Would not decaffinated coffee and tea solve the problem? My late husband loved green tea but had a blood pressure issue that was worsened by caffeine so he drank decaf green tea, both hot and iced, and found it to be a fine substitute. Is not decaf tea and coffee available everywhere? Or is it still considered to be an intoxicant?
corrine
the 5th precept
Re: the 5th precept
I was a social drinker for almost 40 years. I could not see how a glass of wine or Scotch and coke can damage my path to progress.
The majority of my Buddhist male friends (98%) drink alcohol. The media continue to promote alcohol, to say red wine is good for your health.
When I join Dhamma Wheel, I was convinced by some forum members that consumption of alcohol is a BIG NO NO, if you want to progress in your path.
Two months after joining Dhamma Wheel, I completely stop drinking alcohol.
For my surprise I experienced remarkable progress in my practice. My faculties were very clear and alert.
I like to thank all members who help me in this regard.
I think I deserve a good break.
The majority of my Buddhist male friends (98%) drink alcohol. The media continue to promote alcohol, to say red wine is good for your health.
When I join Dhamma Wheel, I was convinced by some forum members that consumption of alcohol is a BIG NO NO, if you want to progress in your path.
Two months after joining Dhamma Wheel, I completely stop drinking alcohol.
For my surprise I experienced remarkable progress in my practice. My faculties were very clear and alert.
I like to thank all members who help me in this regard.
I think I deserve a good break.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: the 5th precept
Getting back to the opening post, I have often wondered about ganja and the interpretation of the 5th precept. I want to emphasize that I am not concerned about whether it is desirable or not to partake of ganja. I am certain that it is not as I am ceratin that it is akusala as it is rooted in greed. The concern I have is as to whether it is a "breach" of the fifth precept or not, and that is not the same thing as the former in my opinion, otherwise you would also have to include all akusala activities which definitely are not covered in their totality by the five precepts.
The issue I have with the interpretation that the fifth precept somehow includes all mind altering substance, and specifically ganja, in addition to fermented drinks is that I do not know of any mention of ganja or derivatives in the Pali canon, although it was of (widespread) use in the Indian culture at the time of the Buddha, including for religious purposes. I would happily be corrected if someone can point to an authoritative different opinion on this. Now, if it was in use, and if it was somehow related to the five precepts (which is very basic right living for an adept) would that have not come up and be mentioned by the Buddha, at least once?
With metta.
The issue I have with the interpretation that the fifth precept somehow includes all mind altering substance, and specifically ganja, in addition to fermented drinks is that I do not know of any mention of ganja or derivatives in the Pali canon, although it was of (widespread) use in the Indian culture at the time of the Buddha, including for religious purposes. I would happily be corrected if someone can point to an authoritative different opinion on this. Now, if it was in use, and if it was somehow related to the five precepts (which is very basic right living for an adept) would that have not come up and be mentioned by the Buddha, at least once?
With metta.
Re: the 5th precept
Does it lead to heedlessness? Does it increase sloth & torpor? Does it increase craving, perhaps for sugars or foods? Is it entertaining, like going to a show? Is it a sensual cord? Does it promote papanca?MidGe wrote:Now, if it was in use, and if it was somehow related to the five precepts (which is very basic right living for an adept) would that have not come up and be mentioned by the Buddha, at least once?
I've smoked a lot of bud in my day, and the answers to the above questions are all "yes" in my experience. I think there might be some insight to be gained in contemplating a mind which wants to shove cannabis through a loophole...
The Buddha didn't name specific mixed drinks, either, but a cannabis preparation for drinking - bhang - probably falls under the precept as worded, and I doubt the Buddha intended a differentiation based on dosing method.
For the record, I'm in favor of legalization, even in favor of civil disobedience to get it done. It's one of the more benign substances around, but it's hardly a neutral anodyne when it comes to mental equipoise.
- "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.
"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Re: the 5th precept
daverupa,
I agree entirely with you, my question is different. As i said in my previous post: "I want to emphasize that I am not concerned about whether it is desirable or not to partake of ganja. I am certain that it is not as I am certain that it is akusala as it is rooted in greed. The concern I have is as to whether it is a "breach" of the fifth precept or not".
I agree entirely with you, my question is different. As i said in my previous post: "I want to emphasize that I am not concerned about whether it is desirable or not to partake of ganja. I am certain that it is not as I am certain that it is akusala as it is rooted in greed. The concern I have is as to whether it is a "breach" of the fifth precept or not".
Re: the 5th precept
Yes, that post of mine was rather rambling; but, to clarify, while it isn't a clearly delineated substance, the fact that bhang was probably around means that cannabis likely (surely?) falls under the proscription.MidGe wrote:daverupa,
I agree entirely with you, my question is different. As i said in my previous post: "I want to emphasize that I am not concerned about whether it is desirable or not to partake of ganja. I am certain that it is not as I am certain that it is akusala as it is rooted in greed. The concern I have is as to whether it is a "breach" of the fifth precept or not".
The answer to the first question I asked, above, is a similar indication.
- "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.
"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
- Dhammarakkhito
- Posts: 1115
- Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
- Contact:
Re: the 5th precept
the precept specifically applies to alcohol, as far as the letter goes. surā, meraya and majja are all alcohol and pamādaṭṭhāna signifies the heedlessness caused by these three. if other substances cause heedlessness but are not alcohol they still don't break the precept in its letter. if we were to extrapolate and say all substances that cause heedlessness, why we would we stop there; why not all forms of heedlessness. for example, jūtappamādaṭṭhāna which is heedlessness caused by gambling or gambling that forms the base of heedlessness however you want to word itHi JC,
jcsuperstar wrote:
so is the original pali, to not drink at all or to not abuse alcohol?
also isnt it specificly aimed at alcohol and not generic intoxicants? (thus not really against drug use?)
In the Theravadin understanding the fifth precept enjoins complete abstinence, not moderation. It is broken when one knowingly consumes even the smallest amount of alcohol. It is not broken if the alcohol is consumed unwittingly or is an ingredient in an essential medicine.
To what substances other than alcohol the precept might be applicable is a matter of contention, but the question to ask is whether the substance will lead to loss of appamāda, meaning non-negligence, heedfulness, diligence. Appamāda consists in the arising of the mental factors of mindfulness (sati), clear comprehension (sampajañña), and wholesome energy (kusala viriya). So, taking amphetamine, for example, will tend to increase one's energy but at the same time impede mindfulness and clear comprehension. In the absence of these two, the energy is sure to be akusala, and so amphetamine is an intoxicant. Cannabis is likely to impede all three mental factors, and so this too is an intoxicant.
Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
and in the seventh precept games are not banned, but in dn 2 games are sandwiched between theatrical shows (which are to be abstained from in the 7th) and the next precept about high beds... i personally go with the spirit of that precept and do not take part in games during uposatha. a legalistic perspective on training rules arguably does not lead to rooting out even the possibility of breaking them; it's not just following the five precepts that leads to stream entry but absolutely making it impossible to break them.
sources: http://www.chezpaul.org.uk/buddhism/MSt ... tation.htm
https://suttacentral.net/en/dn4
- Attachments
-
- Screen Shot 2017-12-11 at 14.45.25.png (206.78 KiB) Viewed 4322 times
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5
https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught
— Ud 5.5
https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6494
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: the 5th precept
The Sigalovādasutta commentary defines surā and meraya as two kinds of alcoholic beverage and majja as any substance that intoxicates (taṃ sabbampi madakaraṇavasena "majjaṃ").Sovatthika wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2017 8:46 pmthe precept specifically applies to alcohol, as far as the letter goes. surā, meraya and majja are all alcohol
The Surāmerayasutta commentary repeats the Sigalovādasutta's definitions of surā and meraya, and then defines majja as either: (1) both surā and meraya together, or (2) any non-alcoholic substance (surāsavavinimutta) whose consumption causes intoxication (madanīya).
The Khuddakapāṭha commentary offers two glosses of majja: (1) as an adjective ("besotting") qualifying surā and majja, and (2) the same as the Surāmerayasutta commentary:
Majjan ti tadubhayameva madaniyaṭṭhena majjaṃ, yaṃ vā panaññampi kiñci atthi madaniyaṃ, yena pītena matto hoti pamatto, idaṃ vuccati majjaṃ.
"Both these are 'besotting' in the sense of causing intoxication; or alternatively, whatever else there is that causes intoxication, by consuming which one becomes mad and negligent, is called 'besotting'."
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: the 5th precept
What if someone spikes your drink? Or you unknowingly eat some egg nog pie with rum in it? Do you break the precept in these instances?
- Dhammarakkhito
- Posts: 1115
- Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
- Contact:
Re: the 5th precept
no, because intention is kamma
"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect."
— AN 6.63 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... tml#part-5
"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect."
— AN 6.63 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... tml#part-5
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5
https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught
— Ud 5.5
https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught
Re: the 5th precept
I had a small piece of cake today with rum in it. Not sure if that breaks the precept. Felt zero intoxication from it, because the amount of rum in the cake was small. It was there more for flavouring and not meant to intoxicate. I guess if I was being super stringent I wouldn't have had the cake, but I haven't felt ill effects from eating food in the past with alcohol in it. I've been drunk before...so I stay away from pouring alcohol in a glass and consuming it, because the intention there is to be inebriated.
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6494
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: the 5th precept
Yes if you're a bhikkhu, for the Vinaya classes the 51st Pācittiya as an acittaka rule - one where the mere act is an offence and the bhikkhu's knowledge, perception and intention are treated as irrelevant.
No if you're a sāmaṇera, for the Khuddakapātha Commentary makes intention relevant in the case of the fifth of the ten precepts.
Probably not if you're layperson. The texts don't actually say so, but one wouldn't expect a five-precept layperson to be required to hold to a more scrupulous standard than a ten-precept sāmaṇera.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: the 5th precept
Thanks Bhante, that question was tripping me up a bit, because I had heard about the Vinaya acittaka rule somewhere before.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2017 4:30 amYes if you're a bhikkhu, for the Vinaya classes the 51st Pācittiya as an acittaka rule - one where the mere act is an offence and the bhikkhu's knowledge, perception and intention are treated as irrelevant.
No if you're a sāmaṇera, for the Khuddakapātha Commentary makes intention relevant in the case of the fifth of the ten precepts.
Probably not if you're layperson. The texts don't actually say so, but one wouldn't expect a five-precept layperson to be required to hold to a more scrupulous standard than a ten-precept sāmaṇera.
Re: the 5th precept
I find this rule to be a bit strange! what is the rationale behind it? to keep the bhikkhu alert all the time/increasing the fear of wrong doing?Dhammanando wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2017 4:30 amYes if you're a bhikkhu, for the Vinaya classes the 51st Pācittiya as an acittaka rule - one where the mere act is an offence and the bhikkhu's knowledge, perception and intention are treated as irrelevant.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6494
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: the 5th precept
In Vinaya texts there is never any stated reason as to why guilt under one rule depends upon mens rea, while under another actus reus suffices. One can always conjecture of course, and in the present case I suspect the aim may be to foster in bhikkhus a heightened circumspection about anything they put in their mouths.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)