[Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics in a contemporary world

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Michael Rolig schreef:

>I always find it is difficult to talk about 'Buddhist ethics'. I'm not
>so sure there are any 'Buddhist ethics' to update.  I'm curious to
>hear other opinions, but as far as I understand, his teachings are all
>contingent on the practitioner to want to find the enlightened way of
>life.  Buddha didn't say "do not consume intoxicants (period)" he
>said, "do not consume intoxicants, if you wish to follow my way of
>awakening".  The Buddha's teachings aren't so much a means to judge
>others as a way to improve the life of yourself and those around you.
>
>
>  
>
I don't understand this. There's utilism, the categorical imperative, 
Christian ethics and so on, why not Buddhist ethics? You shouldn't 
however mix up ethics with morality and psychology. The question whether 
you are behaving or not is psychology, the norms and values you cherish 
(or what the Buddha proclaimed) are morality, the question which is the 
difference between Christian ethics and utilism, or how you can justify 
killing animals in a Buddhist way is ethics. Buddhist ethics is virtue 
ethics like Aristle's or the Stoa. And there's nothing wrong comparing 
Buddhist ethics with other kinds, or investigating certain ethical 
question within Buddhist ethics.
The question whether we are sinners or not is to me just pure narcissim, 
certainly in the light of the anaatmavaada.

erik