DP Tool Club 19/CD_ASCQ_19_010295.iso/vrac/wheel392.zip/VIOLENCE.TXT

Text File | 1994-11-21 | 121KB | 2,171 lines

                   VIOLENCE AND DISRUPTION IN SOCIETY

                  A Study of the Early Buddhist Texts


                                   by
                          Elizabeth J. Harris


                   The Wheel Publication No. 392/393
                         ISBN 955-24-0119-4

                          Published in 1994

                 Copyright 1990 by Elizabeth J. Harris

  Originally published in //Dialogue//, New Series Vo. XVII (1990) by
  The Ecumenical Institute for Study & Dialogue, 490/5 Havelock Road,
  Colombo 6, Sri Lanka. Reprinted in the Wheel Series with the consent
  of the author and the original publisher.


                      BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
                      KANDY              SRI LANKA


                                 * * *

                         DharmaNet Edition 1994

                Formatted for DharmaNet by John Bullitt

        This electronic edition is offered for free distribution
            via DharmaNet by arrangement with the publisher.

                        DharmaNet International
                 P.O. Box 4951, Berkeley CA 94704-4951

                            * * * * * * * *




                                CONTENTS

       Introduction
       Part 1. The Forms of Violence
       Part 2. Reasons for Buddhism's Attitude to Violence
       Part 3. The Roots of Violence
       Part 4. Can Violent Tendencies Be Eradicated?
       Conclusion
       Notes

                            * * * * * * * *




                              INTRODUCTION


  At 8.15 a.m. Japanese time, on August 6th 1945, a U.S. plane dropped a
  bomb named "Little Boy" over the center of the city of Hiroshima. The
  total number of people who were killed immediately and in the
  following months was probably close to 200,000. Some claim that this
  bomb and the one which fell on Nagasaki ended the war quickly and
  saved American and Japanese lives -- a consequentialist theory to
  justify horrific violence against innocent civilians. Others say the
  newly developed weapons had to be tested as a matter of necessity.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki ushered in a new age. Humankind's tendency
  towards conflict and violence can now wipe out the entire human
  habitat. The weapon used on Hiroshima had a destructive force of 12.5
  kilotons; a contemporary cruise missile has the power of 200 kilotons.
  All war, violence and conflict at national and international levels in
  the last quarter of the twentieth century has thus taken on sinister
  proportions. It is not that human nature has changed but that the
  resources at our disposal have. No country is free from the threat of
  nuclear annihilation; no country is free from internal conflict and
  the barrel of the gun. It is against the urgency of this background
  that the teachings of Buddhism about violence must be studied and
  interpreted.

    Excerpts such as the following have been extracted and used to sum
  up the Buddhist attitude to this issue:

       All tremble at violence,
       All fear death;
       Comparing oneself with others
       One should neither kill nor cause others to kill.

                                               Dhp. v. 129


       Victory breeds hatred,
       The defeated live in pain.
       Happily the peaceful live,
       Giving up victory and defeat.

                                               Dhp. v. 201



    These verses would seem to indicate a clearly defined Buddhist
  perspective. Yet such text extraction can lead to misrepresentation if
  not undergirded with a strong supporting framework. Furthermore, if
  Buddhism has a message for a violent world, it must do more than
  condemn violence. It must be able to interpret its nature, its roots,
  its hold on the world and the possibilities for its transformation. It
  must dialogue with other philosophies and ideologies such as
  utilitarianism, [1] scientific socialism and the belief in a just or
  "holy" war. For instance, utilitarianism still lives among those who
  believe that violence can be justified if more people will benefit
  than will be hurt, and the consequentialist theory mentioned with
  reference to Hiroshima is similar to this. Then there are those who
  hold that certain forms of injustice and exploitation can only be
  destroyed through violence and that history will justify its
  legitimacy. The view that violent change is a historical inevitability
  is close to this. Buddhism must be able to comment on the stance which
  argues that if Hitler had been assassinated early in his career
  numerous deaths would have been avoided, or the claim that force is
  justified against a government which is using violence against its
  people under the pretext of law. If it cannot, it will stand accused
  of irrelevance.

    In this study, I define violence as that which harms, debases,
  dehumanizes or brutalizes human beings, animals or the natural world;
  and the violent person, as one who causes harm in speech or action,
  either directly or indirectly, or whose mind is filled with such
  thoughts. [2] The approach will be scriptural, and the resource I use
  will be the Pali texts. The basic issue I investigate is what this
  resource says on the subject of violence. Identity is not assumed
  between the sixth century B.C. and the twentieth century A.D. Rather,
  the potential of the scriptures of any religion to provide guidelines
  for action and models for contemporary interpretation is recognized.
  Hence, the following specific questions will provide the framework for
  my study:

       (1) What different forms of violence do the Buddhist texts show
           knowledge of?

       (2) For what reasons do the texts condemn violence or call it
           into question?

       (3) What do they see to be the roots of violence?

       (4) Do the texts give any guidelines for the eradication of
           violence in the individual or in society?

                            * * * * * * * *



                                   1

                         THE FORMS OF VIOLENCE


                         The Buddha's Awareness
                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  The sermons of the Buddha, as they have been handed down to us, are
  replete with details about the contemporary realities of the times.
  They reveal much about the social contexts within which the Buddha
  moved and the faces of society with which he was familiar.

    The Canki Sutta shows a brahmin overlord insisting that the Buddha
  is equal to him in birth, riches and the knowledge of the Vedas. He
  continues:

       Indeed, sirs, King Seniya Bimbisara of Magadha with his wife
       and children has gone to the recluse Gotama for refuge for
       life. Indeed, sirs, King Pasenadi of Kosala with his wife and
       children has gone to the recluse Gotama for refuge for life.
       Indeed, sirs, the brahmin Pokkharasati with his wife and
       children has gone to the recluse Gotama for refuge for life.
       [3]

    Important here is the reference to kings. The texts show clearly
  that the Buddha had an intimate knowledge of statecraft. Records of
  his conversations with Pasenadi and Bimbisara show him speaking in a
  language which those involved in government could understand.
  Pasenadi, for instance, comes through as a man torn between his duties
  as king, involving some degree of ruthlessness, and his concern for
  spiritual things. At one moment, he is seen preparing a sacrifice in
  which many animals are to be slaughtered and menials beaten and, at
  another, speaking seriously with the Buddha about the dangers of
  wealth, power and evil conduct. [4] What is significant is the level
  of knowledge shown by the Buddha about the pressures on a king such as
  Pasenadi. His use of similes and illustrations, for instance, appeals
  to Pasenadi's experience, including the central concern of all rulers
  at that time -- defense against aggression. At one point Pasenadi asks
  about the value of gifts and to whom a gift should be given for the
  gift to bear much fruit. The Buddha replies:

       A gift bears much fruit if given to a virtuous person, not to
       a vicious person. As to that, sire, I also will ask you a
       question. Answer it as you think fit. What think you, sire?
       Suppose that you were at war, and that the contending armies
       were being mustered. And there were to arrive a noble youth,
       untrained, unskilled, unpracticed, undrilled, timid,
       trembling, affrighted, one who would run away -- would you
       keep that man? Would such a man be any good to you? [5]

    The Buddha thus uses similes from Pasenadi's military world to
  indicate that virtue does not depend on birth but on qualities of
  character. In fact, in a number of texts, illustrations drawn from the
  context of the state, defense and martial arts can be found. Not only
  does the Buddha make use of military metaphors, but the texts show
  that he had extensive knowledge of the strategies of war, punishment
  and political patronage. The Mahadukkhakkhandha Sutta, for instance,
  uses graphic description to show that war and conflict spring from
  sensual desires:

       And again, monks, when sense pleasures are the cause ...
       having taken sword and shield, having girded on bow and
       quiver, both sides mass for battle and arrows are hurled and
       knives are hurled and swords are flashing. Those who wound
       with arrows and wound with knives and decapitate with their
       swords, these suffer dying then and pain like unto dying....

       And again, monks, when sense pleasures are the cause ... having
       taken sword and shield, having girded on bow and quiver, they
       leap on to the newly daubed ramparts, and arrows are hurled and
       knives are hurled and swords are flashing. Those who wound with
       arrows and wound with knives and pour boiling cow-dung over
       them and crush them with the portcullis and decapitate them
       with their swords, these suffer dying then and pain like unto
       dying. [6]

    In the next part of the sutta, a variety of horrific punishments
  are described and a keen awareness of their nature is seen:

       Kings, having arrested such a one, deal out various
       punishments: they lash him with whips and they lash him with
       canes and they lash him with rods, and they cut off his hand
       ... his foot ... his hand and foot ... his ear ... and they
       give him the "gruel-pot" punishment ... the "shell-tonsure"
       punishment ... "Rahu's mouth" ... the "fire-garland" ... the
       "flaming hand" ... etc.[7]

    In another sermon handed down to us, two men are pointed out while
  the Buddha is talking to a headman, Pataliya. One of them is garlanded
  and well-groomed; the other is tightly bound, about to lose his head.
  We are told that the same deed has been committed by both. The
  difference is that the former has killed the foe of the king and has
  been rewarded for it, whilst the latter was the king's enemy. [8]
  Hence it is stressed that the laws of the state are not impartial:
  they can mete out punishment or patronage according to the wish of the
  king and his cravings for revenge or security.

    It cannot be argued that the Buddha was ignorant of the political
  realities of his day. He spurned frivolous talk about such things as
  affairs of state [9] but he was neither indifferent to them nor
  uninformed. On the contrary, his concern for the human predicament
  made him acutely aware of the potential for violence within the
  economic and political forces around him. The political milieu of
  rival republics and monarchies in northern India forms a backdrop to
  his teaching, whether the rivalries between the kingdoms of Kosala and
  Magadha or the struggles of the republics to maintain their traditions
  and their independence in the face of the rising monarchies. [10]

    However, the violence attached to politics and statecraft forms one
  section only of the picture which emerges from the texts. Violence is
  detected in the brahminical sacrificial system, in the austerities
  practiced by some wanderers, and in the climate of philosophical
  dispute among the many //sramana// groupings as well as in the area of
  social discrimination and the economic order.

    Religion, to take this first, is seen as a cause of physical,
  verbal and mental violence. The violence inflicted through sacrifices
  is described thus:

       Now at that time a great sacrifice was arranged to be held for
       the king, the Kosalan Pasenadi. Five hundred bulls, five
       hundred bullocks and as many heifers, goats and rams were led
       to the pillar to be sacrificed. And they that were slaves and
       menials and craftsmen, hectored about by blows and by fear,
       made the preparations with tearful faces weeping. [11]

    In contrast, the //sramana// groupings within this period eschewed
  sacrifice. Denying the authority of the Vedas and a realm of gods to
  be manipulated, their emphasis was on renunciation, the gaining of
  insight and philosophical debate. Nevertheless, a form of violence was
  present. The austerities practiced by some of those who came to the
  Buddha were worse than any enemy might inflict as punishment. The
  Buddha himself confessed to having practiced them before his
  enlightenment. In the Mahasaccaka [12] and the Mahasihanada [13]
  Suttas there is vivid description of the excesses undertaken. Taken
  together, the two  suttas cover the complete range of contemporary
  Indian practices, which included nakedness or the wearing of rags,
  tree-bark fiber, kusa grass, wood shavings or human hair; deprivation
  of food to the extent of existing on a single fruit or rice grain;
  self-mortification through lying on thorns or exposing the body to
  extremes of heat and cold; copying the habits of animals such as
  walking on all fours or eating similar food. It was the Buddha's view
  that such practices were a form of violence, although undertaken in
  the name of religion and truth-seeking. [14]

    Undertaken also in the name of truth were verbal battles between
  different groups of wanderers. The Buddha's followers, in fact, were
  frequently at the receiving end of an aggressive campaign by other
  groups to ridicule their beliefs. The description of these incidents
  gives useful evidence of the prevailing atmosphere. [15] In the
  Udumbarika Sihanada Sutta, Nigrodha the Jain claims:

       Why, householder, if the Samana Gotama were to come into this
       assembly, with a single question only could we settle him;
       yea, methinks we could roll him over like an empty pot. [16]

    In the Kassapa Sihanada Sutta, the Buddha speaks out:

       Now there are, Kassapa, certain recluses and brahmins who are
       clever, subtle, experienced in controversy, hair splitters,
       who go about, one would think, breaking into pieces by their
       wisdom the speculations of their adversaries. [17]

    Violence of state and violence in the name of religion were two
  faces of the Buddha's society. Violence within the economic order was
  another. The sixth century B.C. in India witnessed urbanization and
  commercial growth. Savatthi, Saketa, Kosambhi, Benares, Rajagaha and
  Champa would have been some of the most important centers known to the
  Buddha, who spent much time in urban environments. As Trevor Ling
  argues in his study, //The Buddha//, [18]  the growth of these cities
  spawned individualism and competition in response to changing economic
  patterns and social dislocation. The potentially violent tensions
  generated are reflected in the Buddha's teachings through such themes
  as the rightful gaining of wealth, the place of service and work, [19]
  correct duties towards employees, and the wise choosing of friends.
  For instance, a Samyutta Nikaya text contains a conversation between
  Rasiya the Headman and the Buddha. The Buddha speaks out against those
  who gain wealth by unlawful means, especially with violence. [20]
  Then, in the Sigalovada Sutta, the Buddha outlines rights and duties
  for the different social relationships in society. [21] An employer is
  advised to: assign work according to the strength of the employee;
  supply food and wages; tend workers in sickness; share with them
  unusual delicacies; grant them leave. The same sutta comments on
  friendship and says that four foes in the likeness of friends should
  be avoided: a rapacious person, a man of words not deeds, the
  flatterer and the fellow-waster.

    The study of what the Early Buddhist texts say about violence must
  be seen against this background of political violence and social
  change. The empiricism of Early Buddhism also demands this -- the
  Buddha's appeal to what is observed in society as a basis for
  evaluating the truth of his teachings. [22]

    The analysis of historical context calls into question whether any
  philosophy or thought system can have universal relevance. Since the
  human situation across the permutations of history is indeed subject
  to change, the issue is a valid one. Yet there is also a continuity in
  evolution such that parallels can be drawn between the forces at work
  in the sixth century B.C. and those operating in the latter part of
  the twentieth century. The sixth century B.C. is not identical to the
  twentieth but neither is it completely different. The teaching of
  Early Buddhism on violence, therefore, should not be used as if there
  were either identity or utter separateness. In each new context and
  historical period, there is a need for re-interpretation and
  re-evaluation. At this point, it is enough to stress that the texts
  reveal much about Indian society at the time of the Buddha and about
  the Buddha's own breadth of awareness. It cannot be argued that he had
  no knowledge of the violence within his own society or that his words
  were divorced from the tensions around him. On the contrary, their
  import drew urgency from contemporary observable reality.



              The Buddha's Approach to Empirical Questions
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  Central to Buddhism's approach to the analysis of social phenomena is
  the doctrine of //paticca samuppada// or dependent origination, which
  can be expressed thus:

       When this is, that is; this arising, that arises.
       When this is not, that is not; this ceasing, that ceases.

       //Imasmim sati idam hoti; imass' uppada idam uppajjati//.
       //Imasmim asati idam na hoti;imassa nirodha idamnirujjhati//.

    Events and tendencies within the material world are interpreted
  from the standpoint of causality. Phenomena are conditioned. Buddhism,
  therefore, calls for an analytical attitude in dealing with anything
  to do with human life, including the question of violence. [23]

    One consequence which flows from this is that generalizations and
  statements based on categories of pure reason are suspect. Evidence
  can be drawn from the suttas to show that the Buddha insisted on
  making discriminations when presented with dogmatically held views.
  For instance, in the Subha Sutta, Subha comes out with the view that a
  householder is accomplishing the right path and one who has renounced
  is not. The Buddha replies: "On this point, brahmin youth, I
  discriminate, on this point I do not speak definitely." He stresses
  that both householder (//gihin//) and the one who has renounced
  (//pabbajita//) can be living wrongly; both can be living rightly. The
  deciding factor is not the label, but rightness of action, speech and
  thought. [24]

    A similar approach can be seen in the Esukari Sutta where the
  Buddha speaks about service. In this case, the deciding factor as to
  whether a person should serve is whether the one who serves is better
  for the service in terms of such things as growing in moral habit and
  wisdom. [25] Then, when faced with the question of sacrifice by the
  brahmin Ujjaya, there is again discrimination according to condition.
  Not every sacrifice is blameworthy. Where living creatures are not
  killed or where the sacrifice is an offering for the welfare of the
  family, there is no blame: "No, brahmin, I do not praise every
  sacrifice. Yet, I would not withhold praise from every sacrifice."
  [26] The deciding factor here is the presence of suffering for
  animals.

    //Paticca samuppada// opposes the human tendency to generalize and
  encourages analysis on the basis of empirical data and moral values
  applied to these. [27] It criticizes standpoints which use
  inappropriate categories through insufficient observation and dogmatic
  statements about right and wrong which do not take empirically
  observed facts into account.

    To understand Early Buddhism's analysis of violence, this
  conditionality is important. When the Buddha speaks about the causes
  and the remedies of violence, his approach is dependent on the
  conditions prevalent in a particular situation. For instance,
  psychological factors are not emphasized when the Buddha is speaking
  to those in power about societal disruption; social and economic
  causes are stressed instead. [28] Yet, in other contexts, particularly
  when monks are addressed, it is the psychological factor which is
  given prominence. [29] In contrast again, with King Pasenadi, the
  Buddha does not condemn violence in defense of the realm but places it
  within the larger context of impermanence and death to encourage
  reflection. [30]

    It is possible to hold together the above divergent emphases if we
  bear in mind the full implications of conditionality and the
  empiricism of Early Buddhism. We should not expect dogmatic,
  non-empirical generalizations. For instance, if craving (//tanha//) is
  to be posited as the root of much violence, it would not follow that
  every situation was conditioned by //tanha// in the same way or that
  the remedy in each situation would be identical. Likewise, it would
  not follow that what was incumbent on one type of person in one
  situation would be incumbent on all sections of society in all
  contexts.


                            * * * * * * * *



                                   2

              REASONS FOR BUDDHISM'S ATTITUDE TO VIOLENCE



  Before looking more closely at what is said about the roots of
  violence, it is worth drawing out reasons given in the texts for the
  avoidance, questioning or non-espousal of violence. Interconnected
  frameworks emerge: //nibbana// as the goal of the spiritual life; the
  demands of //metta// and //karuna// (loving kindness and compassion);
  the need for peace, concord and harmony within society.

    Since the ultimate goal of the spiritual path for the Buddhist is
  //nibbana//, attitudes towards violence must first be seen in relation
  to it. //Nibbana// is the ultimate eradication of //dukkha//. It is a
  possible goal within this life and, among other things, involves a
  complete de-toxification of the mind from greed, hatred and delusion,
  a revolution in the way the world is perceived, freedom from craving
  and liberation from the delusion of ego. The //Therigatha// or Songs
  of the Sisters contain some of the most moving testimonies to this
  reality; they are paeans of joy about liberation:

       Mine is the ecstasy of freedom won
       As Path merges in Fruit and Fruit in Path.
       Holding to nought, I in Nibbana live,
       This five-grouped being have I understood.
       Cut from its root, all onward growth is stayed,
       I too am stayed, victor on basis sure
       Immovable. Rebirth comes never more. [31]

    //Nibbana// and //samsara// are antithetical. One is the ceasing of
  the other. In the context of the goal of //nibbana//, actions,
  thoughts and words can be evaluated as to whether they build
  //samsara// or lead to //nibbana//: whether they are unskilled
  (//akusala//) or skilled (//kusala//). Indulgence in violence is
  normally deemed //akusala//. In other words, it cannot lead to the
  goal of //nibbana//. In the Ambalatthika-Rahulovada Sutta, the Buddha
  says to the Venerable Rahula:

       If you, Rahula, are desirous of doing a deed with the body,
       you should reflect on the deed with the body, thus: "That deed
       which I am desirous of doing with the body is a deed of the
       body that might conduce to the harm of self and that might
       conduce to the harm of others and that might conduce to the
       harm of both; this deed of body is unskilled (//akusala//),
       its yield is anguish, its result is anguish." [32]

    Harm to others is central to what is unskilled. In the Sallekha
  Sutta advice is given to monks about the cleansing of the mind as the
  basis of spiritual progress. Foremost among the thoughts which have to
  be cleansed are those connected with harming and violence; both
  represent unskilled states which lead downwards:

       Cunda, as every unskilled state leads downwards, as every
       skilled state leads upwards, even so, Cunda, does non-harming
       (//avihimsa//) come to be a higher state for an individual who
       is harmful, does restraint from onslaught on creatures come to
       be a higher state for the individual who makes onslaught on
       creatures. [33]

    When the Buddha is in conversation with Bhaddiya, //sarambha// is
  added to //lobha//, //dosa// and //moha// (lust, hatred and delusion)
  as a defilement which flows from them. //Sarambha// can be translated
  as "accompanied by violence." As the mind filled with //lobha//,
  //dosa// and //moha// is led to actions which are //akusala//, so is
  the mind filled with the violence which accompanies the triad. All
  lead to a person's loss:

       "Now what think you, Bhaddiya? When freedom from malice
       (//adosa//) ... from delusion (//amoha//) ... from violence
       (//asarambha//) that goes with these arises within oneself,
       does it arise to one's profit or to one's loss?" -- "To one's
       profit, sir." [34]

    The point of the above suttas is that violent action and violent
  thought, actions which harm and debase others and thoughts which
  contemplate the same, stand in the way of spiritual growth and the
  self-conquest which leads to the goal of existence. In this respect,
  indulging in violence is doing to oneself what an enemy would wish. It
  is a form of self-harming:

       He who is exceedingly corrupt
       like a //maluva// creeper strangling a //sal// tree
       does to himself what an enemy would wish.
                                               Dhp. v. 162

    In contrast, abstaining from violence has personal benefit in the
  present and in the future. It is part of the training of mind and body
  which lays the foundation for spiritual progress.

    The accusation has been made that the application of the terms
  //kusala// and //akusala// are oriented only towards an
  individualistic goal, making the motivation for abstention from
  violence a selfish one. But it can be argued that the distinction
  between altruism and egoism breaks down for anyone truly following the
  Noble Eightfold Path. There are also many textual references to the
  inherent importance of harmony, justice and compassion in society to
  balance those passages which seem to be solely individualistic.
  Harmony and justice are recognized as worthwhile in themselves as well
  as a prerequisite for the spiritual progress of society's members.
  Hence, in society, violence is to be eschewed because it brings pain
  to beings with similar feelings to oneself:

       All tremble at violence,
       Life is dear to all.
       Comparing others with oneself
       One should neither kill nor cause others to kill.

                                               Dhp. v. 130


    On the level of personal analogy, men and women are to condemn
  violence. It is an analogy which demands //metta// (loving kindness)
  and //karuna// (compassion) of the human being. [35] They call on a
  frame of mind which cannot remain insensitive to suffering in others
  or untouched by the agony produced by violence. Non-violence,
  therefore, arises through the urge to prevent anguish in others:

       Comparing oneself with others in such terms as "Just as I am
       so are they, just as they are so am I" (//yatha aham tatha ete
       yatha ete tatha aham//), one should neither kill nor cause
       others to kill.
                                               Snp. v. 705


    The Buddha, however, did not credit all people with this level of
  awareness. He is recorded as saying that shame and fear of blame
  protect the world, and if there were not these forces, the world would
  come to confusion and promiscuity. [36] Not all beings rally to the
  call for compassion on the grounds that others have like feelings to
  themselves or that harmony in society is necessary. Therefore, some
  texts invoke the concepts of heaven and hell, rewards and punishments,
  to control violence. Vivid pictures are drawn of the agonies of hell:

       Brahmin youth, here some woman or man is one who makes
       onslaught on creatures, is cruel, bloody-handed, intent on
       injuring and killing, and without mercy to living creatures.
       Because of that deed, accomplished thus, firmly held thus, he,
       at breaking up of the body after dying, arises in the
       sorrowful way, the bad bourn, the Downfall, the Niraya. [37]

       Even so, monks, that anguish and dejection that man
       experiences while he is being stabbed with three hundred
       spears, compared with the anguish of Niraya Hell does not
       count, it does not amount even to an infinitesimal fraction of
       it, it cannot even be compared to it. Monks, the guardians of
       Niraya Hell subject him to what is called the fivefold pinion.
       They drive a red-hot iron stake through each hand and each
       foot and a red-hot iron stake through his breast. Thereat, he
       feels feelings that are painful, sharp and severe. But he does
       not do his time until he makes an end of that evil deed. [38]

    Here, self-interest in terms of avoidance of future pain is
  appealed to as a reason to desist from violence. This emphasis can
  also be seen in the Petavatthu in which those fallen to the realm of
  the //petas// speak to those on the human level about the reasons for
  their suffering. [39] Falsehood, failing in the duties of wife or
  husband, stinginess and fraud are some of the actions mentioned. Story
  No. 32, however, speaks of a deerhunter who explains that he was "a
  ruthless man of bloody hands": "Among harmless creatures, I, with
  wicked mind, walked about, very ruthless, ever finding delight in
  slaying others unrestrained," he declares in verse three. His
  punishment is to be devoured by dogs during the daytime, the hours
  when he used to be involved in slaughter. He is able to teach the
  living that the First Precept should be kept and that it applies not
  only to the killing of human beings but also to animals. The
  deerhunter, therefore, is held up as an authoritative witness to what
  happens to violent individuals. His story is useful as a deterrent to
  socially disruptive elements and is confirmation of the importance
  Buddhism places on non-violence within the social fabric. The threat
  of future punishment is used to control potentially violent elements.

    Two broad, interconnected areas, therefore, emerge in the reasons
  for the condemnation of violence within the Early Buddhist texts.
  Firstly, thoughts of violence and violent action are defilements and
  must be eradicated if //nibbana// is to be reached. In this light,
  //nibbana// is the highest ethical good. This stress alone, however,
  can lead to distortion if //nibbana// is seen as a metaphysical state
  above the empirical world and the path to it as divorced from society.
  Early Buddhism was rooted in the empirical. Violence was to be
  repudiated because it caused anguish to men and women and disruption
  in society. The human person was seen as precious. Harming a being who
  desired happiness and felt pain could rarely be right. If a society
  was to be established in which people could live without fear and with
  the freedom of mind to follow the Eightfold Path, violence had to be
  eschewed.

    The question of political, defensive violence, however, must be
  mentioned here. Can violence be justified in a situation where the
  state needs to defend its citizens against external and internal
  threats? Is this a situation in which violence is not condemned? The
  texts suggest Buddhism would here insist on discrimination. The
  Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta gives this advice to the righteous king:

       This, dear son, that you, leaning on the Dhamma, honouring,
       respecting and revering it, doing homage to it, hallowing it,
       being yourself a Dhamma-banner, a Dhamma-signal, having the
       Dhamma as your master, should provide the right watch, ward
       and protection for your own folk, for the army, for the
       nobles, for vassals and brahmins and householders, for town
       and country dwellers, for the religious world and for beasts
       and birds. [40]

    This passage implies that the need for an army and consequently for
  the use of force in defense is accepted as a worldly necessity. But
  the picture which emerges is not glorification of the "just" war but
  an appeal for war and violence to be seen against a higher set of
  values.

    Relevant perspectives on these political realities are seen in the
  Buddha's advice to the Vajjians and to King Pasenadi. The Vajjians are
  faced with vicious aggression from King Ajatasattu, King of Magadha,
  who is bent on destroying them. The latter sends a brahmin to the
  Buddha for advice and a prediction about how successful he will be in
  war. The very fact that he does so shows that he does not consider the
  Buddha either ill-informed or dismissive of such political conflicts.
  The reply he receives is significant. The Buddha does not refer
  directly to Ajatasattu but implies that the use of arms against a
  people who are morally pure and in concord would be fruitless. His
  words to Ajatasattu become words of advice to the Vajjians that they
  should meet together in concord and give respect to their elders,
  their ancient institutions, their traditions and their women. No
  mention is made of the Vajjian military strength; only of their moral
  strength. Moral strength is held up as defense against violence. Yet
  it is not denied but implicitly understood that the Vajjians would
  have to use force to repulse aggression, and also present is an
  implicit condemnation of Ajatasattu's intentions. [41]

    King Pasenadi is also seen in conflict with Ajatasattu, meeting
  force with force. At first, Ajatasattu is the aggressor and the
  victor. The reported response of the Buddha is significant:

       Monks, the King of Magadha, Ajatasattu, son of the Vedehi
       Princess, is a friend to, an intimate of, mixed up with,
       whatever is evil. The Kosalan King Pasenadi is a friend to, an
       intimate of, mixed up with, whatever is good. [42]

    Thus Pasenadi's role as defender of the nation against aggression
  is accepted as necessary and praiseworthy. In the next battle,
  Pasenadi is the victor. Ajatasattu's army is confiscated but Pasenadi
  is merciful enough to grant Ajatasattu his life. It is still
  Ajatasattu who is condemned. His fate is seen in kammic terms:

       A man may spoil another just so far
       As it may serve his ends, but when he's spoiled
       By others he, despoiled, spoils yet again.
       So long as evil's fruit is not matured
       The fool does fancy: "Now's the hour, the chance!"
       But when the deed bears fruit, he fareth ill.
       The slayer gets a slayer in his turn,
       The conqueror gets one who conquers him,
       The abuser wins abuse, the annoyer frets:
       Thus by the evolution of the deed
       A man who spoils is spoiled in his turn. [43]

    In one respect, Pasenadi becomes an instrument of kamma for
  Ajatasattu. At another level, acceptance of political realities
  emerges. The king has a duty to protect his citizens from external
  threats of violence. Therefore, the advice given to a king or those
  with responsibility for government about reacting to the violence of
  others is fitted to the situation, a situation in which the use of
  violence may become a political necessity in a world governed by
  craving (//tanha//). Yet, even with affairs of state, war is placed in
  the perspective of a more important set of values. To Pasenadi,
  burdened by responsibility, the Buddha says:

       Noble and brahmin, commoner and serf,
       None can evade and play the truant here:
       The impending doom overwhelms one and all.
       Here is no place for strife with elephants
       Or chariots of war or infantry,
       Nay, nor for war or woven spell or curse
       Nor may finance avail to win the day. [44]

    War is not presented as worthy of praise in itself. It is
  recognized that battle cannot take place without hatred and the wish
  to kill, in both the mind of aggressor and victim. A Samyutta Nikaya
  passage illustrates this. A fighting man comes to the Buddha and
  explains his belief that the warrior who is killed whilst fighting
  energetically in battle is reborn in the company of the Devas of
  Passionate Delight. The Buddha's answer condemns this idea as
  perverted. A warrior is always led by the idea, "Let those beings be
  exterminated so that they may be never thought to have existed." Such
  a view can only lead downwards rather than to any heavenly world. The
  Buddha thus rejects any glorification of war, since there can be no
  glory when the mind is dominated by hate.

    Another duty of the state is to punish. Punishment, although a
  harming of creatures and a cause of pain to them, is nevertheless seen
  as a social necessity because of the need to protect society from the
  greater violence which would flow from undeterred greed. Fear of
  punishment (//dandabhaya//) is described in vivid terms, with the
  mention of specific punishments. A man sees them and thinks: "If I
  were to do such deeds as those for which the rajahs seize a bandit, a
  miscreant, and so treat him ... they would surely treat me in like
  manner." [46] Important here is the fact that Early Buddhism would
  make discriminations about the question of punishment. As a deterrent,
  punishment has value. Meted out as an expression of hate, it is to be
  rejected. Inflicted where social justice is the requisite, it is also
  condemned, as seen in the Kutadanta Sutta, referred to in the next
  part.

                            * * * * * * * *



                                   3

                         THE ROOTS OF VIOLENCE



  The Attadanda Sutta of the Sutta Nipata is the voice of someone
  overcome by despair because of the violence he sees:

       Fear results from resorting to violence -- just look at how
       people quarrel and fight. But let me tell you now of the kind
       of dismay and terror that I have felt.

       Seeing people struggling like fish, writhing in shallow water,
       with enmity against one another, I became afraid.

       At one time, I had wanted to find some place where I could
       take shelter, but I never saw such a place. There is nothing
       in this world that is solid at base and not a part of it that
       is changeless.

       I had seen them all trapped in mutual conflict and that is why
       I had felt so repelled. But then I noticed something buried
       deep in their hearts. It was -- I could just make it out -- a
       dart. [47]

    The above is from a translation of the Sutta Nipata which attempts
  to preserve the spirit of the text rather than the letter. Here it is
  the spirit of dismay and fear leading to discovery which is of prime
  importance. The speaker detects a common root -- the dart of craving
  (//tanha//) and greed (//lobha//) -- a view directly in line with the
  Four Noble Truths. Violence arises because the right nourishment is
  present.

    However, it has been pointed out earlier that differences may exist
  in the way in which //tanha// conditions situations of violence. On
  analysis, two broad and mutually interdependent areas emerge: (1)
  violence arising from an individual's maladjustment, and (2) craving
  and violence arising from unsatisfactory social and environmental
  conditions, caused by the craving of others.

    The latter can be taken first with reference to the following
  texts: The Kutadanta Sutta; the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta; and certain
  Anguttara Nikaya passages. The first weaves a myth within a myth. The
  inner myth tells the story of a king, King Wide-Realm, whose land is
  wracked with discontent and crime such that people are afraid to walk
  in the streets for fear of violence.

    The king's solution is to hold a sacrifice for the nation and he
  goes to a holy man for advice. But the king is not given what he
  expects. The sage tells the king that fines, bonds and death for the
  wrongdoers would be self-defeating. Punishment is not the right path.
  On the contrary, it would increase the malady because the root causes
  remained untouched, in this instance, economic injustice and poverty.
  King Wide-Realm is advised to give food and seed corn to farmers,
  capital to traders and food to those in government service:

       But perchance his majesty might think: "I'll soon put a stop
       to these scoundrels' game by degradation and banishment and
       fines and bonds and death." But their license cannot be
       satisfactorily put a stop to so. The remnant left unpunished
       would still go on harassing the realm. Now there is one method
       to adopt to put a thorough end to this disorder. Whosoever
       there be in the king's realm who devote themselves to keeping
       cattle and the farm, to them let his majesty give food and
       seed corn. Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote
       themselves to trade, to them let his majesty give capital.
       Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote themselves
       to government service, to them let his majesty give wages and
       food. Then those men, following each his own business, will no
       longer harass the realm; the king's revenue will go up; the
       country will be quiet and at peace; and the populace pleased
       with one another and happy, dancing their children in their
       arms, will dwell with open doors. [48]

    The above analysis recognizes that men and women can be pushed to
  violence if the prevailing conditions do not enable them to preserve
  their own lives without it. The instinct to survive is credited with
  enough strength to push people to struggle before they will sink into
  need. In such a situation, it follows that to press down the hand of
  the law will not be effective. In fact, it could encourage a growth in
  serious crime.

    This is what happens in the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta, another
  mythological story dealing with disruption in society. It has already
  been mentioned with reference to the duty of kingship. But there is
  one clause concerning his duty that has not yet been mentioned:
  "Throughout your kingdom let no wrongdoing prevail. And whosoever in
  your kingdom is poor, to him let wealth be given." [49] The kings of
  the story who keep to this are blessed with peace. Yet a king
  eventually arises who neglects the giving of wealth to the poor. He is
  soon faced with a situation beyond his control. Poverty becomes
  rampant and this leads to theft, since people would rather steal than
  die. When the king realizes the cause, he starts by being lenient on
  the wrongdoer, by giving him the means to live. Such kindness too late
  leads others to see the only way to survive is turning to theft and
  receiving a royal handout in return. The king has given charity, not
  justice, and crime increases leading to a return to brutal
  punishments. The brutality of the punishments encourages the people to
  be more extreme in their own crime as they try to survive. Punishment
  here fails to deter because of the desperation of the people.

    The sutta presents a disturbing picture of how a society can fall
  into utter confusion because of a lack of economic justice. The
  extremes reached are far greater than anything envisaged in the
  Kutadanta Sutta and they stem from the state's blindness to the
  realities of poverty. Thus the sutta states in refrain after every
  deterioration:

       Thus from goods not being bestowed on the destitute, poverty
       ... stealing ... violence ... murder ... lying ...
       evil-speaking ... immorality grew rife.

       Theft and killing lead to false speech, jealousy, adultery,
       incest and perverted lust until:

       Among such humans, brethren, there will arise a sword-period
       (//satthantarakappa//) of seven days during which they will
       look on each other as wild beasts; sharp swords will appear
       ready to their hands, and they thinking, "This is a wild
       beast, this is a wild beast," will with their swords deprive
       each other of life. [50]

    In the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta, the nourishment of the violence
  is the state's neglect of the poor. The whole myth illustrates the
  principle of //paticca samuppada//. Each state of degeneration is
  dependent on the state before it. An evolutionary process is seen. An
  inevitability seems to emerge, an inevitable movement towards
  bestiality. It is significant that the sutta does not concentrate on
  the psychological state of the people. The obsessive cravings which
  overtake them are traced back to the failure of the state rather than
  to failings in their own adjustment to reality. The root is the
  defilement in the state -- the //raga//, //dosa// and //moha// in the
  king which afflict his perception of his duty.

    An Anguttara Nikaya passage states this principle in simple and
  direct terms. If the king is righteous, his ministers will be
  righteous, the country will be righteous and the natural world will be
  a friend rather than an enemy. The opposite, of course, is also true
  and is placed first in the sutta:

       At such time, monks, as rulers are unrighteous
       (//adhammika//), their ministers are unrighteous, brahmins and
       householders are also unrighteous....[51]

    The above passages show that a change of heart is needed where
  violence exists but this change is needed in those who wield power in
  society. When a state is corrupt, the citizens become victims of the
  state and their own wish to survive and they are then led to actions
  they would never consider if they were free from want. There is an
  understanding that, besides those who do evil, there exists a category
  of people to whom wrong is done and whose reactions are conditioned by
  the original wrongdoing.

    To pass now to the psychological roots of violence, another myth
  can be cited, the Agganna Sutta. Like the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta,
  it describes an evolutionary process which takes on its own momentum.
  The root of the process is significant -- the craving of beings. The
  sutta explains, in myth form, the process by which undifferentiated
  beings come to earth from a World of Radiance to eat the earth's
  savory crust, to the point where there is private property and the
  division of labor. One of its purposes is to challenge the static,
  non-evolutionary theory of a divinely ordained caste system but it is
  significant also because evolution is guided by the growth of craving
  and individualism. The whole sutta turns on the individual and his
  craving as the root of violence. It depicts a situation before state
  power is established. Craving first enters when the beings taste the
  crust of the earth:

       Then, Vasettha, some being of greedy disposition said, "Lo
       now, what will this be?" and tasted the savory earth with his
       finger. He thus, tasting, became suffused with the savor, and
       craving (//tanha//) entered into him. [52]

    The craving develops. The natural world evolves to accommodate the
  beings, becoming ever less easy to manage. The bodies of the beings
  become gross and individually differentiated into male and female,
  comely and unlovely. Jealousy and competition enter. The savory crust
  disappears. Vegetables and plant life evolve. An important point is
  reached when the beings establish boundaries around their individually
  owned rice plots. Individualism is therefore institutionally
  consolidated and the consequence is violence:

       Now some being, Vasettha, of greedy disposition, watching over
       his plot, stole another plot and made use of it. They took him
       and, holding him fast, said, "Truly, good being, you have done
       evil in that, while watching your own plot, you have stolen
       another plot and made use of it. See, good being, that you do
       no such thing again." "Aye, sirs," he replied. And a second
       time he did so. And yet a third. And again they took him and
       admonished him. Some smote him with the hand, some with clods,
       some with sticks. With such a beginning, Vasettha, did
       stealing appear and censure and lying and punishment became
       known. [53]

    The sutta illustrates that //tanha// coupled with individualism
  nourishes violence and conditions the necessity for state power to
  curb excesses. As such, its teaching is directly in the mainstream of
  Buddhist thought: craving and grasping lie at the root of negative and
  unwholesome states in society. However, more needs to be said about
  the causes and consequences of individualism.

    The term "//puthujjana//" is used to describe the ordinary, average
  person:

       Herein, monks, an uninstructed ordinary person, taking no
       account of the pure ones (//ariyanam//), unskilled in the
       Dhamma of the pure ones, untrained in the Dhamma of the pure
       ones, taking no account of the true men, unskilled in the
       Dhamma of the true men, untrained in the Dhamma of the true
       men, does not comprehend the things that should be wisely
       attended to, does not comprehend the things that should not be
       wisely attended to. [54]

    The term "//puthu//" has two main meanings: "several, many,
  numerous," on one hand, and "separate, individual," on the other. The
  usual definition of //puthujjana// is "one of the many folk," linking
  it with the first of the above-mentioned meanings. However, a case can
  be made for the second meaning also. In this analysis, the
  //puthujjana// is one who believes himself to be separate from the
  rest of humankind; one who believes he has a self to be protected,
  promoted and pampered. It is this assumption which leads to so much
  that is disruptive in society.

    Violent tendencies link, at this point, with the defilement of
  //moha// (delusion): delusion in terms of a misunderstanding of
  //anicca// and //anatta//. The latter states that there is no abiding,
  unchanging substance within the human being. Men and women are verbs
  rather than nouns, causal processes rather than unchanging souls.
  Buddhism does not deny that there is a person, but it reformulates the
  definition of what constitutes a person to embrace continuity rather
  than  static entity. As the sound of the lute cannot be found within
  the lute as it is taken apart, so the "I am" cannot be found in the
  human personality when it is dissected into the five //khandhas//.
  [55]

    Much anger and violence stem from the felt need to defend what is
  seen to be one's own or to grasp personal gain. It is a need which
  sees the gain of others as a threat to personal power and the rights
  of others as an attack on personal prestige. This is none other than
  the fault of the //puthujjana//, a failure to see the truth of
  //anatta// and the interdependence of all phenomena. It is this
  failure which leads to the self becoming the touchstone and measuring
  rule for every perception and judgment. It is the failure which leads
  to the urge to be violent in defense of needs and seeming rights. The
  Agganna Sutta shows this ego illusion manifesting itself in the form
  of competitive individualism. That the ego illusion and //tanha// feed
  on one another is a theme found in many texts:

       Monks, I will teach you the craving that ensnares, that floats
       along, that is far flung, that clings to one, by which this
       world is smothered, enveloped, tangled like a ball of thread,
       covered as with blight, twisted up like a grass rope, so that
       it does not pass beyond the Constant Round, the Downfall, the
       Way of Woe, the Ruin....

       Monks, when there is the thought: "I am" -- there come to be
       the thoughts: "I am in this world; I am thus; I am otherwise;
       I am not eternal; I am eternal; Should I be? Should I be in
       this world? Should I be thus? Should I be otherwise? May I
       become. May I become in this world. May I become thus. May I
       become otherwise. I shall become. I shall become otherwise."
       These are the eighteen thoughts which are haunted by craving
       (//tanhavicaritani//) concerning the inner self
       (//ajjhattikassa//). [56]

    One result of this interdependent feeding, the Buddhist texts
  assert, is disruption in society.

    Another important area of study is the mechanism through which the
  "I" notion helps to generate unwholesome states. Buddhism sees a
  danger in the view of some schools of psychology that there is a
  creative use of the concept of self. In this respect, the Pali term
  "//papanca//," commonly translated as proliferation, is important. The
  Madhupindika Sutta declares //papanca// to be the root of taking up
  weapons, and the defeat of //papanca// is the way to end such
  violence:

       This is itself an end to the propensity to ignorance, this is
       itself an end of taking a weapon, of quarreling, contending,
       disputing, accusation, slander, lying speech. [57]

    As the previous analysis in this paper points out, discrimination
  is central to the Buddhist approach and therefore generalizations such
  as the above need to be studied carefully. There is no doubt, however,
  that //papanca// is central to a Buddhist psychology of violence and
  to an understanding of the danger in the "I am" notion.

    A study by Bhikkhu Nanananda, //Concept and Reality//, gives
  extensive coverage to the term "//papanca//".[58] He puts forward the
  view that it is linked with the final stage of sense cognition and
  that it signifies a "a spreading out, a proliferation" in the realm of
  concepts, a tendency for the conceptual process to run riot and
  obscure the true reality of things. He makes much use of the
  above-quoted Madhupindika Sutta and quotes the following:

       Visual consciousness, brethren, arises because of eye and
       visible forms; the meeting of the three is sensory
       impingement; because of sensory impingement arises feeling
       (//vedana//); what one feels, one perceives (//sanjanati//);
       what one perceives, one reasons about (//vitakketi//); what
       one reasons about, one turns into //papanca// (//papanceti//);
       what one turns into //papanca//, due to that
       //papanca-sanna-sankha// assail him in regard to visible forms
       cognizable by the eye belonging to the past, the future and
       the present. [59]

    The same is said of the other senses.

    Nanananda points out that a grammatical analysis of the above
  reveals that the process of perception involves deliberate activity up
  until //papanceti//. After this, deliberation vanishes. The subject
  becomes the object. The person who reasons conceptually becomes the
  victim of his own perceptions and thought constructions. So Nanananda
  writes:

       Like the legendary resurrected tiger which devoured the
       magician who restored it to life out of its skeletal bones,
       the concepts and linguistic conventions overwhelm the
       worldling who evolved them. At the final and crucial stage of
       sense-perception, the concepts are, as it were, invested with
       an objective character. [60]

    His analysis is of immense significance to the study of how certain
  negative and destructive tendencies can grow in society; how objective
  perception and reason can seem to fade before the force of what might
  be irrational and obsessive. He roots the cause in the nature of
  language in the minds of persons governed by //tanha//, //mana// and
  //ditthi// -- craving, conceit (the tendency to measure oneself
  against others), and views -- which in themselves flow from
  ego-consciousness. //Papanca//, according to this analysis, manifests
  itself through //tanha//, //mana// and //ditthi//. It underlies each
  of these qualities and breeds conflict in society.

    To look at the process in more detail: The conventions of language
  enter near the beginning of the process of sense perception, at the
  point where feeling gives rise to mental activity and concepts. The
  mind, if unchecked, will attempt to place order on its feelings
  through language. This language immediately introduces the duality of
  subject and object, subject and feeling. The "I" enters with "I feel
  aversion" or "I feel attraction" or "I like this" or" I don't like
  this." This emphasis on the "I" is predetermined by the very nature of
  language and reinforces the strength of the feeling and the tendency
  for the person to identify completely with what is felt. What seems to
  happen after that is that language takes on a dynamism of its own.
  Concepts proliferate and leave the empirical behind, under the driving
  force of //tanha//, //mana// and //ditthi//. For instance, the
  observation, "I feel aversion" might lead to further thoughts such as:

       I am right to feel aversion.... Therefore, the object is
       inherently worthy of aversion.... So, the object must threaten
       me and others.... Therefore the objects must be got rid of....
       I cannot survive unless the object is annihilated from my
       sphere of vision and feeling.... It is my duty to annihilate
       this for my sake and the sake of others.

    Thus the entrance of "I" leads to the urge to protect the wishes of
  the ego and what is ego-based becomes a seemingly rational decision
  about duty. The above is a purely hypothetical progression, yet it is
  not an implausible one. It illustrates the way in which thought
  progresses further and further away from what is empirically observed.
  Speculation enters as the mind attempts to reason. Eventually, as the
  thought process develops further, what might appear to be reason
  cloaks obsession which, in turn, can make the person a victim of the
  apparent logic of language.

    Kant in his //Critique of Pure Reason// [61] seems to adopt a
  similar point of view. He challenged the view that speculative
  metaphysics using the categories of pure reason could extend our
  knowledge of reality. He attacked particularly those theologians who
  believed that the existence of God could be proved through logic
  alone. There was, he claimed, an irresistible impulse of the mind
  towards seeking unification and synthesis which led to the
  illegitimate use of language. It is this which is particularly
  relevant to this study. For instance, he posited that the mind assumed
  an unconditional personal ego just because all representations were
  unified by the "I think" construction. It also assumed a concept of
  God because of the drive to find an unconditioned unity. Such
  concepts, Kant felt, arose through the impulse of the mind and passed
  beyond the legitimate purview of language. It passed beyond the
  perceptions which could add knowledge and were not based on truly
  empirical data. Therefore, they could not give statements with any
  factual reality.

    Kant grasped that there was an irresistible impulse which led to
  concepts taking on an unwarranted life of their own. Buddhism says
  that these concepts can generate obsessions, victimize the person who
  believes he or she is thinking logically, and lead to disruption in
  society. What is lost in the process is the ability to see objectively
  and value the empirical through senses unclouded by craving, conceit
  and views, or by greed, hatred and delusion.

    //Papanca//, fed and generated by //tanha//, is therefore central
  to the theme of violence in the thoughts and actions of human beings.
  Buddhism suggests that the human person can become the victim of
  obsessive actions, thoughts and inclinations. It holds that the drift
  towards violence within one person or within society, especially if a
  communal or cultural obsession has arisen, may become an inevitable
  causal process unless the inner mechanism is discovered. Related to
  this is the danger and motivating force of dogmatic and speculative
  views as one of the roots of violence -- the //ditthi//, connected in
  the above analysis with //papanca//. In his advice to the Kalamas and
  to Bhaddiya, the Buddha said:

       Be not mislead by report or tradition or hearsay. Be not
       misled by proficiency in the Collections, nor by mere logic or
       inference, nor after considering reasons, nor after reflection
       on or approval of some theory, nor because it fits becoming,
       nor by the thought: the recluse is revered by us. [62]

    Here, logic and inference are deemed to be as dangerous as what is
  passed on by doubtful report and tradition. The same approach is seen
  in the Brahmajala Sutta [63] where a number of mistaken views,
  according to Buddhist analysis, are discussed. //Tanha// is seen as
  the root of these but logic and inference are also mentioned.

    In the following, the question of conflict in relation to dogmatic
  views is more clearly expressed. The Buddha points out the danger of
  saying, "This is indeed the truth, all else is falsehood" (//idam-eva
  saccam//, //mogham-annam//). For dispute is the result and: "If there
  is dispute, there is contention; if there is contention, there is
  trouble; if there is trouble there is vexation." [64] Adhering
  dogmatically to views is a form of //papanca//, a particularly
  dangerous form. Several suttas in the Sutta Nipata take up this theme:
  the Pasura Sutta and the Kalahavivada Sutta, [65] for instance. The
  former speaks of the person who goes forth roaring, looking for a
  rival to contest with, filled with pride and arrogance over his
  theories. A battle-like situation is implied, an attitude closely
  allied to that which actually results in warfare and armed struggle.
  Contemporary struggles in the world give ample evidence to prove that
  war and struggle are caused by the conflict of ideas, ideologies and
  concepts. They show how powerful and charismatic a force ideas can be.
  Whether it is nationalism, ethnicity or religion, groups can be pushed
  towards violence in defense of them. Buddhist analysis points out that
  some ideologies which might appear logical could, in fact, be the
  fruit of //papanca//. Adherents may be convinced of their truth but
  they might have progressed far from analysis based on empirical data.

    In the above analysis of the roots of violence, two broad areas
  have been studied: the external and the internal, the environmental
  and psychological. Yet the two are not separate. They interconnect and
  feed one another, just as external sense objects interconnect with the
  senses, giving rise to consciousness and psychological processes. If a
  people's environment is unhealthy, corrupt or unjust, the seeds are
  sown for violent resistance, through the growth of motivating
  ideologies which take on a life of their own as they grip the minds of
  those who are being oppressed. If the environment is excessively
  competitive, consumer-oriented and materialistic, //tanha// will
  quickly arise, develop and expand into obsessive patterns of greed,
  taking over and dominating the perception of people who find
  themselves victims of craving rather than masters of their own
  perceptual processes. The step to violence is then small. If other
  elements are present, such as a group without access to the wealth
  visible in others, discrimination against minorities or racism, then
  the drive towards violence will be more rapid.

                            * * * * * * * *




                                   4

                 CAN VIOLENT TENDENCIES BE ERADICATED?



  There is an optimism at the heart of Buddhism. The Four Noble Truths
  and //paticca samuppada// present a doctrine of hope because they
  affirm change and evolution. Men and women are not pawns of fate,
  chance or a capricious metaphysical being. [66] They can be makers of
  their own future. Applied to the issue of violence and disruption,
  this means that violence within the individual and in society is not
  intransigent, although the Buddhist texts make it quite clear that the
  obstacles to transformation are large.

    Buddhism has no concept of a worldly utopia. //Samsara// is
  //samsara//, characterized by //dukkha//. //Nibbana// is a victory
  over //samsara//, not a destruction of //samsara//. The doctrine of
  //anicca// (impermanence), in fact, undermines any dream of a golden
  future or a straight road of development towards harmony and peace.
  Yet the worth of working for conditions for concord is never denied.
  The important questions which emerge are: How feasible is the
  lessening of violent tendencies in society? Can changes in the
  individual affect society as a whole? When there is violence inherent
  in the structures of society, what steps can be taken?

    To take the possibility for change within the individual first,
  certain passages from the texts suggest that the Buddha had rather a
  low opinion of the //puthujjana// and his or her ability to change.
  Verse 174 of the Dhammapada reads:

       Blind is the world
       Few are those who clearly see.
       As birds escape from a net
       Few go to a blissful state.

    His sermons show that he recognizes that reaching people set on
  material things with a new message is difficult because their
  perception and ability to hear has been conditioned by the pattern of
  their craving:

       But this situation exists, Sunakkhatta, when some individual
       here may be set on the material things of this world
       (//lokamisadhimutto//), and the talk of the individual who is
       set on the material things of this world follows a pattern in
       accordance with which he reflects and ponders, and he
       associates with that man under whom he finds felicity; but
       when there is talk about imperturbability (//ananja//) he does
       not listen, does not lend an ear, does not rouse his mind to
       profound knowledge, and he does not associate with that man
       under whom he does not find felicity. [67]

       A bad man, monks, is possessed of bad states of mind, he
       consorts with bad men, he thinks as do bad men, he advises as
       do bad men, he speaks as do bad men, he acts as do bad men, he
       has the views of bad men, he gives gifts as do bad men....

       And how, monks, does a bad man act as do bad men? As to this
       monks, a bad man is one to make onslaught on creatures, to
       take what has not been given, to enjoy himself wrongly...[68]

    In one passage, a prince, Prince Jayasena, is pictured in
  conversation with a novice monk who speaks about aloofness and
  one-pointedness of mind. On the evidence given, the prince declares
  such an achievement to be impossible. Confused, the novice goes to the
  Buddha, who says that such direct teaching could not possibly have
  been understood by one of such a lifestyle as the prince:

       That Prince Jayasena, living as he does in the midst of sense
       pleasures, enjoying sense pleasures, being consumed by
       thoughts of sense pleasures, burning with the fever of sense
       pleasure, eager in the search of sense pleasures, should know
       or see or attain or realize that which can be known by
       renunciation, realized by renunciation -- such a situation
       does not exist. [69]

    The above passages might seem to imply the reverse of hope on the
  very same ground as hope was confirmed in the introduction to this
  section -- //paticca samuppada//. If perception is conditioned by a
  person's lifestyle, the friends he or she chooses, and greed for
  material objects, then appreciation of another set of values will not
  arise from that nourishment. Such an argument would seem to be
  realistic given the framework of conditionality. However, this realism
  must be balanced with instances in the texts where change does take
  place in the lives of individuals.

    The case of Angulimala is one of the best known and most frequently
  quoted. Angulimala is a multiple murderer, the terror of Savatthi. He
  is described as having depopulated villages and districts through his
  urge to kill. The Angulimala Sutta describes the story. [70] The
  Buddha, ignoring the fear of the people, sets out by himself toward
  where Angulimala is said to be. Angulimala, on seeing him, decides to
  give him the same fate as others who had dared to walk the roads.
  However, at this point, the Buddha uses a technique which slaps
  Angulimala so hard that he gains sudden insight into the futility of
  the path he had been taking. The Buddha uses his psychic power to
  ensure that Angulimala cannot catch up with him, however much effort
  he applies. This opens up the opportunity for the question of walking
  and standing still to be raised. Angulimala is forced into the
  realization that his life has been a futile chase, a fretful
  searching, without peace or fulfillment. The tranquillity of the
  Buddha contrasts sharply with his own turbulence and the destructive
  state of his mind. The contrast makes him see the nature of his mind.
  A revolution -- in its true sense of a complete turning around --
  takes place. Angulimala, the murderer, becomes a completely changed
  person. He asks the Buddha for ordination as a monk, and soon becomes
  an Arahant, a saint.

    Some interpretations have attempted to explain this in terms of a
  form of grace coming from the Buddha to the murderer. No doubt the
  person of the Buddha had a profound effect on the man. The sheer
  contrast between the states of mind and consequent physical appearance
  and bearing of the two would have shaped the event. Yet it is perhaps
  more helpful to think of Angulimala as being ready to change, ready to
  face what he was doing to his life. The Buddha's words acted as a
  sudden jolt to shock him into realization and change. A similar
  transformation can be seen at the end of the Cakkavatti Sihanada
  Sutta, mentioned earlier, when bestiality has overtaken society to the
  point that a reaction takes place. At the point when beings think of
  one another as wild beasts, some begin to think:

       Let us not slay anyone; nor just let anyone slay us. Let us
       now, therefore, take ourselves to dens of grass, or dens in
       the jungle, or holes in trees, or river fastnesses, or
       mountain clefts and subsist on fruits and on roots of the
       jungle. [71]

    The depth of barbarism causes a reversal, a disgust with the
  nourishment on which violent thoughts were feeding. Something new
  seems to enter but it is nevertheless part of the ongoing causal
  process. The important point is that there can be a stage at which the
  unwholesome is recognized as such by those who are perpetrating it.
  The process through which those who followed the Buddha saw the
  household life as a fetter, a state in which it was difficult to avoid
  greed, materialism and competitiveness, to a certain extent parallels
  this. [72]

    That it is possible for people to change accords with human
  experience. It is also worth going back to the advice given to the
  novice who had tried to instruct Prince Jayasena. [73] The story does
  not end with the Buddha's words about the impossibility of reaching
  the mind of the prince. An alternative method is stressed -- gradual
  training. The Buddha explains that the prince might have understood if
  told that the process of understanding was gradual. The simile of the
  training of an elephant is used: At first, the elephant is brought
  from the forest into the open; he is addressed with kindly words and
  fed; then tasks are given to him, progressing from the simple to the
  more complex up to the point where the animal can endure blows of the
  sword and the din of war without flinching.

    The stress on a gradual process of change and training, beginning
  with moral habit, stretches like a thread across the Buddhist texts.
  There is a firm belief that discipline, education and the taking of
  one step at a time can lead people from a state of relative ignorance
  to greater wisdom. The possibility of gradual change must be admitted
  alongside the sudden change of Angulimala. The two are complementary.

    In the Kevaddha Sutta, Kevaddha, a young householder, comes to the
  Buddha and pleads with him to perform a mystic wonder. [74] The Buddha
  names three wonders of which he has knowledge: the mystic, the wonder
  of manifestation, and the wonder of education. The first two are to be
  feared and abhorred. It was the latter which was to be praised as the
  most worthy -- the wonder of education. Change through a gradual
  process is, therefore, deemed possible but it is also recognized as
  something of a wonder, given the strength of craving and grasping.

    Evidence that groups of both lay and ordained people were following
  the gradual training comes from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta. The sutta
  speaks of the fourfold society being a reality -- the fourfold society
  as composed of monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen. Mara is seen to
  approach the Buddha, urging him to die because the task he had set
  himself earlier had been completed:

       Now is the time for the Exalted One to pass away -- even
       according to the word which the Exalted One spoke when he
       said, "I shall not die, O Evil One, until the brethren and the
       sisters of the Order and until the lay disciples of both sex
       shall have become true hearers, wise and well-trained, ready
       and learned, carrying the doctrine in their memory, masters of
       the lesser corollaries that follow from the larger doctrine,
       correct in life, walking according to the precepts -- until
       they, having thus themselves learnt the doctrine, shall be
       able to tell others of it, preach it, make it known, establish
       it, open it, minutely explain it and make it clear." [75]

    In the above description, both lay and ordained are described with
  the same adjectives. Lay people as well as ordained are credited with
  considerable knowledge. There are grounds of hope here, since the
  first stage of gradual training is morality, the foundation of which
  is the Five Precepts. All of these are linked with abstaining from
  different forms of violence: direct and indirect killing; theft; the
  exploitation of women; the violence connected with speech; violence to
  oneself through the use of drugs. The Early Buddhist texts are replete
  with exhortations to keep the precepts. Heaven and hell, bliss and
  torture, are held up and paeans of praise are given to those who
  follow them:

       Faint is the fragrance of //tagara// and sandal
       But the fragrance of the virtuous is excellent
       Wafting even among the gods.

                                               Dhp. v. 56.

    There are examples, however, of lay people going beyond morality.
  Pessa, the son of an elephant trainer, claims:

       And, revered sir, we householders too, dressed in white, from
       time to time dwell with our minds well applied to the four
       applications of mindfulness (//catusu satipatthanesu//). [76]

    Pessa receives the recognition and praise of the Buddha for this.
  It is significant that mindfulness is crucial in halting the flow of
  mind, in halting //papanca//, as described earlier, and the violent
  thoughts which might consequently flow. The key to mindfulness is the
  development of the ability to stand aside, detached from what is
  happening to the body, to feeling, to thought processes and mental
  objects, [77] so that ever arising and passing movement, feelings and
  thoughts are carefully charted. It is an approach which recognizes
  both //anicca// and //anatta//: //anicca// because what is attended to
  is seen as an ever-changing process; //anatta//, because the elements
  of the process are not assumed to belong to the person and therefore
  are not clung to as unchanging truths. Mindfulness (//satipatthana//)
  in fact can stop the mind before obsessions based on //tanha//,
  //mana// and //ditthi// can grow.

    Guarding the doors of the senses (//indriya samvara//) is one form
  of practice of mindfulness, frequently mentioned as the second step in
  the gradual training. The traditional way of describing this is:

       Having seen a visible form with the eye, he is not entranced
       by the general appearance, he is not entranced by the detail.
       If he dwells with his organ of sight uncontrolled,
       covetousness and dejection, evil unskilled states of mind,
       might predominate. So he fares along controlling it, he guards
       the organ of sight, he achieves control over the organ of
       sight. [78]

    The same is said of the other sense organs. A guard is placed at
  the point where contact between the sense and the sense object results
  in feeling (//vedana//). Knowledge of how the mind works is gained.
  Mindfulness is thus an antidote to //papanca// and stops the mechanism
  through which //papanca// develops. It demands effort and discipline.
  The texts show that such mind-culture is possible and suggest that it
  would lead to the lessening of violence as an expression of personal
  greed.

    The example of the Sangha, the Order of Monks, must also be looked
  at. No compromises were made concerning violence when it came to the
  monk. The Sangha was intended to be a model of harmonious
  interpersonal relationships. It was to provide an alternative set of
  values to lay people, to present a pattern of sharing rather than of
  competitive individualism. [79] If the Sangha had been able to carry
  out successfully this role, a disturbing challenge would have been
  presented to the communities among which the monks walked.

    The Kakacupama Sutta is one of the best examples of the extent to
  which violent retaliation was condemned for the monk. The key
  sentence, repeated many times, speaks of the attitude to be cultivated
  in the face of abuse or violence:

       Neither will my mind become perverted, nor will I utter evil
       speech, but kindly and compassionate will I dwell with a mind
       of friendliness and devoid of hatred (//mettacitto no
       dosantaro//).

    What is significant is the extent to which this is to be taken:

       Monks, as low-down thieves might carve one limb from limb with
       a double-handed saw, yet even then whoever sets his mind at
       enmity, he, for this reason, is not a doer of my teaching.
       Herein, monks, you must train yourself: Neither will our minds
       become perverted ... devoid of hatred. [80]

    The Punnovada Sutta describes a monk who took this teaching to
  heart. He intends to travel to a district where the people are known
  to be hostile. The Buddha questions him about how he will deal with
  abuse and violence. Possibilities are mentioned, increasing each time
  in intensity from verbal abuse to loss of life. After each one, Punna
  responds by saying that he would be thankful that the abuse was not
  even more serious. When the Buddha finally mentions murder, he says:

       If the people of Sunaparanta deprive me of life with a sharp
       knife, revered sir, it will be thus for me there; I will say,
       "There are disciples of the Lord who, disgusted by the body
       and the life-principle and ashamed of them, look about for a
       knife. I have come to this knife without having looked for
       it." [81]

    He is said to have made a thousand followers, suggesting that his
  attitude became a true inspiration to a people who were characterized
  by violence.

    In contrast to the above, there are examples of monks presenting a
  harmful example to lay people. As the Sangha grew in number and in
  reputation, the initial enthusiasm of the first disciples became
  diffused. Evidence in suttas such as the Bhaddali Sutta, the
  Kakacupama Sutta, the Kitagiri Sutta and the Anumana Sutta [82] shows
  that there were forces of deterioration. Some monks were difficult to
  exhort; some were rebellious towards the rules; some were incapable of
  taking correction from others. In this way, their ability to provide
  an example to lay people would have been weakened. Yet it would be
  wrong to place too much emphasis on this weakness. Other suttas can be
  quoted to show what an impact the Buddha's followers had on other
  groups of wanderers and even on kings. [83]

    The important point here is that hope for change in the Early
  Buddhist texts also lies in the Sangha as example and educator. Lay
  people were encouraged to show devotion to the Sangha and to listen to
  its teaching. As outlined above, there is evidence that there was a
  body of lay people who were very serious in their striving to
  undertake the precepts and to train their mind so that //tanha// could
  be reduced. That change in the individual is possible is confirmed by
  a study of the early followers.

    The above picture combines hope with realism. The obstacles
  mentioned at the beginning of the section must not be overlooked; the
  barriers to change are great. According to Buddhism the average person
  (//puthujjana//) will  often need the threat of punishment, either in
  the present or in a future life, to be deterred from socially
  disruptive activities. It has also been pointed out that it is not
  enough to concentrate on the individual. A society is more than the
  sum of its individuals. Just as the human person is such because of
  the specific relationship between the five //khandhas//, so a society
  takes on its character because of the way in which its parts are
  organized through institutions, traditions and external influences.

    The next question which must be looked at is how the individual can
  affect society as a whole or, more exactly, what the consequences are
  when a person follows the gradual training of Buddhism. As with the
  other questions raised, the method of this paper is to discover what
  the texts say, to uncover the guidelines or resources they provide for
  the analysis of contemporary issues.

    In a previous section it was suggested that one of the causes of
  violence was the proliferation of concepts and ideas flowing from the
  perceptual process when governed by //tanha//, //mana// and
  //ditthi//. Is the answer, then, a retreat into silence and inaction
  away from all concepts? The evidence suggests not. The Buddha was
  quick to condemn any inference that he taught a doctrine of either
  inaction or apathy. One example will illustrate this. The Buddha is
  seen in conversation with a person called Potaliya. Potaliya declares
  that the most worthy person is the one who speaks neither in dispraise
  of what deserves not praise nor in praise of the praiseworthy. He
  advocates what would seem a complete withdrawal from judgment and a
  supreme detachment from the issues governing society. And the term
  Potaliya uses to describe the frame of mind he is talking about is
  //upekkha// -- equanimity.

    The Buddha, however, disagrees with him. Far better is the person
  of discrimination who speaks in dispraise of the unworthy and in
  praise of the praiseworthy, saying seasonably what is factual and the
  truth. In other words, he challenges the view that //upekkha//
  (equanimity) means the quality Potaliya advocates. The Buddha puts
  forward another quality:

       Now, Potaliya, there are these four persons existing in the
       world.... Of these four persons, Potaliya, he who speaks in
       dispraise of what deserves not praise and in praise of the
       praiseworthy, saying seasonably what is fact and true -- he is
       the most admirable and rare. Why so? Because, Potaliya, his
       discrimination of proper occasions (//kalannuta//) is
       admirable. [84]

    The Buddha mentions the quality of //kalannuta//, in place of the
  word used by Potaliya -- //upekkha//. The translation given by the
  Pali Text Society is "discrimination of proper occasions." The ability
  to discriminate and make objective evaluations, not indifference, is
  the consequence of curbing //papanca//. A certain silence of the mind
  is indicated but it is not the silence of apathy. The proliferation of
  concepts which is //papanca// results in an obscuring of the
  empirical, since this proliferation moves one further and further away
  from the empirical because of the linguistic edifice of "therefore"
  and "therein" erected on top of the initial emotion of like or
  aversion. Preventing the erection of this edifice on the foundation of
  //tanha// leads to a clearer perception of the empirical and to
  judgments and analyses being made with greater validity. The
  conclusions reached through //papanca// may seem to be analytical.
  They are not. Resisting //papanca// is not a moving away from analysis
  but a moving towards objective analysis unclouded by emotional
  responses. It is this kind of analysis which is so often lacking when
  there is violence and conflict in society.

    When perceptions, judgments and consequent action are governed by
  the roots of //papanca//, there will be no objectivity but a danger
  that obsessions will grow. When //papanca// is allayed, what is good
  and bad, //kusala// and //akusala//, praiseworthy and blameworthy,
  will be more clearly visible. The injustices in society, for instance,
  will be more apparent. Judgments about those who are oppressed in
  society or about those who gain wealth illegally through violence and
  extortion will not be clouded either by the tendency to look down on
  those who suffer or the wish to gain patronage from the wealthy. What
  is wrong and what is right, what harms and what promotes happiness,
  will stand out untouched by personal wishes or personal greed.

    This clarity of judgment can be seen in the words of the Buddha. In
  the Assalayana Sutta, the Agganna Sutta and the Madhura Sutta the
  caste system is vigorously opposed. [85] The Esukari Sutta condemns
  the kind of service which becomes slavery. [86] Meaningless ritual is
  attacked in the Sigalovada Sutta. [87] Brahminical excesses are
  uncovered in the Brahmajala Sutta, the Ambattha Sutta and the Tevijja
  Sutta. [88] The violence and shame of sacrifices is condemned in the
  Kutadanta Sutta. [89] These are not the only examples. The Buddha is
  revealed as a person who was unafraid to point out wrong when he saw
  it and to use uncompromising words. It is this kind of effective
  speech and action which should flow when //tanha//, //mana// and
  //ditthi// are reduced.

    Abstention from the harmful or violent is not enough by itself. The
  texts stress that the active cultivation of the opposite is necessary.
  A replacement is needed as well as an annihilation. This is seen at
  lay level as well as among the ordained. For instance, in the
  Saleyyaka Sutta, addressed specifically to lay people, the two courses
  of faring by Dhamma and not-Dhamma are explained. Malevolence is
  explained by reference to the wish to kill:

       He is malevolent in mind, corrupt in thought and purpose, and
       thinks: "Let these beings be killed or slaughtered or
       annihilated or destroyed or may they not exist at all." [90]

    Faring by Dhamma is explained in opposite terms and yet the effect
  is not merely a negation of or a restraining from not-Dhamma but the
  practice of positive virtue. So, the one who abandons slanderous
  speech becomes "a reconciler of those who are at variance and one who
  combines those who are friends." The one who restrains himself from
  malevolent thought is the one who thinks: "Let those beings, friendly,
  peaceful, secure, happy, look after self." [91] Similarly, during
  meditation, positive qualities are to be cultivated to replace the
  five hindrances. For instance:

       Putting away ill-will and hatred (//vyapadapadosa//), he
       abides with heart free from enmity (//avyapannacitta//),
       benevolent and compassionate towards every living being
       (//sabbe panabhutahitanukampi//) and purifies his mind of
       malevolence. [92]

    The Early Buddhist emphasis, therefore, indicates that the
  eradication of the tendencies which cause violence leads to greater
  realism, the growth of positive, wholesome qualities and more
  effective speech and action against what is unjust and exploitative.
  An important question, however, remains unanswered, the third question
  mentioned at the beginning of this section: When there is violence
  inherent in the structures of society as a whole, what steps can be
  taken?

    In many societies, violence is institutionalized in structures
  which oppress certain sections of the people. Some would mention the
  caste system in India in this context, corrupt trading practices, or
  the forces which keep some groups of people poor. On the other hand,
  violence can flow from the monarchy or state, from internal terrorist
  groups or an outside threat. In these situations, violence is rarely
  lessened by changes in a few individuals, unless these individuals
  have considerable power. What strategies should be used to oppose such
  violence? Is there any situation where violence should be met with
  violence? Is there a different path for the lay person than for the
  monk? Is there a situation where it might be justifiable to overthrow
  the state? If so, could this lead to a changed society? If undeserved
  suffering occurs because of the greed of others, do the demands of
  compassion (//karuna//) ever involve what could be called violent
  resistance to the perpetrators? These are crucial questions in the
  light of current world tensions such as racial injustice, capitalistic
  monopolies, terrorism and fascism. The question here is whether any
  guidelines can be gained from the Buddhist texts themselves.

    There is no doubt that the person who renounces the household life
  is called to abstain from violence completely. It is one of the
  hallmarks of the bhikkhu. Not to react in violent retaliation to abuse
  was part of the training of the disciple. Where there was
  state-instigated violence, the Early Buddhist position seems to have
  been that the Sangha could act as advisers to rulers and, in this
  capacity, could raise issues connected with righteous government, but
  it could not become involved in violent resistance. As for the lay
  follower of the Buddha, he or she undertakes to desist from harming
  others through the first precept. To break this intentionally is to
  risk serious kammic consequences. For the lay person, as for the monk,
  the approved line of action would seem to be advice and non-violent
  pressure or resistance towards those in a position to change violent
  structures.

    A different set of responsibilities, however, is laid on the state
  itself. As previously discussed, rulers with the protection of their
  citizens at heart were inevitably drawn into conflict when threatened
  by aggression. The question can therefore be raised as to whether
  non-violence is an absolute value in Buddhism. For instance, is a
  father, as head and protector of the family, justified in using
  violence against a person forcefully entering his house with the
  intention to kill? Has an elder sister the duty to protect a younger
  brother if he is attacked violently, by using similar violence? Has a
  group of citizens the right to kill a dictator if, by doing so, they
  might save the lives of oppressed minorities to whom the citizens feel
  a duty? Should the terrorist gun be challenged with similar methods?
  These are areas where absolutes seem to break down. As a ruler might
  realize that some aggressor cannot be deterred by persuasion, so some
  citizens might feel that violence or injustice in society cannot be
  stopped merely by giving advice to those in power. That lay people
  should never initiate violence where there is harmony or use it
  against the innocent is very clear. That they should not attempt to
  protect those under their care if the only way of doing so is to use
  defensive violence is not so clear.

    Guidelines about the consequences of violence, however, are laid
  down. The danger of violence, even if it is defensive, is that it will
  generate further violence. Non-hatred (//avera//) and loving kindness
  are the powers which halt it. //Metta// (loving kindness) is shown to
  have great power: it can turn away the poison of a snake or the charge
  of an elephant; [93] it can render burning ghee harmless. [94] The
  latter story concerns a wife, Uttara, who is married to an unbeliever.
  A courtesan, Sirima, is given to her husband so that Uttara can be
  released to attend on religious duties. A quarrel arises between the
  two women which ends in Sirima pouring boiling ghee over Uttara. As
  she prepares to do this, Uttara thinks: "My companion has done me a
  favor. The circle of the earth is too narrow, the world of the devas
  is too low, but the virtue of my compassion is great because by her
  help, I have become able to give alms and listen to Dhamma. If I am
  angry with her may this ghee burn me; if not, let it not burn me." The
  ghee does not burn. Sirima tries again. Then the other women present
  attack Sirima and throw her to the ground. Uttara continues to show
  compassion by coming to her rescue, by preventing her from being hurt.

    Responding to violence with //metta// and non-anger is deemed
  superior to any other path. Non-violent resistance is clearly the best
  path. Yet Buddhism cannot claim to be completely pacifistic. Absolutes
  of that kind cannot be found and perhaps should not be sought for in a
  teaching which spoke of the danger of claiming of a view, "this alone
  is truth, all else is falsehood." The person who feels violence is
  justified to protect the lives of others has indeed to take the
  consequences into account. He has to remember that he is risking grave
  consequences for himself in that his actions will inevitably bear
  fruit. He or she has to be aware that there is a dynamism within
  hatred and violence when the causal chain has not had its nourishment
  removed. Such a person needs to evaluate motives in the knowledge that
  violent tendencies are rooted in the defilements of //lobha//,
  //dosa// and //moha//, and in the obsessions generated by //papanca//.
  Yet that person might still judge that the risks are worth facing to
  prevent a greater evil. Whether the assassination of Hitler would have
  prevented numerous innocent deaths is still an open question.

    In conclusion, it can be said that Buddhism lays down a form of
  mental culture to lessen the mind's tendency to veer towards violence.
  However, it is a culture which involves qualities of faith
  (//saddha//) and effort (//vayama//) that many in society are unable
  to cultivate. Therefore punishment either by the state or in an
  after-life is seen as a valid deterrent for extremes of violence.
  However, where violence flows directly and unjustifiably from the
  state or from other groups or institutions, questions are raised which
  are not dealt with directly by the texts. The drawing of conclusions
  is therefore fraught with difficulty. Yet these questions must be
  tackled if Buddhism is to provide guidelines in a violent world. What
  seems to emerge from the above analysis is that non-violence in the
  face of violence, although preferable for all and incumbent on the
  monk, is not a moral absolute in all circumstances.

                            * * * * * * * *



                               CONCLUSION





  It was claimed at the beginning that the advent of the nuclear bomb
  had issued in a new era of violence and that Buddhism should be able
  to address this development. The foregoing analysis started from a
  study of the Buddha's awareness of violence in his own society and
  passed to questions concerning the condemnation of violence, the roots
  of violence, and the possibilities for its eradication or reduction.
  Each of these issues has relevance for the present age, although it
  has been pointed out that many conditions have changed between the
  sixth century B.C. and the twentieth century A.D.

    One area in which difference can be seen is in the nature of
  warfare. In the Buddha's time, professional armies were used to settle
  conflicts. Although civilians were no doubt killed as victorious
  armies took their plunder, it was the army itself which bore the brunt
  of the slaughter. Today the cost in civilian, animal and plant life in
  any future nuclear war is thinkable only in terms of the most horrific
  nightmare. The duty of the Cakkavatti King might be to defend his
  people. Yet no nuclear weapon can be used in defense. If it was, it
  would prove the Buddhist view that the use of violence leads to
  escalation. The slim, ever-shaky defense that nuclear weapons provide
  is MAD -- Mutually Assured Destruction -- an uneasy,
  computer-controlled peace feeding on fear and the willingness to
  annihilate millions in retaliation, if the other side dares to be the
  aggressor.

    It would seem that, in nuclear weapons, man has created something
  out of his greed which now makes him victim. The analysis given
  earlier about the effects of //papanca// and the process of perception
  is relevant here. Some people might see the development of ever more
  sophisticated weapons of destruction as the result of objective,
  scientific probing into the nature of reality, in this case the use of
  the atom. An approach more in accordance with Buddhism would be to see
  the root as //tanha//, //mana// and //ditthi//: the craving for power
  over the material world and over other people; the wish to protect
  self and judge other groups as inferior; the clinging to one ideology
  whilst condemning all others. The result of //tanha//, //mana// and
  //ditthi// is //papanca//, the proliferation of ideas which turn the
  so-called perceiver into the victim of obsessions bearing little
  relation to the empirical. Nuclear and chemical weapons are horrific
  projections of the human mind. It has come to the point where they
  possess the mind rather than the mind the weapons. Humanity is now the
  victim.

    Within this atmosphere, one may ask how effective change in the
  individual is and whether the few who work to conquer //tanha//,
  //mana// and //ditthi// can act as leaven within the whole. The
  obstacles are great today as they were in the Buddha's time. The
  Buddha saw the //puthujjana// as a person hard to convince or change,
  given the strength of craving and views. Today, ideas have a
  charismatic force. Nationalism, ethnicity and religion, for instance,
  push groups towards violence. They form ego-feeding, identity-creating
  creeds which are hard to break down. In such situations, empirical
  evidence shows that some who try to show the alternative force of
  //metta// become the victims of violence, at least in the frame of
  their present life.

    Two insights from the foregoing study are relevant here: the
  reaction which took place in the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta and the
  interdependent nature of the environmental and the psychological. In
  the Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta, the truth that violence leads to
  greater violence and crime to ever-deepening bestiality eventually
  pierces the consciousness of some members of society as they see what
  is happening around them. Some realize that change is possible through
  a change in thought patterns. A reaction takes place after the trough
  of bestiality has been reached. Today, there are those who are
  "turning around," who are realizing how destructive and bestial is the
  present and potential violence in the world. However, for just as long
  as the external environment remains tension-creating, the rise of
  violent tendencies will continue. Similar injustices exist today as
  are mentioned in the Kutadanta Sutta, but their scope has altered and
  widened to include relationships between blocks of countries as well
  as within countries. In most countries of the world, the poor are
  becoming poorer. Between countries, the richer nations are becoming
  richer at the expense of the poorer. The warning which the Buddhist
  texts give is that such conditions breed violence and that the arm of
  the law or the gun will not curb it. Only change at the level of the
  root causes will create more peaceful conditions. This is one of the
  gravest challenges which the world faces, since it points to a
  complete re-drawing of the world economic system. The formidable
  obstacle in the way of such change is //tanha// in those with power or
  economic might -- for profit, influence and a luxurious lifestyle.

    One reaction of the individual to the above tension is complete
  withdrawal into a life of inaction. This was evidently a temptation in
  the sixth century B.C. It has been a temptation across all religions
  throughout the centuries. The mistake is to confuse renunciation and
  inaction, detachment (//viraga//) and apathy. The life of renunciation
  aims at detachment from //raga//, //dosa// and //moha//, but the
  result should not be apathy but rather greater compassion (//karuna//)
  and loving kindness (//metta//). In the Samanamandika Sutta, a
  wanderer, Uggahamana, declares that the one who does no evil deed with
  his body, speaks no evil speech, intends no evil intention and leads
  no evil livelihood is the recluse who has obtained the most worthy
  end. The Buddha responds:

       This being so carpenter, then according to the speech of
       Uggahamana a young baby boy lying on its back would be of
       abounding skill, of the highest skill, an unconquerable
       recluse, attained to the highest attainments. [95]

    In contrast, the Buddha lays down the importance of developing
  wholesome qualities, not merely abstaining from what is unwholesome.
  The demands of the Eightfold Path are stressed, demands incumbent not
  only on the monk but on all followers:

       As to this, carpenter, a monk is endowed with the perfect view
       of an adept, he is endowed with the perfect intention of an
       adept, ... the perfect  speech ... the perfect action ... the
       perfect mode of livelihood ... the perfect endeavor ... the
       perfect mindfulness ... the perfect concentration ... the
       perfect knowledge of an adept (//sammananena//), he is endowed
       with the perfect freedom of an adept. [96]

    In a violent world, therefore, the duty of the Buddhist disciple is
  not inactive withdrawal or apathy but culture of the mind to root out
  personal defilements so that perception and judgment can be unbiased
  and objective; cultivation of positive qualities which will create
  harmony and peace; and, most important, a readiness to speak out and
  act against what is blameworthy and in praise of what is worthy of
  praise.

                            * * * * * * * *



                                 NOTES

       Abbreviations
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

       DN     Digha Nikaya
       MN     Majjhima Nikaya
       SN     Samyutta Nikaya
       AN     Anguttara Nikaya
       Dhp    Dhammapada
       Snp    Sutta Nipata


  Textual references have been taken from the Pali Text Society's
  editions of the Nikayas. Unless specified otherwise, English
  translations have been taken from the PTS versions, though some have
  been slightly altered.

  1. Utilitarianism is a philosophy which claims that the ultimate end
      of action should be the creation of human happiness. Actions
      should be judged according to whether they promote the greatest
      happiness of the greatest number. The most important exponent of
      this philosophy was the nineteenth century British thinker John
      Stuart Mill. One of the weaknesses of utilitarianism is that it
      can be used to justify the violation of minority rights.
  2. Reference may be made to many texts which stress that encouraging
      others to do harm is blameworthy. AN ii,215, for instance, speaks
      of the unworthy man and the more unworthy man, the latter being
      one who encourages others to do harmful actions such as killing
      living beings.
  3. MN 95/ii,167.
  4. The Kosala Samyutta (Samyutta Nikaya, vol. 1) records the
      conversations which this king had with the Buddha. The examples
      mentioned have been taken from this section.
  5. SN i,97.
  6. MN 13/i,86-87.
  7. MN 13/i,87.
  8. SN iv,343.
  9. In several suttas, the Buddha comes across groups of wanderers
      engaged in heated discussions about kings, robbers, armies, etc.
      (e.g. DN iii,37; MN ii,1). In contrast, the Buddha advised his
      disciples either to maintain noble silence or to speak about the
      Dhamma.
  10. See Romila Thapar, //A History of India// (Pelican Books UK,
      1966), chapter 3.
  11. SN i,75.
  12. MN 36/i,227ff.
  13. MN 12/i,68ff.
  14. At the end of the Buddha's description of his austerities in the
      Mahasaccaka Sutta he says: "And some recluses and brahmins are now
      experiencing feelings that are acute, painful, sharp, severe; but
      this is paramount, nor is there worse than this. But I, by this
      severe austerity, do not reach states of further men, the
      excellent knowledge and vision befitting the Ariyans. Could there
      be another way to awakening?" (MN i,246).
  15. The Mahasakuludayi Sutta (MN 77/ii,1ff.) reflects contemporary
      realities when a town plays hosts to various groups of wanderers.
  16. DN 25/iii,38.
  17. DN 8/i,162.
  18. Trevor Ling, //The Buddha -- Buddhist Civilisation in India and
      Ceylon// (Penquin Books UK, 1973).
  19. See Esukari Sutta, MN 96.
  20. SN iv,330ff.
  21. DN 31.
  22. Reference can be made to the following:
       (a) AN i,188ff. The Buddha's advice to the Kalamas.
       (b) AN ii,167ff. The Buddha advises the monks to scrutinize
           closely anything said to have come from his mouth.
       (c) Canki Sutta: MN 95/ii,170-71. The Buddha says that belief,
           reasoning and personal preference are not guarantees of
           truth.
       (d) Vimamsaka Sutta: MN 47. The Buddha urges his disciples to
           examine his own conduct before deciding whether he is an
           Enlightened One, and to investigate empirical evidence rather
           than accept things through blind faith.
  23. The following texts provide fuller discussions about //paticca
      samuppada//:
       (a) Sammaditthi Sutta: MN 9.
       (b) Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta: MN 38.
       (c) Mahanidana Sutta: DN 15.
  24. MN 99/ii,197.
  25. MN 96/ii,177ff.
  26. AN ii,42.
  27. Reference may be made to the following:
       (a)  Assalayana Sutta: MN 93.
       (b)  Madhura Sutta: MN 84.
       (c)  AN ii,84. Here, four types of people are mentioned, two of
           whom are bound for light and two of whom are bound for
           darkness. Deeds, not birth, is the criterion for the
           divisions between the two sets.
  28. For instance, the Kutadanta Sutta and the Cakkavatti Sihanada
      Sutta, to be discussed below.
  29. The Mahadukkhakkhandha Sutta (MN 13) is an example.
  30. SN i,100ff.
  31. Therigatha vv. 105-6 (Sona).
  32. MN 61/i,415-16.
  33. MN 8/i,44-45.
  34. AN ii,191.
  35. //Metta// and //karuna//, as two of the //brahmaviharas//, are
      mentioned at DN i,250-51, MN i,38, etc.
  36. AN i,51.
  37. MN 135/iii,303.
  38. MN 129/iii,169-70. A similar approach is adopted in the Devaduta
      Sutta: MN 130/iii,178ff.
  39. The Petavatthu is one of the books of the Khuddaka Nikaya. It
      contains 51 stories in four chapters, all concerning the
      //petas//, a class of ghost-like beings who have fallen from the
      human plane because of misdeeds done.
  40. DN 26/iii,61.
  41. DN 16/iii,72ff.
  42. SN i,82.
  43. SN i,83.
  44. SN i,101.
  45. SN iv,308.
  46. AN ii,121ff.
  47. Snp. vv. 935-38. Translation by H. Saddhatissa (Curzon Press,
      1985).
  48. DN 5/i,135.
  49. DN 26/iii,61.
  50. DN iii,73.
  51. AN ii,74.
  52. DN 27/iii,85.
  53. DN iii,92.
  54. MN 2/i,7. The description of the //puthujjana// is a stock passage
      recurring throughout the Canon.
  55. See SN iv,195.
  56. AN ii,211.
  57. MN 18/i,109-10.
  58. Bhikkhu Nanananda, //Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist
      Thought// (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1971).
  59. MN 18/i,111-12.
  60. //Concept and Reality//, p.6.
  61. Immanuel Kant, 1724-1804. His major work, //The Critique of Pure
      Reason//, studies the place of //a priori// ideas in the formation
      of concepts and examines the role of reason and speculative
      metaphysics.
  62. AN i,188; AN ii,190.
  63. DN 1. See e.g. DN i,16: "In the fourth case, monks, some recluse
      or brahmin is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance
      to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his
      argumentations and based on his sophistry...."
  64. MN 74/i,497.
  65. Snp. 824-34; Snp. 862-77.
  66. AN ii,173ff. The Buddha here quotes three views which result in
      inaction: (i) that all feelings are due to previous kamma; (ii)
      that all feelings are due to a supreme deity; and (iii) that all
      feelings are without cause or condition.
  67. MN 105/ii,253.
  68. MN 110/iii,21-22.
  69. MN 125/iii,129-30.
  70. MN 86/ii,98ff.
  71. DN 26/iii,73.
  72. A stock passage found in many suttas (e.g. MN 51/i,344) extols the
      homeless life as the only way "to fare the holy life completely
      fulfilled, completely purified, polished like a conch shell."
  73. Dantabhumi Sutta: MN 125/iii,128ff.
  74. DN 11/i,211.
  75. DN 16/ii,104.
  76. MN 51/i,340.
  77. Body, feelings, thoughts and mental objects are the four
      foundations of mindfulness (see DN 22, MN 10).
  78. MN 27/i,181, and elsewhere.
  79. This point is developed in Trevor Ling, //The Buddha//.
  80. MN 21/i,129.
  81. MN 145/iii,269.
  82. Respectively MN 65, MN 21, MN 70, MN 15.
  83. The Mahasakuludayi Sutta (MN 77) and the Dhammacetiya Sutta (MN
      89) describe the impact which the general concord of the Buddha's
      followers had respectively on groups of wanderers at Rajagaha and
      on King Pasenadi.
  84. AN ii,100.
  85. Respectively MN 93, DN 27, MN 84.
  86. MN 96.
  87. DN 31/iii,181.
  88. Respectively DN 1, DN 3, DN 11.
  89. DN 5.
  90. MN 41/i,287.
  91. MN 41/i,288.
  92. DN 2/i,71 and elsewhere.
  93. See AN ii,71. A monk dies of snakebite, and the Buddha declares
      that if he had suffused the four royal families of snakes with a
      heart of //metta//, he would not have died. A story in the
      Cullavagga of the Vinaya Pitaka relates how the Buddha's envious
      cousin, Devadatta, tried to kill him by releasing a notoriously
      ferocious elephant called Nalagiri at him in the streets of
      Rajagaha. The Buddha is said to have subdued it by exercising
      //metta// and //karuna//, so that the elephant lowered its trunk
      and stopped before the Buddha. Hiuen-Tsang refers to a stupa at
      the place where this is said to have happened.
  94. Vimanavatthu, No. 15.
  95. MN 78/ii,24.
  96. MN 78/ii,29.

                            * * * * * * * *


                 THE BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY

  The BPS is an approved charity dedicated to making known the Teaching
  of the Buddha, which has a vital message for people of all creeds.
  Founded in 1958, the BPS has published a wide variety of books and
  booklets covering a great range of topics. Its publications include
  accurate annotated translations of the Buddha's discourses, standard
  reference works, as well as original contemporary expositions of
  Buddhist thought and practice. These works present Buddhism as it
  truly is -- a dynamic force which has influenced receptive minds for
  the past 2500 years and is still as relevant today as it was when it
  first arose. A full list of our publications will be sent upon request
  with an enclosure of U.S. $1.00 or its equivalent to cover air mail
  postage.

  Write to:

       The Hony. Secretary
       BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
       P.O. Box 61
       54, Sangharaja Mawatha
       Kandy           Sri Lanka

  or

       The Barre Center for Buddhist Studies
       Lockwood Road
       Barre, MA 01005
       Tel: [phone]

                            * * * * * * * *



                       DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 TITLE OF WORK: Violence and Disruption in Society: A Study of the
        Early Buddhist Texts (The Wheel Publication No. 392/393)
 FILENAME: WHEEL392.ZIP
 AUTHOR: Elizabeth J. Harris
 AUTHOR'S ADDRESS:   c/o Buddhist Publication Society
 PUBLISHER'S ADDRESS: Buddhist Publication Society
                    P.O. Box 61
                    54, Sangharaja Mawatha
                    Kandy, Sri Lanka
 COPYRIGHT HOLDER: Elizabeth J. Harris & Buddhist Publication Society (1994)
 DATE OF PUBLICATION: 1994
 RIGHTS AND RESTRICTIONS: See paragraph below.
 DATE OF DHARMANET DISTRIBUTION: November 1994
 ORIGIN SITE: Access to Insight BBS, Pepperell MA * [phone] (96:903/1)


 The copyright holder retains all rights to this work and hereby grants
 electronic distribution rights to DharmaNet International. This work may
 be freely copied and redistributed electronically, provided that the file
 contents (including this Agreement) are not altered in any way and that it
 is distributed at no cost to the recipient. You may make printed copies of
 this work for your personal use; further distribution of printed copies
 requires permission from the copyright holder. If this work is used by a
 teacher in a class, or is quoted in a review, the publisher shall be
 notified of such use. See the title page of this work for any additional
 rights and restrictions that may apply.

 It is the spirit of dana, freely offered generosity, which has kept the
 entire Buddhist tradition alive for more than 2,500 years. If you find
 this work of value, please consider sending a donation to the author or
 publisher, so that these works may continue to be made available. May your
 generosity contribute to the happiness of all beings everywhere.

       DharmaNet International, P.O. Box 4951, Berkeley, CA 94704-4951

[end]