Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Milinda
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2022 8:26 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Milinda »

Bundokji wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:14 pm
Rinpoche wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:59 pm If I remember well the sanskrit word for that is: Chakravarti Raja.
That word Raja is the same like in latin "Rex" or in french Roi and spanish Rey.

That Woke-movement is very based on "christianity", that like Islam is very plebeian as I said before.

The same that Islam and Christianity want to convert everybody to their paths, in order to "save them", that woke (that is somekind of democratic fundamentalism) want to convert everybody to their new-abrahamic non-teistic religion.
Thank you :anjali:

Do you know of any connection between the four classes of modern Hinduism (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and the Shudras) and the four spheres of Buddhist cosmology (Apaya, kama loka, rupa loka and arupa loka)?

From an ordinary (Abrahamic) hierarchical vantage point, the Ariya Sangha should be right on top, and yet being placed in rupa loka seems to fit nicely with the hierarchy of Indian society, considering that the Buddha belonged to the warrior cast.
It remembers me the exposition from Buddhism that Julius Evola made from Theravada Buddhism in: the DOctrine of Awakening.

It's a polemical topic because many people will relate that way of thinking to totalitarianism from century XX :twothumbsup: and this is something very ignorant.

And also it's very hard to meet people who see that this is a 'huge problem' --the democratizacion of the world-- when for example hundreds of times the Dalai Lama advocaded for 'democracy' in a western way that should cover and rule buddhism principles. :rofl:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by mikenz66 »

Rinpoche wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:38 pm And also it's very hard to meet people who see that this is a 'huge problem' --the democratizacion of the world-- when for example hundreds of times the Dalai Lama advocaded for 'democracy' in a western way that should cover and rule buddhism principles. :rofl:
I see no reason to make this conclusion. The Buddha didn't seek to change the political systems that lay people had devised at the time, but as far as his Sangha were concerned he created a very democratic system.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Johann
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Johann »

Bundokji wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 3:15 am As the US midterm elections are undergoing, i was wondering to what extent the human realm or samsara includes aspects of wider Buddhist cosmology. In western democracies in particular, "the house" is divided into representatives and senate (or common vs lords). Even a quick look at the terminology involved reflects how strange the human psyche is.

While modern interpretations interprets the above in terms of psychological structure, in Buddhism, thinking of it in more literal terms is encouraged.

Would it be accurate for a Buddhist to believe that many conflicts in the world are due to allegiances to different devas/brahmas in other realms? and if so, is changing allegiances possible from where we stand? and what are the consequences of it?
Good householder,

even the Devas and Asuras are in steady battle, and the Sublime taught them as well, that it is by seeing thinks dear that conflicts arise, never ends in sensual worlds, as the dear is subject of decay. What ever supports sensual restrain supports ease, what ever nourishes sensual desire, nourishes dis-ease and battles outwardly.
User avatar
Radix
Posts: 1274
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:42 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Radix »

mikenz66 wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:02 pmI see no reason to make this conclusion. The Buddha didn't seek to change the political systems that lay people had devised at the time, but as far as his Sangha were concerned he created a very democratic system.
How do you come to that conclusion??
The Sangha, democratic???
Western Buddhism is the perfect ideological supplement to rabid consumerist capitalism.
Glenn Wallis
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Sam Vara »

Radix wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:15 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:02 pmI see no reason to make this conclusion. The Buddha didn't seek to change the political systems that lay people had devised at the time, but as far as his Sangha were concerned he created a very democratic system.
How do you come to that conclusion??
The Sangha, democratic???
The monastics I am familiar with in the UK seem ultra-democratic, making decisions communally and often voting where there are differences of opinion. It seems to be broadly in line with this account from wikipedia:
Unlike Christian monastics, some schools of Buddhist monastics are not required to live a life of obedience to a superior. However, it is expected that monastics will offer respect to senior members of the Sangha (in Thai tradition, seniority is based on the number of rains retreats, vassas, that one has been ordained). The Buddha did not appoint a successor, nor did he specify rules mandating obedience in the monastic code. Individual groups of monastics are expected to make decisions collectively through regular gatherings of the community, at which decisions regarding violations of monastic rules and the dispositions of communal property are to be made. Individual relationships of teacher/student, senior/junior, and preceptor/trainee may be observed among groups of monastics, but there are no formal positions, nor is there any authority to give orders or commands invested in senior monks. An abbess or abbot, typically a senior monastic still young enough to be active, is usually responsible for the day-to-day administration of the monastery, and may appoint others to assist with the work. In some traditions, the abbess/abbot is chosen by a vote of the monastics in a monastery. In other traditions (Thailand, for example), the abbot is chosen by the lay community.
There are local variations, of course, but have you seen the Sangha behaving very differently from that?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by mikenz66 »

Radix wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:15 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:02 pmI see no reason to make this conclusion. The Buddha didn't seek to change the political systems that lay people had devised at the time, but as far as his Sangha were concerned he created a very democratic system.
How do you come to that conclusion??
The Sangha, democratic???
The vinaya rules of how to resolve disputes in the Sangha are actually very democratic. How it works now is another story...
Dhammanando wrote: Thu Jan 24, 2019 9:32 am
Chanh Dao wrote: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:47 am I recently had a situation where an Abbot wanted me to disrobe. I'm curious as to what kind of powers older monks have in regards to disrobing someone according to the Monastic code.
According to the Vinaya, none. Even where an accusation case has been thoroughly investigated by Vinaya masters and it's well established that a certain monk is guilty of a disrobing offence, if he doesn't disrobe of his own free will then the only thing the Vinaya will allow the saṅgha to do is to ostracise him.

Practically speaking, however, the relevant question for you is not how the Vinaya says things ought to be done but rather how things are in fact done in modern Thailand. The answer then would be that lots of monks in the hierarchy have the power to order your disrobing and for all kinds of reasons, many of them with no basis in the Vinaya. When any of these monks issue a disrobing order, non-compliance with it will result in forcible disrobing by the police.
...
The rules are in the vinaya, but I don't know my way around it well enough to locate the relevant sections quickly. As I recall, if there is something to be decided, it is supposed to be voted on, with all the Sangha having the same voting rights...

:heart:
Mike
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Bundokji »

I guess there are two different statuses/standings to consider when it comes to Buddhist monasticism:

1- Spiritual attainment: these are relevant to spiritual lineage, and serve as a guardian of the teachings. The first Buddhist council was determined by attainments where arahanthood was a prerequisite.

2- Number of retreats: this type of seniority is relevant to managing the community of monks. Democracy might apply here.

So, democracy might be more relevant to issues of minor importance, such as keeping the house in order. In the teachings for householders, husbands are encouraged to give their wives authority over running the household. However, even in modern "democratic societies" the populace have little say about issues relevant to war, even if they are allowed to express objections towards it. The voting process happens in "confidence" which entrusts leaders in national secrets, usually most relevant to "national security". When Trump was accused of keeping documents that belongs to the national archive, nuclear bombs was mentioned, which is indicative of what constitutes "sensitive information" in the collective mind regardless of the truth of it.

Spiritual lineages and allegiances seems to have been replaced by "biological racism" through the blessings of modern science. Holy wars is being replaced by wars of justice, or rules based world or defending democracy. The issue of protecting households and traditional families was mentioned in one of Putin's speeches in relation to the war in Ukraine. Putin's favorite philosopher, Aleksandre Dugin, spoke of the uniqueness of the Russian spirit.

Rejoining one's spiritual lineage offers plausible interpretation as to the goal of holy life in Buddhism. A puthujjana, who have not seen the noble ones, have been wandering in samsara for long, uses worldly heredity that are based on nama-rupa to form a fake identity, hence renouncing the family is a prerequisit for leaving the household life. What constitutes a lineage is unclear in the modern age of confusion, but it is said that Ariyas are able to know each other without reliance on the fake identity of nama-rupa. The holy war of rejoining the lineage is not done on the battle field, but in leaving modernity that provides comfort and security to householders and dwelling in the forest instead.

Paying homage to one's own lineage seems to have benefits that could eventually lead to being converted to an Ariya. It is safe to conclude that Bahiya was aware of esoteric knowledge about his lineage before being converted:
Then a devata who was a former blood-relation of Bahiya of the Bark-cloth understood that reflection in his mind. Being compassionate and wishing to benefit him, he approached Bahiya and said: "You, Bahiya, are neither an arahant nor have you entered the path to arahatship. You do not follow that practice whereby you could be an arahant or enter the path to arahatship."

"Then, in the world including the devas, who are arahats or have entered the path to arahatship?"

"There is, Bahiya, in a far country a town called Savatthi. There the Lord now lives who is the Arahant, the Fully Enlightened One. That Lord, Bahiya, is indeed an arahant and he teaches Dhamma for the realization of arahatship."
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
User avatar
Radix
Posts: 1274
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:42 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Radix »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:01 pmThe vinaya rules of how to resolve disputes in the Sangha are actually very democratic.
Can anyone provide examples?

Does the Vinaya prescribe a quorum for each category of decisions? Does it prescribe the percentage of voters that is necessary for an option to win?
Western Buddhism is the perfect ideological supplement to rabid consumerist capitalism.
Glenn Wallis
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Sam Vara »

Radix wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 8:31 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:01 pmThe vinaya rules of how to resolve disputes in the Sangha are actually very democratic.
Can anyone provide examples?

Does the Vinaya prescribe a quorum for each category of decisions? Does it prescribe the percentage of voters that is necessary for an option to win?
Because all members of the community are guided by a common purpose, there are as far as I can make out few occasions where voting or even persuasion is required to reach a decision. Decisions are supposed to be unanimous, but where that cannot be, there is this from the Adhikarana-Samatha, or rules for settling disputes within the patimokkha:
Acting in accordance with the majority. This refers to cases in which bhikkhus are unable to settle a dispute unanimously, even after all the proper procedures are followed, and — in the words of the Canon — are “wounding one another with weapons of the tongue.” In cases such as these, decisions can be made by majority vote.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/vinaya/bhikkhu-pati.html#as

If you are interested, you will get a much better-informed view on this - especially regarding Mike's point on how things are actually done - by posting in the "Ordination and monastic life" section, or PMing one of the monastics (of whom we have a few new members, it seems...)
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Bundokji »

Apart from the choice between a wheel turning monarch and a fully enlightened Buddha, there seems to be one particular posture that is quite symbolic when it comes to governance, that is, sitting.

In Brahmanism/Abrahamism, god is said to have created the world in six days, and rested on the seventh (the shabbat) on his throne. Thrones, up to our modern age, are closely associated with governance, autonomy and monarchism. One of the most popular TV series in recent times is titled "game of thrones".

The prestigious symbol of a chair/seat is a regularity in the suttas. When disciples visit the Buddha to be taught, it is mentioned that they take a lower seat.

I wonder if this is connected with sitting meditation being the typical posture among the four. I also wonder if this related to the eighth precept.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Governance and Buddhist cosmology

Post by Bundokji »

Today is a special day on the national level where i live, which is the marriage of the crown prince (or the kind to be). I watched parts of the ceremonies and the parade in the streets, which triggered thoughts that might be relevant to the topic of this thread:

1- I thought why the Buddha engaged with Brahmas rather than seculars when he taught the dhamma, even though the later appears to be a more rational recipe for living. Needless to say that rationalism is included within brahmajala, a secular rationalist would frown at the extravagance and the unnecessary costs of such celebrations (especially in a poor country) and would probably dismiss the symbolism of the carefully chosen colors, costumes and protocols as meaningless. However, in the dhammapada, it is mentioned that non-repetition is the bane of scriptures, and if a scripture serves as conveying a story through rearranging repetitions, then the characters in the story can always replace each other. Those who lined up in the streets to greet the crown prince and his pride are probably waiting (or hoping) to replace him in a future life, pending that they perform good kamma.

2- I also thought what would be the correct practice of mudita in such cases. For example, if the crown prince have performed good deeds in past lives, and if those good deeds came into fruition in this life by embodying the character of a crown prince, then should not we rejoice in this efficacy of kamma? At least, it gives us a sense of direction: behave and you would be rewarded. On the other hand, the Buddha did not choose to be a wheel turning monarch but preferred to escape samsara, where such signs are no longer applicable. I can't help but wonder if advanced practitioners who attained the Jhanas still have mudita towards worldly success through just means.

3- The carefully chosen symbolism in the celebrations are meant to make the event "dream like". Dreams have a special place in both Buddhism and Brahmanism. Before the last birth of the Bodhisatta in the world, a prophecy has to be made that he will either be a world turning monarch or a fully enlightened Buddha (awakened from the dream somehow, so he no longer dreams). In the bible, the dreamer is Joseph, who was skilled in interpreting dreams and became a minister for the pharaoh of Egypt at time, and where pyramids still stand up to this day, full of hierarchical symbolism.

4- Another point of convergence between Abrahamic traditions and Buddhism is that in the language of dreams (or dream interpretations), seeing a monarch is a bad omen. In the 1960s, my father was in the air force and dreamed of the king as sitting on top of a building at the airbase at that time, and then few days later, a pilot from the Syrian air force took his Mig and fled to Jordan (which was during the height of the cold war). He was kept in the same building my father dreamed of, and out of curiosity, my father went to talk to him and the military suspected that my father was trying to engage in some act of spying, so they imprisoned him in the same building for few days.

5- The last point in my meaningless ramblings has to do with the relationship between ancestors, dreams and monarchism. Monarchism represent a lineage or ancestry, where the five niyamas seem to operate in parallel. I think paying homage to ones own ancestors can be of great benefit to the practice, such as respecting ones parents while they are still alive, and paying their debts (or doing merits on their behalf) after they pass away. It is no wonder that in many Asian countries, worshiping ancestors and practicing Buddhism work in harmony.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Post Reply