socially engaged buddhism in historical perspective

7/31/2019 Socially Engaged Buddhism in Historical Perspective

1/19

Socially Engaged Buddhism: In Historical Persepective

Santosh K Gupta

Research Scholar, The Academy of Korean Studies

Introduction:

The indisputability of the fact that Buddhists constitute the major component of the religious

population of some Asian countries. Amply demonstrable in the enumeration of the Buddhist

populace to the tune of millions of religious population, necessitate scholarly moorings into

the Buddhist stream on the Asian terrain. It is remarkable to note that Buddhism is also the

most popular, fastest growing and widely distributed religion not only in Asian subcontinent

but also in Western countries. It covers a densely populated area to remote area of the world.

Asian Buddhists, like their counterparts in other countries, have been making efforts to turn

Buddhism as a socially relevant and useful religion. Keeping this in view, a large number of

monks and nuns have undertaken the task of up keeping the monastery, steadfastly practicing

dharma and along with assuming social responsibility in the changing modern world.

Buddhism, imbued with utmost tolerance, has traversed a long distance from the

Monarchical setup to the Democratic setup of the world. The period succeeding the

monarchical rule witnessed the unleashing of a hitherto dormant force in the contemporary

period, now all geared up to play an active role in the modern world. It is imperative to note

that the Buddhism has been already engaged with society for long, thus setting an exquisite

example of co-existence with diverse cultures. Now in this machinery era, where people have

no time to take care of others, its emerging as a vital force to play an active role in shaping of


2/19

modern society. Further, the hectic schedule of work and the social responsibilities have

created a confuse and tence environment around the people.The establishment of old-age

centers and kid-care centers in the Eastern and Western Countries shows that the people are

intend to escap from responsibility of their parents and newly born children. On the other

side, they are running hither and thither in search of peace through sensual materialism. It is

remarkable to note that the Buddha assumed the spiritual path was the opposite of sensual

materialism.1

The growing trend of materialism has raised a question in front of Buddhist

community to prove the relevance of dharma in this changing scenario. And in thesecircumstances, Buddhism has taken a greater challenge to provide the true path to coming

generation, which has been applicable in all diverse society since its inception. This episodic

upsurge enhanced its social relevance further in the form of a socially engaged Buddhism. It

has earlier played a catalytic role in the unification of several Asian countries, and in the

emergence of rudimentary nationalism in different period. Again on the canvass of

contemporary period, the Buddhist pendulum has swung back to the advocacy of the

reconcialation in Asian countries. Not only this, it has also laid great stress on the active role

of Buddhism in social and political arena. This paper intends to deal with two aspects of

engaged Buddhism, firstly it will provide a brief sketch of social engagement of Buddhism in

doctrinal perspective. Secondly, political tenets of Buddhas teaching in historical

perspective.

On the doctrinal level, there has been a wide ranging debate that the engaged

Buddhism is the product of Western influence (reformist view or modernist view). Even

some western scholars assert that the Buddhism both Mahayana and Hinyana have been

socially and politically passive religion. 2 Further, there is no Buddhist ethic for social and

political engagement. The modernists consider that the contemporary socio-political

engagement of Buddhism is byproduct of colonial rule. In the other word, Euro-American

colonial influence on new Buddhism. They asserts the engaged Buddhism as a new

Buddhism, and quite different from traditional Buddhism. On the other hand, traditionalists


3/19

consider that the Buddhism has always been associated with society and politics. The leading

personality of traditionalist, who represents a greater portion of Asian scholars or so called

Asian trained Buddhist, such as Thich Nhat Hanh, Dalai Lama, Sulak Sivaraksa and Maha

Ghosananda. They have considered it only extension of Buddhist tradition, and its

emplemention in practice

It would be appropriate to say that the both interpretations need more scholarly

mooring. As far as this paper is concerned, it intends to shed some light on the Buddhist

canonical text, and further on the teaching of Buddha, particularly in persepective of forsocial and political equilibrium. The another issue quoted by Foster who seems to admit that

early Buddhism may have been socially engaged, but he claims that the East Asian

Buddhism that he studies was not.3 I would also like to focus this issue in very brief.

The term socially engaged Buddhism has gained attention of scholars in 1960s,

when Thich Nhat Hanh, theVietnamese Buddhist monk has coined this term in 1963. As

Henry4

mentioned, Thich Nhat Hanh has revised this term during his Sccotish tour in 2003,

and saying that all Buddhism is engaged. But it is remarkable to note that the Manhae, a

Korean Buddhist monk, who had provoked the monks of Korea for social and political

engagement in late 19th

and early 20th

century. He played an active role in the propogation

of Buddhism and elevating the national counciousness. Not only this, he had also promoted

anti-Japanese movement, and spread pro-independence ideas. The role of Manhae should

also focus in the persepective of engaged Buddhism. That is to say, socially engaged

Buddhism is only a new interpretation or continuation of Buddhism. And their historical

trace goes back to the Buddhas period and his teachings. Before mark the any demarcation

line between Buddhism and engaged Buddhism, we need to reinterprate Buddhist tradition,

we also need to know the essence of each word of both tradition, Hinayana and Mahayana.

The existing sect of Buddhism in Asia clearly varies from nation to nation, both in theory

and practice, but remarkable point is that the essence of dharma is embedded in Buddhas

teachings. Various Buddhist scholars of Asia, during the course of history, have interpreted


4/19

the dharma according to their own geographical and cultural setup. And The modern

emerging trend of Buddhism does not show any sectarian split or doctrinal debate over all.

However, it has been covering the untouched part of West within the framework of Buddhas

teaching through the social and political engagement.

Historical significance of engaged Buddhism:

Buddha's dharma like the social tradition itself has been ceaselessly transmitted from

generation to generation, characterized by universality. The virtues embedded in theBuddhist nucleus kindness, compassion, humanity and equality have been truly

instrumental in the promotion of social solidarity and harmony in a broad socio-cultural

spectrum. Buddha's teaching has cast an indelible imprint on the social spheres of

numerous oriental states, and now is casting an incredible imprint in the west. It needs to

mention that the motive of Buddhas teaching is to overcome the suffering of human

beings, and show them the true path of humanity. Buddhism not only emphasizes on the

cause of suffering, but also emphasizes on the cessation of suffering. That is to say,

Buddhism laid much stress on the sufferings of people which engendered by their actions

both in past and present, and has provided a complete solution through personal

experience. The question raises here that why Buddhism differs from other spiritual sects,

and in my opinion because it posed a greater challenge in front of society to realize the

reality of life through own experience. Buddhism as a spiritual force always intends to

provide the solution for human problems. And modern form of Buddhism is also working

within the framework of tradition. It would be appropriate to mention that the all religions

of world exist for well being of society, however, society does not exist only for religion.

Further, both religion and society are interdependent on each other for their growth, and in

this perspective Buddhas dharma is not an exception. Many people understand that

Buddhism means escapism, isolation from society, and only a teaching for enlightenment.

This misunderstanding has been served a major obstacle in the understanding of Buddhas


5/19

prime motive. Modern Buddhist responses are scattering this shallow concept through the

program of social engagement.

The modern emerging trend in the East Asian Buddhism has been hailed by the

scholars as socially engaged Buddhism. Thich Nhat Hanh, a Vietnamese monk was among

the first who use the term 'engaged Buddhism' in his magnum opus "Peace is every step".

According to him, "Engaged Buddhism, why? Because we are the part of this world,

where running hither and thither are common phenomena, where nobody takes care of

others. It is our responsibility to make it the best world, we can". The goal of engagedBuddhism lies in helping the people who are in trouble, and to solve the social problems

engendered by human activities. It guides them towards a true and pure path for upliftment

of society, and in greater sense, for upliftment of whole human beings of the world.

Socially engaged Buddhism is a novel interpretation of Buddhism, which bears

great historical significance. Cho Sungtaek has reexamined the idea of Buddhist passivity

by his essay Buddhism and society:On Buddhist Engagement with Society.5

He proposes

to trace the historical dimension of social and political engagement of Buddhism through

two traditional texts, Theravada and Mahayana; however, it has not been adduced to

explain the both context. The work does not deal with the Buddhist tradition, nor it

corroborates the tenets of Buddhas teaching which are lies in tradition. On the other hand,

he has criticized the argument of Keel Hee-sung successfully.6 In reexamination of the

idea of Buddhist passivity, Cho points out that the especially Seon Buddhism does not

properly respond to the needs of contemporary society. However, he also tried to focus the

immutability and adoptability (bulbyeon suyeon) of Seon enlightenment, while Keel

ignoring the adoptability of Seon Buddhism, and highlighting the immutability. However,

Chos argument is worth considerable, but needs more contextual explanation. This papers

aims to demonstrate the Theravada and Mahayana, two major traditions of Buddhism what

bears regarding the social and political engagement. First, I would like to discuss the

question of passivity. Historical evidences bear a clear-cut picture of Buddhist engagement


6/19

since its inception. Buddha, the master of dharma, has not only taught about enlightenment

or practicing meditation, but also taught about society; A true and morally high society

which is based on equality, compassion, and Meta (friendship). It needs to be mentioned

that the Buddha has not escaped from society, although he returned into society after

enlightenment. The Buddhist community was constantly in touch with the common people,

begging daily food from them, solving their problems through separate meetings, and

conducting public discourse on various social and political issues. Buddha himself visited

village-to-village and taught about peace and social solidarity. Even he accepted severalinvitation of common populace, praised their donation and gift of the meal without any

discrimination. As Buddhist text mentions that once he accepted the invitation of

Amarapali,7 a professional dancer of Vaisali of ancient India. And historical evidences say

that the Vajjians, rulers of Vajji republic, were intending to invite the Buddha at the same

time, but master had preferred Amrapalis invitation, and heartily visited her house.

Besides, he admired several invitations of King such as Bimbisara, Ajatsatru, Passenjit and

so on, and enjoyed preaching them dharma. Remarkably, early Buddhist centers and

activities were appear to have centered on the ancient city such as Rajagirha,8 Vaishali,

Kausambi, Benars, Pava, Sravasti and so on. These centers were densely populated and

famous for trade and commerce both national and international. That is to say, the

Buddhist centers were not located in the forest or mountainous region. Further, historical

evidences of Asia also shows that all Buddhist centers have flourished under the shed of

society. Perhaps, Buddha intended deeper involvement with society. Even king Bimbisara

decided to allot a residence to Buddha, neither too nears the noise of the town not too far

from the city.9 According toMahavaga, king Bimbisara gave the first park of this kind to

Sangha, only a few weeks after the enlightenment of Buddha. It seems that the king

wanted to make it easier for both people and Sangha, for more engagements. Once,

Buddha had rejected Devadattas proposal that the community should reside permanently

in the forest. Undoubtly, he was against of any kind of isolation and escapism from society.


7/19

As Wijayaratna mentioned that the Buddhist monks were essentially social being, for two

reasons. Firstly, they were members of a society called Sangha (the community), in which

they had responsibilities, duties and also rights. Secondly, as we have seen, they were

depended on lay people for clothing, medicine, and food, and they also had responsibilities,

duties and rights in relation to lay society.10

Thus, modern social engagement is also

enlargement of responsibilities and duties of Buddhist Community. In the other words, the

initiative of worlds Buddhist community is one more step from shallower to deeper social

engagement. A.K.Warder has clearly mentioned that we should remember also thatbesides the Buddha formally established the two branches of the total Buddhist

community: the laymen and lay women ( upasakas and upasikas).11

It needs to mention

that the vast majority of people cannot renounce worldly life, and master of dharma was

aware to this reality. He never tried to turn anybody against his or her wish, and strongly

recommended rules for householders. According to canonical text, many householders

have achieved Arhantship, a higher stage of Buddhism. The order provides an opportunity

for those who are not only willing to prevail their family life along with spiritual

cultivation, but also to serve others. It is difficult for lay followers to devote their whole

life to the service of others. Whereas the monks are completely free from their worldly

affairs, and are able to devote their whole life for well being of the many. Presently,

modern Buddhist monks are inclined to re-implement the tradition in practice for worlds

welfare. According to Sigala-sutta ofDigha-nikaya, the Buddha has regarded that the

great respect of the laymans life are his family and his social life. According to same Suta,

the Buddha has considered the Six Directions for worshiping of family, these were east:

parents; south: teachers; west: wife and children; north: friends and neighbors; nadir:

employees, workers; zenith: religious men.12

Further, he has clearly differentiated the

relation between father and children, the relation between teacher and student, and the

relation between friends and neighbors. His teaching provides a moral guideline for lay

follower to attain the salvation along with social responsibility. The Buddhist concept of


8/19

society is based on morality, non-violence, truth, and abstention from others property. It is

remarkable to note that Buddhas period was full of violence, war and moral degeneration.

He had taught dharma where Imperial powers were taking place of republicans through

sword. He opposed all kind of violence, and preached the theory of non-violence for social

solidarity. Buddhist teaching is much emphasized on the family system, and especially on

family and marriage. According toAnguttara-Nikaya, Buddha said that a man have these

seven kinds of wives. Further defined it in front of Sujata, a house wife of Savatthi, whoso

is pitiless, corrupt in mind, neglecting husband, and inflamed by other man- let her becalled: a slyer and a wife. Whoso would rob her husband of his gains, though little be the

profit that she makes, whether by craftsmanship, or from his trade or by the plough- a

robber and a wife. Ones who bent on nothing doing, strident voice and brings to low

account her husbands zeal-a mistress and a wife. Who ever with loving sympathy, just as

a mother for her only son, for husband cares, and stored-up his wealth- a mother and a

wife. Who holds her husband in the same regard, as elder sister holds the younger born,

meek in heart, who serves every wish to husband- a sister and a wife. And she who is as

glad her lord to see as boon companions ling a part to meet, a gracious character of gentle

birth, a fond helpmate- let her be called: companion and a wife. If fearless of the lash and

stick, unmoved, all things enduring, calm and pure in heart, she bear obedience to her

husbands words, from anger free- let her called: a handmaid and a wife.13

Then Buddha

asked to Sujata, these are the seven kinds of wives a man may have; and which of them are

you? Sujata replied, Lord, let the Exalted one think of me as a handmaid and wife from

this day forth. And later she became the lay follower. As I mentioned above the discourse

of Sigala, where he also explained the relation between married couple in greater details.

According to Buddhism, love between husband and wife is considered almost sacred, and

it is called Sadara-Brahmacariya sacred family life.14

Buddhist tradition laid much

emphasize on faith, respect, devotion and certain responsibility for both husband and wife

to carry the marital life smoothly. There is no discrimination or advantage for any one;


9/19

both are morally bound to take care of each other. Buddhist tradition proposed an ideal

society that is based on the concept of interdependence, devotion, honesty, mutual

understanding and peaceful coexistence. Buddhist social view lies in the reciprocal setup

whereby husband and wife can lead a faithful and respectful life. Once in Getavana Vihara,

the Buddha clearly mentioned that the great requirement is a loving heart to regard the

people as we do an only son.15

Love is the centrifugal force of Buddhism, which is

applicable for all people, race, and for any circumstances. The Buddha has emphasized

much on love, and considered as a sharp weapon to defeat the hatred and violence. Hesays: Hatred is quenched by love, not by hatred.

16The real happiness can be brought

through kindness, charity and friendly treatment. In Buddhism, there is no place for

selfishness, cheating, anger and violence, and Buddha identified it as a major obstacles for

any civil society.

Another aspect, charity, we need to investigate here that the present charity work

of Buddhist organization is it by-product of Western influence or practice of tradition. The

Buddha identified charity as one of the marvelous and wonderful quality of people. The

Buddha says: there is proper time and a proper mode on charity, just as the vigorous

warrior goes to battle, so is the man able to give, he also is an able warrior; a champion

strong and wise in action. Further he says The charitable man is loved by all, well-

known and far-renowned, and there is no sweet companion like pure charity.17

He has

not only defined the charity, but he also described the fruit of charity work. According to

Buddhism, charity is stored wealth of ones life, and leads to return of great joy. Buddhism

promotes untainted and unselfish charity for welfare of all. It is a work of brave, loving

and compassionate people. The Buddha expounds the four virtues conductive to a

laymans happiness, and practice of charity ( Caga) is one of the key elements of the four

virtues. He has suggested that the people should practice charity, generosity, without

attachment and craving for his wealth. According to Anguttara-Nikaya, There are five

achievements of humans life: the perfecting of faith; the perfecting of virtue; the


10/19

perfecting of learning; the perfecting of insight, and the perfecting of charity.18

And in this

way, modern initiative of Buddhist monks and organizations are seems within the

framework of Buddhist tradition. Socially engaged Buddhists are on the path of

achievements through perfecting of charity. Of course the methods of charity work,

functions of Buddhist organizations, and targeted people could be influenced by different

working organizations. Undoubtedly, Buddhist Monastery has been provided shelter for

orphans, and weaker section of society from its inception. On the other hand, Buddhist

monks have always provided psychological and social concealing for depressed people,confused people, and people who were suffering for psychosomatic diseases. There are

many examples in canonical text where many criminals and misguided people have turned

their lives after concealing. Here i would like to suggest that the role of Buddhist monks

should interpret from different angles, and tradition should highlight in new perspectives.

Contemporary engaged Buddhist organizations are devoted to smash the poverty

of world. And in this regard, strengthening of economic condition of weaker section can

play catalytical role in social empowerment. The concept of social and economic welfare

can be visualized in Buddhas approach. The master of dharma was aware that unfavorable

economic and social condition could not lead the people to follow the true path. He

identified poverty as a root cause of crime and moral degradation such as violence,

robbery, hatred, sexual crime and so on. According to Kutadanta-sutta of the Digha-

nikaya, the Buddha laid much stress on the improvement of economic conditions of people.

He suggests that the grain and other facilities for agriculture should be provided for

farmers and cultivators; capital should be provided for traders, and adequate wages should

be paid to those who are employed.19

But it should not be interpret that the Buddha had

approved each and every way of earning money. It does not mean that he had attested the

accumulation of wealth by any improper means. According toAnguttara- Nikaya, he had

prohibited five trades such as trade of weapon; trade of human beings; trade of flesh; trade

of spirits; and trade of poison for lay disciple.20

Buddhist tradition considers it as anti


11/19

social, anti national and evil means of lively hood.

We have seen the result of weapon trade in 20 th century. World has already

experienced two world wars which resulted in the form of atomic attack in Japan.

Presently, terrorist threat is a new emerging phenomenon for world that is challenging the

peaceful existence of globe. The mushrooming of terrorism is completely based on the

weapons trade, and we cannot ignore this fact. Today, most of the countries admit to stop

the trade of weapon in general, and atomic weapon in particular. Besides, several anti

nuclear weapon processions have organized by many philanthropists in last fifty years. Itis imperative to note that what worlds leaders are experiencing and advocating today,

Buddha had already experienced and advocated three thousand years ago. Further, Modern

labor unions of world and other global organizations are keen to protect the economic

interest of labors. These organizations are fighting for minimum wages and other basic

facilities. Perhaps, these movements are drawing inspiration from Buddhas view of

adequate wage. According to Buddhism, people have four kinds of happiness. The first

happiness is economic prosperity earned by righteous means; the second is spending that

wealth on himself, relatives and on meritorious action; the third to be free from debts; and

the fourth happiness is to lead pure life. The economic view of Buddha is completely

based on the concept of social welfare where lay followers can earn money through

righteous means, but undoubtly they are morally bound for certain responsibilities.

Buddhism not only emphasizes on the accumulation of wealth, but also emphasizes that

how to spend for contented society. In present context, it is imperative to note that the

Buddhist traditions strongly attesting the relevance of dharma for contemporary world.

Above-mentioned facts answers the Kings question that is there Buddhist ethic for

modern world. In my view, Buddhas teaching is applicable for all time and space;

however, it only needs implementation in practical life.

Another aspect, the question of political passivity of Buddhism needs more

scholarly debates and interpretation. It needs to mention that the first and foremost goal of


12/19

Buddhism is to create the peaceful surrounding across the world, and without political

stability there is no concept of peace. We should not forget that the master of dharma was

from royal family, and he was aware of contemporary political crisis. The Buddha admired

the republics setup, its democratic pattern that respects for honest people. He showed

deep faith in democracy, and had setup monastery on democratic pattern. Infact Buddha

had enjoyed upon the king to work for political stability and peace. He denied any kind of

violence for political sake, and preached non-violence and peace as a universal massage.

As Walpola mentioned that there is nothing can that can be called just war-which isonly a false term coined and put into circulation to justify and excuse hatred, cruelty,

violence and massacre. The victorious are just and the weak and the defeated are unjust.

Buddhism does not accept this position. One who wins the war after killing million of

people can only realize the illusionary satisfaction? The winner only can satisfy their ego

for certain time. Presently, many nations are trying to justify their war against terrorism

and dictatorship; they wish to maintain peace through violence. The questions raises here

that can any nation provide peace through nuclear weapons, or any other destructive

means? Once Buddha suggested that victory produces hatred; he that is defeated is

afflicted with suffering; he that has renounced both victory and defeat lives in tranquility

and happiness.21

True and genuine peace can be prevailed only in an atmosphere ofMetta,

amity, free from all evil means. There are immortal examples in the history that the theory

of Non-violence and love can maintain the peace of any nation. It is a well-known fact that

Ashoka, the great Indian king had successfully applied the teaching of non-violence to

maintain the peace and prosperity throughout neighboring countries. He organized several

peace missions for teaching of non-violence to Asian countries. I would like to say that the

world should draw inspiration from history to maintain the peace in contemporary period.

It is imperative to note that the Buddha had identified some basic qualities of

kings court.Anguttara-Nikaya clearly states that the seven requisites of a fortress should

be well provided. The king should be well aware of basic necessities for security of fort.


13/19

The Buddha suggested that the Kings citadel in the marches should have pillar, deeply

embedded, and well dug in, immovable and unshakable. This pillar is indication of the

stability and sovereignty of state. Historical evidences attest that the king Ashoka of India

had embedded seven-pillar edict throughout the nation. These pillar edict bears massage of

state, which is devoted to the people. The main motive of the pillar was to provide the

protection for the inmates and for the warding off of outsiders. Second, the moat, both

deep and wide, should be well provided. The historical evidences shows that many kings

had followed prescribed pattern for security of fortress in ancient and medievalconstructions. Third, the road going round the citadel should be well provided. That was

necessary for troops movement from one place to another during invasion. Fourth, the

great armory of spear and sword should be well provided. Fifth, the large troops such as

horsemen, charioteers, bowmen, standard-bearers, noted rajas son, storm troops, and

warriors in cuirasses should station in the citadel. Sixth, the gatekeeper, cleaver, intelligent,

and wise should be well provided. And seventh, the rampart, both high and wide, covered

with a coat of plaster.22

Interestingly,

the Buddha had preached the teaching of non-violence, but it does not mean that

his suggestion indicates violence. However, he was in favor of national security, and he

laid priority for national sovereignty. His teachings does not suggest demolishing the

defense system of nation, it means the maintaining of strong defense can overcome the

possibility of expansion from neighbor counties. It seems that Buddhas suggestion is

based on the both offensive and defensive concept of war. That is to say, the well-

organized defense system is basic need of any independent nation, and the nation can

protect their freedom, sovereignty by strengthening of defense. The Buddha has explained

that how nation can provide a better and peaceful government without any fear of war.

Furthermore, he has also emphasized that the four kinds of supplies should be well

provided in the kings citadel. There should be regular supply of water, wood, and grass

for convenience of the inmates and for the warding off of outsiders. There should be great


14/19

stores of food grains. There should be great store of vegetables such as beans, and cereals.

And there should be great store of medicaments for convenience of residence. Buddhas

view on state security is not only shedding light on the politics, but also greatly

emphasizing the social welfare approach of state. The Buddhist ideas of state security

provides a fearless and peaceful environment around the nation for prosperity and

happiness of inmates.

I would like to mention one instance ofAnguttara-Nikaya, once Buddha dwelt

near Vesali kingdom, and where he addressed the group of Licchavis king that if seventhings will be well maintained then the growth for the Vajjians may be expected, and not

decline. The Buddha said that as the Vajjians shall be often assembled, much in assembly,

their growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall sit down in concord, rise

up in concord, do business in concord, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as

they shall not decree the underfeed nor repeal the decreed, but conform to the ancient

Vajjian laws as decreed, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall honor,

respect, venerate, revere the elders, shall hold they out to be listened to, growth may be

expected, not decline; so long as they shall not forcibly kidnap and make live with them

women and girl of their own clan, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they

shall honor, respect, venerate, revere the shrines within and without, shall not fail to

provide meet offerings, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as meet protection,

refuge, shelter shall be provided for Arahants, growth may be expected, and not decline.23

Buddha had much emphasized on the unity of republicans for their longer survival.

Above-mentioned criteria is not only emphasizing the political view of Buddha, but also

exploring the socialist orientation of state that is expected to provide the respect of their

people and especially to women. Furthermore, we can visualize the principle of good

government through explanation of Buddhist idea, which advocates in favor of secular

administration, happier society, and morally high country.

The master of dharma not only profound the political theory, but also provided


15/19

incredible political suggestion to rulers whenever they requested. According to same

Nikaya, Buddhas words once prevented King Ajatsatru of Magadha from attacking the

kingdom of the Vajjis. As story goes, Magadhas Chief Minister named Vassakara visited

to Buddha to convey the decision of King Ajatsatru that the king is anxious to attack, to

root out, and to destroy the confederacy of Vajjis. The Buddha listened carefully kings

decision and clearly suggested to Vassakara that the possession of any one of things that

cause not decline; but what will be said if they have all seven. He clearly mentioned that

the Vajjians couldnt be overcome by force. But if they will break their alliance then theywill be looser. According to historical evidences, after sixteen years long struggle,

Ajatsatru had braked up the unity of Vajjis by cunningness, and completed his policy of

territorial expansion.24

However, it clearly seems that Buddha had showed deep faith in

Republic set up, but it doesnt mean that he criticized the monarchical set up of

contemporary time. It is imperative to note that the Republic set up and politics is the most

common and vigorous in the Buddhist text. Buddhist political view advocates wisely,

justly and righteously rule for all nations. It recommended moral principle in politics,

which is applicable for all existing political, set up. Although, there has been a long

tradition of democracy in the world, but it depends on scholars that how they are tracing

the root of democracy. In my view, modern democratic ideas not go beyond the

propounded concept of Buddha. The central tenets of modern democracy such as

participation of people in election, voting right, consultation, government formation by

majority, and major decision by debate can be visualized in Buddhist tradition.

Walpola intend to interpret the word king (Raja) by the term government in

present context, and it is worth considerable. He mentions that the Ten Duties of the

King, therefore, apply today to all those who constitute the government, such as the head

of the state, ministers, political leaders, legislative and administrative officers, etc.25

The

Buddha had experienced the degeneration of politics and society in the contemporary

period. And his view clearly shows that how a corrupt government makes their people


16/19

unhappy. According to Buddhist ethic, the king, minister and administrative officers are

solely responsible for social and political degeneration. Corruption on any level in

political and social system can be resulted in instability, revolt and social rebellion, and the

master of dharma was immensely recognized and experienced during the course of history.

So thats why he explained the duties of King in greater details, where non-violence, non-

obstruction, tolerance, austerity in habits, kindness, honesty and integrity, sacrifices,

morality, and charity is central tenets of his teaching. Moreover, Nagarjuna, a doyen of

Mahayanist philosophy, had also prescribed a compassionate and welfare-orientedgovernment for king, which included education for people, socially supported health care,

and low land tax. In this way, engaged Buddhism is a redefinition of the nature and role of

Buddhas dharma for the modern and pluralistic world.

It is evidently acknowledged that Buddhism, since its inception, has been an active

force in society, reconciling the disputes of the social and political institutions. The

Buddha not only proposed the political issues in theory, but he also tried to implement it in

practice. His teaching of non-violence, peaceful co-existence, and reconciliation is imbued

with a greater realm of welfare. It is clearly mentioned in the Buddhist text that the

Buddha, the master of dharma, had gone to the battlefield where two groups were prepared

for bloodshed over the question of the water of the Rohini.26 According to Sukha Vagga

(happiness) ofJataka text, the people of Sakiya and the Koliya Republic caused the waters

of the river Rohini to be confined by a single dam between the city of Kapilavatthu and

the city of Koliya, and cultivated the fields on both sides of the river. Once crops began to

droop, both sides were intended to utilize maximum water for irrigation. Koliyas had

clearly mentioned that they are not going to divide water, thus talked waxed bitter and

resulted in fight. Further, the combatants made matters worse by aspersions on the origin

of the two royal families. Thereafter, both the Sakayas and Koliyas came fourth armed for

battle and cried to show their strength through bloodshed. At that moment, the master of

dharma, went in battlefield, and had settled the dispute through reconciliation.27

He


17/19

considered it as a duty. His participation in dispute settlement shows that the Buddhism

has always been active religion, and the argument of passivity seems baseless.

Concluding Remarks

The modern interpretation of Buddhism, especially the socially engaged

Buddhism, has infused a new lease of life into the scholarly enterprises in the recent

decades. It has also brought forth the pertinent question of the relevance of Buddhist idealsin the modern globalize world. The scholarly debates have also moved towards the

investigation of the engaged Buddhism, raising numerous strands of polemics. In my view,

it should evidently acknowledge that Buddhism, since its inception, has been an active

force in society, reconciling the contradictions of the social and political institutions.

Above mentioned examples answer that the Buddhist ethics are significantly relevant for

contemporary global society. It only needs various scholarly discourses on Buddhas

teaching in modern perspective, and its implementation. The Socio-Political ideas of

Buddha not only applied by King Ashoka of India, but more or less it has also applied by

Korean rulers during the course of history. It would be appropriate to mention that the

Buddhist idea of Panchsila is playing key role between China and India as a part of

bilateral relation. Since 1950s, both countries has persuaded by peaceful means to settle

their disputes through dialogue. Undoubtly, the initiative of the engaged Buddhists is

within the framework of tradition. Ofcourse, the working way of organizations can be

influenced by others organizations, and we cannot deny. Historical evidences attests that

the Buddhism has assimilated with the various indigenous culture of the Asia, but it core

philosophy has always been unchanged. In the context of western Buddhism, it seems that

the Buddhism is corroborating the social and cultural tenets of west to respond

accordingly in contemporary period.


18/19

N o t e s

1 The author tried to discuss the materialistic situation of Buddhas period. For further details see Damien Keown,

Contemporary Buddhist Ethics, (London: Routledge Curzon 2000,187).2 Cho Sungtaek has raised this issue in his article titledBuddhism and society: On Buddhist Engagement with

Society. Professor Cho has tried to criticize the view of Winston King who argued that Buddhism has been

socially and politically passive religion. Further details see Cho Sungtaek,Buddhism and Society: On Buddhist

Engagement with Society, Korea Journal, Vol.42 Winter, (Seoul: 2002, 119-135).3 Yarnall cites the opinion of foster in his essay. For further details see Queen, Prebish and Keown (ed.),Action

Dharma New Studies in Engaged Buddhism, (London: Routledge Curzon 2003, 296)4 Phil Henry, The Sociological Implications for Contemporary Buddhism in the United Kingdom: Socially

Engaged Buddhism, a Case Study, Journal of Buddhist Ethic, Vol. 13(2006, 9)5 Cho (2002,119-336).6

Keel Hee-sung raised a question that whether transcendental enlightenment in Seon Buddhism is compatiblewith social activism. Further he questioned, is it possible for those who are in the realm of enlightenment, where

form is emptiness, to have social and ethical concerns?7 According to Indian history, Amrapalis profession was not respectable. Dancing was socially low profession,

although she was associated with two great royal courts, Magadha and Vaishali of contemporary India.8 Buddhist literature describes Rajagirha of that age as a popular and very prosperous city. Many merchants and

other rich people had houses, and organized trade with foreign countries. For further details see Amulyachandra

Sen,Rajagirha and Nalanda, (Calcutta: Indian publicity Society 1954, 22-24)9 Ibid., p.31.10 Mohan Wijayaratna, Buddhist Monastic Life, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1990, 119)11

A.K.Warder, Indian Buddhism, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1970,158)12 Walpola Sri Rahula, What the Buddha taught(Bangkok: Haw Trai Foundation 1990, 78-80)13 E.M. Hare (tr.).Anguttara-Nikaya, Vol. iv (London: The Pali Text Society 1978, 57-58)14 Walpola, p.79.15 Samuel Beal (tr.).A life of Buddha, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas 1975,234)16

Eugene Watson Burlingame,Buddhist Legends, (Harvard University Press 1921, 176-177)17

Samual Beal, pp.212-218.18 E.M. Hare, p.92.19

Walpola, p.82.20 E.m. Hare, p.153.21 Eugene Watson Burlingame,Buddhist Legends, Part 3 (Harvard University press 1921, 73)22

E.M.Hare, pp.69-70.23

Historical evidences say that the Vajjians could not maintain these mentioned seven things, and they defeated

by king Ajatsatru of Magadha. For further details of seven suggestions see. Ibid., pp.10-11.24

For further details see. Amulyachandra Sen, pp.45-46.25 Ten Duties of the King (Dasa-Raja-dhama) has mentioned inJataka text, which is explaining the Buddhas

teaching on good governance. For details of Ten Duties of King see. Walpola, pp. 84-86.26 Rohini River has not only mentioned in the Buddhist text, but also mentioned in the various ancient Indian

texts. However, historical evidences do not attest the existence of Rohini River. Perhaps, the river would havechanged their direction of flow, and its posed a pertinent question of the authenticity of the river Rohini.27 For further details see Eugene Watson Burlingame, pp. 70-73.

Selected Bibliography

Beal, Samual. tr.(1975)A Life of Buddha: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas.

Buswell, Robert E.(1992) The Zen Monastic Experience: Buddhist Practice in Contemporary Korea:

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Cho, Sungtaek.(2002) Buddhism and Society: On Buddhist Engagement with Society,42 (4):


19/19

Korea Journal.

Davids, Rhys, T.W .tr.(1899) Samannaphala Sutta: In the dialogues of the Buddha: Oxford: The Pali

Text Society.

Hare, E.M.tr.(1978) Anguttara Nikaya, Vol.iv, London: The Pali Text Society.

Harris, Ian .ed.(1998)Buddhism and Politics in Twentieth Century Asia: London and New York:

printer.

Henry, Phil.(2006) The Sociological implications for Contemporary Buddhism in the United

Kingdom: socially Engaged Buddhism, a Case Study,Journal of Buddhit Ethics,13.

Huh, Woosung.(2000) Manhaes Understanding of Buddhism, Korea Journal, 40 (2).

Ken, Jones. (2003)The New Social Face of Buddhism: A Call to Action, Boston: Wisdom

Publications.

Keown, Damien.(2000) Contemporary Buddhist Ethics, London and New York: Routledge Curzon.

Lama, Dalai(1990)A Policy of Kindness: An Anthology of Writings by and about the Dalai Lama:

Ithaca: NY: Snow Lion Publications.

Lee, sun Keun, Rhi, Ki Yong. Ed.,(1976)Buddhism and the Modern World: Seoul: Dongguk

University

Muller, F.Max .tr.(1973)Dhammapada: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas.

Oldenberg, Hermann .ed.(1969) Vinaya Pitakam, Vol. I: London: Luzac and Company.

Queen, Christopher, Charls Prebish, and Damien Keown(2003)Action Dharma: London: Routledge

Curzon.

Queen, Christopher S. and Sallie B.King (ed.).(1996)Engaged Buddhism: Buddhist Liberation

Movement in Asia: Albany: State University of New York Press.

Sen, Amulyachandra.(1954)Rajagriha and Nalnda: Culcutta: Indian Publicity Society.

Sivaraksa, Sulak.(1988)A Socially Engaged Buddhism, Bangkok: Thai Inter-Religious Commission

for Development.

Sri Rahula, Walpola(1990) What the Buddha Taught: Bangkok: Haw Trai Foundation.

Warder, A.K.(1870) Indian Buddhism: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas.

Wijayaratna, Mohan.(1990)Buddhist Monastic Life:Cambridge University Press.

socially engaged buddhism in historical perspective

Documents