Suicide

Wustenfuchs

What is the Buddhist theory on suicide? Were the monks that immolated themselves for a cause in the Vietnam War going against the Buddha's teachings? Is suicide by a lay person for personal reasons "wrong"? How so? Any references? Sorry, not trying to "stir up the pot" so to speak.

federica

The very first precept is To vow to do no harm to any sentient being and that includes one's self.
Suicide is an extremely unwise and unskilful action, due to the repercussions it causes, in both grief and pain for others, and in the wanton destruction of a life.

This said, I know an eminent Theravada monk committed suicide due to unbearable physical pain and agony caused by an intestinal malady.
Jason would be able to provide more accurate information.

As for monks subjecting themselves to immolation - I don't consider tat suicide in the gravest light, personally, but they had reason in bringing attention to a cause in the most dramatic yet non-violent way they could think of.

I am undecided as to the skilful aspect of such an act, but it must have taken extreme calm presence of mind and concentration to have withstood such an ordeal.
I have a great degree of respect and admiration for a person willing to sacrifice their lives for the attention it will bring to the plight of others' suffering.

DhammaDhatu

Wustenfuchs wrote: »

What is the Buddhist theory on suicide? Were the monks that immolated themselves for a cause in the Vietnam War going against the Buddha's teachings?

Hi Wustenfuchs

Buddhists generally undertake a commitment to refrain from taking life. This commitment includes one's own life.

Also, regarding the burning monks, I just learned the cause was not the Vietnam war.

Hòa thượng Thích Quảng Đức<SUP id=ref_anone></SUP> born Lâm Văn Tức in 1897 – died 11 June 1963 was a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk who burned himself to death at a busy Saigon road intersection on 11 June 1963. Thích Quảng Đức was protesting against the persecution of Buddhists by South Vietnam's Ngô Đình Diệm administration. Photos of his self-immolation were circulated widely across the world and brought attention to the policies of the Diệm regime. Malcolm Browne won a Pulitzer Prize for his iconic photo of the monk's death, as did David Halberstam for his written account. After his death, his body was re-cremated, but his heart remained intact. This was interpreted as a symbol of compassion and led Buddhists to revere him as a bodhisattva, heightening the impact of his death on the public psyche.

Thích Quảng Đức's act increased international pressure on Diệm and led him to announce reforms with the intention of mollifying the Buddhists. However, the promised reforms were implemented either slowly or not at all, leading to a deterioration in the dispute. With protests continuing, the Special Forces loyal to Diệm's brother, Ngô Đình Nhu, launched nationwide raids on Buddhist pagodas, seizing the holy heart and causing deaths and widespread damage. Several Buddhist monks followed Thích Quảng Đức's example and burned themselves to death. Eventually, an Armycoup toppled and killed Diệm in November. The self-immolation is widely seen as the turning point of the Vietnamese Buddhist crisis which led to the change in regime.

Wustenfuchs wrote: »

Is suicide by a lay person for personal reasons "wrong"? How so? Any references?

If the reasons are emotional, then the Buddhist view is suicide is unskilful. The reason for this is because suffering can be overcome and both understanding & good trustworthy friends can be found in this world.

The Buddha said to think suicide can bring peace is to 'over-reach'. He said, instead, it is wiser to investigate the causes of our suffering, both within us and, if necessary, outside of us.

How, monks, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, and disgusted by being and they rejoice in (the idea of) non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when the body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does not exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent!' Thus, monks, do some overreach.

How, monks, do those with vision see? Herein a person sees what has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, he practices for the cessation of what has come to be.

Itivuttaka: Held by Views

Kind regards,

DDhatu

Lyssa

I think suicide must be looked at in a case-by-case way. Some suicides are offensive in nature (I'll show them!) whilst some are merely an unskilled attempt to end suffering.

I have trouble seeing the merit in the Vietnamese monks' self-immolations - even if they indirectly promoted peace - because they seem like violent acts committed with the goal evoking horror in witnesses. However, I am not privy to the monks' intent.

Vrusader

Hi Wustenfuchs,

Buddhism teaches us that all actions have consequences and encourages us to choose our actions which will lead to good influences and consequences.

I agree with Lyssa that each case needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis. I do not believe that there is any right or wrong "rules" in Buddhism.

With regards to suicide, we would have to consider why we would want to commit suicide, what that actually achieves and what effects it would have on the people we leave behind.

Consider a very simplisitic example: a teenager recently breaks up with his girlfriend may feel like his life is over. He may feel the desire to commit suicide as a means to escape his emotional pain. Suicide is definitely one option he may take, but it is not necesarily the wisest choice. Although his pain may seem very real right now, if he were to endure, he may find that a short time later, he will fall in love with someone else and be even happier than before. Upon reflection, he would realise that what was so painful at the time, seems rather trival later on.

Furthermore, if he were to commit suicide, what does that actually achieve? He still won't end up being with the girl he likes. It doesn't actually solve the situation. In fact, it would probably cause her more pain since she would know that he died for her. Furthermore, I would imagine that his family and friends would also very sad about it. Thus, rather than doing anything to solve the situation, suicide would only leads to more pain and destruction for everyone involved. And worst of all, there's no going back from such a decision. Thus, in this case, I would suggest that suicide would be an unwise choice.

Consider another example of a terminally ill patient. If a person were to learn with reasonable certainty that they were dying with no hope of cure, and that the last few weeks of their life will be very miserable and painful. Then in this case, what would suicide achieve? In this case, in addition to keeping some dignity and avoid prolonged physical pain and torment, the dying patient may also organise to say goodbye to all family and friends in a dignified manner. Furthermore, it may even spare family and friends the grief of seeing him/her die in agony. In this case, I would suggest that suicide may be a reasonable choice to consider.

With regards to your specific example about self-immolation, again, we have to ask what it achieves. On the one hand, it does achieve the objective in sending a clear message to people to highlight some political/moral agenda in a manner that does not directly hurt other people. However, on the other hand, there are also some negative consequences to such an action. Firstly, I wouldn't consider self-immolation a non-violent action. I would consider it a very brutal and violent action - it just so happens that the violence is directed at yourself. Thus, if the objective is to send a message in a non-violent manner, I would think that self-immolation is a little hypocritical. Secondly, it can send the wrong message to other Buddhists who follow the same agenda: that extreme situations are warranted to achieve their goals. This can be a slippery slope to follow. Thirdly, it can give people the wrong impression about Buddhism itself. People who do not understand much about Buddhism can be detered from Buddhism if they think it is an "extremist religion". Fourthly, other than raising some awareness, it doesn't achieve anything in itself. Sure, some people who witness the suicide may feel more compelled to do something about it. But there are other ways to achieve awareness and also remain alive to continue fighting for the cause. I'm sure there are many more reasons for and against self-immolation.

Finally, I come back to my point that you would need to consider each case on a case-by-case basis. Weigh up the pros and cons of suicide in each case and then make up your own mind about whether it is "right" or "wrong".

However, I think that in general it would usually turn out to be that suicide is an unwise choice and that only in some special cases would suicide be a reasonable choice. In my opinion, a person is always better off alive than dead. Emotional and physical pain will heal with time. If you are alive, you can help other people through similar situations or you can continue to fight for your political/moral agenda. But if you commit suicide, dead is dead - there's nothing more you can do.

Regards,
V

Brigid

Hi, Wustenfuchs,

Suicide is seen as a tragic event in Buddhism for all the reasons stated above. I can attest to the emotional suffering of the survivors as my older sister killed herself two years ago. It was not in an especially violent way, she drank herself to death over a period of about a year and a half. Nonetheless it has been a great challenge to her friends, her husband and children, and other members of my family, especially my oldest sister who found the dead body. I would never choose to kill myself for that reason alone. To inflict that kind of suffering on others is just something I could never do.

Having said that, if I was kidnapped and subjected to great physical/emotional torture to the point where I welcomed death, perhaps my consideration for others would vanish. I don't know. But as everyone has said, this issue must be considered on a case by case basis.

However I do know that all things are impermanent. One day we are acutely suffering and the next we are not. Suicide committed while the mind is in turmoil is a great tragedy because that turmoil could dissolve at any time.

Suicide committed in the way and for the reasons of the Vietnamese monks is an altogether different kettle of fish, in my humble opinion. As DD pointed out, those monks were not protesting the Vietnam war. There were protesting the government's crackdown on Buddhism, the monasteries, and the monks and nuns themselves. I can imagine what that threat must have meant to the monastics. It must have been seen as an attack on the Buddhadhamma itself.

The way they killed themselves, to me, was skillful. I've watched the grainy footage over and over and the expression on the monk's face as the fire ignites and burns never changes. I imagine the monk went quickly into a deep level of meditative concentration and may not have even felt the burning as something painful. I don't know. What I do know is that I saw those images as a child and being catholic and in love with the stories of the saints, those images affected me profoundly. I was horrified but amazed at their composure and sacrifice. I was inspired to develop the same kind of incredible strength and peace in the face of death. I had no idea how to go about it but I wanted it.

Having seen the footage so many times I no longer feel the horror that I did. I know now that it pointed me to a spiritual path that some monastics felt was precious and important enough to sacrifice their lives for. Seeing that monk's face in the flames, his utterly expressionless face, and how no part of his body seemed to move or reflexively try to get away from the fire, is concrete proof to me that meditation is more powerful than anything in this world. More powerful than fire. For my practice that means I've witnessed unshakable proof that what the Buddha taught was true and that's a powerful thing.

So I don't view those suicides as tragedies. They were sacrifices for sure, but as least one witness benefited greatly from them. When I see or hear about those actions now I feel an overwhelming gratitude to those monks and a renewed vigor in my practice.

But that's just me.

In a nutshell, I agree with the others here. I think suicide must be examined case by case. It can be an utterly selfish act or it can be an utterly unselfish act. It all depends upon the intent.

Jason

Wustenfuchs wrote: »

What is the Buddhist theory on suicide? Were the monks that immolated themselves for a cause in the Vietnam War going against the Buddha's teachings? Is suicide by a lay person for personal reasons "wrong"? How so? Any references? Sorry, not trying to "stir up the pot" so to speak.

The short answer is that it depends on the specific circumstances involved. Suicide isn't seen as a skillful action and is strongly discouraged, although there are certain cases recorded in the Pali Canon where monks who committed suicide actually attained awakening and whose actions were considered blameless by the Buddha (e.g, MN 144).

Not knowing the mental states of the monks who immolated themselves during the Vietnam War, however, there's no way to know whether their actions were blameless.

Palzang

And then you have Japanese culture which views seppuku (ritual suicide) as an honorable thing to do when you have "lost face" or otherwise lost your honor, like Yukio Mishima did when he failed to elicit any interest from the Japanese army in his fantasy to overthrow the government. I can't agree with it, but it is part of their culture.

Palzang

Wustenfuchs

Thank you all for taking the time to reply. You've been very helpful.

Speaking from my non-religious (but seeking) Western standpoint I think the monks protest of the Diem government's treatment of Buddhists was a noble cause but unfortunately it didn't change things, still today the Buddhist community is being persecuted in Vietnam, for example the recent events at Bat Nah Monastery.Thanks again for shedding some light on this subject for me. I've got more topics I need some help with, hopefully I won't become annoying!

-Bill