NOTES ON BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA [PART – 10]

B.R. Ambedkar says that twice Buddha was requested by his followers to appoint a successor but every time Buddha refused. Why? Several reasons come to our mind. Firstly, he knew that his was a divinely appointed designation and it was not up to him to appoint a successor. One who appointed him would himself appoint someone else at a suitable time and place.

Or is it that Buddha knew that his disciples were not that worthy? Or can there be a possibility that unworthy but shrewd disciples had won over the hearts of the rest of the disciples. This is merely a hypothesis but there are certain indicators that made us frame this hypothesis.

B.R. Ambedkar says that Buddha carved for himself no place in his religion by laying down any conditions. This is the reason, as per him, that not much is known of the incidents of his life. But if that was so, Buddha also did not stop his followers from doing so. Why is it that his followers didn’t try to write the incidents of his life, after Buddha had passed away from amidst them?

More importantly, when the first Buddhist congregation was held soon after the death of Buddha at Rajagraha, it is explicitly written that Kasyapa presided over the congregation. Who made him the President? B.R. Ambedkar says that Buddha had clearly rejected any question of a successor. Even if a President was to be appointed, why not one from the five Parivrajakas, who were one of the first converts. Also, why not Ananda, who had the distinction of being Buddha’s personal attendant and was also alongside him when Buddha died?

What we find, on the other hand, is Kasyapa presiding over the congregation, that too in a manner that it appears that he wanted to control what was to be discussed and what not to be discussed. Kasyapa raised only two questions during the congregation, one regarding the Dhamma and the other regarding the Vinaya. B.R. Ambedkar writes that he (Kasyapa) closed the questions after Dhamma and Vinaya were told. What was the reason for closing the questions? Why were others not given a chance to speak?

See what B.R. Ambedkar has written:

“Kasyapa then should have put the third question to someone present in the congregation to record some important incidents in the life of the Buddha.

But Kasyapa did not. These were the only two questions with which he thought the Sangh was concerned.

If Kasyapa had collected the record of the Buddha’s life we would have had today a full-fledged biography of the Buddha.

Why did it not strike Kasyapa to collect the record about the Buddha’s life?

It could not be indifference. The only answer one can give is that the Buddha had carved no niche for himself in his religion.”

This statement of B.R. Ambedkar proves that the Buddha’s not carving any niche for himself in his religion were not the words of Buddha himself but conclusions drawn by B.R. Ambedkar due to his inability to cast an opinion on Kasyapa’s integrity. There are several instances where what Buddha did in private is known to us. Had there been a second person alongside Buddha, we could have thought that the other person narrated the incident. But there are narrations talking of how Buddha attain enlightenment, his throwing of food in the river Nairanja to see whether it moved upstream or downstream, what did he do to attain enlightenment, etc. that were performed exclusively in private. This shows that Buddha was not trying to hide incidents from his life from getting known. Moreover, the entire region at least was following what this erstwhile prince of Sakya was up to since Buddha took the Parivraja. Remember, that was the period when Buddha had not even attained enlightenment. If records were not kept about Buddha’s life, it was because somebody wanted that they should not be kept. Later in these notes we will give two or three incidents to prove that Kasyapa’s intentions could be doubtful.

The same is the case of naming Buddha’s teachings as a religion. Not once did Buddha say so. Also, we find that even at the time of the Congregation, Kasyapa mentions the word Dhamma meaning path, thus showing that till that time, at least, Buddha’s teachings had not been labeled as a separate religion. Is it not an irony that those very people who said that Buddha had carved no niche for himself named his religion as Buddhism but did not keep the records of the life of the propagator of their religion?

There is one more point that proves our hypothesis. Let us study the circumstances in which Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma. When we study the same for the five Parivrajakas, Yashas and several others, we find that they had the choice of accepting or denying Buddha’s Dhamma and yet accepted it on the basis of its truth. On the other hand, Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma under circumstances where he had no other choice of continuing with his earlier path of giving fire sacrifice.

Kasyapa was a fire worshipper and he was in fact proud of this fact. Conditions became such that the Naga king Muchalinda, who was influenced with Buddha’s teachings, was already troubling Kasyapa because of Kasyapa being a fire-worshipper when Buddha came to his ashram. Buddha desired to stay in his ashram for the night. Kasyapa raised several objections in spite of the fact that Buddha was persistently insisting. Kasyapa allowed Buddha finally to stay outside while he went off to sleep in spite of knowing that his guest (Buddha) might have been burnt up by Muchalinda. He came to look at his guest only the next morning. There he saw Muchalinda paying obeisance to Buddha. The man who had not dared to come out in the night, leaving his guest to the fate of Muchalinda, knew that it would be impossible for him to continue with his fire worship anymore. Thereafter, he invited Buddha to stay there and build an ashram.

Another point! All Buddhists would agree that it was not possible for Kasyapa to gain salvation through fire-worship. The very fact that Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma shows that he confessed that he was on the wrong. Had he achieved salvation why would he have converted? Yet B.R. Ambedkar writes: “The fame of Uruvella Kasyapa had spread far and wide. He was known to have obtained mukti (salvation) while alive. People from faraway places came to his ashram which was located on the banks of the river Falgu.”

This incident reveals that Kasyapa’s religiosity was suspect even when he was a fire worshipper. The word had been spread that he had attained salvation and he didn’t deny it even when people came to visit his ashram. Does it not show the cunningness, shrewdness and on top of it disrespect for religion on part of Kasyapa, who was taking help of a lie to achieve fame. Moreover, religiosity had not given him courage and steadfastness. If he was on true path, why was he afraid of Muchalinda? Why did he convert?

It appears that Kasyapa used all his time-tested tactics to gain a position of respect in Buddha’s camp. We will see later that Kasyapa had a following that showed no respect to Buddha, not to speak of his teachings. The simple Bhikkus might not have seen behind his plan. But the Buddha knew and that is why he kept on insisting till his last breath that Dhamma itself is sufficient. Unfortunately, Kasyapa and some more of his type didn’t allow this to happen.

We invite you to read the row over Prophet Mohammad’s succession, given a little earlier. We are sure you will find a lot many similarities and also get to realize how a teacher’s teachings can be hijacked by a select few and given a direction of their choice.

* * * * *

Fact is that the conditions that got created after Mohammad’s departure were very similar to those that were created after Buddha. Quran tells the Quraysh that ‘had it been in your hand, you would have chosen one of the elderly from your tribe as Prophet’. Mohammad was chosen not because of his eminence in society but his eminence in front of God. These two are different. Immediately after Mohammad, people chose those who were eminent and respected among them and forgot that when they had no say in choosing of the Prophet, they should have no say in the choosing of successor as well. The same happened in the case of Buddha. He was not chosen as per people’s will but because he attained the enlightenment because of the purity and level of his self and the relation that he created of the self with the Manifest Self. But people still wanted him to name a successor. How could he when he knew that this was a Divine responsibility and came from the other end rather than men themselves choosing their leader. Despite this, all indicators showed that Buddha wanted Ananda to be his successor. On the other hand, Mohammad left no stone unturned to say that the Divine Will for caliphate was in favour of Ali. When Buddha died, his head was on Ananda’s lap and when Mohammad died, his head was on Ali’s lap. Narrations tell that even when Ananda wept inconsolably after Buddha’s death, rest of the people got involved in feast and merry making. On the other hand, even when Ali was lamenting over Mohammad’s departure and making preparations for his burial, there was a group that was fighting among itself for caliphate (read my earlier post on the subject). Buddha’s teachings got deviated when Ananda was not chosen as successor, who would have tried his best to safeguard Buddha’s true teachings, Mohammad’s teachings got deviated the day Ali was not chosen as the successor. I have been saying repeatedly that the Force of Darkness use the same time-tested methods time and again to corrupt the teachings of the true path. That is why I invite you time and again to clear doubts, if any, lest Force of Darkness will corrupt the understanding yet again.

NOTES ON BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA [PART – 8]

The Madhyama Marg (Majjhima Patipada) that Buddha preached was the middle path, which was neither the path of pleasure nor the path of self-mortification. This was exactly as per the teachings of Krishna who denounced sanyas (by which was meant renunciation of all actions and leading a life of a heretic) and worldly actions like being engaged in entertainment and performing ritual sacrifices merely as an action and not as a tool for self-attainment. Said he:

“Only when the self in ye has been conquered that ye are free from lust; ye will then not desire worldly pleasures, and the satisfaction of your natural wants will not defile ye. Let ye eat and drink according to the needs of your body.”

We invite you to read Gita. Is not Krishna saying the same? Is it not apparent that both teachings had same origin? It is apparent from Buddha’s talk on the need to satisfy the needs of life and to keep the body in good health that he wanted his disciples to live in the society.

* * * * *

All the evils that were prevailing were either in connection with man’s relationship to God or man’s relationship with his self and self’s relation with the Manifest Self [Paramatma]. There were stories prevailing about God and many of these were false myths. As regards to self, people committed all kinds of sins and then performed ritual sacrifices in hope that this would take their self on path of elevation. There was another section which performed rituals in love for life after death. Humanity and doing good to others as a way of life was forgotten. Humane concerns were lost, which is evident from several narrations about the lives of priests and other so-called dignitaries. Therefore Buddha saying that his teachings have nothing to do with God does not mean that there is no God. Buddha emphasized on human relationship with other humans and left other things as they were already being practiced to the limit of excess. As Buddha said:

“The centre of his Dhamma is man and the relation of man to man in his life on earth.”

This he said was his first postulate.

His second postulate was that men are living in sorrow, in misery and poverty. The world is full of suffering and that how to remove this suffering from the world is the only purpose of Dhamma. Nothing else is Dhamma.”

The recognition of the existence of suffering and to show the way to remove suffering is the foundation and basis of his Dhamma.”

Surely, there is no denying the fact that entire Buddha’s teachings are centred on recognizing and removing suffering from this world. If we see Gita, stress is more on purity of self and attaining salvation. But if you read Gita with us, through our commentary, you will agree that the eventual focus is on trying to make each human a better person so that all the sufferings and evils of this mortal world are removed. There is no explanation for Krishna indulging in the war with Kauravas but that there was a need to fight the forces of evil, eventual purpose being to make this world a better place. Just as the consequence of such good acts is salvation in the case of Krishna, it is nirvana (salvation) in the case of Buddha.

Unfortunately, neither did the self-confessed followers adhere to Krishna’s teachings nor Buddha’s teachings. People understood the meaning of Self wrongly and devised rituals for the Self. Rest of the life, outside of rituals, they continued to live as before. The illusion of the self even contributed to people becoming more self-centred. Buddha’s teachings tried to do away with the evils which had crept in and we have to see them from this point.

We invite you to ponder at a very interesting point. In all the civilizations, teachings have been slowly upgraded. The first stage we witness all through the world is the attempt to identify the devas in the scheme of God’s things. Unfortunately, be it India, be it China, Egypt, Mesopotamia or Greece, or even Latin America, these devas began to be worshipped as gods. Then the teachings reached the second stage where the presence of self inside us, its relation with the Divine Self or Paramatma and consequently with God is emphasized upon. Preachers talking about human values and interrelationship between creations succeeded this. This was followed by the completion of teachings, which incorporated all the earlier teachings in a comprehensive package.

The same upward gradation of teachings, and in the same manner, is visible not only in India but also in the rest of the civilizations; including Chinese, Greek, Mesopotamian and Egyptian. When there was Krishna talking of self in India, there was a preacher talking on the same subject in Greece or China. Those who are called gods, and who were actually God’s own manifest form – the devas of the Vedas – were introduced in nearly all civilizations.

Likewise, you will find a striking similarity between the teachings of Buddha on human relationship and those of Jesus, who came about 500 years later. Unless we conclude that there was superhuman force working, it won’t be possible for us to understand why similar pattern of teachings is visible all around the world and around the same periods. So much so that the lands that were not discovered till then, like America or Australia too show the same pattern. Though, the similarity is more starkly visible in the case of five centres of civilization, viz. India, China, Mesopotamia, Greece and Egypt.

* * * * *

Were not Krishna or Rama too teaching about the Path of Purity; the Path of Righteousness and the Path of Virtue? Was not Moses or Jesus doing the same? This being the most difficult of the path to tread, it was not easy to understand. Therefore avatar (prophet) after avatar tried to develop the teachings.

Buddha needs to be saluted surely for his greatness. But his teachings for not meant to be transformed into a religion because if Buddhism is a religion, not Buddha alone, but also Rama and Krishna and several other avatars or enlightened persons that came in the Indian subcontinent contributed to it. Similar is the case of Hinduism; this is aptly reflected in the state of Hindus in India prior to Buddha commencing his teachings.

* * * * *

Likewise, wisdom and need to use one’s intellect too has always been the subject of discussion by most Messengers. Man is invited to use his wisdom. Anything that does not appeal to wisdom cannot be true religion. Only knowledge can give wisdom. Otherwise we often see people on TV shows like Big Fight who applause on a view presented by a person and again applause on the counter view presented by other. All believe they are wise but very few are able to use their wisdom; instead knowingly or unknowingly they keep following the views and/or dictates of others. At times, it is Satan or the Force of Darkness which is silently dictating its agenda without we realizing it.

Krishna has devoted an entire chapter to wisdom in Gita. Now see how Buddha describes it:

“Mind is the only instrument through which light can come to man.
“But the mind of these dungeon-dwellers is by no means a perfect instrument for the purpose.
“It lets through only a little light, just enough to show to those with sight that there is such a thing as darkness.
“Thus defective in its nature, such understanding as this is.
“But know, ye Parivrajas! The case of the prisoner is not as hopeless at it appears.
“For there is in man a thing called will. When the appropriate motives arise the will can be awakened and set in motion.
“With the coming of just enough light to see in what directions to guide the motions of the will, man may so guide them that they shall lead to liberty.
“Thus though no man is bound, yet he may be free, he may at any moment begin to take the first steps that will ultimately bring him to freedom.
“This is because it is possible to train the mind in whatever directions one chooses. It is mind that makes us to be prisoners in the house of life, and it is mind that keeps us so.
“But what mind has done, that mind can do. If it has brought man to thralldom, it can also, when rightly directed, bring him to liberty.”
This is Samma Ditti, which leads to destruction of Avijja (Nescience)” [Avidya of Krishna).

Buddha’s words here are extremely important and should not be taken lightly. Come, we invite all in the name of Buddha, Krishna and Mohammad to use their minds so as to do away with ignorance and attain the knowledge of the true path. As Buddha said: “The Path of Virtue must, therefore, be subject to test of Prajna which is another name for understanding and intelligence.”

NOTES ON BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA (PART - 5)

Buddha’s views on the pleasures of the world too are not new but have been presented in a more contemporary fashion. “There is no calamity in the world like pleasures, people are devoted to them through delusion; when he once knows the truth and so fears evil, what wise man would of his own choice desire evil?

“When they have obtained all the earth girdled by the sea, kings wish to conquer the other side of the great ocean; mankind is never satiated with pleasures, as the ocean with the waters that fall into it.”

It is worthwhile to note that pleasure seems to be the evil that has plagued society at all times. Even Krishna laments that people of the time were spending more time in pursuit of entertainment. How true are these words even now!

Siddharth Gautama’s pursuit of perfect knowledge made him learn all the existing forms of religion, albeit in their deviated form, and only when he was dissatisfied with one, he moved to the next. This shows that pursuit of the true knowledge has to be an endless affair. But it can only be practiced when one discard attachment to existing beliefs, ego and anger, which do not allow a person to accept truth.

* * * * *

The mortification of the body in quest for heaven was something that was despised by Krishna in Gita. But we find that the same continued to happen in the name of Krishna himself. Those who called themselves as adherents to Krishna’s teachings continued to do all that Krishna condemned so much so self-mortification and rituals that Krishna had negated were still being seen as positive solutions to go to heaven, even in the time of Buddha. Krishna had said that actions should not be performed in love of heaven, as such persons care little for the well being of others and yet people were doing the same in Buddha’s period. In fact, they continue to do the same activities till this day while calling themselves as devout Krishna bhakts. Likewise, we have mentioned how entertainment was looked down upon by Krishna but when Buddha gave his teachings it was again the chief evil in the society.

The purpose of writing this is to bring home the point that the people at the time of these messengers’ arrival were not superior to us. In fact, arrival of messengers became necessary only when religious values went to nadir. These were the people who never understood the teachings of those very messengers they held in high esteem. Unfortunately, scholars treat all those who were close or present in the company of these messengers as pious and virtuous. They forget that in case of all the messengers or avatars, the number of people opposing them has always been higher than those on their side. They forget that Satan still kept working, perhaps overtime, when the messengers were present in person to deliver the teachings of truth. They forget also that human character is so frail that it can get swayed under slightest brush with ego, lust, anger and other similar ailments and one has to keep a firm control over oneself at all times to prevent this from happening. Therefore, it becomes necessary that we keep in mind that there is still a chance that teachings of these messengers have not been understood truthfully. Just as Buddha found negativities in the practices performed by the revered saints of the time, whereas they were of opinion always that they were on the true path, it is still possible that our understanding of the religion till date may have been based on false foundations. After all, those very practices that Buddha found negative continue to remain in practice till date with perhaps as equal dedication as the saints of Buddha’s period had. We must remember that intelligence is the biggest defense and we should apply our intelligence at all times, without allowing it to get affected because of vagaries of organs of senses and action.

Another point is that there has never been any fault in the teachings of God’s Messengers. They have always tagged the same line and shown the same straight path, be it Rama or Krishna, Buddha or Jesus, Abraham or Mohammad. Fault has always been in our inability to comprehend the message.

As Buddha said: “Some undergo misery for the sake of this world, others meet toil for the sake of heaven; all living beings wretched through hope and always missing their aim, fall certainly for the sake of happiness into misery.

“Has not something like this happened to me?

“It is not the effort itself which I blame, - which flinging aside the base pursues a high path of its own.

“What I ask is, ‘Can the mortification of body be called religion?’

“Since it is only by the mind’s authority that the body either acts or ceases to act, therefore, to control the thought is alone befitting – without thought the body is like a dog.” …

“New light cannot be attained by him who has lost his strength and is wearied with hunger, thirst and fatigue with his mind no longer self-possessed through fatigue.

“How could he who is not absolutely calm, reach the end which is to be attained by his mind?

“True calm and the self-possession of the mind is properly obtained by the constant satisfaction of the body’s wants.”

This brings us to an important conclusion. A great evil plaguing the period of Buddha’s time was the practice of self-mortification, performed by the sages who were revered and looked upon with esteem. This had led to the entire population of people getting deviated. Buddha had to rectify this and to do so he decided to become one like them. The idea was perhaps to remove the evils. To some extent he was successful. But the overzealous adherents of his dhamma took it to other extreme, so much so that we find history full of Buddhist bhikshus and mendicants roaming from place to place or living in secluded places. Was it not because the Buddha they saw was doing the same? They forgot that Buddha’s compulsions were altogether different. Result was that all type of people, who had nothing to do with spirituality or religion, adopted living in this manner, thereby leading to degradation.

Krishna too said the same in Gita though we must confess that Buddha elaborated a lot on this point. Krishna said that it was possible for him to retire to solitude or start living the life of a mendicant but that is not the solution and it is the duty of each of us to continue to work for making this world a better place to live, even if we had to give sacrifices of our pleasures, our leisure, etc. to accomplish this.

* * * * *

Mara (Kama) seems to be Satan, which has been described by Buddha as “another name for evil passions.”

NOTES ON BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA (PART - 3)

Reasons for early decline of Buddhism

Buddhism’s decline was as fast as its rise. My view is that Buddhism’s decline cannot be attributed to any failings in the teachings but because of wrong interpretation of the teachings. We have seen how materialism pervaded the society at the time of Buddha. In the initial years of his life, Siddharth Gautama (or Buddha) fought all the materialistic forces while living within the society itself. So much so that he was made to live in a harem where all the female inhabitants had been instructed to seduce him with their charm. This was a clear example of material beckoning at its extreme. Likewise, he was the son of a king and had all the chances to exploit the wealth of his father. Yet he was fighting these evils while living in the society itself.

Later, when the Sakya Sangh ruled a war against Koliyas, he was seen to be against the decision of the majority. This angered the Sangh and the consequences of this led to Siddharth Gautama opting for Parivraja but only as a way out when compelled, as he wanted to adhere to his ideals and also save his family from confiscation of property or expulsion. Siddharth Gautama was a man of great principles and could not have comprised on truth.

Unfortunately, Siddharth Gautama’s compulsion to take Parivraja or sanyas was accepted as part of the Buddhist teachings. This was perhaps because renunciation by going to the forests or high altitude caves had remained a part of the believes of the people for a long time, even though Krishna had criticized such renunciation in Gita and said that true renunciation was to keep firm control over organs of action and senses and perform all acts for God, seeking nothing in return. Gita is replete with such teachings.

The followers of Buddha didn’t understand this at least initially. This led to hoards and hoards of new recruits to Buddhism starting to live in caves and hermitages, resulting in situation where all good teachings and knowledge got confined to these secluded hermitages and the common man continued to live in ignorance. Slowly, when these hermitages collapsed, the only link of the common men to the true teachings collapsed and Buddhism declined as quickly as it had emerged.

Why did the system of hermitages collapse? This happened because the way of life that these hermits had adapted was not the desired way of life as per Buddhism. Universality of religion lies in the ability of the entire society to accept and live that religion. Clearly, it was not possible for the entire society to start living in caves and hermitages. The initial zeal and enthusiasm made the adherents live a harsh life in such places. But when this died slowly or materialism started brewing inside those very monasteries, the entire structure started to crumble like a pack of cards.

They were doing all this in remembrance of Buddha whom people had seen passing from amongst themselves, with a shaven head, and clothes of a hermit and begging for food in a bowl. They didn’t realize that this was a life that Buddha was forced to live due to certain compulsions which were the consequence of his promise made to the Sangh.

One may ask at this juncture the reason for materialism making inroads into the Buddhist hermitages. The reason is simple. Buddha’s overzealous followers had tried to see his teachings as a new religion when in truth there were not. All Buddha had done was to remove the evils that had permeated in the society that believed in the Vedas. Several of those who accepted his teachings were Brahmins. But portraying Buddha’s teachings as a religion had a negative effect as several ardent believers of Vedas rejected the teachings. Therefore, a lot many serious people who would have otherwise contributed to development of Buddha’s teachings did not came under its fold. After Asoka’s conversion, the new recruits were mainly those who converted due to compulsion. A lot many of these entered the caves and hermitages and thereafter corrupted the entire system. Infighting, fight for supremacy, ego tussles and all other evils of a materialistic society entered these hermitages. This led to the entire system collapsing once Hindu kings replaced Asoka.

* * * * *