Detachment and Compassion in Early Buddhism
by
Elizabeth J. Harris
To people looking at Buddhism through the
medium of English, the practice of compassion and detachment can appear
incompatible, especially for those who consider themselves to be socially and
politically engaged. In contemporary usage, compassion brings to mind
outward-moving concern for others, while detachment suggests aloofness and
withdrawal from the world. Yet Buddhism recommends both as admirable and
necessary qualities to be cultivated. This raises questions such as the
following:
·
If compassion means to relieve suffering in a
positive way, and detachment to remain aloof from the world, how can the two be
practiced together?
·
Does detachment in Buddhism imply lack of
concern for humanity?
·
Is the concept of compassion in Buddhism too
passive, connected only with the inward-looking eye of meditation, or can it
create real change in society?
It is certainly possible to
draw sentences from Buddhist writers which seem to support a rejection of
outward concern for others. For example, Edward Conze has written, "The
Yogin can only come into contact with the unconditioned when he brushes aside
anything which is conditioned."[1] Similarly, G.S.P. Misra writes, "In the
final analysis, all actions are to be put to cessation... The Buddha speaks of
happiness involved in non-action which he further says is an integral part of
the Right Way (sammaa pa.tipadaa).[2] Taken in isolation and out of context, these
remarks can give the impression that the path to Nibbaana implies developing a
lack of concern towards everything in sa.msaara. But is this inference sound? I
would argue that it is not.
This is an issue which touches on the whole question of
transferring concepts across linguistic barriers, in this case Paali and
English. It calls not only for an understanding of how the concepts are used
within the framework of the Paali Buddhist texts, but also for an awareness of
how the English terms used in translation function and whether they are
adequate. Inevitably, a dialogical approach between two linguistic frameworks
is necessary.
Detachment
Viveka and viraaga are the two Paali words which have been translated as
"detachment." The two, however, are not synonymous. The primary
meaning of viveka is separation, aloofness, seclusion. Often physical
withdrawal is implied. The later commentarial tradition, however, identifies
three forms of viveka: kaaya-viveka (physical withdrawal),citta-viveka (mental withdrawal), and upadhi-viveka (withdrawal from the roots of suffering).
Kaaya-viveka, as a
chosen way of life, was not uncommon during the time of the Buddha. To withdraw
from the household life, renounce possessions, and adopt a solitary mendicancy
was a recognized path. The formation of the Buddhist monastic Sangha was
grounded in the belief that going out from home to homelessness (agaarasmaa
anagaariya.m pabbajati) could aid concentrated spiritual effort. Yet to
equate the renunciation which the Buddha encouraged with a physical withdrawal
which either punished the body or completely rejected human contact would be a
mistake.
The Buddha made it clear
that the detachment of a noble disciple (ariyasaavaka) — the detachment
connected with the path — was not essentially a physical act of withdrawal, let
alone austerity. Kaaya-viveka was valuable only if seen as a means to the inner purging
and mental transformation connected with the destruction of craving. This is
illustrated in the Udumbarika Siihanaada Sutta in which the Buddha claims that
the asceticism of a recluse who clings to solitude could lead to pride,
carelessness, attention-seeking, and hypocrisy, if not linked to the
cultivation of moral virtues and the effort to gain insight through meditation.[3]
A further insight is given in the Nivaapa Sutta, which
weaves a lengthy story around the relationship of four herds of deer with a
certain crop, representing sensual pleasure, sown by the hunter (Maara) for the
deers' ensnaring. Both the ascetics who crave for pleasure, and those who deny
themselves any enjoyment in an extreme way, are destroyed. Referring to the
latter, the Buddha says:
Because their bodies were extremely emaciated, their
strength and energy diminished, freedom of mind diminished; because freedom of
mind diminished, they went back to the very crop sown by Maara — the material
things of this world.[4]
The message of the sutta is that ascetic withdrawal can
reduce the mind's ability to discern. It can also lead to the repression of
mental tendencies rather than to their rooting out and destruction.
The detachment of which Buddhism speaks, therefore, is not
an extreme turning away from that which normally nourishes the human body.
Neither is it a closing of the eyes to all beauty, as is clear from the
following:
Delightful, reverend Ananda, is the Gosinga sal-wood. It is
a clear moonlit night; the sal-trees are in full blossom. Methinks deva-like
scents are being wafted around...[5]
This is an expression of delight uttered by Saariputta, an
arahant, on meeting some fellow monks one night.
One must look away from external acts and towards the area
of inner attitudes and motivation for a true understanding of the role of
detachment in Buddhism. Physical withdrawal is only justified if it is linked
to inner moral purification and meditation. In this light, citta-viveka and upadhi-viveka become necessary subdivisions to bring out the full
implications of detachment within Buddhist spiritual practice.Upadhi-viveka,
as withdrawal from the roots of suffering, links up withviraaga, the
second word used within Buddhism to denote detachment.
Viraaga literally means the absence of raaga: the
absence of lust, desire, and craving for existence. Hence, it denotes
indifference or non-attachment to the usual objects of raaga, such
as material goods or sense pleasures. Non-attachment is an important term here
if the Paali is to be meaningful to speakers of English. It is far more
appropriate than "detachment" because of the negative connotations
"detachment" possesses in English. Raaga is a close relation of upaadaana (grasping) which, within the causal chain binding human
beings to repeated births, grows from ta.nhaa (craving) and results in bhava — continued sa.msaaric existence. The English word
"non-attachment" suggests a way of looking at both of them.
The Buddhist texts refer to four strands of grasping (upaadaana):
grasping of sense pleasures (kaamupaadaana), of views (di.t.thuupaadaana),
of rule and custom (siilabbatupaadaana), of doctrines of self (attavaadupaadaana).
All of these can also be described as forms of raaga or desire. To destroy their power over the human psyche,
attachment to them must be transformed into non-attachment. Non-attachment or
non-grasping would therefore flow from the awareness that no possession, no
relationship, no achievement is permanent or able to give lasting satisfaction;
from the discovery that there is no self which needs to be protected, promoted,
or defended; and from the realization that searching for selfish sensual
gratification is pointless, since it leads only to craving and obsession. Phrases
which overlap with attachment in this context and which can help to clarify its
meaning are: possessiveness in relationships, defensiveness, jealousy,
covetousness, acquisitiveness, and competitiveness. Through non-attachment,
these are attenuated and overcome. There is nothing yet in this description
which points to a lack of concern for humanity or the world. The emphasis is
rather on inner transformation so that destructive and divisive traits can be
destroyed, making way for their opposites to flourish.
To take attachment to sense
pleasures as an example, many suttas mention the peril involved. The person
attached to sense pleasures is likened to a "wet, sappy stick" placed
in water. As such a stick cannot be used to light a fire, so the one addicted
to sense pleasures cannot attain the "incomparable self-awakening" (anuttaraaya
sambodhaaya).[6] He is one with whom Maara can do what he
likes.[7] He is like one holding a blazing torch, which
must be dropped if burning and pain is to be avoided.[8] In fact, it is stressed that attachment to
sense pleasures destroys the mind's ability to think clearly and objectively. Viraaga, on
the other hand, is linked to the practice of mindfulness (satipa.t.thaana)
and to seeing into the truth of things. For Buddhists, therefore,
non-attachment or detachment (viraaga) does not mean a withdrawal from
striving for truth but a movement towards seeing the true nature of things more
clearly. In contrast, saraaga (attachment) leads to biased and false perceptions, since
objects are sensed through a net of predispositions towards attraction and
aversion.
Seeing the truth through non-attachment can operate both at
a mundane and a higher level. At a mundane level, for instance, if greed always
arises when an opportunity for gaining quick wealth is glimpsed, wealth will
never be seen objectively as it really is — as transient, subject to change,
and no answer to the search for happiness. Because of raaga,
neither the consequences nor the alternatives will be appreciated. In fact, if
any decision has to be made, the alternatives will not be seen clearly as long
as the mind is clouded by raaga. Dishonesty and the
manipulation of others in order to gain what is craved might result.
With reference to the higher stages of insight, satipa.t.thaana, viveka, and viraaga are intertwined. Found in many suttas are words such as the
following:
He (the monk) chooses some lonely spot to rest on his way —
in the woods, at the foot of tree, on a hillside... and returning there after
alms round, he seats himself, when his meal is done, cross-legged... (kaaya-viveka)[9]
Putting away the hankering after the world, he remains with
a heart that hankers not, and purifies his mind of lusts.[10]
Aloof from the pleasures of the senses, aloof from
unskilled states of mind, he enters and abides in the first jhaana... (citta-viveka and viraaga).[11]
The ultimate results of such practices are the four jhaanas
or absorptions; the verification, by direct vision, of the doctrine of karma;
insight into the Four Noble Truths; and eventually, the knowledge that release
from rebirth has been gained. Viraaga is, in fact, a prerequisite for attaining nibbaana and the treatment of the word in the texts implies that the
two are almost synonymous.
At this point, it is worth looking at how the word
"detachment" has been used in the Western tradition. In colloquial
usage, to say that a person is detached can be derogatory, implying that the
person is not willing to become involved with others or that he or she is
neither approachable nor sympathetic. This current usage must be borne in mind.
Three strands of meaning, however, emerge from most dictionary definitions.
Primarily, detachment refers to the action and process of separating. Flowing
from this has come the military usage to describe the dispatch of a body of
troops. More relevant to this study, however, is the third body of meanings
connected with detachment as an attitude of mind. "Aloofness" and
"indifference to worldly concerns" are phrases used to describe this
attitude. Although these might appear to conform to the above-mentioned
contemporary connotations, we find linked with this (in Webster's Dictionary,
for example) "freedom from bias and prejudice." Thus, in both the
Western tradition and the Eastern, "detachment" is linked with
clarity of perception, nonpartiality, and fair judgment.
Voices supporting this come from the Christian mystical
tradition and the contemporary scientific world. Classical Christian mysticism
saw indifference to worldly and material concerns as an essential component of
the movement towards God. Fulfilling God's will with total love and obedience
was accompanied by detachment from the worldly. In modern scientific research a
similar quality is emphasized. A commitment to truth is recognized but so is
the necessity for a mind detached from the results of research, detached from
the wish for a particular outcome. For it is known that if the scientist is
searching for one particular scientific result, he might unconsciously
manipulate the experiments or observations in order to obtain that result.
Therefore, when looking at the implications of
"detachment," it is worth taking into account Western usage as well.
The socially active person can be quick to look down on those who appear either
distanced from or untouched by the social, economic, and political crises
facing the world. But they should remember that detachment can have a positive fruit
even in relation to social activism: the ability to see the truth more clearly
and to judge more impartially.
To return to the Buddhist
tradition: The Buddha was once faced with the remark that the most worthy
person is the one who speaks neither in dispraise of the unworthy nor in praise
of the praiseworthy. The Buddha disagreed with this. He replied that, because
of his ability to discriminate, the person who speaks in dispraise of the
unworthy and in praise of worthy is best.[12] The Buddha rejects the self-distancing which
refuses to take sides or to speak out against what should be condemned. He
criticizes the desire to keep the truth inviolate and unspoken through a wish
not to become involved with society. Viveka and viraagatherefore do not imply the
kind of withdrawal which is unconcerned with what is good or bad for human
welfare.
The fruits of
non-attachment are not only linked with the gaining of knowledge, the
"incomparable self-awakening," but are also related to creating a
just and harmonious society. The Mahaadukkhakkhandha Sutta makes a direct
connection between attachment to sense pleasures and the movement towards chaos
in society. Greed for the possessions of another leads to disputes and
contentions at the level of both the family and nation, until "having
taken sword and shield, having girded bow and quiver, both sides mass for
battle and arrows are hurled and swords are flashing."[13] In the same sutta, theft, adultery, and
vicious corporal punishment are likewise attributed to sense pleasures and
attachment to them.
In other texts, attachment
to views is spoken about as a cause of disputes, especially in the religious
community. Yet the point drawn is relevant to the whole of society. The result
of a person asserting, "This is the very truth, all else is
falsehood," is dispute. And: "If there is dispute, there is
contention; if there is contention, there is trouble; if there is trouble,
there is vexation."[14]
Therefore, far from implying lack of concern for the
welfare of others, detachment from such things as sensual desires and the urge
to assert dogmatic views is seen as essential to it. We are back to the four
strands of grasping and the need to root these out.
Compassion
Karu.naa is the Paali word translated as compassion. Contemporary
writers have spoken of it thus:
It is defined as that which makes the heart of the good
quiver when others are subject to suffering, or that which dissipates the
suffering of others.[15]
Compassion is a virtue which uproots the wish to harm
others. It makes people so sensitive to the sufferings of others and causes
them to make these sufferings so much their own that they do not want to
further increase them.[16]
This (compassion) isn't self-pity or pity for others. It's
really feeling one's own pain and recognizing the pain of others... Seeing the
web of suffering we're all entangled in, we become kind and compassionate to
one another.[17]
The above definitions vary.
Yet central to all is the claim that karu.naaconcerns
our attitude to the suffering of others. In the Buddhist texts the term often
refers to an attitude of mind to be radiated in meditation. This is usually
considered its primary usage. Nevertheless, the definitions of Buddhist writers
past and present, as well as the texts themselves, stress that it is also more
than this. Anukampaa and dayaa, often translated as
"sympathy," are closely allied to it.[18] In fact, at least three strands of meaning in
the term "compassion" can be detected in the texts: a prerequisite
for a just and harmonious society; an essential attitude for progress along the
path towards wisdom (pa~n~naa); and the liberative action within society
of those who have become enlightened or who are sincerely following the path
towards it. All these strands need to be looked at if the term is to be
understood and if those who accuse Buddhist compassion of being too passive are
to be answered correctly.
The foundation for any spiritual progress within Buddhism
is the Five Precepts. Rites, rituals, ascetic practices, and devotional
offerings are all subservient to the morality they stress. Compassion for the
life, feelings, and security of others is inseparably linked with the first,
second, and fourth precepts.
1. I undertake the rule of training to refrain from injury to
living things (paa.naatipaataa verama.nii sikkhaapada.m samaadiyaami).
2. I undertake the rule of training to refrain from taking what
is not given (adinnaadaanaa verama.nii sikhaapada.m samaadiyaami).
3. I undertake the rule of training to refrain from false
speech (musaavaadaa verama.nii sikkhaapada.m samaadiyaami).
For instance, the ideal of ahi.msaa (non-harming) of the first must flow from compassion if it
is to be effective. The Vasala Sutta makes this relationship explicit, although
the word dayaa, usually translated as
sympathy or compassion, is used and not karu.naa:
Whoever in this world harms
living beings, once-born or twice-born, in whom there is no compassion for
living beings — know him as an outcast.[19]
(Ekaja.m vaa dija.m vaa pi yo paa.naani hi.msati, yassa paa.ne dayaa
n'atthi ta.m ja~n~naa 'vasalo' iti.)
Important to the exercising
of this kind of compassion is the realization that life is dear to all, as
shown in the following Dhammapada verse:[20]
All
tremble at violence
Life
is dear to all
Putting
oneself in the place of another
One
should neither kill nor cause another
to kill.
(Sabbe
tasanti da.n.dassa
Sabbesa.m
jiivita.m piya.m
Attaana.m
upama.m katvaa
Na
haneyya na ghaataye.)
Here, non-harming and compassion flow both from a
sensitivity to our own hopes and fears and the ability to place ourselves in
the shoes of others. Compassion towards self and compassion towards others are
inseparable.
The Buddha's teachings about statecraft and government also
embody compassion as a guiding principle. The Cakkavatti Siihanaada Sutta
describes a state in which the king ignores his religious advisers and does not
give wealth to the poor. Poverty becomes widespread and, in its wake, follow theft,
murder, immorality in various forms, and communal breakdown. The culmination is
a "sword period" in which men and women look upon one another as
animals and cut one another with swords. In this sutta, lack of compassion for
the poor leads to the disintegration of society. Lack of social and economic
justice leads to disaster. In contrast, the ideal Buddhist model for society,
as deduced from the texts, would be one in which exploitation in any part of
its structure is not tolerated. Such a society would be rooted in compassion.
Compassion is its prerequisite.
To move to the second strand, I have already stated that
the word "karu.naa" was most often mentioned in the texts in
the specialized context of meditation to denote an important form of mind training.
Here the emphasis is on each person's pilgrimage towards Nibbaana rather than
on interaction with other beings.
For example, the Kandaraka Sutta describes the path of a
person who "does not torment himself or others." Moral uprightness is
stressed initially but the final stages of the path are seen purely in terms of
meditation and mind-training. At this point, no mention is made of outgoing
action:
By getting rid of the taint of ill-will, he lives
benevolent in mind; and compassionate for the welfare of all creatures and
beings, he purifies the mind of the taint of ill-will.[21]
In this context, the development of karu.naa plays an essential part in the meditation practice that
leads towards wisdom (pa~n~naa) and the destruction of craving. The
importance of this must not be underestimated. The development of a
compassionate mind is a direct preparation for right concentration (sammaa
samaadhi) and a prerequisite of Nibbaana:
If from a brahman's family... if from a merchant's
family... if from a worker's family... and if from whatever family he has gone
forth from home into homelessness and has come into this dhamma and discipline
taught by the Tathaagata, having thus developed friendliness (mettaa),
compassion (karu.naa), sympathetic joy (muditaa), and equanimity
(upekkhaa), he attains inward calm — I say it is by inward calm that he
is following the practices suitable for recluses.[22]
Karu.naa is one of the four "brahma-vihaaras" or
sublime states, along with mettaa, muditaa, and upekkhaa. The
higher stages are seen to rest on them because they have the power to weaken
the defilements of lust, ill-will, and delusion and to bring the mind to a
state of peace. Rarely is meditation mentioned without reference to them.
Yet a distinction must be made between mettaa and karu.naa. The
two are linked together at one level through the brahma-vihaaras. Yet, in the texts, mettaa constantly remains a disposition, an interior attitude.Karu.naa is more than this. Significant here is
Buddhaghosa's treatment of the word in the Visuddhimagga. When
referring to the brahma-vihaaras, he treats karu.naa in a similar way to mettaa. Yet, in a later definition, his words can be translated as:
When there is suffering in others it causes good people's
hearts to be moved, thus it is compassion. Or, alternatively, it combats (ki.naati)
others' suffering and demolishes it, thus it is compassion. Or, alternatively,
it is scattered upon those who suffer, or extended to them by pervasion, thus
it is compassion.[23]
Bhikkhu ~Naa.namoli, in the notes to his translation,
stresses thatki.naati here does not come under the usual meaning of "to
buy" but is linked with the Sanskrit kr.naati, to
injure or kill. Therefore he chooses to translate it as "combat,"
unmistakably connecting Buddhaghosa's definition of karu.naa with action.
In a later paragraph,
Buddhaghosa adds that compassion succeeds "when it makes cruelty subside
and it fails when it produces sorrow."[24]To
Buddhaghosa, karu.naa was both a deliverance of the mind and liberative action
or, more exactly, a quality compelling people towards such action.
This emphasis on liberative
action is seen supremely in AAcariya Dhammapaala's words about the great
compassion (mahaakaru.naa) and wisdom (pa~n~naa) of the Buddha.[25] The passage is structured in a series of
parallel sentences, each one contrasting and comparing the fruits of the two
qualities. The following are selected from the longer whole:
It is through understanding (= wisdom) that he fully
understood others' suffering and through compassion that he undertook to
counteract it... It was through understanding that he himself crossed over and
through compassion that he brought others across...
Likewise it was through compassion that he
became the world's helper and through understanding that he became his own
helper.
In the above passage, pa~n~naa or wisdom is connected with knowledge and insight, and karu.naa or compassion with liberative action. The two are held in
corrective balance, counteracting the view that karu.naa is linked only with the passivity of meditation. For the
Enlightened One, karu.naa was what impelled him to remain in society as teacher and
liberator. He saw the need of the murderer, Angulimaala, and a destructive life
was put on another course.[26] For forty-five years, he preached in the face
of criticism, opposition, and misunderstanding, in the knowledge that the
Dhamma would be understood only by a few. He did not hide the fact that
suffering is universal, but made compassion the reverse side of this truth, as
is shown in the traditional stories of his encounters with Pa.taacaaraa,[27]Kisaagotamii,[28] and the slave girl Rajjumaalaa.[29] He was not slow either to admonish monks who
were unwilling to tend the sick among them or to do the tending himself,
however distressing the illness was: "Whoever would attend on me should
attend on the sick" (yo ma.m upa.t.thaheyya so gilaana.m upa.t.thaheyya)
has come down the centuries as words he said on one such occasion.[30]
This ideal was placed before the whole monastic Sangha.
Although many members of the Sangha may have failed to reach it, it is certain
that some attained a stage where compassionate, loving action had replaced
selfishness. In the final stage of the path, there is a sense in which action
ceases. Yet it is the kind of action which is dictated by attraction or
aversion which must stop, action which has kammic results, not that which flows
from a purified mind filled with compassion. The mission he set for himself and
for the Sangha was one of compassionate, liberative action. The first sixty
arahants were sent out with the words:
Go forth, bhikkhus, for the good of the many, for the
happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the good, benefit,
and happiness of gods and men. Let not two go by the same way.[31]
Mahaakassapa is praised
because "he teaches the doctrine to others out of pity, out of caring for
them, because of his compassion for them."[32]
For the above disciples, all that had to be done for their
release had been done. They now embodied compassion. Compassion was their
nature — Mahaa-karu.naa, great compassion, rather than the elementary
compassion which the novice on the path attempts to radiate and practice. For
these disciples, all desire for self-promotion and self-achievement had been
replaced with outward-moving energy. Therefore, any statement which describes
the enlightened Buddhist disciple as distant from society would be false, or,
more exactly, would be using inappropriate categories. The strength of the
concept of compassion within Buddhism is that it is both a powerful form of
mental purification and a form of liberative action.
Final Reflections
This paper began with questions raised by observers about
the Buddhist notions of detachment and compassion. They center around two main
points: that the two concepts seem to represent contradictory forces, the one
moving away from society and the other towards it; that the Buddhist concept of
compassion is not active enough, being more connected with personal spiritual
growth than the altruistic reformation of society.
Part of the problem is the linguistic framework and the
modern connotations surrounding such concepts as "detachment." The
question would not arise in the same form for those thinking exclusively in
Paali and using the terms viraaga and karu.naa. It
would be evident to them that viraaga does not imply apathy and indifference but a freedom from
passion and attachment that is necessary if actions are not to become biased or
partial. For what passes as compassion can cloak emotions of a very different
kind, such as anger, attachment, or the wish to interfere.
With reference to the second point, a distinction in terms
must be made. There is a form of concern for self which is compatible with and
even essential to altruism. The care for oneself which enables one to feel
empathy with others can be termed "autism." Autism is necessary for altruism,
since it is necessary to be able to accept and even love oneself before one can
show true empathy and compassion for others, before one can feel what they
feel. Autism is not egoism. Egoism is the enemy of both autism and altruism.
Egoism seeks to use others for the material welfare and gain of self. Its
"love" is possessive and manipulative. Egoism has to be destroyed if karu.naa is to develop.
Viraaga, viveka, karu.naa and anukampaa are inter-related terms within Buddhism. Compassion needs
the clear insight that viragaa can bring. The challenge for Buddhists and non-Buddhists
alike is to realize this in our lives. All societies need the active,
liberative compassion which seeks to relieve the suffering of others, establish
greater justice, and assert the dignity and equality of human beings. Karu.naa should certainly be seen in its concentrated meditative
form as a powerful and peace-giving discipline of the mind and an important
part of any spiritual path. But it should never be confined to this framework.
It breaks the framework as liberative action to relieve suffering and
oppression.
No comments:
Post a Comment