Written for the AQA syllabus by Upeksacitta (Robert Ellis), member of the Western Buddhist Order and a former Head of RS.
The 1st Precept: Non-Violence
I undertake the rule of training which consists in abstention from killing living beings.
How far does this precept extend?
Buddhists have always interpreted this precept to mean, not merely a prohibition of murder, but of all kinds of violence against human beings and animals. Whilst killing animals is considered less unskilful than killing human beings (because animals have a less developed consciousness and because killing a person requires more deliberate will and effort), we still have a responsibility to limit the killing and other violence inflicted on animals as far as possible. Buddhists should also avoid actions which indirectly support violence, eg.trading in arms. An important aspect of Right Livelihood (one of the limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path) is that one's job should not cause suffering as far as possible.
Why is killing wrong?
Killing is the expression of a mental state rooted in greed, hatred, and delusion. It is an unskilful act because it brings suffering on the doer and on the victim, holding both back from Enlightenment.
"To kill a living being means to inflict upon him the greatest of all sufferings or evils, for inasmuch as life is the greatest good, so the greatest suffering, or the greatest evil, that can befall one, is to be deprived of life."
Sangharakshita, The Ten Pillars of Buddhism.
Himsa and Ahimsa
Killing is also considered wrong because it is the expression of himsa : force or violence. This violence can be mental or physical, and really means doing to another being something which that being does not want. Ahimsa (non-violence) is the opposite of himsa, and means actively trying to promote reconciliation and love between beings as well as refraining from acts of violence oneself. Ahimsa is described as the highest dharma, because violence is the unskilful action which does most damage and contributes most to suffering.
Violence and the self
Violence is the most extreme form of assertion of one self over another. In doing damage to another, one actually does damage to oneself: one only fails to understand this because of delusion. Non-violence thus follows from the doctrine of no-self.
There are two practices one can cultivate in Buddhism to try to prevent the arising of the self-view and its accompanying violence: 1. The equality of oneself with others, reflecting that one suffers from the same effects of samsara as other beings. 2. Putting oneself in the place of others, imagining that one experiences exactly the same pains and pleasures. The Dhammapada (v.129-130) mentions this practice:
All living beings are terrified of punishment; all fear death.
Putting oneself in the place of others one should neither kill nor cause to kill.
All living beings are terrified of punishment; all love life.
Putting oneself in the place of others one should neither kill nor cause to kill.
Can Violence never be justified?
Violence can only be justified if its aim is actually to help the living being towards whom it is aimed, to save it from its own ignorance. For example, one could justifiably use force to restrain a child from harming itself. In the Mahayana doctrine of Skilful Means the idea of the end justifying the means in this way is elaborated.
Task
What do you think a Buddhist view is or should be on the following issues? How should the first precept be interpreted and what other points should be taken into account?
- 1.War
- 1. War
- 2. Use of violence in self-defence
- 3. Abortion
- 4. Self-immolation as a form of protest (used by Vietnamese monks during the Vietnam War)
Further Reading
Sangharakshita The Ten Pillars of Buddhism p.55-63
Peter Harvey An Introduction to Buddhism p.202-5
Peter Harvey An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics p.69
Tricycle Winter 2003 p.38-9