A widespread stereotype in Western popular culture holds that Islam is a religion of violence while Buddhism is a religion of peace. Like most stereotypes, these claims belie the complex reality of the nature of human beings and religion. We noted in a previous column the problems with viewing Islam as either an inherently peaceful or inherently violent religion.
Now we will look at the issue from a different perspective — pacifist Buddhism could also be described as a violent religion. Buddhism is widely regarded in the West as a nonviolent faith, and there is ample justification for such a view. But throughout its history, Buddhism has also had its violent aspects, and scholars are now examining the history of violent Buddhism.
India was the homeland of Buddhism, and its most famous Buddhist king, Ashoka, is renowned for his conversion to Buddhism and renunciation of military conquest. Yet his edicts include notices that warfare, while inferior to “conquest by Dharma” (conversion), is still permitted, though it must be undertaken with restraint. In other words, he is describing a nascent Buddhist just-war theory.
Notably, however, Ashoka also ordered the massacre of 18,000 Jains for blaspheming the Buddha. And the numerous Buddhist kings of medieval India were indistinguishable from contemporary non-Buddhist kings in their military activities. The Pala kings, for example, while noted for their patronage of Buddhist temples, monasteries and universities, also conquered most of northern India in the ninth century.
Asian martial arts, as popularized in the West, are said to have originated in China at the Shaolin Chan (Zen) Buddhist monastery, which trained its monks in both armed and unarmed forms of combat as part of their spiritual exercises. (They are also the background to the militant Jedi monastic order in Star Wars, with the Chinese “chi” converted into the Star Wars' Force.) Shaolin warrior monks helped establish the Tang dynasty in China in the seventh century. From China, Buddhist militant monastic orders spread to Korea (Bool Kyo Mu Sool), Tibet (Lama Pai) and, most importantly, Japan.
Paradoxically, Japanese Zen Buddhism, which is often viewed as one of the most pacifistic forms of Buddhism, was militarized by the Japanese warrior aristocracy. Bushido, the Japanese samurai warrior code, is in many ways the martial expression of Zen Buddhism. Japanese Buddhism also produced warrior monks (“sohei”), of Tendai Buddhism. These monks played crucial roles in numerous conflicts in medieval Japan, fighting against rival Buddhist temples, rioting and supporting samurai political factions.
The Dalai Lama of Tibet is rightly seen today as one of the premiere advocates of nonviolence in the modern world, well deserving his Nobel Peace Prize. But many of his predecessors ascended to their positions as rulers of Tibet through coups, exiles and murders — most notably the fifth Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lamas rose to power in Tibet largely because of their ideological support for the militant claims of the Buddhist Dzungar Mongols.
In modern times, too, there are many examples of Buddhist militant ideology and terrorism. Over the past few decades, for instance, Buddhist monks were at the forefront of violent extremism in southern Myanmar (Burma), most notably that of the “Democratic Karen Buddhist Army” and the “969 Movement,” which has engaged in anti-Muslim riots and terrorism. In Thailand, some anti-communist monks declared that killing communists did not violate Buddhist commandments.
In the Sri Lankan civil war (1983-2009), some Buddhists engaged in fighting and terrorism based on explicitly Buddhist holy-war ideology. In modern Japan, many Buddhists supported Japan’s aggression in the Second World War, declaring that “We now have no choice but to exercise the benevolent forcefulness of ‘killing one in order that many may live.’” Modern radical militant Japanese Buddhist sects such as Nichiren and the apocalyptic Aum Shinrikyo have been involved in violence and terror attacks.
Now, we need to re-emphasize that we are not attempting to demonize Buddhism or claim that it is an inherently violent religion. Violent and pacifist qualities can be found in all religions. More importantly, violent people will often use religion as a rationalization for their violence. By focusing only on the violent characteristics of Buddhism — as with any other religion, for that matter — one could argue Buddhism to be violent. And Buddhist violence can indeed be found throughout the world and in all periods. But that, of course, would grossly misrepresent the impact and history of Buddhism.
(See “Buddhism and Violence,” edited by V. Tikhonov (2012); and “Buddhist Warfare,” by M. Jerryson (2010).)
Daniel Peterson founded BYU's Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, chairs The Interpreter Foundation and blogs on Patheos. William Hamblin is the author of several books on premodern history. They speak only for themselves.