Archives

The Buddha's message to the modern world

by J. P. Pathirana

To all those who put the question, "Has the Buddha any message that can be of use to the modern world"? - I have an answer, The Buddha stated; that His teachings were timeless, that they were true, that they were effective for all people in all places.

Perhaps I can amplify this statement. When we Buddhists go to our temples, we utter three formulas of adoration. One of these deals with the Buddha Himself, with his personal qualities as teacher, sage, as guide, philosopher and friend of mankind. Our worship consists not in prayer but in the hope that by striving to practise those qualities in our own lives.

We too may acquire those virtues which the Buddha embodied. So we hold the Buddha before our minds as an exemplar, and we show our respect to Him by lighting a lamp, offering flowers and burning incense. In the formula which is uttered last, we enunciate the qualities that should be found in a follower of the Buddha, in order that he may in the end and reach the goal of Nibbana. But it is second of these formulas which I should like to speak of especially - and expression of the qualities of the Buddha's own teachings. In Sri Lanka this formula, like the others, is stated in Pali: Suvakkhato bhagavata dhammo sandithikko akaliko ehipassiko opanaiko paccatam veditabbo vinnuhiti.

Translated, this means that we honour the Buddha's teaching first, because it is plainly stated; it contains nothing hidden or esoteric. Just as the palm of one's hand can be clearly seen and understood, so are the Buddha's teachings, plain, explicable, understandable.

This established a tradition quite a different form; in comparison to the teachings in ancient India called Guru Mushti. This term indicated that there was something which the teacher held in reserve, as in his close-fist, because he felt that if the pupils were told everything, he might lose respect for the teacher or he might not understand it. Therefore the knowledge has to be given in small doses. The Buddha's was not of this kind; the whole was there for all of us to see.

This is the first characteristic of the Buddha's teaching. The second is that it is Sanditthika - that is, its efficacy is direct and immediate. "Is it a good thing to practice anger, illwill and hatred", "No". Therefore the Buddha said "Do not have greed or illwill or hatred or anger in your hearts because, as yourself admits it's a bad thing". "Is it a good thing to practise compassion, and sympathy". 'Yes, it is'. The efficacy of the Buddha's teaching can be shown, it can be demonstrated at once and it is self-evident from the Buddha's teaching, as I mentioned, Akalika - it is timeless and universal; it is true for all places and all people.

It is also Ehipassika - that is it is the come-and-see doctrine. The Buddha's teaching invites investigation; it is not something to be accepted and believed on faith or authority. Rather, the seeker is asked to examine the teaching for himself, to consider it in all details, and then accept or reject it. Acceptance by the individual is predicted only upon his own conviction that the teaching is meaningful and valid for him. This is the proper basis for acceptance. Once a group of men told the Buddha "There are many wise men who try to convert us to their points of view, which are often contradictory and in conflict with one another.

What are we to do in such cases". The Buddha admonished "The only thing you can do is to examine what each man says and accept what you think is reasonable and correct. But when you feel you cannot accept something, do not condemn outright. Never say 'I do not accept this and therefore it cannot be right'. That is not the path of wisdom. Put it by saying 'I do not understand this thing and therefore it is not for me, but perhaps I shall come back to it later'. In this way no idea is rejected arbitrarily.

The teaching of the Buddha is also paccattam veditabbo - it must be realised by each man himself. It is also opanaiko - it has a definite goal. The Buddha which he set for Himself and for every man is the discovery of truth.

And what is truth: He defined as that which is as it is. When we understand truth, then we see things as they really are, then we possess knowledge of what is - not as what we would like it to be, not as other people say things are, but really at it is. And this reality has to be appreciated by each man for himself. It is like the curing of a disease. If I am ill, I go to a physician.

The physician diagnoses my ailment and gives me a prescription for its cure. I take this prescription to a chemist, have it made up, and then I must drink the medicine. It is not enough for the physician to be clever and to understand my difficulty. I can never be cured by singing his praises and saying what a wonderful man he is, or holding festivals in his honour or trying to persuade others that he is the one they should consult. None of these would cure my disease.

Nor it is enough for me to accept his written prescription, put in a casket, place it on the back of an elephant and carry in a procession to the accompaniment of music and dancing. That is not going to cure my disease. Nor is it enough for me to obtain the medicine from the chemist, put it on a shelf and place before it a vase of flowers, burn incense and light candles to it, and say "How wonderful is this prescription given by a great and wise physician and may my disease thereby be cured". That is not enough. Nor is it enough for my wife, anxious to spare, my trouble to say: "This man my husband has been sick, he is old and feeble and weak and it is very unpleasant for him to take this bitter medicine.

Therefore, I will swallow it for him this bitter medicine. None of these things will cure of my disease. I must myself make the effort and swallow the medicine. I must follow the instructions and directions given with regard to my diet and conduct. Then and then only I will be cured and when at last I have become whole and healthy. I shall have done it myself, by my own action.

it is the same with the realisation of Truth, that is to say, the attainment of the supreme end - Nibbana. Each must achieve it for himself or herself. But the Buddha qualifies this statement; the realisation of the truth is possible only by the wise. That is why His Teachings is called Buddhism; it is designed to attain Bodhi or wisdom. And what is Wisdom? It is awakening. And what is awakening? It is the realisation of the truth. It is Nirvana.

When the Buddha was asked to define Nirvana. He gave His answers in many different ways to suit the capacity and the temperaments of His hearers. But one of the commonest answers He gave was that Nirvana is the attainment of Bodhi and Bodhi is enlightenment.

The Buddha is unlike other religious teachers, in that He did not make any claims to personal uniqueness. Rather in calling Himself the Awakened One, He spoke of Himself as a pioneer whose task was to discover the way to enlightenment. How did the Buddha discover these things? Those who have read His life will remember how, as he sat at the foot of the Bodhi tree, enlightenment came to Him. The story is an interesting one, which the Buddha given in His own words.

He said, "As I sat there on the last watch of the night in the month of the fullmoon of May - the month when all nature is beautiful, the moon shone bright in the blue sky and all were still, for the whole world was awaiting this great event which it had expected for centuries. Knowledge appeared in me, the eye of wisdom appeared in me, light appeared in me, vision appeared in me". It is important to note that knowledge and wisdom came to Him in a revelation: He did not seek out and discover them. Knowledge and wisdom were revealed to the Buddhas in His mind's eye.

"The knowledge and wisdom arose within me like the water of a spring bubbling from inside the bowels of the earth and rising to the surface."

The effort is very necessary, but exists only in the preliminary stages. When Nirvana is actually attained all effort has ceased. Why is this effort necessary? In order to produce that condition of limpidity, of transparency of mind, so that the enlightenment may arise within it. Such a condition cannot be won without effort.

And a major concern of Buddhist ethics is the establishment of a technique, of rules to be followed, which will gradually lead the mind to this sought-for-state of limpidity.

Sangha in politics

by Upali S. Jayasekera

Sri Lanka has created history in the Buddhist World by electing a Bhikku as a Member of Parliament.

Since independence our leading politicians tended to attract the support of the Sangha to gain political victories. The clergy in turn, gravitated into politics progressively.

Up to the time the Sangha took to active politics, they received the highest respect, especially in the villages and their word always had a say. The Sangha, in fact, was a unifying force. Once the Sangha was dragged into politics, their esteem went down and the leadership they provided fell to pieces.

The Sangha can now be seen at political meetings, protest rallies, university strikes, rallies of unemployed graduates, shouting slogans and carrying posters along with male and female students, at exhibitions and musical shows mingling with the laity, at cricket matches and at every event that is there. Certain Bhikkhus are seen delivering speeches without the calm and serenity expected of the Sangha.

As a result the waning of the power and hold of the Sangha on the people could be seen. Exceptions, no doubt, are there. The Sangha who follow the precepts and lead a disciplined life, still continue to have influence over the Buddhist laity and even non-buddhists, in the areas they have their temples or monasteries. Why the Sangha has lost the hold on the people is due to their giving up religious service in favour of materialistic values.

The first disciples of The Buddha, who entered the order of the Sangha, Kondanne, Bhaddiya, Vappa, Mahanama and Assaji were Arahats (Saints) who had found release from the cycle of birth and death. That shows the high standards that are attributed to those joining the Sangha Order, to begin with.

Why does a person enter the Sangha Order and continue to be in the robes. It is strictly for the purposes of leading a religious life and engage in religious services. A Bhikku is one who should beg for alms and dependent on 'Dayakayas', the Buddhist laity attached to the temple. Due to societal and economic changes such strict behaviourial pattern cannot be expected and does not exist. Nevertheless, a Bhikku has to be one who has broken the fetters that tie him to lay life. Otherwise there is no difference between the Sangha and the Buddhist laity.

A Bhikku wearing the 'Cheevaraya' is considered a higher being than any layman. The 'Cheevaraya' draws respect of the people.

Thus those who put on the 'Cheevaraya' have to behave as religious leaders. A member of the Sangha should not get up to pay respects to a layman, whoever he may be and whatever the conventions of an institution may be. A Bhikkhu should not keep standing when delivering an 'Anusasana' or speech before laymen. Those traditions have to be broken by a member of the Sangha who takes to politics or gets elected to a Local Body or Parliament. I have heard university students calling fellow Bhikkhu students as 'Sangha Saho' which is most unbecoming.

It is as such, salutary that political parties should keep the Sangha out of party political activities. No political party should nominate members of the Sangha to contest elections.

It may be argued that politics or being elected to local bodies or Parliament are not taboo for the Sangha. It may be so. But Vinaya standards expected of a Bhikkhu do not justify active party politics by the Sangha.

The Sangha could involve themselves in social service activities with acceptance and honour without taking to politics.

I am of the firm conviction that the Sangha should be debarred from party politics and political activities. The law should be amended towards that end.

Such laws exist in Thailand where the monks are debarred from political activities.

Taxila - great city of Buddhist learning

by Aryadasa Ratnasinghe

The story of Taxila or Takshasheela (City of Dressed Stone), provides only an epitome of the story of Gandhara. Over three thousand years ago, an Aryan cattle-herding tribe migrated from Central Asia to Gandhara, where they sang hymns of praise to its abundance. Later generations enshrined these hymns in the Rigveda, a book of sacred writings embodying the genesis of Hinduism.

Since the 6th century BC, Taxila became the centre of Buddhist learning. Situated about 32 km north of Rawalpindi in the Punjab, the city was strategically placed on the route of commerce and conquest. The city Taxila prospered under a succession of disparate kings, and it was acclaimed as one of the most glorious among the cities in Gandhara.

Chandragupta Maurya (321-297 BC), was the first king of Taxila. But he established his capital at Pataliputra (modern Patna) extending far towards the south-east, in the region where Buddha had taught for 45 years, about 200 years ago. At this sensitive frontier of the Maurya empire, the king's grandson, prince Asoka, took his position as Viceroy about 30 year later, and he continued to show his favour for the city, after ascending the Mauryan throne, in 273 BC.

Under the Mauryan king Asoka, Taxila became an educational city, where the university offered law, history, philosophy, theology, social cum political sciences, martial tactics, medicine, astronomy, and arts. With the result, Taxila not only became an educational centre but also a Buddhist holy land, encircled by mountains on three sides, but wide open towards the west, in the direction from where recurring invaders came and settled down in the fertile country, from time to time.

Once Taxila was incorporated into the Mauryan empire of Asoka, it rose to prominence among other cities towards the North and West, and a large number of monasteries, for the Buddhist clergy and 'stupas' (topes) for worship by the laity, were built within the city. The Dharmarajika stupa, being the earliest Buddhist monument in Taxila, stands on a hill, and a ring of stupas and temples clustered around, add beauty to the place. This stupa aptly represents the religious zeal and complexes which provide the primary focus for worship.

The construction of this stupa was regarded as a work of great sanctity.

It is a circular in shape with a raised terrace reached by a flight of four steps. In 1917 a casket was found near the stupa which contained the relics of the Buddha. This was presented by the then Viceroy of India to the Buddhists in Sri Lanka, and has now been enshrined in the Dalada Maligawa in Kandy. Another impressive stupa is the Kunala cetiya, standing high on the hillside opposite the south gate of Sirkap. It marks the spot where emperor Asoka's son, prince Kunala, is said to have been blinded, through the vengeful spite of his lustful step-mother Tishyarakshita. She had fallen in love with the young prince, but failed to entice him to the vice. Therefore, she had the prince blinded by forged royal decree.

When this news reached Asoka, he got enraged over the incident and put her consort Tishyarakshita to death. Fifty years after the death of emperor Asoka, political unrest beset Gandhara for 250 years. City kingdoms ruled by Bactrians, Greeks, Indo-Greeks, Scythians from Central Asia and Parthains from Persia rose and fell. The Kushan potentate Kanishka (128-151), established Gandhara as the cultural, political and Buddhist centre.

Having extended his royal patronage to Buddhism, monasteries in Taxila again filled with pilgrims and pious students entering the university. It was probably king Kanishka who founded yet another city in the middle of the 2nd century AD at Sirkush.

After king Kanishka came the white Huns (a powerful, squat, swarthy and savage nomad race, who moved westward under Attila (433-453), the Scourge of God), the Hunnish king, whose dominion extended from Rhine to the frontiers of China.

By carrying fire and sword, they overthrew the ruling dynasty of Gandhara, leaving monasteries and stupas in ruin and desolation.

The Chinese itinerant traveller Hsuan Tasang, who visited Taxila in the 7th century AD, had mentioned that most of the monuments were found shattered and Taxila itself turned into a dependency of Kashmir. Taxila, where once Buddhism proliferated, lost its hold, and Buddhist schools in Ganhdara came into bitter conflict to the disadvantage of Buddhism and advantage of militant Hinduism.

Today, Taxila is in Punjab, a province in Pakistan, bounded on the East and South by India, with a predominant Muslim population, its capital being Lahore and the chief ethnic groups being Punjabi, Sindhi, Pathan and Baluchi.

Although the country is rich with Buddhist archaeological ruins, they only represent their archaic value.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager