Buddhism and abortion

[Black_Rose]

What is the Buddhist (or other oriental religion/spirituality such as Taoism) teaching on abortion? I think it would also be prohibited due to its general prohibition on the destruction of life forms (as opposed to the Judeo-Christian tradition which place emphasis on humanity while other elements of creation are not as highly regarded.)

Note: this thread is not about the politics or morality of abortion because there are other threads in the forum about that:

Certainly abortion has been generally disapproved of in
Buddhist culture on the grounds that it is a form of murder.
Traditional Buddhist beliefs about the exact timing of
the instantiation of the reincarnating being in the embryo
or foetus are not doctrinal, however, but drawn from latter
exegetical texts.

Some contemporary, and especially Western, Buddhist
writers on abortion have argued for a more tolerant position,
on a number of grounds. First, if the moral status of
the embryo and foetus are contingent on the instantiation of
a sentient being, then current neurophysiological evidence
that suggests that sentience only emerges late in foetal development
would validate abortion up to that point (Barnhart,
1998; Hughes, 1999). Keown (1999) argues against this
point of view, emphasizing the moral importance of the
creation of just the first of the five skandhas, (The five skandhas are the body,
feelings, perceptions, will and consciousness.)] the embryonic
body. However, as Barnhart (1998). makes clear, the
scriptures emphasize that a sentient being is created only
when all five of the elements, including consciousness, are
present.

Moreover, insofar as Buddhism is similar to a utilitarian
ethics towards general happiness, or an ethics of care, or an
ethics of virtuous intent, then the immorality of the abortive
act of violence can be outweighed by the intentions of the
mother and the greater suffering that it may prevent to
mother, potential child and society. The Dalai Lama has argued,
for instance, that although abortion is generally inappropriate,
it may be permissible in cases of severely handicapped
foetuses that may suffer in life; ‘the main factor is
motivation’ (quoted in Tsomo, 1998). Additional considerations
would be the degree to which the mother had become
pregnant and aborted carelessly, without sufficient attention
to the gravity of the act (Tworkow, 1992). Depending on
Buddhists’ beliefs about the importance of consciousness to
the moral status of the embryo and foetus, the intentionality
of the actor and the consequences of the action, some
Buddhists will therefore come to different conclusions on
derivative issues such as the use of embryos in cloning and
stem cell research (Schlieter, 2004).

ieet.org/archive/buddhistbioethics.pdf

This sounds much like Peter Singer’s views on abortion since he believes that it is morally acceptable to terminate the life of a fetus because they do not have feelings, perceptions, will and consciousness (four of the five skandas), but he obviously does not use Buddhist lexicon to support his argument. Furthermore, since some animals such as chickens and cows have the aforementioned traits, it would not be acceptable to kill them. In fact, Buddhist occupational restrictions prohibit one from dealing with meat (such as a Butcher). But again, Buddhist ethics are not based on “speciest” concerns, prohibiting only human killing, and are more universal in scope even in human affairs as Buddhists are general pacificists while some pro-life Catholics deem war permissible sometimes (such as the Invasion of Iraq in 2003) .

 

[rossum]

What is the Buddhist (or other oriental religion/spirituality such as Taoism) teaching on abortion? I think it would also be prohibited due to its general prohibition on the destruction of life forms (as opposed to the Judeo-Christian tradition which place emphasis on humanity while other elements of creation are not as highly regarded.)

Buddhists vary greatly, (think of herding cats), so you will get different opinions.

The piece you quote from James Hughes is a good summary. An embryo is a living organism and so should not be injured without a good reason. It does not, at least in the early stages, meet the Buddhist definition of a human being – the five skandhas are not all present:* Form: a single cell is not a human form. This develops over the period of pregnancy.

• Feelings: Not present initially as feelings require a brain. These become present as the brain develops.
• Perceptions: Not present until the sensory organs and brain develop.
• Impulses: Present from conception, or up to 49 days after – texts vary. Among other things this skandha carries the karma accumulated from previous lives.
• Consciousness: Not present until the brain is well developed.

Note that none of the five is an immortal soul; Buddhism does not have souls.

Abortion is allowed provided there is a good reason for it. The later in the pregnancy the better the reason has to be.

rossum

 

[JohnDamian]

Apologies if I have misunderstood any bhuddhist teaching, for I am no expert; but it seems:

Abortion is contrary to Śīla, as taking life (if we regard abortion as taking life in a bhuddhist context) is against the Five Precepts, and thus is detrimental to ones healthy development.

Abortion is contrary to Dāna, it (abortion) is certainly not an act of giving or generosity

Abortion is contrary to kṣānti’, or tolerance, endurance and acceptance - especially when ones own life is not threatened.

Furthermore, abortion as a product of self-indulgence and the abandonment of responsibility is contrary to Bhuddhism, and especially so in a context wherein one’s own life is not threatened.