nathanielfirst
Member
I have a difficult time understanding buddhist ethics... it seems strange to me how a tradition could be so ethical, as ethical as the most ethical western traditions, never kill, never harm etc., yet it's core goal is about ceasing to exist, not caring, becoming unattached, that seems out of keeping with strict , difficult to practice ethics.
is there something in the buddhist vioew of the universe, the cosmology/ontology of the world that allows ethics to take more of a focus than i would grasp (I am a beginner at buddhism, so pardon my ignorance)?
vaisheshika in hinduism categorize self, mind, alongside time, space, fire, water, earth (the elements) as constituents of the universe- so 'mind' is a real aspect of phenomenon. perhaps buddhism similar worldview of mental phenomenon as real parts of the universe leading to 'dependant origination' among other things, perhaps that is why a bad deed is so bad, even in the face of a religion pointed mainly, at nirvana
my question is hard to say. i guess it is in two parts:
1:why care about ethics if one is a buddhist? isn't the goal nirvana ? yet buddhism is so ethical.
2. is the reason ethics is a focus, because of some strange eastern metaphysics/ontology (that might categorize a 'bad deed' as being similar to a real part of the uiniverse, a cup, chair, tree, object, etc., ) ?
and if so, could someone who knows what they're talking about explain to me more in depth, how buddhism's ontology meshes with its ethics?
sorry for such a strange question by a beginner on a DIR forum, also.
is there something in the buddhist vioew of the universe, the cosmology/ontology of the world that allows ethics to take more of a focus than i would grasp (I am a beginner at buddhism, so pardon my ignorance)?
vaisheshika in hinduism categorize self, mind, alongside time, space, fire, water, earth (the elements) as constituents of the universe- so 'mind' is a real aspect of phenomenon. perhaps buddhism similar worldview of mental phenomenon as real parts of the universe leading to 'dependant origination' among other things, perhaps that is why a bad deed is so bad, even in the face of a religion pointed mainly, at nirvana
my question is hard to say. i guess it is in two parts:
1:why care about ethics if one is a buddhist? isn't the goal nirvana ? yet buddhism is so ethical.
2. is the reason ethics is a focus, because of some strange eastern metaphysics/ontology (that might categorize a 'bad deed' as being similar to a real part of the uiniverse, a cup, chair, tree, object, etc., ) ?
and if so, could someone who knows what they're talking about explain to me more in depth, how buddhism's ontology meshes with its ethics?
sorry for such a strange question by a beginner on a DIR forum, also.