Into the Jaws of Yama, Lord of Death: Buddhism, Bioethics, and Death

10. Buddhism and Genetic Engineering

Chapter 10  Buddhism and Genetic Engineering The genetic engineering of living organisms represents one of the most significant, controversial, and potentially dangerous bioethical dilemmas facing human society today. The potential for designing children and creating mixed species, for example, immediately raises a multitude of practical and moral questions—questions about proprietary control over biotechnologies, the minimum constituents of a human organism, and the responsibility of justly regulating scientific research that affects the future of all life. Buddhists take a broad view of these issues. From a Buddhist perspective, the ethics of genetic engineering must take into account the suffering and happiness of innumerable living beings, both now at the present time and on into the unforeseeable future. It must also seek to provide the necessary conditions for the flourishing of human beings and other living creatures and their habitats. The evolution of life as we know it has taken thirteen million years and a single misstep could bring it all to a tragic end. The logic of carefully considering all possible options is abundantly clear. To understand the Buddhist perspective, it is important to remember that there is not simply one Buddhist point of view but rather a very wide range of them. Second, it is good to remember that the views of Buddhist scholars may vary from those of Buddhists on the street. Third, many contemporary issues are not discussed in the Buddhist texts, since the technologies were not in existence at the time of the Buddha. In the absence of references to these specific issues, everything we can say is merely speculative and an interpolation from cases in the texts and oral traditions of Buddhist cultures that are relevant 195 196 Into the Jaws of Yama, Lord of Death to the bioethical dilemmas of today, so opinions often vary greatly. At present, there are no Buddhist policy statements on Buddhist ethics, no policy-making apparatus, no procedural norms, and no consensus even about whether it would be desirable to draw up such statements and norms. There is no central administrative body that links the various Buddhist traditions. Even within the different Buddhist traditions, there is rarely any central administrative headquarters or decision-making body equivalent to the Vatican. Although H. H. the Dalai Lama is perhaps the best-known and most respected Buddhist figure today, he speaks only for Tibetan Buddhists at most. Therefore there are no Buddhist encyclicals, no position papers, and as yet very few scholarly studies to use as references. This raises a question about who speaks for Buddhism. Considering the wide variety of Buddhist philosophies, practices, traditions, and cultures, it is unlikely that consensus on the nature of conception or the status of the embryo could be reached, especially considering the technical nature of scientific research about these topics, for which exact translations rarely exist. Clearly no one can legitimately speak for the Buddhist tradition as a whole. Here I have tried to fairly report Buddhist views, speaking primarily from a Tibetan Buddhist perspective , though I am American, not Tibetan. My purpose has been simply to begin reflecting on bioethical issues, raise questions, and hopefully initiate a conversation to help inform and facilitate decision making among Buddhists and non-Buddhists, not only at the bedside, but also in public health care. Hopefully this conversation will be long-term and will include scholars and practitioners, as well as voices both within and outside the tradition.1 Cloning Sentient Beings A review of the issues surrounding cloning was prepared by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission after the sheep Dolly was cloned in February 1997.2 However, the review only took into account religious perspectives from the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions. The assumptions these traditions make about death, creation, consciousness, and personhood are radically different from the assumptions that underlie the Asian religious traditions, which went unheard. This is not unexpected. Although diversity is a priority in some government agencies , it certainly is not in all. Moreover, because the technologies are expensive and complex, millions of people in countries around the world have not yet even heard about them, much less had an opportunity to assess them. The Buddhist traditions themselves have yet to undertake a thorough analysis of the issues involved. Buddhism and Genetic Engineering 197 Naturally Buddhist texts have nothing specific to say about cloning —a process that was still fantasy even a few decades ago—so Buddhists are left to theorize...