In the months since the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023, Israel has launched a series of increasingly sweeping military campaigns across the region. From the destruction of Hamas in Gaza to the targeted killing of Hezbollah’s leadership in Lebanon, and now to open attacks within Iran itself, Israel’s military doctrine has shifted dramatically. What was once a strategy of containment and precision has given way to one of overwhelming force. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently stated: “We are changing the face of the Middle East,” framing this approach as both necessary and transformative. (The New York Times)
But amid these shifting alliances and battle lines, urgent ethical questions emerge: What can the teachings of the Buddha offer in a time of escalating war? What resources does Buddhism provide for a world ensnared in cycles of retaliation, fear, and militarized certainty?
A common misconception persists that the Buddha taught pacifism as a political ideology. Psychologist and Vipassana meditation teacher Paul Fleischman argues that this is a misconception. In fact, the Buddha recognized existing systems of power that at times required certain types of violence. Within this system, however, the Buddha addressed individuals and focused on inner transformation. He writes:
The “Dhamma,” or path to liberation for which the Buddha was spokesman, is not an idea but a mode of conduct and a way of life that leads to personal realization. Its goal is to release its practitioners from authorities and ideologies, not anarchistically or capriciously, but through training, by deepening their personal experiences of the nature of their true self and its ethical implications. (Barre Center for Buddhist Studies)
Similarly, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi has written: “In time[s] of war, I would argue, the karmic framework can justify enlisting in the military and serving as a combatant, providing one sincerely believes the reason for fighting is to disable a dangerous aggressor and protect one’s country and its citizens.” (Inquiring Mind)
The first precept, to abstain from killing, is not merely a rule to follow, but a foundation for cultivating a mind free from hatred and delusion. In this view, nonviolence is not ideological but existential. It is a way of seeing, being, and relating to others that begins with empathy. It is recognizing, as the Dhammapada states, “All beings fear violence, all fear death. Using oneself as a criterion, one should not kill or cause death.”
This ethic is not naive idealism. Rather, it is a practical path that begins with restraint or renunciation and culminates in wisdom. A practitioner may begin by avoiding harm out of discipline, but over time, through mindfulness and reflection, comes to embody compassion and peace in every intention.
Yet the Buddha also acknowledged that not everyone walks the same path. He taught people according to their conditions, roles, and capacities. He maintained cordial relations with kings, never calling on them to abdicate or disband their armies. In his dialogues with King Pasenadi, the Buddha neither endorsed nor condemned the use of force in governance. Instead, he invited reflection: What actions lead to lasting welfare? What motivations govern our decisions?
As Flieshman recounts, the Buddha asks: “Can you do this task as an upholder of safety and justice, focused on love of those you protect rather than on hate for those you must kill?” (Barre Center for Buddhist Studies)
This question is particularly relevant as Israel expands its military reach and US President Donald Trump ponders direct American involvement in the war. Is this strategy rooted in the protection of life, or in the trauma and fury of 7 October and past conflicts? Are these attacks aimed at securing peace or simply asserting dominance?
The Buddha’s teachings encourage us to probe the intention behind every action. Volition (Skt: cetana) is the seed of karma. An act of force, even violence, may be karmically mitigated if driven by compassion. A surgeon may cut to heal. A parent may restrain a child to prevent harm. But even necessary force, the Buddha taught, should be free of hatred.
The historical record offers nuance. Emperor Ashoka, who ruled India some centuries after the Buddha, embraced non-violence after a bloody conquest. His edicts praised tolerance and self-restraint, yet he maintained armies and continued to rule. Ashoka banned animal sacrifice and promoted the Dharma, but did not dissolve the apparatus of state power. His vision offers a middle path—not utopia, not cynicism.
Today, Israel and its allies face a parallel question: Can military might co-exist with a moral vision? Has strategic success replaced ethical reflection? As former senior Israeli official and a fellow at Israel Policy Forum, Nimrod Novik, warned: “One wonders whether effective military performance is matched by a sober political vision.” (The New York Times)
Buddhism would respond that true peace can never be found without not only sober political vision, but also genuine care for one’s foes. While deterrence and security may be necessary, they are not sufficient. The Dharma asks us to examine whether our actions reduce suffering or perpetuate it. This is not a call for passivity but for mindfulness.
At its deepest level, the Buddhist path to peace is not about policy but about perception. It is not about what others should do, but about how we meet the world. A committed Buddhist practitioner does not wait for the world to become peaceful.
In this sense, Buddhist non-violence differs from pacifism. It is not a political alignment, but a mirror for self-examination. It recognizes the complexity of roles—the judge, the soldier, the king—but insists that all roles be infused with mindfulness and empathy. And for those who have chosen the path of renunciation, the commitment to nonviolence becomes absolute.
Yet our work to practice the Dharma is pragmatic. It understands that decisions are made in a world of turmoil. It does not offer perfect solutions, but it does offer a compass. In times of war and peace alike, the question remains: how can I, in this moment, given my role and awareness, act from love rather than fear, from wisdom rather than delusion?
The Buddha never promised to bring peace to the world. He spoke from the vast perspective of an endless cosmos, knowing that war and peace rise and fall in historical cycles. What he did promise was a path—a way to reduce suffering, beginning with the mind and radiating outward.
This is the revolution that Buddhism offers. Not a changing of borders, but a changing of hearts. Not the defeat of enemies, but the transformation of enmity. As long as power is pursued without ethical reflection, as long as fear dictates our actions, peace will remain elusive. But where compassion becomes our compass, a different kind of change becomes possible.
Israel’s military doctrine may indeed be changing the face of the Middle East. But can we trust that this is a change toward peace and stability for all parties? And for those walking the Buddha’s path, the more pressing question is: amid the noise of war, are we still committed to a path that does not feed the fire, but turns instead toward peace?
The Dharma calls each of us to become agents of that lasting peace—not merely by what we say or believe, but by how we embody awareness in each interaction. A more peaceful world begins with minds trained in non-violence, hearts grounded in empathy, and voices that speak not for faction but for truth.
We may not halt wars with meditation cushions, but we can change the human terrain on which wars are waged. In our thoughts, speech, and actions, we can be forces of peace wherever we are, which can include voicing and acting out our opposition to violence in the world. And in doing so, we become seeds of the only revolution that truly lasts—one that begins within, but refuses to end there.
See more
Iran War Reflects a Changed Middle East and a New Israeli Military Doctrine(The New York Times)
The Buddha Taught Nonviolence, Not Pacifism (Barre Center for Buddhist Studies)
War and Peace: A Buddhist Perspective (Inquiring Mind)
The Take: MAGA is split over Israel and Iran. Which way will Trump go? (Al Jazeera)
Related features from BDG
The Buddha’s Path to Peace
Buddhistdoor View: Israel and Iran – Pursuing Peace Amid Conflict
The Koan of Gaza: Not Turning Away
On the Prospect of Buddhist Complicity in Genocide
Buddhistdoor View: Israel and Palestine – A Buddhist Path to Peace
Buddhistdoor View: Palestine and Israel
Good points here. Unfortunately, you fail to mention the mass murder (30,000-50,000 protesters murdered very recently) rape and torture committed by the regime in Iran and the fact that the majority of the people there would like to be liberated from it.