Thaibebop wrote: When I know that my wife can walk away with the girls and live a different and better life, in other words, the only reason they are going through what they are is because of me, it seems horribly selfish of me to keep them here.
santa100 wrote:"Improvise, Adapt, Overcome". That's a mantra you should constantly remind yourself of. A Bachelor degree is a valuable asset you already had. Just make sure to continue to keep up with current technologies to stay competitive and marketable. Take advantage of all the free trainings your company gives. Take extra computer courses at night either as non-credits or toward a grad. degree. Local community colleges do offer courses at very decent prices. Improvise, adapt, overcome...
Thaibebop wrote:Yes, you are right. I could move with them, but I go to Thailand as a nobody with no skills or job prospects, with a BA in History. Her family are nice people but upper class Thais and a farang bum hanging around the house doesn't seem to suit them. Can't say I blame either. Besides an english teacher I don't know what I would do and therefore would must likely be living off her parents. I don't want to be a parasite. We have considered moving there. Her parents have gotten on in years and need some help, but I feel that I have disappointed my wife greatly here in America and moving there I just might embarrass the hell out of her. I have heard the upper class Thai society can be pretty unforgiving of personnel flaws. So, I am afraid I will inadvertently find another of way ruining their lives there.
Thaibebop wrote:Can suicide be logic driven rather than emotionally driven, thus making it more acceptable due to the outcome of the death? If it can be proven that life can improve with the absence of someone, the reason for divorce or the ending of friendships, as examples, than can a suicide be determined a good thing by the same logic.
Jason wrote:So the answer may be a tentative yes.
Jason wrote:Thaibebop wrote:Can suicide be logic driven rather than emotionally driven, thus making it more acceptable due to the outcome of the death? If it can be proven that life can improve with the absence of someone, the reason for divorce or the ending of friendships, as examples, than can a suicide be determined a good thing by the same logic.
Interesting question. the Buddha himself seems to have been pretty adamant that only those who are free from greed, hatred and delusion are entirely blameless in such actions, i.e., there's only fault when one "gives up this body and seizes another" (MN 144). That said, according to Ajahn Brahmavamso, the Samantapasadika, Buddhaghosa's commentary on the Vinaya, states that there's no offense for a bhikkhu who commits suicide themselves when done for the appropriate reasons, of which two are given:A bhikkhu is chronically sick with little sign of recovery and he wishes to end his own life so that he will no longer be a burden on the bhikkhus who are nursing him – in this case suicide is appropriate.
A bhikkhu who is enlightened already becomes gravely ill with a painful disease from which he suspects he will not recover. As the disease is burdensome to him and he has nothing further to do, he thinks to end his life – in this case also suicide is appropriate.
So the answer may be a tentative yes.
hermitwin wrote:To think that suicide is the solution is not logical.
What does it solve? It creates more problems.
If you think you are the problem, you can go away.
Why do you have to kill yourself?
It does not make any sense to me at all.
Thaibebop wrote:Jason wrote:Thaibebop wrote:Can suicide be logic driven rather than emotionally driven, thus making it more acceptable due to the outcome of the death? If it can be proven that life can improve with the absence of someone, the reason for divorce or the ending of friendships, as examples, than can a suicide be determined a good thing by the same logic.
Interesting question. the Buddha himself seems to have been pretty adamant that only those who are free from greed, hatred and delusion are entirely blameless in such actions, i.e., there's only fault when one "gives up this body and seizes another" (MN 144). That said, according to Ajahn Brahmavamso, the Samantapasadika, Buddhaghosa's commentary on the Vinaya, states that there's no offense for a bhikkhu who commits suicide themselves when done for the appropriate reasons, of which two are given:A bhikkhu is chronically sick with little sign of recovery and he wishes to end his own life so that he will no longer be a burden on the bhikkhus who are nursing him – in this case suicide is appropriate.
A bhikkhu who is enlightened already becomes gravely ill with a painful disease from which he suspects he will not recover. As the disease is burdensome to him and he has nothing further to do, he thinks to end his life – in this case also suicide is appropriate.
So the answer may be a tentative yes.
So, monks who commit suicide as a form of protest are in the wrong, at least by Theravada's view?
Goofaholix wrote:Thaibebop wrote:Yes, you are right. I could move with them, but I go to Thailand as a nobody with no skills or job prospects, with a BA in History. Her family are nice people but upper class Thais and a farang bum hanging around the house doesn't seem to suit them. Can't say I blame either. Besides an english teacher I don't know what I would do and therefore would must likely be living off her parents. I don't want to be a parasite. We have considered moving there. Her parents have gotten on in years and need some help, but I feel that I have disappointed my wife greatly here in America and moving there I just might embarrass the hell out of her. I have heard the upper class Thai society can be pretty unforgiving of personnel flaws. So, I am afraid I will inadvertently find another of way ruining their lives there.
Yes, what you've described isn't ideal and I know how you feel which is why we live in Farangland and not Thailand, however it's hellava lot better than suicide don't you think.
Perhaps if you start with an extended retreat or ordaining for a few months it might give you time to acclimatise, help you get your head straight, and help you into higher standing with the inlaws.
Thaibebop wrote:You help me remember something. The last time my father-in-law was able to visit he asked if I would ordain, since I was a farang who was interested in Buddhism. I said I would like at least to ordain for a short period of time, like the rainy season. He of course liked the idea, I thought it was just because he was Buddhist, but he only has two daughters, and it seems he can still attain merit if a son-in-law ordains. So, maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Goofaholix wrote:Thaibebop wrote:You help me remember something. The last time my father-in-law was able to visit he asked if I would ordain, since I was a farang who was interested in Buddhism. I said I would like at least to ordain for a short period of time, like the rainy season. He of course liked the idea, I thought it was just because he was Buddhist, but he only has two daughters, and it seems he can still attain merit if a son-in-law ordains. So, maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Yes, I did this for my mother in law as she had no sons also. it meant a lot to her, she gained a lot of respect among her friends and relatives, and most importantly I had the chance to have a good retreat.
I'm sure this would mean a lot to your parents in law also if they are devout Buddhists, make sure you choose a monastery that has good vinaya and a good practise environment
Thaibebop wrote:So, monks who commit suicide as a form of protest are in the wrong, at least by Theravada's view?Kim wrote:Yes.
![]()
Kim
It was their suicide that got me thinking if there was a higher goal for doing it, perhaps I could (live) with it.
Ferox wrote:I'm not sure if you are a practicing Buddhist or not, but if you are and you practice metta.. always remember that we practice metta on ourselves before all beings. Regardless of whether other human beings see value in you or not based on whatever criteria they wish, you are still a being amongst all beings in all the world systems and universes and ... equal to any of them.
Ferox wrote:I'm not sure if you are a practicing Buddhist or not, but if you are and you practice metta.. always remember that we practice metta on ourselves before all beings. Regardless of whether other human beings see value in you or not based on whatever criteria they wish, you are still a being amongst all beings in all the world systems and universes and not better, worse, or equal to any of them.
I agree with others in that people always need their parents in their lives if it is possible, and even if your family never wanted to see you again, is that a real reason to end your life thinking logically? I do not want to make any judgements but It seems to me that you are coming through this post in an emotional manner, which is understandable due to your situation. if you truelly thought about it logically or developed insight regarding it, would it really be skillful or make much sense to end your life?
Ajahn Brahm talks about looking at every situation saying " good, bad, who knows"... you don't know how life will turn out.. and if all this buddhism isn't helping... watch this video... it might help- http://youtu.be/qaA_fSYfmTQ this great scene from the movie cast away in which tom hanks talks about how he had no control and couldn't even kill himself.. but he knew to keep living, because tomorrow the sun will rise, you never know what the tide will bring in.

Kim O'Hara wrote:Thaibebop wrote:So, monks who commit suicide as a form of protest are in the wrong, at least by Theravada's view?Kim wrote:Yes.
![]()
Kim
It was their suicide that got me thinking if there was a higher goal for doing it, perhaps I could (live) with it.
As I said, the rule against suicide has *very* few exceptions. It is nearly always a second-best, third-best ... tenth-best choice. There is nearly always a better way, even if it demands more courage or patience.
The monks who burn themselves in protest are not acting according to dhamma (or dharma - the Mahayana has the same prohibition) and shouldn't be taken as role models by anyone.
On another point ...Ferox wrote:I'm not sure if you are a practicing Buddhist or not, but if you are and you practice metta.. always remember that we practice metta on ourselves before all beings. Regardless of whether other human beings see value in you or not based on whatever criteria they wish, you are still a being amongst all beings in all the world systems and universes and ... equal to any of them.
![]()
![]()
Kim
Kim O'Hara wrote:Thaibebop wrote:On another point ...Ferox wrote:I'm not sure if you are a practicing Buddhist or not, but if you are and you practice metta.. always remember that we practice metta on ourselves before all beings. Regardless of whether other human beings see value in you or not based on whatever criteria they wish, you are still a being amongst all beings in all the world systems and universes and ... equal to any of them.
![]()
![]()
Kim
Return to General Theravāda discussion
Registered users: Alex123, Ben, Bhikkhu Pesala, Bing [Bot], Doshin, Google [Bot], mikenz66, Mindstar, Mr Man, MSN [Bot], palchi, rahul3bds, vagrancy