Turning Over the Alms Bowl

I have to admit that I haven't been keeping up with the situation in Burma very well, but reading the latest news on the issue has reminded me of it again. When the monks in Burma started marching last year with their alms bowls turned upside down, I knew that this was the "turning over of the bowls" that I had heard about.

According to the article Burma: A monk's reflection, "Overturning the bowl" is called patta-nikkujjana-kamma in Pali. This is described in the Vinaya Pitaka of the Tipitaka as follows:

"The bowl may be overturned for a lay follower endowed with (any of) eight qualities: He/she strives for the monks' material loss, strives for the monks' detriment, strives for the monks' non-residence, insults and reviles monks, causes monks to split from monks, speaks in dispraise of the Buddha, speaks in dispraise of the Dhamma, speaks in dispraise of the Sangha. I allow that the bowl be overturned for a lay follower endowed with (any of) these eight qualities." (Cv. V.20.3)

So, as previously stated, monks typically try to stay out of politics because "running errands for kings and ministers of state" is considered Wrong Livelihood for monks. Unfortunately, monks can still get drawn into politics just from the simple act of accepting alms! From the same article:

The military rulers have committed many acts of violence against the general population, especially ethnic minorities, and now they turned their weapons also against the monks. At the same time they appeal to the "religious duties" of the Sangha: they should focus exclusively on the study and practice of the scriptural teachings (divorced from real life) and perform the required rituals (to legitimize the regime), not get involved in any activities that challenge the status quo.

So just accepting food and requisites from members of the government is seen as a sort of endorsement. At some point even this form of passive endorsement becomes intolerable for the monks, and they invoke patta-nikkujjana-kamma.

It's not entirely clear to me what's going to happen in Burma at this point. It seems that they're dealing with a typical stubborn military dictatorship of ruthless thugs. The Buddhist Channel web site has a page for those wishing to help.

A Constitution for Living by P. A. Payutto

Recently someone brought to my attention a book called A Constitution for Living, written by a Thai monk named P. A. Payutto and translated into English by Bruce Evans. I haven't read it yet, but it looks great as it summarizes a lot of stuff from the Tipitaka.

From the introduction:

Many people today look on life in all sectors as a struggle between conflicting interests—the "bosses" against the "workers," the "government" against the "people," the "rich" against the "poor," and even the "women" against the "men," or the "children" against the "parents." When the aim of life is seen as material wealth or power, society becomes a struggle between conflicting personal interests, and we are in need of an ethic to protect those interests. It is a "negative ethic": society is based on selfish interests—"the right of each and every person to pursue happiness"—and an ethic, such as "human rights," is needed to keep everybody from cutting each other's throats in the process.

The Buddhist teachings are a "positive ethic": well-being, rather than power or riches, is the aim; society is seen as a medium through which all people have equal opportunity to maximize self-development and well-being, and ethics are used to facilitate those ends.

So this sounds like it should be a good book for getting out of the negative political mindset, and for researching the political implications of the Tipitaka. I'm sure that I'll be drawing on this book for inspiration quite frequently.

Buddhist Military Sangha

An interesting blog just came to my attention via the E-Sangha Forums.

Buddhist Military Sangha is a blog describing itself as "an online resource for Buddhists associated with the United States Armed Forces."

Welcome to the Buddhist Military Sangha! This is a nonpolitical and nonsectarian forum for Buddhists serving in the US Armed Forces. Our Mission Statement:

• Provide a welcoming and positive forum for Buddhists currently serving or who have served in the military to communicate with and support one another.


• Recognize and promote honorable military service as in accord with the Eightfold Path's Right Livelihood.


• Correct misconceptions about Buddhists serving in the military.


• Help Buddhists unfamiliar with the military understand the jobs of their relatives and friends who are serving or who have served, and who love and respect the military profession.


• Help Buddhist Sanghas learn how to support and understand Buddhist military members, veterans, and their families.


• Represent the importance of religious pluralism and diversity in today's military population, and by extension in American society.


• Provide information about Buddhist Military Chaplaincy in US Armed Forces.

Now I'm sure some of the pacifist extremists out there won't approve, but I personally believe that armies are required by society, and somebody has to staff them. Even the wheel-turning monarch described in the Pali Canon has an army. Ideally armies never actually kill anyone, but history has shown that they at least need to be present in order to deter invasion.

I'd much rather have an army staffed with people who feel that hatred is bad and that killing is wrong than one staffed with people who delight in hatefully killing and torturing others. If someone has to kill, at the very least it should be a rational decision with the view that killing is bad and not be done out of hatred with the view that killing is perfectly fine. So I'm personally happy to see Buddhists who are willing to make the sacrifice of serving in the armed forces.

An interesting essay on the subject of Buddhism and warriors is Buddhism & The Soldier by Major General Ananda Weerasekera. It should be reiterated, as is done in his essay in bold type:

However it should be stressed that a soldier like all others is subject to the law of Kamma and will not escape the Kammic fruits of "taking the Life"of a sentient being (panatipatha) even though he may have had the overall noble intention of protecting his country and his people.

Since this is true, Buddhists should realize that soldiers are putting their kamma on the line, not just their lives. Essentially they're putting not only their current life on the line but future lives as well. This is worthy of respect, in my opinion, especially when those soldiers realize this.

I am a Marxist monk: Dalai Lama

I suppose this is not really new, but the Dalai Lama says he's a Marxist. He says this is because "Marxism is more ethical, unlike capitalism," according to the express news service in India.

Apparently the Dalai Lama doesn't understand Buddhism's 2nd precept which is:

I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

There's really no way around the fact that Marxism, in whatever form, expressly requires that property be taken from someone. I'm a little confused as to how this is more ethical than "capitalism" which essentially says that people have a right to own personal property and not have it stolen from them.

I'd also like to know how the fact that the Dalai Lama charges for his lectures fits in with the whole Marxist thing. I don't see other Buddhist monks doing this. I especially don't see the "right wing" Buddhist monks charging people money.

In any case, I fail to see anything inherently unethical about capitalism. You can have both greedy and generous people in all kinds of political and economic systems. I personally don't see how forcing people to give up their property is generous. Taking property from unwilling persons is inherently unethical regardless of why it's being done, just as killing is always unskillful.

Real generosity comes from a willingness to give away your own property, not take property from others and give it to those who you think are more deserving.

Furthermore, Marxist economic theory totally ignores the very Buddhist concept of developing skillfulness. In economic terms, skillfulness makes one more efficient and able to produce things of greater value. In fact, we see that in reality wealth is not simply "distributed" as some sort of fixed zero-sum resource, but actually produced by people depending on their skill. So what is more Buddhist here, something that acknowledges the role of and encourages the development of skill or something which doesn't?

The Dalai Lama has, unfortunately, bought into the Marxist lie of capitalism being inherently greedy and Marxism somehow being "fair" and generous. This is necessary to make the leap into the idea that "Buddhism supports Marxism because Marxism is non-greedy" or something. This claim about Marxism is not supported by Dhamma though, and as previously stated, Marxism even violates the second of the fundamental Buddhist precepts.

Really the ideal Buddhist state would probably be "capitalist" in the sense that people would own and trade their own property freely, but it would be populated with people who are simply generous enough to fund all public institutions voluntarily, without having to be taxed through threat of force.

This level of idealism in society will probably never come about though. For this reason it seems reasonable to fall back on the Buddhist concept of moderation and the philosophy of the middle path. In this sense, I'd say that Buddhism supports something more like a mixed economy in which some property is public and some is private. As for what degree of government intervention is required, it depends on what is most beneficial for people. This is why we have people who study economics; good intentions alone are not sufficient. We must develop skillfulness in how we govern, and ensure that programs designed to help people don't turn out to cause more harm than good as they have in every single communist country.

The Buddha, though practice of extremes such as self mortification, realized that extremes don't work. Evidence shows us that the same is true of political and economic extremes as well. It's very sad that the Dalai Lama hasn't come to this realization yet.

Free Tickets Gone! (Dalai Lama in Ann Arbor)

Looks like the Dalai Lama is really popular in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

I unfortunately don't have an University ID and a friend of mine who does, but didn't get in line a 5 AM, didn't manage to get tickets. I received the following in an email from Helaine Hunscher, Program Coordinator:

I was just informed by the Michigan Union Ticket Office that all of the free tickets to the 2 PM April 20 Sustainability Lecture by His Holiness the Dalai Lama have been given away in just three hours!

The only options to see his Wege Lecture on Sustainability are:

1) Volunteer as an usher all day Sunday (you would be required to work the Sunday morning Teaching Session hosted by Jewel Heart plus the Sunday afternoon Sustainability Lecture hosted by U-M) We will need 100 volunteers for each of the two days. Please visit: http://sitemaker.umich.edu/dlvolunteering/home

2) Watch a live web-cast of the Lecture. Instructions to join the web-cast will be posted, when arranged, at: http://css.snre.umich.edu/facts/dalailama.html

3) Because the Lecture tickets are free, there may be “no-shows” and we don’t want any empty seats at Crisler. Tickets all stated that seats would be held only until 1:45 PM, at which point, ushers will release any open seat to the general public, regardless of having a ticket or not.

There are some other non-free talks by the Dalai Lama the same day and the day before the free talk. Tickets are probably still available for those, but I'm personally going to pass.