Democracy on Buddhistic Approach

Panya Klaydesh* Sukit Chaimusik** Pachabodee Yaemsoonthorn***

Abstract This article describes the Buddhist principle compatible with the democratic principle. Interpretation of and is more generally attempted to describe in the same accord to assure that Buddhism will be accepted compatible with the current modern government. There are two compatible characteristics as 1. The democratic principle of the Buddhist monastic community: 1) Government of the , by the Bhikkhus, for the Bhikkhus2) All Bhikkhus are equalunder the law (Dhamma and )3) All Bhikkhus can participate to comment and advise the 4) Decision-making by all Bhikkhus 2. The democratic principles in the Buddhist teaching which are similar to Democratic principle nowadays as 1) People Participation 2) Equality 3) Freedom 4) Majority.

Keywords: Democracy, Buddhistic Approach 1. Introduction democracy is widely utilized and extended Democracy is currently accepted by into the religious beliefs in two manners: a wide range of people around the world. 1) contradictory to the religious principle It is also supported by several scholars as -- the democratic principle denies the the best government. The principle of religious concept, incompatible with any

* Assistant Professor., Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Khonkaen Campus ** Associate Professor., Graduate School, Mahamakut Buddhist University *** Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Khonkaen Campus 138 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ democratic principle, and 2) consistent with synonymous. Both systems delegate the the religious principle -- the religious principle power to govern their elected representatives. is harmoniously interpreted in line with the In a , however, these officials are democratic principle to assure that it is the expected to act on their own best judgment world’s best principle of government. of the needs and interests of the country. Similarly, this article describes the Buddhist The officials in a democracy more generally principle compatible with the democratic and directly reflect the known or ascertained principle. Even though Buddhism has not views of their constituents, sometimes directly indicated democracy since it came subordinating their own judgment. after for a long time, the Buddhist concept Ideas that have kindled the struggle and principle are partly compatible with for democracy in the modern world are the the democratic principle. rights of man and the dignity of the individual which have expressed this attitude. In this 2. Meaning and concept of Democracy sense, the records The origins of the term democracy the growth in scope of man’s sense of can be traced back to Ancient Greece. Like moral concern. Moreover, this democratic other words ending with ‘cracy’(for example, moral sense generally implies something autocracy, aristocracy and bureaucracy), about not only the goals that man should democracy is derived from the Greek word seek but also the spirit in which they seek Kratos, meaning power, or rule. Democracy them. A man of democratic temper will thus means ‘rule by the demos’; (the pursue human welfare, but he will not do demos referring to ‘the people’, although so in a context of rigid ranks and hierarchies. the Greeks originally used this to mean ‘the For he seeks more than the improvement poor’ or ‘the many’). Plato and Aristotle in of man’s material condition, he seeks their Ancient Greece viewed democracy as a development of man’s material condition; system of rule by the masses at the expense he seeks their development as independent of wisdom and property. individuals and their entrance as full Although often used interchangeably, participants into the enterprises of their the terms democracy and republic are not community. To believe in democracy is to ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 139 wish to help individuals by giving them the continuous involvement in decision-making, tools to help themselves.1 through devices such as referendum, mass Democracy gives so much freedom meeting, or even interactive television. The to the individual and leaves so much to his alternative and more common form of powers of judgment and self-discipline; it democratic participation is the act of voting, depends more than most other forms of which the central feature of what is usually government on an unspoken atmosphere called . When and on the willing allegiance of most of its citizen vote, they do not so much make citizens to certain moral principles. A the decisions that structure their own chosen democratic form of government may exist lives that will make those decision on their in a society where this atmosphere and behalf. What gives voting its democratic moral outlook are weak or still in the process character, however is that, if the election of development. But in any society where is competitive, it empowers the public to democratic government can be said to be ‘kick the rascal out’, and it thus makes reasonably safe, certain attitudes will be politicians publicly accountable. deeply ingrained and certain ideals will Perhaps a more helpful starting be widely shared.2 Most conceptions of point from which to consider the nature of democracy are based on the principle of democracy is Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg ‘government by the people’. This implies Address, delivered in 1864 at the height of that, in effect, people govern themselveswhich the American Civil War. He extolled the they participate in making the crucial virtues of what he called “government of decisions that structure their lives and the people, by the people, and for the determine the fate of their society. This people”. This have made clear that democracy participation can take a number of forms. links government to the people. The precise However, in the case of direct democracy, nature of democratic rule has been the popular participation entails direct and subject of severe ideological and political

1 Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc., The Power of the Democratic Idea, (Bombay : Popular Prakasshan, 1967), p. 2. 2 Ibid., p. 1. 140 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ debate. Whether or not this definition can do for you ask what you can do for describes the political process in so-called your country.” This is the reminder for Western is a matter of opinion. citizens to have recognition of their Democracy is an emotive term which too duties on their rights which are concept of many implies the freedom of the individual democratization. to participate in those decisions which However, the simple notion of ‘rule affect his life. This suggests that the individual by the people’does not get us very far. In should be directly and regularly involved Bernard Crick’s word, “democracy is in the political process. Only then will the perhaps the most promiscuous word in the ideal of government by the people world of public affairs”.A term that can become a reality. However, from a pluralist mean anything to anyone is in danger of perspective, there is no inconsistency meaning nothing at all. Amongst the between democracy and the exclusion of meanings that have been attached to the the majority from active participation in the word ‘democracy’ is follows:4 political process. From this viewpoint, 1. a system of rule by the poor and democracy is seen as a system of disadvantaged. representative government whereby a 2. a form of government in which plurality of elites represents the range of the people rule themselves directly and interests in society. The pluralist perspective continuously, without the needsof profes- therefore implies that representative sional politicians or public officials. government is the only way the democratic 3. a society based on equal ideal can be realized in contemporary opportunity and individual , rather society.3 As a saying of the former Ameri- than hierarchy and privilege. can President, John F. Kennedy had been 4. a system of welfare and said at his oathing ceremony for presi- redistribution aimed at narrowing social dency in 1961 “Ask not what your country inequalities.

3 Michael Haralambos and Robin Heald, Sociology Themes and Perspectives, (New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 135. 4 Andrew Heywood, , (NewYork : Palgrave, 2002), p. 68. ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 141

5. a system of decision making model of democracy.5 based on the principle of majority rule. 6. a system of rule that secures the 3. Democracy in Buddhism rights and interest of minorities by placing Main characteristic of democratic check upon the power of the majority. system is the people in a state are equal 7. a mean of filling public offices under the law although they have the right through a competitive struggle for the and freedom under the limitation by law. popular vote. Democracy is not best political system but 8. a system of government that is better than other systems in present. serve the interest of the people regardless Buddhism is not democracy but some of of their participation in political life. its feature is similar. We can study and The phrase ‘rule of the people’ analyze the similarity of both democracy may define democratic principle is best and Buddhism. viewed as a mosaic, the element of which, When we consider the Buddhism in by themselves, or in variety of combinations a point of democratic , it can be with each other, generate different models considered into two scopes as: of democracy. The model of democracy, 1. In narrow sense, we can in each case, depends upon which principles consider only in the Sangha community. are combined and, among them, which are 2. In broader sense, we can privileged. Thus, freedom and equality are consider generally in Buddhist teaching. identified as the central justificatory 3.1 Democracy and Sangha principles of democracy, and autonomy as community. the principle underpinning both, it is Sangha is the Buddhist monastic particularly combinations of all (or some) community, everybody when they joined of them, and the dominant role played by this , they have been under same anyone in this combination, which governing like all rivers fall into the sea. contribute to the construction of particular When we consider Sangha society in a

5 Niraja Gopa lJayal (Ed), Democracy in India, (New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 9. 142 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ point of democratic view, it can conclude concerning the evil of such actions. Finally, as follows: the Buddha, when he was alive, 1. Government of the Bhikkhus, by recommended and followed it as the the Bhikkhus, for the Bhikkhus. central regulation. It thus became an act It appears that the rules of of laws. discipline of the Buddhist Sangha, create a Such a law the Buddha, before his well-knit system of Democracy. The passing away, gave the right of amendment. Buddhist Sangha represents a system of He said, “when I am gone, Ananda, let the government formed by the Bhikkhus, for order, if it should so wish, abolish all the the Bhikkhus, and of the Bhikkhus. This is lesser and miner precepts.”6 It is a right democracy in the form as well as in the representing great freedom for the member spirit. The pattern which is represented as of a society to be able to change, cut or being laid down by the Buddha for the add laws to suit their conduct. How regulation of affairs of the Sangha has been prophetic was Buddha when he realized described as democratic, because there is that static laws cannot serve the purpose no monarchical head, no authoritarian of a changing society. The very chain of command and responsibility and amendment-making process in a modern because a recognized procedure exists for constitution is based on this assumption. decision-making by the whole community The Buddha has given the supreme corporately. power of decision making to the Sangha. The prevalence of laws of community He asked Bhikkhus to take their in points towards the existence of democracy. themselves and in the Dhamma and not It was derived from evolution and in any external agency. He advised them experience of Sangha affairs. The procedure to attach importance not to the physical of enacting law was based on the fact that body of the Teacher (Buddha) but to his if there was some wrong action, it was teaching. Therefore, after the Parinibbâna, taken to the assembly of the Sangha by Ananda was asked by the Magadhan some Bhikkhus. There would be discussions minister, Vassakâra as to who would lead

6 Su.DT.M. 10/141/123. ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 143 the Sangha thereafter, the former could nationalities, spoke different dialects and immediately answer that the monks would represented different religious be guided by the Dhamma itself. The temperaments. A variety of intellect, Buddha has given a democratic organization imagination and spiritual nature were to the Sangha. The disputes in the Sangha willingly in the common life of a single were solved in a democratic manner.7 religious order to pass as Sâkyaputtiya Every Sangha affairs have to be performed Samanas.8 Every member of the Buddhist by Sangha assembly, which is the combined Sangha has an equal right to lead the holy form of all Bhikkhus for governing all Bhikkhus. life in order to attain the highest goal of 2. All Bhikkhus are equality under life—Nibbâna, under the same law. It is the law (Dhamma and Vinaya). well-known that the Buddhist Sangha has The statement had been various kinds of people from various mentioned already that the men and classes, castes, and families but they are women who renounced the world and under the same law and order in a new accepted the Master as their teacher and society which supports the spirit of the guide were privileged to feel that they social equality. belonged to one and the same brotherhood CullavaggaVinayaPitaka refers to under a loving father. They came from equality under the discipline and doctrine: different social grade, belonged to different Just, O Bhikkhus, as the great rivers- that is to say, the Gangâ, the Yamunâ the AciravatĨ, the Sarabhu, and the MahĨ - when they have fallen into the great ocean, renounce their name and and are thenceforth rekoned as the great ocean. Just so, O Bhikkhus, do these four castes – the Khattiyas, the Brahmans, the Vessa and the Suddas- when they have gone forth from the world under the doctrine and discipline proclaimed by the

7 S.R.Goyal, A History of Indian Buddhism, (Meerat : KusumajaliPrakashan, 1987), pp. 168-169. 8 Shobha Mukerji, The republican trends in Ancient India, (Delh i : MunshiramManoharlal, 1969), p. 151. 144 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐

Tathâgata, renounce their names and lineage and enter into the number of the Sakyaputtiya Samanas.9

Equality in society was rationalized to you, do you have no a fault in my any by the Buddha through the Buddhist actions or speaking?”10 From his speech, it Sangha by making the Dhamma (Universal may be said that the Buddha gave the right norm) and Vinaya (particular norms for and freedom to all Bhikkhus to comment monks) as the central principle of common and advise or give the suggestion, if they conduct for every member of such a thought that it was wrong, it may be the society. harmfulness of Sangha. Besides he has It can be said that all Bhikkhus are allowed all Bhikkhus to advise to each equality under the same law as Dhamma other. It can be well known from Pavârana and Vinaya. They can live together by ceremony. The ceremony of Pavârana was listening and being respectful to the senior performed at the end of the Vassâvasa monks, particularly to the head of the (Rain-retreat). It was a solemn conference Sangha (Sanghathera), and they are equality at which each requested the also in the Sangha assembly. assembly to call him to account if they had 3. All Bhikkhus can participate to seen or heard or suspected him to be guilty comment and advice to the Sangha. of any transgression during the period of The Buddha allowed all .11 This is one of Democratic principle Bhikkhus to advise him, if they thought that which everybody can participate to his actions were not appropriate. As it comment and advise the Government. All appeared in MahapavâranâSutta that when Bhikkhus have freedom under the laws the Buddha had been in residence at (Dhamma and Vinaya) and they should not PupphâramVihâra with five hundreds of take with another’s freedom. They Bhikkhus, he said “Now, O Bhikkhus, I offer have to consider the virtue of righteousness

9 Vi.C. 7/460/18. 10 Su.S.S. 15/744/231. 11 K.L.Hazra, Constitution of the Buddhist Sangha, (New Delhi : B.R. Publishing Corporation, 1988), p. 135. ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 145 knowing the cause, the purpose, oneself, years of his religious propagation had been moderation, the proper time, the society some aspect of thought and practicing and the individual.12 which are similar to Democratic principle 4. Decision-making by all Bhikkhus. in nowadays as follows: A system of decision making by 1. People Participation majority or popular vote is the main feature The Buddha had established of Democracy. But the Buddha did not new society and his followers had consider it as main feature. He had increased. He did not formulate his social allowed Bhikkhus to hold regular and formation or structure distinctly. He frequent meetings. This meeting had been considered the situation and suitable time done in the assembly. Every affair had to before decision-making for something. decided by all Bhikkhus. He allowed in Religious ceremony and legislation were some cases to do decision making by the originated by participation of some vote of majority as called “Yebhuyyasikâ”. Buddhist laymen and disciples who made This is the one of means for settling a significance of ceremony and legislation. disputes. This form was adopted only in a When he had considered that it was Vivâdâdhikarana (contention in doctrine agreeableto the purpose of monastic and discipline) and only when the matter legislation, he adopted and laid down the in issue was of a grave character and the suitable practice appropriately. But if it did assembly got out of hand and a unanimous not agreement to, he would reject that decision was found to be impossible. The recommendation also. For example, the decision arrived at by the vote of the Buddha, when people censured his majority. Thus Buddha’s thought is broarder disciples who traveled at any time unlike than democracy as the decision-making is other ascetics who resided in rainy season, done by all not by majority. had allowed Vassâvâsa (Rain-retreat) ceremony following traditional culture. He 4. Democracy and Buddhist teachings borrowed the custom of from Buddha’s teachings throughout 45 the Brâhmanical society at the suggestion

12 Su.Dî.Pâ. 11/331/114; Su.A.Satta. 23/65/114. 146 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ of Bimbisâra, King of Magadha.13 etc. It can the qualities of human beings on the basis be said that the Buddha adopted people of their actions or conduct. participation to give some suggestion and Buddhism has adopted human protestation from his government. beings’ equality—prestige, opportunity, 2. Equality. right, action, speech and thought. The teaching of the Buddha was Everybody have right and equality to attain not only for the few. It was meant for all— the ultimate goal—Nibbâna. The Buddha the high, the low, the rich, the poor, the has refused the caste system because it wise, and the ignorant, the noble-mind, and does not stipulate the worth of humanity, the immoral without any distinction. The but Kamma (action) stipulates. If each man Buddha rejected the concept of social in each caste did a meritorious deed, they status determined by birth, colour or could achieve the heaven equally. wealth. On the contrary, he determined by No caste or class can be absolved from Kamma as Buddha said that;

Not by birth does one become an outcast, not by birth does one become a Brâhmana; by deeds one becomes an outcast, by deeds one become a Brâhmana.14 Otherwise, the Buddha believed in honour, during the Buddhist epoch there the social equality of both sexes—men and was a change. Women came to enjoy more women. He was prepared to accept differ- equality and greater respect and authority ences between man and man, but based than ever hitherto accorded them.15 He not on heredity; for this, he relied on the said that “man does not be clever in any criterion of wisdom, deeds and virtue. In time, but woman is clever too”.16 Thus, the pre-Buddhist days the status of women Buddhism adopted equality of everybody in India was on the whole low and without in the way of life. The Buddha considered

13 S.R.Goyal, A History of Indian Buddhism, (Meerat : KusumajaliPrakashan, 1987), p. 157. 14 Su.Kh.Su. 25/383/342. 15 S.R.Goyal, A History of Indian Buddhism, (Meerat : KusumajaliPrakashan, 1987), p. 292. 16 Su.Khu.J. 28/1142/26. ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 147 the equality in the mind which was deeper in action, speech and thought. The Buddha than the equality in democracy which confirmed that human beings had own way emphasized to the equality under the law. of life without being controlled by outside. 3. Freedom He taught the principle of Kamma and Buddha had taught human result of Kamma that the destiny of man beings to free from all impurities on the does not come from supernatural beings basis of wisdom. The ultimate goal of but from his own actions. He said “According Buddhism is Nibbâna. When human beings to the seed that sown, so is the fruit attained the ultimate goal—Nibbâna, then ye reap these from. Doer of good will they had freedom and absent from all gather. Doer of evil, evil reaps.”17 ignorance. Besides the freedom in action, In Buddhism, one is supposed Buddhism has freedom in thought. The to be aware of the three root causes of Buddha did not coerce anybody to have suffering: greed, hatred and delusion. There faith without reasons. He emphasized that are great barriers to openness, compassion the person should have faith and wisdom and responsibility in short, to the Buddhist simultaneously; he had taught the principle conception of freedom, which is threefold. of faithfulness as called “Kâlâmasutta- First, all people should be free from Kankhâniyatthâna” which advised on how insecurities and dangers that threaten their to investigate a doctrine, as contained in existence such as poverty, disease, famine, the Kâlâmasutta. There are ten elements etc. Second is social freedom, all people as following: should be free from human oppression and 1. Be not led by report exploitation: and at last the freedom of the 2. Be not led by tradition. inner life. This means the freedom from 3. Be not led by hearsay. mental suffering, from impurities of the 4. Be not led by the authority of texts. mind that propel people to commit all 5. Be not led by mere logic. kinds of evils. 6. Be not led by inference. Buddhism gives the freedom for all 7. Be not led by considering

17 Su.S.S. 15/903/274. 148 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ appearance. dha’s lifetime, received precious robes 8. Be not led by the agreement from faithful people, but later, he was with a considered and appeared theory. finally blamed. This means that the 9. Be not led by seeming possibilities. majority is beneficial, but it is not always 10. Be not led by the idea, “this is beneficial. It mainly depends upon the our teacher”. quality of people. When understood and known by Besides, there are other Buddhist themselves that those doctrines are good principles with compatible characteristics or bad, blemished or unblemished etc., with democracy. For example, the principle they should reject or follow that doctrine.18 of compromise is the procedure for covering Thus, Buddhism adopts the freedom of over with grass, called Tinavatthâraka. everybody under the law of action. Everyone When there is a conflict in a party, a group, can act, speak and think without being or an organization, any case will increase controlledby anyone. violence or lead to schism if anyone is 4. Majority sentenced guilty. So, the procedure of a The rule of majority is a method reconciliation of both parties without need in democracy. The majority as the ruler or for clearing up the rights and wrongs is the administrator governs the state while allowed. The Buddha has taught his monks the minority as the opponent checks the a moderate path, not too tight and not too operation of rulers or administrators. In the loose, and he has taught his monks to Buddhist monastic community, the monastic mutually depend on each other as in government also used the principle of Singâlasutta.19 The Buddha has taught the majority, for instance, the sentence of the interpersonal relationship, too. As seen, the disciplinary case of dispute. The weakness western democracy is based on a certain of majority was sometimes not beneficial religion’s teaching whereas the eastern for the public. For example, Venerable democracy is conceptualized from the , a notorious monk in the Bud- religion, especially Buddhism, and stressed

18 SU.A.Ti. 20/505/241. 19 Su.Dî.Pâ. 11/198/206-206. ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐ ธรรมทรรศน์ 149 on the supremacy of righteousness. It is According to the author, Buddhism has a “the moderate democracy, so-called neutral view of government and does not Polity, which is the system focus on any certain concepts of without aggression and violence and the government. Importantly, the Buddhist system of compromise.”20 government of the Buddhist monastic community is based on the supremacy of 5. Conclusion righteousness (Dhammâdhipateyya), which Interpretation of Buddhism and is significantly regarded as the righteous democracy is more generally attempted to principle of government. Thus, whichever describe in the same accord to assure that regime is dependent upon the supremacy Buddhism will be accepted compatible the righteousness is accepted in accordance with the current modern government. with the Buddhist principle.

References 1. English (I) Secondary Data Mahamakut Buddhist University. Tipitaka Vol.7, 10,11,15,20,25,28. Bangkok : Mahamakut Buddhist University’s publishing, 1982. (II) Primary Data (1) Book : Andrew Heywood. Politics. New York : Palgrave. 2nd Edition, 2002. K. L. Hazra. Constitution of the Buddhist Sangha. New Delhi : B.R. Publishing Corporation, 1988. Michael Haralambos and Robin Heald. Sociology Themes and Perspectives. New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 2004. Niraja GopalJayal (Ed). Democracy in India. New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 2001.

20 PrayongSuwanbubpha, Political Philosophy in the East and West, (Bangkok : O.S.Printing House, 1998), p. 314. 150 ธรรมทรรศน์ ปีที่ ๑๗ ฉบับที่ ๒ ประจ�ำเดือน พฤษภาคม - สิงหาคม ๒๕๖๐

Prayong Suwanbubpha. Political Philosophy in the East and West. Bangkok : O.S. Printing House, 1998. Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The Power of the Democratic Idea. Bombay : Popular Prakasshan Inc., 1967. S.R.Goyal. A History of Indian Buddhism. Meerat : Kusumajali Prakashan, 1987. ShobhaMukerji. The republican trends in Ancient India. Delhi : Munshiram Manoharlal, 1969. Ven. Phradhammpitaka (P.A.Payautto). Creation of Democracy. Bangkok : Educational Technique Department Ministry of Education, 2001.