Can a Buddhist drink alcohol in moderation?

[User1249x]

Buddhist

Maybe the identitarian term 'Buddhist' needs to be defined?

It is clear to me that if you choose to continuously drink alcohol you are not a buddhist. I really have nothing more to add beyond that.

To avoid arguments with identitarians, I would simply say if you choose to continuously drink alcohol you are not practising the buddhist path.

I more or less agree, when a person thinks about drinking, arranges drinking and is drinking, he is going the wrong way. Same with any other immoral behavior.

[DooDoot]

I more or less agree

[TRobinson465]

You can be a Buddhist and do anything.

[TRobinson465]

If you want to be a practicing Buddhist who keeps the five precepts is another question though. It would still be a violation of the 5th precept. but I personally dont think breaking one of the precepts disqualifies you as a Buddhist. I know plenty of Buddhists who drink. but they practice and beleive in Buddhism and still recognize what thier doing is against the path so i wouldnt disqualify them as a Buddhist.

[TRobinson465]

Just to be clear. I do not drink. But i don't define Buddhist as having to keep all the precepts diligently (even though i try to myself). If you believe in what the Buddha says, kamma, rebirth, 8 fold path and whatnot but kill ants or drinks every once in a while i would still say you are buddhist (albeit one that needs to improve his/her training).

[manas]

You do not want others to go through the same consequences -- OK.

But they will.

So, why want something you can't control?

My father is an alcoholic. Should I break down into tears every time he drinks?

Hi Individual.

I dont think wishing a substance abuser wellness necessitates anguish when it does not come to be.

If you feel like tears that's OK too.

Substance abuse has been destructive in my family so I am familiar with it. I think there is a middle way between not caring about what you cant control and letting that caring tear you apart.

Metta

Gabe

Goodwill (metta) is healing and helpful; it's the attachment to family members (or anyone dear) that leads to distress. Of course our love for dear ones is inevitably mixed with some attachment (until a more advanced stage of the Path, as I understand it), but it's good to be aware of the difference between the two.

[dylanj]

"Just as the ocean is stable and does not overstep its tideline; in the same way my disciples do not — even for the sake of their lives — overstep the training rules I have formulated for them... This is the second amazing & astounding quality of this Dhamma & Vinaya because of which, as they see it again & again, the monks take great joy in this Dhamma & Vinaya."

Uposatha Sutta

[mrgrtt123]

As for alcohol, then the main problem is not the alcohol itself, or its effects, but whether it then causes you to break your other vows or harm others. You can take a Buddhist vow to not take any intoxicants. If you do that, you will probably restrain from taking alcohol at all in your ordinary life.

[pilgrim]

Anyone can develop any opinion he wishes, but according to the Buddha in the Mahanama sutta AN 8.25, those who have taken refuge are Buddhists, and those who keep the 5 precepts well are virtuous Buddhists. Almost every Buddhist I know do not keep the precepts to perfection but I would consider them as somewhat virtuous.

"Mahanama, inasmuch as one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, has gone to the Sangha for refuge; in that way, Mahanama, one is a lay follower."

"Then, venerable sir, in what way is a lay follower virtuous?"

"Mahanama, inasmuch as a lay follower abstains from destroying living beings; abstains from taking what is not given; abstains from sexual misconduct; abstains from lying; and abstains from wine, liquor and intoxicants that are causes for heedlessness; in that way, Mahanama, a lay follower is virtuous."

Keeping the 5 precepts perfectly makes one virtuous in the context of the 5 precepts only. One can still be a pretty nasty job. For eg, a drug pusher does not break the precepts. Neither does a prisoner in solitary confinement.

[Kim OHara]

Anyone can develop any opinion he wishes, but according to the Buddha in the Mahanama sutta AN 8.25, those who have taken refuge are Buddhists, and those who keep the 5 precepts well are virtuous Buddhists. Almost every Buddhist I know do not keep the precepts to perfection but I would consider them as somewhat virtuous.

"Mahanama, inasmuch as one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, has gone to the Sangha for refuge; in that way, Mahanama, one is a lay follower."

"Then, venerable sir, in what way is a lay follower virtuous?"

"Mahanama, inasmuch as a lay follower abstains from destroying living beings; abstains from taking what is not given; abstains from sexual misconduct; abstains from lying; and abstains from wine, liquor and intoxicants that are causes for heedlessness; in that way, Mahanama, a lay follower is virtuous."

Keeping the 5 precepts perfectly makes one virtuous in the context of the 5 precepts only. One can still be a pretty nasty job. For eg, a drug pusher does not break the precepts. Neither does a prisoner in solitary confinement.

The Eightfold Noble Path extends the Precepts, and the drug pusher will fail the "Right Livelihood" step.

As for prisoners, in solitary confinement or not, they may be perfectly virtuous people, Buddhist or not. Just think about what was done to Nelson Mandela on Robben Island - https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... la/prison/ - or to Tibetan monks by China.


Kim