Socially Engaged Buddhism

: In Historical Persepective
Santosh K Gupta Research Scholar, The Academy of Korean Studies

Introduction:

The indisputability of the fact that Buddhists constitute the major component of the religious population of some Asian countries. Amply demonstrable in the enumeration of the Buddhist populace to the tune of millions of religious population, necessitate scholarly moorings into the Buddhist stream on the Asian terrain. It is remarkable to note that Buddhism is also the most popular, fastest growing and widely distributed religion not only in Asian subcontinent but also in Western countries. It covers a densely populated area to remote area of the world. Asian Buddhists, like their counterparts in other countries, have been making efforts to turn Buddhism as a socially relevant and useful religion. Keeping this in view, a large number of monks and nuns have undertaken the task of up keeping the monastery, steadfastly practicing dharma and along with assuming social responsibility in the changing modern world. Buddhism, imbued with utmost tolerance, has traversed a long distance from the Monarchical setup to the Democratic setup of the world. The period succeeding the monarchical rule witnessed the unleashing of a hitherto dormant force in the contemporary period, now all geared up to play an active role in the modern world. It is imperative to note that the Buddhism has been already engaged with society for long, thus setting an exquisite example of co-existence with diverse cultures. Now in this machinery era, where people have no time to take care of others, its emerging as a vital force to play an active role in shaping of

modern society. Further, the hectic schedule of work and the social responsibilities have created a confuse and tence environment around the people.The establishment of old-age centers and kid-care centers in the Eastern and Western Countries shows that the people are intend to escap from responsibility of their parents and newly born children. On the other side, they are running hither and thither in search of peace through sensual materialism. It is remarkable to note that the Buddha assumed the spiritual path was the opposite of sensual materialism.1 The growing trend of materialism has raised a question in front of Buddhist community to prove the relevance of dharma in this changing scenario. And in these circumstances, Buddhism has taken a greater challenge to provide the true path to coming generation, which has been applicable in all diverse society since its inception. This episodic upsurge enhanced its social relevance further in the form of a socially engaged Buddhism. It has earlier played a catalytic role in the unification of several Asian countries, and in the emergence of rudimentary nationalism in different period. Again on the canvass of contemporary period, the Buddhist pendulum has swung back to the advocacy of the reconcialation in Asian countries. Not only this, it has also laid great stress on the active role of Buddhism in social and political arena. This paper intends to deal with two aspects of engaged Buddhism, firstly it will provide a brief sketch of social engagement of Buddhism in doctrinal perspective. Secondly, political tenets of Buddhas teaching in historical perspective. On the doctrinal level, there has been a wide ranging debate that the engaged Buddhism is the product of Western influence (reformist view or modernist view). Even some western scholars assert that the Buddhism both Mahayana and Hinyana have been socially and politically passive religion.
2

Further, there is no Buddhist ethic for social and

political engagement. The modernists consider that the contemporary socio-political engagement of Buddhism is byproduct of colonial rule. In the other word, Euro-American colonial influence on new Buddhism. They asserts the engaged Buddhism as a new Buddhism, and quite different from traditional Buddhism. On the other hand, traditionalists

consider that the Buddhism has always been associated with society and politics. The leading personality of traditionalist, who represents a greater portion of Asian scholars or so called Asian trained Buddhist, such as Thich Nhat Hanh, Dalai Lama, Sulak Sivaraksa and Maha Ghosananda. They have considered it only extension of Buddhist tradition, and its emplemention in practice It would be appropriate to say that the both interpretations need more scholarly mooring. As far as this paper is concerned, it intends to shed some light on the Buddhist canonical text, and further on the teaching of Buddha, particularly in persepective of for social and political equilibrium. The another issue quoted by Foster who seems to admit that early Buddhism may have been socially engaged, but he claims that the East Asian Buddhism that he studies was not.3 I would also like to focus this issue in very brief. The term socially engaged Buddhism has gained attention of scholars in 1960s, when Thich Nhat Hanh, theVietnamese Buddhist monk has coined this term in 1963. As Henry4 mentioned, Thich Nhat Hanh has revised this term during his Sccotish tour in 2003, and saying that all Buddhism is engaged. But it is remarkable to note that the Manhae, a Korean Buddhist monk, who had provoked the monks of Korea for social and political engagement in late 19th and early 20th century. He played an active role in the propogation of Buddhism and elevating the national counciousness. Not only this, he had also promoted anti-Japanese movement, and spread pro-independence ideas. The role of Manhae should also focus in the persepective of engaged Buddhism. That is to say, socially engaged Buddhism is only a new interpretation or continuation of Buddhism. And their historical trace goes back to the Buddhas period and his teachings. Before mark the any demarcation line between Buddhism and engaged Buddhism, we need to reinterprate Buddhist tradition, we also need to know the essence of each word of both tradition, Hinayana and Mahayana. The existing sect of Buddhism in Asia clearly varies from nation to nation, both in theory and practice, but remarkable point is that the essence of dharma is embedded in Buddhas teachings. Various Buddhist scholars of Asia, during the course of history, have interpreted

the dharma according to their own geographical and cultural setup. And The modern emerging trend of Buddhism does not show any sectarian split or doctrinal debate over all. However, it has been covering the untouched part of West within the framework of Buddhas teaching through the social and political engagement.

Historical significance of engaged Buddhism: Buddha's dharma like the social tradition itself has been ceaselessly transmitted from generation to generation, characterized by universality. The virtues embedded in the Buddhist nucleus kindness, compassion, humanity and equality have been truly instrumental in the promotion of social solidarity and harmony in a broad socio-cultural spectrum. Buddha's teaching has cast an indelible imprint on the social spheres of numerous oriental states, and now is casting an incredible imprint in the west. It needs to mention that the motive of Buddhas teaching is to overcome the suffering of human beings, and show them the true path of humanity. Buddhism not only emphasizes on the cause of suffering, but also emphasizes on the cessation of suffering. That is to say, Buddhism laid much stress on the sufferings of people which engendered by their actions both in past and present, and has provided a complete solution through personal experience. The question raises here that why Buddhism differs from other spiritual sects, and in my opinion because it posed a greater challenge in front of society to realize the reality of life through own experience. Buddhism as a spiritual force always intends to provide the solution for human problems. And modern form of Buddhism is also working within the framework of tradition. It would be appropriate to mention that the all religions of world exist for well being of society, however, society does not exist only for religion. Further, both religion and society are interdependent on each other for their growth, and in this perspective Buddhas dharma is not an exception. Many people understand that Buddhism means escapism, isolation from society, and only a teaching for enlightenment. This misunderstanding has been served a major obstacle in the understanding of Buddhas

prime motive. Modern Buddhist responses are scattering this shallow concept through the program of social engagement. The modern emerging trend in the East Asian Buddhism has been hailed by the scholars as socially engaged Buddhism. Thich Nhat Hanh, a Vietnamese monk was among the first who use the term 'engaged Buddhism' in his magnum opus "Peace is every step". According to him, "Engaged Buddhism, why? Because we are the part of this world, where running hither and thither are common phenomena, where nobody takes care of others. It is our responsibility to make it the best world, we can". The goal of engaged Buddhism lies in helping the people who are in trouble, and to solve the social problems engendered by human activities. It guides them towards a true and pure path for upliftment of society, and in greater sense, for upliftment of whole human beings of the world. Socially engaged Buddhism is a novel interpretation of Buddhism, which bears great historical significance. Cho Sungtaek has reexamined the idea of Buddhist passivity by his essay Buddhism and society:On Buddhist Engagement with Society.5 He proposes to trace the historical dimension of social and political engagement of Buddhism through two traditional texts, Theravada and Mahayana; however, it has not been adduced to explain the both context. The work does not deal with the Buddhist tradition, nor it corroborates the tenets of Buddhas teaching which are lies in tradition. On the other hand, he has criticized the argument of Keel Hee-sung successfully.6 In reexamination of the idea of Buddhist passivity, Cho points out that the especially Seon Buddhism does not properly respond to the needs of contemporary society. However, he also tried to focus the immutability and adoptability (bulbyeon suyeon) of Seon enlightenment, while Keel ignoring the adoptability of Seon Buddhism, and highlighting the immutability. However, Chos argument is worth considerable, but needs more contextual explanation. This papers aims to demonstrate the Theravada and Mahayana, two major traditions of Buddhism what bears regarding the social and political engagement. First, I would like to discuss the question of passivity. Historical evidences bear a clear-cut picture of Buddhist engagement

since its inception. Buddha, the master of dharma, has not only taught about enlightenment or practicing meditation, but also taught about society; A true and morally high society which is based on equality, compassion, and Meta (friendship). It needs to be mentioned that the Buddha has not escaped from society, although he returned into society after enlightenment. The Buddhist community was constantly in touch with the common people, begging daily food from them, solving their problems through separate meetings, and conducting public discourse on various social and political issues. Buddha himself visited village-to-village and taught about peace and social solidarity. Even he accepted several invitation of common populace, praised their donation and gift of the meal without any discrimination. As Buddhist text mentions that once he accepted the invitation of Amarapali,7 a professional dancer of Vaisali of ancient India. And historical evidences say that the Vajjians, rulers of Vajji republic, were intending to invite the Buddha at the same time, but master had preferred Amrapalis invitation, and heartily visited her house. Besides, he admired several invitations of King such as Bimbisara, Ajatsatru, Passenjit and so on, and enjoyed preaching them dharma. Remarkably, early Buddhist centers and activities were appear to have centered on the ancient city such as Rajagirha,8 Vaishali, Kausambi, Benars, Pava, Sravasti and so on. These centers were densely populated and famous for trade and commerce both national and international. That is to say, the Buddhist centers were not located in the forest or mountainous region. Further, historical evidences of Asia also shows that all Buddhist centers have flourished under the shed of society. Perhaps, Buddha intended deeper involvement with society. Even king Bimbisara decided to allot a residence to Buddha, neither too nears the noise of the town not too far from the city.9 According to Mahavaga, king Bimbisara gave the first park of this kind to Sangha, only a few weeks after the enlightenment of Buddha. It seems that the king wanted to make it easier for both people and Sangha, for more engagements. Once, Buddha had rejected Devadattas proposal that the community should reside permanently in the forest. Undoubtly, he was against of any kind of isolation and escapism from society.

As Wijayaratna mentioned that the Buddhist monks were essentially social being, for two reasons. Firstly, they were members of a society called Sangha (the community), in which they had responsibilities, duties and also rights. Secondly, as we have seen, they were depended on lay people for clothing, medicine, and food, and they also had responsibilities, duties and rights in relation to lay society.10 Thus, modern social engagement is also enlargement of responsibilities and duties of Buddhist Community. In the other words, the initiative of worlds Buddhist community is one more step from shallower to deeper social engagement. A.K.Warder has clearly mentioned that we should remember also that besides the Buddha formally established the two branches of the total Buddhist community: the laymen and lay women ( upasakas and upasikas).11 It needs to mention that the vast majority of people cannot renounce worldly life, and master of dharma was aware to this reality. He never tried to turn anybody against his or her wish, and strongly recommended rules for householders. According to canonical text, many householders have achieved Arhantship, a higher stage of Buddhism. The order provides an opportunity for those who are not only willing to prevail their family life along with spiritual cultivation, but also to serve others. It is difficult for lay followers to devote their whole life to the service of others. Whereas the monks are completely free from their worldly affairs, and are able to devote their whole life for well being of the many. Presently, modern Buddhist monks are inclined to re-implement the tradition in practice for worlds welfare. According to Sigala-sutta of Digha-nikaya, the Buddha has regarded that the great respect of the laymans life are his family and his social life. According to same Suta, the Buddha has considered the Six Directions for worshiping of family, these were east: parents; south: teachers; west: wife and children; north: friends and neighbors; nadir: employees, workers; zenith: religious men.12 Further, he has clearly differentiated the relation between father and children, the relation between teacher and student, and the relation between friends and neighbors. His teaching provides a moral guideline for lay follower to attain the salvation along with social responsibility. The Buddhist concept of

society is based on morality, non-violence, truth, and abstention from others property. It is remarkable to note that Buddhas period was full of violence, war and moral degeneration. He had taught dharma where Imperial powers were taking place of republicans through sword. He opposed all kind of violence, and preached the theory of non-violence for social solidarity. Buddhist teaching is much emphasized on the family system, and especially on family and marriage. According to Anguttara-Nikaya, Buddha said that a man have these seven kinds of wives. Further defined it in front of Sujata, a house wife of Savatthi, whoso is pitiless, corrupt in mind, neglecting husband, and inflamed by other man- let her be called: a slyer and a wife. Whoso would rob her husband of his gains, though little be the profit that she makes, whether by craftsmanship, or from his trade or by the plough- a robber and a wife. Ones who bent on nothing doing, strident voice and brings to low account her husbands zeal-a mistress and a wife. Who ever with loving sympathy, just as a mother for her only son, for husband cares, and stored-up his wealth- a mother and a wife. Who holds her husband in the same regard, as elder sister holds the younger born, meek in heart, who serves every wish to husband- a sister and a wife. And she who is as glad her lord to see as boon companions ling a part to meet, a gracious character of gentle birth, a fond helpmate- let her be called: companion and a wife. If fearless of the lash and stick, unmoved, all things enduring, calm and pure in heart, she bear obedience to her husbands words, from anger free- let her called: a handmaid and a wife.13 Then Buddha asked to Sujata, these are the seven kinds of wives a man may have; and which of them are you? Sujata replied, Lord, let the Exalted one think of me as a handmaid and wife from this day forth. And later she became the lay follower. As I mentioned above the discourse of Sigala, where he also explained the relation between married couple in greater details. According to Buddhism, love between husband and wife is considered almost sacred, and it is called Sadara-Brahmacariya sacred family life.
14

Buddhist tradition laid much

emphasize on faith, respect, devotion and certain responsibility for both husband and wife to carry the marital life smoothly. There is no discrimination or advantage for any one;

both are morally bound to take care of each other. Buddhist tradition proposed an ideal society that is based on the concept of interdependence, devotion, honesty, mutual understanding and peaceful coexistence. Buddhist social view lies in the reciprocal setup whereby husband and wife can lead a faithful and respectful life. Once in Getavana Vihara, the Buddha clearly mentioned that the great requirement is a loving heart to regard the people as we do an only son.15 Love is the centrifugal force of Buddhism, which is applicable for all people, race, and for any circumstances. The Buddha has emphasized much on love, and considered as a sharp weapon to defeat the hatred and violence. He says: Hatred is quenched by love, not by hatred.16 The real happiness can be brought through kindness, charity and friendly treatment. In Buddhism, there is no place for selfishness, cheating, anger and violence, and Buddha identified it as a major obstacles for any civil society. Another aspect, charity, we need to investigate here that the present charity work of Buddhist organization is it by-product of Western influence or practice of tradition. The Buddha identified charity as one of the marvelous and wonderful quality of people. The Buddha says: there is proper time and a proper mode on charity, just as the vigorous warrior goes to battle, so is the man able to give, he also is an able warrior; a champion strong and wise in action. Further he says The charitable man is loved by all, wellknown and far-renowned, and there is no sweet companion like pure charity.
17

He has

not only defined the charity, but he also described the fruit of charity work. According to Buddhism, charity is stored wealth of ones life, and leads to return of great joy. Buddhism promotes untainted and unselfish charity for welfare of all. It is a work of brave, loving and compassionate people. The Buddha expounds the four virtues conductive to a laymans happiness, and practice of charity ( Caga) is one of the key elements of the four virtues. He has suggested that the people should practice charity, generosity, without attachment and craving for his wealth. According to Anguttara-Nikaya, There are five achievements of humans life: the perfecting of faith; the perfecting of virtue; the

perfecting of learning; the perfecting of insight, and the perfecting of charity. 18 And in this way, modern initiative of Buddhist monks and organizations are seems within the framework of Buddhist tradition. Socially engaged Buddhists are on the path of achievements through perfecting of charity. Of course the methods of charity work, functions of Buddhist organizations, and targeted people could be influenced by different working organizations. Undoubtedly, Buddhist Monastery has been provided shelter for orphans, and weaker section of society from its inception. On the other hand, Buddhist monks have always provided psychological and social concealing for depressed people, confused people, and people who were suffering for psychosomatic diseases. There are many examples in canonical text where many criminals and misguided people have turned their lives after concealing. Here i would like to suggest that the role of Buddhist monks should interpret from different angles, and tradition should highlight in new perspectives. Contemporary engaged Buddhist organizations are devoted to smash the poverty of world. And in this regard, strengthening of economic condition of weaker section can play catalytical role in social empowerment. The concept of social and economic welfare can be visualized in Buddhas approach. The master of dharma was aware that unfavorable economic and social condition could not lead the people to follow the true path. He identified poverty as a root cause of crime and moral degradation such as violence, robbery, hatred, sexual crime and so on. According to Kutadanta-sutta of the Dighanikaya, the Buddha laid much stress on the improvement of economic conditions of people. He suggests that the grain and other facilities for agriculture should be provided for farmers and cultivators; capital should be provided for traders, and adequate wages should be paid to those who are employed.19 But it should not be interpret that the Buddha had approved each and every way of earning money. It does not mean that he had attested the accumulation of wealth by any improper means. According to Anguttara- Nikaya, he had prohibited five trades such as trade of weapon; trade of human beings; trade of flesh; trade of spirits; and trade of poison for lay disciple.20 Buddhist tradition considers it as anti

social, anti national and evil means of lively hood. We have seen the result of weapon trade in 20th century. World has already experienced two world wars which resulted in the form of atomic attack in Japan. Presently, terrorist threat is a new emerging phenomenon for world that is challenging the peaceful existence of globe. The mushrooming of terrorism is completely based on the weapons trade, and we cannot ignore this fact. Today, most of the countries admit to stop the trade of weapon in general, and atomic weapon in particular. Besides, several anti nuclear weapon processions have organized by many philanthropists in last fifty years. It is imperative to note that what worlds leaders are experiencing and advocating today, Buddha had already experienced and advocated three thousand years ago. Further, Modern labor unions of world and other global organizations are keen to protect the economic interest of labors. These organizations are fighting for minimum wages and other basic facilities. Perhaps, these movements are drawing inspiration from Buddhas view of adequate wage. According to Buddhism, people have four kinds of happiness. The first happiness is economic prosperity earned by righteous means; the second is spending that wealth on himself, relatives and on meritorious action; the third to be free from debts; and the fourth happiness is to lead pure life. The economic view of Buddha is completely based on the concept of social welfare where lay followers can earn money through righteous means, but undoubtly they are morally bound for certain responsibilities. Buddhism not only emphasizes on the accumulation of wealth, but also emphasizes that how to spend for contented society. In present context, it is imperative to note that the

Buddhist traditions strongly attesting the relevance of dharma for contemporary world. Above-mentioned facts answers the Kings question that is there Buddhist ethic for modern world. In my view, Buddhas teaching is applicable for all time and space; however, it only needs implementation in practical life. Another aspect, the question of political passivity of Buddhism needs more scholarly debates and interpretation. It needs to mention that the first and foremost goal of

Buddhism is to create the peaceful surrounding across the world, and without political stability there is no concept of peace. We should not forget that the master of dharma was from royal family, and he was aware of contemporary political crisis. The Buddha admired the republics setup, its democratic pattern that respects for honest people. He showed deep faith in democracy, and had setup monastery on democratic pattern. Infact Buddha had enjoyed upon the king to work for political stability and peace. He denied any kind of violence for political sake, and preached non-violence and peace as a universal massage. As Walpola mentioned that there is nothing can that can be called just war-which is only a false term coined and put into circulation to justify and excuse hatred, cruelty, violence and massacre. The victorious are just and the weak and the defeated are unjust. Buddhism does not accept this position. One who wins the war after killing million of people can only realize the illusionary satisfaction? The winner only can satisfy their ego for certain time. Presently, many nations are trying to justify their war against terrorism and dictatorship; they wish to maintain peace through violence. The questions raises here that can any nation provide peace through nuclear weapons, or any other destructive means? Once Buddha suggested that victory produces hatred; he that is defeated is afflicted with suffering; he that has renounced both victory and defeat lives in tranquility and happiness.21 True and genuine peace can be prevailed only in an atmosphere of Metta, amity, free from all evil means. There are immortal examples in the history that the theory of Non-violence and love can maintain the peace of any nation. It is a well-known fact that Ashoka, the great Indian king had successfully applied the teaching of non-violence to maintain the peace and prosperity throughout neighboring countries. He organized several peace missions for teaching of non-violence to Asian countries. I would like to say that the world should draw inspiration from history to maintain the peace in contemporary period. It is imperative to note that the Buddha had identified some basic qualities of kings court. Anguttara-Nikaya clearly states that the seven requisites of a fortress should be well provided. The king should be well aware of basic necessities for security of fort.

The Buddha suggested that the Kings citadel in the marches should have pillar, deeply embedded, and well dug in, immovable and unshakable. This pillar is indication of the stability and sovereignty of state. Historical evidences attest that the king Ashoka of India had embedded seven-pillar edict throughout the nation. These pillar edict bears massage of state, which is devoted to the people. The main motive of the pillar was to provide the protection for the inmates and for the warding off of outsiders. Second, the moat, both deep and wide, should be well provided. The historical evidences shows that many kings had followed prescribed pattern for security of fortress in ancient and medieval constructions. Third, the road going round the citadel should be well provided. That was necessary for troops movement from one place to another during invasion. Fourth, the great armory of spear and sword should be well provided. Fifth, the large troops such as horsemen, charioteers, bowmen, standard-bearers, noted rajas son, storm troops, and warriors in cuirasses should station in the citadel. Sixth, the gatekeeper, cleaver, intelligent, and wise should be well provided. And seventh, the rampart, both high and wide, covered with a coat of plaster.22 Interestingly, the Buddha had preached the teaching of non-violence, but it does not mean that his suggestion indicates violence. However, he was in favor of national security, and he laid priority for national sovereignty. His teachings does not suggest demolishing the defense system of nation, it means the maintaining of strong defense can overcome the possibility of expansion from neighbor counties. It seems that Buddhas suggestion is based on the both offensive and defensive concept of war. That is to say, the wellorganized defense system is basic need of any independent nation, and the nation can protect their freedom, sovereignty by strengthening of defense. The Buddha has explained that how nation can provide a better and peaceful government without any fear of war. Furthermore, he has also emphasized that the four kinds of supplies should be well provided in the kings citadel. There should be regular supply of water, wood, and grass for convenience of the inmates and for the warding off of outsiders. There should be great

stores of food grains. There should be great store of vegetables such as beans, and cereals. And there should be great store of medicaments for convenience of residence. Buddhas view on state security is not only shedding light on the politics, but also greatly emphasizing the social welfare approach of state. The Buddhist ideas of state security provides a fearless and peaceful environment around the nation for prosperity and happiness of inmates. I would like to mention one instance of Anguttara-Nikaya, once Buddha dwelt near Vesali kingdom, and where he addressed the group of Licchavis king that if seven things will be well maintained then the growth for the Vajjians may be expected, and not decline. The Buddha said that as the Vajjians shall be often assembled, much in assembly, their growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall sit down in concord, rise up in concord, do business in concord, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall not decree the underfeed nor repeal the decreed, but conform to the ancient Vajjian laws as decreed, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall honor, respect, venerate, revere the elders, shall hold they out to be listened to, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall not forcibly kidnap and make live with them women and girl of their own clan, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as they shall honor, respect, venerate, revere the shrines within and without, shall not fail to provide meet offerings, growth may be expected, not decline; so long as meet protection, refuge, shelter shall be provided for Arahants, growth may be expected, and not decline.23 Buddha had much emphasized on the unity of republicans for their longer survival. Above-mentioned criteria is not only emphasizing the political view of Buddha, but also exploring the socialist orientation of state that is expected to provide the respect of their people and especially to women. Furthermore, we can visualize the principle of good government through explanation of Buddhist idea, which advocates in favor of secular administration, happier society, and morally high country. The master of dharma not only profound the political theory, but also provided

incredible political suggestion to rulers whenever they requested. According to same Nikaya, Buddhas words once prevented King Ajatsatru of Magadha from attacking the kingdom of the Vajjis. As story goes, Magadhas Chief Minister named Vassakara visited to Buddha to convey the decision of King Ajatsatru that the king is anxious to attack, to root out, and to destroy the confederacy of Vajjis. The Buddha listened carefully kings decision and clearly suggested to Vassakara that the possession of any one of things that cause not decline; but what will be said if they have all seven. He clearly mentioned that the Vajjians couldnt be overcome by force. But if they will break their alliance then they will be looser. According to historical evidences, after sixteen years long struggle, Ajatsatru had braked up the unity of Vajjis by cunningness, and completed his policy of territorial expansion.24 However, it clearly seems that Buddha had showed deep faith in Republic set up, but it doesnt mean that he criticized the monarchical set up of contemporary time. It is imperative to note that the Republic set up and politics is the most common and vigorous in the Buddhist text. Buddhist political view advocates wisely, justly and righteously rule for all nations. It recommended moral principle in politics, which is applicable for all existing political, set up. Although, there has been a long tradition of democracy in the world, but it depends on scholars that how they are tracing the root of democracy. In my view, modern democratic ideas not go beyond the propounded concept of Buddha. The central tenets of modern democracy such as participation of people in election, voting right, consultation, government formation by majority, and major decision by debate can be visualized in Buddhist tradition. Walpola intend to interpret the word king (Raja) by the term government in present context, and it is worth considerable. He mentions that the Ten Duties of the King, therefore, apply today to all those who constitute the government, such as the head of the state, ministers, political leaders, legislative and administrative officers, etc.25 The Buddha had experienced the degeneration of politics and society in the contemporary period. And his view clearly shows that how a corrupt government makes their people

unhappy. According to Buddhist ethic, the king, minister and administrative officers are solely responsible for social and political degeneration. Corruption on any level in political and social system can be resulted in instability, revolt and social rebellion, and the master of dharma was immensely recognized and experienced during the course of history. So thats why he explained the duties of King in greater details, where non-violence, nonobstruction, tolerance, austerity in habits, kindness, honesty and integrity, sacrifices, morality, and charity is central tenets of his teaching. Moreover, Nagarjuna, a doyen of Mahayanist philosophy, had also prescribed a compassionate and welfare-oriented government for king, which included education for people, socially supported health care, and low land tax. In this way, engaged Buddhism is a redefinition of the nature and role of Buddhas dharma for the modern and pluralistic world. It is evidently acknowledged that Buddhism, since its inception, has been an active force in society, reconciling the disputes of the social and political institutions. The Buddha not only proposed the political issues in theory, but he also tried to implement it in practice. His teaching of non-violence, peaceful co-existence, and reconciliation is imbued with a greater realm of welfare. It is clearly mentioned in the Buddhist text that the Buddha, the master of dharma, had gone to the battlefield where two groups were prepared for bloodshed over the question of the water of the Rohini.26 According to Sukha Vagga (happiness) of Jataka text, the people of Sakiya and the Koliya Republic caused the waters of the river Rohini to be confined by a single dam between the city of Kapilavatthu and the city of Koliya, and cultivated the fields on both sides of the river. Once crops began to droop, both sides were intended to utilize maximum water for irrigation. Koliyas had clearly mentioned that they are not going to divide water, thus talked waxed bitter and resulted in fight. Further, the combatants made matters worse by aspersions on the origin of the two royal families. Thereafter, both the Sakayas and Koliyas came fourth armed for battle and cried to show their strength through bloodshed. At that moment, the master of dharma, went in battlefield, and had settled the dispute through reconciliation.
27

He

considered it as a duty. His participation in dispute settlement shows that the Buddhism has always been active religion, and the argument of passivity seems baseless.

Concluding Remarks

The modern interpretation of Buddhism, especially the socially engaged Buddhism, has infused a new lease of life into the scholarly enterprises in the recent decades. It has also brought forth the pertinent question of the relevance of Buddhist ideals in the modern globalize world. The scholarly debates have also moved towards the investigation of the engaged Buddhism, raising numerous strands of polemics. In my view, it should evidently acknowledge that Buddhism, since its inception, has been an active force in society, reconciling the contradictions of the social and political institutions. Above mentioned examples answer that the Buddhist ethics are significantly relevant for contemporary global society. It only needs various scholarly discourses on Buddhas teaching in modern perspective, and its implementation. The Socio-Political ideas of Buddha not only applied by King Ashoka of India, but more or less it has also applied by Korean rulers during the course of history. It would be appropriate to mention that the Buddhist idea of Panchsila is playing key role between China and India as a part of bilateral relation. Since 1950s, both countries has persuaded by peaceful means to settle their disputes through dialogue. Undoubtly, the initiative of the engaged Buddhists is within the framework of tradition. Ofcourse, the working way of organizations can be influenced by others organizations, and we cannot deny. Historical evidences attests that the Buddhism has assimilated with the various indigenous culture of the Asia, but it core philosophy has always been unchanged. In the context of western Buddhism, it seems that the Buddhism is corroborating the social and cultural tenets of west to respond accordingly in contemporary period.

Notes
1 The author tried to discuss the materialistic situation of Buddhas period. For further details see Damien Keown, Contemporary Buddhist Ethics, (London: Routledge Curzon 2000,187). 2 Cho Sungtaek has raised this issue in his article titled Buddhism and society: On Buddhist Engagement with Society. Professor Cho has tried to criticize the view of Winston King who argued that Buddhism has been socially and politically passive religion. Further details see Cho Sungtaek, Buddhism and Society: On Buddhist Engagement with Society, Korea Journal, Vol.42 Winter, (Seoul: 2002, 119-135). 3 Yarnall cites the opinion of foster in his essay. For further details see Queen, Prebish and Keown (ed.), Action Dharma New Studies in Engaged Buddhism, (London: Routledge Curzon 2003, 296) 4 Phil Henry, The Sociological Implications for Contemporary Buddhism in the United Kingdom: Socially Engaged Buddhism, a Case Study, Journal of Buddhist Ethic, Vol. 13 (2006, 9) 5 Cho (2002,119-336). 6 Keel Hee-sung raised a question that whether transcendental enlightenment in Seon Buddhism is compatible with social activism. Further he questioned, is it possible for those who are in the realm of enlightenment, where form is emptiness, to have social and ethical concerns? 7 According to Indian history, Amrapalis profession was not respectable. Dancing was socially low profession, although she was associated with two great royal courts, Magadha and Vaishali of contemporary India. 8 Buddhist literature describes Rajagirha of that age as a popular and very prosperous city. Many merchants and other rich people had houses, and organized trade with foreign countries. For further details see Amulyachandra Sen, Rajagirha and Nalanda, (Calcutta: Indian publicity Society 1954, 22-24) 9 Ibid., p.31. 10 Mohan Wijayaratna, Buddhist Monastic Life, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1990, 119) 11 A.K.Warder, Indian Buddhism, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1970,158) 12 Walpola Sri Rahula, What the Buddha taught (Bangkok: Haw Trai Foundation 1990, 78-80) 13 E.M. Hare (tr.). Anguttara-Nikaya, Vol. iv (London: The Pali Text Society 1978, 57-58) 14 Walpola, p.79. 15 Samuel Beal (tr.). A life of Buddha, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas 1975,234) 16 Eugene Watson Burlingame, Buddhist Legends, (Harvard University Press 1921, 176-177) 17 Samual Beal, pp.212-218. 18 E.M. Hare, p.92. 19 Walpola, p.82. 20 E.m. Hare, p.153. 21 Eugene Watson Burlingame, Buddhist Legends, Part 3 (Harvard University press 1921, 73) 22 E.M.Hare, pp.69-70. 23 Historical evidences say that the Vajjians could not maintain these mentioned seven things, and they defeated by king Ajatsatru of Magadha. For further details of seven suggestions see. Ibid., pp.10-11. 24 For further details see. Amulyachandra Sen, pp.45-46. 25 Ten Duties of the King (Dasa-Raja-dhama) has mentioned in Jataka text, which is explaining the Buddhas teaching on good governance. For details of Ten Duties of King see. Walpola, pp. 84-86. 26 Rohini River has not only mentioned in the Buddhist text, but also mentioned in the various ancient Indian texts. However, historical evidences do not attest the existence of Rohini River. Perhaps, the river would have changed their direction of flow, and its posed a pertinent question of the authenticity of the river Rohini. 27 For further details see Eugene Watson Burlingame, pp. 70-73.

Selected Bibliography Beal, Samual. tr.(1975) A Life of Buddha: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. Buswell, Robert E.(1992) The Zen Monastic Experience: Buddhist Practice in Contemporary Korea: Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Cho, Sungtaek.(2002) Buddhism and Society: On Buddhist Engagement with Society,42 (4):

Korea Journal. Davids, Rhys, T.W .tr.(1899) Samannaphala Sutta: In the dialogues of the Buddha: Oxford: The Pali Text Society. Hare, E.M.tr.(1978) Anguttara Nikaya, Vol.iv, London: The Pali Text Society. Harris, Ian .ed.(1998) Buddhism and Politics in Twentieth Century Asia: London and New York: printer. Henry, Phil.(2006) The Sociological implications for Contemporary Buddhism in the United Kingdom: socially Engaged Buddhism, a Case Study, Journal of Buddhit Ethics,13. Huh, Woosung.(2000) Manhaes Understanding of Buddhism, Korea Journal, 40 (2). Ken, Jones. (2003)The New Social Face of Buddhism: A Call to Action, Boston: Wisdom Publications. Keown, Damien.(2000) Contemporary Buddhist Ethics, London and New York: Routledge Curzon. Lama, Dalai(1990) A Policy of Kindness: An Anthology of Writings by and about the Dalai Lama: Ithaca: NY: Snow Lion Publications. Lee, sun Keun, Rhi, Ki Yong. Ed.,(1976) Buddhism and the Modern World: Seoul: Dongguk University Muller, F.Max .tr.(1973) Dhammapada: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. Oldenberg, Hermann .ed.(1969) Vinaya Pitakam, Vol. I: London: Luzac and Company.

Queen, Christopher, Charls Prebish, and Damien Keown(2003) Action Dharma: London: Routledge Curzon. Queen, Christopher S. and Sallie B.King (ed.).(1996) Engaged Buddhism: Buddhist Liberation Movement in Asia: Albany: State University of New York Press. Sen, Amulyachandra.(1954) Rajagriha and Nalnda: Culcutta: Indian Publicity Society. Sivaraksa, Sulak.(1988) A Socially Engaged Buddhism, Bangkok: Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development. Sri Rahula, Walpola(1990) What the Buddha Taught: Bangkok: Haw Trai Foundation. Warder, A.K.(1870) Indian Buddhism: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. Wijayaratna, Mohan.(1990) Buddhist Monastic Life:Cambridge University Press.