WARRING TO WARRANT WORLD PEACE: BUDDHIST ETHICS

Abstract

Warring with ―jus bellum justum‖ (justified and necessary wars) will instead fuel retributive extremism and miseries. ―The War to End Wars‖ coined by H.G. Wells, Woodrow Wilson, David L. George has thus to be declined. ―Si vis pacem, para bellum (if you want peace, prepare for war)‖ is then cautioned by Plato, Renatus, Shi Ji and Rama VI. Buddhist ethics nevertheless believes that apartheid and holocaustic warring discriminates peacefulness. Warring to warrant world peace through Buddhist ethics emerges two kinds of understanding, i.e. first, the pañca sīla codes,―Thou shalt abstain from killing beings‖ but authorities like policemen and military armforces exploiting lethal arms for suppressions and battles are justified and not guilty. Second, ―Jus bellum justum‖ ethically clashes between duties of abstaining from killing with the duties of national defense, and security from threats. Had war been purposively waged for the national defense through implementing the principle of Aparihāniyadhamma 7; it will never decline but enrich prosperity, welfare and common good because in war-defense and security. It is not declaring war but defending oneself from assaults. So, it is imperative to wage wars with one‘s taṇhā (lusts) and lobha (greeds); only then morality of each one would at the end warrant world peace.