lot of paradoxes and contradictions, and it is quite a tangle. And I certainly don't know the answer, but I think we have to keep talking about it and try to exert some influence on those who do make decisions in this country about our political direction. Stan, did you want to say something? one hand on the other hand it's very it's startling to me to

[47:14]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ