Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The participating in or watching of shows - like boxing - is not cultivating the mind towards enlightenment. The Buddha said that very clearly (as I quoted).
IF you want to do it, is up to you. It's just not bringing you closer to nirvana. I don't think it's necessary to make all these twists and turns to get away from that simple fact.
The question was "Is it wrong to watch/play boxing video games and etc according to Buddhism texts?"
And the answer is simply "yes".
That reminds me of my mother's house. Only religious television and radio programs are allowed to be turned on. Only religious books and reading material are allowed in the house. Her life revolves around the church, various Bible studies, etc. Her entire focus and life are devoted to her religion, and she believes it's wrong to enjoy "worldly things". She would totally agree with you that a religious life demands a hundred percent devotion.
I admire her devotion while shuddering at the thought of restricting my life in such a manner. If I wanted to live like that, I would be a monk. I'm not saying turn off the Buddhism when enjoying yourself, only that as I practice, I discover what I enjoy has changed. In my case, I suspect the first time I caused my opponent to bleed, I'd stop to beg his forgiveness, and he'd slaughter me.
Boxing is by and large an entertainment medium. The participants are willing and eager, and do it to make money and be famous. If two people actually want to fight each other, and the intention is to win a match rather than to actually do harm to the other person (i.e. to a person who doesn't want to fight)... it's a lot like wrestling, kickboxing and martial arts. The combatants want to be the best they can be in their area, to be winners. It's not about harm, but personal glory.
That it promotes violence I'm sure, though not sure to what degree. But is it "wrong" to watch or to play as a video game? I'm not so sure. I don't think it's all that helpful, but neither do I think it's that harmful. It's just another way that we entertain ourselves, that we satisfy that driving need to be happy... and it's no worse than most things on TV or the movies nowadays. You have to draw your own line.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
I've spent too much of my own life playing video games. Generally I approached it as a personal challenge to improve my skills rather than trying to overcome my enemy. However, the aggression and competitiveness of it all still had a tendency to seep in and effect my mind apart from my approach to it. I'm sure my approach was better for me personally than an aggressive me vs. them approach but in the end it would still effect my mind in a negative way.
Oh there's no doubt in my mind that stuff like that affects us, stays with us, sways our habitual mental tendencies and can interfere with, say, our meditation practice. That's why entertainment is cut off for monks and nuns. We just have to decide how far we're going to go with that as lay Buddhists.
I think too often we become attached to what is or is not Buddhist. If Mr. Serenity finds that his Buddhism and his love of fighting can mutually co-exist then more power to him (so to speak) I say.
I've spent too much of my own life playing video games. Generally I approached it as a personal challenge to improve my skills rather than trying to overcome my enemy. However, the aggression and competitiveness of it all still had a tendency to seep in and effect my mind apart from my approach to it. I'm sure my approach was better for me personally than an aggressive me vs. them approach but in the end it would still effect my mind in a negative way.
We played Parcheesi at one point. It is an aggressive board game. I guess we Buddhists can't play board games either.
It's not a question of can or can't, of being a forbidden or not forbidden activity. It's more about being mindful when aggression arises in you as to its causes and effects. By studying these, Buddha taught a way to release us from our suffering. That is all.
I'm pretty sure I know where all this “violence is OK” for Buddhists stuff comes from.
It's related to the myths about Bodhidharma, shaolin & kung fu in China; Zen and the samurai in Japan; and Muay Thai as practised in Buddhist Thailand, as filtered thru a few decades of misleading film, TV and comics.
The problem is that these things are exactly that: myths. Scholars are not even sure if Bodhidharma existed at all let alone teaching kung fu, the biggest Shaolin Temple is in fact a commercial tourist attraction like a Chinese Disneyland where money is more important than metta, most samurai were not the romantic warriors of graphic novels and film but rather vicious thugs who merely appropriated Zen where and when it suited their image, and just because Thais are Buddhist doesn't suddenly condone a violent martial art any more than a bigoted American preacher is truly representative of Jesus' words.
Buddha said that killing or harming others is bad karma, he said that we must work to overcome our basic emotions not pander to them, and he said that we must be aware mindful of the causes and conditions leading to our sufferings and those of others. What that means for participating in violence, watching it, or simply enjoying it, I leave to your own conclusions.
We played Parcheesi at one point. It is an aggressive board game. I guess we Buddhists can't play board games either.
It's not a question of can or can't, of being a forbidden or not forbidden activity. It's more about being mindful when aggression arises in you as to its causes and effects. By studying these, Buddha taught a way to release us from our suffering. That is all.
I'm pretty sure I know where all this “violence is OK” for Buddhists stuff comes from.
It's related to the myths about Bodhidharma, shaolin & kung fu in China; Zen and the samurai in Japan; and Muay Thai as practised in Buddhist Thailand, as filtered thru a few decades of misleading film, TV and comics.
The problem is that these things are exactly that: myths. Scholars are not even sure if Bodhidharma existed at all let alone teaching kung fu, the biggest Shaolin Temple is in fact a commercial tourist attraction like a Chinese Disneyland where money is more important than metta, most samurai were not the romantic warriors of graphic novels and film but rather vicious thugs who merely appropriated Zen where and when it suited their image, and just because Thais are Buddhist doesn't suddenly condone a violent martial art any more than a bigoted American preacher is truly representative of Jesus' words.
Buddha said that killing or harming others is bad karma, he said that we must work to overcome our basic emotions not pander to them, and he said that we must be aware mindful of the causes and conditions leading to our sufferings and those of others. What that means for participating in violence, watching it, or simply enjoying it, I leave to your own conclusions.
Metta to all, may your lives be free of violence
Perhaps, I cannot change the way you look at things, but I see that when you mention martial arts and organized fighting you see just one color. Just violence, and aggression without any benefit. When I look at martial arts I see both the power of good and bad. There is that in everything.
In organized fighting such as martial arts and boxing there is the power to destroy and to build. Buddhism teaches people to be happy with whatever circumstances they may have to deal with, but martial arts teaches you to stand up when you're knocked down, to fight and possibly change your circumstances for the better. To have confidence, and to persevere in the face of adversary. That is a very positive thing.
We need money to advance in this world. Being aggressive, having confidence in yourself is necessary. Martial arts and organized fighting can teach this to people by throwing them in the fire and sharpening and hardening them like a sword. Buddhism in martial arts like Kung Fu, Muay Thai, and Kendo it can only be a good thing. Because it keeps the determination, aggression, and the violence balanced with awareness, meditation, and compassion.
That is what the yin yang is all about, to be able to destroy and to be able to build. So even if the stories about a Buddha teaching martial arts was a myth, I don't think it matters. What matters now is the present moment. Many people get much out of martial arts and fighting. Manny Pacquiao the best boxer of our time is a great example.
He started out as a homeless teen who had to steal cigarettes and sell them to survive. Now look at him, the most successful boxer in the world and a politician. His fighting spirit brought him great things. So there is much possibility for good in organized fighting.
I feel one should look at Buddhism as useful psychology, rather than a set of rules that limits them due to dogmatic beliefs. I've known a monk who claimed to experience samahdi several times (enlightenment), but he had no money, not even an I.D., and even for all he had sacrificed he was still not the most compassionate person I've known. He was impatient and he would call many people "not ethical". I had known many martial art teachers who seemed more compassionate, and patient than him. They took pride on building people up rather than calling them not ethical. They took pride on being able to cultivate the positive, not the negative, even though they taught a fighting art.
So to say that fighting arts are not useful or that Buddhism should not compliment them is being too negative, and mostly just bias due to not enough experience with different fighting styles.
Buddhism and Boxing? Is it wrong to watch/play boxing video games and etc according to Buddhism texts?
Bloody hell my friend. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!! it is NOT wrong according to Buddhist text. Live your life, do what you want to do. Buddha himself wouldnt have mentioned anything about video games or boxing so it cant be in buddhist text. Anything you hear after the 4 noble truths and 8 fold path are just added commentry added over the years. Practice the 8 fold path, be nice, give, practice compassion but have the wisdom to know when not to. meditate, and just live your life.
My points in my first post is being overseen.. Its easy enough to find further up.. There I have a precise reference to the tipitaka as well as my personal view as a lay person..
My points in my first post is being overseen.. Its easy enough to find further up.. There I have a precise reference to the tipitaka as well as my personal view as a lay person..
Ah yes. So you don't accept dancing, singing, or instrumental music? The theater is verboten? We can't listen to stories? Or go to the circus?
Do you think maybe times have changed? Have you seen many "combats of elephants" lately?
Or, are you being selective to only boxing-type combat because you are attached to your own personal preferences?
No. You still ignore my point. If you want to be enlightened, you should stay away from such things. If you just want to go further down the path in this life you can frequent them. The quoted passage is about what Gotama found suitable for a monk.
I do not think times have changed. The essence of the text is easy to comprehend - only the most text loyal interpretation wouldn't make an analogy between "combats of elephants" and other kinds of violent entertainment from fights between animals. Or the list of games - is it only those exact games or is Monopoly also not suitable? Of course it isn't, but one can't make an example of something not yet invented.
In a broader Buddhist context, the words of Buddha makes sense too: Games and entertainment bind us to life, thereby to suffering. We get caught up in the game and forget about the goal: nirvana. To avoid games drawing you further into samsara, avoid games. That is the logic of the Buddha.
I, however, wouldn't dream of quitting games or entertainment. In fact I just played a game (but died and didn't want to start over). As a former boxer and master of jiu-jitsu I'm not personally offended by violent sports. Then again - like any lay person - I'm not set out for enlightenment
No. You still ignore my point. If you want to be enlightened, you should stay away from such things. If you just want to go further down the path in this life you can frequent them. The quoted passage is about what Gotama found suitable for a monk.
I do not think times have changed. The essence of the text is easy to comprehend - only the most text loyal interpretation wouldn't make an analogy between "combats of elephants" and other kinds of violent entertainment from fights between animals. Or the list of games - is it only those exact games or is Monopoly also not suitable? Of course it isn't, but one can't make an example of something not yet invented.
In a broader Buddhist context, the words of Buddha makes sense too: Games and entertainment bind us to life, thereby to suffering. We get caught up in the game and forget about the goal: nirvana. To avoid games drawing you further into samsara, avoid games. That is the logic of the Buddha.
I, however, wouldn't dream of quitting games or entertainment. In fact I just played a game (but died and didn't want to start over). As a former boxer and master of jiu-jitsu I'm not personally offended by violent sports. Then again - like any lay person - I'm not set out for enlightenment
I know this will sound offensive, though I don't mean it to be so. But, there's a difference between one person ignoring a point someone else is making, and the person not making the point clearly. That's why I'm taking exception to your posts in this matter. Let me be clear, when there's a failure in communication, it can be a failure of the speaker or the listener, or both.
What confuses me about what you're saying is that of the list of things in this quotation by Buddha, you appear to feel absolutely free to pick and choose, and it seems as if your picking and choosing is based on "times have changed", even though you say times have not changed.
For example, you are opposed to voluntary boxing as a sport between two people (and if that's what you personally believe, okay), but are trying to compare that to (for example) cock-fighting (which is very common in Buddhist countries such as Thailand). To me there is no comparison. A boxing match (as opposed to a fist fight) is a voluntary sport. In cock fighting, animals are forced to fight, with one often killing the other.
As far as "Games and entertainment bind us to life"...much of what man does, I suppose, binds us to life...or does it? I like to play cards, but when my time of passing comes I doubt I'll cling to life for another round of canasta. Maybe you think we're supposed to sit and meditate 24/7, but I don't. When it's my time to go, I'll accept it. But until then I'd like to get some enjoyment out of life. And I have no apologies for wishing to do so.
To be honest I sense that perhaps you're debating this issue for the sake of the debate...which is okay, but let me know if that's what you're doing.
I've never said, that I am opposed to boxing. I said I've been a boxer myself. I do not try to compare it with cock-fighting. I compared elephant fighting with other animal fighting.
In the text Buddha mentions a lot of entertainment and sports and say that those things are not something he would engage in and criticizes his contemporary recluses for doing so (engaging in it). Among those boxing is specifically mentioned. So as to the question whether in Buddhist texts there is somewhere, where boxing is mentioned as unskillful, the answer must be "yes".
I haven't said the faintest about times changing before you brought it up. The central issue in the text I quoted is as mentioned - stay away from sports/games/shows if you want to reach nirvana. Then you bring forth "combat of elephants" as if the meaning of the text is somehow not relevant because it rests on old-fashioned exemplifications. Then I say that the meaning is still quite clear because we just make analogies - f.ex. from one of the odd games mentioned (in the text) to Monopoly or whatever.
One tiny little pebble of wrong view from Serenity caused such a big ripple in this lake!!! We should not let Mara win homeboys!!! Were da true gangsta practitoners?!!!
One tiny little pebble of wrong view from Serenity caused such a big ripple in this lake!!! We should not let Mara win homeboys!!! Were da true gangsta practitoners?!!!
If I was actually wrong there would not be such a big ripple, and there would not be controversy. There is nothing wrong with Buddhism complimenting boxing and organized fighting. It's just the way you decide to look at it. It's the way someone chooses to view it that makes it either negative or positive.
On the one hand there may be the question: "Is boxing conducive to Buddhist practice?" Since the word conducive is defined as, "Making a certain situation or outcome likely or possible", then I would say the answer is no, boxing is not conducive to Buddhist practice.
On the other hand, if one asks, "Is boxing immoral?" Then I would personally say no, it's not immoral.
And I do think these are two different questions.
Mr. Serenity tries to give the example of Manny Pacquiao. Not a valid example, since he is a rather strict Catholic and we are talking about Buddhist principles here.
I have a feeling that is one thread on this forum where we are not going to come to agreement.
I assume we are talking here about fights using full force. I have to agree that organized fighting can bring someone from the streets and redirect their aggression, build strength, build confidence, etc. There are different strokes for different folks. Argument here if two consenting parties fight without negative emotions toward each other would that result in negative karma based on Buddhist principles. My personal opinion, even if no one gets hurt, if you are a fighter your goal is to finish a fight as quick as possible. That means to knock out a person or cause most damage. Based on that your intention was to cause harm, so that would be classified as negative karma.
I assume we are talking here about fights using full force. I have to agree that organized fighting can bring someone from the streets and redirect their aggression, build strength, build confidence, etc. There are different strokes for different folks. Argument here if two consenting parties fight without negative emotions toward each other would that result in negative karma based in Buddhist principles. My personal opinion, even if no one gets hurt, if you are a fighter your goal is to finish a fight as quick as possible. That means to knock out a person or cause most damage. Based on that your intention was to cause harm, so that would be classified as negative karma.
How can karma be classified as negative before the result has been experienced? Is karma a Buddhist principal or a law of the universe? The karma from boxing could be negative if you wound up with a brain injury. That might make attainment more difficult for sure. If you paid for your childerens education from boxing you might consider the karma to have produced positive results
How can karma be classified as negative before the result has been experienced? Is karma a Buddhist principal or a law of the universe? The karma from boxing could be negative if you wound up with a brain injury. That might make attainment more difficult for sure. If you paid for your childerens education from boxing you might consider the karma to have produced positive results
I assume we are talking here about fights using full force. I have to agree that organized fighting can bring someone from the streets and redirect their aggression, build strength, build confidence, etc. There are different strokes for different folks. Argument here if two consenting parties fight without negative emotions toward each other would that result in negative karma based in Buddhist principles. My personal opinion, even if no one gets hurt, if you are a fighter your goal is to finish a fight as quick as possible. That means to knock out a person or cause most damage. Based on that your intention was to cause harm, so that would be classified as negative karma.
How can karma be classified as negative before the result has been experienced? Is karma a Buddhist principal or a law of the universe? The karma from boxing could be negative if you wound up with a brain injury. That might make attainment more difficult for sure. If you paid for your childerens education from boxing you might consider the karma to have produced positive results
My view is based on my own limited understanding of Tibetan Buddhism, other schools might have different views. Its all in the mind. Results are your thoughts, and in this case it is to cause most damage to another person. Actually hurting someone to me accumulates even more negative karma. There are different levels of karma. Paying for kids boxing is a different case, not saying its all positive, but probably mixed.
'All fear punishment, to all life is dear. Comparing others with oneself, let one neither hurt nor kill.' Dhammapada v.129
'Reflect thus. Is this deed conducive to my harm, or to others' harm, or to that of both? Then this is a bad deed entailing suffering. From such a deed you must desist.' Majjhima Nikaya, I, 61.
Of course these are not moral imperatives, just advice for those seeking liberation.
If you are simply using aspects of Buddhist teaching for other purposes then they can be ignored.
Every homeboy's got a stubborn and deluded mind. Hence when Buddhism talks about 12 dependent origination, the reason for our time in samsara is caused by ignorance! Which made even more sorrowful when one has learnt Buddhism but STILL chooses to follow their own deluded wrong views!
Any serious practitoner would refrain from silly distraction likes computer games which gives the mind fun by playing with violence. boxing, steriod... etc etc... just don't go there.
Comments
I admire her devotion while shuddering at the thought of restricting my life in such a manner. If I wanted to live like that, I would be a monk. I'm not saying turn off the Buddhism when enjoying yourself, only that as I practice, I discover what I enjoy has changed. In my case, I suspect the first time I caused my opponent to bleed, I'd stop to beg his forgiveness, and he'd slaughter me.
That it promotes violence I'm sure, though not sure to what degree. But is it "wrong" to watch or to play as a video game? I'm not so sure. I don't think it's all that helpful, but neither do I think it's that harmful. It's just another way that we entertain ourselves, that we satisfy that driving need to be happy... and it's no worse than most things on TV or the movies nowadays. You have to draw your own line.
It's related to the myths about Bodhidharma, shaolin & kung fu in China; Zen and the samurai in Japan; and Muay Thai as practised in Buddhist Thailand, as filtered thru a few decades of misleading film, TV and comics.
The problem is that these things are exactly that: myths. Scholars are not even sure if Bodhidharma existed at all let alone teaching kung fu, the biggest Shaolin Temple is in fact a commercial tourist attraction like a Chinese Disneyland where money is more important than metta, most samurai were not the romantic warriors of graphic novels and film but rather vicious thugs who merely appropriated Zen where and when it suited their image, and just because Thais are Buddhist doesn't suddenly condone a violent martial art any more than a bigoted American preacher is truly representative of Jesus' words.
Buddha said that killing or harming others is bad karma, he said that we must work to overcome our basic emotions not pander to them, and he said that we must be aware mindful of the causes and conditions leading to our sufferings and those of others. What that means for participating in violence, watching it, or simply enjoying it, I leave to your own conclusions.
Metta to all, may your lives be free of violence
Perhaps, I cannot change the way you look at things, but I see that when you mention martial arts and organized fighting you see just one color. Just violence, and aggression without any benefit. When I look at martial arts I see both the power of good and bad. There is that in everything.
In organized fighting such as martial arts and boxing there is the power to destroy and to build. Buddhism teaches people to be happy with whatever circumstances they may have to deal with, but martial arts teaches you to stand up when you're knocked down, to fight and possibly change your circumstances for the better. To have confidence, and to persevere in the face of adversary. That is a very positive thing.
We need money to advance in this world. Being aggressive, having confidence in yourself is necessary. Martial arts and organized fighting can teach this to people by throwing them in the fire and sharpening and hardening them like a sword. Buddhism in martial arts like Kung Fu, Muay Thai, and Kendo it can only be a good thing. Because it keeps the determination, aggression, and the violence balanced with awareness, meditation, and compassion.
That is what the yin yang is all about, to be able to destroy and to be able to build. So even if the stories about a Buddha teaching martial arts was a myth, I don't think it matters. What matters now is the present moment. Many people get much out of martial arts and fighting. Manny Pacquiao the best boxer of our time is a great example.
He started out as a homeless teen who had to steal cigarettes and sell them to survive. Now look at him, the most successful boxer in the world and a politician. His fighting spirit brought him great things. So there is much possibility for good in organized fighting.
I feel one should look at Buddhism as useful psychology, rather than a set of rules that limits them due to dogmatic beliefs. I've known a monk who claimed to experience samahdi several times (enlightenment), but he had no money, not even an I.D., and even for all he had sacrificed he was still not the most compassionate person I've known. He was impatient and he would call many people "not ethical". I had known many martial art teachers who seemed more compassionate, and patient than him. They took pride on building people up rather than calling them not ethical. They took pride on being able to cultivate the positive, not the negative, even though they taught a fighting art.
So to say that fighting arts are not useful or that Buddhism should not compliment them is being too negative, and mostly just bias due to not enough experience with different fighting styles.
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!! it is NOT wrong according to Buddhist text.
Live your life, do what you want to do. Buddha himself wouldnt have mentioned anything about video games or boxing so it cant be in buddhist text. Anything you hear after the 4 noble truths and 8 fold path are just added commentry added over the years. Practice the 8 fold path, be nice, give, practice compassion but have the wisdom to know when not to. meditate, and just live your life.
Good luck mate.
Best wishes
Do you think maybe times have changed? Have you seen many "combats of elephants" lately?
Or, are you being selective to only boxing-type combat because you are attached to your own personal preferences?
If you want to be enlightened, you should stay away from such things. If you just want to go further down the path in this life you can frequent them. The quoted passage is about what Gotama found suitable for a monk.
I do not think times have changed. The essence of the text is easy to comprehend - only the most text loyal interpretation wouldn't make an analogy between "combats of elephants" and other kinds of violent entertainment from fights between animals. Or the list of games - is it only those exact games or is Monopoly also not suitable? Of course it isn't, but one can't make an example of something not yet invented.
In a broader Buddhist context, the words of Buddha makes sense too: Games and entertainment bind us to life, thereby to suffering. We get caught up in the game and forget about the goal: nirvana.
To avoid games drawing you further into samsara, avoid games.
That is the logic of the Buddha.
I, however, wouldn't dream of quitting games or entertainment. In fact I just played a game (but died and didn't want to start over).
As a former boxer and master of jiu-jitsu I'm not personally offended by violent sports.
Then again - like any lay person - I'm not set out for enlightenment
What confuses me about what you're saying is that of the list of things in this quotation by Buddha, you appear to feel absolutely free to pick and choose, and it seems as if your picking and choosing is based on "times have changed", even though you say times have not changed.
For example, you are opposed to voluntary boxing as a sport between two people (and if that's what you personally believe, okay), but are trying to compare that to (for example) cock-fighting (which is very common in Buddhist countries such as Thailand). To me there is no comparison. A boxing match (as opposed to a fist fight) is a voluntary sport. In cock fighting, animals are forced to fight, with one often killing the other.
As far as "Games and entertainment bind us to life"...much of what man does, I suppose, binds us to life...or does it? I like to play cards, but when my time of passing comes I doubt I'll cling to life for another round of canasta. Maybe you think we're supposed to sit and meditate 24/7, but I don't. When it's my time to go, I'll accept it. But until then I'd like to get some enjoyment out of life. And I have no apologies for wishing to do so.
To be honest I sense that perhaps you're debating this issue for the sake of the debate...which is okay, but let me know if that's what you're doing.
Thanks for listening.
I do not try to compare it with cock-fighting. I compared elephant fighting with other animal fighting.
In the text Buddha mentions a lot of entertainment and sports and say that those things are not something he would engage in and criticizes his contemporary recluses for doing so (engaging in it).
Among those boxing is specifically mentioned. So as to the question whether in Buddhist texts there is somewhere, where boxing is mentioned as unskillful, the answer must be "yes".
I haven't said the faintest about times changing before you brought it up. The central issue in the text I quoted is as mentioned - stay away from sports/games/shows if you want to reach nirvana. Then you bring forth "combat of elephants" as if the meaning of the text is somehow not relevant because it rests on old-fashioned exemplifications. Then I say that the meaning is still quite clear because we just make analogies - f.ex. from one of the odd games mentioned (in the text) to Monopoly or whatever.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html
If I was actually wrong there would not be such a big ripple, and there would not be controversy. There is nothing wrong with Buddhism complimenting boxing and organized fighting. It's just the way you decide to look at it. It's the way someone chooses to view it that makes it either negative or positive.
On the one hand there may be the question: "Is boxing conducive to Buddhist practice?" Since the word conducive is defined as, "Making a certain situation or outcome likely or possible", then I would say the answer is no, boxing is not conducive to Buddhist practice.
On the other hand, if one asks, "Is boxing immoral?" Then I would personally say no, it's not immoral.
And I do think these are two different questions.
Mr. Serenity tries to give the example of Manny Pacquiao. Not a valid example, since he is a rather strict Catholic and we are talking about Buddhist principles here.
I have a feeling that is one thread on this forum where we are not going to come to agreement.
Argument here if two consenting parties fight without negative emotions toward each other would that result in negative karma based on Buddhist principles. My personal opinion, even if no one gets hurt, if you are a fighter your goal is to finish a fight as quick as possible. That means to knock out a person or cause most damage. Based on that your intention was to cause harm, so that would be classified as negative karma.
'All fear punishment, to all life is dear. Comparing others with oneself, let one neither hurt nor kill.' Dhammapada v.129
'Reflect thus. Is this deed conducive to my harm, or to others' harm, or to that of both? Then this is a bad deed entailing suffering. From such a deed you must desist.' Majjhima Nikaya, I, 61.
Of course these are not moral imperatives, just advice for those seeking liberation.
If you are simply using aspects of Buddhist teaching for other purposes then they can be ignored.
Any serious practitoner would refrain from silly distraction likes computer games which gives the mind fun by playing with violence. boxing, steriod... etc etc... just don't go there.