2500 Years Of Buddhism
P.V.
Bapat
---o0o---
CHAPTER 1
INDIA AND BUDDHISM
People from other
countries are often intrigued by the phenomenon that, originating in
India, Buddhism should, except for a few remnants in Bengal, Assam or
Orissa, have given place to Hinduism, which is now the dominant religion
of the country. This is particularly strange in view of the fact that
Buddhism, as a humanist force, profoundly affected religious and moral
ideas in its time, and acted as a powerful catalytic factor in
transforming existing social conditions.
Buddhism is a religion of kindness, humanity and
equality. While the religion of the Vedas allowed animal sacrifice to
propitiate the gods, Buddhism set its face against such sacrifices; on the
contrary, it waged a merciless campaign against this practice. The
complicated nature of the sacrificial ritual required the services of
Brahmins, who had specialized in that lore. The Brahmin therefore came to
hold a unique position in the social structure of the Indo-Aryans. Even
the Kshatriya and the Vaishya, who as dvijas (twice born) enjoyed
certain privileges in common with the Brahmin, could not take as prominent
a part as the Brahmin in the performance of the sacrifice. The Shudra on
the other hand was assigned menial tasks such as chopping wood and cutting
grass for the sacrifices, and dragging to the sacrificial ground dumb
animals like cows, bullocks and rams, with tears trickling down their
faces as described in the Buddhist texts such as the Kutadanta-sutta of
the Digha-nikaya.
The sramanahs who lived a life retirement
in the forests and gave themselves up to philosophical speculation did not
sympathize with sacrifices involving the slaughter of animals. Public
opinion was thus being gradually formed against such sacrifices and clear
indications of his change in public opinion can be found in the
Mahabharata and the Bhagavata Purana. Shantiparva
refers to two sides of the controversy, in which the
hermits pleaded for sacrificial offerings of corn or grain, while the gods
favoured offerings of living animals. In chapter 254 of he same parva,
there is a dialogue between Tuladhara and Jajali where animal
sacrifice is condemned and the practice of eating meat at such sacrifices
is attributed to interested rogues. In another place in the same parva
(257,6), it is claimed that ahimsa is the highest principle. The
Bhagavata Purana (1,8,52), says that killing of animals is not to be
condoned because it forms part of a sacrifice. Indeed, the Brahmins had
subsequently to modify their position and substitute for live animals
images made of corn flour (pista-pasu).
In this connection, it may legitimately be asked how
the Buddha preached the principle of ahimsa and kindness of living
animals, if he himself could eat meat and allow his followers to do so.
The explanation is simple. In a society where meat was commonly used in
daily food, he refused to eat meat, they would probably have starved to
death. As a practical man, the Buddha had to avoid extremes. Here also he
followed the Middle Path. He only imposed the restriction that if any monk
either saw or heard or even suspected that an animal had been killed
specially for him, then he was not to accept the meat.
Another special feature was the Buddhism denounced all
claims to superiority on the ground of birth as the Brahmins claimed. It
denounced all social distinctions between man and man, and declared that
it was karma, the actions of man, that determined the eminence or lowness
of an individual. In Buddhist literature, there are a number of sutras
where the Buddha (or his disciple) is represented as holding a discussion
with renowned Brahmins and ultimately bringing them round to his own way
of thinking. Assalayana-sutta
and Vajrasuci,
for instance, illustrate the Buddhist point of view. The position of the
Buddhists in this respect is appreciated and accepted in the
Mahabharata
and Bhagavata
. The insistence on the equality of social status based on
one’s actions and not on birth is an integral part of the literature of
mediaeval saints like Ramananda, Chaitanya, Kabir, Eknath and others (14th-17th
century A.D.).
The followers of the Buddha did not all belong to the higher classes, but
also included the lower classes, such as barbers, sweepers or
chandalas. Among the mediaeval saints, too Tukaram was a Shudra,
Rohidas a cobbler, and Sena a barber. Similarly, some sects like the
Lingayats, the Mahanubhavas and Ramanandis observe no class distinction.
Another feature of great sociological significance in
Buddhism was the fact that it threw open doors of organised religious life
to women and men alike. It is said that the Buddha was at first unwilling
to admit women into the religious organization of the Sangha. However,
when Ananda approached him on behalf of Mahapajapati Gautami, he finally
agreed, though not without misgivings about the ultimate result of such
step. At the same time, he laid down certain conditions which seem to
imply the subservience of women to men. Neverthless, it must be remembered
that he should not judged by the standards of the twentieth century. In
his day, this was a great step forward and in religious life women enjoyed
the same right of access to the highest position, that of Arhatship, for
instance, as it was recognized that women could also be as learned and
wise as men. In this connection, the names of distinguished nuns like
Khema, Patacara and Dhammadinna may be mentioned. Outside the Sangha,
women like Sujata, Visakha and Samavati all achieved positions of eminence
in different spheres
. Even courtesans like
Amrapali were not denied opportunities to embrace the religious life. In
the Therigatha also women like Uppalavanna, Subha, Kisa, Gautami and Soma
are referred to as having renounced the world out of unhappiness with life
in general. They accepted a life of devotion in order to overcome mundane
suffering and it is said that they made the best use of the opportunities
religion offered.
The institution of a band of disciplined, selfless
workers was at the very foundation of the Buddhist organization. The
Buddha’s injunction to these workers was always to go from place to place,
preaching his teachings throughout the year except during the rainy
season. He asked them to have compassion on the people and to work for
their happiness. One of his important instructions was, as he said, “Let
not two of you go in one and the same direction” (Ma ekena dve
agamittha). Herein lies the secret of success of the Buddhist
missionary activity. This practice naturally inspired the Buddhist
missionaries to create new spheres of activity for each group.
It is worth noting that the popularity of the Buddha
and his religion largely depended upon his method of approach to the
masses. The Buddha had asked his disciples to preach his doctrine in the
people’s own speech (sakaya niruttiya). The people were naturally
impressed. This appeal in a local dialect struck a sympathetic chord in
the hearts of the people, and they listened to the message of the Buddha,
particularly as it came to them through a band of selfless preachers who
had travelled long distances.
Through Gautama Buddha belonged to an aristocratic
family, his life and work were those of a democrat. He served the
interests of the masses and was concerned with their happiness. He
travelled widely for forty-five years, preaching to them. To carry out his
life’s mission, he founded the Sangha, the order of the Buddhist
fraternity of monks and nuns. The constitution and working of this
organization was on democratic lines. Everyone who was ordained as a
Buddhist monk could be a member of the Sangha in a particular locality and
all official business in a formal meeting of the Sangha was transacted
according to democratic principles. Every member had a vote and the
decision of the Sangha was taken by a vote of the majority. When a
complicated question came up before the Sangha, it was referred to a
select committee, whose recommendation had to be placed before the Sangha
for ratification. If a member of the Sangha was absent on account of
illness, his vote was recorded by bringing him, sometimes carrying him, to
the meeting place to cast his vote. All members of the Sangha in a parish
were required to be present at a formal meeting of the Sangha. Questions
about fixing the days of the Uposatha (day of fast), or the beginning of
the Vassavasa (retreat in the rainy season) were setteled by the majority,
and the minority had to submit to its decision, unless, of course, it was
a question of fundamental principles necessitating the convening of a
synod or religious council. The leader of the Sangha was generally elected
from among the theras or senior monks and he was respected by all.
As Buddhist monks had no private or personal property of their own, all
furniture or things in the monastery for the use of the monks, such as
cots or water jars, belonged to the whole community or the Sangha. No one
dared to question the authority of the Sangha which had come to be
respected as one of the Three Jewels (ratnani). The Sangha,
however, was not a close body of people belonging to a particular place,
but was open to monks from all the four directions (catuddisa-sangha).
In short, no official act of the Sangha was valid unless it was
decided at a meeting where all members and visiting monks in a parish were
either present or could communicate their wishes (chanda).
When it came to voting, marked sticks (shalakas)
were used and a responsible officer was appointed to keep watch over
voting. As monastic establishments developed, the Sangha began to appoint
office-bearers to supervise new constructions, to look after property, the
distribution of clothing, the allotment of dwelling places, the acceptance
of property as a gift to the Sangha, and the like. All these officers were
appointed after due election at a meeting of the Sangha, where proposal
was announced three times, and if there was no dissenting voice it was
declared carried.
During his lifetime, the Buddha allowed things to be
decided democratically by the Sangha; after his death, too, he did not
want to restrict the freedom of the Sangha by appointing his own
successor. He wanted the Dhamma and Vinaya to be its guides
after his death and anything which was not authorised by the Dhamma
and Vinaya was to be rejected by the Sangha.
In running its affairs, the Sangha no doubt drew its
inspiration from small oligarchies (ganarajya) like those of the
Vajjis or Licchavis of Vaisali
and of the Mallas of pava
or Kusinara.
At one time the Shakyas
also enjoyed a similar form of Government, but they seem to have lost it
long before. The Buddha showed great admiration for the Vajjis or
Licchavis when, in the Mahaparinibbanasutta, he likened the
Licchavis to the thirty-three gods (Tavatimsa). He also warned
Ajatasatru’s minister, Vassakara, saying that the Vajjis would remain
invincible as long as they adhered to the seven rules governing their
conduct (satta aparihaniya dhamma), namely, (i) daily meetings for
consultation; (ii) unity in action; (iii) adherence to old injunctions;
(iv) respect for elders; (v) respect for women who were never to be
molested; (vi) reverence for places of worship within or without
territory; and (vii) protection to worthy saints (Arhats) in their
territory.
The Liberal attitude shown by the Buddhists in throwing
the doors wide open to all who wished to participate in religious life
seems to have found general acceptance as the Gita indicates.
The worship of the images of deities became a common feature
of both Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious practice. There was nothing in
the practical life of a follower of the Buddha to which a non-Buddhist
could take exception.
Thus, many aspects of the Buddhist religion came to be
accepted by others and gradually no distinction remained. In the course of
time, Buddhism was absorbed by the reformed religion of Hinduism.
This, however, is not all. The Mahayana form of
Buddhism, perhaps under the influence of non-Aryan or aboriginal popular
cults in the lower strata of society, came to assume a darker and debased
form of tantrism. This might have resulted from a misunderstanding of the
symbolic language of the esoteric text of the Tantric school. Magic and
sorcery and secret rites and rituals introduced into later Buddhism,
particularly in respect of the female deities, no doubt, alienated the
people. It was therefore not surprising that people were antagonized by
some of the corrupt practices of the Tantric. This unhealthy development,
too, must have contributed considerably to the decline of Buddhism. This
form of Buddhism was in the ascendant and was studied at the Buddhist
universities of Nalanda and Vikramasila until the end of the 12th
century A.D.
The beginning of the 13th century brought
evil days both for Buddhism and Hinduism. For the former, however, the
blow proved to be more severe. The monasteries of Bihar were despoiled and
many of the monks fled to Nepal and Tibet. The lay Buddhists were left
without any religious guidance, which made it easier for them to be
absorbed in the non-Buddhist community as there was little distinction
left between the lives led by the Buddhist and non-Buddhists.
Nevertheless, a few isolated groups of Buddhists remained in Orissa,
Bengal, Assam and parts of South India. An inscription
recently discovered in Korea tells us of an Indian monk
called Dhyanabhadra who visited Kanchipura where he listened to a
discourse on an Avatamsaka-sutra in the 14th century
A.D.
There followed a long interregnum in the history of
Buddhism until in the later half of the 19th century the
attention of European scholars was drawn to the study of the Buddha and
his religion.
The reader will find in the following pages the story
of Buddhism not only in India (II-IV) but in other countries of the
East-its expansion (V), its ramifications into different schools and sects
(VI), its literature, particularly the literature bearing on the life of
the Buddha, his teachings and his disciplinary code (VII). Chapters have
also been devoted to the discussion of Buddhist ideas on education (VIII),
some great men among the Buddhists, both rulers and writers (IX), the
prevailing state of Buddhism as revealed by the records of the Chinese
pilgrims who came to India in the period between the fifth and the seventh
centuries A.D.
(X). Buddhist art in India and abroad (XI), places of
Buddhist interest in India (XII), and later modifications in Buddhism
which paved the way for its absorption into Hinduism (Xiii). The reader
will undoubtedly be interested in the revival of Buddhist studies, both in
the East and the West, and the eminent scholars who were responsible for
it (XIV). Nor can he forget the work of the Mahabodhi Society to the same
end, nor remain blind to the cultural and political implications of this
revival of the spirit of the Buddha and his teachings in the cause of
peace in the world.
---o0o---
[Content] [I]
[II]
[
III
] [IV]
[V]
[VI]
[VII]
[VIII]
[IX]
[X]
[XI]
[XII]
[XIII]
[XIV]
[XV]
[XVI]
---o0o---
Typing: Quang Huong Ngoc Tram ; Layout: Nhi Tuong
Update : 01-04-2003
