Studies in Buddhist Ethics

Last updated on: March 22, 2012 at 7:52 pm by Justin Whitaker

Studies in Buddhist Ethics 2012-03-22T19:52:56-06:00 Justin Whitaker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The Author in Oxford for Pali Summer School, 2011

As I mentioned recently, I gave a talk last month at the Oxford Center for Buddhist Studies on the topic of Buddhist ethics, or more specifically, recent studies in Buddhist ethics. As Richard Gombrich pointed out in the Q and A, I didn’t mention karma at all in my talk. And I agree with him (see his 2009 book, “What the Buddha Thought” for details) that karma must play a central role in understanding traditional Buddhist ethics (what nontraditional Western Buddhists make of karma is a whole book in itself just waiting to be written).

In any case, my talk aimed to examine recent studies in Buddhist ethics, a somewhat peculiar area of research, and one that is still in need of much work. Despite a recent upsurge in recent scholarship in the field, especially in the last 20 years, there still remain many unresolved and indeed contentious issues. While audio from the talk is forthcoming, I will post bits and pieces here for comments and discussion:

Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies

February 27, 2012

Justin Whitaker

Concepts like knowledge, beauty, and meaning, as well as virtue and justice, all have a normative dimension, for they tell us what to think, what to like, what to say, what to do, and what to be. And it is the force of these normative claims – the right of these concepts to give laws to us – that we want to understand. And in ethics, the question can become urgent, for the day will come, for most of us, when what morality commands, obliges, or recommends is hard: that we share decisions with people whose intelligence or integrity don’t inspire our confidence; that we assume grave responsibilities to which we feel inadequate; that we sacrifice our lives, or voluntarily relinquish what makes them sweet. And then the question – why? – will press, and rightly so. (Christine Korsgaard “The Sources of Normativity” 1996, p.9)

The reason I begin tonight with a quote from a contemporary thinker is that as a philosopher and historian, I think it is important to begin with orientation, or context. Korsgaard’s statement is true, or compelling, for us in Western academia in the 21st century, and surely at least mostly true dating back to the age of enlightenment in the 18th century. It has been through these concepts that we have been trained to think and approach the world, and so naturally it has been through these concepts that academics have approached Buddhism in search of its sources of normativity.

But very quickly we discover that Buddhist normative concepts are all just a little different from what we had hoped to find. Buddhists, and I speak primarily from the perspective of early Buddhism as represented in the Pāli canon, seem more interested in ignorance than knowledge, more likely to discuss suffering and renunciation than beauty…

And so the philosopher seeking normativity quickly becomes the philologist, or at least amateur philologist, seeking to understand words. As the meanings and context of the words emerge, we begin to get a glimpse of the scriptural norms for Buddhists who claim to adhere to them today. And through these textual readings we are able to begin to understand Buddhist ethics.

In terms of this foundation of philology, people working in Buddhist ethics today, such as myself, have had the great fortune of standing on the shoulders of giants. The early 20th century saw great advances in translating Buddhist texts and the formation of the still essential “Pāli-English Dictionary” by T.W. Rhys Davids and William Stede (1921-5).

A second foundation for the study of Buddhist ethics has been anthropology. It has been through anthropology, largely in the last 50 years, that we have been able to see how Buddhists understand moral concepts themselves. Work in the field by scholars such as Winston King (1964), Stanley Tambiah (1970), Melford Spiro (1970), and Richard Gombrich (1971) helped shape useful lenses, or interpretive categories, through which others could then look back and better understand the words and deeds of past Buddhists.

In a few future posts I will discuss the ’emergence’ of Buddhist ethics in the 1970s, its flourishing in the 1990s, and the issues still fueling debate within the discipline today.

Academia

Buddhist Ethics

Previous Post

March 20, 2012

Education and Perseverance

Next Post

March 25, 2012 Studies in Buddhist ethics 2 - the 1970s

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Activism American Buddhism Art Book review Buddhism Buddhism Today Buddhist Ethics Burma/Myanmar China Christianity Commodification Environment Gender Happiness Health Humor India Interfaith Islam Japanese Buddhism Kant Media / News Meditation mindfulness Photography Poetry Politics quicktakes Running Teaching Technology Thailand Theism/Atheism Theravada Tibet Tibetan Buddhism Travels Uncategorized Unitarian Universalism video Western Philosophy Zen

Select a Month June 2021 January 2021 November 2020 August 2020 July 2020 March 2020 January 2020 October 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 November 2004 September 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz