(Ambedkar, 2011, 163-64) To me Buddha gave no satisfactory answer. His answers were: (a) a man should accept service which makes him good and avoid service which makes him bad; (b) lineage does not decide whether a man is good or bad; and (c) high ideals are more important than noble birth. He did not attack the social system and the social stratification directly.
Buddha is known for pronouncing decisions of social significance which go against his principles of universal love and compassion that he himself preached. For example, initially he had hesitation in accepting women in the Sangha at par with men and when he accepted them he put Eight Chief Rules (Ambedkar, 2011, 108) as a precondition for their acceptance; he advised young girls to be trained in Vinaya to serve their husband – whatsoever their parents shall give them – and to keep their money safe by not acting as thief or robber, wastrel or carouser (Ambedkar, 2011, 245). He did not permit soldiers and those under debt to join Sangha, violating their social obligations towards the chieftains or the moneylenders. To quote (Warder, 1980, 54):
… king Bimbisara ordered his generals to march out to quell some trouble on the borders. Some of the soldiers decide that it is a bad thing to fight, desert the army and join the Buddhist community. It is of course a serious crime by secular law to aid and abet desertion, and the King lodges a complaint, whereupon the Buddha promulgates a rule that those in the royal service may not be admitted to the community. It is also found necessary to make rules against admitting persons suffering from certain diseases and deformities. Slaves may not be admitted unless first released from slavery, otherwise again there will be trouble with the secular law. Thieves, debtors and murderers are excluded when they seek to evade the consequences of their actions by ‘leaving the world’. As a rule anyone under the age of twenty is not to be admitted. |
|
