Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
tharpa
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:56 am
Location: North America
Contact:

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by tharpa »

thepea wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:47 pm Just another reason to not put all your eggs in one basket when regarding suttas. They can be deceptive and dangerous to some. This post could be the knife a desperate person is looking for.
Your objection doesn't seem to apply here. The person would have to meet all of those criteria. Most significantly, they would have to be an upasampada bhikkhu. Clarity of mind cuts through a lot of wrong actions.
May all beings, in or out of the womb, be well, happy and peaceful.
thepea
Posts: 1822
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by thepea »

tharpa wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 5:32 pm
thepea wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:47 pm Just another reason to not put all your eggs in one basket when regarding suttas. They can be deceptive and dangerous to some. This post could be the knife a desperate person is looking for.
Your objection doesn't seem to apply here. The person would have to meet all of those criteria. Most significantly, they would have to be an upasampada bhikkhu. Clarity of mind cuts through a lot of wrong actions.
What does that change?
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by Dhammanando »

tharpa wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:19 pm There was only one very specific type of situation where the Buddha said there was no fault for one committing suicide. Each and every instance had all of the following characteristics, without even one missing:
  • The person was a monk.
  • The monk had a fatal disease.
  • The monk's pains were growing worse, not better.
  • The monk was meditating very hard in order to attain nibbana before death.
  • But the pain was interfering with the monk's meditation.
  • The method of suicide was by cutting one's own throat.
  • The monk believed that by cutting his own throat, he could successfully attain nibbana in the few moments before his death.
Do you have a source for these criteria?
Anabhirati kho, āvuso, imasmiṃ dhammavinaye dukkhā, abhirati sukhā.

“To not delight in this dhammavinaya, friend, is painful; to delight in it is bliss.”
(Sukhasutta, AN 10:66)
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5522
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by cappuccino »

Despair is temporary

The worst day will pass

Suffering may lead to awakenin
g
"All men's souls are immortal, but the souls of the righteous are immortal and divine." -Socrates
Good for Your Soul
justindesilva
Posts: 1380
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by justindesilva »

cappuccino wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 7:24 pm Despair is temporary

The worst day will pass

Suffering may lead to awakenin
g
With so called suicides ( a better word taking off life) of an arhant or even an Aryan with marga Pala, what we have to realise is their cetana or intension. It is clear that the intention of ending of life is away from lobha dosa moha. Further their awareness of not continuing in samsara as they are along with the fact that they should not be a burden to others justify their taking off life.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5522
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by cappuccino »

justindesilva wrote: With so-called suicides of an Aryan
the past world is very different from this current world
"All men's souls are immortal, but the souls of the righteous are immortal and divine." -Socrates
Good for Your Soul
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by robertk »

tharpa wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:19 pm The Tatagatha did forbid assisted suicide, however. There was a monk who killed himself, and the Buddha said that it was a fault of the villagers to give him the knife.

The Buddha did also forbid suicide where the person hoped to be reborn in heaven. He said it would have the opposite effect, that they would be reborn in the lower realms instead.

There was only one very specific type of situation where the Buddha said there was no fault for one committing suicide. Each and every instance had all of the following characteristics, without even one missing:
  • The person was a monk.
  • The monk had a fatal disease.
  • The monk's pains were growing worse, not better.
  • The monk was meditating very hard in order to attain nibbana before death.
  • But the pain was interfering with the monk's meditation.
  • The method of suicide was by cutting one's own throat.
  • The monk believed that by cutting his own throat, he could successfully attain nibbana in the few moments before his death.
regarding your point that monk believed he could attain nibbana by cutting his throat.

Actually the monk thought ( wrongly)he was an arahat already.

Ven Bodhi from his translation wiith the Commentary:

"MA: He cut his throat, and just at that moment the fear of death
descended on him and the sign of future rebirth appeared. Recognising
that he was still an ordinary person, he was aroused and developed
insight. Comprehending the formations, he attained arahantship just
before he expired.

---'xxx
tharpa
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:56 am
Location: North America
Contact:

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by tharpa »

robertk wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:38 am
regarding your point that monk believed he could attain nibbana by cutting his throat.

Actually the monk thought ( wrongly)he was an arahat already.

Ven Bodhi from his translation wiith the Commentary:
I'm not sure what you mean by his translation with the Commentary: Are the words you quoted a translation of the Tipitika, or just Commentary? If just Commentary, then it is irrelevant. If Tipitika, do you have the exact Sutta it is from?
May all beings, in or out of the womb, be well, happy and peaceful.
beanyan
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2020 12:21 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by beanyan »

sentinel wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:11 am I am baffled why the Buddha never forbade people from committing suicide ? He laid down precepts in which not allowing to kill other people (including animals) yet not including killing own life ?
Isn't this is something illogical ?
Because he may have commited suicide himself. That sounds idiotic, but hear me out. There was clearly a tradition of sramanas who believed they were enlightened comitting suicide, not by violent means like stabbing themselves but by starvation or poisoning, or a combo of starvation and painkillers that were more or less poisonous herbs. Jain tradition holds that Mahavira starved himself to death. And how did Gotama die? That "bad pork" or whatever it was that he ate, does that suttas not clearly show him saying he knew it was bad, that "I see nobody who could eat this but a Tathagata etc." Which is just a fancy way of saying "this is poisonous," so did Gotama kill himself with poison? This means of death makes it easy for the arhant claimant to predict when he will die, eat his last meal (including poison) and then die right on schedule, proving to those not in the know of how its done that he was truly an arhant "because he accurately predicted when he would die, and only an arhant can do that"; but when they conveniently die after a last meal at a preset and predicted time, people should think more about how that is done.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 1611
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by Pondera »

There’s the case where the Buddha was teaching the contemplation of disgust with the body to (for example) 50 monks (I don’t recall the actual number). After teaching, he retired to his hut.

20 of those monks were so disgusted with their bodies that they committed suicide.

The Buddha emerged the following day and was informed of this. His advice to the remaining 30 monks was to switch over to anapanasati.

How did the Buddha not see that ahead of time? Is he responsible for their deaths?
“Monk, the property of light, the property of beauty, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of space, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the property of the dimension of nothingness: These properties are to be reached as perception attainments.[2] The property of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception is to be reached as a remnant-of-fabrications attainment. The property of the cessation of feeling & perception is to be reached as a cessation attainment."[3]

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by robertk »

tharpa wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:01 am
robertk wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:38 am
regarding your point that monk believed he could attain nibbana by cutting his throat.

Actually the monk thought ( wrongly)he was an arahat already.

Ven Bodhi from his translation wiith the Commentary:
I'm not sure what you mean by his translation with the Commentary: Are the words you quoted a translation of the Tipitika, or just Commentary? If just Commentary, then it is irrelevant. If Tipitika, do you have the exact Sutta it is from?
The SPK is the samantapasidika by Buddhaghosa
Bodhi’s translation and notes . so yes it is the ancient Commentary
The Book of the Six Sense Bases )
p. 1406 connected discourses bhikkhu bodhi
52 Spk: Channa replied to Sariputtas questions by ascribing
arahantship to himself, but Sariputta, while knowing that
he was still a worldling, just kept quiet. Mahacunda, however,
gave him an exhortation to convince him of this.
53 This "teaching of the Blessed One" is at Ud 81,&10. Spk
explains the connection between the teaching and the present
situation thus: For one who is dependent (nissitassa):
"dependent" on account of craving, conceit, and views; there
is wavering (calitam): palpitation. As Channa is unable to
endure the arisen pain, there is now the palpitation of one
who isn't free from the grip of such thoughts as "I am in
pain, the pain is mine." By this, he is telling him, "You're still
a worldling." No inclination (natr): no inclination of craving.
No coming by way of rebirth, no going by way of death. This
itself is the end of su#ering: this itself is the end, the termination,
the limit, of the suffering of defilements and of the suffering
of the round.

54 Spk: He cut his jugular vein and just then the fear of death
entered him. As the sign of his rebirth destiny appeared, he
realized he was still a worldling and his mind became agi-
tated. He set up insight, discerned the formations, and
reaching arahantship, he attained final Nibbana as a
"same-header" (samasisi; see I, n. 312).
55 Spk: Although this declaration (of blamelessness) was
made while Channa was still a worldling, as his attainment
of final Nibbina followed immediately, the Buddha
answered by referring to that very declaration.
If just Commentary, then it is irrelevant
why irrelevant?
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by sentinel »

beanyan wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:36 am
sentinel wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:11 am I am baffled why the Buddha never forbade people from committing suicide ? He laid down precepts in which not allowing to kill other people (including animals) yet not including killing own life ?
Isn't this is something illogical ?
Because he may have commited suicide himself. That sounds idiotic, but hear me out. There was clearly a tradition of sramanas who believed they were enlightened comitting suicide, not by violent means like stabbing themselves but by starvation or poisoning, or a combo of starvation and painkillers that were more or less poisonous herbs. Jain tradition holds that Mahavira starved himself to death. And how did Gotama die? That "bad pork" or whatever it was that he ate, does that suttas not clearly show him saying he knew it was bad, that "I see nobody who could eat this but a Tathagata etc." Which is just a fancy way of saying "this is poisonous," so did Gotama kill himself with poison? This means of death makes it easy for the arhant claimant to predict when he will die, eat his last meal (including poison) and then die right on schedule, proving to those not in the know of how its done that he was truly an arhant "because he accurately predicted when he would die, and only an arhant can do that"; but when they conveniently die after a last meal at a preset and predicted time, people should think more about how that is done.
I have had heard something like this before , probably starving to death is not so painful .
However poisoning may be much sufferings . Anyway , there isnt any death that is not painful unless put to sleep type . Just maybe , killing yourself is a human rights ?! :shrug:
You always gain by giving
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by robertk »

The pork was not poisonous. However because devas infused it with so many nutriments - thinking it was the Buddha's last meal- that it was too rich for other men to eat.

According to the orthodox Theravada"
"It is said in the Great Commentary that Sukaramaddava is the
already available meat of the pig that is tender and
succulent"(Udana commentary (masefield p1025)Cundasuttava.
Pataligamayaga
Suukaramaddavanti suukarassa mudusiniddha.m pavattama.msan"ti
mahaa-a.t.thakathaaya.m vutta.m.

"Some (keci) however, say that sukaramaddava is not pigs meat but
rather bamboo shoots that pigs have trampled upon (maddita), others
that it is a mushroom that has come into being at a spot that pigs
have trampled upon, whilts still others proclaim that sukaramaddava
is the name for a certain elixer". Note that Keci is usually a term
for those outside the orthodox tradition.
Keci pana "suukaramaddavanti na suukarama.msa.m, suukarehi
madditava.msaka.liiro"ti vadanti. A~n~ne "suukarehi
madditappadese
jaata.m ahichattakan"ti. Apare pana "suukaramaddava.m naama
eka.m rasaayanan"ti bha.ni.msu.
_
What is a little more important is that it should be known that
whatever the Buddha ate was in no way poisonous or contributed to
his death: "It is said that into that sukaramaddava the devatas in
the four great continents, had infused nutritive essense, therefore
it was not able to be digested properly by anyone else, in making
which point the Teacher roared his Lion's roar with 'I do not behold
him, Cunda' and so on with the aim of relaesing him from the balme
of others..."
It explains that the illness which had overtaken the Buddha was
grave and "For if [that illness] had arisen to him without his
having partaken therof [of the meal from cunda] it would have been
far too grating; whereas on account of his having partaken of that
succulent food, the pain became diminished
2600htz
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by 2600htz »

Pondera wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:40 am There’s the case where the Buddha was teaching the contemplation of disgust with the body to (for example) 50 monks (I don’t recall the actual number). After teaching, he retired to his hut.

20 of those monks were so disgusted with their bodies that they committed suicide.

The Buddha emerged the following day and was informed of this. His advice to the remaining 30 monks was to switch over to anapanasati.

How did the Buddha not see that ahead of time? Is he responsible for their deaths?
Hi:

I think its because the Buddha was able to see into the past and the future, but only if he directed his mind towards that. He was not omnipotent (example SN 42.9).

___________________________________________________________

About the subject, i think suicide falls into the precept of not killing (and fulfills all steps needed for commiting a kill: there is a living being, intention to kill, a weapon, and the action ) . Forbiding is an exaggeration, precepts are more suggestions, unless you are talking about monks. I dont know about rules, but pretty sure there is some words about suicide being wrong in the canon pali. Even if there where no rule, it does not mean it is a good thing, or that the Buddha was fine with it.

Regards.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 1611
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Why the Buddha never forbade suicide ?

Post by Pondera »

2600htz wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:19 pm
Pondera wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:40 am There’s the case where the Buddha was teaching the contemplation of disgust with the body to (for example) 50 monks (I don’t recall the actual number). After teaching, he retired to his hut.

20 of those monks were so disgusted with their bodies that they committed suicide.

The Buddha emerged the following day and was informed of this. His advice to the remaining 30 monks was to switch over to anapanasati.

How did the Buddha not see that ahead of time? Is he responsible for their deaths?
Hi:

I think its because the Buddha was able to see into the past and the future, but only if he directed his mind towards that. He was not omnipotent (example SN 42.9).

___________________________________________________________

About the subject, i think suicide falls into the precept of not killing (and fulfills all steps needed for commiting a kill: there is a living being, intention to kill, a weapon, and the action ) . Forbiding is an exaggeration, precepts are more suggestions, unless you are talking about monks. I dont know about rules, but pretty sure there is some words about suicide being wrong in the canon pali. Even if there where no rule, it does not mean it is a good thing, or that the Buddha was fine with it.

Regards.
I believe the Buddha was omnipotent also. But how does that justify the deaths of these monks.

Is there some way to say that they ended up in a better realm with better chances of reaching Nibbāna?

I don’t quite see what you’re saying.
“Monk, the property of light, the property of beauty, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of space, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the property of the dimension of nothingness: These properties are to be reached as perception attainments.[2] The property of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception is to be reached as a remnant-of-fabrications attainment. The property of the cessation of feeling & perception is to be reached as a cessation attainment."[3]

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Post Reply