It probably was a breach of sila. Sometimes it's necessary to breach it in order to prevent even greater evil or to enable greater good. Lying to someone who asks where somebody is while you know he asks it to be able to kill that person is a breach of sila too. It would prevent a greater evil (the killing) however.
Yes, i agree. These are somewhat "out of the norm" situations, though, wouldn't you say? The Buddha didn't teach people, as a rule, to violate sila or to disrespect their obligations. Ethics are usually
a good guide, and many who breach them in the name of a "greater good" are deeply deluded.
Alex123 wrote:Probably not until certain level. Though It does seem to me to involve at least some conflict of interest.
Seems so to me too. As I was saying before, dhamma is against the flow whereas family life is going with the flow, so to speak. There's an inherent conflict. The ingredients for a happy family life, in most cases, include things which the yogi is specifically working to transcend. How do you breastfeed a baby, for example, without attachment?
But conflict can also be productive. Maybe a useful approach would be to set some present-life goals and use them to shape decisions..understanding, of course, that these could change over time. There are monks, too, who return to lay life. I would think kamma plays a role in whether or not we have the "vocation" -- the Buddha had lifetimes as a bodhisatta setting the stage for his leaving the palace.
Just my two cents..