CHAPTER VIII
WHAT THE BUDDHA TAUGHT
AND THE WORLD TODAY
There are some who
believe that Buddhism is so lofty and sublime a system that
it cannot be
practised by
ordinary man and woman in this workaday world of ours, and
that one has to retire from it to a monastery, or to some
quiet place, if one desires to be a true Buddhist.
This is a sad
misconception, due evidently to a lack of understanding of
the teaching of the Buddha. People run to such hasty and
wrong conclusions as a result of their hearing, or reading
casually, something about Buddhism written by someone, who,
as he has not understood the subject in all its aspects,
gives only a partial and lopsided view of it. The Buddha’s
teaching is meant not only for monks in monasteries, but
also for ordinary men and women living at home with their
families. The Noble Eightfold Path, which is the Buddhist
way of life, is meant of all, without distinction of any
kind.
The vast
majority of people in the world cannot turn monk, or retire
into caves or forests. However, noble and pure Buddhism may
be, it would be useless to the masses of mankind if they
could not follow it in their daily life in the world of
today. But if you understand the spirit of Buddhism
correctly (and not only its letter), you can surely follow
and practice it while living the life of an ordinary man.
There may be
some who find it easier and more convenient to accept
Buddhism, if they do live in a remote place, cut off from
the society of others. Others may find that that kind if
retirement dulls and depresses their whole being both
physically and mentally, and that it may not therefore be
conducive to the development of their spiritual and
intellectual life.
True
renunciation does not mean running away physically from the
world. Sāriputta, the chief disciple of the Buddha, said
that one man might live in a forest devoting himself to
ascetic practices, but might be full of impure thoughts and
‘defilements’; another might live in a village or a town,
practising no ascetic discipline, but his mind might be
pure, and free from ‘defilements’. Of these two, said
Sāriputta, the one who lives a pure life in the village or
town is definitely far superior to, and greater than, the
one who lives in the forest.
The common
belief that to follow the Buddha’s teaching one has to
retire from life is a misconception. It is really an
unconscious defence against practising it. There are
numerous references in Buddhist literature to men and women
living ordinary, normal family lives who successfully
practiced what the Buddha taught, and realized Nirvāna.
Vacchagotta the Wanderer, (whom we met earlier in the
chapter on Anatta), once asked the Buddha
straight-forwardly whether there were laymen and woman
leading the family life, who followed his teaching
successfully and attained to high spiritual states. The
Buddha categorically stated that there were not one or two,
not a hundred or two hundred or five hundred, but many more
laymen and women leading the family life who followed his
teaching successfully and attained to high spiritual states.
It may be
agreeable for certain people to live a retired life in a
quiet place away from noise and disturbance. But it is
certainly more praiseworthy and courageous to practice
Buddhism living among your fellow beings, helping them and
being of service to them. It may perhaps be useful in some
cases for a man to live in retirement for a time in order to
improve his mind and character, as preliminary moral,
spiritual and intellectual training, to be strong enough to
come out later and help others. But if a man lives all his
life in solitude, thinking only of his own happiness and
‘salvation’, without caring for his fellows, this surely is
not in keeping with the Buddha’s teaching which is based on
love, compassion, and service to others.
One might now
ask: If a man can follow Buddhism while living the life of
an ordinary layman, why was the Sangha, the Order of monks,
established by the Buddha? The Order provides opportunity
for those who are willing to devote their lives not only to
their own spiritual and intellectual development, but also
to the service of others. An ordinary layman with a family
cannot be expected to devote his whole life to the service
of others, whereas a monk, who has no family
responsibilities or any other worldly ties, is in position
to devote his whole life ‘for the good of the many, for the
happiness of the many’ according to the Buddha’s advice.
That is how in the course of history, the Buddhist monastery
became not only a spiritual centre, but also a centre of
learning and culture.
The
Sigāla-sutta (No.
31
of the Digha-nikāya) shows with what great respect the layman’s
life, his family and social relations are regards by the
Buddha.
A young man
named Sigāla used to worship the six cardinal points of the
heavens-east, south, west, north, nadir, and zenith- in
obeying and observing the last advice given him by his dying
father. The Buddha told the young man that in the ‘noble
discipline’ (ariyassa vinaye) of his teaching the six
directions were different. According to his ‘noble
discipline’ the six directions were: east: parents; south:
teachers; west: wife and children; north: friends, relatives
and neighbours; nadir: servants, workers and employees;
zenith: religious men.
‘One should
worship these six directions’ said the Buddha. Here the word
‘worship’ (namasseyya) is very significant, for one
worships something sacred, something worthy of honour and
respect. These six family and social groups mentioned above
are treated in Buddhism as sacred, worthy or respect and
worship. But how is one to ‘worship’ them? The Buddha says
that one could ‘worship’ them only by performing one’s
duties towards them. These duties are explained in his
discourse to Sigāla.
First:
Parents are sacred to their children. The Buddha says:
‘Parents are called Brahma’ (Brahmāti mātāpitaro).
The term Brahma denotes the highest and most sacred
conception in Indian thought, and in it the Buddha includes
parents. So in good Buddhist families at the present time
children literally ‘worship’ their parents every day,
morning and evening. They have to perform certain duties
towards their parents according to the ‘noble discipline’:
they should look after their parents in their old age;
should do whatever they have to do on their behalf; should
maintain the honour of the family and continue the family
tradition; should protect the wealth earned by their
parents; and perform their funeral rites after their death.
Parents, in their turn, have certain responsibilities
towards their children: they should keep their children away
from evil courses; should engage them in good and profitable
activities; should give them a good education; should marry
them into good families; and should hand over the property
to them in due course.
Second: The
relation between teacher and pupil: a pupil should respect
and be obedient to his teacher; should attend to his needs
if any; should study earnestly. And the teacher, in his
turn, should train and shape his pupil properly; should
teach him well; should introduce him to his friends; and
should try to procure him security or employment when his
education is over.
Third: The
relation between husband and wife: love between husband and
wife is considered almost religious or sacred. It is called
sadāra-Brahmacariya ‘sacred family life’. Here, too,
the significance of the term Brahma should be noted:
the highest respect is given to this relationship. Wives and
husband should be faithful, respectful and devoted to each
other, and they have certain duties towards each other: the
husband should always honour his wife and never wanting in
respect to her; he should love her and be faithful to her;
should secure her position and comfort; and should please
her by presenting her with clothing and jewellery. (The fact
that the Buddha did not forget to mention even such a thing
as the gifts a husband should make to his wife shows how
understanding and sympathetic were his humane feelings
towards ordinary human emotions). The fire, in her turn,
should supervise and look after household affairs; should
entertain guests, visitors, friends, relatives and
employees; should love and be faithful to her husband;
should protect his earnings; should be clever and energetic
in all activities.
Fourth: The relation
between friends, relatives and
neighbours: they
should be hospitable and charitable to one another; should
speak pleasantly and agreeably; should work for each others’
welfare; should be on equal terms with one another; should
not quarrel among themselves; should help each other in
need; and should not forsake each other in difficulty.
Fifth: The relation
between master and servant: the master or the employer has
several obligations towards his servant or his employee:
work should be assigned according to ability and capacity;
adequate wages should be paid; medical needs should be
provided; occasional donations or bonuses should be granted.
The servant or employee, in his turn, should be diligent and
not lazy; honest and obedient and not cheat his master; he
should be earnest in his work.
Sixth: The
relation between the religious (lit. recluses and brāhmanas)
and the laity: lay people should look after the material
needs of the religious with love and respect; the religious
with a loving heart should impart knowledge and learning to
the laity, and lead them along the good path away from evil.
We see then
that the lay life, with its family and social relations, is
included in the ‘noble discipline’, and is within the
framework of the Buddhist way of life, as the Buddha
envisaged it.
So in the
Samyutta-nikāya, one of the oldest Pali texts,
Sakka, the king of the gods (devas), declares
that he worships not only the monks who live a virtuous holy
life, but also ‘lay disciples (upāsaka) who perform
meritorious deeds, who are virtuous, and maintain their
families righteously’.
If one
desires to become a Buddhist, there is no initiation
ceremony (or baptism) which one has to undergo. (But to
become a
bhikkhu, a
member of the Order of the
Sangha, one has to
undergo a long process of disciplinary training and
education). If one understands the Buddha’s teaching, and if
one is convinced that his teaching is the right Path and if
one tries to follow it, then one is a Buddhist. But
according to the unbroken age-old tradition in Buddhist
countries, one is considered a Buddhist if one takes the
Buddha, the
Dhamma (the
Teaching) and the
Sangha
(the Order of Monks)-
generally called ‘the Triple-Gem’- as one’s refuges, and
undertakes to observe the Five Precepts (Paňca-sila)-the
minimum moral obligations of a lay Buddhist-(I)
not to destroy life, (2)
not a seal, (3)
not to commit adultery, (4)
not to tell lies, (5)
not to take intoxicating drinks-reciting the formulas given
in the ancient texts. On religious occasions Buddhists in
congregation usually recite these formulas, following the
lead of a Buddhist monk.
There are no
external rites or ceremonies which a Buddhist has to
perform. Buddhism is a way of life, and what is essential is
following the Noble Eightfold Path. Of course there are in
all Buddhist countries simple and beautiful ceremonies on
religious occasions. There are shrines with statues of the
Buddha, stūpas
or
dāgäbas
and Bo-trees in
monasteries where Buddhist worship, offer flowers, light
lamps and burn incense. This should not be likened to prayer
in theistic religions; it is only a way of paying homage to
the memory of the Master who showed the way. These
traditional observances, though inessential, have their
value in satisfying the religious emotions and needs of
those who are less advanced intellectually and spiritually,
and helping them gradually along the Path.
Those who
think that Buddhism is interested only in lofty ideals, high
moral and philosophical thought, and that is ignore the
social and economic welfare of people, are wrong. The Buddha
was interested in the happiness of men. To him happiness was
not possible without leading a pure life based on moral and
spiritual principles. But he knew that leading such a life
was hard in unfavourable material and social conditions.
Buddhism
does not consider material welfare as an end in itself: it
is only a means to an end-a higher and nobler end. But it is
a means which is indispensable, in dispensable in achieving
a higher purpose for man’s happiness. So Buddhism recognizes
the need of certain minimum material favourable to spiritual
success-even that of a monk engaged in meditation in some
solitary place.
The Buddha
did not take life out of the context of its social and
economic background; he looked at it as a whole, in all its
social, economic and political aspects. His teachings on
ethical, spiritual and philosophical problems are fairy well
known. But little is known, particularly in the West, about
his teaching on social, economic and political matters. Yet
there are numerous discourses dealing with these scattered
throughout the ancient Buddhist texts. Let us take only a
few examples.
The
Cakkavattisihanāda-sutta
of the
Digha-nikāya
(No.26)
clearly states that poverty (dāliddiya) is the cause
of immorality and crimes such as theft, falsehood, violence,
hatred, cruelty, etc. Kings in ancient times, like
governments today, tried to suppress crime through
punishment. The
Kūtadanta-sutta
of the same
Nikāya
explains how futile this is. It says that this method can
never be successful. Instead the Buddha suggests that, in
order to eradicate crime, the economic condition of the
people should be improved: grain and other facilities for
agriculture should be provided for farmers and cultivators;
capital should be provided for traders and those engaged in
business; adequate wages should be paid to those who are
employed. When people are thus provided for with
opportunities for earning a sufficient income, they will be
contented; will have no fear or anxiety, and consequently
the country will be peaceful and free from crime.
Because of
this, the Buddha told lay people how important it is to
improve their economic condition. This does not mean that he
approved of hoarding wealth with desire and attachment,
which is against his fundamental teaching, nor did he
approve of each and every way of earning one’s livelihood.
There are certain trades like the production and sale of
armaments, which he condemns as evil means of livelihood, as
we saw earlier.
A man named
Dighajānu once visited the Buddha and said: ‘Venerable Sir,
we are ordinary lay men, leading the family life with wife
and children. Would the Blessed One teach us some doctrines
which will be conductive to our happiness in this world and
hereafter.’
The Buddha
tells him that there are four things which are conductive to
a man’s happiness in this world: First: he should be
skilled, efficient, earnest, and energetic in whatever
profession he is engaged, and he should know it well (utthāna-sampadā);
second: he should protect his income, which he has thus
earned righteously, with the sweat of his brow (ārakkha-sampadā); (This
refers to protecting wealth from thieves, etc. All these
ideas should be considered against the background of the
period.) third: he should have good friends (kalyāna-mitta)
who are faithful, learned, virtuous, liberal and
intelligent, who will help him along the right path away
from evil; fourth: he should spend reasonably, in proportion
to his income, neither too much nor too little, i.e., he
should not hoard wealth avariciously, nor should he be
extravagant- in other words he should live within his means
(samajikatā).
Then the
Buddha expounds the four virtues conducive to a layman’s
happiness hereafter: (I)
Saddhā:
he should have faith and confidence in moral, spiritual and
intellectual values; (2)
Sila:
he should abstain from destroying and harming life, from
stealing and cheating, from adultery, from falsehood, and
from intoxicating drinks; (3)
Cāga:
he should practice charity, generosity, without attachment
and craving for wealth; (4)
Paňňā:
he should develop wisdom which leads to the complete
destruction of suffering, to the realization of Nirvāna.
Sometimes
the Buddha even went into details about saving money and
spending it, as, for instance, when he told the young man
Sigāla that he should spend one fourth of his income on his
daily expenses, invest half in his business and put aside
one fourth for any emergency.
Once the
Buddha told Ānāthapindika, the great banker, one of his most
devoted lay disciples who founded for him the celebrated
Jetavana monastery at Sāvatthi,
that a
layman, who leads an ordinary family life, has four kinds of
happiness. The first happiness is to enjoy economic security
or sufficient wealth acquired by just and righteous means (atthi-sukha);
the second is spending that wealth liberally on himself, his
family, his friends and relatives, and on meritorious deeds
(bhoga-sukha); the third
to be free from debts (anana-sukha);
the fourth happiness is to love a faultless, and a pure life
without committing evil in thought, word or deed (anavajja-sukha).
It must be noted here that three of these kinds are
economic, and that the Buddha finally reminded the banker
that economic and material happiness is ‘not worth one
sixteenth part’ of the happiness arising out of a faultless
and good life.
From the few
examples given above, one could see that the Buddha
considered economic welfare as requisite for human
happiness, but that he did not recognize progress as real
and true if it was only material, devoid of a spiritual and
moral foundation. While encouraging material progress
Buddhism always lays great stress on the development of the
moral and spiritual character for a happy, peaceful and
contented society.
The Buddha
was just as clear on politics, on war and peace. It is too
well known to be repeated here that Buddhism advocates and
preaches non-violence and peace as its universal message,
and does not approve of any kind of violence or destruction
of life. According to Buddhism there is nothing that can be
called a ‘just war’- which is only a false term coiled and
put into circulation to justify and excuse hatred, cruelty,
violence and massacre. Who decided what is just or unjust?
The mighty and the victorious are ‘just’, and the weak and
the defeated are ‘unjust’. Our war is always ‘just’, and
your war is always ‘unjust’. Buddhism does not accept this
position.
The Buddha
not only taught non-violence and peace, but he even went to
the field of battle itself and intervened personally, and
prevented war, as in the case of the dispute between the
Sākyas and the Koliyas, who were prepared to fight over the
question of the waters of the Rohini. And his words once
prevented King Ajātasattu from attacking the kingdom of the
Vajjis.
In the days
of the Buddha, as today, there were rulers who governed
their countries unjustly. People were oppressed and
exploited, tortured and persecuted, excessive taxes were
imposed and cruel punishments were inflicted. The Buddha was
deeply moved by these inhumanities. The
Dhammapadatthakathā
records that he, therefore, directed his attention to the
problem of good government. His views should be appreciated
against the social, economic and political background of his
time. He had shown how a whole country could become corrupt,
degenerate and unhappy when the heads of its government,
that is the king, the ministers and administrative officers
become corrupt and unjust. For a country to be happy it must
have a just government. How this form of just government
could be realized is explained by the Buddha in his teaching
of the ‘Ten Duties of the King’ (dasa-rāji-dhamma),
as given in the
Jātaka
text.
Of course
the term ‘king’ (Rāja)
of old should be replaced today by the term ‘Government’.
The Ten Duties of the King’, therefore, apply today to all
those who constitute the government, such as the head of the
state, ministers, political leaders, legislative and
administrative, etc.
The first of
the ‘Ten Duties of the King’ is liberality, generosity,
charity (dāna).
The ruler should not craving and attachment to wealth and
property, but should give it away for the welfare of the
people.
Second: A
high moral character (sila).
He should never destroy life, cheat, steal, and exploit
other, commit adultery, utter, falsehood, and take
intoxicating drinks. That is, he must at least observe the
Five Precepts of the layman.
Third:
Sacrificing everything for the good of the people (pariccāga),
he must be prepared to give up all personal comfort, name
and fame, and even his life, in the interest of the people.
Fourth:
Honest and integrity (ajjava).
He must be free from fear or favour in the discharge of his
duties, must be sincere in his intentions, and must not
deceive the public.
Fifth:
Kindness and gentleness (maddava).
He must posses a genial temperament.
Sixth:
Austerity in habits (tapa). He must lead a simple
life, and should not indulge in a life of luxury. He must
have self-control.
Seventh:
Freedom from hatred, ill-will, enmity (akkadha). He
should bear no grudge against anybody.
Eight:
Non-violence (avihimsā), which means not only that he
should harm nobody, but also that he should try to promote
peace by avoiding and preventing war, and everything which
involves violence and destruction of life.
Ninth:
Patient, forbearance, tolerance, understanding (khanti).
He must be able to bear hardships, difficulties and insults
without losing his temper.
Tenth:
Non-opposition, non-obstruction (avirodha),
that is to say that he should not oppose the will of the
people, should not obstruct any measures that are conductive
to the welfare of the people. In other words he should rule
in harmony with his people.
If a country
id ruled by men endowed with such qualities, it is needless
to say that that country must be happy. But this was not a
Utopia, for there were kings in the past like Asoka of India
who had established kingdoms based on these ideas.
The world
today lives in constant fear, suspicion, and tension.
Science has produced weapons which are capable of
unimaginable destruction. Brandishing these new instruments
of death, great powers threaten and challenge one another,
boasting shamelessly that one could cause more destruction
and misery in the world than the other.
They have
gone along this path of madness to such a point that now, if
they take one more step forward in that direction, the
result will be nothing but mutual annihilation along with
the total destruction of humanity.
Human beings
in fear of the situation they have themselves created, want
to find a way out, and seek some kind of solution. But there
is none except that held out by the Buddha – his message of
non –violence and peace, of love and compassion, of
tolerance and understanding, of truth and wisdom, of respect
and regard of all life, of freedom from selfishness, hatred
and violence.
The Buddha
says: ‘Never by hatred is hatred appeased, but it is
appeased by kindness. This is an eternal truth.’
‘One should
win anger through kindness wickedness through goodness,
selfishness through charity and falsehood through
truthfulness.’
There can be
no peace or happiness for man as long as he desires and
thirsts after conquering and subjugating his neighbour. As
the Buddha says: ‘The victor breeds hatred, and the defeated
lies down in misery. He who renounces both victory and
defeat is happy and peaceful.’
The only conquest that brings peace and happiness is
self-conquest. ‘One may conquer millions in battle, but he
who conquers himself, only one, is the greatest of conqueors.’
You will say
this is all very beautiful, noble and sublime, but
impractical. It is practical to hate one another? To kill
one another? To live in eternal fear and suspicion like wild
animals in a jungle? Is this more practical and comfortable?
Was hatred ever appeased by hatred? Was evil ever won over
by evil? But there are examples, at least in individual
cases, where hatred is appeased by love and kindness and
evil won over by goodness. You will say that this may be
true; practicable in individual cases, but that is never
works in national and international affairs. People are
hypnotized, psychologically puzzled, blinded and deceived by
the political and propaganda usage of such term as
‘national’, ‘international’, or ‘state’. What is a nation
but a vast conglomeration of individuals? A nation or a
state does not act; it is the individual who acts. What the
individual thinks and does is what the nation or the state
thinks and does. What is applicable to the individual is
applicable to the nation or the state. If hatred can be
appeased by love and kindness on the individual scale,
surely it can be realized on the national and international
scale too. Even in the case of a single person, to meet
hatred with kindness one must be tremendous courage,
boldness, faith and confidence in moral force. May it not be
even more so with regard to international affairs? If by the
expression ‘not practical’ you mean ‘not easy’, you are
right. Definitely it is not easy. Yet it should be tried.
You may say it is risky trying it. Surely it cannot be more
risky than trying a nuclear war.
It is a
consolation and inspiration to think today that at least
there was one great ruler, well known in history, who had
the courage, the confidence and the vision to apply this
teaching of non-violence, peace and love to the
administration of a vast empire, in both internal and
external affairs - Asoka, the great Buddhist emperor of
India (3rd century B.C.) -‘the Beloved of the
gods’ as he was called.
At first he
followed the example of his father (Bindusāra) and
grandfather (Chandragupta), and wished to complete the
conquest of the Indian peninsula. He invaded and conquered
Kalinga, and annexed it. Many hundreds of thousands were
killed, wounded, tortured and taken prisoner in this war.
But later, when he became a Buddhist, he was completely
changed and transformed by the Buddha’s teachings. In one of
his famous Edicts, inscribed on rock, (Rock Edict XIII, as
it is now called), the original of which one may read even
today, referring to the conquest of Kalinga, the Emperor
publicly expresses his ‘repentance’, it was for him to think
of that carnage. He publicly declared that he would never
draw his sword again for any conquest, but that he ‘wishes
all living beings non-violence, self control, the practice
of serenity and mildness. This, of course, is considered the
chief conquest by the Beloved of the gods (i.e., Asoka),
namely the conquest by piety (dhamma-vijaya).’
Not only did he renounce war himself, he expressed his
desire that ‘my sons and grandsons will not think of a new
conquest as worth achieving. .. let them think of that
conquest only which is the conquest by piety. That is good
for this world and the world beyond.’
This is the
only example in the history of mankind of a victorious
conquerer at the zenith of his power, still possessing the
strength to continue his territorial conquests, yet
renouncing war and violence and turning to peace and
non-violence.
Here is a
lesson for the world today. The ruler of an empire publicly
turned his back on war and violence and embraced the message
of peace and non-violence. There is no historical evidence
to show that any neighbouring king took advantage of Asoka’s
piety to attack him militarily, or that there was any revolt
or rebellion within his empire during his lifetime. On the
contrary there was peace throughout the land, and even
countries outside his empire seem to have accepted his
benign leadership.
To talk of
maintaining peace through the balance of power, or through
the threat of nuclear deterrents, is foolish. The might of
armaments can be produce fear, and not peace. It is
impossible that there can be genuine and lasting peace
through fear. Through fear can come only hatred, ill-will
and hostility, suppressed perhaps, for the time being only,
but ready to erupt and become violent at any moment. True
and genuine peace can prevail only in an atmosphere of
mettā,
amity, free from fear, suspicion and danger.
Buddhism
aims at creating a society where the ruinous struggle for
power is renounced; where calm and peace prevail away from
conquest and defeat; where the persecution of the innocent
is vehemently denounced; where one who conquers oneself is
more respected than those who conquer millions by military
and economic welfare; where hatred is conquered by kindness,
and evil by goodness, where enmity, jealousy, ill-will and
greed do not infect men’s minds; where compassion is the
driving force of actions; where all, including and love;
where life peace and harmony, in a world of material
contentment, is directed towards the highest and noblest
aim, the realization of the Ultimate Truth, Nirvāna.
