Ethical Studies OF BUDDHISM

Ethics

Capital punishment

Buddhism and capital punishment
Because Buddhism exists in many forms, under many organisations, there is no unified
Buddhist policy on capital punishment.
In terms of doctrine the death penalty is clearly inconsistent with Buddhist teaching.
Buddhists place great emphasis on non-violence and compassion for all life. The First
Precept requires individuals to abstain from injuring or killing any living creature.
The Buddha did not explicitly speak about capital punishment, but his teachings show no
sympathy for physical punishment, no matter how bad the crime.
An action, even if it brings benefit to oneself, cannot be considered a good action if it causes
physical and mental pain to another being.

The Buddha

If a person foolishly does me wrong, I will return to him the protection of my boundless
love. The more evil that comes from him, the more good will go from me.

The Buddha


Buddhism and punishment
Buddhism believes fundamentally in the cycle of birth and re-birth (Samsara) and teaches
that if capital punishment is administered it will have compromising effects on the souls of
both offender and the punisher in future incarnations.
As far as punishment in this world is concerned, Buddhism has strong views:
~ inhumane treatment of an offender does not solve their misdeeds or those of humanity in
general - the best approach to an offender is reformatory rather than punitive
~ punishment should only be to the extent to which the offender needs to make amends,
and his rehabilitation into society should be of paramount importance
~ punishing an offender with excessive cruelty will injure not just the offender's mind, but
also the mind of the person doing the punishing
~ it is impossible to administer severe punishment with composure and compassion
~ if the crime is particularly serious, the person may be banished from the community or
country


Buddhist countries and capital punishment
Despite these teachings several countries with substantial Buddhist populations retain the
death penalty, and some of them, for example Thailand, continue to use it.
These are no states that have Buddhism as their official religion.
Alarid and Wang (see below) suggest that this apparent paradox partly stems from the
difference between popular and monastic Buddhism. The majority of lay Buddhists in these
countries follow Buddhist practices and are entirely sincere in their commitment, but "the
genuine study of Buddhism, its rituals, and carryover to daily life is superficial for most
Buddhist followers."
Other reasons Buddhist countries retain the death penalty are:
~ belief by politicians that capital punishment is necessary for retribution, cultural customs,
or for deterrence value
~ a long tradition of capital punishment in a particular country
~ keeping order in society is seen as more important than Buddha's teaching
~ reaction to long periods of political unrest or economic instability






Euthanasia, assisted dying, and suicide


Buddhism, euthanasia and suicide
Buddhists are not unanimous in their view of euthanasia, and the teachings of the Buddha
don't explicitly deal with it.
Most Buddhists (like almost everyone else) are against involuntary euthanasia. Their
position on voluntary euthanasia is less clear.

States of mind
The most common position is that voluntary euthanasia is wrong, because it demonstrates
that one's mind is in a bad state and that one has allowed physical suffering to cause mental
suffering.
Meditation and the proper use of pain killing drugs should enable a person to attain a state
where they are not in mental pain, and so no longer contemplate euthanasia or suicide.
Buddhists might also argue that helping to end someone's life is likely to put the helper into
a bad mental state, and this too should be avoided.

Avoiding harm
Buddhism places great stress on non-harm, and on avoiding the ending of life. The reference
is to life - any life - so the intentional ending of life seems against Buddhist teaching and
voluntary euthanasia should be forbidden. Certain codes of Buddhist monastic law explicitly
forbid it.
Lay-people do not have a code of Buddhist law, so the strongest that can be said of a lay
person who takes part in euthanasia is that they have made an error of judgement.

Karma
Buddhists regard death as a transition. The deceased person will be reborn to a new life,
whose quality will be the result of their karma.
This produces two problems. We don't know what the next life is going to be like. If the next
life is going to be even worse than the life that the sick person is presently enduring it would
clearly be wrong on a utilitarian basis to permit euthanasia, as that shortens the present bad
state of affairs in favour of an even worse one.
The second problem is that shortening life interferes with the working out of karma, and
alters the karmic balance resulting from the shortened life.

Euthanasia as suicide
Another difficulty comes if we look at voluntary euthanasia as a form of suicide.
The Buddha himself showed tolerance of suicide by monks in two cases. The Japanese
Buddhist tradition includes many stories of suicide by monks, and suicide was used as a
political weapon by Buddhist monks during the Vietnam war.
But these were monks, and that makes a difference. In Buddhism, the way life ends has a
profound impact on the way the new life will begin.
So a person's state of mind at the time of death is important - their thoughts should be
selfless and enlightened, free of anger, hate or fear.
This suggests that suicide (and so euthanasia) is only approved for people who have
achieved enlightenment and that the rest of us should avoid it.













War

Buddhism and war
Non-violence is at the heart of Buddhist thinking and behaviour. The first of the five
precepts that all Buddhists should follow is "Avoid killing, or harming any living thing."
Buddhism is essentially a peaceful tradition. Nothing in Buddhist scripture gives any support
to the use of violence as a way to resolve conflict.
In times of war
Give rise in yourself to the mind of compassion,
Helping living beings
Abandon the will to fight.

One of Buddha's sermons puts this very clearly with a powerful example that stresses the
need to love your enemy no matter how cruelly he treats you:
Even if thieves carve you limb from limb with a double-handed saw, if you make your mind
hostile you are not following my teaching.
Kamcupamasutta, Majjhima-Nikkaya I ~ 28-29

Figures like the Dalai Lama (who won the Nobel Peace Prize) demonstrate in word and deed
Buddhism's commitment to peace.
"Hatred will not cease by hatred, but by love alone.
This is the ancient law."

Many Buddhists have refused to take up arms under any circumstances, even knowing that
they would be killed as a result. The Buddhist code that governs the life of monks permits
them to defend themselves, but it forbids them to kill, even in self-defence.

For Buddhist countries this poses the difficult dilemma of how to protect the rights and lives
of their citizens without breaking the principle of nonviolence.

The pure Buddhist attitude is shown in this story:
A Vietnam veteran was overheard rebuking the Vietnamese Buddhist monk, Thich Nhat
Hanh, about his unswerving dedication to non-violence.
"You're a fool," said the veteran - "what if someone had wiped out all the Buddhists in the
world and you were the last one left. Would you not try to kill the person who was trying to
kill you, and in doing so save Buddhism?!"
Thich Nhat Hanh answered patiently "It would be better to let him kill me. If there is any
truth to Buddhism and the Dharma it will not disappear from the face of the earth, but will
reappear when seekers of truth are ready to rediscover it.
"In killing I would be betraying and abandoning the very teachings I would be seeking to
preserve. So it would be better to let him kill me and remain true to the spirit of the
Dharma."

Buddhism and martial arts
Buddhist monks have been leaders in developing various forms of martial arts. The Shaolin
Order is perhaps the best known of these, famed for their fighting prowess.
Martial arts would seem to be about as far from non-violence as you can get, but Buddhist
forms of martial arts have very strict rules about how violence can be used.
The Shaolin teaching forbids the monk from ever being the aggressor, and instructs him to
use only the minimum necessary defensive force. By becoming skilled in physical conflict the
monk has a better understanding of violence and is able to use sophisticated techniques to
avoid harm, ranging from simple parrying of clumsy blows to paralysing grips and knockout
blows in the face of extreme violence - but always using only the amount of force needed to
refuse the violence that is being offered to them.
Most martial arts traditions have strong spiritual and philosophical elements, and insist on a
responsible and minimalist attitude to violence.

Buddhism and violence
But Buddhism, like the other great faiths, has not always lived up to its principles - there are
numerous examples of Buddhists engaging in violence and even war.
~ in the 14th century Buddhist fighters led the uprising that evicted the Mongols from China
~ in Japan, Buddhist monks trained Samurai warriors in meditation that made them better
fighters
In the twentieth century Japanese Zen masters wrote in support of Japan's wars of
aggression. For example, Sawaki Kodo (18801965) wrote this in 1942:
It is just to punish those who disturb the public order. Whether one kills or does not kill, the
precept forbidding killing [is preserved]. It is the precept forbidding killing that wields the
sword. It is the precept that throws the bomb.
Sawaki Kodo


Abortion

Buddhism and abortion
There is no single Buddhist view on abortion:
...Most Western and Japanese Buddhists come away believing in the permissibility of
abortion, while many other Buddhists believe abortion to be murder.

James Hughes

Buddhists believe that life should not be destroyed, but they regard causing death as
morally wrong only if the death is caused deliberately or by negligence.Traditional Buddhism
rejects abortion because it involves the deliberate destroying of a life.Buddhists regard life
as starting at conception.
Buddhism believes in rebirth and teaches that individual human life begins at conception.
The new being, bearing the karmic identity of a recently deceased individual, is therefore as
entitled to the same moral respect as an adult human being.

Damien Keown, Science and Theology News, April 2004

Modern Buddhists, however, are more divided about the morality of abortion.

It's personal
Buddhists are expected to take full personal responsibility for everything they do and for the
consequences that follow.
The decision to abort is therefore a highly personal one, and one that requires careful and
compassionate exploration of the ethical issues involved, and a willingness to carry the
burden of whatever happens as a result of the decision.
The ethical consequences of the decision will also depend on the motive and intention
behind the decision, and the level of mindfulness with which it was taken.

Buddhism and killing
According to the teachings of Buddha, five conditions must be present to constitute an act
of killing.

~ the thing killed must be a living being
~ you, the killer, must know or be aware that it is a living being
~ you must have the intention to kill it
~ there must be an effort to kill
~ the being must be killed as the result

Here's an example of how an abortion might constitute an act of killing:
~ When a baby is conceived, a living being is created and that satisfies the first condition.
Although Buddhists believe that beings live in a cycle of birth death and rebirth, they regard
the moment of conception as the beginning of the life of an embodied individual.
~ After a few weeks the woman becomes aware of its existence and that meets the second
condition.
~ If she decides she wants an abortion that provides an intention to kill.
~ When she seeks an abortion that meets the fourth condition of making an effort to kill.
~ Finally the being is killed because of that action.
Therefore the First Precept of Buddhism - not to kill - is violated and this is tantamount to
killing a human being.

Lives in the balance
Buddhists face a difficulty where an abortion is medically necessary to save the life of the
mother and so a life will be lost whether there is or isn't an abortion.
In such cases the moral status of an abortion will depend on the intentions of those carrying
it out.
If the decision is taken compassionately, and after long and careful thought then although
the action may be wrong the moral harm done will be reduced by the good intentions
involved.



Abortion for the sake of the baby
There are cases where not having an abortion may result in the birth of a child with medical
conditions that cause it to suffer.
Traditional Buddhist thinking does not deal with these cases, but it has been argued by
some Buddhists that if the child would be so severely handicapped that it would undergo
great suffering, abortion is permissible.
The Dalai Lama has said:
Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally
speaking. But it depends on the circumstances.
If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the
parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be
approved or disapproved according to each circumstance.

Dalai Lama, New York Times, 28/11/1993

Karma
While it's pretty obvious why abortion is considered to generate bad karma for the mother
and the abortionist it may not be so obvious why it generates bad karma for the foetus.
The foetus suffers bad karma because its soul is deprived of the opportunities that an
earthly existence would have given it to earn good karma, and is returned immediately to
the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Thus abortion hinders its spiritual progress.










Organ donation

Buddhism and organ donation
There are no rules in Buddhism for or against organ donation, but central to Buddhism is a
wish to relieve suffering.
There may also be occasions when organ donation may be seen as an act of charity.
In Buddhism the decision for or against organ donation relies very much on an individual's
decision. People may decide for or against it, without one choice being seen as right, and
the other wrong.
The needs and wishes of a potential donor should not be compromised by the wish to save a
life.
The death process of an individual is viewed as very important, and a body should be
treated with respect. However, there are no beliefs that say the body should be preserved
in its entirety, so removing organs is not an issue from this point of view.
A dead body, however, should only be disturbed for appropriate reasons, and with special
care.
It is also important to consider the consciousness of the dead person, and whether this
might be adversely affected by organ donation, as the surgery takes place immediately after
the donor takes their last breath.
Some Buddhists, including those who are followers of Tibetan Buddhism, believe the
consciousness may stay in the body for some time after the breath has stopped.
Until the consciousness leaves the body it is important the body remains undisturbed, so
Tibetan Buddhists may have some concerns that an operation so soon after death may
damage their consciousness and cause harm to their future lives.
But others may decide this final act of generosity can only have positive ramifications.






Animals

Buddhism and animals
Although Buddhism is an animal-friendly religion, some aspects of the tradition are
surprisingly negative about animals.

The positive
Buddhism requires us to treat animals kindly:
~ Buddhists try to do no harm (or as little harm as possible) to animals
~ Buddhists try to show loving-kindness to all beings, including animals
~ The doctrine of right livelihood teaches Buddhists to avoid any work connected with the
killing of animals
~ The doctrine of karma teaches that any wrong behaviour will have to be paid for in a
future life - so cruel acts to animals should be avoided
~ Buddhists treat the lives of human and non-human animals with equal respect

Buddhists see human and non-human animals as closely related:
~ both have Buddha-nature
~ both have the possibility of becoming perfectly enlightened
~ a soul may be reborn either in a human body or in the body of a non-human animal

Buddhists believe that is wrong to hurt or kill animals, because all beings are afraid of injury
and death:
All living things fear being beaten with clubs.
All living things fear being put to death.
Putting oneself in the place of the other,
Let no one kill nor cause another to kill.

Dhammapada 129


The negative
Buddhist behaviour towards and thinking about animals is not always positive.
The doctrine of karma implies that souls are reborn as animals because of past misdeeds.
Being reborn as an animal is a serious spiritual setback.
Because non-human animals can't engage in conscious acts of self-improvement they can't
improve their karmic status, and their souls must continue to be reborn as animals until
their bad karma is exhausted. Only when they are reborn as human beings can they resume
the quest for nirvana.
This bad karma, and the animal's inability to do much to improve it, led Buddhists in the
past to think that non-human animals were inferior to human beings and so were entitled to
fewer rights than human beings.
Early Buddhists (but not the Buddha himself) used the idea that animals were spiritually
inferior as a justification for the exploitation and mistreatment of animals.

Experimenting on animals
Buddhists say that this is morally wrong if the animal concerned might come to any harm.
However, Buddhists also acknowledge the value that animal experiments may have for
human health.
So perhaps a Buddhist approach to experiments on animals might require the experimenter
to:
~ accept the karma of carrying out the experiment
~ the experimenter will acquire bad karma through experimenting on an animal
~ experiment only for a good purpose
~ experiment only on animals where there is no alternative
~ design the experiment to do as little harm as possible
~ avoid killing the animal unless it is absolutely necessary
~ treat the animals concerned kindly and respectfully

The bad karmic consequences for the experimenter seem to demand a high level of
altruistic behaviour in research laboratories.
Buddhism and vegetarianism
Not all Buddhists are vegetarian and the Buddha does not seem to have issued an overall
prohibition on meat-eating. The Mahayana tradition was (and is) more strictly vegetarian
than other Buddhist traditions.
The early Buddhist monastic code banned monks from eating meat if the animal had been
killed specifically to feed them, but otherwise instructed them to eat anything they were
given.




















Contraception

Buddhism and contraception
Buddhist attitudes to contraception are based on the idea that it is wrong to kill for any
reason.
The most common Buddhist view on birth control is that contraception is acceptable if it
prevents conception, but that contraceptives that work by stopping the development of a
fertilised egg are wrong and should not be used.
Buddhists believe that life begins (or more technically: a consciousness arises) when the egg
is fertilised. That is why some birth control methods, such as the IUD, which act by killing the
fertilised egg and preventing implantation are unacceptable since they harm the
consciousness which has already become embodied.
Unlike some other religions, Buddhism is not strongly pro-family and does not regard having
children as a religious duty.
Although Buddha's teachings do not condemn non-reproductive sexual activity, they do
object to the pursuit of sensual desire, which suggests that Buddhists actively seeking
enlightenment should not use birth control in order to pursue sexual pleasure.

















Links :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/