Dhamma USA : August 2024

Buddhist Perspective on the Environment: A Call to Compassionate Action

By Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Introduction

The Buddhist perspective on the environment is profoundly intertwined with the religion's foundational teachings on compassion, interdependence, and the impermanence of all things. This essay explores how these principles inform Buddhist views on environmental ethics, urging a harmonious coexistence with nature, and promoting sustainable practices that benefit all sentient beings.

Core Buddhist Principles and the Environment

Interdependence (Pratītyasamutpāda): One of Buddhism's core concepts is the notion of interdependence, which asserts that all phenomena arise in dependence upon multiple causes and conditions. This interconnectedness extends to humans and their environment, highlighting that the well-being of one is intricately linked to the well-being of the other. Environmental degradation, therefore, is not just a physical issue but also a spiritual one, as it disrupts the interconnected web of life that Buddhism cherishes.

Compassion (Karunā): Compassion is a central ethical precept in Buddhism, encompassing all sentient beings without discrimination. The destruction of natural habitats and the resultant suffering of animal species is viewed as a direct violation of this principle. Buddhists are thus encouraged to extend their circle of compassion to include all forms of life, advocating for practices that protect and nurture the environment.

Karma and Ethical Conduct (Sīla): The law of karma holds that actions have consequences. In the environmental context, this means that harmful actions towards the environment will eventually return to affect the perpetrator, whether individually or collectively. Ethical conduct for Buddhists thus includes responsibility towards the Earth, promoting actions that are sustainable and that do not cause harm to other beings.

Practical Implications of Buddhist Environmental Ethics

Mindful Consumption: Buddhism promotes moderation and mindfulness in all aspects of life, including consumption. This translates into an environmental ethic that favors sustainability and opposes overconsumption and waste. Mindful consumption encourages individuals to consider the environmental impact of their daily choices, from food consumption to energy use.

Advocacy for All Beings: Buddhists are called to be advocates not only for human beings but for all forms of life. This advocacy can manifest in supporting policies and initiatives that promote biodiversity, reduce pollution, and mitigate climate change. Buddhist leaders and communities worldwide have increasingly voiced support for ecological movements, emphasizing that caring for the planet is integral to spiritual practice.

Environmental Activism as Spiritual Practice: Engaging in environmental protection can be seen as a form of spiritual practice or 'Dharma practice' in Buddhism. Activities like planting trees, cleaning rivers, and protecting wildlife are not merely physical actions but are imbued with spiritual significance, serving as expressions of compassion and interconnectedness.

Challenges and Adaptations

While the Buddhist approach offers a compelling framework for environmental ethics, it also faces challenges. Modern issues such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution require complex and immediate actions that can stretch traditional Buddhist practices. Adaptations include the incorporation of modern scientific understanding with traditional teachings and the fostering of global cooperative efforts among Buddhist communities.

Conclusion

The Buddhist perspective on the environment offers a unique blend of ethical guidance, spiritual practice, and pragmatic action. It calls for a compassionate response to environmental issues, grounded in the principles of interdependence and ethical conduct. As the world grapples with unprecedented environmental challenges, the Buddhist call for mindful interaction with the Earth provides not only moral direction but also a practical path to sustainability and harmony. This perspective encourages a profound respect for nature, urging us all to act with mindfulness and compassion in our stewardship of the planet.

Summary of "Buddhism and Ecology: Theory and Practice" by Leslie E. Sponsel and Poranee Natadecha-Sponsel

Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Leslie E. Sponsel and Poranee Natadecha-Sponsel's article "Buddhism and Ecology: Theory and Practice" delves into the profound alignment between Buddhist principles and ecological awareness. The authors explore key Buddhist concepts such as Pratitya-samutpada (mutual causality and interdependence of all things), Dukkha (suffering caused by ignorance and desire), Anatman (not-self), and Ahimsa (non-harming), highlighting their relevance to addressing modern environmental issues.

Central to the discussion is the idea that Buddhism inherently promotes a life of simplicity and restraint, which aligns closely with sustainable ecological practices. The authors argue that the Buddhist path, particularly through practices like mindfulness and meditation, offers a model for living that minimizes ecological footprints and fosters a compassionate relationship with the natural world.

The article also discusses the role of Buddhist communities (Sangha) in practicing and promoting ecological conservation, noting specific rules that prevent harm to plant life and encourage mindful consumption. The practice of vegetarianism is highlighted as both a manifestation of non-harm and a sustainable choice that reduces environmental impact.

The authors extend the discussion to the broader applications of Buddhism in global ecological movements, noting initiatives such as ordaining trees as a form of forest conservation in Thailand and the role of Buddhist principles in international dialogues on climate change.

In summary, Sponsel and Natadecha-Sponsel provide a comprehensive overview of how Buddhist teachings and community practices contribute to ecological awareness and action, offering a spiritual and practical framework for environmental sustainability.

References:

Leslie E. Sponsel and Poranee Natadecha-Sponsel, “Buddhism and Ecology: Theory and Practice,” in Teaching Buddhism: New Insights on Understanding and Presenting the Traditions, eds. Todd Lewis and Gary DeAngelis (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 318-343.

Bhikkhu Bodhi, “Foreword,” in Buddhist Perspectives on the Ecocrisis, ed. Klas Sandell (Kandy: Buddhist Publications Society, 1987), v-viii.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://fore.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/BEintroduction-Sponsel.pdf

Review of Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions by Lewis Lancaster

By Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

This review provides an overview of Lancaster's article and its significance within the broader context of Buddhist studies and environmental ethics. By critically examining the intersections of culture, religion, and ecology, Lancaster offers a nuanced perspective on the potential contributions of Buddhism to contemporary environmental challenges.

Lewis Lancaster's article, Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions, provides a thought-provoking examination of the intersection between Buddhism and environmental issues. He explores how Buddhism, with its rich historical and cultural background, can offer unique perspectives on ecological challenges. The central theme of Lancaster's work is the caution against imposing Western cultural perceptions onto Buddhist practices and beliefs, particularly in the realm of environmentalism.

Lancaster begins by acknowledging the growing interest in Buddhist approaches to ecology, emphasizing the importance of reappraising methods and sources in Buddhist studies. He stresses that while Buddhism offers valuable insights into environmental conservation, there is a risk of misinterpreting these insights through the lens of Western cultural norms. Lancaster's argument is centered around the idea that Western approaches to charity and aid, which often involve a patronizing attitude toward the "deserving poor," may not align with Buddhist concepts of compassion and assistance. He illustrates this with the example of the Taiwanese nun Jen-yen, whose approach to charity and healthcare transcends the typical Western model by offering help universally, without any sense of condescension.

One of the most compelling aspects of Lancaster's article is his discussion on the "collective cultural perceptions" that shape our understanding of Buddhism and ecology. He warns that without a deep understanding of these perceptions, there is a danger of selectively interpreting Buddhist texts and practices to fit modern Western ethical norms. This could lead to a distorted view of Buddhism's potential contributions to ecological discourse.

Lancaster also delves into historical contexts, comparing the spread of Buddhism across different cultures with varying perceptions of nature. He contrasts the Indian view of forests as dangerous and wild with the Chinese appreciation of nature's healing and spiritual qualities. This comparison highlights Buddhism's adaptability and its ability to offer diverse ecological insights depending on cultural contexts.

Furthermore, Lancaster challenges the common Western perception of nature as a "Garden of Eden" and critiques the tendency to romanticize a return to an untouched natural state. He argues that Buddhism, particularly in its historical context, offers a more nuanced view of nature, one that recognizes the dangers and challenges inherent in the natural world. This perspective is crucial in rethinking how we approach environmental issues today, acknowledging that nature is not merely a victim in need of rescue but a powerful and dynamic force.

The article concludes with a call for a new kind of asceticism in response to contemporary environmental challenges. Lancaster suggests that Buddhism's teachings on mindfulness, simplicity, and moderation can provide a valuable framework for addressing issues such as overconsumption and population growth. He advocates for an asceticism that is not only life-affirming but also adaptable to the modern world, emphasizing that any environmental solution must be both practical and spiritually fulfilling.

Overall, Lancaster's Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions is a significant contribution to the field of Buddhist studies and environmental ethics. His careful analysis of the cultural perceptions that influence our understanding of Buddhism, coupled with his exploration of Buddhism's potential role in ecological discourse, offers valuable insights for scholars and practitioners alike. Lancaster's work reminds us of the importance of cultural sensitivity and historical context when seeking to apply Buddhist principles to contemporary global challenges.

References

Lancaster, Lewis. "Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions." Buddhism and Ecology, edited by Mary Evelyn Tucker and Duncan Ryuken Williams, Harvard University Press, 1997.

Summary of "Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions" by Lewis Lancaster

By Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

In his article "Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions," Lewis Lancaster explores the unique contribution Buddhism can offer to the discourse on environmentalism, emphasizing the need to avoid imposing Western cultural perceptions onto Buddhist practices. Lancaster highlights the risks of interpreting Buddhism through a Western lens which could distort its genuine ecological insights. He discusses how Buddhist teachings on interconnectivity and compassion offer a perspective distinct from Western notions of charity, which often carry a patronizing tone towards recipients.

Lancaster uses the example of Taiwanese nun Jen-yen to illustrate a Buddhist approach to charity that avoids the pitfalls of Western methods, emphasizing universal service without discrimination or condescension. He further explores historical and cultural variations in Buddhist perceptions of nature, contrasting the Indian view of the forest as a place of danger with the Chinese view of nature as a source of spiritual renewal. This adaptability of Buddhism, according to Lancaster, showcases its potential to address ecological issues from various cultural standpoints.

The article concludes by advocating for a modern form of Buddhist asceticism that addresses contemporary ecological challenges such as overconsumption and population growth. Lancaster calls for a reevaluation of Western biases and assumptions about nature and charity within ecological discussions, suggesting that Buddhist principles could inspire more effective and culturally sensitive environmental actions.

Lancaster's work provides a critical reminder of the importance of cultural and historical context in the application of religious principles to environmental issues. His discussion on the adaptability of Buddhism across different ecological and cultural landscapes offers valuable insights for both scholars and practitioners in the fields of environmental ethics and religious studies.

Reference:

Lancaster, Lewis. "Buddhism and Ecology: Collective Cultural Perceptions." In Buddhism and Ecology, edited by Mary Evelyn Tucker and Duncan Ryuken Williams, Harvard University Press, 1997. This article provides an in-depth exploration of how Buddhism can contribute to ecological discourse and stresses the need for cultural sensitivity in applying Buddhist teachings to environmental issues.

Bhutan's Environmental Approach: A Study in Non-Economic Governance and Buddhist Principles

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Bhutan's environmental conservation success is a testament to its integration of Buddhist principles and non-economic governance. By embedding values such as peace, compassion, and long-term thinking into its policies, Bhutan has effectively preserved its biodiversity and cultural heritage while exceeding its conservation goals. Its unique non-linear view of time, which emphasizes the future impacts of present actions, has fostered a holistic approach to environmental management. Although this model is deeply rooted in Bhutan's specific cultural and spiritual context, it provides valuable insights into how non-economic values can enhance conservation efforts and improve quality of life.

Bhutan’s approach to environmental conservation provides a compelling case study in how non-economic governance and deeply ingrained Buddhist principles can shape effective environmental policies. Unlike many countries where economic imperatives often overshadow ecological concerns, Bhutan has managed to balance resource demands with a strong commitment to preserving its environment. This essay explores Bhutan's unique strategy, examining the role of Buddhism in its environmental policies, its integration of spiritual and temporal values, and the broader implications of its approach.

Buddhism and Environmental Conservation in Bhutan

Bhutan's environmental conservation efforts are deeply intertwined with its Buddhist heritage. Although Buddhism is not the state religion, it profoundly influences the country's legislative framework and policy-making processes. The Bhutanese constitution, enacted in 2008 following the country’s transition to a constitutional democracy in 2001, enshrines Buddhism as a central component of Bhutan's spiritual and cultural identity. It emphasizes values such as peace, non-violence, compassion, and tolerance, which are reflected in the country’s conservation policies (Ginsburg and Schonthal 2022).

The integration of Buddhist principles into environmental management has led to a remarkably high level of conservation. Bhutan's approach is characterized by its non-linear conception of time, where present actions are viewed in the context of their long-term consequences (Ginsburg and Schonthal 2022). This perspective encourages a proactive stance on environmental stewardship, ensuring that policy decisions account for their future impacts, thus avoiding the pitfalls of short-term thinking.

The Successes and Limitations of Bhutan's Approach

Bhutan’s conservation model stands out globally for its effectiveness in preserving biodiversity and cultural heritage. The country’s policies have resulted in a situation where it not only meets but exceeds its ambitious conservation targets. Bhutan’s forests are managed with a spiritual imperative to conserve, reflecting a deep commitment to maintaining environmental balance. This commitment is not solely based on scientific evidence but is deeply rooted in cultural and spiritual beliefs (Carse 2012).

Despite its successes, Bhutan’s approach is not without limitations. The integration of Buddhist principles into environmental governance provides a unique model, but it is heavily context-specific. Bhutan’s experience underscores that ideological frameworks significantly influence the outcomes of conservation efforts. While Bhutan’s model has not achieved widespread global recognition, it has inspired similar initiatives in neighboring countries like India and Nepal, where community forestry projects have seen success due to shared cultural values (Buffum, Lawrence, and Temphel 2010).

Broader Implications and Future Prospects

Bhutan’s conservation approach demonstrates that large-scale environmental protection can be achieved without compromising quality of life. The country’s success illustrates the potential for integrating non-economic values into governance structures, offering valuable lessons for other nations grappling with environmental challenges. By embedding environmental stewardship into its cultural and spiritual framework, Bhutan has created a model that balances ecological preservation with socio-cultural values.

However, the applicability of Bhutan's model to other contexts remains debated. The unique interplay of Buddhist principles and governance may not be easily transferable to countries with different cultural and spiritual backgrounds. Nevertheless, Bhutan’s emphasis on long-term thinking and community involvement provides a valuable framework for considering how non-economic values can complement traditional environmental management approaches (Tshewang, Morrison, and Tobias 2021).

In conclusion, Bhutan's approach to environmental conservation exemplifies how a nation can successfully integrate spiritual and cultural values into effective governance. By prioritizing Buddhist principles and a non-linear understanding of time, Bhutan has set a precedent for conservation efforts that balance ecological integrity with cultural preservation. While its model may not be universally applicable, it offers important insights into the role of ideological frameworks in shaping environmental policies and practices.

References

Buffum, B., A. Lawrence, and K. J. Temphel. “Equity in Community Forests in Bhutan.” The International Forestry Review 12, no. 3 (2010): 187–99.

Carse, Ashley. “Nature As Infrastructure: Making and Managing the Panama Canal Watershed.” Social Studies of Science 42, no. 4 (2012): 539–63.

Ginsburg, Tom, and Benjamin Schonthal. Buddhism and Comparative Constitutional Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.

Tshewang, Ugyen, Michael Tobias, and Jane Morrison. Bhutan: Conservation and Environmental Protection in the Himalayas. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2021.

Causality, Conditionality, and Moral Responsibility in Buddhism

(Paraphrase of a section of the article BUDDHISM AND THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL:PALI AND MAHAYANIST RESPONSES by Nicholas F. Gier and Paul Kjellberg Freedom and Determinism: Topics in Contemporary Philosophy, eds., J. K. Campbell, D. Shier, M. O’Rourke (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 277-304.)

In their analysis of Buddhist perspectives on free will and determinism, Nicholas F. Gier and Paul Kjellberg explore how Pali and Mahayanist traditions address these philosophical issues. They highlight that both traditions grapple with the interplay between freedom and determinism, yet they approach these concepts differently. The Pali tradition, with its emphasis on the principle of dependent origination, sees actions as interdependent rather than the result of an independent self. This view supports a form of moral responsibility grounded in intentionality rather than inherent free will. In contrast, Mahayanist thought, while also accepting the fundamental interconnectedness of events, introduces more nuanced views on the potential for achieving liberation and the role of individual agency within the broader cosmic order. Both traditions offer a rich dialogue on how personal agency operates within a framework of causal dependencies, challenging simplistic notions of absolute freedom or determinism.

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

In Buddhist thought, a distinction is made between Nirvana achieved at the end of existence and Nirvana experienced while still embodied, which can be equated with a state of contentment (sukha) similar to the Greek concept of eudaimonia. This state represents freedom from craving. According to Keith Lehrer’s analysis in this volume, Buddhists, like Lehrer’s example of a disciplined writer, act based on spiritual preferences rather than distracting desires, such as a craving for chocolate. Lehrer posits that “our preferences are the source of our freedom,” a view Buddhists would agree with. They recognize that we have the power to shape our preferences and, in turn, they shape us. Preferences, unlike involuntary desires, are consciously chosen.

For a Buddhist, succumbing to cravings perpetuates the cycles of existence, which is undesirable. Choosing spiritual practices like meditation aligns with the ultimate preference of Nirvana and freedom from Samsara. Buddhists are seen as agents of their preferences, not passive victims of their desires. Moreover, Buddhists are not burdened by the notion of an omnipotent deity influencing their choices, unlike in some theistic frameworks like those of Augustine and Luther. (Most Buddhists also do not grapple with neurophilosophers from Southern California dictating their preferences.)

Although Buddhism does not frame its teachings in terms of free will, it fundamentally embraces determinism: every effect has a cause. The concept of an uncaused or self-caused will contradicts the Buddhist principle of interdependent co-origination (pratītyasamutpāda), which holds that nothing in the universe originates from itself. Instead, Buddhist causality is viewed as a complex web of conditional relationships rather than simple cause-and-effect interactions. The Buddha taught that moral responsibility arises only from intentional actions, opposing the Jain view that accidental karma, such as unintentionally harming a bug, could impose moral blame. The Jains argued that only strict determinism could maintain objective ethical standards, a position the Buddha contested by arguing that such determinism would negate the possibility of liberation and moral responsibility.

The Buddha proposed that "freedom of the mind" operates through an understanding of how to counteract the causes of sorrow by developing equanimity and dispassion. He suggested that personal temperament and circumstances influence the outcomes of past causes, implying that causality is not strictly deterministic. The well-known analogy of a lump of salt illustrates this point: the impact of salt dissolving in a small cup of water versus a large lake shows that effects can vary depending on the context.

Pali Buddhist ethics can be described as contextual pragmatism, where understanding causation (pratītyasamutpāda) is essential to grasping the Dharma. This understanding is highly personal, involving a practical sense of what is fitting based on one’s circumstances. Mindfulness in Buddhism is about forming preferences that align with one’s needs and avoiding the extremes of excess or deficiency, similar to Aristotle’s concept of moderation.

Buddhist free agents are characterized by their awareness of the consequences of their actions on themselves and others. They are free from attachment to cravings and live within a balanced mean. Moral freedom, in this context, is the ability to align desires with one’s needs and circumstances, rather than possessing a self-determining power.

The Buddha viewed the craving for an independent self as a major source of bondage, ironically contrasting with the European philosophical belief that such self-determination is essential for true freedom. Instead, the concept of "situated autonomy" proposed by some modern political theorists resonates with Buddhist views on autonomy, where agents manage their cravings and act on their preferences within their context.

David Kalupahana describes Buddhist "conditionality" as a middle path between strict determinism and indeterminism, aligning with "soft" determinism. Buddhist conditionality suggests a complex network of conditions rather than straightforward causation. This view is akin to contemporary physics' concept of interdependent events rather than isolated causes.

Conditionality in Buddhism is summarized by formulas such as: “When this is present, that comes to be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.” The twelve-fold chain of conditionality, starting with ignorance and leading to rebirth, emphasizes that rebirth is contingent on various conditions, not predetermined by a single cause. This nuanced view of causality challenges modern science’s focus on predictive models by highlighting the complex, interconnected nature of events.

In summary, the Buddhist understanding of karma and moral responsibility is grounded in the recognition of a multitude of conditions affecting actions and outcomes, rather than a simplistic causal framework. This approach aligns with the view that actions motivated by positive intentions lead to favorable outcomes, while negative motivations result in suffering. The ripening of karmic actions reflects this interconnected web of conditionality in Buddhist ethics.

End Notes:

11. Samyutta Nikaya II.19-22, cited in Luis O. Gomez, “Some Aspects of Free-Will in the Nikayas,” Philosophy East and West 25:1 (1975), pp. 85-85. I am indebted to Gomez for both texts and insights.

12. Majjhima-nikaya I.190-1, cited in Kalupahana, Buddhist Philosophy: A Historical Analysis (Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 1976), p. 64. The pronoun has been changed to “they” to avoid the exclusive “he.”

13. See William Galston, Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues, and Diversity in the Liberal State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), passim, p. 230 for a revised view of the self; and "Liberal Virtues and the Formation of Civic Character" in The Seedbeds of Virtue: Sources of Competence, Character, and Citizenship in American Society, eds. M. A. Glendon and D. Blankenhorn (Lanham, MD: Madison Books, 1995), pp. 35-60. See Stephen Macedo, Liberal Virtues (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), passim, pp. 220-221 for “situated autonomy.”

14. See Kalupahana, Buddhist Philosophy, chapter 3.

15. Ibid., p. 28.

16. R. H. Robinson and Willard L Johnson, The Buddhist Religion: A Historical Introduction (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1992), p. 17.

17. Edward Conze, Buddhist Thought in India (London: Allen & Unwin, 1962), p. 149.

Ibid. The difference between abstract and concrete here can be explained with the distinction between rational or aesthetic order. See N. F. Gier’s “Synthetic Reason, Aesthetic Order, and the Grammar of Virtue,” Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 18:4 (2001).

Ibid., p. 146 fn.

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa recorded a long tradition of a metaphorical interpretation of the realms of existence. See Toward Truth, ed. Donald K. Swearer (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1972).

I am indebted to Joseph Goldstein for this statement and this insightful way of redefining karma. See his “Cause and Effect” in Radiant Mind: Essential Buddhist Teachings and Texts, ed. Jean Smith (New York: Riverhead Books, 1999), pp. 291. The definition of karma as volitional action is not only good Pali Buddhism but it is also the position of the great Mahayanist philosopher Vasubandhu: “karma is will (cetana) and voluntary action (cetayita karanam)” (cited in Theodore Stcherbatsky, The Central Conception of Buddhism [New Delhi: Motilal Barnarsidass, 1974], p. 32).

The Buddha and Modernist Dichotomies

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Modernist thought is characterized by its tendency to create dichotomies, drawing sharp lines between subjects and objects, inner and outer realms, private and public spheres, as well as separating fact from value and religion from science. While these distinctions can be useful, postmodern critiques have highlighted their significant drawbacks. For instance, if free will is considered a purely subjective experience and causality an objective one, and if free will operates solely within an internal domain, then reconciling free will with moral responsibility becomes a critical issue. This perspective naturally leads to related philosophical problems, including questions about the nature of the external world, the knowledge of other minds, and the existence of moral facts, which are central themes in modern European philosophy.

In contrast, the extensive teachings of the Buddha from his 45 years of philosophical discussions do not reflect these modernist concerns. Was the Buddha’s approach to reality and knowledge overly simplistic, or was he correct in his assumptions? By not drawing a firm distinction between inner and outer realms, the Buddha’s perspective avoids the modernist problems associated with free will and external causality. Both the Buddha and William James, a notable modern philosopher, suggest that basic experience does not split into separate inner and outer dimensions. Instead, they see the inner and outer as interrelated, with each influencing the other. This view challenges the Cartesian separation of inner mental experiences from the outer physical world. Moreover, the Buddha’s empiricism parallels James’s radical empiricism in that both reject the divide between facts and values, acknowledging that emotional and value-laden experiences shape perception and reasoning.

Critics might concede that inner and outer experiences are interconnected but argue that personal inner experiences do not seamlessly connect with another person’s inner experiences. Buddhists, however, reject this criticism, citing their own claims of extrasensory perception (ESP) and mind-reading abilities. The Buddha and his followers reportedly possessed the ability to perceive others' karmic balances. While the validity of such claims is debatable, there is an argument to be made that people can indeed infer others' thoughts and feelings through non-verbal cues and body language. This ability to read others is seen by Buddhists as a potential that anyone can develop through heightened mindfulness. In Buddhism, mindfulness (sati) is more accurately described as the faculty (indriya) through which one manages the six senses, including the mind, and advances in moral and spiritual development.

End Notes:

9. See Spiritual Titanism, chapter 2 and the Series Introduction by David Ray Griffin in any volume of SUNY Press’s Series on Constructive Postmodern Thought.

10. Mahavedallasutta, I.293.

Free Will as a Modernist Concept

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

One reason Asian philosophers may not address the concept of free will as explored in contemporary debates is their focus on spiritual freedom rather than freedom of will. Thinkers from the Indian Subcontinent often prioritize a transcendental freedom that goes beyond the material realm of cause and effect. For these Indian yogis, karma and its limitations are seen as part of the cycle of existence until one achieves ultimate liberation, making the deterministic nature of karma less of an issue.

Hindu scriptures depict saints with extraordinary abilities and powers. For instance, the Taittiriya Upanishad describes the yogi as possessing "independent sovereignty" and experiencing a bliss far surpassing even the highest gods (1.6; 2.8). Similarly, the Maitri Upanishad portrays the ascetic as transcending Brahman and the gods (4.4), while the Shvetashvatara Upanishad describes yogis achieving feats like rolling up space (6.20). This view, termed "spiritual Titanism," involves humans acquiring divine attributes and powers.

In contrast, the Buddha dismissed these grand claims from Hindu and Jain yogis, particularly their assertions of omniscience. Although he acknowledged their view of divine subordination and the necessity of human reincarnation for liberation, the Buddha himself and his followers did not see themselves as divine beings. Instead, they pursued Nirvana within this world rather than in a supernatural realm. The Buddha viewed personal identity as embodied and did not see the senses or emotions as inherently evil. He distinguished between Nirvana achieved within the body and Nirvana at the end of existence cycles, and, as an empiricist, he chose not to speculate about the latter. However, the state of Nirvana experienced in life, defined as "freedom," will be analyzed in compatibilist terms in the third section.

The Buddha's indifference to the concept of free will may stem from a deeper philosophical reason shared by Greek and Roman thinkers and absent in Asian philosophies. This reason relates to the modernist division between the "inner" and the "outer" worlds, which creates a conflict between internal freedom and external causality.

Historical analysis suggests that the concept of free will, as understood in modern contexts, emerged in the writings of Augustine of Hippo, who paradoxically advocated for divine omnipotence and causality. Augustine's God, embodying absolute sovereignty, undermines the possibility of true free will. Medieval Christian philosophers, including Aquinas, struggled with this issue, and it was only with thinkers like William of Ockham that the notion of divine power leading to direct causation was explored. Unlike in Western thought, divine power and free will were less prominent concerns in Asian and Greco-Roman philosophies.

The challenge of divine omnipotence may have triggered the quest to understand human will and freedom, particularly in the context of medieval Christian thought. The evolution from medieval nominalism to the Reformation's radical fideism marked a shift, with faith returning to the inner world and reason advancing in empirical science. This period laid the groundwork for the modern philosophical dichotomy between reason and faith.

Modernism redefined the concept of subjectivity, prominently influenced by Descartes' Meditations, which established the thinking self as the primary subject of experience. This shift from viewing all things as subjects to considering them as objects in relation to the thinking subject reflects the emergence of modern objectivism and the mechanistic worldview, setting the stage for modern notions of otherness and alienation.

End Notes:

5. Nicholas F. Gier, Spiritual Titanism: Indian, Chinese, and Western Perspectives (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2000).

6. One could say that the issue was first raised by the Stoics, who criticized Epicurus’ attempt to introduce indeterminism among the atoms, but what is entirely missing from Greco-Roman philosophy is the concept of a fully self-determining will. Furthermore, Epicurus’ indeterminism is no more successful in addressing free-will than those who would now want to appeal to Heisenberg’s indeterminacy principle. Finally, it is clear that modernist concepts such as autonomy and the separation of fact and value were indeed anticipated and affirmed by some ancient schools of thought, such as Sankhya-Yoga, Jainism, Indian and Greek atomism, and Chinese Mohism.

7. For example, see H. Hudson, “Wittgenstein and Zen Buddhism,” Philosophy East and West 23:4 (October, 1973), pp. 4471-482; “Wittgenstein and Nagarjuna,” Philosophy East and West 35:2 (April, 1985), pp. 157-170; Chris Gudmunsen, Wittgenstein and Buddhism (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1977); Paul Wienpahl, “Eastern Buddhism and Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations,” pp. 22-54; and Nathan Katz, “Nagarjuna and Wittgenstein on Error” in Buddhist and Western Philosophy, ed. Nathan Katz (Atlantic Heights, NJ: Humanities Press, 1983), pp. 306-327.

8. See Nicholas F. Gier, “Three Types of Divine Power,” Process Studies 20:4 (Winter, 1991), pp. 221-232.

Understanding Social Conflict: Causes and Solutions

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

In the context of social conflict, the Buddha was once queried by Sakka, the King of Devas, about why conflicts and violence persist among beings despite their desire for peace. The Buddha explained that conflicts arise from fundamental roots such as desire, selfishness, jealousy, and biased views. These issues are deeply rooted in ignorance, greed, and hatred (Sakkapanhasutta, DN). To address conflicts effectively, one must tackle these core issues rather than merely addressing surface-level symptoms.

The Buddha's teachings suggest that the path to resolving social conflict involves addressing these deep-seated causes directly. For example, the Buddha emphasized that conflicts are often exacerbated by selfishness—marked by a focus on personal gain or perspective—and ignorance, rather than by merely managing external disputes (M 139). This perspective underscores the need to root out internal biases and misconceptions that lead to conflict.

Further, in the "Exposition of Non-conflict," the Buddha advised that one should focus on understanding and appreciating the Dhamma itself, rather than praising or criticizing individuals. By doing so, one avoids the pitfalls of prejudice, conceit, and further conflict (M 139). The Buddha also identified six specific roots of disputes, including anger, contempt, envy, deceit, ill will, and rigid adherence to one’s own views. Such traits, he noted, lead to discord and suffering in the community (AN VI, 36).

The Buddha highlighted three primary negative roots—greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), and delusion (moha)—which manifest in ten harmful actions such as killing, stealing, lying, and slandering. These actions contribute to the perpetuation of social conflict. To counteract these tendencies, Buddhism advocates for restraint and the practice of virtuous deeds (Dhammapada 5, 131).

In situations where conflict arises, addressing its root causes is crucial. The Buddha outlined principles of cordiality to foster unity and reduce disputes. These include showing respect, promoting helpfulness, and maintaining non-contentious attitudes (M 48). Importantly, Buddhism rejects violence as a means of resolving conflict, asserting that "Hatred is never appeased by hatred. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased" (Dhammapada 5). This approach encourages individuals to seek peaceful and compassionate resolutions rather than resorting to aggression.

Overall, the Buddha's teachings on social conflict emphasize the importance of addressing underlying causes, fostering mutual respect, and maintaining a compassionate approach to achieve lasting peace and harmony.

References:

Canonical Sources:

1 Digha Nikaya, translated by Maurice Walshe. Buddhist Publication Society (BPS), 1996. Kandy, Sri Lanka.

2 Majjhima Nikaya, original translation by Ven. Nanamoli, revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi. BPS, 1995. Kandy.

3 Samyutta Nikaya, Burma Pitaka Association, Yangon, Myanmar.

4 Anguttara Nikaya, translated by Mr. Rhys Davids. Pali Text Society (PTS), London.

5 Mahavagga Pali, translated by Mrs. Rhys Davids. PTS, London.

6 Khuddakapatha, translated by Ven. Nanamoli. PTS, Oxford, 1991.

7 Dhammapada, translated by Ven. Achriya Buddharakkhita. Sukhi Hontu Publication, Malaysia.

Non-Canonical Sources:

1 A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, translated by Narada Thera, revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi. BPS, Kandy.

2 The Compendium of Buddhism, Burma Tipitaka Association. Inward Path Publication, Penang, Malaysia, 2000.

3 An Approach to Social Philosophy, by Ven. Pategama. Printed in Singapore, 1996.

4 The Ethics of Buddhism, by Tachiaba. India, 1923.

5 Social Aspect of Early Buddhism, by Ven. Devananda.

6 The History of Buddhist Thought, by Edward T. Thomas.

7 A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms, Yangon, Myanmar.

8 Man and Society, by Bertrand Russell.

Understanding Social Relationships: A Buddhist Perspective

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Social relationships encompass interactions between individuals, individuals and groups, and groups with each other. These relationships can be categorized into various types based on context and social roles.

In familial contexts, a person may hold various roles such as husband, father, son, or nephew. Outside the family, individuals may have roles such as citizen, worker, or employer. For women, roles include mother, wife, or daughter within the family and professional or social roles outside it. The Buddha illustrated these relationships in the Singalovada Sutta (DN 31), mapping them onto six directions: East (parents and children), South (teachers and pupils), West (husbands and wives), North (friends and companions), Zenith (clergy and laity), and Nadir (employers and employees). Each direction represents a distinct category of relationships with its own set of expectations and responsibilities.

The Buddha emphasized the importance of familial duties, especially between parents and children. Parents are expected to guide their children by discouraging vice, encouraging virtue, providing education, suggesting suitable marriages, and ensuring inheritance is properly managed (DN 31). The Mangalasutta further highlights that supporting one's parents, caring for one's spouse and children, and maintaining a righteous livelihood are considered supreme blessings in Buddhism (Mhv, p. 21).

For relationships between spouses, the Buddha taught that mutual respect, affection, and support are crucial. A husband should honor his wife, share household responsibilities, and provide for her needs, while a wife should manage her duties with diligence, hospitality, and fidelity. The Buddha’s teachings stress equality between partners rather than hierarchy, promoting a partnership based on mutual respect and shared responsibilities.

In friendships, the Buddha advised recognizing good friends who exhibit qualities such as generosity, courtesy, and truthfulness. True friends offer protection, support in times of trouble, and consideration for one another’s families. The Mangalasutta underscores that good friendships contribute significantly to one's well-being and spiritual progress (Mangalasutta). The Buddha even remarked that the entirety of the noble life depends on such good friendships (DN 180).

For those who have renounced family life for religious purposes, the Buddha taught that relationships should be marked by loving-kindness and detachment. The ideal monk’s relationships are characterized by mutual respect and support, as illustrated by the harmonious living of the Venerable Anuruddha and his companions in the Culagosinga Sutta (M 31).

Moreover, the Buddha's instructions on maintaining harmony within monastic communities include showing kindness through actions, speech, and thoughts, sharing resources, and upholding shared virtues and views (M 48). The practice of generosity and non-attachment is emphasized as vital for community cohesion and personal spiritual development.

In terms of teacher-student relationships, the Buddha outlined mutual respect and care. Teachers should provide guidance and support as a father would, while students are expected to show respect, diligence, and attentiveness. This reciprocal relationship is crucial for effective learning and personal growth.

Lastly, the Buddha's approach to religious guidance involves ensuring that teachings are verified through personal experience rather than blind acceptance. In the Kesamutti Sutta (AN), he advised evaluating teachings based on their outcomes and alignment with wisdom rather than tradition or authority.

These principles reflect the Buddha’s emphasis on ethical conduct, mutual respect, and personal responsibility in all forms of social relationships, contributing to individual and collective well-being.

Social Relationships in the Buddha’s Time

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

During the Buddha’s era in the 6th century BCE, Indian society was deeply entrenched in the Vedic tradition and Brahmanism, which were characterized by a rigid caste system. According to Vedic beliefs, the caste hierarchy was divinely ordained, with Brahmins, considered to be born from Brahma’s mouth, at the top. Brahmins held exclusive privileges as priests, teachers, and advisors, and they regarded themselves as the sole custodians of spiritual knowledge. They maintained their superiority by refusing to engage with or listen to those from lower castes. Below the Brahmins were the Khattiyas, or warriors and governors, who were believed to be born from Brahma’s arms. The Vessās, born from Brahma’s thighs, were engaged in agriculture and trade, while the Sudras, born from Brahma’s feet, were laborers and servants. The outcastes, or Chandalas, were considered the lowest and were ostracized from mainstream society. The caste system was enforced by strict prohibitions and punishments, creating a deeply entrenched social divide.

The Buddha challenged this hierarchical structure, rejecting the caste system and its basis in divine authority. In texts such as the Ambalattha Sutta, Sonadanda Sutta (DN), and the Assalāyana Sutta (MN), the Buddha argues against caste discrimination using biological, sociological, and ethical reasoning. For instance, in the Ambalattha Sutta, the Buddha pointed out that Brahmins, like everyone else, are born from women, thus questioning their claim to divine superiority (DN, p. 413). He also criticized the notion of caste purity and highlighted that true respect and status come from wisdom and virtue, not birth (DN, p. 413).

The Buddha emphasized that in the Buddhist monastic community, all distinctions of caste are abolished. He used the analogy of rivers merging into the sea to illustrate that caste differences dissolve in the monastic order, where everyone is considered equal (AN 1, Nipata Maha Vagga). He famously stated, "None is by birth a Brahmin, None is by birth an outcast. By deed one becomes a Brahmin, By deed one becomes an outcast" (Vasala Sutta). This reflects the Buddhist view that moral actions, rather than birth, determine one’s spiritual status.

Brahmanical traditions, with their focus on rituals and sacrifices, often left individuals in a state of dependence and suffering, relying on divine intervention for purification and better rebirths. The Buddha countered these beliefs by advocating for self-reliance and personal effort. He taught that individuals should be their own refuge: "Atta hi attano nātho, Ko hi nātho parosiya?" (Dhp 145), and encouraged self-improvement and wisdom as paths to liberation. His teachings called for boundless compassion and the pursuit of the Dhamma for the welfare of all beings, urging his disciples to spread his teachings for the benefit and happiness of both gods and humans (AN 1, Nipata Maha Vagga; Dhp 138).

The Buddhist Perspective on Social Relations: Interdependence, Ethical Conduct, and Harmony

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta (Bhante Sumitta)

Introduction

The Buddhist perspective on social relations offers a profound and multifaceted view of human interactions, emphasizing interconnectedness, ethical behavior, and the cultivation of harmonious relationships. Central to Buddhist teachings is the concept of interdependence (pratītyasamutpāda), which asserts that all phenomena, including human relationships, are interconnected and mutually influencing. This essay explores how Buddhism addresses social relations through its core principles, including interdependence, karma, ethical conduct, and the pursuit of social harmony.

Interdependence and Social Connections

At the heart of Buddhist thought is the doctrine of interdependence, which posits that all beings and phenomena exist in a network of mutual causation. According to this view, our actions, thoughts, and emotions are not isolated but are part of a complex web of interactions that affect ourselves and others. This perspective on interdependence profoundly impacts social relations by highlighting the interconnected nature of human interactions.

In practical terms, this means that individuals are seen not as isolated entities but as part of a larger community. Each person's actions and decisions have ripple effects on others, reinforcing the importance of mindful behavior and compassion. For example, the Buddha's teachings emphasize that cultivating positive qualities such as loving-kindness (mettā) and compassion (karuṇā) contributes to a more harmonious and supportive social environment. Recognizing the interdependent nature of relationships encourages individuals to act with awareness of how their behavior impacts others, fostering a sense of shared responsibility and mutual support.

Karma and Social Responsibility

The concept of karma, which refers to the law of moral causation, is another crucial aspect of Buddhism that influences social relations. Karma asserts that every action, whether physical, verbal, or mental, has consequences that affect an individual's future experiences. This principle extends beyond personal conduct to encompass social interactions, emphasizing the ethical dimension of relationships.

In a social context, understanding karma encourages individuals to engage in actions that promote positive outcomes for themselves and others. For instance, acts of generosity, kindness, and ethical behavior contribute to positive karma and enhance social harmony. Conversely, harmful actions such as deceit, cruelty, and exploitation generate negative karma and can lead to discord and suffering within communities. By recognizing the impact of their actions on both themselves and others, individuals are motivated to cultivate ethical conduct and contribute to a more just and compassionate society.

Ethical Conduct and Social Harmony

Buddhism places significant importance on ethical conduct (sīla) as a foundation for healthy social relationships. Ethical conduct encompasses principles such as non-harm (ahiṃsā), truthfulness, and respect for others' rights and dignity. These principles are integral to creating and maintaining harmonious social interactions and are seen as essential for both personal and collective well-being.

The Five Precepts (pañcaśīla) in Buddhism outline fundamental ethical guidelines for lay practitioners, including refraining from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and intoxication. These precepts serve as a framework for ethical behavior that supports positive social relations. By adhering to these guidelines, individuals contribute to a respectful and supportive community environment.

In monastic communities, the Vinaya Pitaka provides detailed rules and guidelines for ethical conduct among monks and nuns. These rules are designed to promote harmony and cooperation within the monastic community, reflecting the broader Buddhist commitment to ethical living and social harmony.

The Role of Compassion and Loving-Kindness

Compassion (karuṇā) and loving-kindness (mettā) are central virtues in Buddhism that profoundly influence social relations. Compassion involves empathizing with the suffering of others and actively seeking to alleviate it, while loving-kindness involves wishing for the well-being and happiness of all beings without discrimination.

These qualities are cultivated through practices such as meditation, mindfulness, and altruistic actions. By developing compassion and loving-kindness, individuals contribute to a more empathetic and supportive social environment. The Buddha's teachings on the Four Immeasurables (brahmavihāras)—loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy (muditā), and equanimity (upekkhā)—highlight the importance of these qualities in fostering harmonious relationships and a sense of interconnectedness among all beings.

Challenges and Contemporary Relevance

While the Buddhist perspective on social relations provides a valuable framework for fostering harmony and ethical behavior, it also faces challenges in contemporary contexts. For instance, the ideal of non-attachment and detachment from worldly concerns may sometimes be perceived as passive or disengaged in addressing social injustices and inequalities.

However, modern interpretations of Buddhism emphasize the integration of spiritual practice with social engagement, advocating for active involvement in social justice and community support. By applying Buddhist principles to contemporary issues, such as human rights, environmental sustainability, and social equity, practitioners can contribute to creating a more just and compassionate world.

Conclusion

The Buddhist perspective on social relations offers a rich and insightful framework for understanding and improving human interactions. Through the principles of interdependence, karma, ethical conduct, and the cultivation of compassion and loving-kindness, Buddhism provides valuable guidance for fostering harmonious and supportive relationships. By integrating these teachings into daily life and contemporary social challenges, individuals and communities can work towards creating a more interconnected, ethical, and compassionate society.

Buddhism and social relations (1)

BUCU 13014 – History of Buddhist Culture

By Bhante Sumitta

Introduction:

Among the world's religious founders, Gotama Buddha left an extensive body of teachings, which have been systematically categorized into the Three Baskets (Tipiṭaka) or Five Collections (nikāya). This vast collection, comprising fifty-two volumes, encompasses 84,000 topics, along with various commentaries (Aṭṭhakathā) and sub-commentaries (Ṭīkā). The sheer volume of content might make one wonder how followers manage to study and practice these teachings.

A scholarly examination of the Buddha’s teachings covers a range of disciplines including philosophy, psychology, sociology, ethics, history, and linguistics. Practically, however, Buddhism is often regarded as a way of life, indicating principles that are actively embraced and lived. These principles address not just philosophical or psychological aspects but also ethical values. The Buddha used terms like Dhamma (Teaching) and Vinaya (Discipline) to describe his teachings, which are seen as a practical system aimed at liberating individuals from suffering.

In his first sermon, the Buddha introduced his Middle Way (Majjhima Paṭipadā) and the Four Noble Truths, which are foundational to his teaching: the truth of suffering (Dukkha sacca), the origin of suffering (Samudaya sacca), the cessation of suffering (Nirodha sacca), and the path leading to the cessation of suffering (Dukkha paṭipada (Magga) sacca). In his second sermon, the Buddha elaborated on the three marks of existence: impermanence (anicca), dissatisfaction (dukkha), and non-self (anatta).

The Buddha’s teachings led his listeners to develop insight, achieve various stages of sainthood, and ultimately attain the highest state of enlightenment, Arahantship. The Buddha tailored his teachings to suit the needs and inclinations of his audience, addressing topics such as charity (dāna), morality (sīla), heavenly realms (sagga), and renunciation (nekkhamma). The ultimate aim of the Buddha’s teachings is to liberate beings from the cycle of birth and rebirth (saṁsāra) and to achieve Nibbāṇa, or eternal peace.

His teachings address human problems and nature, focusing on improving human welfare and happiness in this life. Many of the Buddha’s discourses also delve into social relationships and ethical guidelines, as seen in texts like the Sigālovāda Sutta, Cakkavatti Sutta, and various others recorded in the Vinaya Piṭaka.

Buddhist Attitude on Human Relationships

Buddhism is fundamentally centered on human concerns, focusing on issues related to human nature, behavior, and relationships. This emphasis reflects the Buddha's teachings, which address human interactions and societal dynamics. As social beings, humans are inherently interconnected, seeking security, pleasure, and happiness through relationships. From birth, individuals are embedded in familial structures, influenced by their family members, and later interact with teachers, peers, and various social groups. Such interactions shape and are shaped by personal experiences and social environments.

Human relationships are not always harmonious and can lead to conflicts and challenges. Buddhism provides guidance on how to live harmoniously and joyfully by promoting wise reflection, understanding, and ethical conduct. Without such guidance, instinctive and impulsive behaviors can lead to personal and social discord.

The Buddha's teachings offer a framework for assessing moral responsibility in human interactions. For instance, in the Ambalaṭṭhikārahulovādasutta, the Buddha advises individuals to consider the consequences of their actions: “Rahula, before performing any action with your body, speech, or mind, reflect on whether it would lead to your own suffering, others' suffering, or both. If the action is likely to cause harm, it should be avoided. Conversely, if the action is beneficial and leads to positive outcomes, it is acceptable” (MN 61, p. 5246). This reflection underscores the importance of moral responsibility and wisdom in guiding one's actions to minimize harm and promote well-being.

Another key aspect of Buddhist social philosophy is compassion and loving-kindness. The Loving-kindness Discourse teaches that one should cultivate boundless goodwill towards all beings, similar to how a mother cares for her only child: “Just as a mother would protect her only child with her life, one should develop an immeasurable mind of love towards all living beings” (M 61, p. 5246). This principle highlights two fundamental virtues in Buddhism: Wisdom (paññā) and Compassion (karuṇā).

Wisdom in Buddhism involves understanding things as they truly are, leading to right view and reflective insight. It requires a calm and balanced mind that is not swayed by personal biases or desires. The Buddha emphasized that all wholesome states arise from proper attention and understanding (Ye keci kusala dhammā, sabbe te yonisomanasikāra mūlā).

Compassion, on the other hand, is the deep awareness of others' suffering and a genuine desire to alleviate it. This compassion extends beyond humans to all living beings, reflecting a universal and non-discriminatory approach to care. The Brahmavihāras, or Four Immeasurables, encapsulate this compassionate approach: loving-kindness (mettā), compassion (karuṇā), sympathetic joy (muditā), and equanimity (upekkhā). By practicing these virtues, one contributes to creating a more harmonious world, embodying the ideal that if universally practiced, there would be no need for a separate paradise.

Buddhism - A Very Short Introduction

by Damien Keown - Chapter 8 (iv)

Chapter 8 - Ethics

Summary and Critical Analysis by Bhante Sumitta

Summary

Monastic Ethics:

Buddhist monastic life is governed by the Monastic Rule (vinaya), a detailed code found in the Pali Canon. This rule, essential for maintaining communal order among monks and nuns, includes the patimokkha—a set of 227 precepts outlining proper conduct. The Monastic Rule covers various aspects of daily life, from attire and housing to detailed moral precepts, and resembles the Rule of St. Benedict in its comprehensive nature. However, it includes extensive historical and practical information about the origins and modifications of the rules. While the Buddha is traditionally viewed as the author, many rules were likely established after his death.

The Monastic Rule not only dictates daily practices but also incorporates major moral precepts such as prohibitions against killing, stealing, and lying. The ethical discussions and case histories within the Monastic Rule offer insights into the underlying principles of these rules and provide a framework for understanding moral conduct in Buddhist monastic life. This aspect of the Monastic Rule serves as a form of moral philosophy, helping to clarify ethical issues.

Skillful Means (Upaya):

The Mahayana tradition introduced the concept of skillful means (upaya-kausalya), which builds on the Buddha’s ability to tailor his teachings to his audience. This doctrine suggests that early teachings, including their ethical precepts, were provisional and adapted to the audience’s needs rather than ultimate truths. This idea implies that Mahayana Buddhism allows for greater flexibility in moral rules, especially for bodhisattvas—those who vow to help all beings achieve enlightenment.

In practice, this can mean that bodhisattvas might have the latitude to break traditional precepts if doing so serves a greater compassionate purpose. For instance, extreme cases in some Mahayana texts suggest that even acts like killing or lying might be permissible under specific circumstances to prevent greater harm or to further the bodhisattva’s mission. The interpretation of these actions often hinges on the intention behind them and the context in which they occur.

The application of skillful means raises questions about the continuity of ethical standards in Buddhism. While Mahayana ethics propose a more flexible approach, they still align with traditional views that major precepts like those against killing or stealing express fundamental principles of Dharma. The adaptation of Buddhist ethics to Western contexts, where laws and cultural values differ, is anticipated to further influence and evolve the application of these ethical principles.

Critical Analysis

The Monastic Rule and the concept of skillful means highlight the adaptability and depth of Buddhist ethics. The Monastic Rule’s detailed regulations and historical context provide a structured approach to monastic life, aiming for moral and communal harmony. The extensive nature of these rules helps ensure consistency and discipline within monastic communities, reflecting Buddhism’s commitment to a disciplined ethical life.

However, the rigorous nature of the Monastic Rule may seem inflexible in modern contexts, where the cultural and social dynamics differ significantly from those of ancient monastic societies. While the detailed rules are instrumental in maintaining order, they may pose challenges for adapting to contemporary needs and practices.

The doctrine of skillful means introduces a significant innovation in Mahayana Buddhism, suggesting that ethical precepts can be flexible and context-dependent. This flexibility allows Mahayana practitioners to adapt their moral practices in ways that might better align with compassionate goals. However, this approach also risks undermining the perceived universality and consistency of Buddhist moral teachings. The notion that bodhisattvas might sometimes break precepts to further a compassionate end raises complex questions about the limits of ethical flexibility and the potential for moral relativism.

In Western contexts, the influence of these principles on legal and ethical systems will be an area of interest. As Buddhism interacts with diverse legal and cultural frameworks, its ethical teachings may evolve, influencing and being influenced by Western norms and values. This cross-cultural exchange could lead to new interpretations and applications of Buddhist ethics, reflecting both the adaptability and the challenges of integrating traditional Buddhist principles into modern contexts.

Overall, while the Monastic Rule and skillful means illustrate the depth and adaptability of Buddhist ethics, they also highlight the ongoing challenge of balancing traditional teachings with contemporary ethical and legal considerations.

Buddhism - A Very Short Introduction

by Damien Keown - Chapter 8 (iii)

Chapter 8 - Ethics

Summary and Critical Analysis by Bhante Sumitta

Summary

Buddhist ethical teachings, particularly the principle of ahimsa (non-violence), significantly impact its approach to contemporary moral issues like abortion. The Buddhist perspective on abortion is nuanced by the belief in rebirth, which frames life as a continuous cycle rather than a discrete event with a clear beginning. This perspective raises the question of whether abortion is considered a serious moral transgression or a less critical issue due to the belief that it merely postpones rebirth.

Traditional Buddhist sources generally regard abortion as morally wrong, similar to the killing of a human being at any stage of life, despite the belief in rebirth. Buddhism traditionally holds that individual human life begins at conception, a view that has persisted in many Buddhist societies. Consequently, in countries like Sri Lanka and Thailand, abortion is largely illegal except in cases where the mother's life is at risk. Conversely, in countries like Japan, where Buddhism has influence but is not the state religion, abortion is legal and widely practiced, highlighting a regional variation in attitudes.

Contemporary Buddhists, particularly in Western contexts, may adopt a more flexible stance on abortion. They argue that modern views on women's rights and gender equality, which were less pronounced in ancient societies, should inform current ethical considerations. Some Buddhists support a woman's right to choose and advocate for meditation and personal reflection to make decisions in alignment with one's conscience.

In Japan, a unique cultural response to the issue of abortion has emerged in the form of the mizuko kuyo, a memorial service for aborted children. This ritual involves honoring the lost child through ceremonies and offerings, helping families process their grief and acknowledge the loss. This practice reflects a blend of traditional Buddhist values with contemporary societal needs, influencing Western practices as well.

Critical Analysis

Buddhism's approach to abortion illustrates the complexity of applying ancient ethical principles to modern dilemmas. The belief in rebirth adds a distinctive dimension to the debate by challenging conventional notions of when life begins and the gravity of terminating it. While Buddhism traditionally views abortion as a serious moral issue due to the belief in life beginning at conception, the flexible application of ethical principles reflects an adaptive approach to contemporary concerns.

The traditional Buddhist stance aligns with a conservative view on abortion, emphasizing the sanctity of life and the continuity of existence through rebirth. This position upholds the moral seriousness of abortion but may seem rigid in the context of modern debates on women's rights and bodily autonomy. In contrast, the contemporary Buddhist perspective in the West, which supports a woman's right to choose, acknowledges evolving societal values and offers a more nuanced view that balances traditional ethics with contemporary issues.

The Japanese practice of mizuko kuyo presents an innovative and compassionate response to the abortion issue. By incorporating a ritualistic approach to honor aborted children, this practice addresses both the ethical and emotional dimensions of abortion. It provides a means for families to grieve and find closure, reflecting Buddhism's emphasis on compassion and understanding. This adaptation not only respects traditional values but also resonates with modern societal needs, demonstrating Buddhism's capacity to influence and integrate into diverse cultural contexts.

In summary, Buddhism's approach to abortion is shaped by its fundamental ethical teachings and the belief in rebirth. While traditional views emphasize the moral gravity of abortion, contemporary perspectives offer a more flexible interpretation in light of modern values. The development of practices like the mizuko kuyo highlights Buddhism's adaptive responses to ethical challenges, bridging traditional principles with contemporary concerns.

Buddhism - A Very Short Introduction

by Damien Keown - Chapter 8 (ii)

Chapter 8 - Ethics

Summary and Critical Analysis by Bhante Sumitta

Summary

In Buddhist ethics, the precepts play a crucial role but are not sufficient for a fully moral life. The precepts are rules that outline prohibited actions, but true morality also requires the right intentions and motivations behind following these rules. The virtues complement the precepts and are seen as the essence of moral character, representing the internalization of ethical values rather than mere adherence to external rules. Virtues are essential for moral conduct to become a natural and spontaneous expression of one's inner beliefs.

Early Buddhist texts emphasize cultivating correct dispositions and habits so that moral actions arise from a deep understanding and internalization of values, rather than just rule-following. For example, the First Precept against killing should stem from genuine compassion and an understanding of interconnectedness rather than mere compliance. This process of aligning one's inner character with the precepts is believed to bring practitioners closer to enlightenment.

Buddhist virtues, particularly the three cardinal virtues of non-attachment (araga), benevolence (adosa), and understanding (amoha), are essential for counteracting negative dispositions like greed, hatred, and delusion. Non-attachment addresses selfish desires, benevolence promotes goodwill towards all beings, and understanding reflects knowledge of human nature and the Four Noble Truths.

The principle of ahimsa, or the inviolability of life, is central to Buddhist ethics. Both Buddhism and Jainism, emerging from renouncer traditions, rejected animal sacrifice and advocated for the sanctity of life. While extreme measures were sometimes taken to avoid harming even the smallest forms of life, such as using strainers or avoiding certain agricultural practices, Buddhism generally views intentional harm or negligence towards life as morally wrong, but does not consider unintentional harm in agriculture as severe.

Critical Analysis

The emphasis on virtues alongside precepts highlights a nuanced approach to Buddhist morality, recognizing that ethical behavior must be rooted in internal motivations and character development rather than mere compliance with rules. This dual perspective acknowledges that true morality involves both external adherence to ethical guidelines and the internal cultivation of virtues.

The notion that precepts are effectively a list of actions a virtuous person will avoid underscores the importance of moral character in Buddhism. This view aligns with the idea that ethical behavior should naturally emerge from internalized virtues, promoting a more integrated and genuine form of morality. However, this approach could be critiqued for its idealism; the expectation that all practitioners will effortlessly align their actions with virtues may overlook the complexities and gradual nature of moral development.

The focus on the three cardinal virtues—non-attachment, benevolence, and understanding—provides a clear framework for addressing the roots of ethical behavior. These virtues counteract fundamental negative dispositions, offering a constructive approach to moral growth. Nevertheless, the application of these virtues in practice might be challenging, as they require deep personal transformation and a profound understanding of Buddhist teachings.

The principle of ahimsa reflects a significant ethical stance within Buddhism, emphasizing the sanctity of life and the rejection of harm. While the historical context shows an evolution from ritual sacrifice to symbolic offerings, the extreme measures taken by some Buddhist and Jain traditions reveal a tension between ideal ethical standards and practical living. Buddhism's more moderate stance—viewing intentional harm as morally wrong while accepting the inevitability of some harm in practices like agriculture—illustrates a pragmatic approach to ethical dilemmas. This balance allows for a more adaptable and realistic application of Buddhist principles in everyday life.

In summary, the integration of virtues with precepts in Buddhist morality presents a holistic view that values both ethical conduct and the internalization of moral values. While this approach promotes a deep and genuine form of morality, its practical application and the balance between idealism and real-world constraints remain critical areas for reflection.

Buddhism - A Very Short Introduction

by Damien Keown

Chapter 8 - Ethics

Summary and Critical Analysis by Bhante Sumitta

Summary

In Buddhism, morality (sīla) is a crucial component of the Eightfold Path, forming the foundation of a religious life. It is essential for developing Meditation (samādhi) and Wisdom (paññā). To live morally is to align with Dharma, a term denoting a universal law governing both the physical and moral dimensions of the universe. Dharma is not created or controlled by any supreme being; even the gods are subject to it. It represents both the natural order and Buddhist ethical teachings, believed to be inherently true and reflective of reality.

Dharma can be understood as "Natural Law," capturing both the regularity of natural phenomena and the universal moral law discovered by enlightened beings like the Buddha. This law influences all aspects of existence, including physical phenomena and moral actions. The moral aspect of Dharma is expressed through the law of karma, which dictates the consequences of moral deeds in present and future lives. Adhering to Dharma leads to happiness and liberation from suffering, while violating it results in continued suffering and rebirth (samsara).

Buddhist ethics are structured around various precepts:

Five Precepts (pañcasīla): Prohibitions against killing, stealing, sexual immorality, lying, and taking intoxicants.

Eight Precepts (atthangāsīla): Includes the Five Precepts with additional restrictions such as specific rules on meal times.

Ten Precepts (dasasīla): More extensive rules, often observed by laypeople on holy days.

Ten Good Paths of Action (dasakusalakammapatha): Guidelines for ethical behavior.

Monastic Disciplinary Code (patimokkha): Over 200 rules detailing the regulations for monastic life.

Buddhist morality is expressed as duties, with the Five Precepts being fundamental to all practitioners. These duties are formally accepted by individuals in a ritual context, emphasizing their voluntary nature.

Critical Analysis

The concept of Dharma in Buddhism offers a profound understanding of ethical and natural order, illustrating a comprehensive framework that integrates morality with universal principles. The notion that Dharma is an impersonal universal law, not created or controlled by a supreme being, differentiates it from many theistic moral systems. This aligns with the Buddhist view of reality as self-regulating and independent of divine will, positioning Dharma as both a natural and moral order that even gods must follow.

The translation of Dharma as "Natural Law" effectively encapsulates its dual aspects: the regularity of natural processes and the moral guidelines established by enlightened beings. This translation underscores the idea that ethical behavior is inherently linked to the natural order, suggesting that moral truths are discovered rather than invented. This perspective supports the view that Buddhist teachings are objective and reflective of the true nature of reality.

The structure of Buddhist precepts highlights a tiered approach to ethical practice, accommodating varying levels of commitment based on one’s status and circumstances. The Five Precepts provide a basic ethical framework for lay practitioners, emphasizing fundamental moral behaviors. The additional precepts and codes, such as the Eight and Ten Precepts and the Monastic Disciplinary Code, reflect the progressive nature of Buddhist ethics, where more rigorous standards are applied to different contexts and stages of spiritual development.

However, one might critique the rigid categorization of precepts and codes, which could be seen as potentially restrictive or overly prescriptive. While the precepts aim to guide behavior and ensure moral conduct, the extensive rules for monastics, for example, might be perceived as cumbersome or detached from practical realities. Furthermore, the emphasis on duties might overshadow the personal and contextual dimensions of ethical decision-making, possibly neglecting the nuances of individual circumstances.

In conclusion, Dharma provides a robust framework for understanding morality within Buddhism, linking ethical behavior with the natural and cosmic order. The structured approach to precepts underscores a commitment to moral development but also invites reflection on the balance between universal principles and individual contextual needs.

By Dr. Nivitigala Sumitta Thero (Bhante Sumitta)

When writing academic papers, it's essential to use the appropriate citation style to ensure proper attribution of sources. Three commonly used citation systems are Chicago Fullnote, MLA, and APA. The Chicago Fullnote style is often employed in history and the arts, requiring full citations in footnotes and a bibliography. MLA (Modern Language Association) is widely used in the humanities and emphasizes in-text citations paired with a "Works Cited" page. APA (American Psychological Association) is preferred in the social sciences and uses in-text citations alongside a "References" list. Each citation style has specific formatting rules tailored to different academic disciplines, making it crucial to choose the correct one for your work.

1. Chicago Fullnote

Fullnote Example:

Kurt A. Behrendt, The Art of Gandhara in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2007), 45.

Subsequent Short Note Example:

Behrendt, The Art of Gandhara, 45.

Instructions:

Books: Include the author's full name, the title of the book in italics, the place of publication, the name of the publisher, the year of publication, and the specific page number.

Articles: Include the author's full name, the title of the article in quotation marks, the title of the journal in italics, the volume number, the issue number (if available), the publication year in parentheses, and the specific page number(s).

Full note for an Article Example:

John Smith, "Buddhist Art in Ancient India," Journal of Asian Studies 52, no. 1 (2003): 67.

2. MLA (Modern Language Association)

Works Cited Example for a Book:

Smith, John. Buddhist Art in Ancient India. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2007.

In-Text Citation:

(Smith 45)

Instructions:

Books: Start with the author's last name, followed by the first name. Italicize the title of the book. Include the place of publication, the publisher's name, and the publication year.

Articles: Begin with the author's name, followed by the title of the article in quotation marks, the title of the journal in italics, the volume number, the issue number (if applicable), the publication year, and the page numbers.

Works Cited for an Article Example:

Smith, John. "Buddhist Art in Ancient India." Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 52, no. 1, 2003, pp. 67-82.

In-Text Citation:

(Smith 67)

3. APA (American Psychological Association)

Reference List Example for a Book:

Smith, J. (2007). Buddhist art in ancient India. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.

In-Text Citation:

(Smith, 2007, p. 45)

Instructions:

Books: Start with the author's last name, followed by the first initial. Include the publication year in parentheses, the title of the book in italics, and the place of publication followed by the publisher's name.

Articles: Start with the author's name, the publication year in parentheses, the title of the article in sentence case, the title of the journal in italics, the volume number, and the page range.

Reference List for an Article Example:

Smith, J. (2003). Buddhist art in ancient India. Journal of Asian Studies, 52(1), 67-82.

In-Text Citation:

(Smith, 2003, p. 67)

Summary:

Chicago Fullnote: Often used in history and the arts, with full citations in footnotes and a bibliography.
MLA: Commonly used in humanities, with in-text citations and a "Works Cited" page.
APA: Used primarily in social sciences, with in-text citations and a "References" list.

Each style has its unique formatting rules, so it’s important to use the correct format for your discipline and assignment requirements.

Tags/Keywords:

#Citation styles, #Chicago Fullnote, #MLA format, #APA format, #academic writing, #referencing, #bibliography, #in-text citations, #humanities, #social sciences, #academic disciplines, #writing tips, #research paper, #academic guidelines.