Indian Intellectual Influences – Buddha

Introduction

We will discuss about Buddha and his period, growth, decline and resurgence of Buddhism and Ambedkar’s interpretation of Buddhism. Buddhism is among the greatest religions of the world. It is a missionary religion which had spread to most of Asia which included Sri Lanka, China, Tibet, Japan, Thailand, Burma, South-east Asia, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and India. The founder of this religion was the Buddha (the Enlightened) who spread his message of peace, love and brotherhood in his life and prepared a group of followers who would disseminate his message after his life.

 

Buddha and His Times

The period in which Gautama (later the Buddha) was born, and his creed was established, witnessed profound economic, social and political changes. Iron was being used on an increasingly large scale to clear forests and to expand agriculture leading to growth in population. Trade was increasing and a large mercantile class was being formed. There was an increase in urbanization and large cities were being established. At a political level, more and more lineage groups were forming kingdoms and empires. The cultural-religious milieu of this period was distinguished by two important trends:

• Shramanic (ascetic)
• Brahmanic (priestly)

In the Shramanic tradition, the Shramanas or the ascetic-renouncers abandoned the family and society and became wanderers in search for God and the meaning of life. They went to live in forests in seclusion and moved from one place to another interacting with other ascetics.

The Brahmanic tradition, on the other hand, encouraged householders’ religious practices, even though it was not opposed to asceticism. This was a period when the practice of sacrifices was spreading fast as more and more areas came under Brahmanical cultural influence. The idea of a society divided into four varnas – Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras in that order – was also being accepted at a wider level.

The two main points on which the Brahmanic tradition was in conflict with the Shramanic tradition were observance of regular sacrifices (yajnas) and a hierarchical caste structure. The Brahmans claimed pure descent from the Vedic days as the keepers and upholders of the Vedas, and as priests. The Shramanas, however, contested the idea of hereditary succession by asserting that a person became Brahman by virtuous and moral conduct, and not by birth. While the Brahmanic tradition gradually placed more and more disabilities on the lower social orders, particularly the Shudras, by even excluding them from many religious observances, the Shramanic tradition was open to all and generally preached equality. Both, however, believed in the ideas of karma and rebirth, although they sometimes interpreted them differently. There was a lot of interaction between both traditions and regular exchange of ideas was common.

The Buddhist tradition, as it emerged in this environment, attempted to assimilate the best of both the traditions. In Buddhist literature, both the Shramanas and the Brahmans were accorded equal respect, even though it identified a Brahman with quality and not birth. Both the categories, along with that of the Buddhist monk, were identified with persons who had achieved self-control, were compassionate, and lived a virtuous and moral life. Buddhism criticized pure and completely detached asceticism as well as priestly ritualism and the culture of sacrifices.

The Buddha, founder of Buddhism, was born as Siddhartha Gautam in c. 566 BCE in Kapilvastu on the border of Nepal and India. His father’s name was Suddhodana and mother’s name was Maya. The ganasangha (tribal republic) to which he belonged was known as the Sakya. It was an oligarchy and his father was the chief of this polity. At the age of 16, Siddhartha was married to Yasodhara. They had a son later on who was named Rahul. Soon after Rahul’s birth, Siddhartha became a renunciate at the age of 29. He kept wandering for a few years when he ultimately sat down to meditate and received enlightenment at the age of 35 at Bodh Gaya in Bihar. He gave his first sermon at Sarnath near Varanasi known as ‘Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dharma’. He also proclaimed himself as Tathagata (‘one who has attained what is really so’). After that, he spread around his teachings and died in c. 486 BCE at the age of 80 in Kushinagar in Uttar Pradesh.

The Buddha questioned the idea that the Vedas were infallible, he criticized the practice of sacrifices and rituals for attaining salvation, and he rejected the hierarchical principle of the varna order. He preached the following Four Noble Truths:

• Life is suffering.
• Suffering is caused by craving.
• Suffering can have an end.
• There is a path which leads to the end of suffering.

Buddhism envisages an endless chain of cause and effect. Everything which takes birth is full of sorrow (dukkha), is impermanent (anicca) and lacks self-essence (anatta). Nirvana from the cycles of birth and rebirth is the ultimate goal. The eight-fold path which would take one out from this cycle is known as ‘the middle way’. Thus, the two most important ideas associated with Buddhism are the Four Noble Truths and the middle path. Moreover, in Buddhism, there is no God and no soul, no ritualism and no magic. Buddhism accepted members of all castes and women into the Sangha. At this level, at least, social inequalities were abolished.

 

Development and Expansion of Buddhism

According to tradition, after the death of the Buddha, the Buddhists held their first council at Rajagriha in c. 400 BCE in order to determine the real teachings of the founder. This attempt eventually resulted in the collections of his teachings in three baskets (tripitika).

The Second Buddhist Council was held in c. 383 BCE at Vaishali which resulted in a split within the religion between Sthaviras (the elders) and Mahasamgikas (great assembly).

Under of reign of Emperor Asoka, who had become a follower, Buddhism became firmly established in North India and the Emperor also sent emissaries to various parts of Asia to spread the creed of the Buddha. It was in this period that the Third Buddhist Council was held at Pataliputra in c. 250 BCE.

In the course of time, three important schools developed within Buddhism:

1. Theravada (the doctrine of the elders)
2. Mahayana (the great vehicle)
3. Vajrayana

Theravada was the first to evolve, claiming to be based on original teachings of the Buddha. This school of Buddhism holds predominant influence in South Asia (as in Sri Lanka and Myanmar).

Mahayana developed later with many famous Buddhist philosophers belonging to this trend. It was more philosophical and transcendental. It also did not consider the Buddha just as a historical person but established him as the purest God. It also laid less stress on monastic life and allowed lay followers in their meetings and listened to their views. Mahayana philosophers introduced the idea that anybody from any caste and status could become enlightened (bodhisattva). The most famous Buddhist philosopher belonging to the Mahayana was Nagarjuna (in 2nd century CE) who is reputed to have established the trend known as Madhyamaka or the ‘Middle Path’, which was a sophisticated improvisation of the similar original teaching.

It was under the aegis of Mahayana that Buddhism spread to South India, Central Asia and China between 200 BCE and 200 CE. It is more prevalent in Tibet, Central Asia, China and Japan.

Vajrayana developed still later having many features of the tantra. In contrast to Theravada school, Vajrayana refused to strictly follow monasticism and rejected its puritanical attitude towards women. It focused on human body and considered the unity of male and female important for achieving salvation. Like other schools of Buddhism or even more so, and in conformity with tantric tradition, Vajrayana was opposed to caste discrimination and welcomed anybody to join it.

For about a thousand years, from around 400 BCE to 600 CE, Buddhism was the most dominant cultural influence in South Asia. It continued to influence art, architecture and literature till the middle of first millennium CE. Great Buddhist universities were founded in India. The greatest of these was the Nalanda University where, at any given time, over ten thousand students studied logic, grammar, epistemology, medicine and religion. It was a great center of learning and continued to flourish from the seventh to the twelfth century.

 

Decline of Buddhism in India

It is astonishing that Buddhism declined and disappeared in its country of origin even as it spread far and wide in various parts of Asia exercising major influence and even dominance on the religious and cultural lives of several countries. Various scholars have given their opinions on this issue.

According to A.L. Basham, Buddhism faced enormous challenge from a ‘reformed’ Hinduism which absorbed innumerable local gods into its pantheon as avatars of Vishnu and Shiva. Even the Buddha was declared to be the ninth avatar of Vishnu thus bringing him within the Hindu fold. This move was supported at another level by the new philosophical upsurge within Hinduism, pioneered by Acharya Shankara, which focused on building of institutions to support the religion. The influence of Buddhism had declined in the lives of the common people, and it had become mostly restricted to the monasteries.

Finally, with the Muslim invasion, monasteries and Buddhist institutions were destroyed and monks killed. With the monks running away to inaccessible areas like Tibet for shelter, Buddhism was extinguished from the country where it had originated and wielded such large influence for more than a thousand years.

B. R. Ambedkar also was of the opinion that it was Muslim invasion which dealt final blows to Buddhism in India, after it was weakened by resurgent Hinduism, leading to its disappearance.

According to Carl Olson, the decline of Buddhism happened during the Gupta period. The Buddhist monasteries had flourished when they had received social and political support by the people and favorable kings. When the kings, after the fall of the Mauryan dynasty, turned away from Buddhism, ‘monastic life became more precarious, and its leadership gradually eroded’. The emergence and growth of many Hindu devotional movements gradually won over the lay followers of Buddhism leading to the decline of its social support. The resurgent Hinduism also adopted many ideas of Buddhism attempting to absorb it within its expanding fold. The long wave of invasions from the North-west region beginning with the Huns in the sixth century continued until the thirteenth century (by the Turkish invaders) which destroyed monasteries and images of worship, killed monks and nuns, and obliterated the centers of Buddhist learning. All these developments led to the wiping out of Buddhism from North India, although it survived in South India until the seventeenth century. And of course, it continued to flourish in East and South-east Asia.

Damien Keown also considers that since 450 CE onwards, Buddhism suffered due to the successive invasions by the Huns who destroyed Buddhist monasteries in Afghanistan and North-west India. Later since the tenth century, the Muslim Turkish invasions dealt a decisive blow to Buddhism as the attackers destroyed the monasteries and universities, burnt the libraries, and destroyed the idols of the Buddha and Bodhisattvas and other art works in North-west, North and then East India.

Gail Omvedt, on the other hand, disputes the ‘sword of Islam’ thesis and argues that it was the preceding confrontation between Buddhism and Hinduism which had severely weakened Buddhism. Moreover, she argues that as major missionary religions, both Buddhism and Islam had much more at stake and were more in competition not only in India, but the world over than Hinduism ever had with Islam. In fact, she argues, Brahmanical Hinduism reached an accommodative understanding with the Islamic regimes in India if the Muslim rulers allowed the caste system to function as usual. According to her, the Muslim rulers were quite accommodating in this regard to work as upholders of the Varna order almost as the Hindu rulers had been.

 

Revival of Buddhism in Modern India

Revival of Buddhism in India began with the interests displayed by some Orientalist scholars and some other European intellectuals in Buddhism in the late nineteenth century. The leaders of the Theosophical movement, H. S. Olcott and H. P. Blavatsky contacted the Asian Buddhists in 1875. They were successful in energizing two important Sri Lankan Buddhist scholars, David Hewaviratne and Anagarika Dharmapala, to work towards the revival of Buddhism in South Asia. The extensive work by William Rhys Davids on Buddhist canonical texts greatly helped in the process. In 1891, Dharmapala came to India and attempted to restore traditional Buddhist places of worship such as Bodh Gaya. In the same year, Mahabodhi Society was formed in Colombo. In India, many scholars began exploring our Buddhist past. Famous historians like Rajendralal Mitra, R.G. Bhandarkar and Hari Prasad Shastri were important early intellectuals who wrote on Buddhism. Later, Sarat Chandra Das was involved more deeply in writing and spreading information about Buddhism. In 1882, he published a journal for the Buddhist Text Society and, in 1893, Anagarika Dharmapal gave him the responsibility of editing the Maha Bodhi Journal. K.A. Keluskar published a popular book on the Buddha in 1898. This was the first book on the Buddha which Ambedkar read later on. Dharmanand Kosambi became a Buddhist in 1902 and wrote many important works on the Buddha and Buddhism. One of his important books, Bhagwan Buddha (1940), had an impact on Ambedkar’s thinking on the subject.

The Tamil Dalit leader Iyothee Thass was one of important early figures who led the movement for the revival of Buddhism in India. By the 1890s, Iyothee Thass was firmly interested in Buddhism and in 1898 he visited Sri Lanka to be more acquainted with the doctrine. He was instrumental in linking Buddhism to the masses, particularly in Tamil Nadu in the early decades of the twentieth century. His writings and movement enabled Buddhist ideas to spread beyond the confines of intellectuals and middle classes. He claimed that the Tamil Dalit caste Paraiyars were the original inhabitants of Tamil Nadu and they had been Buddhist in the Ashokan period. He also argued that the Paraiyars were originally Buddhists who had descended from the Buddha’s own clan, the Sakyas. He was instrumental in founding the Sakya Buddhist Society which attracted members from both the Dalit and non-Dalit castes.

Laxmi Narasu was another important Buddhist activist and scholar at the turn of the century. He published an important book, The Essence of Buddhism, in 1907 in which he tried to re-interpret Buddhist dogmas regarding karma, dharma and sorrow (dukka).

During the 1920s, many other Dalit leaders and intellectuals were attracted towards Buddhism, claiming it as their original religion. However, the overall reach of Buddhism remained limited and by the 1930s, various other forms of devotional faiths were adopted by Dalit movements in many parts of the country.

 

Ambedkar and Buddhism

According to Gail Omvedt, ‘Ambedkar’s movement towards Buddhism began in 1908, when he first received a book on the Buddha’s life. He followed it with reading on Indian tradition and whatever Buddhist texts he could get access to, with discussions, with visits to the ancient sites of Buddhist caves in Maharashtra. It reached a climax in 1935 when Ambedkar announced, ‘Although I have been born a Hindu, I will not die a Hindu.’ And it culminated in October 1956 in the city of Nagpur in central India when he and 400,000 followers took the ‘three refuges’ of traditional Buddhism and an additional 22 vows.’ However, it seems that this journey had not been so continuous. Various alternatives and strategies were adopted to fight against the caste oppression which varied from reform within Hinduism, as exemplified in temple entry campaigns, to the choice of Christianity, Islam or Sikhism as an alternative religion. It was only around the mid-1930s that Buddhism began to be seriously considered by Ambedkar as a comprehensive alternative to Hinduism. In 1933, he showed an inclination to consider Buddhism as an alternative religion. He also named his house ‘Rajagriha’ which was a center of the Buddha’s teachings.

Even when Ambedkar had become convinced about the greater appropriateness of Buddhism, he did not adopt it simply. He instead radically re-interpreted Buddhism in the light of modern ideas and imbued it with a post-enlightenment sensibility where secularism stood along with the ideals of equality, liberty and fraternity. For him, Buddhism was based on reason, not on revelation or rituals.

Ambedkar’s re-interpretation of the Buddha’s teachings derives authority from the great teacher himself as he told his disciple, Ananda, not to rely on any scripture or paths shown by others, but to find one’s own path based on reason and experience:

O Ananda, be ye lamps unto yourselves. Be ye a refuge to yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth as a lamp. Hold fast as a refuge to the Truth. Look not for refuge to anyone besides yourselves. And how, Ananda, is a brother to be a lamp unto himself, a refuge to himself

Ambedkar argued that while other prophets promised salvation, the Buddha was the only one who made no such promise. He distinguished between mokshadata (the provider of salvation) and margdata (the one who shows the way). According to the Ambedkar, the Buddha wanted each individual to find his or her own path.

Ambedkar declared that the ‘purpose of Dhamma is to reconstruct the world’ and presented Buddhism as the religion which transformed the world. He attempted to rescue what he thought were the original teachings of the Buddha, the fundamental principles of the creed, from what he considered the spurious interpretations as well as from the distortions brought about by the process of Brahmanical cooption of the Buddha.

Thus, Ambedkar did not adopt the prevalent Buddhist ideas about the Four Noble Truths by declaring that they were not part of the original teaching of the Buddha. He considered such ideas as pessimistic and escapist. Sorrow in the world is not self-inflicted by the individual. In fact, he argued, suffering in the world arose due to oppression of one group or individual by another group or individual. He asserted that Buddhism did not preach a constant condition of sorrow; instead, Buddhism was about the way to eliminate sorrow and suffering from the world.

He also rejected the conventional Buddhist notion of karma as the cause of rebirth. He argued that since Buddhism rejected the existence of soul, it is not possible therefore to entertain the idea of rebirth. Moreover, the ideology of karma justifies status quo and the caste system.

Ambedkar also questioned the role of the Buddhist Sangha as a monastic institution where the renouncer-monks sought spiritual self-realization. Instead, he wished to reorient the Sangha towards social service to the larger community. Ambedkar did not think that the Sangha was a self-contained and isolated world of the monks and nuns. Instead, he visualized it as a social service center which worked for the uplift of the poor and the oppressed. Thus, he argued that ‘a bhikkhu who is indifferent to the woes of mankind, however perfect in self-culture, is not at all a bhikkhu’.

Ambedkar placed more emphasis on the Buddhist idea of the ‘middle path’ between the strict asceticism-renunciation of the world and a hedonist-luxurious life. He emphasized the Buddhist virtues such as love, kindness and compassion towards fellow human beings.

Ambedkar conceived Buddhism as a this-worldly religion rather than an other-worldly religion. According to him, Buddhism was capable of delivering liberation to the oppressed people through its teachings of equality and justice. For him, Buddhism was truthful, ethical and rational. It did not believe in any god but relied upon the individual to be his / her own guide. At the same time, Ambedkar saw in Buddhism ‘a theory of social action’ which ‘can be a plausible ground for a Buddhist concept of social justice’. Thus, both the individual and the social were parts of his conception of Buddhism.

He went to the extent of considering Buddhism as working against and as providing solution to the exploitation and oppression of human beings. According to Gail Omvedt, Ambedkar ‘held out the Sangha as the ideal Communist society, and he believed that through the morality of Dhamma humans could transform themselves and reconstruct society’. He argued that not only Buddhism strove for equality, but it’s also ‘goal was, in essence, a welfare state, with a major aim of providing wealth to the destitute’. Ambedkar called his radical re-interpretation of Buddhism as Navayana, to differentiate it from the existing schools within Buddhism – Mahayana, Theravada and Vajrayana. Although his re interpretation was thoroughly original, he also derived from the early-twentieth century interpretations of Buddhism by Iyothee Thass and Laxmi Narasu. The result of Ambedkar’s interpretation of Buddhism was published after his death as The Buddha and His Dhamma (1957). In this, he presents Buddhism not just as a spiritual but also as a rational system which would work to transform the world and free the people from sorrow.

Ambedkar visualized a fundamental conflict between Hinduism and Buddhism. While he identified Hinduism with inequality and unreason, he extolled Buddhism as a rational religion of equality and brotherhood. According to him, the decline and defeat of Buddhism resulted in a sharp division of society into castes and the spread of untouchability. Most of Buddhists, argues Ambedkar, who refused to the absorbed by the now-dominant Brahmanism were declared to be untouchables. In his famous essay, The Untouchables (1948), he argued that the Dalits were Buddhists who were condemned as untouchables by a resurgent Brahmanism.

On 14 October 1956, Ambedkar embraced Buddhism along with his family and around 400,000 followers at a deeksha (conversion) ceremony held in Nagpur. Ambedkar was instrumental in helping the process of revival of Buddhism in India and his death was held as ‘Mahaparinibbana’ (the great voyage) by his followers.