The Discourses of Buddhist Medical Ethics

Abstract

INTRODUCTION There are three major branches of Buddhism called Theravāda, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna. Although they developed sequentially in India, they eventually overlapped and all spread beyond India's borders. Over time, Theravāda became associated primarily with Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, Mahāyāna with East Asia, and Vajrayāna with Tibet. Buddhism died out in India, the land of its birth circa 1300, although it has been making a comeback in the modern period with its conversion of the Dalits. Buddhism denies a Supreme Being or Absolute. It also denies revelation. Its concept of enlightenment is based on insight into the very nature of reality framed by the law of karma (the law of reaping what one sows) and cosmic and individual cycles of existence ( saṃsāra ). Its doctrines of no-soul ( anātman ), impermanence ( anitya ), and becoming ( pratītya - samutpāda ) collectively produce a spiritual existentialism, which has as its sacred authority the experience of liberation ( nirvāṇa ). As in Hinduism (see Chapter 9), religion, philosophy, and medicine have been integrated into a “way of life” and telos that include both spiritual and rational orientations. The place of ethics in Buddhism, however, is hotly debated. There are two prevailing views. One is that the Buddha's teachings and path are provisional, a raft to be eventually left behind. In this view, ethics (rules and virtues) are instrumental, and epistemology has two levels (provisional knowledge and truth). As a result, ethics cannot be made into absolute or universal rules and enlightenment is not characterized by goodness.