The Buddha's teaching at its root is essentially a contemplative one. It deals primarily with the question of dukkha, i.e. the unsatisfactoriness and suffering in our lives. It is a discipline of training our mind in order to achieve liberation from dukkha. In its earliest form there is little that is ritualistic about it. The path to liberation from dukkha requires no rituals whatsoever. What it requires is a dedicated effort to investigate deeply into the nature of dukkha and its cause, to purify one's mind from the cause of dukkha, and thus realise its cessation. This effort is the work of contemplation. And no amount of rituals can accomplish its aim.
But later on this teaching was gradually institutionalised into a religion - Buddhism. And, as with any other religion, rituals become a necessary accompaniment and adornment. There is nothing really bad about turning the Buddha's teaching into a religion. It's a natural progression that takes place when the Dhamma starts to become popular among the general mass. When a big group of people come together for a common purpose to follow the Buddha's teaching, they need a system to organise and regulate their group practise, to impart and share knowledge about the Dhamma, to support each other in their commitment to the practise, and also to serve as their group identity. The religious system, Buddhism, gradually emerged out of this need.
Rituals are part of this system which serve many useful purposes. For example the ritual of recitation and reflection on passages from the scriptures serves to draw out and impress upon the Buddhist devotees the profound meaning of certain aspect of the Buddha's teaching. This promotes understanding and faith. Rituals also give the devotees a very real sense of closeness to the Buddha and his teaching. This promotes faith and dedication to the observance of his teaching. Devotees who participate together in a ritual also feel a sense of belonging to a common cause and community. This promotes fellowship which leads to the devotees supporting each other spiritually and materially in their spiritual quest, which strengthens the community.
In the Buddha's time, he and his core disciples, majority of whom were monks and nuns with contemplative bent, constitute more or less a contemplative movement. There were lay disciples to be sure but they were mostly on the periphery and played mostly supportive role for the core contemplative movement, the Saṅgha. And the majority of these disciples not only strive very hard in their meditative practise but also aim to bring the practise all the way to its conclusion, i.e. the realisation of the cessation of dukkha.
While most of these disciples of the Buddha during his time were satisfied with and could get by just on learning Dhamma and meditation alone, and their faith in the Dhamma is firmly established and affirmed by the profound clarity arising out of their contemplative work, the later non-contemplative masses of Buddhism (the religion), comprising mostly lay people whose aim of a religious life is not so much to strive in meditation practise, much less to realise the final goal of the Dhamma (not in this life anyway), but more to just live their daily life in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma, they needed rituals as an addition to their religious practise to continuously sustain their faith.
Majority of the lay devotees in the early days of Buddhism up until recent times in Asia were simple farmers who do not possess the intellectual bent for the in-depth learning of the Dhamma. And until about 70 years ago - before the revival of vipassanā meditation in Burma took place where lay people begin to take to vipassanā meditation in large numbers, encouraged by the meditation teachers then - those lay devotees with contemplative bent, who possess a fervent desire to be free from dukkha, would likely join the Saṅgha to lead a meditative life. So those who remained in lay life, the majority Buddhists, are mostly those who know only enough about the basic doctrine of the Dhamma and who do not spend time in intensive contemplative work.
They are sustained in their faith by daily religious practises like observance of sīla, performing dāna, the daily pūja (devotional practises) which includes chanting and reflection on passages from the scriptures, association with the Saṅgha, and the occasional listening to Dhamma talks. As far as meditation is concern they do, at most, some simple and short daily (or occasional) meditation (e.g. on the virtues of the Buddha, on mettā, on the breath, etc.) more as part of their religious observance than to strive for the final goal of cessation of dukkha. In Buddhist religion most of these activities are usually performed as part of some rituals carried out in either a small group (e.g. at home with the family) or in a large one (e.g. in the Vihāra with the larger community). These rituals form part of the Buddhist culture that the devotees are accustomed to and find comfort and solace in. The performance of these rituals draw the devotees closer to the Dhamma, arouse, strengthen, and sustain their faith in the Dhamma, and thus they are able to be continuously committed to the Dhamma.
Traditionally Buddhist rituals are simple, meaningful, and contemplative in nature, as befitting its root tradition. Their purpose is to arouse or strengthen the faith of the devotees by reminding them of their commitment to the principles and practise of Dhamma and helping them to reflect on certain aspect of the Dhamma and its practise. The traditional pūjā for example consists usually of reciting the formula for paying homage to the Buddha, seeking refuge in the Triple Gems, observance of the precepts, and reciting and reflecting on the virtues of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha, all of which, if carried out with the right attitude and reflection, serve the purposes just mentioned.
Pūjā is usually accompanied by offering of flowers (an opportunity to reflect on the impermanence of the flowers and life itself), incense (the fragrance of virtues or sīla), water (the cool nature of Nibbāna that quenches the thirst of craving), etc. Suitable passages from the Suttas are also usually recited which remind and impress upon the devotees the teaching of Dhamma, especially on the true nature of impermanence, suffering, and non-self which arouse in them a sense of urgency to practise the Dhamma more diligently. In some places mettā chanting is done, reminding the devotees to send kind thoughts towards all beings.
When rituals are simple, meaningful, and contemplative in nature they serve not only to arouse in the devotees the faith and interest to practise the Dhamma, but if properly carried out they also draw the devotees into a contemplative mood, the right frame of mind that serves as a basis for the inner work of contemplation. And so it is not unusual to find devotees spending a short time after pūjā in contemplative meditation. In fact some Buddhist rituals send the devotees right into meditation. For example, visit the many pagodas in Burma and you will not fail to find some devotees seated in front of the Buddha images, beads in hand, eyes closed, doing their daily ritual of reflecting on the nine virtues of the Buddha, counting one bead as they finish one round of reflection until all the beads are counted. This ritual is essentially a meditation practise: Buddhānussati (recollection of the virtues of the Buddha).
But as Buddhism began to establish itself in various countries across Asia its rituals also started to become entangled with many elements of the local cultures, elements that are usually superstitious and has nothing to do with the Buddha's teaching. So we find Buddhists beginning to move away from the contemplative tradition established by the Buddha and indulging in rituals and practises that are meant to promote worldly benefits like wealth, fortune, good luck, charm, power, and even invincibility.
Then, beginning around early 16th century, discovery of maritime route to Asia via the Cape of Good Hope coupled by their desire to establish new trading routes and ports to access and exploit Eastern trade markets brought the European explorers, traders, conquerors, and colonisers to Asia. Since then Buddhism began its encounter with Christianity, the evangelical religion of the Europeans that seek strength in increased number of devotees through conversion, a practise that is foreign to the spirit of Buddhism. In the spirit of the Buddha's teaching Buddhists traditionally do not involve themselves in the work of proselytising and trying to increase the number of converts into their fold. Buddhist "missionaries" (if they can be called that) consists mostly of monks who, in the tradition established by the Buddha himself, are in the habit of travelling from place to place. Wherever they go people who are interested in the Dhamma will seek them out and hold discussion with them or organise talks. The purpose of these discussions and talks is not so much conversion but more to help those interested to understand the Dhamma. Whether conversion takes place or not is immaterial.
But, due perhaps to the unfortunate turn of historical development during the European colonial days in Asia, especially in Sri Lanka where Buddhism was consciously undermined by the colonisers, Buddhists, in order to revive their religion, began to be attracted by the organised and systematic methods of the Christian Missionary groups which were very successful in drawing in new converts. Some Buddhists who noticed the success of the Christians' sought to emulate their activities in the hope of producing the same success for Buddhism.
Absorbing and adapting the practise of other religious groups into our own is quite common place. Such cross-fertilisation of religious practises has occurred throughout history as different religious groups meet due to human movement across cultural borders. There is nothing wrong in borrowing ideas from the activities of other religious groups and doing it ourselves, especially where it does not encroach on our own religious principles and where it enriches our own practise. Some of these activities are worth emulating.
For example Sunday schools where children, who otherwise would not learn about the religion of their parents, are introduced to and educated about basic Dhamma. We should, however, also consider Sunday school for adults, because many adult Buddhists, though they may not know it, have the need to learn the Dhamma properly. Buddhist parents should not expect their children to learn the Dhamma when they do not do so themselves. Just as the Christians have Bible study groups we should also have similar scriptural study groups where Buddhists come together regularly to study and discuss the Dhamma based on our scriptural texts.
We know of a few Suttas study groups which have appeared in recent years which is a good start. But scriptural studies should not be confined to Suttas alone, important as they are. The rich heritage of the Dhamma that have come down to us extends well beyond the Suttas. And often times the passages from the Suttas cannot be adequately understood on their own without the help of knowledge acquired from other texts like the Vinaya, Abhidhamma and even the Commentaries. That is why translators of Suttas inevitably have to recourse to their knowledge of these other texts in their translation work. There is no reason why Buddhists should deny themselves knowledge of these other texts and confine themselves solely to the Suttas. To do so would be to deny themselves the richness of their heritage.
But education is not the only area where Buddhists have borrowed from the Christians. The borrowing of ideas extends to rituals as well. We have seen in our time some additions to Buddhist rituals that are not part of the traditional rituals we inherited from traditional Buddhist lands. Here we would like to comment on just two of these. The first is hymn singing which is becoming a common ritual in many modern Buddhist centres.
Traditionally Buddhists do not sing hymns as part of their religious practise. What we have is recitation of scriptural verses and passages, in either original Pāḷi or translated into local languages, which are pregnant with Dhamma ideas and meanings. And they are deliberately recited (not sung) in a way that is as soothing and as non-sensually enticing as possible so that the mind can focus more on the meaning of what is recited rather than being carried away by the rhythm of the recitation.
Many Buddhists who supported the practise of hymn singing say that it is a useful addition to Buddhist activities as it helps to attract more youngsters to come attend the activities in the centre. A song with its enticing rhythm appears more modern and is definitely more attractive to a young and restless mind than the often monotonous recitation of Dhamma passages which requires reflection and is therefore more demanding on the mind. And hopefully, they say, through the songs the young may also pick up a thing or two about the spirit of the Dhamma.
What should we make of this new addition to Buddhist rituals? Our root tradition as we have pointed out at the beginning is essentially a contemplative one. Therefore many orthodox elders do not take too well to the idea of singing as part of Buddhist religious practise. This is because singing, even religious songs, and especially when its aim is to attract the attendance of youngsters, undeniably arouse sensual desire which the Buddha's teaching aims to tame (right down to its root). In fact in Aṅguttara-Nikāya we find the following stern remark by the Buddha:
"This, bhikkhus, is considered crying in the discipline of the Noble One, namely singing. This is considered [an act of] a mad person in the discipline of the Noble One, namely dancing. This is considered childish in the discipline of the Noble One, namely excessive laughter that bares the teeth. Therefore, bhikkhus, destroy the bridge leading to singing; Destroy the bridge leading to dancing; and it is enough, when you are glad about something, to smile moderately."
~ Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Threes, Sutta 103
Although the Buddha directed this remark at a group of wayward monks and not to lay people, whose basic 5 precepts do not entail total abstention from sensual indulgence, it nevertheless clearly show the value system of our root tradition, the discipline of the Noble One, with regards to singing, dancing, and immoderate laughter.
Having made this point, however, we must also not forget that the great majority of Buddhists today are lay people whose precepts, as just mentioned, are necessarily less austere than those of the monks. A certain degree of sensual desire, even though unwholesome, is not considered morally impermissible for lay people. This includes the enjoyment of music and singing. And, as we have also pointed out, for a great majority of these lay Buddhists their aim of a religious life is simply to live their daily life in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma rather than to strive in meditation practise to achieve the ultimate goal of the Dhamma.
Humans also by nature like to sing. Nobody needs to teach a child to sing. But when a child hears music and songs he or she will take naturally to them like duck to water. That is why every human culture has developed an appreciation for music and singing. So given that lay people are not restricted by their moral precepts nor do most of them aim at the highest goal of the Dhamma, given that humans have a natural tendency to enjoy music and singing, and given that majority of those involved in the activities in the various Buddhist centres nowadays are lay people, and in fact in many centres activities are carried out only by lay people as they do not have a resident monk to lead them in these activities, given all these circumstances it is inevitable that some elements of hymn singing will eventually creep into our rituals.
It also cannot be denied that some of these hymns are well written and they do help to instil simple Buddhist values on impressionable young minds. But at the same time we also cannot deny that hymn singing does tend to arouse sense-desire the more it is indulged in, to the extent that they often ended up being indulged in, usually unwittingly, more for their pure enjoyment rather than for the Dhamma message the lyrics is trying to convey. And this takes us a step away from the spirit of our root contemplative tradition.
The question then is, to what extent do we bring hymn singing into our rituals? How do we strike a balance between tradition and modernity in such a way that tradition is not compromised? How far do we go before we decide that we have diverged too far from the spirit of our root contemplative tradition, when hymn-singing begin to fail in serving the purpose of imparting Buddhist values and begin, instead, to be carried out for the mere pleasures that it accords? How far do we go before our rituals start to become unrecognisable by their distinctly Buddhistic features and start to display and imitate features that are distinctly modern or even Christian? These are questions that Buddhist leaders need to critically consider even as they evolve their religious practises.
Buddhists leaders must never lose sight of the goal of the Buddha's teaching as well as the contemplative method employed by the Buddha to achieve this goal. They serve as the foundation of our tradition. It is incumbent on Buddhist leaders to constantly remind their fellow Buddhists and to guide them towards the core values of the Buddha's teaching, even if these values are, for the majority Buddhists, just to serve as ideals to gradually strive towards, not necessarily in this life. For, if these values were to be forgotten, our foundation will be weakened, and in a matter of just a few generations the tradition as we know it may be lost.
It must also be reminded that in Buddhism we do not really aim to increase the quantity of adherents but to improve their quality. We would prefer that if a person becomes a Buddhist that he or she becomes a Buddhist not in name only, but be a Buddhist who actually studies the Dhamma, who have a sound and appreciative understanding of the Dhamma, and who actually puts the Dhamma to practise.
We also prefer not to attract new adherent for the wrong reasons. We do not want devotees to come to the centres just to enjoy the songs, music, and food, to socialise, and make friends. We cannot deny that for lay people these activities are helpful to strengthen fellowship, and we are not suggesting that they should be abolished entirely, for fellowship among Buddhists is also very important for the strength of the religion. But more importantly devotees should come to the centres to learn the Dhamma. Buddhist centres should primarily be a place for learning and strengthening the devotees' faith in the Dhamma. For this reason we should focus more on activities that help to promote understanding of the Dhamma among the devotees (Dhamma talks, Dhamma classes, Dhamma discussion, Dhamma publication, etc.) as well as its practise (meditation retreats, group meditation and discussion, performing dāna not only to the Saṅgha but also other charities, community services, etc.) These should be the focal activities of a Buddhist centre, while the other activities for fellowship sake are there to serve as periphery support.
The second addition to Buddhist rituals which we would like to discuss here is the ritual of marriage. This is also another ritual which we have borrowed from Christianity. It is still in its developmental stage and has not acquired any final form yet, but it is definitely emerging. Even now in some Buddhist groups this ritual has evolved to become something very similar with a Christian wedding complete with readings from scriptural texts, taking vows, saying 'I do' in the "presence" of the Buddha. Here it is not our place to say how Buddhists should or should not conduct their wedding ceremony. There are actually no such rules in the Buddha's teaching. But just to offer the following food for thought.
In theistic religions like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, devotees are supposed to live their life by a set of laws that are divinely ordained by God. These God-given laws can be very comprehensive and they can govern and regulate almost every aspect of the devotees' life from birth to death (including marriage) so much so that in some cases they are able to serve even as a constitution for the governance of a country. For example Saudi Arabia's constitution is based on the Qu'ran and Sunnah of Islam.
In Buddhism, however, except for the monks and nuns who are governed by the Vinaya, there are no such laws, divine or otherwise, for governing and regulating the lives of the lay devotees. As a spiritual teacher the Buddha did not claim any divine authority for himself. He neither claimed that he is God or a representative of God on earth. In fact he did not recognise at all the existence of a God in the theistic sense, a God who creates humans and all other creatures, who determines their fate, who lords over them, and to whom all must submit without question. The revealing of God's laws is the concern only of theistic religions in order to bring their adherents into submission to God.
So the Buddha who did not claim any divine authority and who reject the theistic notion of God, did not concern himself with legislating the secular life of his lay devotees. At most he advised and encouraged them to observe the basic five precepts, in their letter and spirit, as well as offered some other advice from time to time mostly on how to live a morally good life in society. But these are only advices. They are unlike the God-given divine laws of theistic religion which can be enforced by church authority, where there can even be a religious court where those who have violated these laws can be charged and prosecuted. The five precepts are undertaken voluntarily by Buddhists and they answer only to themselves (their own kamma), and the secular laws where it applies, if they violate these precepts.
Another reason the Buddha did not concern himself too much with how lay people live their life is because lay people live a largely secular life and involve themselves in many worldly matters (e.g. marriage) which are not the domain proper of his teaching which is more concerned with the spiritual question of dukkha. For monks and nuns, however, who, by joining the Saṅgha, have dedicated their life to striving after the final goal of the Dhamma, he legislated heavily, and thus the Vinaya.
The theistic religions that legislate the life of their devotees have rituals for the conduct of many of the worldly affairs of their lay followers, including marriage. But since the Buddha does not make any demands on how lay devotees should live their life, they are free to live it as they see fit under the guiding principles of the Dhamma. There are also no rituals prescribed for the conduct of their worldly affairs. Most Buddhists go by their local customs, culture, and traditions in their daily life in so far as these do not go against the principles of the Dhamma. This is probably one of the reasons contributing to the tolerant spirit of Buddhism. It is able to exist side by side with locally established norms without trying to alter them unnecessarily. In countries where Buddhism has taken root, the local customs and traditions are usually preserved with very little change, although after many centuries of existing side by side with them Buddhism may also naturally and gradually alter these customs and traditions to give them a more Buddhistic flavour.
Therefore in the teaching of the Buddha we cannot find any rules concerning how to conduct a marriage. Marriage in Buddhism is not considered a religious affair but a secular one between a man and a woman (and in Asia, also their families). And so in Buddhism there is traditionally no ceremony to religiously sanction and recognise the marriage. Being a secular affair it does not need sanction or recognition from any religious authority. It only needs to be registered with the secular authorities for legal purposes. And as far as our modern secular governments are concern marriage is considered complete and binding the moment it is registered.
The local traditions and customs, however, may dictate some rites of passage to officially mark the couple's passage into a life as a married couple, and for the society to recognise them as such. And Buddhists usually carry out their marriage ceremony according to their own local traditions and customs. For example Buddhists of Chinese descent in Malaysia usually have a tea ceremony which is a way of welcoming and accepting the bride into the groom family and vice-versa.
They may of course also grace the auspicious occasion by performing dāna to the Saṅgha and requesting the Saṅgha members to recite some religious verses for their well-being. This dāna and recitation is not to give religious approval to the marriage (monks are expressly forbidden by the Vinaya to unite a couple in marriage) but merely as an occasion for the newly wed to do merit together for the first time as a married couple which is a good way to start their married life. It would also be meaningful if a representative of the Saṅgha can deliver a Dhamma talk to the couple, giving advice on how to live their life together meaningfully in accordance with the Dhamma.
In conclusion, while the root tradition of the Buddha's teaching as preserved in our scriptural texts remains unchanged from the Buddha's time until now, Buddhism as a religion is continuously being shaped and moulded by Buddhists of each successive generation subjected to the many different external elements that are encountered in each generation. In our present time, with such a rapid process of globalisation, Buddhism is being exposed to various different elements to such a great extent that it is constantly under pressure to change and adapt to appear modern. But as wise Buddhists we must not change the face of Buddhism indiscriminately just for the sake of following the fashionable trend of the day. In deciding how best to change and adapt our religious practise we must always look back to the values of our root contemplative tradition for guidance so that we do not make the mistake of totally disfiguring the face of Buddhism, changing it into something so different that cannot be easily identified with our root tradition.
No comments:
Post a Comment