Some Buddhist Thoughts on Good Governance

Venerable U Bodhinyana

Governance is now one of the most frequently discussed issues among academicians, policy
makers, civil society, governance analysts and international development communities even
though as a system of exercising authority in individual and collective activities it is as old as
human society. There are differences in the interpretations of governance, but the core content of
the term remains almost similar that refers to “the process of decision making and the process by
which decisions are implemented (or not implemented)”.

The phrase ‘good governance’ may be literally defined as the system of ‘good control’, ‘good
administration’ or ‘good management’, which is universally accepted by all as an ideology for
running a government or a state. In a wider term, the ‘good governance’ can be defined in terms
of eight major characteristics: (i) participation; (ii) adherence to the rule of law; (iii)
transparency; (iv) responsiveness; (v) a consensus oriented approach; (vi) equity and
inclusiveness; (vii) effectiveness and efficiency; and (viii) accountability. The website of the
ESCAP provides the following chart, showing the eight characteristics of ‘good governance’
thus:

The present paper makes an attempt to develop a framework of good governance from Buddhist
perspective based on the salient features from Tipitaka (Tripitak). Buddhism appeared as a revolt
against rigid class and caste based society in India, Buddha was the crown prince and was at the
apex of the authority structure. While he discovered the disparity and sufferings of the people, he
left the palace in search of an alternative way for the salvation of the suffering beings and after
being endowed with enlightenment he propagated his doctrine which he named as Dhamma
Vinaya now we call it Buddhism after the name of Buddha. Dhamma means truth, righteous and
Vinaya means rules, ideals and standard of behavior.

I think the appropriate Pali word for ‘good governance’ in English is ‘dhammappasasana’
(dharmaprasasana in Sanskrit and Shushasan in Bangla), a compound, which comes from two
words: dhamma (virtue/law/ righteous) + pasasana (governance). The word pasasana in Pali or
prasasana in Skt. is equivalent to ‘governance or administration’ in English, so the word
dhammappasasana’ (Skt=dharmaprasasana) translates exactly as ‘an administration or
governance with the dhamma’.

A modern nation is a place of radical plurality - political affiliation, plurality of faith and
religion, economic status, sexuality, ethnicity, culture and ability. The question of how to
manage this diverse plurality is a major challenge for any government. Different words and
phrases have been coined to describe the task of making a nation harmonious: integration;
cohesion; regeneration; renewal; capacity-building; gaining stakeholder confidence; co-
responsibility; co-existence.

What can the insights of Buddhism offer to this? Can what he taught speak to a modern world?
Buddhists would say it can for two main reasons: the context of India in the fifth century BCE
was not completely unlike the twenty first century; the teaching of the Buddha transcends the
particular and can speak to the human condition throughout time. Buddhism was successful in
India because it offered something for the whole of society. Not only did the Buddha call upon
people to leave their families to follow him as celibate members of an Order, he also advised
rulers and inspired many who remained deeply involved in family life. He did this against a
backdrop of growing urbanisation, economic change and a plethora of competing beliefs and
ideologies.

Before moving to this, let me offer a word about the spread of Buddhism after the Buddha's
death. As it spread from India to the north, south and east, it interacted with the cultures and
religions it met. It grew into itself what could be made Buddhist and was influenced by other
philosophies. Buddhism as we know it today, therefore, is incredibly diverse. He denounces
castes, and values a person not from his birth, social status, race, colour, sex, muscle power and
wealth but rather in accord with his moral behaviour.

Some scholars divide Buddhism into Southern or Theravada Buddhism (followed in Burma,
Cambodia, Laos, Sri Lanka, Thailand including the Buddhist of Bangladesh), Northern or
Buddhism (Tibet, Bhutan, Sikhism, Mongolia) and Eastern Buddhism (China, Japan, Korea,
Vietnam). The last two can also be generally called Mahayana Buddhism. All these forms are
now present in Australia, Europe and in America and new ones too are up. In this paper I will
draw mainly, but not exclusively, on Pali text (Tipitaka, Sanskrit-Tripitak) the Theravada
Buddhist canon.

The concept of governance is as old as human civilization. Good governance is neither Buddhist
nor non-Buddhist in character. It is the common interest of everyone and of all civilizations.
Good governance is an ideal that is difficult to achieve in its totality. Over the centuries, the
teachings of the Buddha on the law of karma have had an enormous influence on the culture and
life of the people. For the philosophy not only addresses questions of development, but also
governance. Drawing spiritual inspiration from the Buddha’s “Middle Path Approach”, the
philosophy provides principles for appropriate conduct based on moderation, reasonableness,
self-awareness and wisdom.

As individuals, communities, businesses and nations are in search of an appropriate development

strategy embrace this “Middle Path”, it is a matter of finding the right balance at each level to
build a firm foundation to face the challenges of the modern world. Through promoting moral
values, the approach also aims to strengthen society’s moral fibre. And through such a holistic
approach to human development, one inspired by Buddhist principles, we believe we will attain
our goal of a more just, more equitable and more sustainable society.

Good governance and the Buddha’s teachings have never been more relevant. ‘Good
governance’ nowadays encompasses corporate governance, local governance, national
governance, and international governance. It is intimately involved with decision-making and the
process through which decisions are implemented. Only could we ensure development in every
sphere of life for the people, for good governance, peace and development are interlinked. With a
peaceful heart, peaceful actions would become a real possibility for individuals and for a
peaceful society at large. The Five Precepts (abstain from taking life, stealing, sexual
misconduct, false speech and drug), which are the very basic moral codes of a Buddhist,
emphasize the respect for life, property and family; responsible speech; and mindful
consumption of food and drinks. A just society is also one in which there is no divine right for
one group over another, all are considered equal in terms of the law of karma.

It is clear from the foregoing comments that the teachings of the Buddha are in tune with, and
have contributed to, the practice of good governance and the promotion of development. As the
“Middle Path Approach” continues to inspire us toward new paradigms of sustainable
development and building peaceful and just societies, all of us are enjoined to help ensure the
ongoing contribution of Buddhism to uplifting the spirit of humanity. In Buddhism, a king like
all other human beings is born in this world following his past deeds. He is never regarded as
incarnation of One and Supreme Creator as believed in the Vedic traditions. At Jataka I, 132, the
Pali text mentions the word sammutideva, as referring to a king. The word actually means simply
‘the conventional god’ or ‘god in the public opinion’, not the god by birth at all. More
importantly, once he ascends to the throne, it does not mean that he will be respected or
worshiped by all peoples wholeheartedly without obstructions or opponents who may plot to
overthrow him. To guarantee that he will be widely accepted and revered by his subjects for
many years, the Buddha states that he must strictly follow various virtues as mentioned by him
on various occasions in the Pāli Canonical texts.

In the Agganna Sutta of the Digha Nikaya, the Buddha stresses that the evolution of the human
society beings as a result of necessity, and not at the will of any divine forces. The raja or
khattiya are selected on account of their righteousness and ability. People have freedom to
choose the most virtuous and able man to be their leader. He may be overthrown from the
kingship if he is later known to be immoral and incapable. This means that the virtues and
efficiency of a king are important.

At Jataka V, 378, the Buddha clearly states that a good king has to follow strictly the “tenfold
virtue of the ruler” (dasavidha-rajadhamma) – that head or chiefs or rulers of people, countries,
nation or other organs are purposed to hold. It moves us from ethics to statecraft by using the
dramatis personae to expound palace life from a management studies perspective. It provides job
descriptions and flow-charts of responsibility for the king and for his subordinates which is
stated as follows:
 1. Dana (charity) — being prepared to sacrifice one's own pleasure for the well-being of the
public, such as giving away one's belongings or other things to support or assist others,
including giving knowledge and serving public interests.
2. Sila (morality) — practicing physical and mental morals, and being a good example of
others.
3. Pariccaga (altruism), being generous and avoiding selfishness, practicing altruism.
4. Ajjava (honesty) — being honest and sincere towards others, performing one's duties
with loyalty and sincerity to others.
5. Maddava (gentleness) — having gentle temperament, avoiding arrogance and never
defaming others.
6. Tapa (self restraining) — destroying passion and performing duties without indolence.
7. Akkoda (non-anger) — being free from hatred and remaining calm in the midst of
confusion.
8. Avihimsa (non-violence) — exercising non-violence, not being vengeful.
9. Khanti (forbearance) — practicing patience, and trembling to serve public interests.
10. Avirodhana (uprightness) — respecting opinions of other persons, avoiding prejudice and
promoting public peace and order.

Apart from this, at Digha Nikaya, II, 196, and III, 223, the king must not have any partiality or
slanted views against his subjects as the ruler of the country. He must spread the brahma vihara -
Four Sublime States of Mind towards all living creatures, animals and humans alike:
1. Metta (Sanskrit, Maitri): caring, loving kindness displayed to all;
2. Karuna: compassion or mercy, the special kindness shown to those who suffer;
3. Mudita: sympathetic joy, being happy for others, without a trace of envy;
4. Uppekha (Upeksa): equanimity or levelness, the ability to accept others as they are.

At Digha Nikaya III,182,288, the king who rules the country must try to avoid the Four Biases or
Prejudices (agati) against his subjects, no matter where they live and what colour skin they may
have, namely,
1. chandagati - biases because of like;
2. dosagati - biases because of dislike;
3. mohagati - biases because of delusion or stupidity; and
4. bhayagati - biases because of fear.
This means he must, equally and fairly, take care of every subject in his kingdom.

At Samyukta Nikaya, I, 76, King Pasenadi Kosala performed one of the Hindu Great Sacrifices
(yajna in Skt and yanna in Pali), in which he ordered to be killed five hundreds of bull, five
hundreds of male bullocks, five hundreds of female bullocks, five hundreds of goats, and five
hundreds of rams, in order to establish himself as a universal monarch. The passage in the
Tipitaka along with its commentary, explains various kinds of animal and human sacrifices of
Vedic origin performed during the Buddha’s lifetime. Upon knowing of this sacrifice, the
Buddha rejects all these rituals outright. At Digha Nikaya I,127 ff, Buddha condemns all the
animal sacrifices as inefficacious. On the other hand, the Buddha praises all other sacrifices in
which no living being is injured, all the labour is voluntary, and no regrets are felt at any stage of
performing them. Several sacrifices which are mentioned in the Pali Canon are traceable to
Vedic texts, which were presumed to be the revelation from God.
The Buddha had an entirely different and more realistic concept of kings and Kingship and to the
modern government systems. In the Agganna Sutta he put forward a social contract theory of
monarchy. In ancient days, he said, people saw the need for some form of government and so
they elected from amongst themselves a person who they thought would be best able to rule
them. According to the Hindu myth, the first king of India was Mahasammata, a name which the
Buddha reinterpreted in support of his idea to mean ‘elected by the majority’ (Digha Nikaya III,
93; Jataka II, 352). Thus according to the Buddhist theory, kings derived their legitimacy from
general consent, i.e. from the people (of the people, by the people, for the people) they ruled. It
followed from this that a king retained his right to rule only for so long as his subjects benefited
from it. Several stories in the Jataka implicitly suggest that people had a right to overthrow a
king who was cruel, unjust or incompetent (Jataka I, 326; III, 513-14; VI, 156).

One stereotype of Buddhism is that it is about individual well-being and peace only. Yes it may
be one of the core components of his teaching. There are other dimensions of his teachings that
Buddha had equally emphasised — for the economic well beings, for social harmony and, also
for the political peace and development. As we see the aristocratically-born Buddha is seen as an
adviser to kings and political leaders, in times of war and conflict. The Buddha himself went to
the field of battle and intervened personally to prevent war, as in the case of Sakyas and the
Koliyas who were prepared to fight over the distribution of waters of river Rohini. He said “O
Kings! What is more valuable water or blood?” They said “Ven. Sir, blood is much more
valuable”. Then the Buddha admonished them, “For the sake of some water, which is of little
value, you should not destroy your lives which are of so much value. Why do you take this
unwholesome course of action?” The Buddha never encouraged war of any type. For three
consecutive times Buddha went alone to the frontiers of Kosala and Sakya as the two countries
campaigned for war and was preventer it. Upon the fourth attempt the Lord Buddha realised the
moment was near, the impending evil karma of the Sakyas could not save them of their
destruction. Thus began the day of the wholesale massacre of the Sakyas.

And one of the necessary qualities in order to ensure the well-being of society as laid down by
the Buddha is that the rulers must gather in harmony, conduct affairs in harmony and disperse in
harmony. There are several social principles which contribute to the strength of social order and
harmony. Among those principles, seven foundations for social prosperity as given to Vajjian
republic (known asVajj-aparihaniyadhamma) are well known:
1. To hold regular and frequent assemblies;
2. To meet together in harmony, disperse in harmony and carry out business in harmony;
3. Not authorise what has not been authorized but proceed according to what has been
authorized but abide by the original principles;
4. Honour, respect, revere and salute the elders, and consider them worthy of listening to;
5. Women and girls are not forced and abducted to live with men;
6. To honour, respect, revere and salute the religious shrines at home and abroad, and do not
neglect those righteous ceremonies held before them; and
7. To provide proper protection and support for Saints (Arahats), so that such Saints may
come in future to live there while those already there may live in comfort.

A question may be raised: has there been any king in the world who has followed the Buddhist
ideology of kingship strictly? The answer is ‘Yes, there is’. In Indian history, King Asoka the
Great is reputed as having followed it strictly. Apart from supporting Buddhist monks in various
ways as a good Buddhist should do, the king appointed his officers for propagating Buddhism
among the general public. These officers were known as dharmamahamatras. Buddhist tradition
says he built 84,000 stupas throughout his empire over the sacred relics of the Buddha. In
addition, he observed the first Buddhist precept. Thus, in his first Rock-Edict the king clearly
states: hida no kicchi jive alabhitu pajohitaviye: ‘Here no living being must be killed and
sacrificed’.

He is also portrayed as having tried to be a vegetarian by minimising the killing of animals for
his food. The text lucidly says: ‘Formerly in the kitchen of King Devanam Priyadarsin many
hundred thousands of animals were killed daily for curry. But now, when this prescript on
morality is caused to be written, then only three lives are being killed viz., two peacocks and one
deer, but even this deer not regularly. Even these three shall not be killed in future.’

One of the major rock edicts of Asoka concerns relationships between religions and beliefs, and
contains these words: “But beloved-of-the Gods, King Piyadasi, do not value gifts and honours
as much as he values this - that there should be growth in the essentials of all religions. Growth
in essentials can be done in different ways, but all of them have as their root restraint in speech,
that is, not praising one's own religion or condemning the religions of others without good cause.
And if there is cause for criticism, it should be done in a mild way. But it is better to honour
other religions for this reason. By so doing, one's own religion benefits and so do other religions,
while doing otherwise harms one's own religion and the religions of others.”

Asoka is still remembered today by Buddhists as an ideal example of good governance. This
edict goes back to the Buddha who, in a context where acrimonious exchanges took place
between different religious groups, encouraged his followers not to feel ill-will when other
groups criticised them, but to engage in dialogue, pointing out misunderstandings with reason
and courtesy.

At Digha Nikaya III, 61, the Buddha addresses the duties or virtues of an authentic universal
king (cakkavattivatta), or the virtues that makes a simple king a universal one: First, the king
must rule the country with righteousness. Second, the king must protect all the people living in
his country with the right principles and upholds justice all the times. Third, he must not let
immorality spoil his kingdom. Fourth, he must provide financial aid or funds to those who are in
need of it to improve their quality of life. Fifth, he must approach, from time to time, learned and
virtuous recluses or Brahmins in order to get better understanding of dhamma for the
advancement of his moral practices.

When the characteristics of ‘good governance’ are compared with the virtues of a good King as
explained in Buddhism, we can see that there are many similarities:
1. ‘Participation’ in modern good governance corresponds to what is called in Buddhism
‘the avoidance the four agatis (prejudices because of like, dislike, delusion or stupidity
and fear), because the King of the Buddhist dhammaraja system must base himself on the
merit system, allowing the representatives of his peoples of all colours, ranks, etc. to help
him rule the country in one way or another. Everyone with good quality must be provided
a chance to work for the king;
 2. ‘Rule of Law’ is equivalent to the king’s observation of sila (morality), which could refer
to the law or the constitutions as well as other rules and regulations in the country
throughout his reign;
3. ‘Transparency’ corresponds to ajjava (honesty), avirodhana or avirodha (absence of
obstruction) and even sila (morality), because the king must be honest and rule the
country following the righteous principles; he must not suppress others who do not agree
with him sometimes, and he must not transgress the law, constitutions or rules and
regulations himself. We have to bear in mind that the word sila is, according to A,v,281,
divided into three aspects (sucaritas), namely kayasucarita (good conduct in action),
vacisucarita (good conduct in speech) and manosu- carita (good conduct in mind);
4. ‘Responsiveness’ is equal to loving-kindness (metta) and compassion (karuna) towards
all subjects without any prejudices or biases. The king must see the suffering of the poor
or underprivileged people in the society as his own;
5. ‘A consensus-Oriented Approach’ is the same as what is called in Pali yebhuyyasika,
which means that the king must not exercise his power at will (which would fall within
the category of attadhipateyya, i.e holding one’s own opinions as supreme);
6. ‘Equity and Inclusiveness’ is to make decisions which affect the people in the kingdom in
accordance with the vote of the majority. It could also mean that he must be honest
(ajjava) enough to accept others’ viewpoints, must be tolerant to what he does not like
(akkodha), must be patient (khanti), must not impose obstructions upon others (avirodha
or avirodhana), and usually listens to that which the majority votes for
(lokhadhipateyya);
7. ‘Effectiveness and Efficiency’ corresponds to self-sacrifice (pariccaga) because the king
has to sacrifice his own personal happiness for the sake of others and works hard for the
happiness and welfare of the many instead. He must be patient (khanti) and maintain a
good temperament no matter how difficult his jobs and responsibilities are, and he must
strive for the betterment of his kingdom by abandoning personal luxuries and self-
indulgences, and living a simple, moderate life (tapa) as an example to his subjects.
Literally, the word tapa means the mortification of the fresh; and
8. ‘Accountability’ corresponds to honesty (ajjava), moral integrity (sila), and patience
(khanti). With these virtues, the king must not impose any obstructions against others,
simply because he does not agree with them, and he must not do something against the
good traditions and culture in the country too (avirodhana).

The kingly virtues as described in the Pali Canonical Texts of Theravada Buddhism, which were
adhered to by the kings of the past, are now neglected by presidents, PMs, ministers, MPs and
bureaucrats. Most modern people with progressive minds look at Western politicians as their role
models, while considering the virtues of the King in the Absolute Monarchical system to be
obsolete. The king, who is endowed with various ruling virtues, is replaced by MPs, whose
virtues are not clearly defined; if they are elected, they are accepted as having legitimacy to run
the country. A large number of people in modern countries are not seriously interested in
investigating whether MPs are engaged in corrupt practices. According to Winston Churchill, the
democratic system is the least evil of the systems of government in the world. However, since it
allows room for the potential of corruption, it will be worse if politicians neither adhere to the
virtues of the ruling class (rajadhamma) as explained by the Buddha, nor follow the principles of
good governance as widely known nowadays.
Buddhism does not favour any particular political system for the governing of a country. Instead,
it lays a great emphasis on the virtues which should be displayed by the ruling class, raja in the
Absolute Monarchical System, or MPs in the democratic system of modern times. The Buddha
clearly states that of the three kinds of adhipateyya, dhammadhipateyya (holding the
righteousness as the principle) is the best i.e. principle based leadership. Sometimes the ruling
party /class have to look beyond the majority votes and stick to the principles of righteousness.
From the foregoing discussions, we can see that what is called ‘good governance’ is, in fact,
nothing new to Buddhism at all. Within the Buddha’s teachings, principles which are similar to
what is called ‘good governance’ in the West, are found in abundance, and these have been
taught by Buddhism for more than two thousands and five hundred years. They are older than the
principles of ‘good governance’ proposed by the United Nations.

Because the King under the system of the Absolute Monarchy has all the powers at hand, the
Buddha has laid down several principles for becoming a good king to make sure that his powers
will be exercised fairly and righteously. We have to bear in mind, however, that raja simply
means ‘ruler’, therefore the rajadhamma also means simply as ‘the virtues of a ruler’. After
scrutinizing its definition and application, every Buddhist scholar will not fail to see the
similarities between the principles which embody what is called ‘good governance’ in the West
and the teaching of Lord Buddha, which has been transmitted for more than two thousand years.
It can even be said that if modern politicians and bureaucrats follow the Buddhist teaching
strictly, they will adhere to the principles of ‘good governance’ automatically.

‘Good governance’ is an ideal formulated in the West when the Western people wanted to see
how a good government in a civilized country should govern a country. What they have
formulated, however, is in conformity with the ideas taught by the Buddha more than 2500 years
ago. Having explored the meaning of good governance, which is supposed to be a tool for a good
democratic statesman, I argue that no true democracy will be achieved as long as MPs and
bureaucrats continue to lack moral integrity, and the country remains full of corruption. True
democracy or a just society cannot be possible without strict adherence to the principles of ‘good
governance’ or Buddhist rajadhamma, a sine qua non.

He also had shown how a whole country could become corrupt, degenerate and become
miserable when the head of its government, the ministers and administrative officers become
corrupt and unjust. For a country to be happy it must have a just government. Social justice and
social welfare are two features of ideal society of Buddhism. It is a society in which all activities
including agriculture and industry should be just (dhammika) through the righteous means
(dhammena). All social groups such as parents, children, husband, wife, teacher, pupil,
employer, employee, friend, companion, the householder and the religious, perform well their
perspective duties. Even the King or the ruler of the country also trains himself in righteousness
with ten royal duties (dasa rajadhamma).

The term “anthropocentric” means to regard humankind as the centre of existence. In this sense
Buddhism is a philosophy religion primarily focused on the welfare of humankind in this life.
This Buddha’s doctrine places responsibly on efforts of individual and potential of this
individual. No divine or supernatural intervention being necessary. Disciplined individuals
especially politicians who handle power and money could make terrific impact on governance
and also greater a consolatory environment to citizens. Buddhism in this sense is a living
philosophy for the living beings and the Nature that could make a tremendous impact on ‘good
governance’.

END

He is the Convener of ‘Center for Multifaith Dialogue’ and President of ‘Arakanese Research
Society of Bangladesh’. While he was a layperson he was known as Maung Than Aye. After
completing his Masters in Management with Honours from the University of Chittagong he
served in a private bank for over 8 years was later ordained as a monk (bhantay/ bhante/
bhikkhu) in 1997 and since then he has been a proponent of Engaged Buddhism (applied
Dhamma) distinct from “popular Buddhism” and/or any school or branch of “organised
religion”. He engages himself in meditation, reading, writing, and interest on interfaith healing
and multifaith dialogues. He can be reached at emails: u_bodhinyana@yahoo.com or at cell
phone: 01720 657913.