BUDDHISM, MEDICINE AND ETHICS

Mental Health and Human Well Being: PsychoSocial and Philosophical Perspective World Philosophy Day Icpr Sponsored One Day International Conference 15 March, 2024 BUDDHISM, MEDICINE AND ETHICS Elena Sobolnikova Natalia Dorodneva BUDDHISM, MEDICINE AND ETHICS This report examines the most important aspects of the debate about the bioethical issues within Buddhist ethics. In connection with the development of philosophical understanding of medical knowledge in modern culture, there is a need to show the importance of applying religious and ethical principles to the main modern problems of biomedical ethics. BUDDHISM, MEDICINE AND ETHICS The main purpose of this report is an attempt to formulate a number of Buddhist principles that can be consistently applied to a number of biomedical problems (euthanasia, human birth and death, etc.). The subject of our research is ethics in the context of medicine, namely the relationship between Buddhism and medical practice. Bioethical problem: The problem of the origin of human life Buddhism adheres to the idea that everything that happens at conception is the rebirth of a pre-existing individual. Theravada considers death and rebirth as a continuous process. The Tibetan tradition believes that there is an intermediate state between a person's life and his subsequent rebirth, which is designated by the concept of «bardo». In this regard, the deprivation of life from the moment of conception to the moment of death is forbidden by the Buddha. Thus, carrying out an abortion or fatal experiments on an unborn child constitutes murder. Buddhism opposes the use of human embryos for scientific research, especially for testing drugs and toxic substances. Bioethical problem: The problem of scientific experiments In the Buddhist worldview, destructive experiments on embryos represent a direct encroachment on the basic good of life and a violation of the precepts of religion. Can research fail to be justified if it's motivated by compassion for human suffering and a desire to eradicate diseases? The notion that compassion for one being can justify causing death to another is an example of selective, rather than universal, compassion, which is clearly contrary to the Buddhadharma. Thus, for the above reasons, the distinction between animate and inanimate embryos has no practical significance for the position of Buddhism regarding embryo research, which excludes almost all research conducted today. Bioethical problem: Birth control In modern healthcare, fertility control can be considered in two aspects: in a positive form, fertility control aims to cause pregnancy, and in a negative form - to prevent it. As for the moral value of those methods that do not lead to abortion, it is not uncommon among Buddhists to find the opinion that, although the use of interception methods is wrong, the use of contraceptive methods is morally acceptable: while introspective methods involve the destruction of a newly formed being, the conceptual method does not. When using the pill, no new life arises and, therefore, no creature is directly harmed. Bioethical problem: In Vitro Fertilization Positive fertility control refers to situations where a woman's goal is the ability to get pregnant. Two main methods are used to achieve this goal: artificial insemination and In vitro fertilization (IVF). The fact is that such technology destroys traditional ideas about fatherhood and motherhood. Moreover, five adults may be involved in the birth of one child in surrogacy technologies: donors of sexual material, customers (for example, a man and a woman in a family relationship, and in many countries there are no restrictions on non-traditional couples and single men and women resorting to such technologies), a surrogate mother who carried a child, therefore, the nature of the methods used today in most IVF centers does not correspond to Buddhist ethical principles, since it destroys the integrity of the family and the intimacy of the relationship between husband and wife. Bioethical problem: The criterion of death In Buddhism, there are four key terms that in early sources are associated with the functioning of living organisms: vitality (ayus), heat (usnzan), physical vitality (rupajivitindria) and breathing (prana): «Such a 'death of personality,'» Some canonical passages touch upon the question of the difference between a living body and a dead one, describing the immateriality, impermanence and fragility of the body, mentioning three factors that distinguish a living body from a dead one: «vitality», «warmth» and «consciousness». Bioethical problem: Euthanasia Death is not the final end, but the door to rebirth and a new life. Euthanasia, from the point of view of Buddhist ethics, is an interference with karma. Secondly, the use of euthanasia involves the use of doses of drugs that put the patient into a comatose state, depriving him of a conscious understanding of what needs to be done. From the point of view of Buddhist ethics, doctors have no obligation to support the lives of patients at any cost. The goal of the doctor here is to eliminate the pain, not the patient. Thus, Buddhism opposes euthanasia mainly because of its positive assessment of life. To put death above life, «making death your goal» or «praising death» and so on, is to deny that life is a basic good. Bioethical problem: Transplantation The development of transplantation is largely associated with the transition to a new understanding of the criterion of death, to the legal consolidation of the so-called brain death. Transplantation is a specific science and practice. Not all bioethical principles in it work in full. For example, the traditional bioethical principle of «Do no harm» is completely unrealizable when it comes to taking a donor organ from a living donor. Or in the case when the recipient who received the donor receives pharmaceutical immunosuppression throughout the rest of his life, which prevents rejection of the donor organ. Also, such an important bioethical principle as the principle of truthfulness in terms of completeness of information is not implemented in transplantology. Conclusion 1. In modern ethics, Buddhism is often understood as a teleological ethics of virtue that postulates a specific goal or end result (telos) as the realization of human potential and argues that this goal should be realized through the cultivation of certain spiritual practices. According to Buddhism, the goal of human perfection is nirvana, which is achieved through the process of moral improvement and intellectual self— transformation, through following the Eightfold Path. 2. The Buddhist moral point of view is based on the belief in reincarnation or rebirth, which certainly distinguishes it from Western ethical thought. Central to many issues of bioethics is the question of the nature and status of the moral subject. Buddhism adheres to a broader moral horizon than is accepted in society. Belief in interspecific rebirth and respect for animal life is a characteristic feature of Buddhist ethics. Buddhism views a man as a single being in a manner closer to Aristotelian than Platonic, perceiving man in the aspect of a single being of a human personality. 3. Buddhist philosophy says that everything that exists is the product of causes and conditions (dukkha) caused by craving and ignorance. If we eliminate the causes of rebirth, namely longing and ignorance, we can prevent the problem of suffering from arising. Thus, the general approach to solving bioethical problems in Buddhism is to eliminate the causes that primarily cause problems that destroy human spiritual health. Bibliography 1. Becker, Carl B. (1990) 'Buddhist views of suicide and euthanasia', Philosophy East and West 40, pp. 543-56. 2. Byrne, Paul A. and Richard G. Nilges (1993) 'The Brain Stem in Brain Death: A Critical Review', Issues in Law & Medicine 9, pp. 3-2l. 3. Chapple, Christopher (1992), 'Nonviolence to Animals in Buddhism and Jainism', in Inner Peace, World Peace, ed. Kenneth Kraft, SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies, ed. Matthew Kapstein, Albany, NY: SUNY, pp. 49-62. 4. Duncan, AS., G.R Dunstan, and RB. Welbourn (1981), Dictionary of Medical Ethics. London: Darton, Longman and Todd. 5. Eller, Cynthia (1992), 'The Impact of Christianity on Buddhist Nonviolence in the West', in Inner Peace, World Peace, ed. Kenneth Kraft, SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies, ed. Matthew Kapstein, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 91-1 09. 6. Gormally, Luke, ed. (1994), Euthanasia, Clinical Practice and the Law. London: The Linacre Centre for Health Care Ethics. 7. Griffiths, Paul J. (1986), On Being Mindless: Buddhist Meditation and the Mind-Body Problem. La Salle: Open Court. 8. Jolly, Julius (1951), Indian Medicine. Poona: CG. Kashikar. 9. Jones, K. (1989), The Social Face of Buddhism. London: Wisdom. 10. Danden, Vol. 1. Dharamsala: The Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. 11. Keown, Damien (1992), The Nature of Buddhist Ethics. London: Macmillan. 12. Stout, Jeffrey (1990), Ethics After Babel. Cambridge: James Clark. 13. Williams, Paul (1989), Mahayana Buddhism. The Doctrinal Foundations. London: Routledge. 14. Willson, Martin (1987), Rebirth and the Western Buddhist. London: Wisdom. 15. Young, Katherine K. (1989), 'Euthanasia: Traditional Hindu Views and the Contemporary Debate', in Hindu Ethics. Purity, Abortion, and Euthanasia, eds Harold G. Coward, Julius J. 16. Zysk, Kenneth G. (1991), Asceticism and Healing in Ancient India: Medicine in the Buddhist Monastery. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Our contacts Elena N. Sobolnikova – Ph.D. in Philosophy, Associate Professor, Saint Petersburg State Chemical and Pharmaceutical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, Russia, [email protected]; Natalia V. Dorodneva – Ph.D. in Pedagogics, Associate Professor, Tyumen State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Tyumen, Russia, [email protected].