Violence And
Disruption In Society:
A Study Of The Early Buddhist Texts
Elizabeth
Harris
---o0o---
Introduction
At 8.15 a.m. Japanese time, on August 6th 1945, a
U.S. plane dropped a bomb named "Little Boy" over the center of the city of
Hiroshima. The total number of people who were killed immediately and in the following
months was probably close to 200,000. Some claim that this bomb and the one which fell on
Nagasaki ended the war quickly and saved American and Japanese lives -- a consequentialist
theory to justify horrific violence against innocent civilians. Others say the newly
developed weapons had to be tested as a matter of necessity.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki ushered in a new age.
Humankind's tendency towards conflict and violence can now wipe out the entire human
habitat. The weapon used on Hiroshima had a destructive force of 12.5 kilotons; a
contemporary cruise missile has the power of 200 kilotons. All war, violence and conflict
at national and international levels in the last quarter of the twentieth century has thus
taken on sinister proportions. It is not that human nature has changed but that the
resources at our disposal have. No country is free from the threat of nuclear
annihilation; no country is free from internal conflict and the barrel of the gun. It is
against the urgency of this background that the teachings of Buddhism about violence must
be studied and interpreted.
Excerpts such as the following have been
extracted and used to sum up the Buddhist attitude to this issue: All fear death;
Comparing oneself with others One should neither kill nor cause others to
kill." Dhp. v. 129
"Victory breeds hatred, The defeated live
in pain. Happily the peaceful live, Giving up victory and defeat." Dhp.
v. 201
These verses would seem to indicate a clearly
defined Buddhist perspective. Yet such text extraction can lead to misrepresentation if
not undergirded with a strong supporting framework. Furthermore, if Buddhism has a message
for a violent world, it must do more than condemn violence. It must be able to interpret
its nature, its roots, its hold on the world and the possibilities for its transformation.
It must dialogue with other philosophies and ideologies such as utilitarianism, [1]
scientific socialism and the belief in a just or "holy" war. For instance,
utilitarianism still lives among those who believe that violence can be justified if more
people will benefit than will be hurt, and the consequentialist theory mentioned with
reference to Hiroshima is similar to this. Then there are those who hold that certain
forms of injustice and exploitation can only be destroyed through violence and that
history will justify its legitimacy. The view that violent change is a historical
inevitability is close to this. Buddhism must be able to comment on the stance which
argues that if Hitler had been assassinated early in his career numerous deaths would have
been avoided, or the claim that force is justified against a government which is using
violence against its people under the pretext of law. If it cannot, it will stand accused
of irrelevance.
In this study, I define violence as that which
harms, debases, dehumanizes or brutalizes human beings, animals or the natural world; and
the violent person, as one who causes harm in speech or action, either directly or
indirectly, or whose mind is filled with such thoughts. [2] The approach will be
scriptural, and the resource I use will be the Pali texts. The basic issue I investigate
is what this resource says on the subject of violence. Identity is not assumed between the
sixth century B.C. and the twentieth century A.D. Rather, the potential of the scriptures
of any religion to provide guidelines for action and models for contemporary
interpretation is recognized. Hence, the following specific questions will provide the
framework for my study:
(1) What different forms of violence do the
Buddhist texts show knowledge of?
(2) For what reasons do the texts condemn
violence or call it into question?
(3) What do they see to be the roots of
violence?
(4) Do the texts give any guidelines for the
eradication of violence in the individual or in society?
1.
The Forms Of Violence
The Buddha's Awareness
The sermons of the Buddha, as they have been
handed down to us, are replete with details about the contemporary realities of the times.
They reveal much about the social contexts within which the Buddha moved and the faces of
society with which he was familiar.
The Canki Sutta shows a brahmin overlord
insisting that the Buddha is equal to him in birth, riches and the knowledge of the Vedas.
He continues:
" Indeed, sirs, King Seniya Bimbisara of
Magadha with his wife and children has gone to the recluse Gotama for refuge for life.
Indeed, sirs, King Pasenadi of Kosala with his wife and children has gone to the recluse
Gotama for refuge for life. Indeed, sirs, the brahmin Pokkharasati with his wife and
children has gone to the recluse Gotama for refuge for life." [3]
Important here is the reference to kings. The
texts show clearly that the Buddha had an intimate knowledge of statecraft. Records of his
conversations with Pasenadi and Bimbisara show him speaking in a language which those
involved in government could understand. Pasenadi, for instance, comes through as a man
torn between his duties as king, involving some degree of ruthlessness, and his concern
for spiritual things. At one moment, he is seen preparing a sacrifice in which many
animals are to be slaughtered and menials beaten and, at another, speaking seriously with
the Buddha about the dangers of wealth, power and evil conduct. [4] What is
significant is the level of knowledge shown by the Buddha about the pressures on a king
such as Pasenadi. His use of similes and illustrations, for instance, appeals to
Pasenadi's experience, including the central concern of all rulers at that time -- defense
against aggression. At one point Pasenadi asks about the value of gifts and to whom a gift
should be given for the gift to bear much fruit. The Buddha replies:
"A gift bears much fruit if given to a virtuous
person, not to a vicious person. As to that, sire, I also will ask you a question. Answer
it as you think fit. What think you, sire? Suppose that you were at war, and that the
contending armies were being mustered. And there were to arrive a noble youth, untrained,
unskilled, unpracticed, undrilled, timid, trembling, affrighted, one who would run away --
would you keep that man? Would such a man be any good to you?" [5]
The Buddha thus uses similes from Pasenadi's
military world to indicate that virtue does not depend on birth but on qualities of
character. In fact, in a number of texts, illustrations drawn from the context of the
state, defense and martial arts can be found. Not only does the Buddha make use of
military metaphors, but the texts show that he had extensive knowledge of the strategies
of war, punishment and political patronage. The Mahadukkhakkhandha Sutta, for instance,
uses graphic description to show that war and conflict spring from sensual desires:
"And again, monks, when sense pleasures
are the cause ... having taken sword and shield, having girded on bow and quiver, both
sides mass for battle and arrows are hurled and knives are hurled and swords are flashing.
Those who wound with arrows and wound with knives and decapitate with their swords, these
suffer dying then and pain like unto dying....
And again, monks, when sense pleasures are the
cause ... having taken sword and shield, having girded on bow and quiver, they leap on to
the newly daubed ramparts, and arrows are hurled and knives are hurled and swords are
flashing. Those who wound with arrows and wound with knives and pour boiling cow-dung over
them and crush them with the portcullis and decapitate them with their swords, these
suffer dying then and pain like unto dying." [6]
In the next part of the sutta, a variety of
horrific punishments are described and a keen awareness of their nature is seen:
"Kings, having arrested such a one, deal
out various punishments: they lash him with whips and they lash him with canes and they
lash him with rods, and they cut off his hand ... his foot ... his hand and foot ... his
ear ... and they give him the "gruel-pot" punishment ... the
"shell-tonsure" punishment ... "Rahu's mouth" ... the
"fire-garland" ... the "flaming hand" ... etc."[7]
In another sermon handed down to us, two men
are pointed out while the Buddha is talking to a headman, Pataliya. One of them is
garlanded and well-groomed; the other is tightly bound, about to lose his head. We are
told that the same deed has been committed by both. The difference is that the former has
killed the foe of the king and has been rewarded for it, whilst the latter was the king's
enemy. [8] Hence it is stressed that the laws of the state are not impartial: they
can mete out punishment or patronage according to the wish of the king and his cravings
for revenge or security.
It cannot be argued that the Buddha was
ignorant of the political realities of his day. He spurned frivolous talk about such
things as affairs of state [9] but he was neither indifferent to them nor uninformed.
On the contrary, his concern for the human predicament made him acutely aware of the
potential for violence within the economic and political forces around him. The political
milieu of rival republics and monarchies in northern India forms a backdrop to his
teaching, whether the rivalries between the kingdoms of Kosala and Magadha or the
struggles of the republics to maintain their traditions and their independence in the face
of the rising monarchies. [10]
However, the violence attached to politics and
statecraft forms one section only of the picture which emerges from the texts. Violence is
detected in the brahminical sacrificial system, in the austerities practiced by some
wanderers, and in the climate of philosophical dispute among the many sramana groupings as
well as in the area of social discrimination and the economic order.
Religion, to take this first, is seen as a
cause of physical, verbal and mental violence. The violence inflicted through sacrifices
is described thus:
"Now at that time a great sacrifice was
arranged to be held for the king, the Kosalan Pasenadi. Five hundred bulls, five hundred
bullocks and as many heifers, goats and rams were led to the pillar to be sacrificed. And
they that were slaves and menials and craftsmen, hectored about by blows and by fear, made
the preparations with tearful faces weeping." [11]
In contrast, the sramana groupings within this
period eschewed sacrifice. Denying the authority of the Vedas and a realm of gods to be
manipulated, their emphasis was on renunciation, the gaining of insight and philosophical
debate. Nevertheless, a form of violence was present. The austerities practiced by some of
those who came to the Buddha were worse than any enemy might inflict as punishment. The
Buddha himself confessed to having practiced them before his enlightenment. In the
Mahasaccaka [12] and the Mahasihanada [13] Suttas there is vivid description of
the excesses undertaken. Taken together, the two suttas cover the complete range of
contemporary Indian practices, which included nakedness or the wearing of rags, tree-bark
fiber, kusa grass, wood shavings or human hair; deprivation of food to the extent of
existing on a single fruit or rice grain; self-mortification through lying on thorns or
exposing the body to extremes of heat and cold; copying the habits of animals such as
walking on all fours or eating similar food. It was the Buddha's view that such practices
were a form of violence, although undertaken in the name of religion and
truth-seeking. [14]
Undertaken also in the name of truth were
verbal battles between different groups of wanderers. The Buddha's followers, in fact,
were frequently at the receiving end of an aggressive campaign by other groups to ridicule
their beliefs. The description of these incidents gives useful evidence of the prevailing
atmosphere. [15] In the Udumbarika Sihanada Sutta, Nigrodha the Jain claims:
"Why, householder, if the Samana Gotama
were to come into this assembly, with a single question only could we settle him; yea,
methinks we could roll him over like an empty pot." [16]
In the Kassapa Sihanada Sutta, the Buddha
speaks out:
"Now there are, Kassapa, certain recluses
and brahmins who are clever, subtle, experienced in controversy, hair splitters, who go
about, one would think, breaking into pieces by their wisdom the speculations of their
adversaries." [17]
Violence of state and violence in the name of
religion were two faces of the Buddha's society. Violence within the economic order was
another. The sixth century B.C. in India witnessed urbanization and commercial growth.
Savatthi, Saketa, Kosambhi, Benares, Rajagaha and Champa would have been some of the most
important centers known to the Buddha, who spent much time in urban environments. As
Trevor Ling argues in his study, The Buddha, [18] the growth of these cities spawned
individualism and competition in response to changing economic patterns and social
dislocation. The potentially violent tensions generated are reflected in the Buddha's
teachings through such themes as the rightful gaining of wealth, the place of service and
work, [19] correct duties towards employees, and the wise choosing of friends. For
instance, a Samyutta Nikaya text contains a conversation between Rasiya the Headman and
the Buddha. The Buddha speaks out against those who gain wealth by unlawful means,
especially with violence. [20] Then, in the Sigalovada Sutta, the Buddha outlines
rights and duties for the different social relationships in society. [21] An employer
is advised to: assign work according to the strength of the employee; supply food and
wages; tend workers in sickness; share with them unusual delicacies; grant them leave. The
same sutta comments on friendship and says that four foes in the likeness of friends
should be avoided: a rapacious person, a man of words not deeds, the flatterer and the
fellow-waster.
The study of what the Early Buddhist texts say
about violence must be seen against this background of political violence and social
change. The empiricism of Early Buddhism also demands this -- the Buddha's appeal to what
is observed in society as a basis for evaluating the truth of his teachings. [22]
The analysis of historical context calls into
question whether any philosophy or thought system can have universal relevance. Since the
human situation across the permutations of history is indeed subject to change, the issue
is a valid one. Yet there is also a continuity in evolution such that parallels can be
drawn between the forces at work in the sixth century B.C. and those operating in the
latter part of the twentieth century. The sixth century B.C. is not identical to the
twentieth but neither is it completely different. The teaching of Early Buddhism on
violence, therefore, should not be used as if there were either identity or utter
separateness. In each new context and historical period, there is a need for
re-interpretation and re-evaluation. At this point, it is enough to stress that the texts
reveal much about Indian society at the time of the Buddha and about the Buddha's own
breadth of awareness. It cannot be argued that he had no knowledge of the violence within
his own society or that his words were divorced from the tensions around him. On the
contrary, their import drew urgency from contemporary observable reality.
The Buddha's Approach to Empirical Questions
Central to Buddhism's approach to the analysis
of social phenomena is the doctrine of paticca samuppada or dependent origination, which
can be expressed thus:
When this is, that is; this arising, that
arises. When this is not, that is not; this ceasing, that ceases.
Imasmim sati idam hoti; imass' uppada idam
uppajjati. Imasmim asati idam na hoti;imassa nirodha idamnirujjhati.
Events and tendencies within the material
world are interpreted from the standpoint of causality. Phenomena are conditioned.
Buddhism, therefore, calls for an analytical attitude in dealing with anything to do with
human life, including the question of violence. [23]
One consequence which flows from this is that
generalizations and statements based on categories of pure reason are suspect. Evidence
can be drawn from the suttas to show that the Buddha insisted on making discriminations
when presented with dogmatically held views. For instance, in the Subha Sutta, Subha comes
out with the view that a householder is accomplishing the right path and one who has
renounced is not. The Buddha replies: "On this point, brahmin youth, I discriminate,
on this point I do not speak definitely." He stresses that both householder (gihin)
and the one who has renounced (pabbajita) can be living wrongly; both can be living
rightly. The deciding factor is not the label, but rightness of action, speech and
thought. [24]
A similar approach can be seen in the Esukari
Sutta where the Buddha speaks about service. In this case, the deciding factor as to
whether a person should serve is whether the one who serves is better for the service in
terms of such things as growing in moral habit and wisdom. [25] Then, when faced with
the question of sacrifice by the brahmin Ujjaya, there is again discrimination according
to condition. Not every sacrifice is blameworthy. Where living creatures are not killed or
where the sacrifice is an offering for the welfare of the family, there is no blame:
"No, brahmin, I do not praise every sacrifice. Yet, I would not withhold praise from
every sacrifice." [26] The deciding factor here is the presence of suffering for
animals.
Paticca samuppada opposes the human tendency
to generalize and encourages analysis on the basis of empirical data and moral values
applied to these. [27] It criticizes standpoints which use inappropriate categories
through insufficient observation and dogmatic statements about right and wrong which do
not take empirically observed facts into account.
To understand Early Buddhism's analysis of
violence, this conditionality is important. When the Buddha speaks about the causes and
the remedies of violence, his approach is dependent on the conditions prevalent in a
particular situation. For instance, psychological factors are not emphasized when the
Buddha is speaking to those in power about societal disruption; social and economic causes
are stressed instead. [28] Yet, in other contexts, particularly when monks are
addressed, it is the psychological factor which is given prominence. [29] In contrast
again, with King Pasenadi, the Buddha does not condemn violence in defense of the realm
but places it within the larger context of impermanence and death to encourage
reflection. [30]
It is possible to hold together the above
divergent emphases if we bear in mind the full implications of conditionality and the
empiricism of Early Buddhism. We should not expect dogmatic, non-empirical
generalizations. For instance, if craving (tanha) is to be posited as the root of much
violence, it would not follow that every situation was conditioned by tanha in the same
way or that the remedy in each situation would be identical. Likewise, it would not follow
that what was incumbent on one type of person in one situation would be incumbent on all
sections of society in all contexts.
2. Reasons For Buddhism's
Attitude Towards Violence
Before looking more closely at what is said about
the roots of violence, it is worth drawing out reasons given in the texts for the
avoidance, questioning or non-espousal of violence. Interconnected frameworks emerge: nibbana
as the goal of the spiritual life; the demands of metta and karuna (loving
kindness and compassion); the need for peace, concord and harmony within society.
Since the ultimate goal of the spiritual path for
the Buddhist is nibbana, attitudes towards violence must first be seen in relation
to it. Nibbana is the ultimate eradication of dukkha. It is a possible goal
within this life and, among other things, involves a complete de-toxification of the mind
from greed, hatred and delusion, a revolution in the way the world is perceived, freedom
from craving and liberation from the delusion of ego. The Therigatha or Songs of
the Sisters contain some of the most moving testimonies to this reality; they are paeans
of joy about liberation:
"Mine is the ecstasy of freedom won As Path merges in Fruit and
Fruit in Path. Holding to nought, I in Nibbana live, This five-grouped being have I
understood. Cut from its root, all onward growth is stayed, I too am stayed, victor on
basis sure Immovable. Rebirth comes never more." [31]
Nibbana and samsara are antithetical. One
is the ceasing of the other. In the context of the goal of nibbana, actions,
thoughts and words can be evaluated as to whether they build samsara or lead to nibbana:
whether they are unskilled (akusala) or skilled (kusala). Indulgence in
violence is normally deemed akusala. In other words, it cannot lead to the goal of nibbana.
In the Ambalatthika-Rahulovada Sutta, the Buddha says to the Venerable Rahula:
"If you, Rahula, are desirous of doing a deed with the body,
you should reflect on the deed with the body, thus: "That deed which I am desirous of
doing with the body is a deed of the body that might conduce to the harm of self and that
might conduce to the harm of others and that might conduce to the harm of both; this deed
of body is unskilled (akusala), its yield is anguish, its result is anguish." [32]
Harm to others is central to what is unskilled. In
the Sallekha Sutta advice is given to monks about the cleansing of the mind as the basis
of spiritual progress. Foremost among the thoughts which have to be cleansed are those
connected with harming and violence; both represent unskilled states which lead downwards:
"Cunda, as every unskilled state leads downwards, as every
skilled state leads upwards, even so, Cunda, does non-harming (avihimsa) come to be
a higher state for an individual who is harmful, does restraint from onslaught on
creatures come to be a higher state for the individual who makes onslaught on
creatures." [33]
When the Buddha is in conversation with Bhaddiya, sarambha
is added to lobha, dosa and moha (lust, hatred and delusion) as a
defilement which flows from them. Sarambha can be translated as "accompanied
by violence." As the mind filled with lobha, dosa and moha is
led to actions which are akusala, so is the mind filled with the violence which
accompanies the triad. All lead to a person's loss:
"Now what think you, Bhaddiya? When freedom from malice (adosa)
... from delusion (amoha) ... from violence (asarambha) that goes with these
arises within oneself, does it arise to one's profit or to one's loss?" -- "To
one's profit, sir." [34]
The point of the above suttas is that violent action
and violent thought, actions which harm and debase others and thoughts which contemplate
the same, stand in the way of spiritual growth and the self-conquest which leads to the
goal of existence. In this respect, indulging in violence is doing to oneself what an
enemy would wish. It is a form of self-harming:
"He who is exceedingly corrupt like a maluva creeper
strangling a sal tree does to himself what an enemy would wish." Dhp. v. 162
In contrast, abstaining from violence has personal
benefit in the present and in the future. It is part of the training of mind and body
which lays the foundation for spiritual progress.
The accusation has been made that the application of
the terms kusala and akusala are oriented only towards an individualistic
goal, making the motivation for abstention from violence a selfish one. But it can be
argued that the distinction between altruism and egoism breaks down for anyone truly
following the Noble Eightfold Path. There are also many textual references to the inherent
importance of harmony, justice and compassion in society to balance those passages which
seem to be solely individualistic. Harmony and justice are recognized as worthwhile in
themselves as well as a prerequisite for the spiritual progress of society's members.
Hence, in society, violence is to be eschewed because it brings pain to beings with
similar feelings to oneself:
"All tremble at violence, Life is dear to all. Comparing others
with oneself One should neither kill nor cause others to kill. " Dhp. v. 130
On the level of personal analogy, men and women are
to condemn violence. It is an analogy which demands metta (loving kindness) and karuna
(compassion) of the human being. [35] They call on a frame of mind
which cannot remain insensitive to suffering in others or untouched by the agony produced
by violence. Non-violence, therefore, arises through the urge to prevent anguish in
others:
"Comparing oneself with others in such terms as "Just as I
am so are they, just as they are so am I" (yatha aham tatha ete yatha ete tatha
aham), one should neither kill nor cause others to kill. "Snp. v. 705
The Buddha, however, did not credit all people with
this level of awareness. He is recorded as saying that shame and fear of blame protect the
world, and if there were not these forces, the world would come to confusion and
promiscuity. [36] Not all beings rally to the call for compassion on
the grounds that others have like feelings to themselves or that harmony in society is
necessary. Therefore, some texts invoke the concepts of heaven and hell, rewards and
punishments, to control violence. Vivid pictures are drawn of the agonies of hell:
"Brahmin youth, here some woman or man is one who makes
onslaught on creatures, is cruel, bloody-handed, intent on injuring and killing, and
without mercy to living creatures. Because of that deed, accomplished thus, firmly held
thus, he, at breaking up of the body after dying, arises in the sorrowful way, the bad
bourn, the Downfall, the Niraya." [37]
"Even so, monks, that anguish and dejection that man
experiences while he is being stabbed with three hundred spears, compared with the anguish
of Niraya Hell does not count, it does not amount even to an infinitesimal fraction of it,
it cannot even be compared to it. Monks, the guardians of Niraya Hell subject him to what
is called the fivefold pinion. They drive a red-hot iron stake through each hand and each
foot and a red-hot iron stake through his breast. Thereat, he feels feelings that are
painful, sharp and severe. But he does not do his time until he makes an end of that evil
deed." [38]
Here, self-interest in terms of avoidance of future
pain is appealed to as a reason to desist from violence. This emphasis can also be seen in
the Petavatthu in which those fallen to the realm of the petas speak to those on
the human level about the reasons for their suffering. [39] Falsehood,
failing in the duties of wife or husband, stinginess and fraud are some of the actions
mentioned. Story No. 32, however, speaks of a deerhunter who explains that he was
"a ruthless man of bloody hands":
"Among harmless creatures, I, with wicked mind, walked about,
very ruthless, ever finding delight in slaying others unrestrained,"
he declares in verse three. His punishment is to be
devoured by dogs during the daytime, the hours when he used to be involved in slaughter.
He is able to teach the living that the First Precept should be kept and that it applies
not only to the killing of human beings but also to animals. The deerhunter, therefore, is
held up as an authoritative witness to what happens to violent individuals. His story is
useful as a deterrent to socially disruptive elements and is confirmation of the
importance Buddhism places on non-violence within the social fabric. The threat of future
punishment is used to control potentially violent elements.
Two broad, interconnected areas, therefore, emerge
in the reasons for the condemnation of violence within the Early Buddhist texts. Firstly,
thoughts of violence and violent action are defilements and must be eradicated if nibbana
is to be reached. In this light, nibbana is the highest ethical good. This stress
alone, however, can lead to distortion if nibbana is seen as a metaphysical state
above the empirical world and the path to it as divorced from society. Early Buddhism was
rooted in the empirical. Violence was to be repudiated because it caused anguish to men
and women and disruption in society. The human person was seen as precious. Harming a
being who desired happiness and felt pain could rarely be right. If a society was to be
established in which people could live without fear and with the freedom of mind to follow
the Eightfold Path, violence had to be eschewed.
The question of political, defensive violence,
however, must be mentioned here. Can violence be justified in a situation where the state
needs to defend its citizens against external and internal threats? Is this a situation in
which violence is not condemned? The texts suggest Buddhism would here insist on
discrimination. The Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta gives this advice to the righteous king:
"This, dear son, that you, leaning on the Dhamma, honouring,
respecting and revering it, doing homage to it, hallowing it, being yourself a
Dhamma-banner, a Dhamma-signal, having the Dhamma as your master, should provide the right
watch, ward and protection for your own folk, for the army, for the nobles, for vassals
and brahmins and householders, for town and country dwellers, for the religious world and
for beasts and birds. "[40]
This passage implies that the need for an army and
consequently for the use of force in defense is accepted as a worldly necessity. But the
picture which emerges is not glorification of the "just" war but an appeal for
war and violence to be seen against a higher set of values.
Relevant perspectives on these political realities
are seen in the Buddha's advice to the Vajjians and to King Pasenadi. The Vajjians are
faced with vicious aggression from King Ajatasattu, King of Magadha, who is bent on
destroying them. The latter sends a brahmin to the Buddha for advice and a prediction
about how successful he will be in war. The very fact that he does so shows that he does
not consider the Buddha either ill-informed or dismissive of such political conflicts. The
reply he receives is significant. The Buddha does not refer directly to Ajatasattu but
implies that the use of arms against a people who are morally pure and in concord would be
fruitless. His words to Ajatasattu become words of advice to the Vajjians that they should
meet together in concord and give respect to their elders, their ancient institutions,
their traditions and their women. No mention is made of the Vajjian military strength;
only of their moral strength. Moral strength is held up as defense against violence. Yet
it is not denied but implicitly understood that the Vajjians would have to use force to
repulse aggression, and also present is an implicit condemnation of Ajatasattu's
intentions. [41]
King Pasenadi is also seen in conflict with
Ajatasattu, meeting force with force. At first, Ajatasattu is the aggressor and the
victor. The reported response of the Buddha is significant:
" Monks, the King of Magadha, Ajatasattu, son of the Vedehi
Princess, is a friend to, an intimate of, mixed up with, whatever is evil. The Kosalan
King Pasenadi is a friend to, an intimate of, mixed up with, whatever is good." [42]
Thus Pasenadi's role as defender of the nation
against aggression is accepted as necessary and praiseworthy. In the next battle, Pasenadi
is the victor. Ajatasattu's army is confiscated but Pasenadi is merciful enough to grant
Ajatasattu his life. It is still Ajatasattu who is condemned. His fate is seen in kammic
terms:
"A man may spoil another just so far As it may serve his ends,
but when he's spoiled By others he, despoiled, spoils yet again. So long as evil's fruit
is not matured The fool does fancy: "Now's the hour, the chance!" But when the
deed bears fruit, he fareth ill. The slayer gets a slayer in his turn, The conqueror gets
one who conquers him, The abuser wins abuse, the annoyer frets: Thus by the evolution of
the deed A man who spoils is spoiled in his turn." [43]
In one respect, Pasenadi becomes an instrument of
kamma for Ajatasattu. At another level, acceptance of political realities emerges. The
king has a duty to protect his citizens from external threats of violence. Therefore, the
advice given to a king or those with responsibility for government about reacting to the
violence of others is fitted to the situation, a situation in which the use of violence
may become a political necessity in a world governed by craving (tanha). Yet, even
with affairs of state, war is placed in the perspective of a more important set of values.
To Pasenadi, burdened by responsibility, the Buddha says:
" Noble and brahmin, commoner and serf, None can evade and play
the truant here: The impending doom overwhelms one and all. Here is no place for strife
with elephants Or chariots of war or infantry, Nay, nor for war or woven spell or curse
Nor may finance avail to win the day." [44]
War is not presented as worthy of praise in itself.
It is recognized that battle cannot take place without hatred and the wish to kill, in
both the mind of aggressor and victim. A Samyutta Nikaya passage illustrates this. A
fighting man comes to the Buddha and explains his belief that the warrior who is killed
whilst fighting energetically in battle is reborn in the company of the Devas of
Passionate Delight. The Buddha's answer condemns this idea as perverted. A warrior is
always led by the idea, "Let those beings be exterminated so that they may be never
thought to have existed." Such a view can only lead downwards rather than to any
heavenly world. The Buddha thus rejects any glorification of war, since there can be no
glory when the mind is dominated by hate.[45]
Another duty of the state is to punish. Punishment,
although a harming of creatures and a cause of pain to them, is nevertheless seen as a
social necessity because of the need to protect society from the greater violence which
would flow from undeterred greed. Fear of punishment (dandabhaya) is described in
vivid terms, with the mention of specific punishments. A man sees them and thinks:
"If I were to do such deeds as those for which the rajahs seize
a bandit, a miscreant, and so treat him ... they would surely treat me in like
manner." [46]
Important here is the fact that Early Buddhism would
make discriminations about the question of punishment. As a deterrent, punishment has
value. Meted out as an expression of hate, it is to be rejected. Inflicted where social
justice is the requisite, it is also condemned, as seen in the Kutadanta Sutta, referred
to in the next part.
3.
The Roots Of Violence
The Attadanda Sutta of the Sutta Nipata is the voice
of someone overcome by despair because of the violence he sees:
"Fear results from resorting to violence
-- just look at how people quarrel and fight. But let me tell you now of the kind of
dismay and terror that I have felt.
Seeing people struggling like fish, writhing
in shallow water, with enmity against one another, I became afraid.
At one time, I had wanted to find some place
where I could take shelter, but I never saw such a place. There is nothing in this world
that is solid at base and not a part of it that is changeless.
I had seen them all trapped in mutual conflict
and that is why I had felt so repelled. But then I noticed something buried deep in their
hearts. It was -- I could just make it out -- a dart. "[47]
The above is from a translation of the Sutta
Nipata which attempts to preserve the spirit of the text rather than the letter. Here it
is the spirit of dismay and fear leading to discovery which is of prime importance. The
speaker detects a common root -- the dart of craving (tanha) and greed (lobha) -- a view
directly in line with the Four Noble Truths. Violence arises because the right nourishment
is present.
However, it has been pointed out earlier that
differences may exist in the way in which tanha conditions situations of violence. On
analysis, two broad and mutually interdependent areas emerge: (1) violence arising from an
individual's maladjustment, and (2) craving and violence arising from unsatisfactory
social and environmental conditions, caused by the craving of others.
The latter can be taken first with reference
to the following texts: The Kutadanta Sutta; the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta; and certain
Anguttara Nikaya passages. The first weaves a myth within a myth. The inner myth tells the
story of a king, King Wide-Realm, whose land is wracked with discontent and crime such
that people are afraid to walk in the streets for fear of violence.
The king's solution is to hold a sacrifice for
the nation and he goes to a holy man for advice. But the king is not given what he
expects. The sage tells the king that fines, bonds and death for the wrongdoers would be
self-defeating. Punishment is not the right path. On the contrary, it would increase the
malady because the root causes remained untouched, in this instance, economic injustice
and poverty. King Wide-Realm is advised to give food and seed corn to farmers, capital to
traders and food to those in government service:
"But perchance his majesty might think:
"I'll soon put a stop to these scoundrels' game by degradation and banishment and
fines and bonds and death." But their license cannot be satisfactorily put a stop to
so. The remnant left unpunished would still go on harassing the realm. Now there is one
method to adopt to put a thorough end to this disorder. Whosoever there be in the king's
realm who devote themselves to keeping cattle and the farm, to them let his majesty give
food and seed corn. Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote themselves to trade,
to them let his majesty give capital. Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote
themselves to government service, to them let his majesty give wages and food. Then those
men, following each his own business, will no longer harass the realm; the king's revenue
will go up; the country will be quiet and at peace; and the populace pleased with one
another and happy, dancing their children in their arms, will dwell with open
doors." [48]
The above analysis recognizes that men and
women can be pushed to violence if the prevailing conditions do not enable them to
preserve their own lives without it. The instinct to survive is credited with enough
strength to push people to struggle before they will sink into need. In such a situation,
it follows that to press down the hand of the law will not be effective. In fact, it could
encourage a growth in serious crime.
This is what happens in the Cakkavatti
Sihanada Sutta, another mythological story dealing with disruption in society. It has
already been mentioned with reference to the duty of kingship. But there is one clause
concerning his duty that has not yet been mentioned:
"Throughout your kingdom let no wrongdoing
prevail. And whosoever in your kingdom is poor, to him let wealth be
given." [49]
The kings of the story who keep to this are blessed
with peace. Yet a king eventually arises who neglects the giving of wealth to the poor. He
is soon faced with a situation beyond his control. Poverty becomes rampant and this leads
to theft, since people would rather steal than die. When the king realizes the cause, he
starts by being lenient on the wrongdoer, by giving him the means to live. Such kindness
too late leads others to see the only way to survive is turning to theft and receiving a
royal handout in return. The king has given charity, not justice, and crime increases
leading to a return to brutal punishments. The brutality of the punishments encourages the
people to be more extreme in their own crime as they try to survive. Punishment here fails
to deter because of the desperation of the people.
The sutta presents a disturbing picture of how
a society can fall into utter confusion because of a lack of economic justice. The
extremes reached are far greater than anything envisaged in the Kutadanta Sutta and they
stem from the state's blindness to the realities of poverty. Thus the sutta states in
refrain after every deterioration:
"Thus from goods not being bestowed on
the destitute, poverty ... stealing ... violence ... murder ... lying ...
evil-speaking ... immorality grew rife.
Theft and killing lead to false speech,
jealousy, adultery, incest and perverted lust until:
Among such humans, brethren, there will arise
a sword-period (satthantarakappa) of seven days during which they will look on each other
as wild beasts; sharp swords will appear ready to their hands, and they thinking,
"This is a wild beast, this is a wild beast," will with their swords deprive
each other of life." [50]
In the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta, the nourishment of
the violence is the state's neglect of the poor. The whole myth illustrates the principle
of paticca samuppada. Each state of degeneration is dependent on the state before it. An
evolutionary process is seen. An inevitability seems to emerge, an inevitable movement
towards bestiality. It is significant that the sutta does not concentrate on the
psychological state of the people. The obsessive cravings which overtake them are traced
back to the failure of the state rather than to failings in their own adjustment to
reality. The root is the defilement in the state -- the raga, dosa and moha in the king
which afflict his perception of his duty.
An Anguttara Nikaya passage states this
principle in simple and direct terms. If the king is righteous, his ministers will be
righteous, the country will be righteous and the natural world will be a friend rather
than an enemy. The opposite, of course, is also true and is placed first in the sutta:
"At such time, monks, as rulers are
unrighteous (adhammika), their ministers are unrighteous, brahmins and householders are
also unrighteous...."[51]
The above passages show that a change of heart
is needed where violence exists but this change is needed in those who wield power in
society. When a state is corrupt, the citizens become victims of the state and their own
wish to survive and they are then led to actions they would never consider if they were
free from want. There is an understanding that, besides those who do evil, there exists a
category of people to whom wrong is done and whose reactions are conditioned by the
original wrongdoing.
To pass now to the psychological roots of
violence, another myth can be cited, the Agganna Sutta. Like the Cakkavatti Sihanada
Sutta, it describes an evolutionary process which takes on its own momentum. The root of
the process is significant -- the craving of beings. The sutta explains, in myth form, the
process by which undifferentiated beings come to earth from a World of Radiance to eat the
earth's savory crust, to the point where there is private property and the division of
labor. One of its purposes is to challenge the static, non-evolutionary theory of a
divinely ordained caste system but it is significant also because evolution is guided by
the growth of craving and individualism. The whole sutta turns on the individual and his
craving as the root of violence. It depicts a situation before state power is established.
Craving first enters when the beings taste the crust of the earth:
"Then, Vasettha, some being of greedy
disposition said, "Lo now, what will this be?" and tasted the savory earth with
his finger. He thus, tasting, became suffused with the savor, and craving (tanha) entered
into him. "[52]
The craving develops. The natural world
evolves to accommodate the beings, becoming ever less easy to manage. The bodies of the
beings become gross and individually differentiated into male and female, comely and
unlovely. Jealousy and competition enter. The savory crust disappears. Vegetables and
plant life evolve. An important point is reached when the beings establish boundaries
around their individually owned rice plots. Individualism is therefore institutionally
consolidated and the consequence is violence:
"Now some being, Vasettha, of greedy
disposition, watching over his plot, stole another plot and made use of it. They took him
and, holding him fast, said, "Truly, good being, you have done evil in that, while
watching your own plot, you have stolen another plot and made use of it. See, good being,
that you do no such thing again." "Aye, sirs," he replied. And a second
time he did so. And yet a third. And again they took him and admonished him. Some smote
him with the hand, some with clods, some with sticks. With such a beginning, Vasettha, did
stealing appear and censure and lying and punishment became known." [53]
The sutta illustrates that tanha coupled with
individualism nourishes violence and conditions the necessity for state power to curb
excesses. As such, its teaching is directly in the mainstream of Buddhist thought: craving
and grasping lie at the root of negative and unwholesome states in society. However, more
needs to be said about the causes and consequences of individualism.
The term "puthujjana" is used to
describe the ordinary, average person:
"Herein, monks, an uninstructed ordinary
person, taking no account of the pure ones (ariyanam), unskilled in the Dhamma of the pure
ones, untrained in the Dhamma of the pure ones, taking no account of the true men,
unskilled in the Dhamma of the true men, untrained in the Dhamma of the true men, does not
comprehend the things that should be wisely attended to, does not comprehend the things
that should not be wisely attended to. "[54]
The term "puthu" has two main
meanings: "several, many, numerous," on one hand, and "separate,
individual," on the other. The usual definition of puthujjana is "one of the
many folk," linking it with the first of the above-mentioned meanings. However, a
case can be made for the second meaning also. In this analysis, the puthujjana is one who
believes himself to be separate from the rest of humankind; one who believes he has a self
to be protected, promoted and pampered. It is this assumption which leads to so much that
is disruptive in society.
Violent tendencies link, at this point, with
the defilement of moha (delusion):
"delusion in terms of a misunderstanding of
anicca and anatta. The latter states that there is no abiding, unchanging substance within
the human being. Men and women are verbs rather than nouns, causal processes rather than
unchanging souls. Buddhism does not deny that there is a person, but it reformulates the
definition of what constitutes a person to embrace continuity rather than static entity.
As the sound of the lute cannot be found within the lute as it is taken apart, so the
"I am" cannot be found in the human personality when it is dissected into the
five khandhas." [55]
Much anger and violence stem from the felt
need to defend what is seen to be one's own or to grasp personal gain. It is a need which
sees the gain of others as a threat to personal power and the rights of others as an
attack on personal prestige. This is none other than the fault of the puthujjana, a
failure to see the truth of anatta and the interdependence of all phenomena. It is this
failure which leads to the self becoming the touchstone and measuring rule for every
perception and judgment. It is the failure which leads to the urge to be violent in
defense of needs and seeming rights. The Agganna Sutta shows this ego illusion manifesting
itself in the form of competitive individualism. That the ego illusion and tanha feed on
one another is a theme found in many texts:
"Monks, I will teach you the craving that
ensnares, that floats along, that is far flung, that clings to one, by which this world is
smothered, enveloped, tangled like a ball of thread, covered as with blight, twisted up
like a grass rope, so that it does not pass beyond the Constant Round, the Downfall, the
Way of Woe, the Ruin....
Monks, when there is the thought: "I
am" -- there come to be the thoughts: "I am in this world; I am thus; I am
otherwise; I am not eternal; I am eternal; Should I be? Should I be in this world? Should
I be thus? Should I be otherwise? May I become. May I become in this world. May I become
thus. May I become otherwise. I shall become. I shall become otherwise." These are
the eighteen thoughts which are haunted by craving (tanhavicaritani) concerning the inner
self (ajjhattikassa)." [56]
One result of this interdependent feeding, the
Buddhist texts assert, is disruption in society.
Another important area of study is the
mechanism through which the "I" notion helps to generate unwholesome states.
Buddhism sees a danger in the view of some schools of psychology that there is a creative
use of the concept of self. In this respect, the Pali term "papanca," commonly
translated as proliferation, is important. The Madhupindika Sutta declares papanca to be
the root of taking up weapons, and the defeat of papanca is the way to end such violence:
"This is itself an end to the propensity
to ignorance, this is itself an end of taking a weapon, of quarreling, contending,
disputing, accusation, slander, lying speech." [57]
As the previous analysis in this paper points
out, discrimination is central to the Buddhist approach and therefore generalizations such
as the above need to be studied carefully. There is no doubt, however, that papanca is
central to a Buddhist psychology of violence and to an understanding of the danger in the
"I am" notion.
A study by Bhikkhu Nanananda, Concept and
Reality, gives extensive coverage to the term "papanca".[58] He puts forward the
view that it is linked with the final stage of sense cognition and that it signifies a
"a spreading out, a proliferation" in the realm of concepts, a tendency for the
conceptual process to run riot and obscure the true reality of things. He makes much use
of the above-quoted Madhupindika Sutta and quotes the following:
"Visual consciousness, brethren, arises
because of eye and visible forms; the meeting of the three is sensory impingement; because
of sensory impingement arises feeling (vedana); what one feels, one perceives (sanjanati);
what one perceives, one reasons about (vitakketi); what one reasons about, one turns into
papanca (papanceti); what one turns into papanca, due to that papanca-sanna-sankha assail
him in regard to visible forms cognizable by the eye belonging to the past, the future and
the present." [59]
The same is said of the other senses.
Nanananda points out that a grammatical
analysis of the above reveals that the process of perception involves deliberate activity
up until papanceti. After this, deliberation vanishes. The subject becomes the object. The
person who reasons conceptually becomes the victim of his own perceptions and thought
constructions. So Nanananda writes:
"Like the legendary resurrected tiger
which devoured the magician who restored it to life out of its skeletal bones, the
concepts and linguistic conventions overwhelm the worldling who evolved them. At the final
and crucial stage of sense-perception, the concepts are, as it were, invested with an
objective character." [60]
His analysis is of immense significance to the
study of how certain negative and destructive tendencies can grow in society; how
objective perception and reason can seem to fade before the force of what might be
irrational and obsessive. He roots the cause in the nature of language in the minds of
persons governed by tanha, mana and ditthi -- craving, conceit (the tendency to measure
oneself against others), and views -- which in themselves flow from ego-consciousness.
Papanca, according to this analysis, manifests itself through tanha, mana and ditthi. It
underlies each of these qualities and breeds conflict in society.
To look at the process in more detail: The
conventions of language enter near the beginning of the process of sense perception, at
the point where feeling gives rise to mental activity and concepts. The mind, if
unchecked, will attempt to place order on its feelings through language. This language
immediately introduces the duality of subject and object, subject and feeling. The
"I" enters with "I feel aversion" or "I feel attraction" or
"I like this" or" I don't like this." This emphasis on the
"I" is predetermined by the very nature of language and reinforces the strength
of the feeling and the tendency for the person to identify completely with what is felt.
What seems to happen after that is that language takes on a dynamism of its own. Concepts
proliferate and leave the empirical behind, under the driving force of tanha, mana and
ditthi. For instance, the observation, "I feel aversion" might lead to further
thoughts such as:
"I am right to feel aversion....
Therefore, the object is inherently worthy of aversion.... So, the object must threaten me
and others.... Therefore the objects must be got rid of.... I cannot survive unless the
object is annihilated from my sphere of vision and feeling.... It is my duty to annihilate
this for my sake and the sake of others."
Thus the entrance of "I" leads to
the urge to protect the wishes of the ego and what is ego-based becomes a seemingly
rational decision about duty. The above is a purely hypothetical progression, yet it is
not an implausible one. It illustrates the way in which thought progresses further and
further away from what is empirically observed. Speculation enters as the mind attempts to
reason. Eventually, as the thought process develops further, what might appear to be
reason cloaks obsession which, in turn, can make the person a victim of the apparent logic
of language.
Kant in his Critique of Pure Reason [61]
seems to adopt a similar point of view. He challenged the view that speculative
metaphysics using the categories of pure reason could extend our knowledge of reality. He
attacked particularly those theologians who believed that the existence of God could be
proved through logic alone. There was, he claimed, an irresistible impulse of the mind
towards seeking unification and synthesis which led to the illegitimate use of language.
It is this which is particularly relevant to this study. For instance, he posited that the
mind assumed an unconditional personal ego just because all representations were unified
by the "I think" construction. It also assumed a concept of God because of the
drive to find an unconditioned unity. Such concepts, Kant felt, arose through the impulse
of the mind and passed beyond the legitimate purview of language. It passed beyond the
perceptions which could add knowledge and were not based on truly empirical data.
Therefore, they could not give statements with any factual reality.
Kant grasped that there was an irresistible
impulse which led to concepts taking on an unwarranted life of their own. Buddhism says
that these concepts can generate obsessions, victimize the person who believes he or she
is thinking logically, and lead to disruption in society. What is lost in the process is
the ability to see objectively and value the empirical through senses unclouded by
craving, conceit and views, or by greed, hatred and delusion.
Papanca, fed and generated by tanha, is
therefore central to the theme of violence in the thoughts and actions of human beings.
Buddhism suggests that the human person can become the victim of obsessive actions,
thoughts and inclinations. It holds that the drift towards violence within one person or
within society, especially if a communal or cultural obsession has arisen, may become an
inevitable causal process unless the inner mechanism is discovered. Related to this is the
danger and motivating force of dogmatic and speculative views as one of the roots of
violence -- the ditthi, connected in the above analysis with papanca. In his advice to the
Kalamas and to Bhaddiya, the Buddha said:
"Be not mislead by report or tradition or
hearsay. Be not misled by proficiency in the Collections, nor by mere logic or inference,
nor after considering reasons, nor after reflection on or approval of some theory, nor
because it fits becoming, nor by the thought: the recluse is revered by
us." [62]
Here, logic and inference are deemed to be as
dangerous as what is passed on by doubtful report and tradition. The same approach is seen
in the Brahmajala Sutta [63] where a number of mistaken views, according to Buddhist
analysis, are discussed. Tanha is seen as the root of these but logic and inference are
also mentioned.
In the following, the question of conflict in
relation to dogmatic views is more clearly expressed. The Buddha points out the danger of
saying, "This is indeed the truth, all else is falsehood" (idam-eva saccam,
mogham-annam). For dispute is the result and:
"If there is dispute, there is contention; if
there is contention, there is trouble; if there is trouble there is
vexation." [64]
Adhering dogmatically to views is a form of papanca,
a particularly dangerous form. Several suttas in the Sutta Nipata take up this theme: the
Pasura Sutta and the Kalahavivada Sutta, [65] for instance. The former speaks of the
person who goes forth roaring, looking for a rival to contest with, filled with pride and
arrogance over his theories. A battle-like situation is implied, an attitude closely
allied to that which actually results in warfare and armed struggle. Contemporary
struggles in the world give ample evidence to prove that war and struggle are caused by
the conflict of ideas, ideologies and concepts. They show how powerful and charismatic a
force ideas can be. Whether it is nationalism, ethnicity or religion, groups can be pushed
towards violence in defense of them. Buddhist analysis points out that some ideologies
which might appear logical could, in fact, be the fruit of papanca. Adherents may be
convinced of their truth but they might have progressed far from analysis based on
empirical data.
In the above analysis of the roots of
violence, two broad areas have been studied: the external and the internal, the
environmental and psychological. Yet the two are not separate. They interconnect and feed
one another, just as external sense objects interconnect with the senses, giving rise to
consciousness and psychological processes. If a people's environment is unhealthy, corrupt
or unjust, the seeds are sown for violent resistance, through the growth of motivating
ideologies which take on a life of their own as they grip the minds of those who are being
oppressed. If the environment is excessively competitive, consumer-oriented and
materialistic, tanha will quickly arise, develop and expand into obsessive patterns of
greed, taking over and dominating the perception of people who find themselves victims of
craving rather than masters of their own perceptual processes. The step to violence is
then small. If other elements are present, such as a group without access to the wealth
visible in others, discrimination against minorities or racism, then the drive towards
violence will be more rapid.
4. Can Violent Tendencies Be
Eradicated?
praiseworthy, saying seasonably what is fact and
true -- he is the most admirable and rare. Why so? Because, Potaliya, his discrimination
of proper occasions (kalannuta) is admirable." [84]
The Buddha mentions the quality of kalannuta,
in place of the word used by Potaliya -- upekkha. The translation given by the Pali Text
Society is "discrimination of proper occasions." The ability to discriminate and
make objective evaluations, not indifference, is the consequence of curbing papanca. A
certain silence of the mind is indicated but it is not the silence of apathy. The
proliferation of concepts which is papanca results in an obscuring of the empirical, since
this proliferation moves one further and further away from the empirical because of the
linguistic edifice of "therefore" and "therein" erected on top of the
initial emotion of like or aversion. Preventing the erection of this edifice on the
foundation of tanha leads to a clearer perception of the empirical and to judgments and
analyses being made with greater validity. The conclusions reached through papanca may
seem to be analytical. They are not. Resisting papanca is not a moving away from analysis
but a moving towards objective analysis unclouded by emotional responses. It is this kind
of analysis which is so often lacking when there is violence and conflict in society.
When perceptions, judgments and consequent
action are governed by the roots of papanca, there will be no objectivity but a danger
that obsessions will grow. When papanca is allayed, what is good and bad, kusala and
akusala, praiseworthy and blameworthy, will be more clearly visible. The injustices in
society, for instance, will be more apparent. Judgments about those who are oppressed in
society or about those who gain wealth illegally through violence and extortion will not
be clouded either by the tendency to look down on those who suffer or the wish to gain
patronage from the wealthy. What is wrong and what is right, what harms and what promotes
happiness, will stand out untouched by personal wishes or personal greed.
This clarity of judgment can be seen in the
words of the Buddha. In the Assalayana Sutta, the Agganna Sutta and the Madhura Sutta the
caste system is vigorously opposed. [85] The Esukari Sutta condemns the kind of
service which becomes slavery. [86] Meaningless ritual is attacked in the Sigalovada
Sutta. [87] Brahminical excesses are uncovered in the Brahmajala Sutta, the Ambattha
Sutta and the Tevijja Sutta. [88] The violence and shame of sacrifices is condemned
in the Kutadanta Sutta. [89] These are not the only examples. The Buddha is revealed
as a person who was unafraid to point out wrong when he saw it and to use uncompromising
words. It is this kind of effective speech and action which should flow when tanha, mana
and ditthi are reduced.
Abstention from the harmful or violent is not
enough by itself. The texts stress that the active cultivation of the opposite is
necessary. A replacement is needed as well as an annihilation. This is seen at lay level
as well as among the ordained. For instance, in the Saleyyaka Sutta, addressed
specifically to lay people, the two courses of faring by Dhamma and not-Dhamma are
explained. Malevolence is explained by reference to the wish to kill:
"He is malevolent in mind, corrupt in
thought and purpose, and thinks: "Let these beings be killed or slaughtered or
annihilated or destroyed or may they not exist at all." [90]
Faring by Dhamma is explained in opposite
terms and yet the effect is not merely a negation of or a restraining from not-Dhamma but
the practice of positive virtue. So, the one who abandons slanderous speech becomes
"a reconciler of those who are at variance and
one who combines those who are friends."
The one who restrains himself from malevolent
thought is the one who thinks:
"Let those beings, friendly, peaceful, secure,
happy, look after self." [91]
Similarly, during meditation, positive qualities are
to be cultivated to replace the five hindrances. For instance:
"Putting away ill-will and hatred
(vyapadapadosa), he abides with heart free from enmity (avyapannacitta), benevolent and
compassionate towards every living being (sabbe panabhutahitanukampi) and purifies his
mind of malevolence." [92]
The Early Buddhist emphasis, therefore,
indicates that the eradication of the tendencies which cause violence leads to greater
realism, the growth of positive, wholesome qualities and more effective speech and action
against what is unjust and exploitative. An important question, however, remains
unanswered, the third question mentioned at the beginning of this section: When there is
violence inherent in the structures of society as a whole, what steps can be taken?
In many societies, violence is
institutionalized in structures which oppress certain sections of the people. Some would
mention the caste system in India in this context, corrupt trading practices, or the
forces which keep some groups of people poor. On the other hand, violence can flow from
the monarchy or state, from internal terrorist groups or an outside threat. In these
situations, violence is rarely lessened by changes in a few individuals, unless these
individuals have considerable power. What strategies should be used to oppose such
violence? Is there any situation where violence should be met with violence? Is there a
different path for the lay person than for the monk? Is there a situation where it might
be justifiable to overthrow the state? If so, could this lead to a changed society? If
undeserved suffering occurs because of the greed of others, do the demands of compassion
(karuna) ever involve what could be called violent resistance to the perpetrators? These
are crucial questions in the light of current world tensions such as racial injustice,
capitalistic monopolies, terrorism and fascism. The question here is whether any
guidelines can be gained from the Buddhist texts themselves.
There is no doubt that the person who
renounces the household life is called to abstain from violence completely. It is one of
the hallmarks of the bhikkhu. Not to react in violent retaliation to abuse was part of the
training of the disciple. Where there was state-instigated violence, the Early Buddhist
position seems to have been that the Sangha could act as advisers to rulers and, in this
capacity, could raise issues connected with righteous government, but it could not become
involved in violent resistance. As for the lay follower of the Buddha, he or she
undertakes to desist from harming others through the first precept. To break this
intentionally is to risk serious kammic consequences. For the lay person, as for the monk,
the approved line of action would seem to be advice and non-violent pressure or resistance
towards those in a position to change violent structures.
A different set of responsibilities, however,
is laid on the state itself. As previously discussed, rulers with the protection of their
citizens at heart were inevitably drawn into conflict when threatened by aggression. The
question can therefore be raised as to whether non-violence is an absolute value in
Buddhism. For instance, is a father, as head and protector of the family, justified in
using violence against a person forcefully entering his house with the intention to kill?
Has an elder sister the duty to protect a younger brother if he is attacked violently, by
using similar violence? Has a group of citizens the right to kill a dictator if, by doing
so, they might save the lives of oppressed minorities to whom the citizens feel a duty?
Should the terrorist gun be challenged with similar methods? These are areas where
absolutes seem to break down. As a ruler might realize that some aggressor cannot be
deterred by persuasion, so some citizens might feel that violence or injustice in society
cannot be stopped merely by giving advice to those in power. That lay people should never
initiate violence where there is harmony or use it against the innocent is very clear.
That they should not attempt to protect those under their care if the only way of doing so
is to use defensive violence is not so clear.
Guidelines about the consequences of violence,
however, are laid down. The danger of violence, even if it is defensive, is that it will
generate further violence. Non-hatred (avera) and loving kindness are the powers which
halt it. Metta (loving kindness) is shown to have great power: it can turn away the poison
of a snake or the charge of an elephant; [93] it can render burning ghee
harmless. [94] The latter story concerns a wife, Uttara, who is married to an
unbeliever. A courtesan, Sirima, is given to her husband so that Uttara can be released to
attend on religious duties. A quarrel arises between the two women which ends in Sirima
pouring boiling ghee over Uttara. As she prepares to do this, Uttara thinks:
"My companion has done me a favor. The circle
of the earth is too narrow, the world of the devas is too low, but the virtue of my
compassion is great because by her help, I have become able to give alms and listen to
Dhamma. If I am angry with her may this ghee burn me; if not, let it not burn me."
The ghee does not burn. Sirima tries again. Then the
other women present attack Sirima and throw her to the ground. Uttara continues to show
compassion by coming to her rescue, by preventing her from being hurt.
Responding to violence with metta and non-anger is
deemed superior to any other path. Non-violent resistance is clearly the best path. Yet
Buddhism cannot claim to be completely pacifistic. Absolutes of that kind cannot be found
and perhaps should not be sought for in a teaching which spoke of the danger of claiming
of a view, "this alone is truth, all else is falsehood." The person who feels
violence is justified to protect the lives of others has indeed to take the consequences
into account. He has to remember that he is risking grave consequences for himself in that
his actions will inevitably bear fruit. He or she has to be aware that there is a dynamism
within hatred and violence when the causal chain has not had its nourishment removed. Such
a person needs to evaluate motives in the knowledge that violent tendencies are rooted in
the defilements of lobha, dosa and moha, and in the obsessions generated by papanca. Yet
that person might still judge that the risks are worth facing to prevent a greater evil.
Whether the assassination of Hitler would have prevented numerous innocent deaths is still
an open question.
In conclusion, it can be said that Buddhism
lays down a form of mental culture to lessen the mind's tendency to veer towards violence.
However, it is a culture which involves qualities of faith (saddha) and effort (vayama)
that many in society are unable to cultivate. Therefore punishment either by the state or
in an after-life is seen as a valid deterrent for extremes of violence. However, where
violence flows directly and unjustifiably from the state or from other groups or
institutions, questions are raised which are not dealt with directly by the texts. The
drawing of conclusions is therefore fraught with difficulty. Yet these questions must be
tackled if Buddhism is to provide guidelines in a violent world. What seems to emerge from
the above analysis is that non-violence in the face of violence, although preferable for
all and incumbent on the monk, is not a moral absolute in all circumstances.
Conclusion
It was claimed at the beginning that the advent of
the nuclear bomb had issued in a new era of violence and that Buddhism should be able to
address this development. The foregoing analysis started from a study of the Buddha's
awareness of violence in his own society and passed to questions concerning the
condemnation of violence, the roots of violence, and the possibilities for its eradication
or reduction. Each of these issues has relevance for the present age, although it has been
pointed out that many conditions have changed between the sixth century B.C. and the
twentieth century A.D.
One area in which difference can be seen is in
the nature of warfare. In the Buddha's time, professional armies were used to settle
conflicts. Although civilians were no doubt killed as victorious armies took their
plunder, it was the army itself which bore the brunt of the slaughter. Today the cost in
civilian, animal and plant life in any future nuclear war is thinkable only in terms of
the most horrific nightmare. The duty of the Cakkavatti King might be to defend his
people. Yet no nuclear weapon can be used in defense. If it was, it would prove the
Buddhist view that the use of violence leads to escalation. The slim, ever-shaky defense
that nuclear weapons provide is MAD -- Mutually Assured Destruction -- an uneasy,
computer-controlled peace feeding on fear and the willingness to annihilate millions in
retaliation, if the other side dares to be the aggressor.
It would seem that, in nuclear weapons, man
has created something out of his greed which now makes him victim. The analysis given
earlier about the effects of papanca and the process of perception is relevant here. Some
people might see the development of ever more sophisticated weapons of destruction as the
result of objective, scientific probing into the nature of reality, in this case the use
of the atom. An approach more in accordance with Buddhism would be to see the root as
tanha, mana and ditthi: the craving for power over the material world and over other
people; the wish to protect self and judge other groups as inferior; the clinging to one
ideology whilst condemning all others. The result of tanha, mana and ditthi is papanca,
the proliferation of ideas which turn the so-called perceiver into the victim of
obsessions bearing little relation to the empirical. Nuclear and chemical weapons are
horrific projections of the human mind. It has come to the point where they possess the
mind rather than the mind the weapons. Humanity is now the victim.
Within this atmosphere, one may ask how
effective change in the individual is and whether the few who work to conquer tanha, mana
and ditthi can act as leaven within the whole. The obstacles are great today as they were
in the Buddha's time. The Buddha saw the puthujjana as a person hard to convince or
change, given the strength of craving and views. Today, ideas have a charismatic force.
Nationalism, ethnicity and religion, for instance, push groups towards violence. They form
ego-feeding, identity-creating creeds which are hard to break down. In such situations,
empirical evidence shows that some who try to show the alternative force of metta become
the victims of violence, at least in the frame of their present life.
Two insights from the foregoing study are
relevant here: the reaction which took place in the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta and the
interdependent nature of the environmental and the psychological. In the Cakkavatti
Sihanada Sutta, the truth that violence leads to greater violence and crime to
ever-deepening bestiality eventually pierces the consciousness of some members of society
as they see what is happening around them. Some realize that change is possible through a
change in thought patterns. A reaction takes place after the trough of bestiality has been
reached. Today, there are those who are "turning around," who are realizing how
destructive and bestial is the present and potential violence in the world. However, for
just as long as the external environment remains tension-creating, the rise of violent
tendencies will continue. Similar injustices exist today as are mentioned in the Kutadanta
Sutta, but their scope has altered and widened to include relationships between blocks of
countries as well as within countries. In most countries of the world, the poor are
becoming poorer. Between countries, the richer nations are becoming richer at the expense
of the poorer. The warning which the Buddhist texts give is that such conditions breed
violence and that the arm of the law or the gun will not curb it. Only change at the level
of the root causes will create more peaceful conditions. This is one of the gravest
challenges which the world faces, since it points to a complete re-drawing of the world
economic system. The formidable obstacle in the way of such change is tanha in those with
power or economic might -- for profit, influence and a luxurious lifestyle.
One reaction of the individual to the above
tension is complete withdrawal into a life of inaction. This was evidently a temptation in
the sixth century B.C. It has been a temptation across all religions throughout the
centuries. The mistake is to confuse renunciation and inaction, detachment (viraga) and
apathy. The life of renunciation aims at detachment from raga, dosa and moha, but the
result should not be apathy but rather greater compassion (karuna) and loving kindness
(metta). In the Samanamandika Sutta, a wanderer, Uggahamana, declares that the one who
does no evil deed with his body, speaks no evil speech, intends no evil intention and
leads no evil livelihood is the recluse who has obtained the most worthy end. The Buddha
responds:
"This being so carpenter, then according
to the speech of Uggahamana a young baby boy lying on its back would be of abounding
skill, of the highest skill, an unconquerable recluse, attained to the highest
attainments. "[95]
In contrast, the Buddha lays down the
importance of developing wholesome qualities, not merely abstaining from what is
unwholesome. The demands of the Eightfold Path are stressed, demands incumbent not only on
the monk but on all followers:
"As to this, carpenter, a monk is endowed
with the perfect view of an adept, he is endowed with the perfect intention of an adept,
... the perfect speech ... the perfect action ... the perfect mode of livelihood ... the
perfect endeavor ... the perfect mindfulness ... the perfect concentration ... the perfect
knowledge of an adept (sammananena), he is endowed with the perfect freedom of an
adept." [96]
In a violent world, therefore, the duty of the
Buddhist disciple is not inactive withdrawal or apathy but culture of the mind to root out
personal defilements so that perception and judgment can be unbiased and objective;
cultivation of positive qualities which will create harmony and peace; and, most
important, a readiness to speak out and act against what is blameworthy and in praise of
what is worthy of praise.
Notes
Abbreviations:
DN Digha Nikaya
MN Majjhima Nikaya
SN Samyutta Nikaya
AN Anguttara Nikaya
Dhp Dhammapada
Snp Sutta Nipata
Textual references have been taken from the Pali
Text Society's editions of the Nikayas. Unless specified otherwise, English translations
have been taken from the PTS versions, though some have been slightly altered.
1. Utilitarianism is a philosophy which claims that
the ultimate end of action should be the creation of human happiness. Actions should be
judged according to whether they promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
The most important exponent of this philosophy was the nineteenth century British thinker
John Stuart Mill. One of the weaknesses of utilitarianism is that it can be used to
justify the violation of minority rights.
2. Reference may be made to many texts which stress
that encouraging others to do harm is blameworthy. AN ii,215, for instance, speaks of the
unworthy man and the more unworthy man, the latter being one who encourages others to do
harmful actions such as killing living beings.
3. MN 95/ii,167.
4. The Kosala Samyutta (Samyutta Nikaya, vol. 1)
records the conversations which this king had with the Buddha. The examples mentioned have
been taken from this section.
5. SN i,97.
6. MN 13/i,86-87.
7. MN 13/i,87.
8. SN iv,343.
9. In several suttas, the Buddha comes across groups
of wanderers engaged in heated discussions about kings, robbers, armies, etc. (e.g. DN
iii,37; MN ii,1). In contrast, the Buddha advised his disciples either to maintain noble
silence or to speak about the Dhamma.
10. See Romila Thapar, A History of India (Pelican
Books UK, 1966), chapter 3.
11. SN i,75.
12. MN 36/i,227ff.
13. MN 12/i,68ff.
14. At the end of the Buddha's description of his
austerities in the Mahasaccaka Sutta he says: "And some recluses and brahmins are now
experiencing feelings that are acute, painful, sharp, severe; but this is paramount, nor
is there worse than this. But I, by this severe austerity, do not reach states of further
men, the excellent knowledge and vision befitting the Ariyans. Could there be another way
to awakening?" (MN i,246).
15. The Mahasakuludayi Sutta (MN 77/ii,1ff.)
reflects contemporary realities when a town plays hosts to various groups of wanderers.
16. DN 25/iii,38.
17. DN 8/i,162.
18. Trevor Ling, The Buddha -- Buddhist Civilisation
in India and Ceylon (Penquin Books UK, 1973).
19. See Esukari Sutta, MN 96.
20. SN iv,330ff.
21. DN 31.
22. Reference can be made to the following:
(a) AN i,188ff. The Buddha's advice to the Kalamas.
(b) AN ii,167ff. The Buddha advises the monks to
scrutinize closely anything said to have from his mouth.
(c) Canki Sutta: MN 95/ii,170-71. The Buddha says
that belief,
reasoning and personal preference are not guarantees
of
truth.
(d) Vimamsaka Sutta: MN 47. The Buddha urges his
disciples to
examine his own conduct before deciding whether he
is an
Enlightened One, and to investigate empirical
evidence rather
than accept things through blind faith.
23. The following texts provide fuller
discussions about paticca samuppada:
(a) Sammaditthi Sutta: MN 9.
(b) Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta: MN 38.
(c) Mahanidana Sutta: DN 15.
24. MN 99/ii,197.
25. MN 96/ii,177ff.
26. AN ii,42.
27. Reference may be made to the following:
(a) Assalayana Sutta: MN 93.
(b) Madhura Sutta: MN 84.
(c) AN ii,84. Here, four types of people are
mentioned, two of
whom are bound for light and two of whom are bound
for
darkness. Deeds, not birth, is the criterion for the
divisions between the two sets.
28. For instance, the Kutadanta Sutta and the
Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta, to be discussed below.
29. The Mahadukkhakkhandha Sutta (MN 13) is an
example.
30. SN i,100ff.
31. Therigatha vv. 105-6 (Sona).
32. MN 61/i,415-16.
33. MN 8/i,44-45.
34. AN ii,191.
35. Metta and karuna, as two of the brahmaviharas,
are mentioned at DN i,250-51, MN i,38, etc.
36. AN i,51.
37. MN 135/iii,303.
38. MN 129/iii,169-70. A similar approach is adopted
in the Devaduta Sutta: MN 130/iii,178ff.
39. The Petavatthu is one of the books of the
Khuddaka Nikaya. It contains 51 stories in four chapters, all concerning the petas, a
class of ghost-like beings who have fallen from the human plane because of misdeeds done.
40. DN 26/iii,61.
41. DN 16/iii,72ff.
42. SN i,82.
43. SN i,83.
44. SN i,101.
45. SN iv,308.
46. AN ii,121ff.
47. Snp. vv. 935-38. Translation by H. Saddhatissa
(Curzon Press, 1985).
48. DN 5/i,135.
49. DN 26/iii,61.
50. DN iii,73.
51. AN ii,74.
52. DN 27/iii,85.
53. DN iii,92.
54. MN 2/i,7. The description of the puthujjana is a
stock passage recurring throughout the Canon.
55. See SN iv,195.
56. AN ii,211.
57. MN 18/i,109-10.
58. Bhikkhu Nanananda, Concept and Reality in Early
Buddhist Thought (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1971).
59. MN 18/i,111-12.
60. Concept and Reality, p.6.
61. Immanuel Kant, 1724-1804. His major work, The
Critique of Pure Reason, studies the place of a priori ideas in the formation of concepts
and examines the role of reason and speculative metaphysics.
62. AN i,188; AN ii,190.
63. DN 1. See e.g. DN i,16: "In the fourth
case, monks, some recluse or brahmin is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives
utterance to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and
based on his sophistry...."
64. MN 74/i,497.
65. Snp. 824-34; Snp. 862-77.
66. AN ii,173ff. The Buddha here quotes three views
which result in inaction:
(i) that all feelings are due to previous kamma;
(ii)that all feelings are due to a supreme deity;
(iii) that all feelings are without cause or
condition.
67. MN 105/ii,253.
68. MN 110/iii,21-22.
69. MN 125/iii,129-30.
70. MN 86/ii,98ff.
71. DN 26/iii,73.
72. A stock passage found in many suttas (e.g. MN
51/i,344) extols the homeless life as the only way "to fare the holy life completely
fulfilled, completely purified, polished like a conch shell."
73. Dantabhumi Sutta: MN 125/iii,128ff.
74. DN 11/i,211.
75. DN 16/ii,104.
76. MN 51/i,340.
77. Body, feelings, thoughts and mental objects are
the four foundations of mindfulness (see DN 22, MN 10).
78. MN 27/i,181, and elsewhere.
79. This point is developed in Trevor Ling, The
Buddha.
80. MN 21/i,129.
81. MN 145/iii,269.
82. Respectively MN 65, MN 21, MN 70, MN 15.
83. The Mahasakuludayi Sutta (MN 77) and the
Dhammacetiya Sutta (MN 89) describe the impact which the general concord of the Buddha's
followers had respectively on groups of wanderers at Rajagaha and on King Pasenadi.
84. AN ii,100.
85. Respectively MN 93, DN 27, MN 84.
86. MN 96.
87. DN 31/iii,181.
88. Respectively DN 1, DN 3, DN 11.
89. DN 5.
90. MN 41/i,287.
91. MN 41/i,288.
92. DN 2/i,71 and elsewhere.
93. See AN ii,71. A monk dies of snakebite, and the
Buddha declares that if he had suffused the four royal families of snakes with a heart of
metta, he would not have died. A story in the Cullavagga of the Vinaya Pitaka relates how
the Buddha's envious cousin, Devadatta, tried to kill him by releasing a notoriously
ferocious elephant called Nalagiri at him in the streets of Rajagaha. The Buddha is said
to have subdued it by exercising metta and karuna, so that the elephant lowered its trunk
and stopped before the Buddha. Hiuen-Tsang refers to a stupa at the place where this is
said to have happened.
94. Vimanavatthu, No. 15.
95. MN 78/ii,24.
96. MN 78/ii,29.
Source :
The Wheel
Publication No. 392/393 ISBN
955-24-0119-4 Copyright 1990 by Elizabeth J. Harris
Buddhist
Publication Society Kandy, Sri Lanka http://lanka.com/dhamma/bpsframe.html
DharmaNet
International P.O. Box 4951, Berkeley
CA 94704-4951 http://www.dharmanet.org/ To obtain more Buddhist Publication Society materials please use the links above
or contact The Barre Center For Buddhist Studies
Lockwood Road Barre, MA 01005
Tel: (508) 355-2347 http://www.dharma.org/bcbs.htm
Or Dowload many of these materials for
free from: The Access To Insight Theravada Text
Archives http://world.std.com/~metta/lib/bps/index.html
Update : 01-12-2001