F-' <._L_{ rr.f-?-\r\.-- -\4./J t\ l- '.r \ ro! l* t\. i, ^tf ws DECEMBER 'r --\SFF/-. *43 1990 Vol. 28 No.2 PP I I t/3/90 r\ I *t
Buddhist Missionary Society 123, Jalan Berhala, Brickfields, 50470 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Aims & Objects I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. To study and propagate Buddhism. To encourage, foster and develop the qualities of truth, compossion ond to practise the Teachings of the Buddha. ' To arrange religious lectures wherever possible. To print Buddhist literature. To assist in the opening of religious schools and to render assistance to Buddhist organisations where necessary. To render spiritual ossistance/ advice to members or any Buddhist in case of sickness and/or death. To establish an Endowment Fund. Annual Subscription: Maloysia - M$s.00 Dollar Areas - U.,S. $5.00 Sterling Areas - Other countries - f" 3.00 U.,S. $4.00 Back copies are ovailable at M$3.00 per copy from the Society. The back copies can be eosily bound into volumes for reference. Advertisement rates on application. Letters and articles tor publication Should be addressed to The Editor. Published by The Buddhist Missionary Society. Printed by P.K.S., Petaiing Jaya, Mz:.ysia. rssn N42/2094-t990 FRONT PAGE: The picture depicts the Buddha arriving on the scene and advising the contending parties on the futility of war and the need for a peaceful settlement. Peace War is diametricolly opposed to peace. To achieve peoce, evil thoughts such os greed, jeolousy and hate must be controlled. The eradication of such thoughts and the maintenance of peoceful dialogue between individuals will lead to a world of peoceful and harmonious living. During the time of Gautama Buddha petty squobbles arose between farmers on either side of River Rohini which served as the boundory between the Sakyan and Koliyan kingdoms. This was the result of each party trying to divert more water to their fields. Subsequeit events led lo open hostilities between the Sokyas and Koliyas, culminating in both parties ossembling on either side of River Rohini in full battle orray. CONTENTS PAGE 'Disputes and Quarrels' Where do they come frorn? Kolahavivada Sutta - The Sutta - Nipato... 1 Validity and Vitality of The Theravada Tradition by Ven. Prof. Dr. ltalpolo Sri Rohula, England... 3 The Buddhist Concept of Moral Developme'nt by Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda, Malaysia... 8 Literary Elegance of The Dhammapada by Dr. Yoga Dhyan Ahuja, U.S.A.... 14 The Role of The Sangha and The Laity by Ven. Walpola Piyananda, U.S.A... 18 Buddha-Dhamma Our Rich Heritage by Tan Teik Beng, Malaysia... 20 CHINESE ARTICLE by DR. K. Sri Dhammananda... 24 BOOK REVIEWS...26 NEWS & ACTMTIES... 28
(6io { -B DECEM BE R PP l lt/3/90 -'*g 'Disputes and Quarrels' Where do they come from? Kalahavivada Sutta - The Sutta - Nipata 'Sir, Whenever there are arguments and quarrels there are tears and anguish, arrogance and pride and grudges and insults to go with them. Can you explain how these things come about? Where do they all come from?' 'The tears and anguish that follow arguments and quarrels, the arrogance and pride and grudges and insults that go with them are all the result of one thing. They come irom having preferences, from holding things precious and dear. Insults are born out of arguments and grudges are inseparable from quarrels.'said the Buddha. 'But why, Sir, do we have these preferences, these special things? Why do we have so much greed? And all the aspirations and achievements that we base our lives on, where do we get them from? 'The preferences, the precious things, come from the impulse of desire. So too does the greed and so too do the aspirations and achievements that make up people's lives.'said the Buddha. 'From where, Sir, comes this impulse of desire? From where do we derive our theories and opinions? And what about allthe other things that you have named - such as anger, dishonesty and confusion?' &=* 'The impulse of desire arises when people think of one thing as pleasant and another as unpleasant: that is the source of desire. It is when people see that material things are subject both to becoming and to disintergration that they form their theories about the world.' said the Buddha. Voice of Buddhism 1
Anncrrs 'Anger, confusion and dishonesty arise when things are set in pairs as opposites. The person with perplexity must train himself in the path of knowledge. The recluse declared the Truth after realizations.' said the Buddha.' 'But why, Sir is it that we find some thing pleasant and some unpleasant? What could we do to stop that? And this idea of becoming and disintegration, could you explain where that comes from?' 'lt is the action of contact, of mental impression, that leads to the feelings of pleasant and unpleasant. Without the contact they could not exist. And, as I see it, the idea of becoming and disintegration also comes from this source, from the action of contact.'said the Buddha. 'So what, Sir, does this contact come from? And the grasping habit, what's the reason for that? Is there anything that can be done to get rid of possessiveness and anything that could be eliminated so that there would be no more contact?' 'Contact exists because the compound of mind and matter exists. The habit of grasping is based on wanting things. If there were no wanting, there would be no possessiveness. Similarly, without the element of form, of matter, there would be no contact.' said the Buddha. 'What pursuit leads a person to get rid of form? And how can suffering and pleasure cease to exist? This is what I want to know about.' 'There is a state where form ceases to exist. It is a state without ordinary perception and without disordered perception and without no perception and without any annihilation of perception. It is perception, consciousness, that is the source of all the basic obstacles.'said the Buddha. 'Sir, you have explained to us everything we have asked you about. There is one more question we would like you to answer for us: Do the learned scholars of the world say that this is the highest purification of the individualbeing or do they say that there is some other, kind of goal?' 'There are scholars and authorities who say that this is the highest and the purification of the individual. There are others who maintain that the highest purity is to be found in the complete eradication of the five components of the person.' said the Buddha. 'And there is also the muni, the wise man. He has realized which things are dependencies and he knows that these are only crutches and props. And when he has realized this, he has become free. He does not enter into arguments and so does not enter the round of endless becomings.' said the Buddha. 2 Voice of Bu'ddhisnt
Validity and Vitality of The Theravada Tradition Lecture delivered at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, England. l t the Second Buddhist Council held in \ Vntoti, 700 years after the Buddha's I LParinibbana, some monks sought to change certain minor ruies in the Vinaya but toere opposed by the elder Theras, uho remained knotpn as the orthodox Therapada School These monks then broke off to form a separate, unorthodox School called Mahasanghika, u:hich uas the forerunner of the Mahayana School of Buddhism, as toe knout it today. Follouing the Second Council, many sects and schools arose from Theraoada and Mahasanghika but of these, only the Theraoada school has retained the same name up to the present time. Buddhism of the Therauada tradition usas introduced to Sri Lanka by the Arahant Mahinda in the third Century 8.C., during the reign of Emperor Asoka. It u)as not until the first Century B.C. that the Tripitaka u)as first committed to uriting at Aluaihara in the Matale District in Sri Lanka. Until then, the Buddhaaacana (toord of the Buddha) had been handed doun by oral tradition. It is true that in both Mahayana and Therauada Schools, there are popular beliefs and ritualistic external obseroances and practices peculiar to each of them. But they are superficial. What is important is that the fundamental and essential teachings of the Buddha are common to both Schools, such as the Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, Dependent Origination (Paticca Samuppada) and the thirty-seaen factors o r re q uisites of Enlightenment (Bo dhip akkhiv a Dhamma). Ed. By Ven. Prof. Dr. Walpola Sri Rahula Anncus During the life-time of the Buddha there was nothing called Theravada or Mahayana. There was only "the Buddha-uacana - the uord of the Buddha" or "Buddha-sasana - the message of the Buddha", " the teaching of the Buddha", consisting of the Dhamma "Doctrine" and the Vinaya "Discipline". It was not divided into books or classified as three Pitakas or five Nikayas. About three months after the parinirvanal of the Buddha, Maha Kassapa Thera, the oldest and the most respected of the then living disciples, convened a Council of five hundred direct disciples who were recognized as arahants, in order to determine and settle the authentic teaching of their Master. This council was held at Rajagaha, the capital of Magadha. The chief protagonists at this extremely important historical event were Ananda Thera, the Buddha's closest companion and attendant, considered to be the Custodian of the Dhamma (dhammabhandagarika), and Upali Thera who had been declared by the Master himself as the greatest expert in the Vinaya. Maha-kassapa Thera who presided at the Council, first took up the Vinaya as it was regarded as the life of the Sasana (ainayosasanassa ayu), and questioned Upali Thera about every precept beginning with the first parajika - where the precept was laid down, on account of what person, what was the offence etc. When the Vinaya Pitaka was settled in this manner and accepted by the Council as authentic, it was entrusted to Upali Thera himself with the request that he should, with his pupils, preserve the text.2 After the Vinaya, the Dhamma was taken sp, Maha-Kassapa Thera questioned Ananda Thera about the thirty four sutras of the Digha-nikaya (collection of long Discourses) beginning with the Brahmajala-sutta, and the Custodian of the Dhamma answered all the questions and recited the suttas. The perpetuation of the Dighanikaya was entrusted to Ananda and his pupils.'ln this manner the other four Nikayas also were settled. Sariputta Thera, the chief disciple of the Buddha, had passed away before the Master. So the preservation of the Maiihima-nikaVa (Middle iength Discourses) was entrusted to his pupils.a The Samyutta-nikaya (Kindred Sayings) was Voire o{ Buddhi-;n 3
Anrrcrrs assigned to the President of the Council, Maha- Kassapa Thera himself and his pupils.s The Anguttar a-nikaya (Gradual Sayings) was put in the charge of Anuruddha Thera and his pupils. The Cullavagga says that at the First Council all five Nikayas (panca nikaye) were settled.twe have seen that the Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta and Anguttara Nikayas were entrusted for perpetuation to four groups. But there is no mention of the Khuddaka-tikaya. Now, the Khuddaka-nikaya is the biggest of the five Nikayas. It is composed of the whole of the V in ay a-p it ak a, th e Ab h i d ahmm a-p it ak a, and the fifteen books such as the Khuddaka-patha, Dhammapada, Udana, ltiuuttaka, Suttanipata, etc.,8 We saw already that the Vinaya-pitaka was entrusted to Upali Thera and his pupils. But we do not know to whom the rest of the Khuddakanikaya, namely the Abhidhamma-pitaka and the other fifteen books were assigned. From the day in the fifth century B.C. up to the first century B.C. when the Tipitaka was for the first time committed to writing at Aluvihara in Matale District in Sri Lanka, for four long centuries the Buddhavacana "the usord of the Buddha" was handed down by oral tradition. Those Maha Theras who were the Buddha's direct disciples and their unbroken pupilary succession preserved the text by ganasajjhayana "group recitation" which is the oral tradition. It is not one person alone reciting a text, but a group of persons reciting it together. If one omits a word, others will supply it. If one uses a wrong word, another will correct it. If one forgets a line, others will recite it. Thus the text is controlled, protected and preserved intact. This method of oral tradition is supposed to be more reliable than a written record by one person from his memory after a period of some months or years. At the end of the Council Ananda announced that the Buddha had told him that the Sangha could abolish or amend minor rules if they so desired, after His death.eananda was reproved by the Council for not ascertaining from the Buddha what rules the Master meant by the term "minor". Different opinions were expressed on the question of the "minor rules". No unanimity was possible. Therefore, on a motion brought forward by the Council's President, Mahakassapa Thera, the Sangha unanimously decided neither to lay down new rules nor to remove any of the existing rules, but to follow the rules as they were laid down by the Buddha. Maha-Kassapa's main argument for his resolution was that the public opinion would go against them if they removed any rules. however minor they might be. This was the argument to which the resolution was accepted.lo It is of importance that, apart from public censure, Maha-Kassapa did not give any valid reason for not changing the rules. From that day to the present time, as far as we can gather, not a single Vinaya rule was ever changed by the Sangha of the Theravada tradition, nor were new rules introduced into the body of the Vinaya. But as time went on, they had to face the realities of life under newly developed circumstances, and felt difficulty in following the Vinaya in its original form. But the decision of the Rajagaha Council stood against any change or amendment of the Vinaya. Therefore, without changing the letter of the law and without incurring public censure on which so much emphasis was laid by Maha-Kassapa, bhikkhus discovered ways and means of overcorrring the difficulty by interpreting the law without compromising themselves. After all, the Vinaya was not ultimate truth, but only a convention, a legal system, agreed upon for the smooth conduct of a particular community. As such, it had to be interpreted. These interpretations and decisions are known under the term palimuttakavinicchaya which means "decisions not found in the original texts."1l There is a whole book called the Palimuttaka-vinayavinicchaya by Sariputta Thera who lived at Polimuttaka in Sri Lanka in the 13th century. It contains discussions and decisions not found in the original Vinaya texts Ṡo the first Council was smoothly and successfully terminated in seven months.12 As it was accomplished by Maha-Kassapa and other Theras, it was called theriya sangiti "Convocation of Theras" or Theravada. This was the beginning of what we call Theravada today. Only the Theravada existed during the first one hundred years after the Buddha 's death.13 Then, about one hundred years after the First Council, the Vajjiputtaka bhikkhus in Vesali declared lawful some ten practices, generally called "Ten Points" They were minor matters. For example, let us take a few : to keep and carry 4 Voice of Buddhism
Anncrrs salt in a horn uessel, in order to seasoh unsalted foods, uhen receiued (singilona-kappa); to take the midday meal, euen after the prescribed time, as long as the sun's shadozo had not passed the meridian by more than tuso fingers' breadth (duangula-kappa); to drink unfermented palmtaine) ialogi-kappao; to accept gold and siluer (jatarupa-raiata). But these amounted to modifying or disregarding some minor rules, which was against the unanimous decision of the Rajagaha Council. Therefore a Council of seven hundred selected eminent bhikkhus,la headed by Yasa, Revata and Sabbakami, was held at Vesali where the ten practices (Ten Points, dasa vatthu) were rejected as unlawful, and the dhamma (Doctrine) and the Vinaya (Discipline)were recited as at the First Council. This Second Council took eight months to complete its task.15 About ten thousand bhikkhus, condemned by the Vesali Council for unlawful, wrong practices, formed a separate, unorthodox Sect or School (acariya-vada) named Mahasanghika "Great Community." The Mahavamsa calls it acariyavada "Sect-S" or "School".tt But the Tika, ihe Commentary on the Mahavamsa, says that they "split the original Community" - mulasangham bhinditva - and "founded another opposing, rival Community" - annam sangham vilomam akamsu." Whether this acaruya-vada named Mahasanghika could be considered as sanghabheda, "schism", is an interesting question. We know Devadatta committed sangha-bheda. He tried to form his own Sangha rejecting the Buddha, his Dhamma and Sangha. But the Mahasanghika-bhikkhus did not reject the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. They only did not agree with the orthodox Theravada Community on certain disciplinary questions, but they, like the Theravada bhikkhus. accepted the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Today there are many "Sects" or Nikayas within the Sangha in Buddhist countries due to various minor matters, but they have nothing to do with sangha-bheda. During the years that followed the Second Council, there arose many Sects or "Schools" both from Theravada and Mahasanghika, such as G okulik a, Ek au y o harik a, P annttiu ada, B ahu- Iika, Mahimsasaka, V ajjiputtaka, Bhadray anika, Sammiti, Sabbatthaaada.'E They promulgated various theories and doctrines. Of these Schools or Sects, no one, except Theravada, exists today bearing any of those names. About two hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvana, i.e. in the third century 8.C., Asoka, the great Emperor of India embraced Buddhism and became its ardent patron. Allured by the high status and comforts granted to the Sangha by the Emperor, undesirable and corrupting elements entered the Order thereby disturbing its unity and peace. Asoka was compelled therefore to hold at Pataliputra (modern Patna) a sangiti which is generally known as the Third Council, to settle authoritatively the Canon of the Scriptures and to rid the Sangha of dissensions. This Council had as its members one thousand distinguished bhikkhus and its work was completed ln nine months.le After this Council, under the instructions of its farsighted President, Moggaliputta-Tissa Thera, dhamma-suttas or missionaries for the establishment of Buddhism were sent out to nine countries among which Sri Lanka was included. Asoka's own son, Mahinda Thera, was entrusted with the task of establishing Buddhism in Sri Lanka. The Emperor perhaps felt that his work would be most successful in that island, for Devanampiya-Tissa, the King of Sri Lanka, had already expressed his friendship by sending ambassadors with valuable gift to the Indian Emperor. Wherever they went, the Indian Buddhist missionaries were successful. Even Greeks like Yonaka Dhammarakkhita became Buddhist monks. But Sri Lanka was the most fertile of all fields for the Buddhist activities of Asoka. What Mahinda took to Sri Lanka was pure Theravada as it was settled at the Third Council. It had nothing to do with Hinayana (Small Vehicle) or Mahayana (Great Vehicle). These terms are not known to the Theravada Pali literature. They are not found in the Pali Canon (Tipitaka) or in the Commentaries (Atthakatha) on the Tipitaka, not even in the Pali Chronicles of Sri Lanka, the Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa. It is universally accepted by scholars that the terms Mahayana and Hinayana are later inventions. Historically speaking, Theravada already existed long before these terms came into being. At the time Buddhism went to Sri Lanka, i.e. in the 3rd century B.C., there was nothing called Mahayana, which began to appear much later, about the beginning of the Christian Era. Without Mahayana there could not be Hinayana. Voice of Buddhism 5
Anncrrs Buddhism that went to Sri Lanka with its Tipitaka and Atthakatha (commentaries), in the 3rd century 8.C., remained there intatt as Theravada, and did not enter the scene of the Mahayana-Hinayana dispute that developed later in India. It is therefore illegitimate to include Theravada in either of these two categories. However, after the inauguration of the World Fellowship of Buddhists in Sri Lanka in 1950, well-informed people, both in the East and in the West, use the term Theravada, and not the term Hinayana, with reference to the Buddhism prevalent in South-East Asian countries like Burma. Cambodia, Sri Lanka'and Thailand. In fact, it is doubtful if any Hinayanan sect or School, mentioned in the Mahavamsa or in other ancient books is in existence today anywhere in the world. The Pali texts of the Tripitaka, brought to Sri Lanka by Mahinda Thera, continued to be handed down by oral tradition. The first century B.C. was one of the most important periods in the history of Theravada Buddhism. Certain radical changes with farreaching results pertaining to the life of bhikkhus as well as Buddhist doctrines took place during the later part of that century. At that time the whole of Sri Lanka was violently disturbed by a foreign invasion on the one side, and on the other, it was ravaged by an unprecedented famine. The whole country was in chaos. Some learned theras had died. Some others had left the country for foreign lands. Even the continuation of the oral tradition was gravely threatened. During this period there was only one monk who knew by heart the Pali text named the Maha- Niddesa. He was a man of immoral character. Yet the virtuous and learned maha-theras had even been willing to learn it from him so that the text might not be lost with his death.2oit was under these circumstances that the far-seeing maha theras decided, as the last resort, to commit the Tripitaka to writing at Aluvihara in Matale so that the teaching of the Buddha might prevail. On account of these calamities, the attitude of monks seems to have undergone a vital change. After the famine, at a meeting of several hundred monks held at a monastery called Mandalarama, a new question was raised-question that was never raised before: What is the basis of sasana (religion) - pariyatti (learning) or Patipatti (practice)2l Some maintained that patipatti was the basis while others held that pariyatti (learning) was the basis of the sasana, and not patipatti (practice). Out of this new debate there seem to have evolved, as a necessary corollary, two vocations termed gantha-dhura and'vipassanadhura. Gantha-dhura which means the "vacation books" denotes the learning and teaching of the dhamma while vipassana-dhura means original Canonical Pali texts. This division is found only in Pali Commentaries of the 5th century A.C. and other non-canonical works. The acceptance of the new idea that learning is the basis of sasana seems to have given rise to this innovation. In the 5th century A.C., Buddhaghosa edited and translated the Sinhala Commentaries into Pali. There is a mistaken idea among some people that Buddhaghosa was the author of the pali Commentaries. But Buddhaghosa himself says in his elegant introductory verses to the Pali Commentaries that the Commentaries brought to Sri Lanka by Mahinda Thera were translated into Sinhala language and that he was translating them into Magadha22, which we now call Pali. We can be certain that not a single page of the pali canon was lost after the 5th century A.C. because the text was fixed by the Commentaries, whereas about goof the original Sanskrit Tripitaka was lost. They are now available in Chinese and Tibetan versions. Sub commentaries or Tikas on the Pali Commentaries and works embodying the interpretations and decisions of the great theras in Sri Lanka were written after the 10th century A.C. This corpus of enormous literature - Tipitaka, Atthakatha, Tika and Pakarana - produced by the theras of Sri Lanka, was later transmitted to Burma, Cambodia and Thailand where it was accepted as the pure Theravada tradition. Talking about Theravada we should not forget Mahayana. There are people who think these are two different religious systems. Some orthodox Theravada Buddhists even consider Mahayana to be heretical. It is true there are popular beliefs and ritualistic external observances and practices peculiar to each of them. But they are superficial. The fundamental and essential teachings of the Buddha are common to both. For example, Four Noble Truths, Dependent Origination (Paticcasamuppada), 6 Voirc af Eudrl/ttsttt
ARncrrs Anatta doctrine, thirty seven Factors or Requisites of Enlightenment (bodhipakkhiya dhamma) which include Four Foundations of Mindfulness (satipatthana), Four Bases of Power (iddhipada), seven Factors of Enlightenment (bojjhanga) and such other teachings are common to both Theravada and Mahayana. With regard to certain teachings, Mahayana, and also Sarvastivada, come closer to the Pali suttas than the Theravada Abhidhamma. In the Pali Nikayas of the Sutta-pitaka we come across four rupavacara jhanas (Absorptions of the fine Material Sphere). But the Pali texts of the Abhidhamma-pitaka speak of four jhanas (Absorptions, Trances) according to one method and of five according to another. Thus, the Dhammasangani, an abhidhamma text, first enumerates the four jhanas as found in the suttas and says this is the catukka-naya (Method of Four), and then gives the five jhanas according to another method and calls it pancaka-naya (Method of Five).8 The Vibhangi too, another abhidhamma text, as usual, first gives the four jhanas and says it is the Suttantas), and then gives the five jhanas and says it is the Abhidhammabhajaniya (Division according to the Abhid- hamma).z Later Pali works on the Abhidhamma such as the Abhidhammattha-sangaha and the Abhidhammavatara speak only of five jhanas5 ignoring altogether even the classifications according to "the Method of Four and Five" of "the Division according to the Sutta and the Abhidhamma". But in the Abhidharma-samuccaya of Asangu,'u u purely Mahayana Abhidharma text of the fourth century A.C. as well as in the Abhidharma-kosa of Vasubandhu2T, a Sarvastivada Abhidharma text, also of the same century, we find only four rupavacara-dhyanas. It is evident that the list of five rupavacarajhanas, which is not found in the original Pali suttas, is a later development in the Abhidhamma, and the very terms Suttanta-bhajaniya and Abhidhamma - Bhajaniya found in the Vibhanga seem to support this. There is no such division in the original suttas. If you study the subject in detail, you will see that the treatm nt of the dhyanas found in the Mahayana and Sarvastivada Abhidharma is, on the whole, closer to the original Pali suttas than that found in the Theravada Abhidhamma, particularly in the later Abhidhamma texts. a- Notes L Some people write "Ninsana of the Buddha" uhich is meaningless. The death of the Buddha or an arahant is called pariniruana. 2. Digha-nikaya Atthakatha I (PTS) p.13 3. lbid p.ls a. Ibid p.ls s. lbid p.ls 6. lbid p.ls 7. Vinaya Vol Il Cullauassa (PTS) p.287 8. Samantapapasadika I (PTS) p.27; DA 27: Da I (PTS) p.23 Generally, books on the history of Pali literature consider the Khuddaka-nikaya as belonging to the Sutta-pitaka, which is an error. When the Buddha uacana "The word of the Buddha" is dioided into fiue Nikayas, all Buddha-t:acana, all tripitaka, must be included in fiue Nikayas, not only the Suttapitaka. 9. Cullauagga, p. 287 10. Ibid. p. 288 77. Samantapasadika (Simon Hewauitaq/rnse ed.) p 557 12. DA I (PTS) p. 12 L3. Mahauamsa V 7-2.74. Mahauamsa lv 62; Samantapasadika I (PTS) p. 3a 1s. lbid 76. Mahatsamsa V 3-4 77. Mahauamsa-Tika, Vamsatthappakasini Vol I (PTS) 18. 19. 20. 21,. 22 23. 24. 25. p. 173 Mhu. V 3-13 Smp. I (PTS) p. 61; Mho. V 279 Smp. ( Simon Heutaoitarne ed.) p.. 503 pariyatti nu kho sasanassa mulam udahu patipatti, Anguttaqraq Atthakatha (Simon Hetoaqz;ita/ rne e d. ) p. 52 See the introductory oerses to Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta, Anguttara and Vinaya Commentaties. Dhammasangani ( PTS) pp. 31-36 Vibhanga (PTS) pp. 2s6-277 Abhidhammattha-sangaha, ed. Siri Deoamitta, (1929), p.3 Abhidhammatsatara (PTS) p. 4 26. Abhidharma-samuccaaya of Asanga, ed. Pradhan (19s0) p. 68 or Compendium de la Super-Doctrine (Philosophie), (Abhidharmakosa, Ch. Vlll, uu 7-9 I rr1ri. 11r t1;til"tttirt,,
Anncrm The Buddhist Concept of Moral Development I n any society, it is imperatiue for its members I to be guided by a set of morals and ethics Luhich are conducitse to the well-being of the community. Othenoise it uould be deuoid of character, direction and unity. Whereas in the past religious teachers sought to try and define uhat morality u)as most suitable for the masses, and ztsere held in great aue and respect as the guardians of morality, today their control ouer moral behauiour has considerably weakened. While Buddhism is mainly concerned with the moral deuelopment of man, it needs to be noted that moral latps in Buddhism tuere not formulated by a supernatural being, but euolued by man according to his understanding and experience of the human life. lt also lays great importance on the deuelopment of utisdom. The behauiour of a Buddhist is,not gouemedby hb fear of punbhment by a diuine being, but by his oton inner understand ing of what is good or bad for himself and others. The reuard for performing good deeds is that it promotes the well-being of self and others. When bad deeds are done, it causes unhappiness and misery to self and others, and the resulting remorse is its otan punbhment. This is the distinctiue feature of thb Buddhist concept of moral deuelopment. Ed. By Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda, Malaysia. The question of moral development has intrigued man from the very earliest of times. There can be no denying that when we talk of morals we are concerned with ideas that touch us very deeply and that are most necessary for our survival as human beings. Even amongst animals we can discern certain codes of behaviour which can very generally be classified as "moral", insofar as they contribute to the security and well being of the group. For example, all animals that live in groups show very great degrees of cooperation, like following the leader, protecting the young and so on. Primitive people also have certain codes of behaviour which contribute to the general cohesiveness and well being of the group. Of course this does not mean that animals bear the responsibility for what they do and they are therefore not "moral" in any human sense. But such behaviour means restraint and the sacrifice of a certain degree of individual freedom so that all may benefit. So long as one has to live as a member of a community one has to control his behaviour to meet the approval of others. Before we reall! go into a discussion of the subject "Moral Development through Religion", it would perhaps be wise to define what we mean by morality. To my mind the term "morality" defies any empirical description because morality reflects the culture of a group of people and is therefore deeply subjective. This means that what is "moral" to one society may be considered immoral in another. For example, bigamy or polygamy is acceptable in some societies, because of social and economic reasons whereas in other societies it is regarded as totally unacceptable. Again, the eating of human and other flesh is disgusting to some while to others it is quite normal. Our attitudes to sexual behaviour also vary qutte considerably from one,community to another. Morals could therefore mean a code of behaviour acceptable to or approved by a certain group or society at a particular period of time. The moral code pertaining to any one particular community is subject to change for any number of reasons. For our purposes let us consider the terms "ethics" and "morals" together because they are generally used interchangeably. "Ethics" is derived from the Greek word "ethos" which originally meant customs, habitual conduct, usages (later it was also used to connote 'character'). The term "morals" on the other hand is derived from the Latin 'mores' which signifies customs or habits. Therefore ethics and morals refer to those things we disapprove of as being harmful or not conducive to the well-being of a community. Each 8 Voice of Buddhbm
Anncus society, religion, professional group or community has its principles, its standards of conduct. Our daily behaviour is governed by such standards: for example, we must not kill, or tell lies or get intoxicated or indulge in sexual misconduct and so on. Such moral rules are necessary to guide a social group, otherwise the group will be devoid of character and direction and unity. These rules are not permanent. As society changes over a period of time according to economic and social developments, so too do values change. For example, only a hundred years ago in the West and most parts of Asia it was considered immoral for a woman to reveal her arms and legs to public view, but such an attitude no longer holds true. Similarly in the past abortion was considered disgraceful in some countries but today abortion has been legalised in many countries. To be sure, the main aim of leading a "moral" life is to produce a maximum of pleasure of cheerfulness or serenity and correspondingly a minimum of pain and discomfort to oneself. Of course, when one seeks pleasure one is basically displaying a degree of self-interest but if one is a moral person then one would seek happiness without in any way jeopardising the happiness of others, Ernest Hemingway has said that any action is moral that does not induce remorse after it is done. For us the overiding question should be "How should I live in order to achieve happiness, well-being, the enioyment of the good not only for myself, but also of other living beings?". Today, probably more than any other time in the history of man, we must address ourselves to the problem of the moral development of man. Ever since the animal called "Homo Sapiens" first walked on the face of the earth, he had very little individual choice in the conduct of his life, in how he could seek happiness. For the vast majority of people the greatest, and sometimes even the only need, was to satisfy the basic necessities of food, shelter and sexual gratification. This meant there was very little time for the pursuit of happiness. The majority of men had most of their moral choices made for them by their feudal masters, their landlords, their priests or their creditors. Man's personal freedom was further curtailed by natural phenomena like rain, drought, famine, plagues, earthquakes and so on. In short the average man throughout history had very little individual freedom through which he could exercise moral development. Such a state of affairs exists even today in many of the poor countries of the world. Throughout history religious teachers and thinkers sought to try and define what morality meant for the masses. For the most part religious leaders took it upon themselves to become the guardians of morality and much cruel punishment was meted out in the name of the preservation of morality. Here we only have to think of the infamous Spanish Inquisition or the witch hunts of Salem in Puritan America to see how much cruelty was engendered in the name of morality. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the last century and thanks to the socialist ideas of thinkers like Marx and Engels, the writings of novelists like Charles Dickens and the scientific discoveries of Charles Darwin, individual human beings began to exercise more and more freedom; they began to be free because their basic needs of food and shelter and clothing were made available relatively more easily than ever before. However the materialistic development of man in the last 100 years has brought about a corresponding development in his moral behaviour. It can safely be said that perhaps for the first time in history man is in control of the forces of nature, resulting in his no longer being so completely concemed with survival alone. He has also more money to spend and certainly he has far more time for leisure. And never before have there been so many opportunities for the common man to indulge in the pleasures of the senses. So much of modern entertainment has been designed to satisfy man's greed for sensual pleasures. The ready availability of lewd entertainment through the cinema and television, the vast quantities of liquor on sale, the number of gambling houses that remain open, the massage parlours, the night clubs, the drug pushers and so on, together with the availability of more money means that our moral standards which stood us in good stead in the past are in severe danger of being destroyed. I would not say that modem man is any more cruel, or more degenerate or more greedy or more selfish than his predecessors. I think that in any age man has consistently displayed his innate animal nature. But the difference between ourselves and our ancestors lies in the fact that today we have far more resources and methods to arouse L/oice oi fludilhi,<rtt 9
Anncrm man's lust for sensual pleasure than ever before. We may say that he is a victim of affluence. On the other hand, we must remember also that certainly in no olher age has mah's conscience been so sharp, and his concern for the safety of the human race so acute. But today there is a very thin line between morality and immorality. The traditional guardians of morality - religious people - are not being held in as great awe and respect as before. Consequently, their control over moral behaviour is perhaps at its weakest point. Today few people would allow others to control their moral behaviour. Thanks to widespread education, individuals can judge for themselves what is good for themselves and others. And today the average man is in a position to bear the responsibility for his deed. He can therefore not blame anyone but himself for anything he does which is wrong. In the past many religions held the people in check by threatening them with punishment in the after life. Today very few people lead a moral life because of the fear of punishment. Rather they pursue morality voluntarily because they understand that happiness can only be gained by restraint and a genuine concern for the welfare of others. The function of moral laws is to uplift man, to raise him from the level of mere animal behaviour. In this sense many moral codes found in religion do serve a very important function, namely to improve the nobility and dignity of mankind. However we must remember that some moral codes whkh were set up for the benefit of a group at one time in history, may no longer be relevant at another time. If we cannot adapt to changing needs, we will be in danger of becoming fossilized and irrelevant. Today we should try and examine the common grounds all our various religions have, so that by understanding them together we can cooperate more closely to help the people of the world become better citizens and nobler human beings. It is with this hope in mind that I would like to move on to the next part of my discussion, namely how Buddhists view the question of the moral development of man. I hope that with our co-religionists who hold different beliefs we can find common grounds on which we can all cooperate as citizens of a country. In the Buddhist scheme of things the concepts of good and bad are seen as two sides of the same coin. Cood and bad deeds both originate in the mind, the ultimatesource of all action. Bad deeds are caused by the negative mental attitudes of Craving, Hatred and Illusion (Loba, Dosa, Moha). In order for a bad action to result one or more of these conditions must be present. Conversely, good deeds prevail in the absence of these three conditions of Craving, Hatred.and lllusion. In order to prevent evil or unwholesome thoughts and actions a Buddhist must conscientiously cultivate the positive mental attitudes of Aloba, Adosa and Amoha (non crauing, compassion and perception). The strength of these virtues are inversely proportionate to their opposite, negative attitudes. The presence or absence of good and evil attitudes within a person therefore has nothing to do with divine will. It is merely a condition of birth, present in every normal human being. Every human being is born with the tendenry towards goods as well as evil. How he cultivates these tendencies is entirely up to the individual. If a man trains his mind to be free from craving, hatred and illusion, he becomes liberated from misery; he is at peace with himself, and he brings no misery to others. This is the only reward he seeks. According to Buddhism, moral laws can be classified into 2 very broad categories namely:- 1. Those which are governed by attributes that affect all human beings equally. Shame and fear, cruelty and kindness, compassion are all manifestations of leamed behaviour and every human being bears within him the potential for displaying such behaviour. 2. Man made, culturally defined moral codes which are changeable and which can vary from one society to the next. Most national legal systems fall into this category (e.g. "antidadah", internal security etc.) According to Buddhism, everything is in a state of flux, nothing is ever permanent. In such a situation we must never take a rigid stand on any moral law, but be prepared to adapt ourselves to the changing circumstances so that we do not become fossilized and hard. We must clearly understand the universally unchangeable laws of nature and keep modifying our man-made laws so that while they are 70 Voice of ljtddhtsm
Anncus kept alive and meaningful with each other they remain true to the universal laws. Moral laws in Buddhism were not formulated by any superior being in order to satisfy that being. However, these laws were evolved by man according to his understanding and experience of the nature of the universe. So at one time, while it was considered moral to make animal sacrifices to the various forces of nature, man's understanding, his compassion and his mastery over these forces make such sacrifices unnecessary and immoral. What is important to note here is that Buddhists lay great stress on the development of wisdom and the behaviour of a man is governed not by his fear of punishment by an external force, but by his own inner understanding of what is good or bad for himself and others. Hence Buddhists are not bound by any rigid moral laws which they may not disobey. They understand that they can expect no reward or punishment for good or bad deeds. They understand that good behaviour that promotes the well-being of self and others is its own intrinsic reward, Similarly, bad behaviour does not invoke the wrath of an external being whose anger is provoked. Rather, bad behaviour causes unhappiness to self and others, and the remorse that follows such action is its own punishment. So it can be seen that a Buddhist bears the sole responsibility for each of his own actions. It has often been asked what happens when someone is in trouble. While people of other faiths can turn to an external, divine source for comfort and protection, Buddhists do not look for any such aid. The Buddha was asked this question and he replied "Dhammo Have Rakkhati Dhamma Cari". It means "He who lives according to the Dhamma, he will be protected by the Dhamma." Here "the Dhamma" refers to the Universal Law of Existence. When one lives in harmony and in accordance with this law, then the Dhamma will protect him because he does not violate the law and upset the equilibrium of the universe. We suffer because we upset the natural order (pollution is just one example). Hence man must respect the universal laws in order to live in peace and harmony. This is the only protection he needs to seek. To do this, Buddhists are guided by the Noble Eightfold Path which was preached by the Buddha as a means by which they control, develop and purifi their behaviour in their individual quest for peace and understanding. No one is forced to follow the path, there is no punishment for him who choose not to be guided. The Buddha, alone among all the religious teachers, has expressly stated that no one must follow his teachings simply because He said so. On the other hand, each individual must seek to understand what the Noble Eightfold Path means and only follow it out of his own conviction that it can lead to peace, contentment and above all, wisdom. The Eightfold Path is divided into three parts, Sila, Samadhi and Panna (Moral Conduct, Concentration and Wisdom). The first part of this clearly defines the moral behaviour of a human being who has decided of his own free will to embark on the voyage to wisdom. The very placement of SILA at the beginning of the eightfold path serves to emphasize the fact that moral behaviour is the first requisite of anyone who wishes to lead a pure religious life. In fact it has been noted that morality is the very foundation of Buddhism. A strong moral base, where the senses are controlled, is absolutely necessary for anyone who wishes to progress on the path to freedom from hatred, ignorance and greed. If there is no moral development, there can be no religious way of life for Buddhists. Sila is based on loving compassion. Why should one refrain from harming or robbing others? It is because one loves others as oneself. Why does one help the poor and the helpless? It is out of compassion. Buddhism in its essence teaches one to do good and to avoid evil. Here we can see these two aspects of Sila viz: L. Varitra: Where one avoids evil in a passive sense 2. Caritra: Where one fulfils one's duty and does good in an active sense Sila embraces within it qualities of the heart such as love, modesty, tolerance, pity, generosity and happiness at the success of others. And all these great qualities contribute to compassion. But compassion must arise not merely because someone or some eternal being requires it. Compassion must arise from wisdom. If one develops good conduct without the wisdom to understand Vaice of Buddhisn 71
Anncrrs why he does so, he merely becomes a goodhearted fool. On the other hand if one merely develops his intelligence without at the same time developing Sila (morality) then he becomes a hard-hearted intellectual. Many of today's scientists who seek material knowledge without concerning themselves about love for living things fall into this.category. By observing Sila a good Buddhist can contribute to the happiness of his fellow beings in a definite way. The way to do this is to follow the five precepts which are: L. to abstain from killing 2. to abstain from taking what is not given 3. to abstain from irresponsible sexual behaviour 4. to abstain from irresponsible speech 5. to abstain from taking anything which induces loss of self control. (liquor, drug etc.) If a man can observe these five precepts even passively he can contribute much to society. In the moral code of Buddhists, the main reason for observing Sila is to allow others to live peacefully, the concern is for the well-being of others, human and animal, not the selfish hope of a reward for doing something that pleases an all powerful eternal being. No one can deny that this noble aim is the highest contribution that religion can make to the happiness of rnankind. The Buddha has taught that even before the religions of the world came into existence, men were guided towards moral behaviour through the existence of two qualities which distinguished them from animals, namely moral Shame and moral Dread. According to the accepted meanings of these words we may say that human beings refrain from evil actions because of their fear of punishment and the shame that follows upon the discovery of a misdeed. Buddhists have a deeper meaning attached to these words. According to them, a human being feels Shame (Hiri) not for selfish reasons but because he realizes that his bad action will bring shame upon the human race to which he belongs. Therefore he does good with the noble aim of uplifting the good name of his kind. Similarly Dread (Othappa) does not arise from selfish motives. A Buddhist empathizes with the fear of a victim facing danger. Since he understands and feels the fear of the victim, as if he were himself 12 1.1:ice ot Ruijhistn in danger, he refrains from causing pain or putting another being in fear. So we can see that the underlying motives which made man do good (to avoid shame and fear) are given a new and nobler significance in the Buddhist rationale for good behaviour. It should be clear here that according to Buddhism good moral conduct is the means to an end, namely to seek the wisdom to find inner peace and tranquillity and while doing this to contribute actively to the well-being of all living things. In developing good moral behaviour a Buddhist undertakes to develop the following which are the first three divisions of the noble eightfold path:- (the other five are designed to develop mindfulness and wisdom). 1. Right Speech : to be vigilant against irresponsible speech like lying, slander, harshness, idle talk, boasting and so on. 2. Right Action : to avoid killing, stealing, illicit sexual indulgence, cultivating compassion, taking only that which is given and which is deserved. 3. Right Livelihood : avoiding wrong ways of earning a living which bring harm to others: e.g. trafficking in arms, dealing with animals for slaughter, slavery in any form, selling intoxicating liquor, drugs and so on. In order to ensure that these three steps of moral conduct are practised on a daily basis the practising Buddhist undertakes to observe the five basic principles to be observed which were discussed earlier on. It must be stressed once more that Buddhists do not undertake to follow these precepts because of fear of punishment or because of the hope of a reward either here or in the after life. Buddhism does not make any such promise or threat. On the other hand they are encouraged to understand that the practice of SILA as enshrined in the 5 precepts will contribute to the well-being of all living beings, animal as well as human. Buddhism has often been described as a "gentle religion" for the reason that it constantly reminds its followers to practise restraint and ensure the well-being of others.