After more than two years of crippling violence, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas was formalized and approved by the Israeli cabinet earlier this month. The deal stipulates a phased withdrawal from Gaza, the release of hostages and prisoners, and the reopening of key crossings, alongside the promise of a new diplomatic era. US President Donald Trump immediately declared the war over, calling it “a historic dawn of a new Middle East.” (The Guardian) Yet multiple observers caution that gunfire has not fully ceased, and that the real work has only just begun.

Amid cautious optimism, progressive Jewish organizations and activists have responded with statements of hope, continued vigilance, and calls for justice. For instance, the Reform Movement issued a public statement condemning the starvation and suffering of Gaza’s civilians, declaring these harms incompatible with Jewish values. Meanwhile, Rabbis for Ceasefire, a coalition of Jewish clergy and lay leaders, are mobilizing not only to celebrate the ceasefire but to keep attention on the rights of Palestinians, planning town halls and sustained advocacy. Progressive and centrist Jewish bodies expressed support for the deal, seeing it as a necessary, albeit insufficient, step toward reconciliation.

In this shifting landscape, how might Buddhists respond? How can the Dharma guide our reflection and action in this fraught moment, particularly knowing that Buddhists in many lands have been complicit in or victimized by war?

First, Buddhism recognizes that simply stopping violence is necessary but not sufficient. The cessation of hostilities is a crucial relief from suffering: it opens a space in which healing, trust, and transformation may begin. In Sanskrit terminology, nirodha (cessation) is one of the noble truths. But cessation must lead directly to the marga (Skt. path), which points to skillful methods of repair. A ceasefire is like the opening of a doorway, the path is the work of crossing through it.

From a Buddhist vantage, true peace is not merely the absence of conflict but the presence of right relations: justice, reconciliation, mutual recognition, and structural change. In this moment, the progressive Jewish voices urging accountability, humanitarian relief, and human rights for Palestinians align with a Buddhist ethic of a compassion-based response to suffering in the world.

The Buddhist call is not to take sides in a binary conflict, but to see and act for the flourishing of all beings, especially the most vulnerable. As BDG columnist John Harvey Negru wrote more than 18 months ago: the world today is awash in blame, enhanced by divisive leadership and social media algorithms, leading to a hopelessly “us-vs-them” mode of thinking. The solution, Negru argued, is in looking beyond the dualities in one’s views and in seeking to be a helper—or find the helper, to borrow from the late Mr. Rogers—in one’s practice.*

Thus, while many will rightly rejoice in the hostage releases and halted bombardments across Gaza, we also must resist complacency. The path of reconstruction, of addressing displacement, trauma, inequity, occupation, and structural power imbalances will be long and fraught. Buddhist practice invites patience, reflection, and repeated recommitment, rather than triumphalism.

This is the message found a more recent article for BDG by Nachaya Campbell-Allen, “A Buddhist Response to Global Unrest.” There she reiterates Negru’s caution about falling into binary thinking, instead urging us to see the interconnectedness of all beings and—working through one’s own mental defilements—seeking to bring all beings through the fire of samsara.**  

A central Buddhist practice is mindful witnessing, to see suffering clearly in both ourselves and others, without denial or evasion. The reports from Gaza during this war have been harrowing. They included mass displacement, destruction of hospital and water systems, civilian deaths, crises of famine, and the return of bodies bearing signs of torture. These are not distant abstractions; they are raw, human suffering. A Buddhist response demands that we not turn away, claim neutrality, or relativize the pain.

Yet bearing witness also entails accepting that Buddhists—in Cambodia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and other countries—have not always avoided violence. In Myanmar, for instance, Buddhist nationalism has fueled horrific persecution of Rohingya Muslims. In Sri Lanka, Buddhist-majority governments waged protracted war against Tamil minorities, often with Buddhist justification of the state as protector. White convert Buddhists must recognize the legacies of violence in their own history as well. Buddhists, too, have justified violence in the name of identity or “protection,” and must take responsibility.

The humility of such acknowledgement helps to break the illusion that one’s side is automatically “pure” or immune to violence. Here we might share a vow to not repeat the same karmic patterns, and to instead commit to non-harm more deeply.

Buddhism emphasizes the union of compassion (Skt: karuna) and wisdom (Skt: prajna). In a conflict such as Gaza’s, compassion must reach both Israeli and Palestinian victims while wisdom must discern how to avoid contributing to further suffering or injustice.

A naive pacifism that ignores power, occupation, structural violence, or terrorism is not adequate. At the same time, a cold “realism” that discounts civilian harm is incompatible with Buddhist ethics. The middle way—neither violent dominance nor passivism—calls for transformative policies: truth-telling, equitable reparations, and systems that address root causes of injustice.

Practically, this might look like supporting multinational peace-building efforts, legal inquiry into war crimes, safe zones for civilians, infrastructure rebuilding, refugee return, inter-religious reconciliation movements, and political frameworks that respect sovereignty and human dignity.

A Buddhist approach invites deep psychological healing. Trauma, grief, hate, and intergenerational memory must be transformed through relational practices, not just institutional design. Monastics, Dharma centers, meditation communities—all might contribute to safe conversational spaces, listening circles, and interfaith dialogue across historical wounds.

While the ceasefire offers a needed breather, the reality is far from a stable peace. Gunfire has flared in Gaza even after the agreement. The peace is fragile. Netanyahu has stated that Israel will “give peace a chance,” but emphasized conditions on demilitarization and disarmament. (CBS News) Meanwhile, Hamas has been accused of executing alleged collaborators in Gaza, raising grave concerns about internal violence.

We must remain vigilant. Concessions by either side cannot overlook accountability, human rights, and the dignity of marginalized voices. The Buddhist path here means holding simultaneously hope and clear-eyed attention. It means refusing to idealize one side or vilify the other entirely; instead, to hold complexity, grief, aspiration, and restraint.

In practical terms, progressives—Jewish, Buddhist, interfaith, and so on—can support civil society efforts, back legal accountability (e.g. through international courts), promote equitable reconstruction aid, insist on civil and political rights, and ensure during reconstruction that no new forms of injustice or dispossession arise.

In many Buddhist traditions, the concept of engaged Buddhism (as articulated by Thich Nhat Hanh) denotes a commitment to compassionate action in the world; to apply mindfulness and ethical insight to social suffering. In the wake of the Gaza ceasefire, engaged Buddhists can play roles as mediators, healers, and supporters of grassroots reconciliation.

Dharma centers might host interreligious retreats or dialogues involving Israelis, Palestinians, Jews, Muslims, Christians, and secular peacebuilders. Monastics or lay teachers could offer meditation practices for trauma, support for bereaved families, or safe listening spaces. Buddhist peace organizations might lend their voice to calls for justice, relief, or human rights, aligning with progressive Jewish and Muslim voices seeking a better future.

At the same time, engaged Buddhism does not imply political partisanship. Its grounding is in non-attachment—to views, ideologies, or outcomes—while committing to non-harm, empathy, and generosity. Thus, one can affirm the aspirations of both Palestinians and Israelis without collapsing into uncritical alignment with any military, political, or religious agenda.

The Gaza ceasefire is undeniably a moment for relief—for grieving families to see hostages returned, for cease of aerial bombardments, for the possibility of a new diplomatic era. Yet it is not a moment to celebrate victory: too many conditions remain unmet, too many structures of violence and inequity remain entrenched.

From a Buddhist perspective, this moment calls us to fresh commitment—to see suffering, to act with compassion, to repair broken relations, to guard against complacency, and to remain open to transformative change. As progressive Buddhists and allies, we can stand beside progressive Jewish voices, Palestinian activists, Israeli peacebuilders, international human rights organizations, and civil society movements to nurture the long, arduous path toward a just and stable peace, not one imposed by force, but one co-created across wounds, grief, and aspiration.

* Rising Above the Blame Game (BDG)

** A Buddhist Response to Global Unrest (BDG)

See more

Trump sets sights on peace with Iran as he hails ‘end of Gaza war’ (The Guardian)
Reform Movement Statement on Starvation in Gaza (Union for Reform Judaism)
For 2 years, these US Jews sought a ceasefire. Their movement is ‘just beginning.’ (Religion News Service)
Netanyahu says Israel giving “peace a chance,” but no Palestinian state without “destroying fanaticism” (CBS News)
Hamas executes ‘collaborators and lawbreakers’ in graphic scenes in Gaza (ABC News)

Related features from BDG

Buddhistdoor View: The Wise and Compassionate Way to Shape Government
Buddhistdoor View: Israel and Iran – Pursuing Peace Amid Conflict
Buddhistdoor View: The 2024 US Election – Politics, Power, and Compassion
Dharma and Politics
Responding to Politics with Equanimity