What the Buddha Taught

I am going to divide it into several sections to acheive my 30 acceptable entries before putting advertisements

this is the first section

 

The Buddha

 

The Buddha, whose name was Siddhartha, and their family name was Gotama, lived in North India in the 6th century B.C. His father, Suddhodana, was the ruler of the kingdom of the Sakyas (in modern Nepal). His mother was Queen Maya. According to the custom of the time, he was married relatively young, at the age of sixteen, to a beautiful and devoted young princess named Yasodhara. The young prince lived in his palace with every luxury at his command. But all of a sudden, confronted with the reality of life and the suffering of humanity, he decided to find the solution to this universal suffering.  At 29, soon after the birth of his only child, Rahula, he left his kingdom and became an ascetic in search of this solution.

           For six years, the ascetic Gotama wandered about the valley of the Ganges, meeting famous religious teachers, studying and following their systems and methods, and submitting himself to rigorous ascetic practices.  They did not satisfy him.  So, he abandoned all traditional religions and their methods and went his own way.  It was thus that one evening, seated under a tree(since then known as the Bodhi- or Bo-tree, “the Tree of Wisdom’) on the bank of the river Neranjara at Buddha-Gaya (nearly in modern Bihar), at the age of 35, Gotama attained Enlightenment, after which he was known as the Buddha, “The Enlightened One’.

           After his Enlightenment, Gotama the Buddha delivered his first sermon to a group of five ascetics, his old colleagues, in the Deer Park at Ispatana (modern Sarnath) near Benares. From that day, for 45 years, he taught all classes of men and women-kings and peasants, Brahmins and outcasts, bankers and beggars, holy men and robbers-without making the slightest distinction between them.  He recognized no differences in caste or social groupings, and the way he preached was open to all men and women who were ready to understand and follow it.

           The Buddha passed away at Kusinara (in modern Uttar Pradesh, India) at  80.

           Today, Buddhism is found in Ceylon, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Tibet, China, Japan, Mongolia, Korea, Formosa, some parts of India, Pakistan, and Nepal, and also in Russia. The world's Buddhist population is over 500 million.

                                            

CHAPTER 1

 

THE BUDDHIST ATTITUDE OF MIND

 

Among the founders of religions, the Buddha (if we are permitted to call him the founder of a religion in the widespread sense of the term) was the only teacher who did not claim to be other than a human being, pure and simple.  Other teachers were either God or his incarnations in different forms or inspired by him.  The Buddha was not only human; he claimed no inspiration from any god or external power either.  He attributed all his realizations and achievements to human endeavour and intelligence.  Only a man can become a Buddha.  Every man has within himself the potentiality of becoming a Buddha if he so wills it and endeavours.  We can call the Buddha a man of excellence.  He was so perfect in his ‘human-ness’ that he came to be regarded later in popular religion almost as ‘super-human.’

           According to Buddhism, man's position is supreme. He is his master; no higher being or power judges his destiny.

           ‘One is one’s refuge; who else could be the refuge?’ said the Buddha.  He admonished his disciples to ‘be a refuge to themselves’ and never to seek refuge in or help from anybody else.  He taught, encouraged and stimulated each person to develop and work out his emancipation, for man can liberate himself from all bondage through effort and intelligence.  The Buddha says: ‘You should do your work, for the Tathagatas only teach the way.  If the Buddha is to be called a ‘saviour,’ it is only in the sense that he discovered and showed the Path to Liberation, Nirvana.  But we must tread the Path ourselves.

            The Buddha allows freedom to his disciples on this principle of individual responsibility.  In the Mahapainibbanasutta, the Buddha says that he never thought of controlling the Sangha9Order of Monks) nor did he want the Sanhs to depend on him.  He said there was no esoteric doctrine in his teaching, nothing hidden in the ‘closed fist of the teacher’ or,  in other words, there was never anything ‘up his sleeve.’

           The freedom of thought allowed by the Buddha is unheard of elsewhere in the history of religions.  This freedom is necessary because, according to the Buddha, man’s emancipation depends on his realization of Truth and not on the benevolent grace of a god or any external power as a reward for his obedient good behaviour.

           The Buddha once visited a small town called Kesaputta in the kingdom of Kosala.  The inhabitants of this town were known by the common name Kalama.  When they heard that the Buddha was in their village, the Kalamas visited him and told him: ‘Sir,  some recluses and Brahmanas visit Kesaputta. They explain and illumine their doctrines and despise, condemn and spurn others’ doctrines.  Then come other recluses and Brahmanas, who explain and illumine only their doctrines and despise, condemn and spurn others’ doctrines.  But, for us, Sir, we always have doubt and perplexity as to who among these venerable recluses and brahmans spoke the truth and who spoke falsehood.’

           Then the Buddha gave them this advice, unique in the history of religions: ‘Yes, Kalamas, it is proper that you have doubt, that you have perplexity, for a doubt has arisen in a doubtful matter.  Now, look at you, Kalamas; do not be led by reports, tradition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea: ‘this is our teacher.’  But, O Kalamas, when you know that certain things are unwholesome, wrong, and bad, give them up...And when you know that certain things are wholesome and good, accept and follow them.’

           The Buddha went even further. He told the bhikkhus that a disciple should examine even the Tathagata (buddha) himself so that he (the disciple) might be fully convinced of the actual value of the teacher he followed.

           According to the Buddha’s teaching, doubt is one of the five Hindrances to a clear understanding of Truth and spiritual progress.  Doubt, however, is not a ‘sin’ because Buddhism has no articles of faith.  There is no ‘sin’ in Buddhism, as sin is understood in some religions.  The root of all evil is ignorance and false views. Undeniably, as long as there is doubt, perplexity, and wavering, no progress is possible.  It is also undeniable that there must be doubt as long as one does not understand or see clearly.  But to progress further, it is essential to see things.  But to progress further, it is necessary to get rid of doubt.  To get rid of doubt, one has to see things.

           There is no point in saying that one should not doubt or believe.  To say ‘I believe’ does not mean you understand and see.  When a student works on a mathematical problem, he comes to a stage beyond which he does not know how to proceed, where he is in doubt and perplexity; as long as he has this doubt, he cannot proceed.  If he wants to proceed, he must resolve this doubt.  And there are ways of determining that doubt.  To say ‘I believe’ or ‘I do not doubt’ will not solve the problem.  To force oneself to believe and accept a thing without understanding is political, not spiritual or intellectual.

           The Buddha was always eager to dispel doubt.  Even just a few minutes before his death, he requested his disciples several times to ask him if they had any doubts about his teaching and not to feel sorry later that they could not clear those doubts.  But the disciples were silent.  What he said then was touching: ‘If it is through respect for the Teacher that you do not ask anything, let even one of you inform his friend’ (i.e., let one tell his friend so that the latter may ask the question the other’s behalf).

           The freedom of thought and the tolerance allowed by the Buddha are astonishing to the students of the history of religions.  Once in Nalanda, a prominent and wealthy householder named Upali, a well-known lay disciple of Nigantha Nataputta, was expressly sent by Maavira himself to meet the Buddha and defeat him in an argument on specific points in the theory of karma because the Buddha’s views on the subject were different from those of Mahavira.  Contrary to expectations, Upali, at the end of the discussion, was convinced that the views of the Buddha were correct and his master's were wrong.  So, he begged the Buddha to accept him as one of his lay disciples.  But the Buddha asked him to reconsider it and not be in a hurry, for ‘considering carefully is good for well-known men like you.’  When Upali expressed his desire again, the Buddha requested him to continue to respect and support his old religious teachers as he used to.

           In the third century B.C., the great Buddhist Emperor Asoka of India, following this noble example of tolerance and understanding, honoured and supported all other religions in his vast empire.  In one of his Edicts carved on rock, the original of which one may read even today, the Emperor declared: ‘One should not honour only one’s religion and condemn the religions of others, but one should honour others’ religions for this or that reason.  By so doing, one helps one’s religion to grow and renders service to the religions of others, too.  In acting otherwise, one digs the grave of one’s religion and also harms other religions.  Whosoever honours his religion and condemns other religions does so indeed through devotion to his religion, thinking, “I will glorify my religion.” On the contrary, in so doing, he injures his religion more gravely.  So concord is good: Let all listen and be willing to listen to the doctrines professed by others.

           We should add here that this spirit of sympathetic understanding should be applied today not only to religious doctrine but also to other matters.

           This spirit of tolerance and understanding has been one of the most cherished ideals of Buddhist culture and civilization from the beginning. That is why there is not a single example of persecution or the shedding of a drop of blood in converting people to Buddhism or in propagating it during its long history of 2500 years. It spread peacefully all over the continent of Asia, having more than 500 million adherents today. Violence in any form, under any pretext whatsoever, is absolutely against the teaching of the Buddha.

           The question has often been asked: Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy? It does not matter what you call it.  Buddhism remains what it is, whatever label you may put on it.  The label is immaterial.  Even the label ‘Buddhism,’ which we give to the teaching of the Buddha, is of little importance.  The name one gives it is inessential.

           What’s in a name? That which we call a rose,

           By any other name, it would smell as sweet.

In the same way, Truth needs no label: it is neither Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, or Moslem. It is not the monopoly of anybody. Sectarian labels are a hindrance to the independent understanding of Truth, and they produce harmful prejudices in men’s minds.

This is true not only in intellectual and spiritual matters but also in human relations. When, for instance, we meet a man, we do not regard him as a human being but put a label on him, such as English, French, German, American, or Jew, and regard him with all the prejudices associated with that label in our mind. Yet he may be completely free from those attributes that we have put on him.

People are so fond of discriminative labels that they even put them on human qualities and emotions common to all.  So they talk of different ‘brands’ of charity, for example, of Buddhist charity or Christian charity, and look down upon other ‘brands’ of charity.  But charity cannot be sectarian; it is neither Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or Moslem. A mother's love for her child is neither Buddhist nor Christian; it is mother love.  Human qualities and emotions like love, charity, compassion, tolerance, patience, friendship, desire, hatred, ill-will, ignorance, conceit, etc., need no sectarian labels; they belong to no particular religions.