|
|
|
|
Ethicsby Ven. Thubten Gyatso |
|
In reference to Buddha's teaching that one of the most harmful karmas one can perform is to kill one's mother, an ancient Indian Buddhist text asked the hypothetical question, "If an egg is taken from the womb of one woman and placed in the womb of another, and the resulting child kills the surrogate mother, does it incur the heavy karma of killing its mother?" The text then gives the answer, "It is negative karma, but the child will only receive the particularly heavy karma of killing its mother if it kills the woman who donated the egg." Apart from this question and answer being a useful medico-legal point today, I find its remarkable prescience regarding modern obstetric practice to be a good indication of how the wisdom of India was so far ahead of Europe, which Westerners so blindly assume to be the cradle of knowledge. Still on the subject of eggs and wombs, the stream of consciousness coming from the previous life is said to join with the egg close to the time of conception. Although for the first twenty-five weeks the mind is in a state of deep sleep, its subtle activity is essential for embryonic development. Conception, therefore, is when rebirth occurs, not nine months later, and to deliberately abort an embryo or foetus is to incur the karma of killing a human being. It is a mistake to think that an embryo or foetus is a mindless bunch of cells. Whether a woman faced with an unwanted pregnancy has an abortion or not is her own choice, but if she does not have all the information she may make an unwise choice. A fertilised egg within a test-tube may or may not be a human being, depending upon whether a stream of consciousness has entered that egg or not. If there is no mind, destroying it is not the karma of killing. The ancient texts do not mention this situation, but my feeling is that probably a mindstream does not join with the fertilised egg until it is placed within a womb. It is important to understand that Buddha's explanation of karma is simply a description of the subtle cause and effect mechanism that lies behind our entire lives. It is a teaching given for individuals; it is not a system of morality invented to bring order within society. Buddha had the courage to stand before the world and declare that he had seen reality and, out of compassion, for forty years he explained the nature of the mind, the fundamental ignorance that lies behind all suffering, and how this happens. These teachings have withstood the tests of time and of transmission from one culture and language to another many times. There is no divine purpose behind the system of cause and effect that Buddha called karma; it is simply a natural function of the ignorant mind, just as gravity is a natural function of matter. "Now you know," he said at the end of his teachings, "whether or not you benefit from this knowledge by modifying your behaviour is completely up to you." We must have compassion for those who act out of ignorance; hatred of abortionists or of anti-abortionists is a sign of utter human folly. It reminds me of the time when two animal-liberationists visited me and the discussion came around to the subject of rebirth. "You should not hate the scientists," I said, "for the result of their research may be that they will be reborn as rabbits in a laboratory." "Oh, I hope so," they said in unison. "But can't you see," I said, with a degree of frustration, "that the animals for which you now have so much compassion may be ex-scientists?" At the other end of life, death occurs when the body is no longer able to support consciousness and the mindstream separates from the body, usually soon after the breathing stops. To turn off a life-support machine that is artificially maintaining bodily function is not the karma of killing because death will occur as a natural process. For a person who is not on life-support, however, to deliberately end their life, even with the compassionate thought to relieve pain, is a karma of killing because there is ignorance within the motivation - the belief that this is the best thing to do. It is not necessarily the best thing because, for example, a premature death may inadvertently cause someone to be born in a realm of great suffering whereas if they had lived longer they would have exhausted that karma and would have been reborn in a more pleasant place. Only a fully-realised meditator with clairvoyance can tell if someone is heading towards a pleasant or unpleasant rebirth. The best way to help a
dying person is to surround them with an atmosphere of kindness, ease
their physical pain as much as possible without destroying their clarity
of mind, and relieve their worries with wise counsel. There are many
meditational practices that can be done by both the dying person and
their carers that can ease the transition into the next life. Now
is the time to learn these practices; when we are on our deathbed
it will be too late. Gyatso
|
|
|
This teaching is by the Venerable Thubten Gyatso (previously Dr Adrian Feldmann), an Australian monk and old friend now working in Mongolia. One of the senior students of Lama Yeshe, Lama Zopa Rinpoche (and also Geshe Roach) he is currently teaching at the FPMT centre in Ulaan Baatar. These teachings originally appeared in his local English language newspaper in Ulaan Baatar and arereproduced with his permission. Thanks
to Diane Olander (pelmo@got.net),
these teachings first
appeared on the Internet on the website (www.gepeling.org)
of |
|
Teachings
Home | FPMT
| Buddhist
Images | B V Forum | B
V Home | Zamba Home
