Check out this video next on how Buddhist compassion practice became an empathy practice: th-cam.com/video/FVpdon6YErY/w-d-xo.html Consider joining us on Patreon if you find benefit in these videos, and get fun extras like exclusive behind-the-scenes videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
It sounds like the Buddha incited the monks to suicide, but I have also read that an arhat cannot accumulate negative karma. It is fine details like this that make me want to not become a Buddhist. Also, the Buddha never specified whether nirvana was annihilation or some higher form of existence. Did he know? If he knew, then the withholding of that knowledge seems insidious to me.
it’s good to see how open minded one can be and consider the feelings about the individual in pain more rather than always thinking of suicide as an act of selfishness towards their loved ones.
I recall a woman in the USA was told she had 6 months to live because of cancer so a week later went to a doctor who helped her with assisted suicide in a state where it's legal.
I find it odd so many have had difficulty understanding the Buddha's teaching on suicide. It is stated quite clearly in the Channa story SN 35.87. "If someone gives up this body to continue with another body, I say that this is indeed a serious fault. If, [however], someone has given up this body and does not continue with another body, I do not say that this is a serious fault. There is therefore no serious fault in that he has taken a knife and killed himself in Pāvārika’s Mango Grove at Nālanda’." The teaching is clear. Arahant's may kill themselves because they are not causing a rebirth which might lead them further from awakening. They will not be reborn. Therefore, there is no problem. When a non-Arahant commits suicide, they risk a rebirth which may set them back on the path to awakening and cause harm for a long time.
Hey Murphy, I also saw that comment on Ajhan brahm video on same topic. I like ur comment and ofc not many people can understand or hard to understand some sutras.
I was an eternal bright light of love and compassion that couldn't get bodily pleasure out of anything so I left that state because I missed bodily pleasure and ended up having paranoid psychosis. Was this state a delusion. Was my psychosis a delusion. I was predicting things in the short future and everyday I woke up I thought I was in another dimension. My consciousness felt connected to everyone else's. I think these were delusions and they were frightening especially feeling like I was jumping dimensions and I'm pretty secular. Maybe too much meditation and lack of sleep? Because I was living like a monk. Heard Alan Watts say meditation can cause something like an LSD trip and beginners don't know what to do when this happens. Any advice if I decide to do it all over again?But many of these delusions matched with Buddhist beliefs.
Love the videos as always. A topic suggestion: Buddhism and humor? Secular Buddhism helps us to suffer less but would be interesting to hear how it may teach us to laugh and smile more as well!
Suicide is a difficult topic for people who don’t understand the desire for annihilation. It scandalises the living but suffering dukkha eventually kills everyone, so why shouldn’t it come about by a conscious decision?
Suicide on its own is very sad, and not to be pursued if there is a better option. Finding equanimity through correct practice is such an option, which is open to us in the vast majority of cases.
Thanks Doug, and also thank you for revealing a little more about your personal view - which seems fairly rare in your videos. I particularly appreciated your point about compassion over-ruling slavish clinging to fixed doctrine and that does seem to be a sound principle for a kinder life.
I sought this video because I am grieving the loss of my dog after euthanasia. We rescued him awhile before COVID and back then, it was before I had really started learning about Buddhism and the concept of non-attachment. I knew right when we rescued him that we were giving an old dog a second chance and that there would come a day we would have to say goodbye, and over the years (especially after learning about Buddhism throughout COVID and learning about non-attachment...much thanks to years of watching your videos, too) I tried to continually remind myself that his life was eventually going to end, and yet when the day actually came, he suffered SO much, and despite how much I thought I had done my best to mentally prepare and not feel immense emotional clinging, the actual day devastated me to no end and I felt like someone had pulled the rug from under me and ripped my heart out of my chest. I feel like absolutely no amount of non-attachment practice could have eliminated my grief. I know that non-attachment isn't just intellectualizing and understanding the inevitability of death, but I truly can't imagine any situation where making that decision wouldn't have torn me to shreds. It makes me feel that in situations that are this difficult, that non-attachment and deep compassion are at odds, and for me compassion wins over - in this case causing me and my partner suffering so my sweet and wonderful dog didn't have to anymore. I'm sorry this is so long. I'm probably just trying to work through something. I appreciate you leaving room for situations where euthanasia is the most compassionate option. There was virtually zero chance if we tried to prolong his life he wouldn't greatly suffer. He wouldn't be able to walk anymore. His kidneys were completely failing. He had immense neurological pain and had tremors from the pain even when the vets had him on morphine and looked absolutely miserable with no will to live. He couldn't even stand up and support his own weight that day (which is why we took him in, because he suddenly fell and couldn't stand and was just yelping in pain for who knows how long while both of us were at work.) How could I prolong that on the .0000001% he would have any reasonable quality of life? Sorry for the novel. I could really use your help...any points to videos or texts that might help me through this. Thank you for all the amazing work you do, Doug.
Thanks so much for your heartfelt story. I agree, in cases like these it seems to me as well that euthanasia is the truly compassionate action, it's one I'd want for myself if I were in that situation. And grief is completely normal, since in ordinary life attachment is completely normal. The aim is to practice with a knowledge of the death and ending of things so that when we say our final goodbyes they aren't as difficult as they would have been without that wisdom. As for texts and videos, I think Pema Chödron has a book "When Things Fall Apart". I haven't read it, but it sounds like the topic might resonate. I also have a video on illness and death that might be useful: th-cam.com/video/L2jTFPzKtK8/w-d-xo.html . 🙏
@@DougsDharma Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I am always appreciative of how much time you put into responding to these comments, and I know mine was a bit long. I appreciate your realistic outlook that we practice with the contemplation of death so our "final goodbyes aren't as difficult as they would have been without that wisdom," rather than the (in my opinion) unrealistic expectation some have that we can entirely eradicate our grief over the loss of our loved ones. I think we can work towards less suffering, but I think with any sense of compassion, it's pretty normal for a layperson like myself to feel intensely about this. I will check out the book you recommended. Please know I'm so grateful for your work. Thank you so much, Doug.
@@zellamaestro I'm so sorry for your loss truly, I know how heartbreaking it is. And I just wanted to second Doug's recommendation of "When Things Fall Apart". I've read it multiple times and it always hits close to home and helps me find peace in "groundlessness" as she puts it. All the best to you.
@@DELFamilyvideos Thank you for your kind words and for doubling down on the recommendation. I'm definitely ordering it as soon as I finish the book I'm reading.
At present Dalai Lama, a religious teacher has concentrated on the matter of self-willed death. He says,“in the event a person is definitely going to die, and he is either in great pain or has virtually become a vegetable, and prolonging his existence is only going to cause difficulties and suffering to others, the termination of his life may be permitted.”
"To me it is simply unethical to require somebody to undergo terrible suffering in the behalf of what actually are relatively speculative religious ideals." Well put, I was relieved to hear that's your opinion on the topic. There should be more people who are genuinely interested in religious traditions but critical and intellectually autonomous at the same time. PS: I just happened to see the secular buddhism hashtag. ;)
I think about suicide a lot! I wish you would explain more shortly and to the point to be more helpful for a depressed person who can't even wait and listen much.
What if the suffering is many times worse after suicide than what you are feeling now. You need professional help. There are so many ways depression can be treated. Be strong!!
My position is that Channa didn't kill himself. He was already dying. And not in that "we'll all die some day" kind of way. He was dying to die, he just minimized his suffering in the only way that was left to him.
There are parallels to be draw here with painkillers. If one feeling strong aversion to pain, perhaps it is better to look at the aversion. However, if one is mindful and has extinguished the aversion, there is also no reason to wish for the pain to persist! There may be skillful ways in which to use them in these circumstances. Even if there is strong aversion to the pain, we do have little trouble allowing others to use them. We can understand and empathise with it. We may even help administer them, if requested. We would of course prefer they understand the Dharma better and do so skillfully, but we are not going to condem either way. We must be careful not to cling to some view and force it upon others. Even if the Dharma is absolute here, to scramble to impose it forcefully upon the world may not be skillful. So with suicide and euthaniasia, if one has a strong aversion to life for one reason or another, perhaps the Dharma can help address that. I am still not going to force someone either way. I think the way the Samaritans in the UK deal with such matters is skillful: they respect the choice and talk to people as they die if that is what they wish. They do not try to call an ambulance or police unless requested. Much like painkillers and as eluded to in this video, there is no reason to deliberately harm oneself. If you are in great chronic pain, even with a mindful understanding and experience of it, you may be causing your own suffering by clinging to life. Where the line is between the two is another conversation, I simply wish to express that their may indeed be times where such action is skillful. We must also be careful not to cling to our own ideals here.
Thank you for tackling this challenging subject and being so transparent about your own views. You're a great teacher, Doug. All your time and effort making videos and replying to comments is greatly appreciated. I'd like to ask if you have a personal favorite sutta. Thank you again.
I appreciate that Slick Machine. As to a favorite sutta, I'd have a hard time choosing one, since they go together and require one another in so many ways. Perhaps one of the deepest would be MN 22, but there are so many others.
When one suffered due to fruition of negative karma from one's actions, choosing suicide instead of repentance will bring more suffering in future. In the case of an arahant who is already free from samsara, it is different.
If a person got into a situation of killing himself he already has gone through a lot of suffering which probably made his heart more soft - this is why I think suicide will not bring more suffering in the afterlife
I’m personally a Christian but have great respect for the Buddhist religion and the emphasis on mindfulness and ahimsa. A lot of my trauma therapy has been very mindfulness-oriented and developing healthier coping mechanisms, which I have benefited so much from! I’m currently working on a paper discussing the vast array of opinions across Buddhist culture related to physician-assisted suicide. Your video was very informative and I appreciate your willingness to share your insight for all to learn and understand!! Off I go to continue my paper writing, thank you again and I wish you the best!
@@DougsDharma much thanks for responding. I would like to ask if you have a recommendation on mediation or something else to calm the mind? I have a lot of trouble with that
@@jarnoboumaa Calming the mind is one of the basic functions of meditation, so it's usually suggested to do mindfulness of breathing. The problem may be one of practice. The more we do it, the better. Lovingkindness practice may also help if you are beset by worries and/or anger.
I wish we wouldn't have been subjected to any religions so we could have actually enjoyed our life. These mental gymnastics and contradictions in all these religions is depressing and a waste of our lives.
It is bold to investigate this topic in a public sphere. There is one somewhat perplexing point in your reading. Why was Sariputta, who was also an Arahant, shocked or seemingly shocked by the monk's suicide? Was he not supposed to understand the nature of the monk's suicide?
The sense of life. The sense of Life is to do what you want to do. This is only possible, when we give each other the freedom to do what we want to do. Never decide over someone else’s life, you are not allowed to harm, you are not allowed to kill. You are not allowed to force people do what is best for you. Love and help others, and you will be free. This tells a lot about karma. The first verse and the first story of the Dhammapada explains quite a lot about harming and killing. You might interpret the first statement as against the law of karma. But the point is, the monk was indeed pure in his mind, and without any bad karma, even if he killed. I think buddhism taught not about realising oneself from the karma, but rather about reaching a pure mind. And this is the right way to enlightenment. Understanding acting from a pure mind, not as much as not harming at all. Because harming in most cases is indeed wrong. It is not about what would happen to someone, if you did something, it is what you have inside. For example guilt, anger, envy, hate… The monk had nothing of that inside. And this is the right meditation ever, to get rid of impurities, of taints of your mind. Your mind leads to acting, but the acting itself has nothing to do with enlightenment. I interpret the words of the buddha about the monk, who suicide as such: the monk enlightened just the tiny glimpse he killed himself because, he was enlightened afterwards, and were enlightening before, because he was flying as a butterfly to the flame. It was his final lesson, because indeed learning, if killing yourself is right or wrong is quite difficult. It was right, but if he would not do that, he would not enlighten. The Buddha says he did that blamelessly, he points out that he was enlightened, because there were no taint to his act. And he felt no blame behind his act, because he knew it was right. I think, of course you can not kill another person just like that, because you decide about the life of that person and many others, and you could cause lots of suffering, that you could not even know or imagine before. In case people are suffering from difficult diseases which make them suffer, many other around them want to help them and ease their pain, but are struggling about this ethical issue, because it is killing. But in this case, the persons intention is to help. In my opinion, in such cases you mostly see the soul of that person breaking and shrinking because of pain, and why should a being go to his next life with a broken soul filled with lots of pain? If a person is suicidal because he is depressed, I do not think he should commit suicide. I think it is a human state of mind, which is difficult to change but which is still nevertheless malleable, and I think psychology is already very far in understanding depression and therapist are trying to help depressed people. In my opinion, depressed people should look for beauty in life, i believe life’s core is beautiful, there is a fondness blue and whole. But these are only opinions.
Some people say that there is a flaw in early Buddhism if we remove rebirth from the equation, that is, that parinibbana has the same effect than suicide because the five aggregates cease forever with nothing left. It's dark!
That's looking at it from the religious angle. From the secular angle the point of practice is to diminish dukkha within this life, and therefore live a more fulfilled life. Depression is the problem, not the solution.
Thank you so much for this enlightening video and particularly for your view on the subject. I would like to say that the “craving for non-existence” and the Buddhists’ aim for Nibbāna are not far apart. The difference is, to me, how one sees reality. If one sees reality as nothing but processes of mind and matter (nāma and rūpa) one will naturally relinquish the chain of existence.
Thanks Kumari. From my understanding of the Buddha's teaching, his approach would have been a middle path between craving for existence and craving for non-existence. It would have been no craving for either one.
the key point of those cases......state of the mind of the being and thoughts when they commit those actions......which make it different from a sucide and a sacrifice........ “Chethanaham bikkawe kamman wadami. Chethaithwa kamman karothi kayena wachaya manasa” Dear Bikkhus, I introduce thought as karma. It is after having thought that we engage in action physically, verbally and mentally.If they doing those actions with a intense of selfishness thinking they will end the suffering which cause others around him or her to suffer which address the case of sucide which will consider as bad karma.......if they doing those actions with a intense of compassion, kindness of others for their wellbeing which address the case of sacrifice which will consider as good karma"..........if we know the core concept of Buddhism we didn’t want to look anywhere else just use it to as a tool to analyze those situations part by part till we satisfied that we have clear our doubts.Huge respect goes to mr doug for bringing those topics to public to discuss and clear people’s doubt with proper explanations.
Doug, I just finished reading the 'Advice to Channa' Sutta from the MN. I have an important question. Do we have any Suttas from the Pali Canon where Buddha is clearly against suicide ? Does he say anything like 'You should not take your own life, because it is the most valuable thing ever !' or 'Your life is a gift. Never even think about taking it' or something like that ? I am just wondering what Buddha thought about this issue, in GENERAL.
I don't know that the Buddha ever talked about this issue in general Dipayan. Though he did say in many places that a human life was very rare and that therefore we should make the most of it while we were alive.
Actually there is a concept in hinduism in Bhagwad Geeta, that whole scripture has lot of similarities with Buddhist scripture. Keeping it short, it claims that when a person who has meditated a lot, during his death is able to enter deep stage of meditation much deeper than he was alive. By doing he may even achieve arhant hood at dying moment.
From an Indian perspective, it's clear that death of Channa was not a way of suicide but one of euthanasia. It is because he has access to medicines, care and other assistances. He even mentions them to Sariputta. He came from the town of Pubbavijjhana which was a prominent urban area sitting on ancient trade route in north western India. It's likely that he had relations and friends who were well-to-do or wealthy. Hence, it is not surprising that he had access to a relatively good healthcare and other assistances by the standards of his time. Even after such a privileged access, he was unable to find a cure to his disease and suffering. It is in this condition that he opts for ending his life. As per today's standards, one can equate this to a cancer patient in his very last stage with no signs of recovery, opting to end his life. It's interesting to know that the case of euthanasia has been widely debated in India from ancient times of Buddha to the modern times. In 2018, the Supreme Court of India in the Aruna Shanbaugh case allowed passive euthanasia to be legal after a long series of judicial debates. The notion of not killing is so strong in India coming from various traditions and our ancient thought systems that euthanasia is still widely debated today even after the apex court's judgment. Hence for me, it's not surprising to find commentaries on the death of Channa which take slightly different stances and try to establish a new or different element to his Arhatship which does not perfectly relate to his death as stated in earlier texts. In my view, it's pretty much logical to end a life when a disease is not curable and the ensuing suffering is not reduced and the person is not able to engage in a meaningful karma due to such a suffering. Hence, Channa says the word "blamelessly" to Sariputta. In this moment, Channa had already become wiser than Sariputta and became an Arhat because he has realized this fundamental aspect of life related to euthanasia. The people who had not gone through this experience of life what Channa did and later commented on his death, missed out the perception that Channa had at the time of his death. This is exactly what Buddha wants to mean to Sariputta when he underscores the word "blamelessly" to him. It is also necessary to understand that Buddha is not somebody who goes on to elaborate things to his disciples which are simply not in their experience. Hence, again it is not surprising for me that Buddha did not converse more on this to Sariputta.
You may have covered this specific topic in other videos, Doug, but I am wondering what the Buddhist perspective is re: monks who self-immolate in reaction to various challenging political situations as a way of protest...I will never have the images of monks who did this during Viet Nam (and other times as well)...Thank you for your insight.
You're very welcome Sherwin. It's not something I've discussed in these videos because they're mostly about the beliefs and practices around early Buddhism, and that kind of protest is very recent, at least to my knowledge. That said, I think we can find some roots of those practices in the texts I mention in this video.
First off, thanks for entertaining my questions in the past as your answers have been helpful. I had questions, until the end of the video where now I just have curiosity. For one thing, didn't Siddhartha Gautama become the Buddha by deciding to die under that tree if he didn't become enlightened? Also, I think whether or not Channa was enlightened or not before committing to their decision is irrelevant. It makes me think of the time the Buddha was insulted and spat on while insulted, then the next day the Buddha explained that the one insulted yesterday was not here today (edit: well I mean I think he smiled throughout the exchange, so the Buddha was not the same person from moment to moment). So the Channa that committed suicide was not the same Channa that died. Enlightenment doesn't seem tied to any person.
True, but the issue has to do with karma, as its seen working in traditional Buddhism. Though the person may not literally be the same moment to moment, nevertheless karma works on the same causally connected stream over time.
Hello Doug thank you again so much for this video. I have questions about the SN 54.9 that the Buddha did not response at all to the mass suicides of the monks neither did Ven. Ānanda. For me, this indicates that both the Buddha and Ānanda understood and empathized with those monks.
That’s a fair interpretation. I’d also say that the sutta at 12:34 gives a clue that the Buddha was simply focused on non-rebirth above all. And this fact confused even Sariputta (discussed at 24:01), so I don’t blame laypeople for being confused. As laypeople, we are mostly hardwired to assume that all cases of euthanasia had deep aversion. And that’s a useful assumption for laypeople. But monks and sages (like Indian sadhu, sufis etc) are deeply different from laypeople. Their calling is nirvana, moksha, etc - not ‘getting food, extending life, etc.’ In other suttas, the Buddha heard about the euthanasia of 3 famous monks Channa, Godhika, and Vakkali and said they were ‘blameless’ . Sariputta was confused, he said ‘but the monk has people connected to him, what if we give the monk nice circumstances (food medicine etc),’ and Buddha replied ‘I blame monks who are reborn, the monk wasn’t reborn.’
Doug, what do you have to say about the Godhika Sutta ? Don't you think that Attachment to Life is NOT a problem ? Did Buddha really praise 'Non Attachment' to Life, in general ? Or did he consider that to be an 'Extreme View' ? Also, did he praise Godhika's Suicide only because he was dying ? I am confused. I want to know what Buddha believed in. If he did Praise Godhika, why did he do so ?
Check out my video on the four shortest descriptions of the dharma in early Buddhism: th-cam.com/video/Ls54cfbqwNE/w-d-xo.html . The Buddha’s path was a path of global non-attachment to all things. This does not mean aversion to all things, only non-attachment.
Hard topic. These cases show that the pali canon portrays Buddha in quite a realistic way. Not perfect. Not omniscient, because other ways he would have not given such teachings on the body to the monks that later killed himself. And he changed his opinions on several of the monastic vows.
There is some debate about the historicity of this story though. Richard Gombrich has argued that the story is based on a misinterpretation of the early Pāli texts.
Hey Doug I’m new to Buddhism and I had a quick question. There are no temples by my area can I do religious practices example meditate in my home and still be a Buddhist?
I have a recent video on this general topic here: th-cam.com/video/VlKp1lp-lvk/w-d-xo.html . But yes, you don't need to go to a temple to be Buddhist. Though really "Buddhist" is just another label, what matters is the attitude and practice.
Great and fascinating subject and scholarship ounce more, thank you for synthesising all this for us, and thank you for your own insights on the topic. My own question here would be whether we can draw a meaningful distinction between states of pain which are being forced upon us (as in dying of an illness) and states which we are to a greater extent enabling/inflicting upon ourselves (Suicidal thoughts, preferring non-existence, seeking out death actively). As so often the case with Mental practices, Issues of free-will seem perennial and persistent. You might say only an awakened being is allowed to make the choice to die, because only an awakened being could truly claim the freedom to choose to endure any pain, and therefore their choice would be said to be truly non coerced.
Hello Doug. I have even read of philosophers who killed themselves after losing battles with bad diseases. What's your take on their soul and karma? Thank you
Hi Doug, what would you say about a disease on the throat and mouth that prevents the person from eating and she can't get adequate help? Should she starve to death to go through the karma?
@@DougsDharma you are right. I should have asked what does Buddhism say. If the person, who loves life, can't handle such torture, and commits suicide. That's because her throat and mouth will start bleeding before she dies of starvation. Does that mean she will come back with the same trial in the next life? If so, how can she ever complete it without some medical help?
Samantha, please do NOT try to starve yourself to death. Life is a Gift. No one knows anything about an afterlife. Maybe this is the only life that you have. Please try to get some help. Can your condition be treated ? How bad is it, if you don't mind me asking ?
Buddha DID NOT condemn suicide, and never told such an act brings "bad karma". It is all depends on intention and circumstances when such act is committed. Read SN 4.23 - story about Godhika.
I'm doing a school project on how to counsel Buddhist based off of beliefs. How would someone counsel a Buddhist that has thought about suicide or euthanasia or has euthanized their family? thanks
Through analysis, but you haven't discussed the position of the enabler in euthanasia: the doctor or nurse who provides the means. Euthanasia never occurs as an isolated personal decision. I'm saying this as a son of a doctor who once enabled euthanasia (legal in the Netherlands, where I live) and very much regretted this afterwards. And having lost a student of mine who committed euthanasia, which i didn't support. One other thing that you may have overlooked is that the commentaries may have been aware of the Buddha's original views, but preferred, for didactic reasons, not to want to set a precedent and therefore dismissed Channa's suicide as a puthujana's mistake.
Thanks Khemadhammo. Yes, a doctor might be necessary, but also might not be. There are methods that do not require a doctor’s intervention as well, though they might not always be appropriate. I think it would be most beneficial to have a doctor present nevertheless. 🙏
@@DougsDharma I read somewhere that the Buddha was opposed to abortion. But this is, again, a challenging issue with many interpretations. Today's safe, therapeutic abortions may not be what the Buddha had in mind.
I dont think that historical Buddha could have foreseen the advancements in psychiatric diagnoses that would confound what makes mental suffering for one person harder to deal with than someone else’s. If two people endure the exact same hardships but one of the two of them was born with major depressive disorder and is a highly sensitive person, you have a cocktail of circumstances that leads to over a 90% instance of suicidal ideation than the other. If someone has the cards stacked against them so badly based on biology then how can they be held to the same standard of pain endurance as the example without the un changeable personality type and biologically based mental health issues
Right; within traditional Buddhism this would be understood as a difference in karmic antecedents, and I suspect the historical Buddha would have understood it that way. The medical model of mental illness is a very recent invention.
I'd have to do more research on it but my understanding is that traditional Buddhism is opposed to it as a form of killing, though many Western Buddhists are pro-choice.
Non-existence, in contrast to eternal existence, is easily attained. Is it really grasping if the desire can be ultimately, and finally satisfied? If I recall correctly, you don’t believe in reincarnation. It seems to me that permanent non-existence is the very goal of all Buddhism. Awakening ends the cycle of rebirth. Finally, and end to life on earth, which is essentially suffering. Strive to die while you’re still alive, so as to never be alive again seems to be the prime objective. What is the selling point, here? Equanimity? I don’t get it
yeah, Buddhists believe that all realms from lowest hell to highest heaven are temporary, you have lifespan which can range from thousands to millions of years depending on the realm. Since this cycle of samsara is full of suffering, especially lower realms, Buddhists try to leave this cycle by attaining non existent which can only be attained by attaining all the 8 states of meditation and finally nirvana
Prashant Lakhera my question is then, if one is a “secular” Buddhist, that doesn’t believe in a cycle reincarnation, why not commit suicide, even if you haven’t reached enlightenment?
What about when it was medical science that caused the suffering in the first place. Ie medication and has a terrible side effect to which has the made the individual irreversibly ill and as a result the individual is in terrible suffering.
Well the idea that suffering always holds value comes from Christian theodicy. In Buddhism suffering can have great value if we come to know it intimately and thereby become enlightened.
It's good you don't blindly follow the commentaries like some people do. Yet I think you are deeply influenced by them when you talk about jhānas, Dough. Your emphasis on absorption shows this pretty clearly. Don't trust Bhikkhu Analayo in everything he says. :) Metta.
@@DougsDharma Many actually. It would render a thorough study to refute all the commentarial development that redefined the sutta jhanas. Basically, the suttas teach a form of samadhi in which there is still a great deal of awareness. The commentaries developed this samadhi at a point which there is only awareness of your object of meditation, and nothing else. It's a huge redefinition of what ekaggata means. I recommend reading Ven Thanissaro's essay 'How Pointy is One-pointedness?'. Be well.
Yes, that's a different sort of case, though it does seem to be presaged by Dabba's self-cremation in the Udāna and Āgamas. Anālayo has a paper on it that is in the show notes.
@@djsteel56 You said that the Dalai Lama stated self-immolations are wrong, now you link to him saying they take courage and might not be as effective as hoped. Where is here condoning them saying they are wrong?
The usual method in the suttas is by meditation on the foulness of the body, but this is aimed at monastics pretty exclusively. I don't think laypeople need to worry so much about these techniques.
Check out this video next on how Buddhist compassion practice became an empathy practice: th-cam.com/video/FVpdon6YErY/w-d-xo.html
Consider joining us on Patreon if you find benefit in these videos, and get fun extras like exclusive behind-the-scenes videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
Doug's Dharma have you awakened?
It sounds like the Buddha incited the monks to suicide, but I have also read that an arhat cannot accumulate negative karma. It is fine details like this that make me want to not become a Buddhist. Also, the Buddha never specified whether nirvana was annihilation or some higher form of existence. Did he know? If he knew, then the withholding of that knowledge seems insidious to me.
Could you share with me the paper by BK Analayo, please?
it’s good to see how open minded one can be and consider the feelings about the individual in pain more rather than always thinking of suicide as an act of selfishness towards their loved ones.
Yes, well it's a sad thing anyway. Thanks Guadalupe.
Really interesting thanks, I like to think Buddhism is too rational and compassionate not to have room for euthanasia.
You're very welcome John, yes I agree.
I recall a woman in the USA was told she had 6 months to live because of cancer so a week later went to a doctor who helped her with assisted suicide in a state where it's legal.
I hadn't heard that, thanks for sharing.
I find it odd so many have had difficulty understanding the Buddha's teaching on suicide. It is stated quite clearly in the Channa story SN 35.87. "If someone gives up this body to continue with another body, I say that this
is indeed a serious fault. If, [however], someone has given up this body and
does not continue with another body, I do not say that this is a serious fault.
There is therefore no serious fault in that he has taken a knife and killed
himself in Pāvārika’s Mango Grove at Nālanda’." The teaching is clear. Arahant's may kill themselves because they are not causing a rebirth which might lead them further from awakening. They will not be reborn. Therefore, there is no problem. When a non-Arahant commits suicide, they risk a rebirth which may set them back on the path to awakening and cause harm for a long time.
Yes indeed Brian, thanks!
Hey Murphy, I also saw that comment on Ajhan brahm video on same topic. I like ur comment and ofc not many people can understand or hard to understand some sutras.
I was an eternal bright light of love and compassion that couldn't get bodily pleasure out of anything so I left that state because I missed bodily pleasure and ended up having paranoid psychosis. Was this state a delusion. Was my psychosis a delusion. I was predicting things in the short future and everyday I woke up I thought I was in another dimension. My consciousness felt connected to everyone else's. I think these were delusions and they were frightening especially feeling like I was jumping dimensions and I'm pretty secular. Maybe too much meditation and lack of sleep? Because I was living like a monk. Heard Alan Watts say meditation can cause something like an LSD trip and beginners don't know what to do when this happens. Any advice if I decide to do it all over again?But many of these delusions matched with Buddhist beliefs.
Love the videos as always. A topic suggestion: Buddhism and humor? Secular Buddhism helps us to suffer less but would be interesting to hear how it may teach us to laugh and smile more as well!
I'll have to think about that one Aahlad! There are some satirical stories in the early tradition, but not really laugh-out-loud funny.
@@DougsDharma that would be great! Or even just how Buddhism views humor. Thanks.
I am starving to death because my mouth and throat disease can't be treated..I Love life but I am desperate
So sorry to hear that Samantha. 🙏
Is that oral cancer?
Suicide is a difficult topic for people who don’t understand the desire for annihilation. It scandalises the living but suffering dukkha eventually kills everyone, so why shouldn’t it come about by a conscious decision?
Suicide on its own is very sad, and not to be pursued if there is a better option. Finding equanimity through correct practice is such an option, which is open to us in the vast majority of cases.
Thanks Doug, and also thank you for revealing a little more about your personal view - which seems fairly rare in your videos. I particularly appreciated your point about compassion over-ruling slavish clinging to fixed doctrine and that does seem to be a sound principle for a kinder life.
You're very welcome Geoff, agreed. Thanks for your comment!
I sought this video because I am grieving the loss of my dog after euthanasia. We rescued him awhile before COVID and back then, it was before I had really started learning about Buddhism and the concept of non-attachment.
I knew right when we rescued him that we were giving an old dog a second chance and that there would come a day we would have to say goodbye, and over the years (especially after learning about Buddhism throughout COVID and learning about non-attachment...much thanks to years of watching your videos, too) I tried to continually remind myself that his life was eventually going to end, and yet when the day actually came, he suffered SO much, and despite how much I thought I had done my best to mentally prepare and not feel immense emotional clinging, the actual day devastated me to no end and I felt like someone had pulled the rug from under me and ripped my heart out of my chest.
I feel like absolutely no amount of non-attachment practice could have eliminated my grief. I know that non-attachment isn't just intellectualizing and understanding the inevitability of death, but I truly can't imagine any situation where making that decision wouldn't have torn me to shreds. It makes me feel that in situations that are this difficult, that non-attachment and deep compassion are at odds, and for me compassion wins over - in this case causing me and my partner suffering so my sweet and wonderful dog didn't have to anymore.
I'm sorry this is so long. I'm probably just trying to work through something. I appreciate you leaving room for situations where euthanasia is the most compassionate option. There was virtually zero chance if we tried to prolong his life he wouldn't greatly suffer. He wouldn't be able to walk anymore. His kidneys were completely failing. He had immense neurological pain and had tremors from the pain even when the vets had him on morphine and looked absolutely miserable with no will to live. He couldn't even stand up and support his own weight that day (which is why we took him in, because he suddenly fell and couldn't stand and was just yelping in pain for who knows how long while both of us were at work.) How could I prolong that on the .0000001% he would have any reasonable quality of life?
Sorry for the novel. I could really use your help...any points to videos or texts that might help me through this. Thank you for all the amazing work you do, Doug.
Thanks so much for your heartfelt story. I agree, in cases like these it seems to me as well that euthanasia is the truly compassionate action, it's one I'd want for myself if I were in that situation. And grief is completely normal, since in ordinary life attachment is completely normal. The aim is to practice with a knowledge of the death and ending of things so that when we say our final goodbyes they aren't as difficult as they would have been without that wisdom. As for texts and videos, I think Pema Chödron has a book "When Things Fall Apart". I haven't read it, but it sounds like the topic might resonate. I also have a video on illness and death that might be useful: th-cam.com/video/L2jTFPzKtK8/w-d-xo.html . 🙏
@@DougsDharma Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I am always appreciative of how much time you put into responding to these comments, and I know mine was a bit long. I appreciate your realistic outlook that we practice with the contemplation of death so our "final goodbyes aren't as difficult as they would have been without that wisdom," rather than the (in my opinion) unrealistic expectation some have that we can entirely eradicate our grief over the loss of our loved ones. I think we can work towards less suffering, but I think with any sense of compassion, it's pretty normal for a layperson like myself to feel intensely about this. I will check out the book you recommended. Please know I'm so grateful for your work. Thank you so much, Doug.
@@zellamaestro I'm so sorry for your loss truly, I know how heartbreaking it is. And I just wanted to second Doug's recommendation of "When Things Fall Apart". I've read it multiple times and it always hits close to home and helps me find peace in "groundlessness" as she puts it. All the best to you.
@@DELFamilyvideos Thank you for your kind words and for doubling down on the recommendation. I'm definitely ordering it as soon as I finish the book I'm reading.
At present Dalai Lama, a religious teacher has concentrated on the
matter of self-willed death. He says,“in the event a person is
definitely going to die, and he is either in great pain or has virtually
become a vegetable, and prolonging his existence is only going to
cause difficulties and suffering to others, the termination of his life
may be permitted.”
Yes I think that is compassionate and makes a lot of sense. Where does he say this?
Unfortunately Dalai Lama is not longer reliable.
"To me it is simply unethical to require somebody to undergo terrible suffering in the behalf of what actually are relatively speculative religious ideals."
Well put, I was relieved to hear that's your opinion on the topic. There should be more people who are genuinely interested in religious traditions but critical and intellectually autonomous at the same time.
PS: I just happened to see the secular buddhism hashtag. ;)
Well yes, thanks Danilo. I think we can be open to belief and practice while also retaining our own critical autonomy.
I think about suicide a lot! I wish you would explain more shortly and to the point to be more helpful for a depressed person who can't even wait and listen much.
Find good professional help, ask your doctor. And be well! 🙏🙂
What if the suffering is many times worse after suicide than what you are feeling now. You need professional help. There are so many ways depression can be treated. Be strong!!
My position is that Channa didn't kill himself. He was already dying. And not in that "we'll all die some day" kind of way. He was dying to die, he just minimized his suffering in the only way that was left to him.
Yes, this is one way to look at it, thanks a7i20ci7y.
There are parallels to be draw here with painkillers.
If one feeling strong aversion to pain, perhaps it is better to look at the aversion. However, if one is mindful and has extinguished the aversion, there is also no reason to wish for the pain to persist! There may be skillful ways in which to use them in these circumstances.
Even if there is strong aversion to the pain, we do have little trouble allowing others to use them. We can understand and empathise with it. We may even help administer them, if requested. We would of course prefer they understand the Dharma better and do so skillfully, but we are not going to condem either way.
We must be careful not to cling to some view and force it upon others. Even if the Dharma is absolute here, to scramble to impose it forcefully upon the world may not be skillful.
So with suicide and euthaniasia, if one has a strong aversion to life for one reason or another, perhaps the Dharma can help address that. I am still not going to force someone either way. I think the way the Samaritans in the UK deal with such matters is skillful: they respect the choice and talk to people as they die if that is what they wish. They do not try to call an ambulance or police unless requested.
Much like painkillers and as eluded to in this video, there is no reason to deliberately harm oneself. If you are in great chronic pain, even with a mindful understanding and experience of it, you may be causing your own suffering by clinging to life. Where the line is between the two is another conversation, I simply wish to express that their may indeed be times where such action is skillful.
We must also be careful not to cling to our own ideals here.
Yes, exactly so Joshua. I think we ought to leave it up to each person to decide such weighty matters.
Thank you, Doug. Your channel has been very helpful to me. I feel like I have found many questions answered here. Cheers.
You’re very welcome Socks! 🙂🙏
eye opening talk with lots of clarity.
Thanks Arvind, I'm glad you found it useful. 🙏
Thank you for tackling this challenging subject and being so transparent about your own views. You're a great teacher, Doug. All your time and effort making videos and replying to comments is greatly appreciated. I'd like to ask if you have a personal favorite sutta. Thank you again.
I appreciate that Slick Machine. As to a favorite sutta, I'd have a hard time choosing one, since they go together and require one another in so many ways. Perhaps one of the deepest would be MN 22, but there are so many others.
You always bring up good questions.
I try my best! 🙂
When one suffered due to fruition of negative karma from one's actions, choosing suicide instead of repentance will bring more suffering in future. In the case of an arahant who is already free from samsara, it is different.
Right, that's the traditional understanding.
If a person got into a situation of killing himself he already has gone through a lot of suffering which probably made his heart more soft - this is why I think suicide will not bring more suffering in the afterlife
I’m personally a Christian but have great respect for the Buddhist religion and the emphasis on mindfulness and ahimsa. A lot of my trauma therapy has been very mindfulness-oriented and developing healthier coping mechanisms, which I have benefited so much from! I’m currently working on a paper discussing the vast array of opinions across Buddhist culture related to physician-assisted suicide. Your video was very informative and I appreciate your willingness to share your insight for all to learn and understand!! Off I go to continue my paper writing, thank you again and I wish you the best!
You're very welcome Stephanie, thanks for your comment! 🙏
Thank you for the uploads Doug. I have watched the first videos of the beginners playlist and I am very inclined to be educated further on Buddhism.
That's great Jarno, let me know if you have other questions that arise!
@@DougsDharma much thanks for responding. I would like to ask if you have a recommendation on mediation or something else to calm the mind? I have a lot of trouble with that
@@jarnoboumaa Calming the mind is one of the basic functions of meditation, so it's usually suggested to do mindfulness of breathing. The problem may be one of practice. The more we do it, the better. Lovingkindness practice may also help if you are beset by worries and/or anger.
@@DougsDharma i would like to start meditating again, so I will look into that concept, thank you Doug!
I wish we wouldn't have been subjected to any religions so we could have actually enjoyed our life. These mental gymnastics and contradictions in all these religions is depressing and a waste of our lives.
It is bold to investigate this topic in a public sphere. There is one somewhat perplexing point in your reading. Why was Sariputta, who was also an Arahant, shocked or seemingly shocked by the monk's suicide? Was he not supposed to understand the nature of the monk's suicide?
Yes, it's something I wonder about as well!
Thank you Doug!! I totally agree with you in the euthanasia part. Thanks for sharing
My pleasure Max!
The sense of life.
The sense of Life is to do what you want to do. This is only possible, when we give each other the freedom to do what we want to do. Never decide over someone else’s life, you are not allowed to harm, you are not allowed to kill. You are not allowed to force people do what is best for you. Love and help others, and you will be free. This tells a lot about karma.
The first verse and the first story of the Dhammapada explains quite a lot about harming and killing. You might interpret the first statement as against the law of karma. But the point is, the monk was indeed pure in his mind, and without any bad karma, even if he killed. I think buddhism taught not about realising oneself from the karma, but rather about reaching a pure mind. And this is the right way to enlightenment. Understanding acting from a pure mind, not as much as not harming at all. Because harming in most cases is indeed wrong. It is not about what would happen to someone, if you did something, it is what you have inside. For example guilt, anger, envy, hate… The monk had nothing of that inside. And this is the right meditation ever, to get rid of impurities, of taints of your mind. Your mind leads to acting, but the acting itself has nothing to do with enlightenment.
I interpret the words of the buddha about the monk, who suicide as such: the monk enlightened just the tiny glimpse he killed himself because, he was enlightened afterwards, and were enlightening before, because he was flying as a butterfly to the flame. It was his final lesson, because indeed learning, if killing yourself is right or wrong is quite difficult. It was right, but if he would not do that, he would not enlighten. The Buddha says he did that blamelessly, he points out that he was enlightened, because there were no taint to his act. And he felt no blame behind his act, because he knew it was right.
I think, of course you can not kill another person just like that, because you decide about the life of that person and many others, and you could cause lots of suffering, that you could not even know or imagine before.
In case people are suffering from difficult diseases which make them suffer, many other around them want to help them and ease their pain, but are struggling about this ethical issue, because it is killing. But in this case, the persons intention is to help. In my opinion, in such cases you mostly see the soul of that person breaking and shrinking because of pain, and why should a being go to his next life with a broken soul filled with lots of pain?
If a person is suicidal because he is depressed, I do not think he should commit suicide. I think it is a human state of mind, which is difficult to change but which is still nevertheless malleable, and I think psychology is already very far in understanding depression and therapist are trying to help depressed people. In my opinion, depressed people should look for beauty in life, i believe life’s core is beautiful, there is a fondness blue and whole.
But these are only opinions.
Thanks for your thoughts Maria.
Some people say that there is a flaw in early Buddhism if we remove rebirth from the equation, that is, that parinibbana has the same effect than suicide because the five aggregates cease forever with nothing left. It's dark!
That's looking at it from the religious angle. From the secular angle the point of practice is to diminish dukkha within this life, and therefore live a more fulfilled life. Depression is the problem, not the solution.
Thank you so much for this enlightening video and particularly for your view on the subject.
I would like to say that the “craving for non-existence” and the Buddhists’ aim for Nibbāna are not far apart. The difference is, to me, how one sees reality. If one sees reality as nothing but processes of mind and matter (nāma and rūpa) one will naturally relinquish the chain of existence.
Thanks Kumari. From my understanding of the Buddha's teaching, his approach would have been a middle path between craving for existence and craving for non-existence. It would have been no craving for either one.
In my own meditation on death I have realized that most deaths are slow suicide.
the key point of those cases......state of the mind of the being and thoughts when they commit those actions......which make it different from a sucide and a sacrifice........ “Chethanaham bikkawe kamman wadami.
Chethaithwa kamman karothi kayena wachaya manasa”
Dear Bikkhus, I introduce thought as karma. It is after having thought that we engage in action physically, verbally and mentally.If they doing those actions with a intense of selfishness thinking they will end the suffering which cause others around him or her to suffer which address the case of sucide which will consider as bad karma.......if they doing those actions with a intense of compassion, kindness of others for their wellbeing which address the case of sacrifice which will consider as good karma"..........if we know the core concept of Buddhism we didn’t want to look anywhere else just use it to as a tool to analyze those situations part by part till we satisfied that we have clear our doubts.Huge respect goes to mr doug for bringing those topics to public to discuss and clear people’s doubt with proper explanations.
You're very welcome nik. 🙏
Doug, I just finished reading the 'Advice to Channa' Sutta from the MN. I have an important question. Do we have any Suttas from the Pali Canon where Buddha is clearly against suicide ? Does he say anything like 'You should not take your own life, because it is the most valuable thing ever !' or 'Your life is a gift. Never even think about taking it' or something like that ? I am just wondering what Buddha thought about this issue, in GENERAL.
I don't know that the Buddha ever talked about this issue in general Dipayan. Though he did say in many places that a human life was very rare and that therefore we should make the most of it while we were alive.
Actually there is a concept in hinduism in Bhagwad Geeta, that whole scripture has lot of similarities with Buddhist scripture. Keeping it short, it claims that when a person who has meditated a lot, during his death is able to enter deep stage of meditation much deeper than he was alive. By doing he may even achieve arhant hood at dying moment.
From an Indian perspective, it's clear that death of Channa was not a way of suicide but one of euthanasia. It is because he has access to medicines, care and other assistances. He even mentions them to Sariputta. He came from the town of Pubbavijjhana which was a prominent urban area sitting on ancient trade route in north western India. It's likely that he had relations and friends who were well-to-do or wealthy. Hence, it is not surprising that he had access to a relatively good healthcare and other assistances by the standards of his time. Even after such a privileged access, he was unable to find a cure to his disease and suffering. It is in this condition that he opts for ending his life. As per today's standards, one can equate this to a cancer patient in his very last stage with no signs of recovery, opting to end his life. It's interesting to know that the case of euthanasia has been widely debated in India from ancient times of Buddha to the modern times. In 2018, the Supreme Court of India in the Aruna Shanbaugh case allowed passive euthanasia to be legal after a long series of judicial debates. The notion of not killing is so strong in India coming from various traditions and our ancient thought systems that euthanasia is still widely debated today even after the apex court's judgment. Hence for me, it's not surprising to find commentaries on the death of Channa which take slightly different stances and try to establish a new or different element to his Arhatship which does not perfectly relate to his death as stated in earlier texts. In my view, it's pretty much logical to end a life when a disease is not curable and the ensuing suffering is not reduced and the person is not able to engage in a meaningful karma due to such a suffering. Hence, Channa says the word "blamelessly" to Sariputta. In this moment, Channa had already become wiser than Sariputta and became an Arhat because he has realized this fundamental aspect of life related to euthanasia. The people who had not gone through this experience of life what Channa did and later commented on his death, missed out the perception that Channa had at the time of his death. This is exactly what Buddha wants to mean to Sariputta when he underscores the word "blamelessly" to him. It is also necessary to understand that Buddha is not somebody who goes on to elaborate things to his disciples which are simply not in their experience. Hence, again it is not surprising for me that Buddha did not converse more on this to Sariputta.
Yes I agree Apurv. Thanks for the comment.
@@DougsDharma also Doug, active euthanasia is at the moment illegal in India.. So, what Channa did at that time would be illegal in today's India
You may have covered this specific topic in other videos, Doug, but I am wondering what the Buddhist perspective is re: monks who self-immolate in reaction to various challenging political situations as a way of protest...I will never have the images of monks who did this during Viet Nam (and other times as well)...Thank you for your insight.
You're very welcome Sherwin. It's not something I've discussed in these videos because they're mostly about the beliefs and practices around early Buddhism, and that kind of protest is very recent, at least to my knowledge. That said, I think we can find some roots of those practices in the texts I mention in this video.
Interesting to k ow how to relate Buddha teaches, Today.
Yes, I think that's very important to do.
Very well expounded! 🥰 Thanks a lot! I totally agree with your personal opinion. Euthanasia: yes or no? It depends... 🙏🏻
Thanks xiao mao, exactly!
Very interesting, indeed! Thank you!
My pleasure!
First off, thanks for entertaining my questions in the past as your answers have been helpful. I had questions, until the end of the video where now I just have curiosity.
For one thing, didn't Siddhartha Gautama become the Buddha by deciding to die under that tree if he didn't become enlightened?
Also, I think whether or not Channa was enlightened or not before committing to their decision is irrelevant. It makes me think of the time the Buddha was insulted and spat on while insulted, then the next day the Buddha explained that the one insulted yesterday was not here today (edit: well I mean I think he smiled throughout the exchange, so the Buddha was not the same person from moment to moment). So the Channa that committed suicide was not the same Channa that died. Enlightenment doesn't seem tied to any person.
True, but the issue has to do with karma, as its seen working in traditional Buddhism. Though the person may not literally be the same moment to moment, nevertheless karma works on the same causally connected stream over time.
My younger brother committed suicide a week ago! I’m crushed. 😢
So sorry to hear. Be well. 🙏
What are the differences of Buddhism and Jainism?. Great talk!!!
Thanks Dillon! Unfortunately there are too many differences to describe simply here.
Hello Doug thank you again so much for this video. I have questions about the SN 54.9 that the Buddha did not response at all to the mass suicides of the monks neither did Ven. Ānanda. For me, this indicates that both the Buddha and Ānanda understood and empathized with those monks.
That’s a fair interpretation. I’d also say that the sutta at 12:34 gives a clue that the Buddha was simply focused on non-rebirth above all. And this fact confused even Sariputta (discussed at 24:01), so I don’t blame laypeople for being confused.
As laypeople, we are mostly hardwired to assume that all cases of euthanasia had deep aversion.
And that’s a useful assumption for laypeople. But monks and sages (like Indian sadhu, sufis etc) are deeply different from laypeople. Their calling is nirvana, moksha, etc - not ‘getting food, extending life, etc.’
In other suttas, the Buddha heard about the euthanasia of 3 famous monks Channa, Godhika, and Vakkali and said they were ‘blameless’ .
Sariputta was confused, he said ‘but the monk has people connected to him, what if we give the monk nice circumstances (food medicine etc),’ and Buddha replied ‘I blame monks who are reborn, the monk wasn’t reborn.’
Doug, what do you have to say about the Godhika Sutta ? Don't you think that Attachment to Life is NOT a problem ? Did Buddha really praise 'Non Attachment' to Life, in general ? Or did he consider that to be an 'Extreme View' ? Also, did he praise Godhika's Suicide only because he was dying ? I am confused. I want to know what Buddha believed in. If he did Praise Godhika, why did he do so ?
Check out my video on the four shortest descriptions of the dharma in early Buddhism: th-cam.com/video/Ls54cfbqwNE/w-d-xo.html . The Buddha’s path was a path of global non-attachment to all things. This does not mean aversion to all things, only non-attachment.
The problem with suicide is the effect it has on others . Family , friends , the police etc .
For sure.
Hard topic. These cases show that the pali canon portrays Buddha in quite a realistic way. Not perfect. Not omniscient, because other ways he would have not given such teachings on the body to the monks that later killed himself. And he changed his opinions on several of the monastic vows.
Yes it’s interesting and I think illustrative that the canon depicts the Buddha in such a human way.
There is some debate about the historicity of this story though. Richard Gombrich has argued that the story is based on a misinterpretation of the early Pāli texts.
Hey Doug I’m new to Buddhism and I had a quick question. There are no temples by my area can I do religious practices example meditate in my home and still be a Buddhist?
I have a recent video on this general topic here: th-cam.com/video/VlKp1lp-lvk/w-d-xo.html . But yes, you don't need to go to a temple to be Buddhist. Though really "Buddhist" is just another label, what matters is the attitude and practice.
There are many monasteries that do videos online. Check out buddhist insights or bhavana society's page. good resources and they do live q&a's.
Great and fascinating subject and scholarship ounce more, thank you for synthesising all this for us, and thank you for your own insights on the topic. My own question here would be whether we can draw a meaningful distinction between states of pain which are being forced upon us (as in dying of an illness) and states which we are to a greater extent enabling/inflicting upon ourselves (Suicidal thoughts, preferring non-existence, seeking out death actively). As so often the case with Mental practices, Issues of free-will seem perennial and persistent. You might say only an awakened being is allowed to make the choice to die, because only an awakened being could truly claim the freedom to choose to endure any pain, and therefore their choice would be said to be truly non coerced.
Maybe so, it’s hard to say definitively with this kind of topic.
Hello Doug. I have even read of philosophers who killed themselves after losing battles with bad diseases. What's your take on their soul and karma? Thank you
As a secular practitioner, I set aside such speculations.
@@DougsDharma Thank you for your explanation
Hi Doug, what would you say about a disease on the throat and mouth that prevents the person from eating and she can't get adequate help? Should she starve to death to go through the karma?
My opinion is not important in this matter. All that matters is the opinion of the person going through such a disease. 🙏
@@DougsDharma you are right. I should have asked what does Buddhism say. If the person, who loves life, can't handle such torture, and commits suicide. That's because her throat and mouth will start bleeding before she dies of starvation. Does that mean she will come back with the same trial in the next life? If so, how can she ever complete it without some medical help?
Samantha, please do NOT try to starve yourself to death. Life is a Gift. No one knows anything about an afterlife. Maybe this is the only life that you have. Please try to get some help. Can your condition be treated ? How bad is it, if you don't mind me asking ?
Buddha DID NOT condemn suicide, and never told such an act brings "bad karma". It is all depends on intention and circumstances when such act is committed. Read SN 4.23 - story about Godhika.
Did you watch the whole video? 🙂
I'm doing a school project on how to counsel Buddhist based off of beliefs. How would someone counsel a Buddhist that has thought about suicide or euthanasia or has euthanized their family? thanks
Through analysis, but you haven't discussed the position of the enabler in euthanasia: the doctor or nurse who provides the means. Euthanasia never occurs as an isolated personal decision. I'm saying this as a son of a doctor who once enabled euthanasia (legal in the Netherlands, where I live) and very much regretted this afterwards. And having lost a student of mine who committed euthanasia, which i didn't support.
One other thing that you may have overlooked is that the commentaries may have been aware of the Buddha's original views, but preferred, for didactic reasons, not to want to set a precedent and therefore dismissed Channa's suicide as a puthujana's mistake.
Thanks Khemadhammo. Yes, a doctor might be necessary, but also might not be. There are methods that do not require a doctor’s intervention as well, though they might not always be appropriate. I think it would be most beneficial to have a doctor present nevertheless. 🙏
As a human being I feel sorry for the people who committed suicide, why any “God”can’t???? Aren’t they depict the most compassionate attitude???
I wonder what Buddhism says about abortion. I tried to find some information but I would like something more specific.
I don't believe it's mentioned in the suttas.
@@DougsDharma I read somewhere that the Buddha was opposed to abortion. But this is, again, a challenging issue with many interpretations. Today's safe, therapeutic abortions may not be what the Buddha had in mind.
Abortion is a kind of killing .
I dont think that historical Buddha could have foreseen the advancements in psychiatric diagnoses that would confound what makes mental suffering for one person harder to deal with than someone else’s. If two people endure the exact same hardships but one of the two of them was born with major depressive disorder and is a highly sensitive person, you have a cocktail of circumstances that leads to over a 90% instance of suicidal ideation than the other. If someone has the cards stacked against them so badly based on biology then how can they be held to the same standard of pain endurance as the example without the un changeable personality type and biologically based mental health issues
Right; within traditional Buddhism this would be understood as a difference in karmic antecedents, and I suspect the historical Buddha would have understood it that way. The medical model of mental illness is a very recent invention.
Hey Doug, could you talk about the Buddhist view on abortion? Thank you
I'd have to do more research on it but my understanding is that traditional Buddhism is opposed to it as a form of killing, though many Western Buddhists are pro-choice.
@@DougsDharma thank you very much for your help
Non-existence, in contrast to eternal existence, is easily attained. Is it really grasping if the desire can be ultimately, and finally satisfied? If I recall correctly, you don’t believe in reincarnation. It seems to me that permanent non-existence is the very goal of all Buddhism. Awakening ends the cycle of rebirth. Finally, and end to life on earth, which is essentially suffering. Strive to die while you’re still alive, so as to never be alive again seems to be the prime objective. What is the selling point, here? Equanimity? I don’t get it
As I see it, the goal of Buddhism is to eliminate greed, hatred, and delusion.
yeah, Buddhists believe that all realms from lowest hell to highest heaven are temporary, you have lifespan which can range from thousands to millions of years depending on the realm. Since this cycle of samsara is full of suffering, especially lower realms, Buddhists try to leave this cycle by attaining non existent which can only be attained by attaining all the 8 states of meditation and finally nirvana
Prashant Lakhera so lasting suicide is the goal
@@mysigt_ yeah, nirvana is also translated as non-existence in many mahayana sutras.
Prashant Lakhera my question is then, if one is a “secular” Buddhist, that doesn’t believe in a cycle reincarnation, why not commit suicide, even if you haven’t reached enlightenment?
What about when it was medical science that caused the suffering in the first place. Ie medication and has a terrible side effect to which has the made the individual irreversibly ill and as a result the individual is in terrible suffering.
In this case I don't think it's the cause of the suffering that matters, only whether it can be alleviated or not.
is it a Buddhist view on suffering that suffering holds absolutely no value?
Well the idea that suffering always holds value comes from Christian theodicy. In Buddhism suffering can have great value if we come to know it intimately and thereby become enlightened.
Pruning versus soil nutrients
Soil nutrients or soil nutrients. Or even sun fuel later on in the future
Well isn't that awakened beings can voluntarily die through deep meditation? Y did chana have to use a knife
No, there is no such claim, at least not in the early tradition.
That's from East Asian tradition, through fasting or self-immolation. Has always been controversial though.
@First name Last name Well-put.
How about grasping for non-grasping?
I did a video on that question awhile back: th-cam.com/video/ZTqibLMY1LM/w-d-xo.html
It's good you don't blindly follow the commentaries like some people do. Yet I think you are deeply influenced by them when you talk about jhānas, Dough. Your emphasis on absorption shows this pretty clearly.
Don't trust Bhikkhu Analayo in everything he says. :)
Metta.
I'm not following the commentaries, but the suttas. Is there some aspect you feel the commentaries say that the suttas do not?
@@DougsDharma Many actually. It would render a thorough study to refute all the commentarial development that redefined the sutta jhanas.
Basically, the suttas teach a form of samadhi in which there is still a great deal of awareness. The commentaries developed this samadhi at a point which there is only awareness of your object of meditation, and nothing else. It's a huge redefinition of what ekaggata means.
I recommend reading Ven Thanissaro's essay 'How Pointy is One-pointedness?'.
Be well.
Just read that Godhika killed himself and the buddah praised him for it.WTF.
What about in the case of the self emulation of Buddhist monks as protest?
The Dali Lama has stated that the self- immolation by monks is wrong.
Yes, that's a different sort of case, though it does seem to be presaged by Dabba's self-cremation in the Udāna and Āgamas. Anālayo has a paper on it that is in the show notes.
@@djsteel56 The Dalai Lama also said that self-immolation done with the right attitude is an appropriate expression of his dharma.
@@leuchtendebirke However the Dali Lama has concerns over the effectiveness of their sacrifice. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-15799562
@@djsteel56 You said that the Dalai Lama stated self-immolations are wrong, now you link to him saying they take courage and might not be as effective as hoped. Where is here condoning them saying they are wrong?
Please make a video on how to deal with sexual carvings kind sire. 🙏🙇
The usual method in the suttas is by meditation on the foulness of the body, but this is aimed at monastics pretty exclusively. I don't think laypeople need to worry so much about these techniques.
*VERY NICE. From **#WorldHAX*