Chapter III — Buddhism
The founder of Buddhism was Sakyamuni Gautama. As a child he was called Sidhartha, but after receiving "enlightenment" he was called Buddha. Sidhartha was born in the sixth century B.C. in the palace of Rajah Sidhodan, near the foot of the Nepalese Himalayas.
When twenty-nine years of age he renounced the world, and spent six years in asceticism and meditation under a Bo tree at Gaya. Then, having received enlightenment, he began to teach his system of religion, and, after teaching for forty-five years, died at the age of eighty.
Buddhism cannot really be called a religion, because in it there is nothing about God, Who is the foundation and life of all religion. It is a combination of morality and agnosticism, and the influence of Hinduism has to some extent coloured its teachings as well. Thus we find in it the doctrine of Transmigration and the Law of Rewards and Retributions (Karma), and, in a different form, the doctrine of Salvation and extinction (Nirvana). But, unlike Hinduism, it does not contain incompatible doctrines, as that there are three eternal Realities — Soul, Matter and Brahma; or that God is both without attribute or nirguna and possessed of attributes or saguna.
I. Buddha's Renunciation and Teaching
1. At the age of twenty-nine a son was born to Sidhartha, and, filled with joy, his father ordered a chariot and sent him for a drive in the gardens, that he might show his joy to all. While driving along, they saw by the roadside a frail old man, then a sick man, and then the body of a dead man. He was much moved by the thought that all will, sooner or later, have to pass through these states. A little further on he saw a fakir (bhiksu) sitting under a tree, and his coachman told him that this fakir, having found the world full of sorrow and suffering, had renounced it. This produced a still greater effect on Sidhartha's mind, and, pondering about it all, he determined that he too would renounce the world. That night he drove to the borders of his father's kingdom, and, stripping himself of his royal robes, he sent them back with the chariot to his father. Then, on foot, and clothed in the robe of a religious devotee, he set off for Gaya.
On arriving there he began the practice of austerities, and continued them for six years, until, worn out by the severity of his practices, he swooned. When he recovered consciousness the Enlightenment came to him, that nothing was to be gained by austerities, nor by the mere enjoyment of luxuries, but that one must take the Middle Way between them.
2. After he had been thus enlightened, he went on to Benares to preach his doctrines. On the road he saw a naked fakir, called Upaka, who asked Buddha, "Friend, who art thou?" Buddha answered, "All-conquering have I now become. Mine is all wisdom. No teacher have I.[1] My equal nowhere can be found in all the worlds of God and man. There is no one to rival me. I have attained Nirvana."
[1] I think that the reason why he did not go to the fakir in the garden was lest some one should say that he had been the fakir's disciple. My opinion is that if Buddha had conversed with that fakir, then he might have been saved from his years of austerity, and from agnosticism, and been helped back to the worship of God.
3. Had Buddha not been influenced by the religious nature and environment of India, he would have been simply a materialistic philosopher; but, influenced by the religions around him, he became a moral teacher. Although an intellectual man, he could not by pure thought comprehend the Being of God. He could not admit a God himself, nor could he teach others about Him. But he was compelled by the God-given law of his inner nature and conscience to give moral teaching. As other sages and recluses who wished to solve all life's problems by their intellects and invented methods had failed, so Buddha got no enlightenment from austerities and meditation beyond a few philosophical and moral ideas. Hence seekers after truth must, without man-made rules, humbly open their hearts to God, because only through prayer can men find God and satisfy the deepest longings of their spiritual natures.
4. The Buddhist Scriptures, especially the Tripitaka, the most sacred of them all, teach that the personality and being of the soul is not everlasting. It may be compared to a river in which the drops of water are always changing, or to fire which is the product of the burning of sticks. So the soul is born from the combination of the elements, and again, like a fire, is extinguished. Existence is a perpetual dreamless sleep. Some movement arouses the soul, and it awakens to life, but only for a short time.
In the universe there is a universal law of causation in operation, and because of this all that is appears and again vanishes.
In Buddhism natural law itself takes the place of God, and beyond this no sort of Divine personality exists. Hence Buddhists neither pray nor know the meaning of prayer nor of its benefits. As a well-known Buddhist missionary, who was a delegate at the Chicago Parliament of Religions, once said, "Buddhism . . . looks to no god or gods, and asks for no extraneous help. . . . Prayer is useless, for what is required is effort. The time spent on prayer is lost."
5. Buddha, being kind by nature, taught that all sorts of men, beasts and living creatures should be treated with love and kindness. We have an example of his moral teaching. Once his son Rahula asked, "What are good and evil, and virtue and vice?" Buddha replied, "Evil and vice is that which will cause injury to you or to others. Do not do it. Good and virtue is that which will be profitable to you and to others. Do it."
6. The question therefore rises, If in Buddhism there is neither God nor hope of a future life and happiness, then how was it that it made such progress in India?
(a) People were attracted to it by Buddha's renunciation of his kingdom and of his life of luxury. There is the example of Rajah Pukkusathi of Taxila in Kashmir (now in the Punjab). Without having even seen Buddha, but after having heard about him from Rajah Bimbisara, he was so impressed that he too followed his example in giving up his kingdom and becoming a fakir or bhiksu.
(b) Many in those days, who had no better philosophy, found relief in the negations of Buddhism, and became its adherents.
(c) Buddha's teaching against caste exclusiveness, idol worship, and the claims of pre-eminence made by Brahmans, attracted many, especially of those who wished to be free from the arrogance of the Brahman's assumptions.
(d) The great and powerful king Asoka made determined efforts to spread Buddhism within his kingdom, and in this he succeeded.
Yet in spite of all this, the agnosticism of the Buddhist teaching could not appeal permanently to the religious instincts of the people of India; and its hold steadily declined, till to-day, except among a few admirers of Buddha's personality, it has ceased to exist as a living religious faith in the land of its birth.
The idea expressed a few years ago by a Buddhist writer, that the decline of Buddhism began with the raids of Mahmud of Guzni on India, is surely far-fetched; for why, then, was not the Hindu religion destroyed together with Buddhism? Were the Muhammadans enemies of the Buddhists only, and not of the Hindus, who were the greater idolaters?
II. Nirvana
1. Nirvana is the term used by Buddhists for Salvation. It means the extinction of all desire. Desire is the cause of all pain and suffering, and if all desire can only be removed from our hearts, then pain and suffering will disappear with it.
If they mean the destruction of evil desires only, then all lovers of truth will agree with them. But their meaning is that all desire, good as well as bad, is to be destroyed. In Ceylon I once met a Buddhist leader, who said in course of conversation, "Even good desires are based on selfishness; for when we desire to do good to others, then, consciously or unconsciously, we have in view the reward that we shall merit. So it is only in the hope and desire of some benefit to himself that a man worships any god. As our experience of life extends, our desires, and along with them our anxieties and dissatisfaction, also increase, hence not only bad, but even good desires should be repressed; and this extinguishing of desires is Nirvana." To this I replied, "As living creatures cannot exist without feeling, so it is impossible for any living being to exist without desire. If they did so exist, they would be lifeless, and where there are feelings then desires will surely be produced from them. To satisfy lawfully every physical and spiritual desire is a law of being, and if we kill the desires we utterly destroy the life in which the desires are. From this point of view, elimination of desire would be destruction of life and not Salvation."
2. From experience we know that no desire is without an object, for He Who created desires, and beings endowed with desires, has provided the material for the satisfying of those desires according to their capacities. And here is the proof:
Every desire makes its own demand, and it is obvious that the material is available fully to satisfy that demand. If the material for satisfying those "desires" does not exist (i.e. water for thirst), then perhaps we may come to the conclusion that "desire" has no object, and in that case should be extinguished. No one has "desire" for suffering, but rather seeks to avoid it (and even if he is ready to suffer, he does it with the "desire" for its rewards and good results). And no one wishes for ill-health or for spiritual pain; for "desire" of health is a law of life, without which security and vigour of life are not possible.
3. If perfect salvation is the extinction of all desire, then the desire to kill desire is itself a desire. It is like trying to extinguish fire with fire, or to dry up water with water. It is absolutely impossible and contrary to the law of nature.
4. The fact that the Creator has given us spiritual and physical perceptions proves our connection with the things, seen and unseen, of our environment. If it had been the Creator's will that we should have no connection with this creation and environment, then He would not have given us that intimate connection and perception with those spiritual and physical realities; but the very existence of that material, and our capacity for making use of it to meet our varied needs, shows not only the Creator's noble plan, but also a special object and intention on His part.
But I have said enough. When it is the desire of the Creator Himself that I should use rightly His created things, then why should I make myself a sinner through my not using those things, and by my utterly killing the desire to fulfil the desire?
5. The fact of any desire being born in us is proof of the presence of the material for satisfying that need, and proof that it will be fulfilled in its own proper time. As Emerson has said, "The longing of the soul is the prophecy of its fulfilment."
One word more. As we progress in life our desires, but not our restlessness, increase, because restlessness can only result if desire is not satisfied. But as in the providence of that Almighty God we progress, so, according to His plan, He will satisfy our increasing desires, and however much we may progress, and to whatever extent our desires increase, that Infinite Being, which is Love, is sufficient and able fully to satisfy all our desires.