FAQs

Dear Readers,

If you have any questions pertaining to the Buddhist Five Precepts, please email them to [email protected]. Venerable Faxun will be answering your questions periodically, and answers will be posted on this page.

Thank you!

1st Precept: Abstain from killing

2nd Precept: Abstain from stealing

Can one steal out of poverty?

3rd Precept: Abstain from sexual misconduct

Is this precept (sexual misconduct) still relevant in contemporary society? How should we understand the precept of sexual misconduct? What if one chooses sex outside of marriage?
Most of my friends are sexually active. If I don’t act like them, they will think I am odd.
Many of my friends, including myself, have two or three sexual partners. How do you suggest I can keep the Third Precept?

4th Precept: Abstain from untruthful speech

5th Precept: Abstain from consuming intoxicating drinks and drugs

The taking of precepts

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Many business people may think that it is impossible to keep the precept of not lying. However, consider this. If a business person is truthful in his/her claims and perhaps makes a little less on a honest transaction, the chances are that by creating trust, he/she would have gained a loyal client. In other words, being truthful does not conflict with doing business and can instead bring about long term success. I once read of a very successful businessman in Malaysia, whose success was due to his truthfulness and sincerity. The story goes like this…

After the businessman entered into a contract, the price of the necessary raw materials went up. If he stuck to the contract price, he would have lost money. Since there was no way to change it, the only choice would have been to “cheat” with cheaper, substandard materials. However, the businessman decided to courageously tell his customer the truth about the situation. His truthfulness and sincerity touched the customer, who then agreed to an adjustment of the contract pricing. The businessman is now one of Malaysia’s most successful.

Let us now take a look at the state of affairs in the consumer market today. There are many shoddy and fake goods that have harmed consumers. The Chinese use the term “black heart” (黑心产品) to describe such products. Just to quote an example, the 2008 Sanlu Milk incident in China killed four babies and left thousands ill. Business people who want to maximise profits produce such so-called “black hearted” products. These are harmful and are detrimental to public safety.

There are always ways and means to make money ethically. Therefore, we should always strive to be truthful and honest about our products or services, and the fourth precept sets out the guideline for us.

See the entire answer

An Australian devotee once told me she used to drink with her mum. According to her, it is part of Australian culture to drink; to drink alone means you are alcoholic, but drinking with someone is just being sociable.

Are we being unnecessarily prudish if we do not join in what “normal” people do? Is what “normal” people do always correct? In the Kalama Sutta, the Buddha advised us not to follow blindly what others do, but to use our wisdom to inquire. Only when we are satisfied that an action benefits us and others, then we proceed.

A sister nun of mine was studying in a university in Japan. Once she was invited to attend a function in her faculty, where she was offered a glass of wine by her professor. She would have appeared rude if she did not accept the offer, but she courageously decided to do so politely anyway. She confidently told her professor that since her ordination, she had promised the Buddha that she would not drink from then on. Her professor not only did not feel offended, he was very impressed by her courage and honesty, and got her a cup of fruit juice instead.

As the world globalises, there is greater acceptance and understanding of other cultures and behavioural systems. We need to learn to express our choice in a polite way. If we are clear about why we are upholding the precepts and of what we are doing, we can speak with confidence and sincerity. Our friends will accept our differences and respect the choices we make.

See the entire answer

There is a segment of the society which feels victimised by the modern economic system. They feel that multi-national companies such as Internet providers, phone companies, banks, chain stores, etc, have been ripping consumers off by charging high processing fees and interest rates, among other unjustified actions, and compelling consumers to contribute to their coffers. Some have argued that we have the right to steal for survival and have even outlined “ethics” for stealing – to take only what one needs, from multi-national companies who can afford the losses.

To reply to this, let us first take a look at the impact of modern advertising.

Most of us are exposed to a myriad of commercial advertisement – in trains/buses, along the highways, and on various media platforms such as the Internet, TV and radio. However, we often do not reflect on the impact that these have on us. Quite un-mindfully, we tend to believe what the advertisers say and we literally buy into this consumerist system. In reality, these commercial messages compel us to believe that we must possess certain things and if we do not, we are deemed inadequate or marginalised. Our unlimited wants are misinterpreted as basic needs, and often with undesirable outcomes. We start to believe that we need certain things when in fact we only want more.

The precept of not stealing sets the boundaries; it stops one from taking possessions which belong to others. Once we hit the boundaries, we bounce back to check our mind and action. The practice of mindfulness enables us to examine our mind. In fact it is our mind - the state of wanting something we do not have - that makes us feel poor, unhappy and dissatisfied. If we are not mindful, the discontented mind will compel us to steal. By looking deeply into ourselves, we will be able to find the underlying reasons which make us unhappy. Seeing the state of wanting and grasping, how it makes us and others suffer, we naturally begin to drop the thought of “wanting.” The only way out of poverty is through cultivation, to overcome the undesirable state of mind which traps us in inadequacy. Only when our evil roots – wanting, ill-will, and ignorance – are up-rooted, will we feel rich within and be truly happy. Only then will we become free and not be a slave to consumerism. The precept of not stealing also addresses what I will call the “sickness” of contemporary culture. It emphasises social responsibility.

Not only should we respect the property of others, but we should also not exploit them by enriching ourselves at the expense of others. In a capitalist culture, trying to maximise our profits fans our greed. This precept reminds us to be mindful and not become a slave to greed.

Stealing is never an answer to poverty or want. If we believe that it is alright to steal, we are creating insecurity and chaos. How would you feel living in a society full of thieves? Applying the “take from the rich” concept, the losers in the end are the consumers. Consider this – by stealing from a giant chain store – although they could probably write off the losses – the cost would subsequently be passed on to other consumers.

This is unfair to innocent consumers and also creates social disharmony and insecurity. According to Buddhism, if one is poor, he or she cannot become rich by taking others’ possessions. The Law of Karma and its results show that we are responsible for our actions and the results we experience due to them. In fact, if we steal, we are planting the seeds of poverty. If we constantly feel poor, such a mental state will certainly lead us to poverty! Conversely, generosity and sharing our belongings are the causes of wealth.

In the Parinirvana Sutta (佛遗教经), the Buddha said, “Contentment is the greatest happiness.” If we are contented, even if we sleep on the floor, we are happy; if we are not contented, even if we are in heavenly realms enjoying luxury, we feel dissatisfied. Ajahn Brahm, an Australian monk, goes to prisons to teach meditation. One day after a meditation session, the inmates asked him to share his story as a monastic. He told the inmates that there are walls surrounding the monastery just like walls surround a jail. Monastics wake up early, have only one meal a day and stop eating after mid-day. They do not have coffee breaks, and eat only what is donated to them. They sleep on simple beds, without TV, radio or newspapers. After hearing his story, the inmates told Ajahn that it is better for him to live with them in jail! Monastics live simple and frugal lives, yet they feel happy within. Regardless of being rich or poor, the mind is crucial.

See the entire answer

There are various opinions among the different Buddhist traditions with regards to this question. The Buddha, himself, was not a vegetarian. Traditionally, Theravadin monastics live on alms food; they receive whatever is put into their alms bowl. In other words, they have no control over their diet. However, in the Jivaka Sutta (MN 55), it is mentioned that the Buddha only allowed meat to be taken on the condition that it is pure in three aspects – that the monastic:

did not see the animal being killed
did not hear the cry of the animal being killed
did not suspect that the animal was killed specifically for the monk/nun

Although these conditions technically apply only to monastics, they are often used as a reasonable guide by devout lay people. The Mahayanists relate these three types of “purified meat” (三淨肉) to the nurturing of compassion. If we see the suffering of the dying animal, we should be compassionate towards them and try to relieve their suffering. It is against the principle of compassion if we do not help them, and indeed, even go ahead to consume their meat.

Exceptions have also appeared in Tibetan Buddhism. In Tibet, people traditionally lived as nomads and it was, and probably still is, difficult to grow vegetables in the high altitudes, making it difficult to be vegetarian. Hence, monastics from the Theravadin and Tibetan traditions are generally not vegetarian.

When Buddhism spread to China, the idea of compassion was developed further in the Chinese Mahayanist tradition, and the Bodhisattva vow of not taking meat was strongly emphasised and made compulsory. Chinese Mahayanist monastics are therefore vegetarian, and so are many devotees who have taken the Bodhisattva precepts.

Today, more and more Theravadin monastics are encouraging vegetarianism, and His Holiness the 14^th Dalai Lama also encourages Tibetan monastics living outside Tibet, and who have control over their diet, to be vegetarian.

In my opinion, vegetarianism should be encouraged, but not imposed on others.

See the entire answer

(Taken from Ven. Sangye Khadro’s article, Mandala Magazine, June 2007)

There is a lot of debate within Buddhism about this issue. There are some Buddhists who are vegetarian (no meat or fish), and some who are vegans (no animal products at all, including dairy products and eggs). And there are some Buddhists who do eat meat.

What did the Buddha himself say about eating meat? Well, it seems that he said different things at different times. This may sound like he contradicted himself, but the Tibetans say that the Buddha was a very skilful teacher who understood the minds and needs of his listeners and would teach them accordingly. So to some, the Buddha said it was okay to eat meat, provided that they did not kill the animal themselves, or order it to be killed. But to others, the Buddha said that if you are a follower of the bodhisattva path, and truly compassionate, you should not eat meat. To these people he spoke of the harmful consequences of doing so.

In fact, there is an entire chapter in the Lankavatara Sutra (a Mahayana sutra which has been translated into English) in which the Buddha spoke very strongly against meat-eating. So as I understand it, the Buddha did not actually forbid his followers to eat meat, but left it up to each person to decide this issue for him/herself. In a way, that was compassionate of the Buddha, because some people live in places and conditions where it would be extremely difficult to abstain from meat, and if they had to be vegetarian in order to be Buddhist, they probably would not be able to do it.

Also, some people are unable to be strictly vegetarian because of their physical make-up or their health. His Holiness the 14^th Dalai Lama is an example of this. He tried to be vegetarian, but his health suffered and his doctors advised him to eat meat. But I am sure he eats as little as possible, because in his teachings he often encourages people (especially the Tibetans, who are quite fond of meat) to either give up or at least cut down on the consumption of meat. His advice seems to be working, because I have noticed in the last few years an increase in the number of Tibetans who have given up meat, as well as Tibetan-run organisations promoting vegetarianism. I even heard that Sera Monastery in South India is a meat-free zone!

See the entire answer

(taken from Thich Nhat Hanh, For a Future to be Possible, 2007, Appendix 1, p109-110)

Thay [Thich] Nhat Hanh advises us not to drink any alcohol, if possible. If you still have a strong inclination to drink, please do so mindfully. Look deeply into the conditions of your liver, your heart, and the fact that humankind is wasting a lot of grain and fruit making alcohol instead of feeding other humans. Meditating in this way will lead us to feeling uncomfortable when drinking any amount of alcohol.

If you are not ready to stop drinking entirely, please take the first four mindfulness trainings and try to drink mindfully until you are ready to stop. Thay [Thich] Nhat Hanh advises those who take the Fifth Mindfulness Training [Fifth Precepts] not to drink at all, even one glass of wine or beer a week. French authorities advise their citizens that one glass of alcohol is okay, but that three is saying hello to the damage that an accident can cause. But how can you have a second or third glass if you have not had the first?

Under normal conditions, we may drink one or two glasses of wine from time to time. But in moments of despair, we might have five, six, or seven glasses in order to forget our sorrows. This can lead to alcohol abuse. A lovely grandmother on a retreat in England asked this question, and I told her, “You are a moderate drinker, but are you sure all your sons, daughters, and grandchildren are like you? If during one or two moments of despair they gradually drink more and more and become alcoholic and destroy themselves physically and mentally, who would be responsible? Haven’t you participated partly in that process? If you keep the Fifth Mindfulness Training now, you may be the torch for the future generations of your grandchildren. You keep the mindfulness trainings as a bodhisattva and not as an order that you are forced to obey.”

See the entire answer

Chan Master Sheng Yen: According to the Buddhist teaching of cause and effect, since one has not realised the truth of all phenomena, or is not liberated from life and death, suicide is pointless. When one’s karmic retribution is not exhausted, death by suicide only leads to another cycle of rebirth. This is why Buddhists do not support suicide, and instead, encourage constructive living, using this life to diligently practise good, thus changing the present and the future for the better.

His Holiness the 14^th Dalai Lama: Some people commit suicide; they seem to think that there is suffering simply because there is the human life, and that by cutting off the life there will be nothing... But, according to the Buddhist viewpoint, that’s not the case; your consciousness will continue. Even if you take your own life, this life, you will have to take another body that again will be the basis of suffering. If you really want to get rid of all your suffering, all the difficulties you experience in your life, you have to get rid of the fundamental cause (greed, hatred and delusion) that gives rise to the aggregates that are the basis of all suffering. Killing yourself isn’t going to solve your problem.

Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda: Taking one’s own life under any circumstances is morally and spiritually wrong. Taking one’s own life owing to frustration or disappointment only causes greater suffering. Suicide is a cowardly way to end one’s problems of life. A person cannot commit suicide if his mind is pure and tranquil. If one leaves this world with a confused and frustrated mind, it is most unlikely that he would be born again in a better condition. Suicide is an unwholesome or unskillful act since it is encouraged by a mind filled with greed, hatred and delusion. Those who commit suicide have not learnt how to face their problems, how to face the facts of life, and how to use their mind in a proper manner. Such people have not been able to understand the nature of life and worldly conditions.

Ven. S. Dhammika, Good Question Good Answer, 2008, p26: When one person murders another they might do it out of fear, anger, fury, greed or some other negative emotions. When a person kills himself or herself they might do it for very similar reasons or because of other negative emotions like despair or frustration. So whereas murder is the result of negative emotions directed towards another, suicide is the result of negative emotions directed towards oneself, and therefore would be breaking the Precept. However, someone who is contemplating suicide or has attempted suicide does not need to be told that what they are doing is wrong. They need our support and our understanding. We have to help them understand that killing themselves is perpetuating their problem, surrendering to it, not solving it.

See the entire answer

Dear Readers,

If you have any questions pertaining to the Buddhist Five Precepts, please email them to [email protected]. Venerable Faxun will be answering your questions periodically, and answers will be posted on this page.

Thank you!

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply