Issue

12th Issue (June, 2009)

Evaluative and Prescriptive Model of Buddhist Ethics Regarding Human Behaviour

Ven. Upali
University of Peradeniya
revupalisramon@gmail.com

01. Prologue

Buddhism employs a unique method of analysing and evaluating human behaviour. This method of explanation commences on the basis of three doors of performing actions: through body [kāyena], speech [vācā], and mind [cittena]. In this essay, I basically glimpse into the relationship of these three. Then I elucidate on the evaluative and prescriptive criteria used in Buddhism to understand and explain human behaviours. This aims at a definition of human culture based on human behaviours – one’s intention, speech, and, action.     

02. The Triangular Relation of Human Behaviour

The triangular relationship of the three doors of performing actions in Buddhism analyses human behaviour in two levels:

1. The primal level or the thinking stage – seed [bīja] or the root [mūla] of action originating in our thinking.
2. Expressive/communicative stage – the inner thoughts manifesting in our words [vācā] and bodily actions [kāyakamma].

Of the two the priority is given to the first, i.e. our thinking, because it is actually our thoughts that direct our physical or verbal behaviour. Therefore the major concern of Buddhist literature is pertaining to analysis and categorisation of our mind, mental behaviour, and demonstrating the ways of training and developing proper mental culture. This analysis explains that even those who are physically or verbally disabled can perform serious evil actions if the intention is evil. Conversely if they strive, they can even attain higher attainments [jhāna-s]. 

If the thought stage in primal level manifests in the exposure level only, others can see and judge one’s behaviour. Unless one attains the knowledge of ‘knowing others’ thoughts’ [paracittavijānanñāṇa] , it is impossible to know what another person thinks. However, there is an implicit relation between our thinking or emotions and physical expressions. Even in our unawareness, our emotions are reflected in physical expressions. If we are angry, for example, our facial expressions will reflect that.

Therefore if one thinks well, that will be reflected in his actions and speech. Similarly, if his thought or intention is bad, also his action and speech would reflect that. When one’s thinking is bad but does not express in words or action , then only that person is affected inside. But, if one expresses it then not only oneself but the person to whom one says bad words or misbehaves is also affected. It is at this level that we say social harmony is molested.

Actions done through these three doors are either good or bad. There are ample terminologies explaining this distinction and various levels of it. Some such terms that are frequently used in Tipiṭaka are – sīlo [moral], dussīlo [immoral], puñña [merit], pāpa [evil], sucarita [good behaviour], duccarita [bad behaviour], sādhu­ [good], asādhu [bad], dhammā [righteous or lawful], adhammā [unlawful], sappurisa [virtuous], asappurisā [vicious], sammā [right or proper], micchā [wrong, false or improper]etc. These terms are related to each other but taken individually, they have broader implications than what is explicit in their definitions. This shows the richness of Buddhist moral philosophy.

The terms sucarita and duccarita[1] are very close to the English words good-behaviour and misbehaviour. The Buddhist explanation of human behaviour is evaluative and prescriptive. The term ‘prescriptive’ is used here not to mean ‘authoritarian’ or ‘rigid’ but in the sense of virtues advocated by the Buddha to be exercised for maintaining the harmony. Buddhism does not only explain the sort of actions censurable or praiseworthy but also prescribes the noble standard of living. Hence, enumeration of similar items of moral principles can be seen categorised under different headings based on the magnitude of the results of our actions. 

Sometimes, someone’s evil actions [even murder] may go unpunished by state or law. But, according to Buddhism as long as s/he is not willing to change his/her attitudes, s/he is undergoing the punishment of that evil action. The line of demarcation drawn between good and bad in Buddhism is not complex. The simple definition of good action or behaviour is ‘doing things in such a way as not to harm either oneself or others.’ Therefore, every person is entitled with the responsibility and criteria to judge the good and bad. In the enumeration of these three doors of performing actions, we follow the traditional pattern of considering body first than speech, and lastly mind.

03. Bodily Misbehavior

Our body or physical energy is the best means to implement our thoughts and endeavour into action. Among the material achievements, physical well-being is said to be the greatest.[2] Therefore one should not exploit one’s physical energy recklessly and unproductively. There are four major misconducts committed by body [kāyaduccaritāni] subject to censure by the wise and harmful to social peace. They are categorized under four broad headings: killing or harming living beings, stealing or improper acquisition of wealth, sensual misconduct and consumption of alcoholic drugs.[3]

The present world is increasingly threatened by these evils. Despite being incorporated into laws and being subject to punishments, these evils do not seem to stop. The unnecessary mass destruction of human resources is seen not only in wars but also by infatuated persons blinded by hatred and their ego centric desires. Despite there is the exploitation of human labor. Deceitful traders are looking forward to cheat general people and take possession of their money using deceptive and unhealthy goods and trading destructive intoxicating drugs. Sexual abuse of children, prostitution, and commercialization of sexuality are crippling the human morality. Therefore the world is extremely in need of abstaining from these.

Abstention from these misconducts itself is a cultivation of the good behavior. This attempts to regulate human behavior for a true harmonious society. The outcome of refraining from these evil activities is shown in terms of gaining healthy physical condition, wealth, good social relations etc. in this as well as in future life. Besides abstinences from these misbehaviors, the Buddha had prescribed their opposites using positive terminologies. While refraining from harming living beings, for example, one should give up fighting with rods/sticks and weapons, being modest and compassionate, wishing the welfare of beings.[4]  

03. The Value of Speech: Use of Language

There are various perspectives in which language has been analysed. More than critical or grammatical analysis, we can see in various sutta-s that, the Buddha had an ethical point of view of language. Therefore, instead of finding grammatical components or literary elements, the Buddha’s discussions on language are based on the use and impact of language within the speaker and upon one’s audience at large. According to this approach, the Buddha has attempted to look at human mentality and attitudes through the words and the way one speaks. Thus, language could be either well-spoken [subhāsita] or badly spoken [dubbhāsita]. This explanation, however, relates language ultimately to ‘thinking level’ or ‘intention’ from where an action really begins.

The Buddha made very clear distinctions as to what sort of speech is good or bad. The fourth in the enumeration of five fundamental precepts [pañcasīlāni] is to refrain from falsehoods. Through this precept the Buddha’s stance towards the truth becomes obvious. In another instance the Buddha has been reported saying “There is nothing impossible for a person who speaks lie deliberately (sampajāno).”[5] Sincerity to think, know, and express the truth has been emphasized by the Buddha as a fundamental requirement of being a true human.

In various other instances, the Buddha elaborated on what sort of speech he recognises as ‘musāvāda’ [falsehood]. In fact, it is only one factor of several unwholesome speeches [vacīduccarita – lit. Misbehaviour of speech]. The expression vacīduccarita has been defined as – the distortion of the precept laid down for the door of speech.[6] There are four types of speech categorised under this. They are falsehood, harsh speech, slanderous speech, and frivolous talk.[7] The person who practices these four kinds of speech, or at least one, is directed to hell. One who refrains from these is directed to the heaven. The opposite of vacīduccarita is the practice of vacīsucarita. In one instance the Buddha said one who speaks the following five kinds is praised by the wise and never subject to anybody’s censure. They are: speaking on proper time, speaking the truth, exquisite/delicate words, speaking meaningful words, speaking with a heart full of love.[8]

Insincerity and deceitfulness are never appreciated in Buddhism. The danger in just believing what others say as truth has been pointed out in the famous discourse to the Kālāmas. In this discourse, the necessity of observation and investigation of others’ truth-claims has also been established. A similar criticism is made of insincere persons and back-biters. The Buddha says - there are four types of persons censurable by the wise. They are without test [ananuvicca] and examination [aparigāhetvā]

1. praise a person who is not praiseworthy.
2. blame a person who is praiseworthy
3. appreciate/showing approval what is not pleasing
4. not appreciating what should be appreciated.

These people the Buddha says are unwise, immoral, and above all have no personality. If one cannot discriminate the good and bad and one does not speak truth at appropriate places, what power does he have as a human being? There is no meaning of his back bone and standing erect, because he is already bent. In contrast to him, a wise person examines well and speaks the truth. There is no downfall for him. Regarding violation of truth, Ken Jones writes “…we live in an “information society” where it is now commonplace for information to be withheld or otherwise manipulated for one’s interests by those who have the power to do so.”[9] Therefore, disciplines of speech, as seen above, are immensely important to be exercised by media agents.  

04. Mental Behaviour

Of the three doors of performing actions, Buddhist philosophy exhibits great concerns on the factors included in the list of mental activities [manokamma].
When it speaks about evil mental behavior [manoduccarita] or unwholesome activities that are committed by mind, there are three factors: covetousness [abhijjā], ill-will [vyāpāda], and false-views [micchādiṭṭhi]. The first is to cherish desires for obtaining others’ possession which is not legally or morally possible to obtain. The second includes cherishing evil-thoughts and conspiracies to harm others. By that, Buddhism shows, one in fact paves the way for self destruction. Because when we harm others, naturally and certainly, they will retaliate and sometimes in worse ways. With regard to the third, i.e. wrong-views, there is a traditional list of ten wrong views. However, in Tipiṭaka we can see that the Buddha denounced various philosophical and existential views that were cherished by religious practitioners, ritualists, and general people. Simply defined, wrong views mean ‘not understanding the exact nature of phenomenal existence as it really is [yathābhūta].’ Cherishing wrong views does not only harm oneself or others, but also, is an obstruction to understand the reality of things and what happens around us.

The major problem, according to this explanation, that is responsible for social disharmony is cherishing fixed and wrong views overcome in a way or other by greed [lobha], hatred [dosa], and illusion [moha]. Free-will or free thinking and importance of reasoning, established in Kālāma sutta, do not encourage individualism in anyway. Ven. Dharmasiri has shown that free thinking has been wrongly defined in the present world, resulting in extreme egoistic attitudes or individualism that values no respect for other’s opinions.

The individualist belief that ‘I am right’ arises due to some rigid definition of right and wrong. A person may do business on wine, because there is no legal restriction in trading wine [with some other alcoholic drugs] in his country. He would not consider about the people who get addicted to wine and gradually lead to wastage of wealth, physical condition, and harm social peace. Buddhism discourages such wrongly defined concept of ‘right’ and ‘legal’. The reason is that a trader of wine may do the business well but considering in a broader sense it is only he who is benefited. A bigger society is on the gradual sway to destruction. At this point the Buddha shows how moral obligation could replace such individualist attitudes. Thus, in doing every activity and taking any decision, one should maintain absolute vigilance not to be strayed or subscribe into any wrong views. Buddhist definition of right [sammā] abandons all forms of extremism [anta].

06. In Terms of the Final Goal

In the spiritual level, the ultimate aim of Buddhist moral or intellectual exercise is attainment of ‘nibbāna’ – the complete extinction of suffering, the perfect bliss. “It is in relation to this attainment”, writes Prof. Premasiri “that Buddhism attached moral significance to all other human concerns”.[10] Among the factors contributing to this attainment, one should eradicate the hindrances [nīvaraṇa-s] that obstruct our worldly gains as well as spiritual attainments.[11] One needs to be vigilant [appamādo] and exert to overcome these hindrances and realize the four noble truths. The path prescribed to attain this final goal is the noble path comprising eight limbs. These also can be explained in terms of the three doors of performing actions and the threefold training: sīla, samādhi, paññā.  In the scheme of threefold training leading to the attainment of nibbāna, sīla [morality] comprises bodily and verbal behavior. The remaining two samādhi [concentration] and paññā [wisdom] are based on human psychology. The relation among these is inextricable. Wisdom arises with development of concentration and at the same time behavioral transformation also takes place. Various methods of meditation are prescribed to develop the mental culture. 

It may be observed that among the five precepts only the behavioral aspect, which falls under sīla, is taken into consideration. “Practice of sīla”, Prof. Premasiri asserts, “is a method by which a person could be vigilant about his overt behavior through abstention and conscious self-control, and the practice of the opposite type of actions, so that transformation occurs at the grossest and most tangible level of one’s personality.”[12] The implication is to progress from regulating our speech and bodily activities gradually to concentration and wisdom.

The evaluative and prescriptive model of Buddhist ethics with regard to human behaviour is not restricted to be followed by only Buddhists. In addition to these there are various other supportive virtues to be cultivated. The aim is to make our lives with the neighbourhood a ‘noble abode’ [brahmavihāra] comprising – loving kindness, compassion, appreciative joys, and equanimity. In addition the four bases of benevolence [saṅgahavatthu] are “conceived as the behavioural expression of the brahmavihāra”.[13] They consist of charity, good speech, service for the welfare of others, and non discriminatory behaviour.[14] The evaluative and prescriptive method has been applied in various other discourses.[15] This explains the human behaviour in general and aims at formulating a virtuous human society. It is impossible to achieve this aim by single person. Therefore Buddhism prescribes the virtues to be exercised by all the members of a society.

07. Conclusion

The above discussion presents a brief account of the evaluative and prescriptive model of Buddhist ethics regarding human behaviour. These are not to be regarded as commandments but as guidelines to evaluate our behaviour in any given situation. The ultimate aim of this model is to form a noble abode [brāhmavihāra] in the human society and attainment of nibbāna in the spiritual sense. 

08. Bibliography

1. Dhammapada, ed. Sumangala Thera, PTS, London, 1914
2. Majjhimanikāya, V. Trenckner and R. Chalmers, 3 vols.PTS, London, 1954-59
3. Itivuttakapāli, ed. E. Windish, PTS, London, 1889
4. de Silva, Padmasiri, Environmental Philosophy and Ethics in Buddhism, Macmillan Press Ltd. 1998
5. _________, Buddhism, Ethics and Society, Monash Asia Institute, Clayton. 1933
6. Narasu, P. Lakshmi, The Essence of Buddhism, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1993
7. Premasiri, P,D., “Introduction to Buddhist ethics” in: Studies in Buddhist Philosophy and Religion: Collected Papers, Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society, Singapore, 2006
8. Saddhatissa, H., Buddhist Ethics: Essence of Buddhism, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, 1970