Human Nature and Conflict: Buddhist Perspective
Human Nature and Conflict:
Buddhist Perspective
Venerable Assist. Prof.
Dr. Phramaha Hansa
Dhammahaso
Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya
University
1. Introduction
In our present world, with its diversity of cultures, languages, philosophy and religions, it is very possible for conflict to arise between two people or two groups. There are many reasons why human beings and societies are driven to conflict. In fact, conflict that arises in this context could even be a natural and necessary thing in human life.
According to Chaiwat Satha-Anand, since earliest times, human beings and societies have always had conflict; in fact, it has been unavoidable since they were born in different social-cultural environments. This raises the question of whether conflict is good or bad, and right or wrong and right or wrong.
As conflict theorists have said, the human being is a social animal, who forms one unit in his society. People attempt to look for physical resources, in order to satisfy their desires and need. At the same time, as long as they do not fully understand the nature of their desires, they have unlimited needs. As a result, they fall into the trap of suffering that arises from conflict.
In 1993, the American political scientist, Samuel Huntington, gave his opinion that the source of conflict did not arise from idealism or economic problems, but from cultural foundations. He concluded that this was the clash of civilization.[1] Various Thai political scholars, such as, Teerayuth Bunmee[2], Surachart Bamrungsuk[3] and Rohiem Pramath[4], have agreed with him and asserted that nationalism, ethnocentrism and religion are main of conflict and violence.
Does Buddhism, which is well recognized ‘Religion of Peace’[5] agree or not that ‘conflict is the nature of human beings and societies’?
In fact, the Buddha tells us, ‘I only teach suffering and the cessation of suffering’ in these terms, we might understand that conflict is one form of suffering causes and that we should learn, understand and manage it. The important question is how do human beings and societies live with conflict in the present time?
2. What is Conflict?
We will begin by defining the word ‘conflict’, as it is a key-term in our discussion. ‘Conflict’ comes from the Latin language: - ‘Confligere’ which connotes fighting, warfare, incompatibility, opposition and contradiction. Conflict is used for both people and groups who have beliefs, attitudes, needs and benefits that are absolutely different, so that they debate, dispute, and even kill each other as a result.[6]
According to the Thai Royal Academy dictionary, conflict means ‘resistance’, which is to say, disobedience, violation and persistence, and also ‘objection’, that is, dispute and opposition.
Moreover, Johan Galtung, the Norwegian peace-keeper, said that conflict is related to mankind’s behavior. Conflict arises because people are concerned or understand that there are some groups who are working against their advantage. Thus conflict, in his definition, goes together with attitude and behavior. He suggested that they exist in relationship of cause and effect, as illustrated in the diagram below[7], relating Conflict, Attitude and Behavior.
In Buddhist doctrine, the terms used for conflict are: ‘dispute’, ‘debate’, or ‘quarrel’.[8] People or groups might conflict about views, values, data, interests and structures. As they cannot solve these problems or find the best solutions, conflict arises. In other words, conflict usually arises in the first place from trying to defend one’s own interests against other people’s in areas such as, views or material resources, views or material resources. In cases where some people or groups cannot do so successfully, they will dispute, attack, fight and hurt each other.
To sum up, one might define conflict as follows: (1) in its positive meanings, conflict is something right that leads to creative thinking and the more successful development of organizations and society in general. (2) In its negative meaning, conflict is something wrong that organizations and society cannot manage, and so violence or quarrels in different forms and levels will result.
3. Why do Humans and Societies Conflict?
These are many reasons why human beings and societies are in conflict. First of all, we will consider this term as it is understood in Buddhism. Generally, it is an indisputable fact that people come from different cultures, speak different languages, follow different religions and at the same time, confront increasing globalization.
However, in my opinion, conflict arises when two people or two groups want the same thing at the same time; conversely, in most cases, if the same thing is desired by more than one person or group at different times, conflict is unlikely to arise. Thus, ‘conflict’ can be defined as irreconcilable interests.
We may conclude that, from Buddhist perspective, the causes of conflict are multiple. They include desire, arrogance, delusion and attachment:
1. Desire refers to acquisitiveness and aspirations. Acquisitiveness includes the need to ‘possess’ material goods and also people, whereas aspirations concern the wish for status, power and position etc. Furthermore, the world’s natural resources would be sufficient for all the world’s people, but a greedy person always wants more, because materialistic capitalist societies do not have unlimited raw materials. Such societies, therefore, will go to great lengths to obtain all the available resources, even though this means depriving other groups. Failure to negotiate results in conflict.
We can illustrate this with reference to the following story from Buddhist scripture: the Brahmin Aramadanda asked Mahākaccayana, “What is the cause of conflict between king and king, Brāhmin and Brāhmin, or wealthy person and wealthy person?” The latter replied that whenever human beings grasp tightly, adhere, or are sexually aroused or held by desire[9], they come into conflict. Also, parents and children, siblings and other relatives come into conflict, quarrel and attack each other because of desire.[10]
According to Tipitaka, Koliya and Sakya, who are relatives of the Buddha, fought each other because they wanted water for agriculture, and kings Pasenadi of Kosala and Ajātasattu fought each other because they wanted to control part of the land which is on the border line between their countries. When we analyze these two examples, we can see that conflict arose between these people because they were controlled by desire.
However, in my view, desire in this case covers the need for power, too. Power in itself is neither good nor bad, but in this case, ‘power’ refers to politics, economic and social control for more benefit and interest. These kinds of power tend to corrupt the mind; the love of power leads to the desire for even more power and control for the sake of more benefits and interests. When everyone wants power, conflict arises, because nobody wants to be subjected to the power or authority of anyone else.
2. Arrogance refers to human beings’ preference for showing themselves that they are better than other people in term of status, personality, property, education, work or knowledge dignity.[11] As a result, somebody who has been insulted sometimes disputes, quarrels and even kills. In this case, the Buddha said that anyone who really likes to say and think that he is better than other people, is highly likely to conflict within his society.[12]
A good example of this is the case of the kings of Sakya who believed that they were racially superior to all the other kings of Jambudipa. They therefore refused to associate with or marry into other groups. When King Pasendi of Kosala, born as a commoner by birth, wanted to marry a relative of Sakya, they brought him a slave girl girl. Not long afterwards, he had a son, Vithudabha. The kings of Sakya did not want to welcome him, when the boy went to visit them in Kapilavastu. When Vithudabha learnt that he was not their grandson, but the son of a slave girl, he and his soldiers went to kill all the kings of Sakya clan.
For this reason, the Buddha said that Bhikkhus should not claim that they are better or superior people because they observe many precepts or have great merit.[13] Whenever people are arrogant, they do not like to listen to or understand each other. In general, active listening is extremely important, because it involves opening one’s mind in order to understand and appreciate another person’s feelings, minds and needs. However, selfishness obstructs creative thinking, causing an inability to accept a diversity of views.
3. Delusion is a form of ignorance, which can be compared to a shadow over the mind that prevents us from seeing things as they really are. Thus, good and evil can become confused; advantages can be perceived as disadvantages and vice versa.[14]
The Buddha said, ‘Whoever holds extreme opinions quarrels very easily[15] and has difficulty avoiding disputes.’[16] On another occasion, Mahākaccāyana asked the Buddha as what the cause of conflict between monks was. The Buddha replied that whenever monks with narrow minds refuse to accept different views from their own, cling to material things or are sexually aroused or controlled by desire, conflict arises, easily.[17] According to the Tipitaka, conflict arose between Vinayadhara Bhikkus and Dhammadhara Bhikkus in Kosambi, even though they had been good friends before, because they had different views on the interpretation of the Vinaya.
4. Attachment
To sum up, most conflict arises form desire, arrogance and delusion, all of which the Buddha counseled against, because they prevent clear thinking and impede effective social and professional relationships. Whenever a human being can be brought to understand this, inner peace becomes possible, and this is the basis for true happiness in human society.
4. Is Conflict Natural and Necessary for Human Beings and Societies?
The ‘Three Common Characteristics’ are principles which can completely explain the ultimate state of conflict: impermanence, suffering and selflessness. Everything in the world is characterized by these, especially of conflict.
Although some political conflict theorists claim: ‘conflict leads to permanence’, according to the three principle characteristics, permanence also leads to conflict. The thoughts and actions of human beings and societies change continuously, and cannot endure and be sustained. As a result, they are uncontrollable even if we wish to control them. So, as soon as expectations about benefit and position are not met, conflict arises.
In fact, when one understands the rules of the characteristics, it is very easy to explain whether or not ‘conflict is necessary and natural for human beings and societies’. Before we answer this question, we should first define ‘human beings’ in this context; they are people whether unenlightened or Arhat.
However, when we analyze human beings, using the concept of the characteristics, whenever they are consumed by passions, which include desire, anger and delusion – all of their actions, including thinking, speaking and acting will relate to merit (kusala) or evil (akusala) or both. In this case, xonflict is a normal thing that will arise among unenlightened human beings. According to the Tipitaka as referred above, the conflict that arose between Vinayadhara Bhikkus and Dhramadhara Bhikkus in Kosumbi, or relatives of the Buddha: the Sakya and Koliyas, about water in Rohini River is included in the case.
All of these examples suggest that it is very difficult for layman being cultural to avoid conflict, because people generally, have to make contact with others, relating to work, politics, economics, family and soon. So conflict occurs, because human beings and societies have to live together in the world and satisfy their physio-mental needs and work together in order to have their need and want.
Therefore, according to Buddhist doctrine, conflict is a natural and aspect of human life; thus it is neither completely good nor completely bad. At the same time, we have to ask ourselves how to live with conflict in the best possible way. In addition, we should take time more time to consider the reasons why human beings and societies find themselves in conflict.
5. Do Arahats Conflict?
According to Buddhism, Arahat means one who has attained the goal of enlightenment or awakening absolutely free from suffering. With this term, we refer to the inner reality of their mind. In fact, it is not possible to say that Arahats have conflict because they have achieved complete enlightenment. The Buddha said that ‘Oh Akkhinivesana Bhikkhu whois enlightened, does not dispute or quarrel with other people in the ways of the world’,[18] and ‘Munis who have wisdom… [are] enlightened [and do] not dispute’.[19]
On the other hand, it is possible that the Arahats had conflict, not for themselves, but worked on and managed it within Sangha, and it is also possible that Arahats, who have realized absolute truth, can understand all conventional truth, whereas before reaching enlightenment, they did not have different knowledge or ideas.
According to Milindapanga, Nagasena said that ‘to know all things is not, generally, the nature of all Arahats; some of them do not know certain things, such as the names and ancestry of people; some of them only know vimutti, some of them only know Abhinna. Only an omniscient person knows everything’.[20] In this case, Arahats have unlimited knowledge about some things, so a possible interpretation is that they may have different views and understandings of other things.
In the first grand council held by Buddhists for the purpose of revising the Tipitaka[21], three months after the Buddha passed away, five hundred Bhikkhus met to discuss the minor training rules and what the Buddha mentioned before he passed away. After they had spent a long time trying to resolve this question, they were finally unable to find a resolution. They had a lot of answers, and each answer was very different in each group. So this is a good example that proves that Arahats can have conflict, too, but not dispute and quarrel in real sense.
6. Sins of Conflict that Damn Human Beings and Societies
From Buddhist perspective, there are many reasons why conflict damns human beings and societies.
1. Losing mental balance: The Buddha often said, ‘passions come from quarrels’. When we analyze his words, we can see that he was suggesting that dispute prevents human beings from finding the best resolution; as a result, their minds will lose equilibrium, because passions will overpower and possess them, and when they can no longer control themselves, violence arises. In this case, Saphiya Bhikku concluded:[22]
‘People do not realize that they are ruining things in this world. Then they clearly understand that conflict leads to loss, disputes can be managed easily; however, some of them behave as if they will never die, which makes it impossible to resolve problems’.
According to this explanation, when people are unable to manage conflict, not only does this lead to loss of mental balance, but it also destroys harmony in society. From this case, The Buddha concluded that ‘people should refrain and abstain from quarrelling, not participate in it, and deep their minds free from passions’[23]
2. Loss of property: According to Khutthakanikaya Chatakha, when two otters, who have caught a fish in the lake could not share it, they disputed with each other for a long time. Then, a fox approached them. They asked him to divide the fish fairly. So, he gave one of them the head, and the other the tail, and he took the main part of the fish home to his wife.
As a result, the two otters came to understand clearly that ‘if we do not dispute, the main part of the fish will feed us for a long time, but because we quarreled, the fox took the fish to his wife. In this case, The Buddha concluded: ‘Of all the human beings in the world, those who have disputed and quarreled will go before a judge in order to find a solution, and then they will lose a lot of their property’.[24]
3. Failure of reconciliation in society: In my opinion, ‘Sangha society’ was designed by the Buddha to serve as a model for eliminating individual and social suffering, especially in the case of managing conflict. In fact, The Buddha clearly emphasized Sangha. So even of somebody like Devadatta tries to destroy harmony in Sangha, his action is a mistake according to Dhamma; Anantariyskarma and Vinaya; Abhatti Sanghatnisesa. This is a particularly strong reason for the Buddha’s saying, ‘Sukha Sanghassa Samakke’, ‘harmony is the source of happiness between two groups’.
The Buddha has established Sangha as a ‘society of reconciliation’ and ‘assistance in good conduct’. He described the dangers of quarrelling as a wrong view[25], and desire to win[26], in order to obtain the things of the world: possessions, rank, reputation and individual happiness[27]; when people understand this, they should distance themselves and abstain from quarrelling.[28]
To sum up, the sinfulness of disputes and quarrels has five negative aspects: the loss of property, of time, of feeling, of opportunity and of friends.
7. Value and Significance of Conflict
Buddhism would argue that evil sometimes occurs from conflict in logical sense of curiosity. On the other hand, in many situations, conflict also leads to many benefits for human beings and societies.
1. Conflict leads to develop oneself: There are many reasons why Siddhattha became a renunciate until he achieved enlightenment. In my opinion, conflict inside his mind was one important reason for his making this decision.
According to Tipitaka, before The Buddha became a monk, he had to confront important questions, such as why human beings have to be born, grow old, suffer pain and die, in spite of the fact that his father, Suddhodana, tried to prevent him from asking such questions from his earliest childhood. However, the most important question, which was a turning point in his life, was that of ‘true happiness’. Although he tried to answer this question again and again, he did not solve the problem until he met a priest (samana). As a result of this meeting, he chose to become a monk, not long afterwards, and he discovered that there can be harmony in a state of conflict: Nirvana. This case is the same as that of Yasa, who left home and went into the forest, saying that there is trouble here, and there is objection here. Unfortunately, when he met The Buddha, he had conflict in his inner mind.
2. Conflict leads to socio-political development: In my opinion, conflict is fundamental to society and politics, because in the past conflicts that arose in societies usually led to the establishment of states. According to Aggañña Sutta, establishing a system of monarchy is related to conflict, because most people have physical needs, such as land for living and agriculture[29].
In this case, they consulted together and concluded that ‘we should share rice and separate land for living’. However, some of them were unable to conform with the first agreement, and also stole their neighbors’ rice: those who had desires wanted more material things than they needed and tried to keep their own part and also steal other parts which nobody offered them.[30]
Not so long afterwards, they quarreled again and again, because some of them could not maintain the ground rules about sharing. Other groups said that you make mistakes because of trying to keep your own part and take other parts, which was not permitted, in other times, so you should not act like this’.
Furthermore, conflict was widespread, and led to violence: people fought and destroyed each other. So, one of them suggested, ‘Evil occurs in our group: stealing, censuring, telling lies and destroying by weapons. So, we should appoint somebody who can negotiate, give advice and punish those who make mistakes with regard to our rules.
As a result, they chose somebody in their group and appointed him as their leader, later known as king, in order to share agricultural land equally. Therefore, the king in this context means ‘agriculturist’ whose job is to share rice and land for parties smoothly.
3. Conflict leads to the establishment of Vinaya: The Vinaya is fundamental rules comprised for Buddhist monks to follow, in order to eliminate passion from their minds. However, establishing the Vinaya did not occur from The Buddha’s will, but it is based on monks’ mistakes. The Buddha said, ‘I did not establish the Vinaya until after monks had made mistakes in Sangha and society’.[31]
The Buddha realized Mahavira did not establish rules for his followers as a result, after his death, they did not know and understand what the rules were, and had different views and practices. Later, disciples following his rules conflict, quarrel and separate from their group. It was with partial reference to this that the Buddha established the rules for Buddhist monks.
There are such good examples in this case, such as Daniya taking public wood to build his kuti, a personal hut. As a result, King Bimbisara and the villagers blamed him. From this case, The Buddha established this Vinaya: ‘the monk who takes public wood to build a Kuti must be making abatti (mistake), and parachika (lose his monkhood)’.[32] In another case, ‘the monk who tries to destroy Sangha (group of monks) must Apatti Sanghatises’.[33]
From the above discussion, we can see that a similar goal in providing Vinaya and law is to manage conflict in societies; the former resolves conflict in groups of Sangha, whereas the latter resolves problems in groups of lay people. Furthermore, regarding the law, in many cases, this can lead to conflict as well.
Regarding the above saying, in the case of The Buddha, his established rules are very flexible, and also not static. In considering this issue, it is very important to understand that establishing rules is not a question of covering the mistakes that some monk has made. The Buddha will establish new rules. This is the meaning of ‘Anubanñatti’.
4. Conflict led to the first revision: In my opinion, conflict led to the forst revision of The Buddhist scripture, and had an influence on the revision. In considering this issue, it is very important to answer the following questions:
1) Why did monks have to have a meeting in order to set down The Buddha’s teaching, three months after he had passed away?
2) When Kassapa heard the words of Supataa, who criticized The Buddha, saying to the monks, ‘you should not cry; it is a very good thing that The Buddha has passed away, because nobody should assert that one thing is wrong and another is right, or that one thing should be done and another should not be done’[34], he was very concerned that the Vinaya should be revised to prevent unrighteousness from spreading and righteousness from decreasing. He said that the Avinaya would spread and the Vinaya would decrease; that Adhammavāti would gain power and Dhammavāti would lose power; Avinayavāti would have power and Vinayavāti would lose power’[35]
In order to be reasonable, Rev. Mahakassapa referred to Supatta’s words again. Sangha was the first to begin revising The Buddha’s discipline codes at the cave of Sattabanbot, beside Vebarabanbot Mountain near Rachachur.[36]
This is the most likely explanation for why the first revision was made three months after The Buddha passed away. Therefore, in this case, it is possible to argue that conflict was necessary and significant for the first revision. It would not have been possible for Rev. Mahakassapa to start the revision if he had not looked into the causes of the conflict that had arisen in the group of Sangha.
5. Conflict leads to economic development: According Kuthatanta Sutra[37], King Mahavichitarach had a great deal of properties, and wanted to retain them for as long as he lived. So, he wished to offer a sacrifice in order to give satisfaction to the group of angels, who, according to his ideas, were persons who could give everything to him.
In this case, the king’s chaplain, who was a Brahmin, stated that the heart of the king stands for his people, even if the king cannot understand their needs, and that therefore it is possible that some of them will protest against him, and destroy his properties.
However, the king’s advisers said, ‘our country has enemies who persecute us and thieve from our homes, villages, and cities; if you, as the king, perform an act of worship, this is the right thing to do’. Moreover, the king’s advisers argued convincingly that suppressing enemies such as thieves by killing, confinement, fines, blemish or deportation will not completely eliminate theft, because the thieves who are not caught will continue to steal. As an alternative, the king’s advisers suggested a process of administrative science and economic development:
(1) The state should develop the economy for the poorer classes by providing plants and foods to people who were diligent, so that they could practice agriculture and raise animals, subsidizing them until they could help themselves.
(2) The state should develop the economy for the middle and upper classes by providing material and financial support, in order to permit them to buy products and goods from the agriculturists. This is an excellent way for rotating goods and services.
(3) The leader of the state should motivate administrators by offering food and raising salaries when they attempt to work very hard in order to serve people and develop the country continuously.
In considering this issue, we can see the importance of proceeding with a dual policy to develop the country. The king’s advisers concluded, ‘Whenever citizens are diligent, concentrate on their work, do not confine or take advantage of other people, the people in their country will be able to live peacefully, and people will be happy and families will enjoy happiness’.
8. Summary
To sum up, from the Buddhist perspective, conflict is possibly, natural and conventional in the world, because the suffering of human beings and societies is common one. However, there is one unconditional thing which has no conflict, in Buddhism that is Nirvana: ultimate truth; absolute freedom from and transcendence beyond The Three Common Characteristics of Things.
Furthermore, from the above discussion, objectively speaking, conflict leads to development as well as disdevelopment of inner values of human beings, and moreover, in a subjective sense, conflict led to the establishing of the Vinaya, first revision, and developed the economy as well. So, conflict in Buddhism can be a good and a bad thing. Essentially, how should we view conflict? We would be able to live with each other happily and peacefully in this different and pluralistic society.
[1] See in Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993
<http://www.zmag.org/terrorframe.htm 221144releasedateCPMPWBContentsP.Member P>.
[2] Teerayuth Boonmee, Road Map: Thailand (Bangkok: Saitarn, 2004), p. 36-37.
[3] Surachart Bamrungsuk, “War across state and War in state: From the world-situation to the south of Thailand”, in Mathichon (1249): 33.
[4] Rohiem Pramath, War in the future, (Bangkok: Mathichon, 2006), p.36.
[5] Khu.Tha. (Pali) 25/202/52. (Pali) 25/787-794.
[6] Reymond W. Mack and John Pease, Sociology and Social Life, (New York: D Van Nostrand Company, 1973), -.68.
[7] Phuthisarn Chumpon, “Peace under condition of conflict in social and politic”, in Human and Peace, (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn, 2001), p.47.
[8] Khu.ma. (Pali) 29/97/209
[9] Ang. Tuka. (Thai) 20/38/83.
[10] Khu.chu.(Thai) 30/136/443-444.
[11] Khu.chu. (Thai) 30/103/351-353; compare in Khu.ma. (Thai) 29/178/508-510.
[12] Khu.ma. (Thai) 22/77/231.
[13] Khu.ma. (Thai) 29/153/420.
[14] Khu.ma. (Thai) 29/115/341.
[15] Khu.ma. 29/82/243.
[16] Khu su. (Thai) 25/803-807/694.
[17] Ang.thuka.a. (Thai) 2/38/48.
[18] M.M. (Pali) 13/206/182. M.M. (Thai) 13/275/243.
[19] M.M. (Pali) 29/112/335.
[20] Milindha 3/227-279.
[21] Vi.Ju. (Thai) 7/441/382.
[22] Khu.Thera. (Thai) 26/275-276/388.
[23] Khu.Ma. (Thai) 29/63/203.
[24] Khu.Cha. (Thai) 27/38/261.
[25] Khu.Ma. (Thai) 29/63/203.
[26] Khu.Ma. (Thai) 29/67/203.
[27] Khu.Ma. (Thai) 29/63/203.
[28] Khu.Ma. (Thai) 29/63/203-204.
[29] Ti.Pa. (Thai) 11/129/96.
[30] Ti.Pa. (Thai) 11/129/94.
[31] Vi.Ma. (Pali) 1/21/13.
[32] Vi.Ma. (Pali) 1/87/76.
[33] Vi.Ma. (Pali). 1/409/309.
[34] Vi.Ju. (Pali) 7/437/376.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Vi.Ju. (Thai) 7/438/377.
[37] Ti.Si. (Pali) 9/323-358/127-150.
ความเห็น (1)
นมัสการครับพระอาจารย์
กราบขอบพระคุณที่นำบทความดีๆมาให้ศึกษา