Buddhist metaethics and normative ethics?

[Lethemyr]

Hello all!

Buddhist philosophy covers a lot of ground. Most of the Western "genres" of philosophy like metaphysics, epistemology, and applied ethics have had a lot of work done on them throughout the Buddhist tradition.

However, I've struggled to find much work corresponding to the Western categories of metaethics or even normative ethics.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which is usually a good place to find sources, basically just says that Buddhist authors don't talk much about those subjects and then says that forms of consequentialism and virtue ethics could be reasonably implied by many texts. That's not a very satisfying answer to me. I've also found some academic papers trying to examine similarities between Buddhist ethics and different normative frameworks, but none of it was really what I'm looking for either.

I'm wondering if anyone here can point me towards any sources discussing Buddhist metaethics and normative ethics as derived from scripture and traditional authors. Works on Buddhist metaethics would especially be appreciated, and the works of ancient authors are best of all. And if such examinations really don't exist, then someone really ought to get on that...

May all sentient beings be free from suffering - 阿彌陀佛

[PadmaVonSamba]

The closest thing to definition of absolute right and wrong in Buddhism is ultimate the question of whether an action keeps you headed on the path to realization, or sidetracks and distracts you and sends you off on the opposite direction, towards more dukkha.

The point to what the Buddha taught was the cessation of dukkha (“suffering”). Everything he expressed was geared toward that. Liberation from samsara was the context. Simple, practical, direct.

One might ask
1. “this is what Moses taught… did the Buddha teach anything close to this?”

or, one might ask,

2. “my doctor says I should get more exercise …did the Buddha ever teach anything close to this?”

—and 2 would be closer, because it is about alleviating suffering.
But because we in the West are introduced to Buddhism as a philosophical proposition, we liken it to some kind of religion, when it is really more like extremely practical advice.

[Javierfv1212]

A lot of the discussion has focused around interpreting Shantideva, since he is the author with the most to say regarding ethical theory

Some of the sources I've looked at include:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Santideva
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Santideva
Westerhoff, Jan. The Golden Age of Indian Buddhist Philosophy (2018)
Lele, Amod. Ethical Revaluation in the Thought of Śāntideva (2007)
Garfield, Jay. Buddhist Ethics
Garfield, Jay. Engaging Buddhism: Why It Matters to Philosophy
Jonathan C. Gold, ‎Douglas S. Duckworth, Readings of Śāntideva's Guide to Bodhisattva Practice
Goodman, Charles, 2009, Consequences of Compassion: An Interpretation and Defense of Buddhist Ethics, Oxford University Press.
Carpenter, Amber. Indian Buddhist Philosophy (2014)
Edelglass et al. (2022) The Routledge Handbook of Indian Buddhist Philosophy (Routledge Handbooks in Philosophy)


There are different views, some (Goodman) interpret Buddhist ethics as a kind of Virtue Ethics, others reject this (Garfield calls it a "moral phenomenology")