Buddha’s approach to life
At one time the ideas of Buddha had a great impact in much of Asia and parts of Africa and Europe. Existentialists like Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Sartre and Kierkegaard (Moad, 2010; Teo, 1973) have taken interest in Buddhism and commented upon it. Although there are differences in interpretations but a dominant view seems to be that for both existentialism and Buddhism man is nothing (i.e., not a certain thing). The implication of this is that man himself determines his future and, therefore, he is fully responsible for his actions. There are no objective, essentialist laws of human nature. The world is unequal and human beings are different. As trees are all not the same due to differences in seeds human beings are different due to differences of Karmas. To quote Buddha: “All beings, O youth, have karma as their portion; they are heirs of their karma: they are sprung from their karma: their karma is their kinsman; their karma is their refuge; karma allots beings to meanness or greatness.” (Warren, 1980, 215)
Buddha’s approach to questions of life is more of psychological and philosophical rather than religious. Like Mahavir, Gautama is silent on issues which cannot be rationally examined such as existence of God or where does one go after death. On questions like this he did not respond and for him such questions are not amenable to settlement. He told that the cause of suffering (“all the meanness and agony without end”) is craving. Once a person understands the impermanent nature of reality and soullessness of existence, lives a simple, ethical life, and follows middle of the road approach in life he becomes free from suffering. Coomaraswamy (1916, 121) says:
It is most likely that the earliest Buddhism had no other moral code than that of the mental and moral discipline appointed for those who renounced the world and entered the Paths. The following Ten Commandments are those which are binding upon the Brethern:
To avoid (1) the destruction of life, (2) theft, (3) unchastity, (4) lying, (5) the use of intoxicating liquors, (6) eating between meals, (7) attending secular entertainments, (8) use of unguents and jewellery, (9) the use of high or luxurious beds, and (10) the handling of money. Those who attached themselves to the teaching of the Brethern, but remained laymen, were required to obey the first five of these injunctions – all of which, it will be noticed, are of a negative character; but in the case of laymen, the third commandment is taken to mean only the avoidance of adultery.
|
|
