Violent sports

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by greenjuice »

James the Giant wrote:The intention in those sports is to have fun, exercise, develop skills, socialise.
If the intention was to kick some arse and be violent, that'd be a different story.
That's motivation, not intention. Intention is concerned with concrete actions, and the opposite of intentional is unintentional, accidental. The rule in Vinaya that I know of that concerns violence to others (without intention to kill) says that it is unwholesome to do violence to others out of anger or displeausure, but that it is not unwholesome to do violence out of self-defense. Violence with the motivation of having fun is not mentioned. Maybe in another rule, but idk. There are rules that forbid swimming or hiding someone's belongings for fun, but I don't think those are to be applicable to laypeople.
Alex123 wrote:Another thing: Is it possible to use combat styles to protect sangha, and aryans from harm that some deranged person can inflict on them?
Perfectly fine. According to Tipitaka, vinaya rule Pc 74, there is nothing unwholesome in doing violence in defense.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: Violent sports

Post by Mkoll »

zamotcr wrote:
Mkoll wrote:
"Monks, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions. Which eight? Gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. These are the eight worldly conditions that spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions.
-AN 8.6
Of course that's the goal but we aren't monks neither. If we apply this reasoning to every aspect of our lives then we have to be almost monks. We should abstain from everything, not just sports. Of course if you don't like them, don't practice it.

But saying that a thing by itself is unwholesome it's weird, unwholesome are a mental condition.
The point of me posting that sutta was just to bring the Buddha's teaching on the 8 worldly conditions forth for those who have not heard them before. Even if one chooses to immerse themselves in the world, it is good to know this teaching because one is that much closer to wisdom.

:anjali:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Anagarika
Posts: 915
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by Anagarika »

I happen to judge professional MMA events, and also attend Muay Thai events when I am in Thailand. I can vouch for the integrity of most of the combatants, as the level of sportsmanship and respect is very high among the fighters. Still, I have some concern about being in a sport where violence occurs, and has inflicting effective damage on another as one of its scoring criteria. I took some comfort in the idea that as a young prince, the Buddha likely (due to his status) was around archery and martial arts. I took further comfort when listening to Ven. Thanissaro speak of the balanced fighting stance of a Muay Thai fighter as being analogous to the firm foundation needed for meditation. Ajahn Geoff spoke of being around Muay Thai when he was a young man teaching in Chiang Mai.

I hope that my involvement is not contrary to what the Dhamma would require. When in doubt, I think of someone that I met a few years ago, Phra Khru Bah of Thailand, a former Muay Thai fighter turned Bhikkhu that now runs the Golden Horse Temple for orphaned boys. A very compelling man who uses Muay Thai as part of his discipline training for the young men he trains. His story is here for anyone not familiar:

http://youtu.be/wNEBXxahCH8
zamotcr
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:11 am

Re: Violent sports

Post by zamotcr »

greenjuice wrote: That's motivation, not intention. Intention is concerned with concrete actions, and the opposite of intentional is unintentional, accidental. The rule in Vinaya that I know of that concerns violence to others (without intention to kill) says that it is unwholesome to do violence to others out of anger or displeausure, but that it is not unwholesome to do violence out of self-defense. Violence with the motivation :hug: of having fun is not mentioned. Maybe in another rule, but idk. There are rules that forbid swimming or hiding someone's belongings for fun, but I don't think those are to be applicable to laypeople.
As far as I know Vinaya is for monks not for laity. For laicism only the 5 precepts are necessary.
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by greenjuice »

Vinaya can help clarify lay precepts. E.g. vinaya rules against killing humans, doing violence to humans or against killing animals can be used to better understand the first precept, rules concerning sexuality can be used to clarify the third uposatha/ anagarika precept, also it should be noted that the five precept are just the beginning of lay ethics, being that they don't even cover all the unwholesome acts that can lead to bad rebirths.
zamotcr
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:11 am

Re: Violent sports

Post by zamotcr »

greenjuice wrote:Vinaya can help clarify lay precepts. E.g. vinaya rules against killing humans, doing violence to humans or against killing animals can be used to better understand the first precept, rules concerning sexuality can be used to clarify the third uposatha/ anagarika precept, also it should be noted that the five precept are just the beginning of lay ethics, being that they don't even cover all the unwholesome acts that can lead to bad rebirths.
Previous kamma can lead us to bad rebirths. But following the 5 precepts, taking refuge in the triple realm how can then one reborn in a bad destination? Which other acts can lead someone to bad destination? :thinking:
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: Violent sports

Post by Mkoll »

zamotcr wrote:
greenjuice wrote:Vinaya can help clarify lay precepts. E.g. vinaya rules against killing humans, doing violence to humans or against killing animals can be used to better understand the first precept, rules concerning sexuality can be used to clarify the third uposatha/ anagarika precept, also it should be noted that the five precept are just the beginning of lay ethics, being that they don't even cover all the unwholesome acts that can lead to bad rebirths.
Previous kamma can lead us to bad rebirths. But following the 5 precepts, taking refuge in the triple realm how can then one reborn in a bad destination? Which other acts can lead someone to bad destination? :thinking:
Here's an example off the top of my head: one who has taken refuge and doesn't break precepts but is gluttonous, lazy and given to inaction, slanders others/speaks harshly/speaks idly, and does all sorts of unwise things but doesn't break the precepts. But who can say whether that person will be born in a good or bad destination? It bears well to keep in mind that attachment to rites and rituals does not take one to enlightenment.

Regardless, there is an urgency to attain stream-entry and cut the first 3 fetters to ensure no more bad rebirths.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
greenjuice
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by greenjuice »

Ten unwholesome actions, injuring a Buddha, creating a schism in the Sangha and being quarrelsome and annoying are thirteen different courses of action that can lead to rebirth in states of deprivation as an angry ghost, hungry ghost, animal or in hell. Five precepts cover only the first four of the ten unwholesome actions.
guyfromlouisiana
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 5:30 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by guyfromlouisiana »

I've spent a tremendous amount of time over the past few years thinking about this topic, as it pertains to American football. I was a big American football fan since I was a boy, but for two years now I haven't watched more than a few minutes, and I no longer cheer for any team. Scientists have been discovering for the past decade that an unknown number of players -- quite possibly a great many players -- sustain terrible brain damage and develop an illness called chronic traumatic encephalopathy that leads to early dementia, violent outbursts, depression, and frequently suicide. Here's one recent article on this issue: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/99322 ... src=mobile

I cheered for my team -- the New Orleans Saints -- for many years and I loved the players. I can't stand watching my favorite players slowly kill themselves. I think of my metta practice. "May all beings be safe from danger." Well, these players are certainly not safe from danger; by some estimates they sustain thousands of concussive and near-concussive hits to the head over their careers. "May all beings be mentally happy." This sport systematically destroys the mind. "May all beings be physically well." American football has long been known to leave players completely physically broken when they retire. "May all beings live with ease of well being." Again, systematic brain trauma and heightened risk for dementia cannot be classified as "living with ease."

So I spent much of my life cheering for football players to defeat (destroy is a better term) other football players. Why? For the honor of my city! For social interaction! For entertainment! There's nothing honorable about what is going on in American football -- especially since league doctors for decades denied that there was any increased risk of brain disease. Once I knew the damage being inflicted on countless plays every year, on each player on every single team, the game was no longer entertaining to me.

There's a great karmic cloud over the United States on the issue of American football, which is the country's most popular form of entertainment. I believe most Americans are choosing to live in denial or willful ignorance about this issue. It upsets me quite a lot, actually.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Violent sports

Post by Dhammanando »

guyfromlouisiana wrote:I believe most Americans are choosing to live in denial or willful ignorance about this issue.
To say nothing of the cheerleading that accompanies this Neanderthal recreation.

The Dangers of Cheerleading

Cheerleading: The Most Dangerous Sport in the World
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by kmath »

guyfromlouisiana wrote:I've spent a tremendous amount of time over the past few years thinking about this topic, as it pertains to American football. I was a big American football fan since I was a boy, but for two years now I haven't watched more than a few minutes, and I no longer cheer for any team. Scientists have been discovering for the past decade that an unknown number of players -- quite possibly a great many players -- sustain terrible brain damage and develop an illness called chronic traumatic encephalopathy that leads to early dementia, violent outbursts, depression, and frequently suicide. Here's one recent article on this issue: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/99322 ... src=mobile

I cheered for my team -- the New Orleans Saints -- for many years and I loved the players. I can't stand watching my favorite players slowly kill themselves. I think of my metta practice. "May all beings be safe from danger." Well, these players are certainly not safe from danger; by some estimates they sustain thousands of concussive and near-concussive hits to the head over their careers. "May all beings be mentally happy." This sport systematically destroys the mind. "May all beings be physically well." American football has long been known to leave players completely physically broken when they retire. "May all beings live with ease of well being." Again, systematic brain trauma and heightened risk for dementia cannot be classified as "living with ease."

So I spent much of my life cheering for football players to defeat (destroy is a better term) other football players. Why? For the honor of my city! For social interaction! For entertainment! There's nothing honorable about what is going on in American football -- especially since league doctors for decades denied that there was any increased risk of brain disease. Once I knew the damage being inflicted on countless plays every year, on each player on every single team, the game was no longer entertaining to me.

There's a great karmic cloud over the United States on the issue of American football, which is the country's most popular form of entertainment. I believe most Americans are choosing to live in denial or willful ignorance about this issue. It upsets me quite a lot, actually.
Totally disagree. The players know there is a major risk involved in playing and they choose to accept that risk -- for the money, for the glory or just for the thrill of playing. Nobody is forcing them. Furthermore, football does have cultural value. The best quality time I have with my dad and brother is while watching football. We bond over it in a totally wholesome way.
zamotcr
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:11 am

Re: Violent sports

Post by zamotcr »

guyfromlouisiana wrote: ...
There's a great karmic cloud over the United States on the issue of American football, which is the country's most popular form of entertainment. I believe most Americans are choosing to live in denial or willful ignorance about this issue. It upsets me quite a lot, actually.
No, it is not. Playing american football does not create bad kamma. Following your example, then we shouldn't exercise our self. A sport is that, a sport.
guyfromlouisiana
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 5:30 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by guyfromlouisiana »

Re:Kmath's comments

I agree that grown men have the right to accept the risks to play football, but football players were repeatedly lied to about the risks by owners and executives whose motivations were purely driven by profit. Secondly, children do not have the ability to adequately weigh the risks of football. Parents may allow their children to engage in an activity with a great amount of risk, but again, parents have been lied to about the risks of football for generations. I think a lot of parents are making decisions for their children based on cultural tradition, hoping the science is wrong, and in the process placing a large gamble on the mental health of their children decades from now. Of course, those football executives want them to keep making this gamble, because the executives are driven by present and future profit. So the American corporations are doing their best to minimize widespread acceptance of the risks of football to the brain. I'd argue that there is no place for young children to play tackle football, and college football is a dubious endeavor at best given the fact that at least a percentage of these young men are dismantling their intellect at a place of "higher learning." In the process, college football players enrich so many people, but they themselves do not earn a dime of legitimate earnings. Let's just make it a professional game.

As for the cultural value in and of itself of bonding with others, there are a lot of ethically unsound things people have bonded over. If you follow the precepts closely, then alcohol is an example of this, isn't it? What about the Roman gladiators? Was it an ethically sound thing for the spectators to bond over the deaths of gladiators? This is the same thing, except players die much more slowly.

Zamotcr, you misread my post. I never said playing football is ethically unsound.
User avatar
kmath
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: Violent sports

Post by kmath »

guyfromlouisiana wrote: I'd argue that there is no place for young children to play tackle football...


Young kids can't hit hard enough to cause brain damage.
guyfromlouisiana wrote:...and college football is a dubious endeavor at best given the fact that at least a percentage of these young men are dismantling their intellect at a place of "higher learning." In the process, college football players enrich so many people, but they themselves do not earn a dime of legitimate earnings. Let's just make it a professional game.
Most of the players are just there to play ball anyway. I'm ok with paying them.
guyfromlouisiana wrote: As for the cultural value in and of itself of bonding with others, there are a lot of ethically unsound things people have bonded over. If you follow the precepts closely, then alcohol is an example of this, isn't it?
Don't think it's actually ethically unsound per se. It's just that it easily leads to behavior that is ethically unsound, hence the precept.

:toast:
guyfromlouisiana wrote: What about the Roman gladiators? Was it an ethically sound thing for the spectators to bond over the deaths of gladiators? This is the same thing, except players die much more slowly.
I guess, but that's a little different. Gladiators weren't paid millions of dollars the way our athletes are. From Wikipedia on gladiators: "Most were despised as slaves, schooled under harsh conditions, socially marginalized, and segregated even in death."

I'm happy to agree to disagree on this one.

kmath
Post Reply