The Buddha, a Humanist?

By Norman Joseph [Jou] Smith 13/4/2004 Committee Member of the Humanist Society of Queensland 2004. There seems to be much ignorance around regarding many things. In fact we could say that the religion of ignorance is the biggest in the world. I would like to think that most of the readers of this would not accept the saying, Ignorance is bliss. We would know for ourselves, as Humanists, that there are many misconceptions about what Humanists believe and do. What would that be based on, but ignorance? Stereotypes based on ignorance. Ignorance fuels fear, fear of the unknown and fear fuels humanitys mistreatment of itself and others [through greed and hatred], i.e. the breaking of the golden rule found in many religions. I think this is why I see such a strong emphasis on education amongst Humanists. I have met some Humanists that are anti-religious and some that are nonreligious and think the latter approach a more educated one. If anyone, or any movement is to have any positive effect on the world at large, I think it will have to work towards unity not division. To do so one would need to focus on the commonalities, not the differences. Those that I have met that are anti-religious would not seem to be able to acknowledge ANY good in religion. From that stance I doubt common ground could be found. In fact this would be exactly the attitude those religious fundamentalists have to other groups. The process of demonizing the other [and the correlative of deifying oneself], would not be limited to religious fundamentalists and it would be based on ignorance and fear. To focus on the commonalities one would first have to clarify commonalities of what? There is a big difference between Buddhism and the Buddhas teaching, just as there is between Christianity and Christs teaching. For example, with the latter, of which most of you would be more familiar, we can find two peoples calling themselves Christian, or followers of Christ, killing each other, despite Christ teaching not to kill [Matt. 26:52], but to love [John 15:12]. Closer to home we have Christians spending much time judging others, when Christ taught not to judge [Matt. 7:1] and taught that he himself did not come to judge, but to save [John 12:47].1 The teaching of the Buddha, as distinct from Buddhism, is one of those things around which I have found much ignorance and I have written a book called The Gift of the Buddha a Happy Life [yet to be published] to try to dispel some of that ignorance. The Buddhist tradition knows that his teaching is said to be for
1

There seems to be two types of judgment in the New Testament, judging people, which is opposed and judging behaviour, to which one is told to judge rightly [not just by appearance, John 7:24]. Matt. 7:16 says by their fruits you will know them, but fruit has an application other than action: The Fruit of the Spirit [Gal. 5:22], which are harder to see, not such a superficial thing as action.

Page 1 of 5

this very life, but much of its interpretation thereof is not applicable to this very life. One of the important teachings of the Buddha is ignorance is the cause of suffering and this might be a common ground shared with Humanists. [Popular] Buddhism says the Buddha taught that desire is the cause, but I consider that a corruption. Both ideas can be found in the early texts, but a core teaching, Dependent Origination, traces suffering back beyond desire to ignorance 2. This core teaching is also interpreted in popular Buddhism in a way that its relevance for this life is missed. One of the teachings ascribed to the Buddha in the early texts, which I think is authentic, or uncorrupted is the teaching to the Kalama people3. It has been called the Buddhas Charter of Free Inquiry and I think it is a teaching that could be accepted by any Humanist. In it the Buddha lists ten things that could be used to gather circumstantial evidence and which the Buddha discourages as taking as final authority they are: 1. Report 2. Legend 3. Tradition 4. Scripture 5. Logical conjecture 6. Inference 7. Analogy 8. Agreement through pondering views 9. Probability 10. The thought, 'This is our teacher. What he suggests instead is When you know for yourselves, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' -then you should abandon them. So I take this as the Buddha advocating personal experience as the final authority. Though personal experience would not be limited to experiencing them directly oneself, but also the experience of seeing others affected by them. I do not see that this teaching is saying that those ten things are useless, but one may come to an hypothesis via information in them and then one must see if it works in experience. He then goes on to ask the Kalama people: Does greed, hatred and delusion arise in someone for benefit or harm. They reply, harm. "And this deluded person, overcome by greed, hatred, or delusion, his mind possessed by delusion, kills, steals, goes after another person's spouse, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering?" They reply, yes. He questions whether they are unskillful etc. as above. They reply, yes. Then he goes on to address the opposite case, avoiding greed, hatred and delusion, one
2 3

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel277.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel008.html

Page 2 of 5

avoids those behaviours and it is for benefit not harm, so one should develop that. The Buddha taught three kinds of action: mental, verbal and bodily and out of these three he said he found mental action as the most reprehensible for harm to oneself and others4. In this way he agreed with Cognitive Behavioural Psychology. In the Kalama discourse he addresses these three kinds of action in the reverse, first the grossest, the easiest to identify, then going to the subtler. Having addressed bodily [killing, stealing, sexual misconduct] and verbal action [lying] he then addressed mental action, but in the positive. He spoke of the four exalted dwellings [or divine abodes] and related them to life here and now. The four are boundless indiscriminate thoughts of: loving kindness, empathetic sadness, empathetic gladness and equanimity. Usually the divine abodes were and are thought of things we achieve in the NEXT life, not THIS one, but in the Kalama discourse the Buddha shows how they are relevant to this life, no matter ones belief about an afterlife. 1. Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result [vipaaka], of deeds [kamma/karma] done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss. 2. Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself. 3. Suppose evil results befall an evil-doer (in this very life). I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill results affect me who do no evil deed? 4. Suppose evil results do not befall an evil-doer (in this very life). Then I see myself purified in any case. Rather than arguing about something that cannot be proven or disproven, something that one believes or not, an afterlife, the Buddha shows how irrespective or our beliefs, what matters is how we live, HERE AND NOW, IN THIS VERY LIFE. This, I believe, is the type of approach we need to work and live together recognizing what is important, how we want to live and not getting caught up in what is not, arguing about our beliefs. There is another well-known teaching where the Buddha converted religious ritual into practical life skills5, where a young man was getting up early and going out to pay respects [bowing] to the six directions of north, south, east, west, up and down out of respect for his fathers dying wish. The Buddha associated each direction with relationships the youth had with others in society and that to pay

4 5

Paali PTS M i 373 = M 56 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn31.html

Page 3 of 5

respects to the directions was to fulfill ones duties to each of the directions, i.e. relationships. These teachings are very consistent with the report that one on the path to enlightenment will have given up three fetters: identity view, doubt and attachment to rites and rituals6. The first of these two being internally focused are almost impossible to see in others, but if you want any evidence that Buddhism and the Buddhas teaching are very different, just go to a Buddhist temple and see the ritual. Finally to show that his teaching is for this human life we find this quote: Mendicants, for a faithful disciple who is intent on fathoming the Teachers Teaching, it is proper that he conduct himself thus: Willingly let, only my skin, sinews and bones remain and let my flesh and blood dry up on my body, by my energy shall not be relaxed so long as I have not attained what can be attained by manly strength, manly energy, manly persistence.7 In my opinion, one of the erroneous views of the Buddhas teaching is that he spoke of past lives and that is run with in later texts where the Buddha had many lives and they were not all human. The early text8 that is used as a support for this doctrine does not mention lives (jiivitaani) at all in the original Indian language. The closest word to life found there is aayu, which means life span, age, period of life. The other words translated as past lives are pubbenivaasam. which means past habitations or past dwellings. So the text could read as he recalled his past [the past of his life], his many habitations, his many births, he saw death at the end of one phase of life and birth into another, over and over again and knew, this is suffering [stress]. I think this is just one of the many examples of people talking about the Buddhas teaching when they have not studied it, i.e. speaking in ignorance. Birth, I suggest has a psychological meaning in the Buddhas teaching, just like world which is said to be found in this fathom long body with its senses and perceptions 9. I see birth as forging an identity by identifying with one aspect of experience and disregarding or suppressing the others and therefore creating stress and tension within oneself. The five aspects of experience that the Buddha says we cling to in this way are: form, sensation, ideas, formations and discernment. This is why he so often encouraged us not to think I am [not] one of those five things, but to see all of them as they really are, i.e. to clearly know ones experience in the present moment.

6 7

Paali PTS S v 61, A V 17 Paali PTS M i 480-481 : MN 70 8 Paali PTS M i 22-23 = MN 4 9 Paali PTS A iv 45

Page 4 of 5

Of course some of you may be familiar with the idea that birth in at least Christian religious circles has a psychological meaning, e.g. when Nicodemus and Jesus spoke [John 3:3-8]. It may just be that some religious teachers were trying to work with common ground, from within religious traditions, trying to bring change by giving deeper more relevant meanings to words/ideas in those religious traditions. It is much easier and requires less investigation, patience and willingness to see good in others, just to judge it all as useless and advocate the end of religion. So I hope you see that there are many ideas about what the Buddha taught and what Buddhism is, just as there are many ideas of what Humanism is and what Humanists do. Some ideas are more informed than others. It is very easy to make stereotypes and judge the whole thing as useless and thereby throw the baby out with the bathwater. I hope as Humanists we are more willing to listen, in vestigate and see the humanity in all of humankinds endeavours.

Page 5 of 5