BUDDHA AS PRAGMATIC PHILOSOPHER INSTITUTING

SOCIAL HARMONY AND PEACE

P.D. Satya Pal,

Professor , Department of Anthropology,
Andhra University, Visakhapatnam.
C. Pradgna,
Professor of English, Dept. of Basic Sciences
and Humanities, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam.

Ever since the formation of human societies, peaceful and harmonious co-existence
has been the cherished ideal. However, history is replete with social conflicts, human
bondage, oppression and discrimination based on gender, race, class, caste, religion,
region etc., Amidst scores of philosophers postulating on human misery, Buddha stands tall
for his radical epistimo – psychological breakthrough shifting from substance thinking to
process thinking. He was the first to recognize that events arise under specific
conditions and cease with the cessation of these conditions. The arising of unwholesome
state of affairs can be prevented by the eradication of conditions giving rise to it. Instead
of engaging in abstract speculation about the extraterrestrial origins and purposes of the
universe and human existence, Buddha called for an empirical investigation into the actual
conditions. Debunking the Brahminical logic of innate nature and natural inequality, Buddha
dissects the very sources of oppression and declares that the naturalized Brahminical
culture of inequality in status, power and wealth as the causes of social disharmony and
conflict. Explaining the causal origination of the Brahminical society and the conditions in
creating and maintaining a society as ‘Alpajana sukhaya’, Buddha sets out to reconstitute
an equitable and harmonious society of ‘Bahujana sukhaya’ by rearranging the socio-
economic and political relations grounded on morality. This paper attempts to highlight
Buddha’s formulations of establishing a democratic society and to defend such
arrangement through proactive morality and constant vigil. This paper focuses on
Buddha’s scientific method as the panacea for the world’s suffering and disharmony.

***

All Philosophers attempt at understanding the nature of Truth/reality. Plato has

conferred a grand title to Philosophers as “Spectators of all time and all existence.” While
the Philosophers have been arguing where to see - whether to take a bird’s eye view of
Transcendentalist or a worm’s eye view with the Empiricist, Buddha has shown different
procedure from all other philosophers. For others, the starting point of investigation is a
thought, an idea, or a concept. The starting point of Buddha’s Philosophy is not a thought,
an idea, or concept but a feeling – the feeling of pain – physical and Mental suffering.

Pain is common for all beings and all beings strive to overcome its effects of
irritation. In animals irritation resulted in evolution and as a result the organism changes.
In the case of humans, the sensible existence (to think) has been developed to act as
human being. This makes us realize that there is suffering. It was Buddha, who explained
for the first time that “Where there is sensibility, there is suffering; without sensibility life
can’t exist”. Our infatuation with transitory pleasures makes us ignore this fact.
He also emphasized that Suffering warns us – It makes us think what we really
have to get rid off is not suffering, but the imperfection which suffering warns us is there.
Hence, the realization of suffering is important because it is a sign that we are not living as
we ought to live as human beings.

1
The Pragmatic Philosopher “Yathakari Tathavadi”:

Babasaheb Ambedkar says “Philosophy is no purely theoretical matter. It has

practical potentialities. Philosophy has its roots in the problems of life and whatever
theories philosophy propounds must return to society as instruments of reconstituting
society. It is not enough to know. Those who know must endeavor to fulfill”. Being the
teacher of Nibbana, Buddha did not lose sight of social problems of his day. He not only
analyzed and came up with the solutions to the problems but strived hard to put them in
action. The greatness of Buddha lies not just in espousing the foundations of a suffering
society and providing a way out but by carrying out the mission of emancipation, himself.
He operationalised his ideas into action for reconstituting society as practical (pragmatic)
philosopher. In fact he has heralded a cultural and psychological battle against the system
causing dehumanization, exploitation, coercion and suffering.

“Problems are never solved by ignoring them. The frank reorganization of a

difficulty is the first step towards overcoming it”. And the course of getting rid of
imperfection and attain perfection calls for rearranging things favorably. We clearly see
Buddha, not as a presenter of a doctrine, but tracing a problem, providing a method and
application of the method for transformation of society.

The Method:

Through his radical epistemo-psychological break through, the Buddha shifted the
point of departure for investigation, from substance thinking to process thinking. This shift
of emphasis is the revolution of Buddha, pointing towards the necessity to reconstruct the
society or the foundation of the social work.

Buddha’s mission is to dig out the very sources of oppression for critical
examination. By declaring that the mind is the master and thoughts are the causes of
deeds, good or bad – Buddha exhorts every human being to use reason and logic in
estimating the consequences of their actions. Thus an individual can understand the
sources of oppression and be liberated from the bondage of dogma and ignorance and
subservient position and can become an elevated human being. Creating people capable of
thinking is the starting point of Revolution

Buddha’s method confronts the Brahmanical dogma and its derivatives of

inequalities – social, economic and political. The Brahmin theory of Varna Dharma was, in
fact, an ingenious structural – functional explanation of society based on mythical
foundation. The Brahmanical cultural hegemony is an instance of Conscious and
determined minority creating conditions, in their favour, over an amorphous and ignorant
majority. Buddha propounded this contradiction as Alpajana vs. Bahujana and the
Bahujans as the victims in the schema of Colonization of mind and capturing social order.

Application on the Brahmanical System:

Brahminism is based on the theory that all realities and persons are hierarchically
stratified, according to their innate nature, as determined by Brahma. This view, though
couched in theological terms, is similar to the Aristotelian theory of intrinsic nature. The
absolute Self is similar to Plato’s theory of the Absolute Spirit. Plato taught that visible
realities are shadowy and partial reflections of Universal Ideas conceived by the Absolute
Spirit.

2
 Buddha questions the determination of social position based on innate nature. Like
an Anthropologist he explains - it is not nature that prevents people from changing their
life conditions, but culture. The Brahmins had naturalized culture to present social
reproduction of the division of labour as a natural occurrence, like biological reproduction of
different animal species.

The heart of the Buddha’s ethic is his doctrine of anatta or ‘no self’. It also shows
the emptiness of the Aristotelian theory of substances and innate natures. Human
existence is necessarily conditioned. Impermanence is an inevitable law of existence, but
the rise and dissolution of phenomena take place according to observable patterns and
regularities. “Events arise under specific conditions, and they cease with the cessation of
these conditions. The arising of an unwholesome state of affairs can be prevented by the
eradication of conditions giving rise to it”. The Buddha called for an empirical investigation
into actual conditions instead of engaging in abstract speculation about the extraterrestrial
origins and purposes of the universe and human existence.

His own experiences of the System might have enhanced his resolve. On one
occasion Buddha was refused food in a Brahman village as a teacher against their time
honoured tradition and institutions (Samyuttanikaya 1: 140). On another occasion he was
refused even water and that again in a Brahmin village (Udapana Sutta p.81).

Tackling the System:

The word jati has connotations of ‘birth’, ‘race’ or ‘species’ and Buddha preferred
term for various cultural or ethnic communities jana, meaning ‘people’ so as to take away
the implications of status. His dealt with the foundations of the Brahminical system and
tackled it on three points: infallible character of the Vedas, hereditary and the inherent
superiority. The Vedas were attributed an infallible status and the scriptural statements on
the inequal caste system are also considered as sacred and people did not dare to question
their validity. Buddha saw that the divine authority attributed to Vedas is the strongest
point that supported the Brahminical system. So he dealt the first and the severest blow at
it when he advised people not to accept anything on the mere authority of the scriptures.
In Kalama Sutta, we find that by advocating the rational method Buddha attacked the
fortifications made by Brahmins for safe guarding the in-equal social system.

The hereditary character of the Brahminical system based on the mythical theory of
creation in the Purusha Sukta of Rg Veda. Here we observe that the inequal social system
is closely entwined with the oppression of women. The myth of a resurrected male god,
mystically embodying the new society, effectively excluded women from the public sphere -
religious and secular. Women were declared ritually unclean and that the womb of women
produced only ‘an animal-like existence’, doomed to decay and death. The Brahmins had to
denounce women as a dangerous illusion and relegate them to the impermanent corporeal
realm because they were aware that life coming from her womb in practice undermined
their grand scheme of ‘reality’. In his discourse with Assalayana, Buddha reasons that ‘the
Brahmins have quite forgotten that their wives have their periods, are seen to be with
child, bring forth and nurse children. And how can the Brahmins claim that they are the
genuine children of Brahma, born from his mouth and his heirs?’ (Majjhima Nikaya II, page
84-85; Digha Nikaya III, page 78-79).

3
 Buddha also exploded the claims of inherent superiority of Brahmins through his
elaborations on several occasions and declares that “All four classes are on precisely the
same footing, and I see no difference at all between them”. (Majjhima Nikaya II page
44).In Assalayana Sutta, Buddha argues that the caste system was a local institution
brought into existence and maintained by a section of interested people. In Vassatta Sutta
he gave detailed explanation of the occupational character of caste system and revealed
that the caste distinctions maintained by the advocates of the system are without a basis.
Buddha set conduct as the criterion of superiority and inferiority. “It is not birth that
makes a man mean, nor is it birth that makes a man noble. It is the conduct that makes a
man mean, and it is the conduct that makes a man noble”.

Knowledge of the Beginnings:

The Agganna Sutta unravels the origins of the social division of labour. Buddha uses
the Law of Conditioned Co-Genesis as a method of historical explanation. The word
agganna literally means ‘with knowledge of beginnings’. The term was consciously used to
refute the spurious theory of creation propagated by the Brahmins. Buddha unravels step
by step the stages of social evolution that produced the stratified society of his day and he
offers a superlative archaeological-genealogical explanation. It is also a study on the
archaeology of power because Buddha explains how power differentials arose with the
emergence of property difference during a long historical process culminating in the rise of
monarchies and the state. Anthropologists and paleontologists today agree that the human
species spent the greater part of its existence on this planet hunting and gathering.
Buddha begins with human groups in this ‘primitive’ food-gathering stage.

Theory of Power and Social Contract:

Buddha was the first thinker in world history to formulate a theory of contractual
power. The Agganna Sutta is the earliest known discourse on politics where the source of
state power is traced to popular consensus. Buddha masterfully disclosed that the belief in
a permanent ultimate reality is fuelled by a compelling will-to-power. A ruler’s ‘first and
enduring title’ was Mahajana Sammate: The People’s Consensus. Buddha calls this ‘the
first constituting element’. In other words, the title indicates the historical genesis and
juridical basis of the rights to govern.

The second title and constituting element was ‘khattiya’. Buddha states that
originally the term meant ‘Lord of the Fields’. It was a function created by the people, not
a divine institution as the Brahmins claimed. The second title defined the nature and limits
of a ruler’s jurisdiction. He was given powers of ‘over lordship’ but not rights of
proprietorship over the people or lands. Thus Buddha was dealing with the agrarian
systems organized on different lines of gana-sanghas, gahapatis and monarchial kingdoms
and the emergence of new relations of production during his times. “What he counterposed
against the Brahmanical system of stratification based on inherent values was the reality of
economic differentiation, between those who controlled the means of production and those
who were themselves controlled by the controllers of the means of production”(Uma
Chakravarti,2004,p.17).

4
 He concluded the Agganna Sutta with this declaration: “Human beings are not
different from one another. They are equal, not unequal. This is in accordance with
Dhamma”. The Buddha’s ascending analysis of power demolishes conventional theories of
right. Interestingly, the method of popular consensus, the secret ballot system was
formulated by Buddha! The Vasettha and Agganna Suttas together provide the basic
principles for the formulation of a bill of fundamental human rights: All men and women
are equal according to a fundamental Law. Applying his basic explanatory principle of
conditioned co-genesis to social analysis, the Buddha discloses how, with maldistribution of
wealth and the rise of poverty, other unwholesome social conditions surface and
proliferates.

New Personality- New Social Order- Democratic Society:

The essence of Buddhism consists not in the removal of suffering- which is only
negative and incidental, but in the attainment of perfection, which is positive and
fundamental – establishing a democratic society. Dhamma or morality becomes the
bedrock of human personality as well as basis for the establishment of a human society.
“Dhamma is the path or method taught by the Buddha, for us to follow, in order to
maintain our human dignity and intelligence, to lead a noble and righteous way of life”.

New Personality is based on – Pradgna – competence; Sila - character and Karuna

- compassion. No longer filled with hatred, without the old social differences and labels to
divide them they address each other as ‘good being,’ not ‘you’ or ‘outcaste’ or ‘prince’.
Becoming aware of their common humanity, the ‘new humans’ resolve to create a new
society.

Sangha as a microcosm of democratic society:

Buddha established the Sangha promoting equality and brotherhood among the
members of his order. “Just so, O brethren, do these four castes – when they begin to
follow the doctrine and discipline … they renounce different names of castes and rank, and
become members of one and the same society” (Anguuttara Nikaya p.101). The Sangha is
open to all - Upali was son of barber, Sunita was an outcaste. Sati was the son of a
fisherman, Nanda was a cowherd, two Panthas were born out of wedlock to the daughter of
a noble and a slave, Kumara Kassapa was an orphan. Capa was the daughter of a deer-
stacker, Punna and Punnika were slave girls, Sumangalamata was the daughter of a worker
in rushes and Subha was the daughter of a smith.

All people were equal in the eye of the Compassionate One- He received alms from
members of all castes. In this connection the Buddha recommended what is known as the
rule of Sapadanacariya i.e., going from door to door for alms without leaving any house in
between on grounds of caste, rank and position. It is a remarkable fact that the Buddha
received his last meal from Cunda-the smith, a man of low caste. We have an instance of
this case in the episode of Ananda and Candalika. When Ananda went with his bowl for
water Candalika refused it on ground that she was an outcaste girl. In reply Ananda said
that he wanted water and he had nothing to do with her caste.

Buddhism seeks liberation of human beings from any psychological and social
conditioning, while the caste system demands complete subordination to imposed social
order thereby denying any choice for an individual to be free from that social order.

5
 Radha Krishnan wraps up the revolution of Buddha “By putting spiritual
brotherhood in place of hereditary priesthood, personal merit in place of distinctions of
birth, logical reason in place of Vedic revelation, moral life in place of ceremonial piety, and
the perfected sage above gods, Buddha provoked the wrath of the Hindu priests who
regarded him as an anti-social force. What made Buddha and his followers’ unpardonable
heretics in the eyes of the Brahmin priests is the social revolution they preached. There is
nothing in the doctrine of Buddha which cannot be reconciled with Hindu thought; but the
conflict between a social system based on Brahminical supremacy and one which denied it
is radical”.

Buddha wanted to bring about a radical change in the social order and that by a
peaceful revolution, revolution of thought. Buddha took an impartial and enlightened view
of the matter- while advocating the case of the down-trodden people the Buddha saw to it
that no prejudice was entertained against other. He regarded both the wronged and
the wrong doers as victims to an evil system. Both of them were objects of his
compassion. So to represent Tathagata as the champion of one class or caste as against
the other is to do injustice to his greatness. His concern is to elevate human beings
languishing in the systemic sub-human conditions to the highest humane level. Impact of
his psychological revolution can be seen in three important areas- Education for all,
Equality between sexes and Rule by Sudras.

Constant Vigil:
Buddha warns that even in the most perfect of societies, the law of anicca will
prevail. The true realm of freedom can blossom if people live according to Dhamma but
always with this realm of necessity and impermanence as its basis. The Buddha did not
make promises he could not keep nor raise hopes he could not fulfill. He remained
resolutely and realistically on ‘this side’ of the threshold of hope.

In Indian society today the existence of a democratic Constitution recognizing

cultural pluralism is by no means an indication that the society has a democratic culture. In
spite of legal abolition, the Brahminical Caste system still organizes the people of this
country against the Constitutional Morality of equality, liberty and fraternity.

Therefore, to establish democratic society is the goal set for us by Buddha. It

requires Positive reconstruction of society on democratic ideals of Social democracy and
economic democracy – one man one value. Morality is not passive, it is pro active. To
defend democracy, in its true sense, becomes the moral duty of every Buddhist.

Unless we start practicing what we want to achieve, how can we get them? We
form a new society in the process of becoming. We practice them first.