What would you do?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Disciple
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:13 pm

What would you do?

Post by Disciple »

Apologies if this question offends anyone, but it is something I've been thinking about recently. Given the Buddha's stance on non violence, if someone came up to you and started physically assaulting you, what would you do about it? What would a good Buddhist do about it?
Reductor
Posts: 1382
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: What would you do?

Post by Reductor »

I'd defend myself, even if that meant the use of violence. But I'd refrain from using excess force.

In my opinion, a good Buddhist would refrain from hating his/her attacker, and refrain from causing undue harm, but would defend themselves never-the-less (unless they were a perfected arahant).
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: What would you do?

Post by LonesomeYogurt »

I believe that monks are allowed to defend themselves physically in the Vinaya, although they are prohibited from killing or attempting to kill.
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cittasanto »

Disciple wrote:Apologies if this question offends anyone, but it is something I've been thinking about recently. Given the Buddha's stance on non violence, if someone came up to you and started physically assaulting you, what would you do about it? What would a good Buddhist do about it?
The Buddha said erradicate ill-will, he didn't say get punched about!
we are permited to defend ourselves so that we can get away, but this needs to be balanced in the mind with good-will. We should not give in to aggression and loose control of ourselves to the point when we intentionally harm i.e. become the aggressor.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cal
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm
Location: South Coast, England, UK

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cal »

Cittasanto wrote: The Buddha said erradicate ill-will, he didn't say get punched about!
But he did say let yourself be sawn apart without ill will :-
Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Think I might need a bit more practice before being able to demonstrate that level of metta and equanimity...

Cal
Right Speech: It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will. [AN 5.198]

Personally, I seem to gain the most insight when I am under the most pressure, when life is at its most unpleasant. There is something in me on those occasions which feels that there is nothing left but to be aware of 'this'. Ajahn Sumedho - Don't Take Your Life Personally, p288
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: What would you do?

Post by Mr Man »

I'm not sure. I might cry or I might try and run away.
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: What would you do?

Post by cooran »

Cal wrote:
Cittasanto wrote: The Buddha said erradicate ill-will, he didn't say get punched about!
But he did say let yourself be sawn apart without ill will :-
Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Think I might need a bit more practice before being able to demonstrate that level of metta and equanimity...

Cal
Hello Cal,

This Sutta is about Right Speech. The saw is simply a simile. It does not mean you should not protect yourself.

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi Cal,
and obviously the receiver of the limb hacking is overpowered!
Even in the worst situation you should not be over-powered by ill-will. he doesn't say just let it happen - or as Ajahn Chah might say "that is the equanimity of a log" (as opposed to "that is the equanimity of a water buffalo" when remarking about a monastic dwellings state.)
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: What would you do?

Post by Mr Man »

This blog post from Ajahn Sucitto may be of interest: http://sucitto.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/o ... nness.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"In my case the trust in openness was most dramatically demanded of me when a group of bandits, brandishing axes and cudgels jumped me near Rajgir in Bihar, India. What do you do when four armed men have grabbed you, and in the heat of the moment, one is grimacing and waving an axe at your head? Fortunately there’s not much else to do but to stay open. For me, in that moment, the reflection arose that everyone has to die, and maybe this was my time. The only choice that was available was to go without fear. So instinctively, I bowed my head to the man with the axe and drew the blade of my hand across the top of my skull to indicate where to hit. ‘This won’t take long,’ I thought. The bandit paused and his energy and body language softened. I stepped forward, again offering my head. The heat in the situation dropped like a stone. The man with the axe looked confused and lowered his weapon, and the other men released my arms. I slipped my bag from my shoulders, placed it before them and slowly walked away. No kiss on the neck, but enough for me to trust the power of openness."
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by BubbaBuddhist »

Furthermore, monks hold higher and stricter standards of conduct than us laypersons. If I had to conform to bhikkhu standards I would fail within ten seconds after awakening in the morning.

No hypothetical for me; since I've begun studying Buddhism (I'm not presumptuous enough to call myself a Buddhist) I've defended myself at least a dozen times from various assaults ranging from drunken idiots to a couple of attempted muggings. I also once stopped a guy who was beating his wife, and administered some instant kamma to a schmuck who was abusing a cat and had the misfortune to do so within my sight. No remorse or second-guessing in any of these cases, though I've been the recipient of no end of nit-picking from so-called Buddhists who would rather work my program than their own. :tongue:

BB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: What would you do?

Post by Ben »

BubbaBuddhist wrote:Furthermore, monks hold higher and stricter standards of conduct than us laypersons. If I had to conform to bhikkhu standards I would fail within ten seconds after awakening in the morning.

No hypothetical for me; since I've begun studying Buddhism (I'm not presumptuous enough to call myself a Buddhist) I've defended myself at least a dozen times from various assaults ranging from drunken idiots to a couple of attempted muggings. I also once stopped a guy who was beating his wife, and administered some instant kamma to a schmuck who was abusing a cat and had the misfortune to do so within my sight. No remorse or second-guessing in any of these cases, though I've been the recipient of no end of nit-picking from so-called Buddhists who would rather work my program than their own. :tongue:

BB
Agree. I probably would have done the same thing.
The use of force need not be accompanied by aversion. One can use force to restrain or stop someone from attacking you, from attacking others, and to protect the perpetrator from incurring evil kamma.
kind regards,

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
Cal
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm
Location: South Coast, England, UK

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cal »

Does anyone have any sutta references to back up the view that physical intervention is acceptable?

I heard the Ajahn Sucitto story before and feel that it really highlights the value of Buddhist practice and the development of equanimty in dealing with aggression. Good on him. :bow:

Best wishes
Cal
Right Speech: It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will. [AN 5.198]

Personally, I seem to gain the most insight when I am under the most pressure, when life is at its most unpleasant. There is something in me on those occasions which feels that there is nothing left but to be aware of 'this'. Ajahn Sumedho - Don't Take Your Life Personally, p288
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by DNS »

There may be only this one specific reference which appears to directly allow self-defense:

In the Vinaya, Suttavibhanga, the 92 pacittiya (rules entailing confession), number 74 states:

74. Should any bhikkhu, angered and displeased, give a blow to (another) bhikkhu, it is to be confessed.

The factors for the full offense here are three.

1) Object: another bhikkhu.
2) Effort: One gives him a blow
3) Intention: out of anger.

Non-offenses: According to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense for a bhikkhu who, trapped in a difficult situation, gives a blow "desiring freedom." The Commentary's discussion of this point shows that it includes what we at present would call self-defense; and the Commentary's analysis of the factors of the offense here shows that even if anger or displeasure arises in one's mind in cases like this, there is no penalty.

Summary: Giving a blow to another bhikkhu when impelled by anger, except in self-defense, is a pācittiya offense.

And another important point to the above is that that is the rule for monks. How much more leeway might lay people have? Not to kill of course, but certainly protect for self-defense.

See also: Self-defense
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cittasanto »

BubbaBuddhist wrote:Furthermore, monks hold higher and stricter standards of conduct than us laypersons. If I had to conform to bhikkhu standards I would fail within ten seconds after awakening in the morning.

No hypothetical for me; since I've begun studying Buddhism (I'm not presumptuous enough to call myself a Buddhist) I've defended myself at least a dozen times from various assaults ranging from drunken idiots to a couple of attempted muggings. I also once stopped a guy who was beating his wife, and administered some instant kamma to a schmuck who was abusing a cat and had the misfortune to do so within my sight. No remorse or second-guessing in any of these cases, though I've been the recipient of no end of nit-picking from so-called Buddhists who would rather work my program than their own. :tongue:

BB
Knowing your own shortcomming is good, then you can do something about them!
I have a soft spot for cats so partial agreement from me there.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cal
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm
Location: South Coast, England, UK

Re: What would you do?

Post by Cal »

Thanks David, helpful. :anjali:

Best wishes
Cal
Right Speech: It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will. [AN 5.198]

Personally, I seem to gain the most insight when I am under the most pressure, when life is at its most unpleasant. There is something in me on those occasions which feels that there is nothing left but to be aware of 'this'. Ajahn Sumedho - Don't Take Your Life Personally, p288
Post Reply