Warrior-Priests

"It seems that priests today are focused on irrelevant issues and go all-out to display a pious demeanor. As they strive they become soft and gentle, and because of this there are none who attain true enlightenment. It is unseemly that they encourage warriors to follow the same path. This leads a warrior to follow two paths and turns him into a useless coward. Unless a warrior is totally committed to bushido, he is of no consequence. Old men and retired warriors may follow the priest's path, but not active warriors."
I realize this quote is from an ancient book, but I think some of you can see how it is still relevant. One might replace the word bushido with the Force, or priest with Jedi. However you decide to interpret it, I hope no one takes it personally.

Opinions vary, lol...

I think it is very possible to become that way, even in the Jedi community.
Many people believe I am too militaristic, and that may be true in their eyes. And I recognize that. So to help me along and create the possibility of having more balance in my life, or a more well-rounded knowledge and skill set to pull from so that a better balance in life may be achieved, I have spent my free time studying the Seminary courses and clerical workings.

Often, people pursue what they feel connected to and love. This can cause people to become specialized and then lean more heavily on one aspect over all others. Where it is not necessarily bad, it does pull them further from a balanced center.

But as Jestor said, opinions vary… and that is my variation.

Priests.. warriors... just words. I'm me, and beyond that I'm an expression of the Force. To talk in general terms about any group of people based solely on their vocation is a mistake, it seems to me.

But I guess if forced to use these sorts of terms, before I am a warrior or a priest I am a Jedi. Jedi don't strive to be soft and gentle, unless we are starting out from a point of being rigid and hard. We work to find balance and harmony.

Some priests perhaps, but not most from my experience with the religious and religious leaders.

Many priests I have personally met and watched sermons from, push their congregations to take action on the issues that are both important to the church (congregation), and the followers themselves. These include things such as taking action on helping the impoverished, hungry, and less than fortunate. It includes things such as defending ones family and ones country from threats (both foreign and domestic), and things such as living with honor and acting with courage when one is called to be courageous.

I'm sorry you have met and watched sermons from more passive priests, but I can say from my experience that they are most definitely in the minority.

There are several examples of Warrior Priests/Monks:

Sohei
Teutonic Knights
Yamabushi warrior monk
Catholic Lay Brothers
Warrior Monks in Germany
Crusader Knights

One could argue any "radical" religious person willing to fight for their religion.

Maybe as we gain wisdom and insight we see the center path and learn a more balanced and less extreme or violent approach which could b e perceived as soft and gentle.

Streen wrote: "It seems that priests today are focused on irrelevant issues and go all-out to display a pious demeanor. As they strive they become soft and gentle, and because of this there are none who attain true enlightenment. It is unseemly that they encourage warriors to follow the same path. This leads a warrior to follow two paths and turns him into a useless coward. Unless a warrior is totally committed to bushido, he is of no consequence. Old men and retired warriors may follow the priest's path, but not active warriors."

—The Hagakure

I realize this quote is from an ancient book, but I think some of you can see how it is still relevant. One might replace the word bushido with the Force, or priest with Jedi. However you decide to interpret it, I hope no one takes it personally.

Are "soft" and "gentle" the correct translations? English is much more adaptable and words that have specific meanings in other languages do not necessarily have specific meanings in our's. "Soft" could perhaps mean fickle, and "gentle" might mean "too accommodating of failure".

That point will need further clarification, but assuming they are the appropriate words...

I do not agree at all with this quote.

The author presumes that being "soft" and "gentle" means you cannot reach full enlightenment (though what the author actually means is "What I think classifies as being enlightened"). Both Jesus and the Buddha would seem to be individuals capable of reaching what we might call "enlightenment" and they did so very gently. Whatever violence either may have ever caused one would not describe them as "warriors" (of physical war).

Assuming also that the path the priests follow is one of softness and gentleness then why would that ever be a bad thing to educate warriors with? If someone had to fight, would you rather they did it because they enjoyed fighting and killing? Or would you rather that they did it out of necessity and wept at the destruction caused? Gentler and softer soldiers and fighters everywhere in the world would probably reduce the amount of total and collateral damage caused by conflicts.

Why does pursuing softness and gentleness, while also martial combat turn you into a coward?

Like I said... if "soft" and "gentle" are the appropriate translations then I very much disagree with what this person has said.

Akkarin wrote: If someone had to fight, would you rather they did it because they enjoyed fighting and killing? Or would you rather that they did it out of necessity and wept at the destruction caused? Gentler and softer soldiers and fighters everywhere in the world would probably reduce the amount of total and collateral damage caused by conflicts.

While no leader wants his troops to revel in bloodshed, his soldiers cannot fear it either.

Softer gentler soldiers would just cause more dead soldiers.

Better policy’s to deal with conflict are needed if we want less collateral damage. If you want to bring your boys home once the fighting is over, they better carry the spirit of the bayonet fighter with them as they fulfill the task that was assigned them.

And that is why soldiers train soldiers and priest should advise politicians.

I am not a soldier, nor have I been in the military, but I do not see teaching softness and gentleness would also mean you couldn't teach someone not to fear death and dying.

The very excellent service last night: http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/sermons/2139-death

Is an excellent example of this. There are also lots of sermons we have that teach softness and gentleness, all of these sermons are written by people that would probably be considered as being priestly if not fully fledged priests.

We all have our own interpretation of the Jedi path, that's the beauty of it to my mind.

"Warriors, warriors we call ourselves. We fight for splendid virtue, for high endeavor, for sublime wisdom, therefore we call ourselves warriors." - Aunguttara Nikaya

One of my favorite lines from the movie "pacific rim"

"Do not mistake my calm demeanor for weakness"...that short simple line spoke volumes about the commander...he did not back down from a fight, did not fear it, he had the wisdom and restraint to fight when it was necessary and to not hold back ...

Another good line of his:"I carry nothing with me into the drift, no fear, no memories, just the mission at hand"...when he enters battle he enters with a clear mind and a singular focus...to end the battle...

How do you know how gentle, peaceful, and priestly some of the best warriors in history were or were not when they were not in battle?

Within the nature of yin and yang, there are many people today who listen to very violent and angry metal music yet are very socially passive and peaceful in character. The music they listen to is a vehicle to vent their aggression through, often helping them maintain themselves as level-headed. On the flip-side there are very docile, philosophical and deep-minded people who are typically quite feared because of how quiet they are. People know that they think a lot and can become very clever and could easily build up anger inside of them over time. When it comes time to fight, they can be some of the most vicious and smart fighters you'll see.

Proteus wrote: How do you know how gentle, peaceful, and priestly some of the best warriors in history were or were not when they were not in battle?

Within the nature of yin and yang, there are many people today who listen to very violent and angry metal music yet are very socially passive and peaceful in character. The music they listen to is a vehicle to vent their aggression through, often helping them maintain themselves as level-headed. On the flip-side there are very docile, philosophical and deep-minded people who are typically quite feared because of how quiet they are. People know that they think a lot and can become very clever and could easily build up anger inside of them over time. When it comes time to fight, they can be some of the most vicious and smart fighters you'll see.

All through school people would keep a good distance from me until they got to know me....one day we were talking about it and they said that as a general rule: " always be afraid of the quiet ones, you never know where their mind is"...as for me..I always ignore that rule and am usually the first to make friends with the quiet ones (we have the preference for quiet in common)

Lets not assume soft and gentle is easy, so it might be a comment on the level of dedication rather then the actual concepts of soft and easy.

Though the discussion reminds me of 'Walk softly and carry a big stick'!? I like the idea of efficiency and precision... which would tend towards 'softness'.... but ramp up when required to achieve the desired (wise) effect.

Since the quote mentions enlightenment, one possible perspective of enlightenment is that it has a triune base nature of empty essence, radiant nature and all-encompassing compassionate resonance... all very soft things perhaps!, but the nature seems to represent the ground state of it - and not its active form. For me, the application of that ground state to the environment is the purpose of my Jedi path ie using the Force, not just trying to dissolve back into it.

Nor does he rejoice in victory.
How could he rejoice in victory and delight in the slaughter of men?
He enters a battle gravely,with sorrow and with great compassion,
As if he were attending a funeral. 

And that is why I'm somber after a fight, why I become disappointed with myself...
While there is a part of me that is thrilled with it that part is not in charge...

I may have something to contribute to this conversation, although I always caveat with "Your mileage may vary." I am speaking on my personal experiences alone.

I've been under oath since I was an adult, and have had the privilege of working closely with all branches of America's military, as well as the warrior traditions from many other nations and peoples. I will not say that Warrior = Combat Soldier by necessity, though. People have certainly been one or the other for as long as the path and the profession have existed, though I DO believe that walking the path aids the profession.

With those two caveats explicitly stated, I would like to start by saying that I enjoy my job. Not because I am afforded certain grave responsibilities or because of the tools I am given to perform my duties. Both are poor reasons to want to be in the profession of arms. The prime component for me is the opportunity to represent the values and ethics of my people through actions holding serious consequence. The concept of a nation, a country, nationalism, implies that we are unified by something we value - the common life we all share, a certain set of basic principles we may not quite understand, or even simply an adherence to the laws that act as representatives of our value system. It is difficult to really nail down exactly what it is...but there it is. The point is this - true warriors act on behalf of the intangibles of the world - not for personal gain, fame, glory, or need. That does not, in any way, imply only violent acts. When I stated above that being a warrior aids in the profession of arms, I meant that because of the severity of the things a soldier is asked to do...acting on principle is one of the only things that brings a soldier back to his people intact. Warrior codes, creeds, and rules of engagement are guides to those principles he or she represents. Adherence to them implies that you act on behalf of a value system, not your own motivations. When soldiers kill out of hate or anger alone, outside the purview of their status as an agent of their society...that's when they are in real jeopardy. They can truly damage their soul.

Codes and ROE are certainly there to protect people, most notably their adherents. When you take the various Jedi Codes as examples, you see a focus on the self. By focusing on self and right action, that translates to the world around the Jedi who lives by it. Most often for the positive. The Code speaks to those common beliefs we share, regardless of where we come from or who we are. In any given situation, a thousand choices abound and we could go down many paths...the Code does not address any of them specifically because it isn't designed to do so - The Jedi Code is the star field by which we orient and navigate.

Back to the Warrior-Priest. Depending on how you define either, I think the author of the original quote Streen used meant that it is folly for the adherent to represent their chosen principles merely in superficial ways. Acting in a gentle way, defined as we know it, is not a detractor for the warrior. A warrior's gentleness in adhering to principle is. The calling of the Warrior's Path requires a deep commitment to the societal values it espouses...public appearance and self-aggrandazing should not be the warrior's focus. While the Soldier acts on behalf of the physical realm, and the Priest on behalf of the spiritual one, the Warrior is called to act for both - often an impossibly difficult task.

And now to go full-on nerd:

I'm reminded of a quote from the Lord of the Rings, when Denethor is questioning Gandalf's motivations in mixing into Gondor's affairs. Gandalf reminds him that while Denethor is the Steward of Gondor, Gandalf is a steward of something higher.

"The rule of no realm is mine, but all worthy things that are in peril as the world now stands, those are my care. And for my part, I shall not wholly fail in my task if anything passes through this night that can still grow fair or bear fruit and flower again in days to come. For I too am a steward. Did you not know?" - Gandalf/The Return of the King/J.R.R. Tolkien


Gandalf is tasked with acting as agent for all things good...a representative for the Valar. Not as merely a defender of the realm, as Denethor is. Or as a spiritual adviser to those who DO act...but as an active agent of principle and duty. He will do whatever he can to preserve and protect all 'that can still grow fair' . The melding of acting for the tangible and intangible. A warrior. Tolkien got it.

I would like to say 2 things...

1 - Reacher, THANK YOU! nothing else need be said.

2 - Example of a Warrior Priest

Although I don't agree with some of his thoughts and methods, he is an example of a Warrior Priest.

Whilst we romanticize the old Samurai, I'm reminded that their descendants bombed my country Australia, tortured and executed our Prisoner of Wars. All unprovicated.

I would have preferred some softness and compassion, instead of the suicidal bombing.

Even now the Japanese are pretending like it never happened. Our foreign born Prime Minister recently praised the Japanese for how they tortured Australians. Truly it's dark days for us here, with this idiot in charge.

Recently big ears committed our country to the war in Iraq, because the USA said Jump and he asked how high.

He didn't pause. He didn't find it difficult to send more young people to their deaths.

The point of my post...well it's 2014 and I think we've had enough glorifying of the warrior.

It takes much more courage to start thinking about peace.