Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Sep 22, 2012 7:40 am

danieLion wrote:
Hanzze wrote:Are you a marijuana doctor or a just a cannabies user?
your question is inappropriate...you ought to be ashamed of yourself
Well, since this thread started as a question about medical uses of marijuana, it seems appropriate. Presumably no-one would use the obviously valid clinical uses of narcotics such as morphine as an argument for recreational use. I would hope that the same was true for other drugs such as marijuana or alcoholic beverages.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Hanzze » Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:34 am

danieLion wrote:
Hanzze wrote:Are you a marijuana doctor or a just a cannabies user?
your question is inappropriate...you ought to be ashamed of yourself
You raise a very importand point. Regardless if informations we might give are useful or not useful for others, the underlying intention we give such informations has direct impact on one self. How ever, its better to be very ashamed one time as to continue to act out of not so clean intentions. If somebody searches for informations, he will get them in this or in that way. So no need to worry that much about others in regard of information. To remember other on good conduct is a very wholesome deed.
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:22 am

mikenz66 wrote:
danieLion wrote:
Hanzze wrote:Are you a marijuana doctor or a just a cannabies user?
your question is inappropriate...you ought to be ashamed of yourself
Well, since this thread started as a question about medical uses of marijuana, it seems appropriate....
:anjali:
Mike
The OP is:
Hi,

I've just wondering if people working for a legal marijuana dispensary have violated the 5th precept ? What makes it different from selling alcohol is that alcohol is clearly intoxicants, while in this case it's for medical uses only. What do you think ?

Much metta,
zolek
Nothing here about recreational use. Therefore, the question is :offtopic:. Furthermore, it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack (not to mention an extension of Hanzze's puritanism).

User avatar
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Hanzze » Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:44 am

Maybe it fits to the OP Question to much? :tongue:

It's all about intention and the highest intention to get free from every addiction, not to solve just a disliked current problem (the worldy way to be able to continue as usual)

But to answer: "I don't like to answer your question" is also an answer.
Or: "Yes." or "No, but I was and it helped me" or "No"

We feel aversion in a question if it touches something we don't like to be touched or endangered. Don't take it peronal, it's just about the meaning of good livelihood and precepts and not about you or me.
The first simile:

Two strong men have grabbed another man by the arms and are dragging him to a pit of burning embers. The Buddha notes, "Wouldn't the man twist his body this way and that?"

The second simile:

A man searching for fruit climbs a tree to eat his fill and to stuff his garments with fruit to take home. While he is there, another man searching for fruit comes along. The second man can't climb the tree but he has an axe, so he chops the tree down. If the first man doesn't quickly get out of the tree, he may break an arm or a leg, or even die.

The third simile:

A person searching for milk tries to get milk out of a cow by twisting its horn. Another person searching for milk tries to get milk out of the cow by pulling at its udder.

and more about Faith In Awakening
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6622
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:32 am

danieLion wrote: Nothing here about recreational use. Therefore, the question is :offtopic:. Furthermore, it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack (not to mention an extension of Hanzze's puritanism).
nail + hammer = hitting nail on the _________.
but the main point is how do you know, are you a doctor with relevant qualifications or someone with a vested interest to smoke the green stuff?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Hanzze » Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:01 am

Well I would not maintain such a thought like "he could be a smoker of ..." and even so, its up to the individual, but actually that shows another aspect why it would be not the best to walk on the edge as many people could misunderstand good intentions and there are always other alternatives.

One needs to look also that he does not to Associate With The Unwise:
Not To Associate With The Unwise Is Most Blissful.

Fools or ignorant people not only injure themselves, but also those around them. If we associate with them, we are apt to follow their ways and so harm ourselves mentally as well as bodily, because all troubles or fear arise from ignorance or foolishness. Even if we do not practise their methods, the more fact of associating with them will harm our reputation; in the same way that a banana leaf is contaminated if it is used to wrap up a piece of rotten fish or meat. The leaf is dirty and smelly even after the fish or rotten meat is thrown away.

one of the Mangalas
So even we have a way to help others, but it is generally not regarded as something wholsesome, we would need to make it discret and maybe unseen.
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:53 am

Cittasanto wrote:
danieLion wrote: Nothing here about recreational use. Therefore, the question is :offtopic:. Furthermore, it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack (not to mention an extension of Hanzze's puritanism).
nail + hammer = hitting nail on the _________.
but the main point is how do you know, are you a doctor with relevant qualifications or someone with a vested interest to smoke the green stuff?
These questions are inappropriate because they cross the public/private social contract we've all implicitly agreed to. I've never once asked someone here in the forums what they do for a living or what their consumption habits are. Why? Because my sila is such that I know better than to do something that unethical.

The efficacy of cannabis is irrelevant to my personal life, and stands on its own merits.

That's why I said it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack.

And am I to go by your opinion of what "relevant qualifications" are?

The hallmark of a true puritan is that no matter how hard they try to conceal it they still reveal the fact that they think they know better than you--and the evidence.

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:55 am

Hanzze wrote:Well I would not maintain such a thought like "he could be a smoker of ..." and even so, its up to the individual, but actually that shows another aspect why it would be not the best to walk on the edge as many people could misunderstand good intentions and there are always other alternatives.

One needs to look also that he does not to Associate With The Unwise:
Not To Associate With The Unwise Is Most Blissful.

Fools or ignorant people not only injure themselves, but also those around them. If we associate with them, we are apt to follow their ways and so harm ourselves mentally as well as bodily, because all troubles or fear arise from ignorance or foolishness. Even if we do not practise their methods, the more fact of associating with them will harm our reputation; in the same way that a banana leaf is contaminated if it is used to wrap up a piece of rotten fish or meat. The leaf is dirty and smelly even after the fish or rotten meat is thrown away.

one of the Mangalas
So even we have a way to help others, but it is generally not regarded as something wholsesome, we would need to make it discret and maybe unseen.
Nietzsche wrote:"Oh, who will tell us the entire history of narcotics?--It is nearly the history of 'culture', our so-called higher culture!"
The Gay Science (86)

User avatar
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Hanzze » Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:07 am

I am not sure if associating with Nietzsche is amoung what Buddha had meant with it.

But if you prefer Nietsche than see my question in association which his quote:
„In der That, man thut gut (und klug), zur Erklärung davon, wie eigentlich die entlegensten metaphysischen Behauptungen eines Philosophen zu Stande gekommen sind, sich immer erst zu fragen: auf welche Moral will es (will er –) hinaus?“

– Jenseits von Gut und Böse
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6622
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:07 pm

danieLion wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
danieLion wrote: Nothing here about recreational use. Therefore, the question is :offtopic:. Furthermore, it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack (not to mention an extension of Hanzze's puritanism).
nail + hammer = hitting nail on the _________.
but the main point is how do you know, are you a doctor with relevant qualifications or someone with a vested interest to smoke the green stuff?
These questions are inappropriate because they cross the public/private social contract we've all implicitly agreed to. I've never once asked someone here in the forums what they do for a living or what their consumption habits are. Why? Because my sila is such that I know better than to do something that unethical.

The efficacy of cannabis is irrelevant to my personal life, and stands on its own merits.

That's why I said it's a slippery slope to an ad hominem attack.

And am I to go by your opinion of what "relevant qualifications" are?

The hallmark of a true puritan is that no matter how hard they try to conceal it they still reveal the fact that they think they know better than you--and the evidence.
Just to clarify (here)
I was being facetious :) I wouldn't call it unethical like it breaks an explicit code of conduct but it is pointless, fallacious, and discourteous, like trying to be a teacher to people. but couldn't think of better way to put it earlier...

relevant qualification = evidence external to your own opinion, or references showing how you came to such a conclusion. which I believe is all that is reasonably asked in most threads.
anyway enough of my little metta-discussion.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 am

Whatever brahmans & contemplatives
describe purity in terms of views & learning,
describe purity in terms of precepts & practices,
describe purity in terms of manifold ways:
none of them, living there in that way,
I tell you, have crossed over birth & aging.
-Sutta Nipata, 5.7: Nanda's Questions (Nanda-manava-puccha).

[Nanda-manava-puccha/Snp 1084/PTS 208:

Ye kecime samaṇabrāhmaṇā se (nandāti bhagavā)
Diṭṭhena sutenāpi1- vadanti suddhiṃ,
Silabbatenāpi vadanti suddhiṃ
Anekarūpena vadanti suddhiṃ
Kiñcāpi te bhagavā tattha yathā carantā
Nātariṃsu jātijaranti brūmi
.]

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by mikenz66 » Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:15 am

Sure, unlike us, an arahant has no need to make an effort to maintain precepts:
An arahant monk whose mental fermentations are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis, cannot possibly transgress these five principles. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to intentionally deprive a living being of life. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to take, in the manner of stealing, what is not given. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to engage in sexual intercourse. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to tell a conscious lie. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to consume stored-up sensual things as he did before, when he was a householder.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:anjali:
Mike

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:19 am

mikenz66 wrote:Sure, unlike us, an arahant has no need to make an effort to maintain precepts:
An arahant monk whose mental fermentations are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis, cannot possibly transgress these five principles. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to intentionally deprive a living being of life. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to take, in the manner of stealing, what is not given. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to engage in sexual intercourse. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to tell a conscious lie. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to consume stored-up sensual things as he did before, when he was a householder.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:anjali:
Mike
Is the Pāli for "to consume stored-up sensual things, as he did before, when he was a householder," sannidhikārake kāme paribhuñjituṃ, seyyathāpi pubbe agāriyabhūto?

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by danieLion » Tue Oct 23, 2012 6:21 am

Cittasanto wrote:relevant qualification = evidence external to your own opinion
Relevant qualifications aren't deduced from comparing my opinion to other opinions but in interpreting the "total" effect of all relevant opinions, of which mine is one.
Cittasanto wrote:or references showing how you came to such a conclusion.
I've posted several references here, and to post all the ones availible is not practical.

Regarding my reasons:
To sum up: there is no 'scientific world-view', just as there is no uniform enterprise 'science'--except in the minds of metaphysicians, schoolmasters and politicians trying to make their nation competitive. Still, there are many things we can learn from the sciences. But we can also learn from the humanities, religion and from the remnants of ancient traditions that survived the onslaught of Western Civilization. No area is unified and perfect, few areas are repulsive and completely without merit. There is no objective principle that could direct us away from the supermarket 'religion' or the supermarket 'art' towards the more modern, and much more expensive supermarket 'science'. Besides, there are large areas of knowledge and action in which we use procedures without any idea as to their comparative excellence. An example is medicine, which, though not a science, has increasingly been connected with scientific research. There are many fashions and schools in medicine just as there are many fashions and schools in psychology. It follows, first, that the idea of a comparison of 'Western medicine' with other medical procedures does not make sense. Secondly, such a comparison is often against the law, even if their should be volunteers: a test is legally impossible. Adding to this that health and sickness are culture-dependent concepts, we see that there are domains, such as medicine with no scientific answer to question 2 (What's so great about science?). This is not really a drawback. The search for objective guidance is in conflict with the idea of individual responsibility which allegedly is an important ingredient of a 'rational' or scientific age. It shows fear, indecision, a yearning for authority and a disregard for the new opportunities that now exist: we can build world-views on the basis of personal choice and thus unite for ourselves and for our friends, what was once separated by a series of historical accidents (Footonote 22. Woflgang Pauli, who was deeply concerned about the intellectual situation fo the time, demanded that science and religion again be united: letter to M. Fierz, 8 August 1948. I agree but would add, entirely in the spirit of Pauli, that the unification should be a personal matter; it should not be prepared by philosophical-scientific alchemists of the mind and imposed by their minions in education....).
-Paul Feyerabend, Against Method (pp. 247, 261, 4th Ed.)

User avatar
mirco
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 2:12 pm

Re: Selling medicine marijuana, is it violate the 5th precept

Post by mirco » Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:47 pm

zolek wrote:I've just wondering if people working for a legal marijuana dispensary have violated the 5th precept ? What makes it different from selling alcohol is that alcohol is clearly intoxicants, while in this case it's for medical uses only. What do you think ?
How can something be violated? Acts just have an outcome. Selling intoxicants has impact on the seller. Consuming intoxicants has impact on the consumer. No violation.

But - when thoughts come into game, things get more complicated. You start to think about if it is wrong or right, if it violates something or not. Remorse comes up, restlessness or other hindrances arise.

What always arises, if one consumes intoxicants, is doubt about the rightness of the Dhamma. Plus it makes it easier for all the other hindrances to come up, because it creates the ground for "breaking" other precepts. Be aware of that, when you have to take intoxicants as medication.

So, if one sells intoxicants, for what ever reason, then this person supports the other person to create a non-clear kind of mind, that leads away from Dhamma.


Regards (-:
"An important term for meditative absorption is samadhi. We often translate that as concentration, but that can suggest a certain stiffness. Perhaps unification is a better rendition, as samadhi means to bring together. Deep samadhi isn't at all stiff. It's a process of letting go of other things and coming to a unified experience." - Bhikkhu Anālayo

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests