Brahmajāla Sutta vs martial arts?

mithril

So i came across this:

"Or he might say: 'Whereas some honorable recluses and brahmins, while living on food offered by the faithful, attend unsuitable shows, such as: shows featuring dancing, singing, or instrumental music; theatrical performances; narrations of legends; music played by hand-clapping, cymbals, and drums; picture houses; acrobatic performances; combats of elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, goats, rams, cocks and quails; stick-fights, boxing and wrestling, sham-fights, roll-calls, battle-arrays, and regimental reviews — the recluse Gotama abstains from attending such unsuitable shows.'
[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html]

Did the Buddha really advise his monks to refrain from taking part in martial art? Why would he find this unsuitable?

Sabre

hi mitrhil

Not only did he advise his monks from refraining from participating, if you read closely it means he also advices them not to attend to them. He says this because it is not suitable for practicing the Dhamma as a monk. For example could you imagine the Dalai Lama yelling at a wrestling match? Monks simply don't care about those things.

But as a lay person I think it is fine to participate in martial arts if you don't just do it out of the intention of hurting the other. If it was absolutely against the Dhamma it would be included in the first five precepts.

With metta
Sabre

DhammaDhatu

For example could you imagine the Dalai Lama yelling at a wrestling match?

I kind of could, actually. He certainly has yelled & wrestled enough about Dorje Sugden and now about Osama Bin Laden.

:-/

DhammaDhatu

Did the Buddha really advise his monks to refrain from taking part in martial art? Why would he find this unsuitable?

For the Buddha, a monk must exemplify complete non-violence & safety.

For a monk to learn "fighting skills" does not accord with renunciation & harmlessness.

Kind regards

Monks, even if bandits were to savagely sever you, limb by limb, with a double-handled saw, even then, whoever of you harbors ill will at heart would not be upholding my Teaching.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.021x.budd.html

Vincenzi

think MMA. some martial ARTS are allowed; Kung Fu was invented by a buddhist monk so that other monks could practice (they were fat and there were many stealing).

DhammaDhatu

not by the Buddha

wearing a robe does not make one a "bhikkhu"

a bkikkhu is a state of mind; of renunciation, harmlessness and fearlessness

fivebells

Did the Buddha really advise his monks to refrain from taking part in martial art? Why would he find this unsuitable?

You have to look at the context. He's saying the tathgatha doesn't seek entertainment or self-aggrandizement.

The bit in the sutra about the tathagatha quivering at the suffering of any being is also relevant to combat, but also doesn't entirely preclude it...

mithril

So i guess it is against the teachings?

I was asking since i remember reading a story by some monk (don't exactly remember, it was a while ago) and every time he had to sleep in a dangerous place he never thought "if a tiger came i will defend myself in this way" or "if a ghost should come i will defend myself like this". He was always just looking to himself and seeing he was worried but he'd go through dangerous places just the same, and later recognizing that what he worried about actually never really happened since he was thinking kind thoughts regarding the being he feared (or so he believed).

So i'm thinking if you were learning material arts you would probably do this thinking you can defend against an attacker by force instead of kindness only, and i wonder if this would go with the teachings, as much as i have read it really wouldn't work together.

But really on the other hand - most of the movies i've seen seem to think that martial art is a major part of Buddhism. Also, i was thinking Shaolin Monastery, they practice material arts there as well afaik... Dunno, there is just this huge association between martial arts and Buddhism, but the teachings seem to be quite clear on that the Buddha disagrees?

+ there is that entertainment aspect, frowned on by the Buddha as well...

Mr_Serenity

Martial arts is the science of making the body a tool of war (it is an art of war). Why would you ever learn how to punch properly if you will never punch? I would think a good Buddhist monk should try to deflect issues with words. But a good martial artist has a gun at the center of their core, full of fire, and thunder. They may have an aura like calm water, but whenever they need it, they will not hesitate to physically defend themselves or another.

That is what martial arts is for, to learn how to fight. Of course once can use it for fitness, and for fun, and for building your own confidence, but then are you really learning it at an academic level? To learn martial arts properly you have to imagine how it is used in a practical sense, otherwise you're learning glorified dancing.

So with that in mind, I look at the yin and yang. There cannot be all good in one thing. Violence is not all bad. Sometimes violence is the right thing to do.
This is how the Shaolin monks think, yin and yang. Two sides, most likely they will never fight. But if they need to, they will and there is nothing wrong with that. Because that is the natural balance of the world. Even animals are violent when necessary, and originally this is where the Shaolin monks learned their arts from, animals.

fivebells

So i guess it is against the teachings?

Not prohibited. It happens a lot less for someone who practices a lot, and they have a different relationship to it. Actually, it depends who you ask. The Chinese Mahayana version of this sutra that I've seen is explicitly proscriptive (E.g., "Sons of the Buddha must not eat meat! To do so causes immeasurable sin!") But I think that is a corruption, as the Pali sutra conveys a different message, to my intepretation.

Look at the broad context of the sutra. He hears some people presumably arguing about his teachings, and he exhorts his followers not to become angry or elated at criticism or praise of the three jewels, because to do so would cloud their minds. Then he gives a long list of ethical behaviors he practices, but denigrates them as trivial matters which an uninstructed person would praise him for. They're obviously not the main issue for him. Then he gives a long list of views which he says are wrong, but he says they're wrong because they indicate a state of mind dominated by dependent origination ("conditioned by contact.") He's saying that these ideas and behaviors aren't where it's at, that the end of dependent origination is where it's really at.

Taken that way, the list of ethical behaviors are actually a description of where the practice leads, not a prescription of prerequisites for success in the practice. But if you're practicing violence, it probably indicates a defilement which the practice will uproot at some stage, if you go far enough with it.

aura

I had always automatically equated serious martial arts practice with violence and had therefore always regarded it as inappropriate, but Fivebell's point about someone who practices a lot having a different relationship to it is an excellent one well taken.
I met a serious Ch'an practitioner who trained with the Shaolin and said the only opponent ever engaged was oneself- one's own physical, mental, and spiritual indolence! Upon observation that appeared to be the case.
I also met a serious practitioner whose martial arts practice consisted of wandering the streets of the hardest part of the city late at night with no weapon and physically disarming whatever muggers would attack and try to rob him. He had a large collection of weaponry that he had removed from the hands of muggers "so they'd not harm themselves or others." It was his way of helping the truly lost find the path.

Vincenzi

@aura

indeed, there are very skillfull ways to disharm someone. but seeking danger is not a good advice.

Mr_Serenity

I also met a serious practitioner whose martial arts practice consisted of wandering the streets of the hardest part of the city late at night with no weapon and physically disarming whatever muggers would attack and try to rob him. He had a large collection of weaponry that he had removed from the hands of muggers "so they'd not harm themselves or others." It was his way of helping the truly lost find the path.

That's hilarious! Sounds like him and I would get along. I jog at late hours in Los Angeles streets all the time because people know just by looking at me that I'm the wrong dude to pick a fight with. It be like trying to pick a fight with a wild tiger. I know how to disarm blades, guns, fight multiple guys at once, you name it. And even if someone *did try to pick a fight with me, it be good practice. That's exactly how I look at it. That's why I run whenever I want.
Because I'm the last guy anyone wants to pick a fight with.