THE BUDDHIST SOLDIER: A MADHYAMAKA INQUIRY

ABSTRACT

Dialogue between international humanitarian law (IHL) and Buddhism draws attention to the challenging question of the nature and identity of the Buddhist soldier. Here, the Buddhist soldier is considered not as a simple binary contradiction but as a complex dynamic paradox that can be unfolded, explored and understood through the use of Buddhist philosophy. The dialectical logic of Madhyamaka is harnessed through dialectical process analysis (DPA), a method that shows complex dynamic relationships in relatively accessible and legible spatial form, as maps. DPA maps are used to analyse the complex, dynamic nature of military duty, the soldier as responsible individual, and the soldier in socio-political context. Connections between the Mahāyāna Buddhist ideal of the bodhisattva and the Jungian Warrior Hero archetype are explored. A model is proposed for the ethical conduct of military operations in accordance with IHL, which includes the failure of ethics and law in the case of military atrocity. Ethics are discussed in both Buddhist and more general terms as ‘natural ethics’, for the critical test is not some parochial religious orthodoxy, but practical compliance with IHL in the field of conflict. Difficulties that the practice of ethical soldiering faces are noted. These will not be overcome without significant change, so implications are noted for management education, cultural change and organisational development in military training.

KEYWORDS:

• Buddhist soldier
• military Buddhism
• military ethics
• Buddhist ethics
• Madhyamaka philosophy
• international humanitarian law (IHL)
• complex problems
• Dialectical Process Analysis (DPA)
• Polarity Management
• Carl Jung
• Warrior Hero archetype
• Bodhisattva path
• shadow
• military atrocity
• legitimacy of military duty
• politics of soldiering
• organisational development

Disclosure statement

This article has been supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. The founder of Madhyamaka is Nāgārjuna, supported by Āryadeva, conventionally dated 150–250 CE. Nāgārjuna’s importance within the Buddhist tradition is such that he is sometimes known as a ‘Second Buddha’. However, Nāgārjuna insists that his work is entirely consistent with the original Buddhist tradition, which it seeks to reinstate. This is a core theme of the Mahāyāna. Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, the foundational text of Madhyamaka, cites the Buddha’s Discourse with Kaccayāna from the Pali Canon (Kaccayānagotta Sutta, Saṃyutta Nikāya 12.15; for a translation see Thanissaro Bhikkhu 1997). Nāgārjuna’s consistency with other original Pali sources, such as the Aṭṭhakavagga and Pārāyanavagga of the Sutta-Nipāta, is emphasised by e.g. Kalupahana (1994). For authoritative contemporary commentary on Nāgārjuna and Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, see e.g. Garfield (1995), and Siderits and Katsura (2013).

2. Capacity to explore the interconnection between apparent opposites is not unique to Madhyamaka, for it is common to any philosophical method based on dialectical logic. What is unique to Madhyamaka is that its dialectics are rooted in insight into the empty nature of phenomena (Śūnyatā), which is why it is preferred here.

3. Buddhist tradition enumerates the pāramitās in various ways. In the Pali Canon, the Buddhavaṃsa (Khuddaka Nikāya 14) lists 10 perfections. In the Mahāyāna tradition, the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras list six, whilst amongst them the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka (White Lotus) Sūtra adds a seventh: upāya aramita, Perfection of (Skilful) Means. The Theravādin commentator Dhammapāla (identity and dates uncertain, but pre-twelfth century CE) equates the sets of 10 and six. The lists of Buddhist doctrine are no more (and no less) than analytic schemata, mnemonic devices that evolved during the early oral tradition of Buddhism. Content matters more than number. For a contemporary discussion, see e.g. Wright (2009).

4. Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 63. For a translation see Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1998).

5. Examples of the iconography of Mañjuśrī:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=univ&tbm=isch&q=manjushri+images&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjZkJv8vLLtAhVDC-wKHVGaCK0QjJkEegQIAxAB&biw=2560&bih=1329.

6. Examples of the iconography of Padmasambhava: https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=univ&tbm=isch&q=padmasambhava+images&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjG-oS4qd3tAhXHVsAKHSNlAbUQjJkEegQIBRAB&biw=2560&bih=1329&dpr=2.

7. Examples of the iconography of Vajrapāṇi: https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=univ&tbm=isch&q=vajrapani+images&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY7YGzvrLtAhXKvKQKHRLqAQkQjJkEegQIAxAB&biw=2560&bih=1329.

8. Examples of the iconography of Vajrasattva: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=vajrasattva+images&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjyirq0vrLtAhWJiqQKHfKEDRAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=vajrasattva+images&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzICCAA6BAgAEEM6BggAEAcQHlCV3QRY5ewEYIjwBGgAcAB4AIABdIgB1wWSAQQxMC4xmAEAoAEBqgELZ3dzLXdpei1pbWfAAQE&sclient=img&ei=lDTJX_LwHImVkgXyibaAAQ&bih=1329&biw=2560.

9. The ideology of ‘holy war’ is all too familiar within the major world religions. Buddhism is sometimes considered to be an exception, but for an analysis of the perversion of Buddhist doctrine in the service of Japanese militarism, see Victoria (2006).

10. Jung (1990, para. 709) defines enantiodromia as ‘the emergence of the unconscious opposite in the course of time. This characteristic phenomenon practically always occurs when an extreme, one-sided tendency dominates conscious life; in time an equally powerful counterposition is built up which first inhibits the conscious performance and subsequently breaks through the conscious control’. As Jung (2014) notes, this thinking is found in the Western tradition as far back as Heraclitus. It is evident in Plato’s Phaedo and the dialectics of Socrates, as well as being fundamental within the Buddhist and Taoist traditions.

11. See note 2.

12. See e.g. Sangharakshita (1986).

13. For details of these events, and a history of the Superior Orders defence, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders.

14. Quoted by von Moltke (Hughes 1993, 92).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Dharmacārin Siṃhanāda

Dharmacārin Siṃhanāda is a Buddhist practitioner and teacher. His principal interests are dialectics, Madhyamaka as anti-philosophy and the Yogacara-Madhyamaka synthesis. A Buddhist since 1979, he was ordained into the Triratna Buddhist Order as Siṃhanāda in 2006. As a secular professional, he has broad cross-sector experience over 40+ years as a researcher, psychometrician, teacher, trainer of trainers, business school lecturer, group facilitator, activist, change agent and management consultant in the field of organizational development (OD). His efforts to cross-fertilise these fields with traditional Buddhist practice include harnessing Madhyamaka as a problem-solving technology.