Buddhist ethics - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 140.126.125.111 (talk) at 02:11, 6 June 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:11, 6 June 2006 by 140.126.125.111 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Pancha Sila

Buddhism's ethical foundation for laypeople is the Pancasila: no killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct, or intoxicants. (Some Mahayana followers add further items such as gambling.) That is, in becoming a Buddhist--or affirming one's commitment to Buddhism--a layperson is encouraged to vow to abstain from these negative actions, in order to avoid accumulating negative karma. Buddhist monks and nuns take many hundreds more such vows (see vinaya).

Why be good?

An interesting feature of Buddhist ethics is that it seems to consist of hypothetical imperatives rather than categorical imperatives. That is, a Buddhist does not abstain from killing and stealing simply for the sake of doing what is right, but in order to attain a certain end, namely enlightenment. If we imagine a parallel universe where karma rewards those who kill and steal, one wonders what the Buddhist response would be. (Most Buddhist thinkers would deny that such a universe would be possible, since an effect must resemble its cause.)

We may also note that Buddhism simply assumes "enlightenment"--variously understood as the cessation of suffering and its causes, the removal of obscurations to one's innate luminous nature, etc.--to be a worthy goal. A Christian, for example, might wonder whether suffering might be intentionally chosen, for the sake of others (a perspective which Buddhism would not necessarily reject).

Mahayana Buddhists stress the bodhicitta principle--that one should seek enlightenment not only for one's own sake, but for the sake of "all sentient beings." (Cf. the Theravadin practice of mettabhavana meditation, in which one wishes all beings well.) This orientation however is not so much altruistic as reflective of the Mahayana belief that bodhicitta is instrumentally necessary in order to develop omniscience--that is, in order to become "fully enlightened."

The nature of enlightenment is typically held to transcend dualistic or conceptual categories such as good and evil. Might an enlightened being commit murder, or adultery? On one hand many such stories can be found in Buddhist lore (and not all of them ancient); on the other hand, strong social constraints against this philosophy obviously exist. By the same token, some may conclude from the teaching of sunyata (emptiness) that such things as human life do not ultimately matter--a conclusion which Buddhism roundly rejects.

Selflessness and moral agency

Buddhist denials of the "self" (atman) lead to many involved philosophical conundrums, many of them apparently posed by the Buddha himself. If "I" do not exist, then who is the "moral agent" (as ethicists would say)? What connects the identity of the person who committed the negative action in the past, with his "future incarnation" who will suffer the corresponding negative karma? Where Western ethicists have agonized over divine justice, arguing for example whether God is ethical or not, such discussions tend not to arise in connection with karma, which is perceived as an impersonal amoral law, like gravity.

Middle Way

One of the teachings of Gautama Buddha, the historical founder of Buddhism, was the Middle Way. This interests ethicists for its resemblance to Aristotle's Golden Mean. However, Buddha does not seem to have been a virtue ethicist, as Aristotle was.

Detachment

Another interesting feature of Buddhism is that it emphasises "detachment", whereas many ethicists believe that on the contrary, attachment to others is a virtue. Not a few dharma students have raised the clever question of whether it is wrong to become "attached" to Buddhism or enlightenment, or for that matter to one's spouse (as opposed to all the other possible partners of the world). However, Buddhists understand "attachment" to mean "selfish attachment." Selfless "attachment"--including love for others (to the extent that this is truly selfless")--is positive.

Buddhism--a religion without holy war?

Some Buddhists are under the impression that their religion is morally superior to others. For example, one sometimes reads that there has never been a Buddhist holy war. However, a glance at the contemporary politics of Sri Lanka will find Buddhist monks regularly urging military action against that island's Tamil minority. Other historical examples could be cited, e.g. from Tibet and its relation to the Bön faith.

Sex Roles

All traditions of Buddhism describe or assume different roles for men and women (including monks and nuns). The resulting inequalities have led to predictable responses from feminists, especially Western nuns. An example would be the campaign to restore the bikhuni (fully-fledged nun's) ordination in Theravadin countries, where the move has met with intense social resistance.

Abortion

Main article: Religion and abortion

Buddha advised against the taking of conscious life, as he identified such activity as a cause of suffering. Buddhism generally asserts that conscious life begins before birth. Therefore, many Buddhists consider abortion to be equivalent to infanticide.

Mizuko kuyo (水子供養 — lit. "water-child memorial service"), or a memorial service held by or for those who have experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, has become widespread in Japan since the 1970s. Reasons for the performance of these rites can include parental grief, desire to comfort the soul of the fetus, or even fear of retribution from vengeful or wayward spirits. Originally, mizuko kuyo was used to make offerings to Jizo, a Bodhisattva who is believed to protect children. In the Edo period, when famine sometimes lead the poverty-stricken to infanticide and abortion, it was adapted. Today, mizuko kuyo continues, although it is debated whether it is be a considered an authentically Buddhist practice. Specifics of the ceremony vary from temple to temple, school to school, and individual to individual. It is common for temples to offer Jizo statues for a fee, which are then dressed in red bibs and caps, and displayed in the temple yard. Some modern services have come under criticism for allegedly preying upon the afformentioned Japanese belief regarding retaliation from the spirits of the dead.

Death Penalty

Main article: Religion and capital punishment

As a religion Buddhism places great emphasis on the sanctity of life. However there is disagreement among Buddhists as to whether or not Buddhism forbids the death penalty. The first of the Five Precepts (Panca-sila) is to abstain from destruction of life. Chapter 10 of the Dhammapada states:

Everyone fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill.

Chapter 26, the final chapter of the Dhammapada, states "Him I call a brahmin who has put aside weapons and renounced violence toward all creatures. He neither kills nor helps others to kill". These sentences are interpreted by many Buddhists (especially in the West) as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the death penalty. However, as is often the case with the interpretation of scripture, there is dispute on this matter. Thailand, where Buddhism is the official religion, practices the death penalty, as do many other countries where the majority of the population are Buddhist, such as Sri Lanka, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. Moreover, almost throughout history, countries where Buddhism has been the official religion (which have included most of the Far East and Indochina) have practiced the death penalty. One exception is the abolition of the death penalty by the Emperor Saga of Japan abolished in 818. This lasted until 1165, although in private manors executions conducted as a form of retaliation continued to be conducted.

The first precept of Buddhism focuses mainly on direct participation in the destruction of life. This is one reason that the Buddha made a distinction between killing animals and eating meat, and refused to introduce vegetarianism into monastic practice (see Vegetarian section of Buddhism). In Jataka, which tell stories of the past lives of the Buddha, Boddisatva (a previous incarnation of the Buddha) actually kills someone to save another person's life, though because of this action, he was no longer able to achieve enlightenment in that particular life. Therefore, few (if any) Buddhist groups issue blanket decrees against Buddhists being soldiers, police officers or farmers (which in Buddhism is classified as a profession involved in destruction of life), and some argue that the death penalty is permissible in certain circumstances. In general, Buddhist groups in secular countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan tend to take anti-death penalty stance while those in Thailand, Sri Lanka and Bhutan where Buddhism has strong political influence, the opposite is true. Almost all Buddhist groups, however, oppose the use of the death penalty as a means of retribution.

Euthanasia

Main article: Euthanasia

In Theravada Buddhism, for a monk to praise the advantages of death including simply telling a person of the miseries of life or the bliss of dying and going to heaven in such a way that he/she might feel inspired to commit suicide or simply pine away to death is explictedly stated as a breach of one of highest vinaya code regarding prohibition of harming life, hence it will result in automatic expulsion from Sangha. In caring for the terminally ill, no one should subject a patient to treatment designed to bring on death faster than it would if the disease were simply allowed to run its course.

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it.

Homosexuality

Main article: Homosexuality and Buddhism

In Buddhism, the third of the Five Precepts states that one is to refrain from sexual misconduct. Among the many interpretations of what constitutes "sexual misconduct" are: sex outside of marriage (a relatively modern idea), sex with another person without the consent of your life partner, or the historically prevalent view that it was limited to describe rape, incest, and bestiality.

No Buddhist school prior to the European Imperialism that began largely around the 17th Century had ever described homosexuality as "sexual misconduct". Traditionally, however, monks of the Theravada and most Mahayana schools are expected to be celibate and restrain themselves from all sexual activity. However, Buddhist functionaries, or "priests", of the Vajrayana and many Korean and Japanese schools are allowed to marry.

Buddhist schools condemning homosexuality for laypersons is a recent development with no scriptural basis. The closest would be a few Buddhists who equated homosexuality to a disability, or to being a transvestite, but there was no condemnation in any real sense (see also ). Buddhist leaders throughout Asia accepted or even sanctified homosexuality.

During the 1990's, the Dalai Lama debated American gay activists over certain Buddhist scriptural admonitions against homosexuality (or more specifically, the use of the "wrong orifice"). The Dalai Lama seemed confused over the demands of the activists, that he somehow abrogate what he saw simply as statements of karmic law from the Buddhist scriptures. Whether to follow the advice or not was up to the individual practitioner.

Vegetarianism

Main article: Vegetarianism in Buddhism

Many Buddhists, especially in East Asia, believe that Buddhism teaches vegetarianism. While Buddhist theory tends to lump killing animals together with killing people (and avoids the conclusion that killing can sometimes be ethical, e.g. defense of others), as a practical matter most Buddhists do eat meat. In Theravada countries, monks must accept whatever food is offered them. (Buddha himself seems to have died from eating rancid pork.) Vegetarian Tibetans are rare indeed (and not only for lack of vegetables in Tibet, since Tibetan exile monks in India actually consume more meat). The Dalai Lama once engaged in an amusing ethical discussion with Theravadan Buddhists, who believed that as long as one was determined to eat meat, seafood was preferable to red meat. The Dalai Lama responded that one bowl of shrimp would kill multitudes of sentient beings, but one sheep or cow would feed many people!

The first lay precept in Buddhism is usually translated as "I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures." Many see this as implying that Buddhists should not eat the meat of animals. However, this is not necessarily the case. There is a divergence of views within Buddhism on the need for vegetarianism, with the majority of schools of Buddhism rejecting such a claimed need and with most Buddhists in fact eating meat. A minority of Mahayana Buddhists, however, strongly oppose meat-eating on certain scriptural grounds.

In the Pali version of the Tripitaka, there are number of occasions in which the Buddha ate meat as well as recommending certain types of meat as a cure for medical conditions. On one occasion, a general sent a servant to purchase meat specifically to feed the Buddha. The Buddha declared that

meat should not be eaten under three circumstances: when it is seen or heard or suspected (that a living being has been purposely slaughtered for the eater); these, Jivaka, are the three circumstances in which meat should not be eaten, Jivaka! I declare there are three circumstances in which meat can be eaten: when it is not seen or heard or suspected (that a living being has been purposely slaughtered for the eater); Jivaka, I say these are the three circumstances in which meat can be eaten.
-- Jivaka Sutta

The Buddha, on one particular occasion, specifically refused suggestions by a monk to institute vegetarianism in Sangha. According to Kassapa Buddha (a previous Buddha of legend not Shakyamuni Buddha) "aking life, beating, wounding, binding, stealing, lying, deceiving, worthless knowledge, adultery; this is stench. Not the eating of meat." (Amagandha Sutta). There were, however, rules prohibiting consumption of 10 types of meat. Those are humans, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears and hyenas because these animals can be provoked by the smell of the flesh of their own kind.

Theravada commentaries explain the Buddha was making distinction between direct destruction of life and eating of already dead meat. Moreover, they point out that any act of consumption would involve proxy killing, including the farming of crops, so the idea that meat eating amounted to proxy killing while eating vegetables does not is ignorance. For this reason, they discourage gluttony or any other act of craving which lead to over consumption. However, some Therevadan monks suggest that it is possible to make some case for vegetarianism starting from brahmavihara. Interestingly, that is how Mahayana Buddhism makes the case for vegetarianism.

There is no mention of Buddha endorsing or repudiating vegetarianism in surviving portions of Sanskrit Tripitaka. Moreover, no major Mahayana sutras explicitly declare that meat eating violates the first precept. However, certain Mahayana sutras vigorously and unreservedly denounce the eating of meat, mainly on the ground that such an act violates the bodhisattva's compassion. The sutras which inveigh against meat-eating include the Nirvana Sutra, the Shurangama Sutra, the Brahmajala Sutra, the Angulimaliya Sutra, the Mahamegha Sutra, and the Lankavatara Sutra, as well as the Buddha's comments on the negative karmic effects of meat consumption in the Karma Sutra. In the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra, which presents itself as the final elucidatory and definitive Mahayana teachings of the Buddha on the very eve of his death, the Buddha states that "the eating of meat extinguishes the seed of Great Kindness", adding that all and every kind of meat and fish consumption (even of animals found already dead) is prohibited by him. He specifically rejects the idea that monks who go out begging and receive meat from a donor should eat it: ". . . it should be rejected . . . I say that even meat, fish, game, dried hooves and scraps of meat left over by others constitutes an infraction . . . I teach the harm arising from meat-eating." The Buddha also predicts in this sutra that later monks will "hold spurious writings to be the authentic Dharma" and will concoct their own sutras and lyingly claim that the Buddha allows the eating of meat, whereas in fact he says he does not. A long passage in the Lankavatara Sutra shows the Buddha speaking out very forcefully against meat consumption and unequivocally in favor of vegetarianism, since the eating of the flesh of fellow sentient beings is said by him to be incompatible with the compassion that a Bodhisattva should strive to cultivate. In several other Mahayana scriptures, too (e.g., the Mahayana jatakas), the Buddha is seen clearly to indicate that meat-eating is undesirable and karmically unwholesome.