YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

What would you do? - Dhamma Wheel

What would you do?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Disciple
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:13 pm

What would you do?

Postby Disciple » Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:42 pm

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: 1381
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: What would you do?

Postby Reductor » Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:56 pm

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?

Postby LonesomeYogurt » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:02 pm

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


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:18 pm



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.

User avatar
Cal
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm
Location: South Coast, England, UK

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cal » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:57 pm




User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 2873
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: What would you do?

Postby Mr Man » Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:41 pm

I'm not sure. I might cry or I might try and run away.

User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8502
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: What would you do?

Postby cooran » Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:15 pm

---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: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:15 pm

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.)


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.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 2873
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: What would you do?

Postby Mr Man » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:27 pm

This blog post from Ajahn Sucitto may be of interest: http://sucitto.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/o ... nness.html

"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?

Postby BubbaBuddhist » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:29 pm

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: 18442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: What would you do?

Postby Ben » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:56 pm

“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

(Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • •

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?

Postby Cal » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:02 pm

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



User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
Posts: 10648
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Postby David N. Snyder » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:10 pm

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:
Image




User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:19 pm



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.

User avatar
Cal
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm
Location: South Coast, England, UK

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cal » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:30 pm

Thanks David, helpful. :anjali:

Best wishes
Cal



User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:25 pm

Parajika one also has the advise to resist sexual attack.
I think there is another reference in the Bhikkhuni only rules also?


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.

User avatar
Bonsai Doug
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Finger Lakes area of NY

Re: What would you do?

Postby Bonsai Doug » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:02 am

So where in all this would the famous Shaolin Monks fit? There's not much doubt as to their
self defense skills. Or are they too much of an aberration for this discussion?
Now having obtained a precious human body,
I do not have the luxury of remaining on a distracted path.

~ Tibetan Book of the Dead

whynotme
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: What would you do?

Postby whynotme » Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:19 am

Please stop following me

Reductor
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: What would you do?

Postby Reductor » Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:21 am

A monk, presumably, has severed most of the big ties to the world, so of them I'd expect a lot more than I would of a married parent with young children, like myself. (of course I allow myself leeway - see how nice I am?)

The will to violence depends on how much attachment you have to the world.

pegembara
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: What would you do?

Postby pegembara » Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:09 am

And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.


Return to “Sīla”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine