A Comparative Study of Ahimsa (non-violence) in Jainism and Metta-Karuna (loving-kindness and compassion) in Theravada Buddhism1 Archphurich Nomnian2

Fourth International Summer School for Jain Studies, India , , , , () ( ) ( )

2

( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

107

 ()

1. Introduction Buddhism and Jainism, two important religions of India, have contributed greatly to the development of social and ethical norms. Although the former spread beyond the confines of India land of its birth and the latter is confined to India territory, their noble doctrines have remarkably influenced our society and social institutions (Santini, 1975). Among the sublime ethical doctrines which these two great religions advocate are Ahimsa (non-violence) and Metta-Karuna (loving kindness-compassion), the former put forward by Jainism and the latter by Theravada Buddhism. Clothey (2006) claims that one of the most significant contributions of the Jains to the Indian landscape is the principle of non-violence itself. Apparently they are the first people in the world to espouse such an ethic, and its practice is adapted by Buddhists and selectively appropriated by Jain and Buddhist dynasties alike. Although one appears to be negative in approach and the others are positive, there are commonalities in both of these doctrines. The present paper discusses both these concepts presented by Jain and Theravada Buddhist scholars in our literature. This paper is divided into five sections. Following the introduction section, section two explores the concept of ahimsa in Jainism. The concepts of metta-karuna in Theravada Buddhism are discussed in section three. Section four

108

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

compares these two concepts in relation to the killing of animals. The last section summarises key concepts and provides some recommendations.

2. Concept of Ahimsa (non-violence) in Jainism This section explores the concept of ahimsa in Jainism, which has been variously viewed by different scholars. According to Koller (1982), Jainism is viewed as a way of compassion and ascetic self-restraint designed to liberate the jva or soul from the bondage of karmic matter (p.109). Koller (1982) views ahimsa as non-hurting which is considered to be the basis of Jaina morality, for ultimately all questions of good and evil and right or wrong come down to whether or not the thought, speech, or action in question hurts any life-form. Based on linguistics, Malasekara (1997) defines the term ahimsa by distinguishing it into two parts: a and himsa; the former is a negative prefix meaning no or not, whereas the latter is derived from han meaning to kill and to injure, and thus the term ahimsa means not to kill and not to injure. Gopalan (1973) also comments that the term himsa is injury or violence caused to the living organism due to carelessness and negligence, and actuated by passions like pride, prejudice, attachment and hatred. Gopalan (1973, p.160) further claims that ahimsa as non-killing and non-violence is generally associated with acts, which are always preceded by an intention and a will, i.e. a mere avoidance of the act may not necessarily mean that there is no intention. The mind (manas), therefore, must be completely free from evil intentions to kill or commit violence. D.N. Bhargava (1975, p.125) summarises the idea of non-violence in Jainism as the following presumption: everyman is basically non-violent; non-violence falls outside the inter-relationship of one member of the society and other member of the society; the idea of inter-relationship or ownership is incoherent with the idea of non-violence; and any statement and every statement can be interpreted both
( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

109

ways rightly or wrongly. Wrong interpretation leads to violence, whereas right interpretation removes all disputes. We can see that Jainism views the relationships between physical acts and mental attitudes as mutual and reciprocal. Gopalan (1973) notes that coordination between the mind and body is considered necessary for the practice of non-violence, and this should be accompanied also by proper speech derived from the heart. It is clear that the principle of ahimsa in Jainism naturally implies purity of thought, word, and deed and is a result of universal love and sympathy towards all living beings. Ahimsa, therefore, implies both action and intention. According to Koller (1982), hurting is defined as harming other living organisms either deliberately, or by carelessness or neglect, or through actions motivated by pride, greed, hatred, prejudice, or desire. But the very intention of harming others, even if the physical action is not carried out, is regarded as hurting them. All actions rooted in anger, pride, hatred, greed, and dishonesty are regarded as forms of violence and must be renounced and abandoned. Of course, since the whole universe is alive, it is impossible to completely avoid injuring life-forms if one is to act at all. But the degree and extent of hurtful activity can be greatly reduced, and the higher life-forms, which are capable of greater suffering, can be treated with special care and kindness (Koller, 1982). Koller (1982) further explains that every Jaina takes vows not to injure any living beings, but the monastic community carries its vows to a further extreme than do laypersons. Both groups refrain from occupations and acts that are particularly hurtful, such as, hunting, fishing, making war, or dealing in drugs and alcohol. But monks do not dig in the earth for fear that they hurt earth bodies; they avoid swimming and bathing or walking in the rain in case they hurt water bodies; they neither light nor extinguish fires for fear that they injure fire bodies; they avoid sudden movements in case they injure air bodies; and they are extremely careful in walking to avoid injuring vegetation growing along the path.

110

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

Usually, they sweep the path ahead of them to remove small living beings so that they do not get trampled, and they wear a cloth across their nose to avoid breathing and destroying life-forms in the air. Jainas also avoid alcohol and honey, which are regarded as literally swarming with life-forms. Figs and other fruits with many tiny seeds and plants with sweet sticky tissue are not eaten because they are regarded as hosts for millions of life bodies. Undoubtedly, the widespread practice of vegetarianism and the general aversion to alcohol in the larger Indian community owe much to the Jaina elevation of non-hurting to the position of the central moral virtue. Jain Bhaskar (2001) views non-violence and religion as integral and inseparable, and thus Jains views of the entire world including plants, trees, birds, animals, water, etc., is possessed of life. It is, therefore, our prime duty to protect them as we are to treat others as we would want to be treated. Clothey (2006, p.39) also notes that the best-known of all the Jain vows is that of non-violence. Monks are to eschew the taking of any life altogether, while laymen are selective in the observance of this vow. Non-violence, for the monk and layman, entails the avoidance of: a) occupational violence one should avoid occupations that can cause one to take life (i.e. butcher, fisherman, hunter); in some cases, kings are exempted from this vow, insofar as war is understood to be the last resort; b) protective violence one should refrain from taking a life even if attacked, again more carefully followed by monks than laymen; c) intentional violence any intentional harm to a living being is considered detrimental to the pursuit of liberation; d) accidental violence monks, in particular, have been known to use a whisk broom to sweep the path before they take a step or to wear gauze over the mouth lest an insect be inadvertently swallowed.

( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

111

Clothey (2006) further explains that the rationale behind these vows is self-discipline and the burning off of ajvas. By non-exploitation of others and the purification of ones own lifestyle one is thought to be able to attain ultimate liberation. As the Jain community takes its place on the subcontinent in subsequent centuries, the community places a high degree of emphasis on education monks are the teachers and exemplars par excellence. Many lay Jains go into occupations consistent with their vows commercial enterprises, craftsmanship, the study of language and literature, and the production of the arts especially of miniature portrayals. They are advisors to kings; writers of lexicons and producers of artistic expressions. This concept of non-violence and non-hurting can be applicable to our daily lives in terms of protecting the environments and ecosystem. Chapples (2006) study focuses on the living nature of the world and the importance of purifying oneself through respecting the existing life forms. It is claimed that at the time of its inception and until recent decades, the protection of ecology and environment was rather insignificant to Jain way of life that was more concerned about the minimisation of harm on others. In the contemporary times, however, Jain principles regarding non-violence and non-possession have been reinterpreted as enhancing human-earth relations, which allow us to be more aware of our consumption of foods and environments (Chapple, 2006, p.158). To conclude, it is evident that Jainism can be considered as a up-to-date religion aims to protect all human beings and living things in order to create peaceful and tranquil society and environment in our contemporary world. Saddhatissa (1970, p.90), however, claims that ahimsa (non-injury) has also its positive counterpart, which demands not only abstention from injury but also the practice of metta (loving-kindness), and karuna (compassion) to other livings. These two concepts will be critically discussed in the next section.

112

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

3. Concepts of Metta (loving-kindness) and Karuna (compassion) in Theravada Buddhism This section discusses two related concepts: metta (loving-kindness) and karuna (compassion), which allow us to understand the ways human beings can create peace in our society through the lens of Theravada Buddhism. According to Sumedho (1991), the concepts of metta and karuna are two of the four concepts in Theravada Buddhism, including mudita (sympathetic joy) and upekkha (serenity) of brahma-viharas which values qualities of unselfish human beings. The concepts of metta-karuna are more relevant for the discussion of this study because they reflect the positive aspect of ahimsa, and that can allow us to compare these ideas between Jainism and Theravada Buddhism, which will be discussed in section 4. The concept of metta will be firstly explored and followed by the explanation of karuna. Narasabho (1971, p.212) notes that the term metta chosen by the Buddha for his teaching is from mitta, meaning a friend. It is one kind of love which is the indispensable and the essential foundation of the growth and purification of the individual as of the construction of a peaceful, progressive and health society. It is a spiritual love that looks for guidance to the love of a mother for her child, uplifts itself to the ideal of the pure fount of all safety, welfare and spiritual health. Metta, however, can destroy others by mere disturbance of their minds through anger. It is known that one who develops metta neither hurts himself nor cause injury upon others, but lives satisfied and tranquil. As a result, individuals who wish to develop metta should first have moral purity as their ethical standard (Narasabho, 1971, p.218). Metta can be implemented through meditation. According to Saddhatissa (1970, p.90), individuals, who wish to meditate on metta, should first remove the obstacles unfavorable to their peaceful surroundings. Then, they should choose a suitable time and a quiet place where they can, without interruption, devote
( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

113

themselves to this meditation practice. They should then perceive the danger of anger arising and, at the same time, should realize the advantage of possessing patience, because anger has to be abandoned and patience has to be fostered in the development of this meditation. The dangers of anger should be understood in every possible way. The most effective method would be to understand it in accordance with the teaching of the Buddha. After that, they should embark upon the development of metta for the purpose of removal the mind of hate which is a danger and for the acquisition of patience which is known as an advantage. However, metta should, at first, only be directed towards certain types of persons and not to others. It is absolutely unwise, as well as, dangerous, at the commencement of the practice of metta, to direct ones thoughts towards the following six kinds of persons: (i) an antipathetic, (ii) a very dearly-loved, (iii) a neutral, (iv) a hostile or (v) a deceased person, or (vi) a member of the opposite sex. Why should metta not, in the preliminary stages, be developed towards these six kinds of persons? To direct thoughts of metta towards an antipathetic person, a very dearly-loved one, or a neutral one is mentally fatiguing, and in the case of a very dear person there may be emotional involvement. Anger springs up if a hostile person is recollected. If metta is directed towards a deceased person, neither absorption nor access concentration is reached. developed towards the opposite sex, lust may arise. Payutto (1993) claims that when there is goodwill, metta, the mind is naturally happy, cheerful, and clear, and hence it is a condition which is beneficial to the psyche, supporting the quality and efficiency of the mind (p.19). Payutto (1993, p.70) further explains that metta, goodwill, friendliness; sympathetic, is a mental stance assumed towards those who are in the normal condition, or on an equal plane with ourselves; karuna, compassion, is a proper mental attitude toward those who are in distress. The concept of karuna will be addressed next. Should metta be

114

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

Samtani (1975) defines Karuna as pity, love, compassion, mercy. Narasabho (1971, p.262) notes that karuna deals with the attitude of kindness and the feeling of pity that is evoked by the sight of the suffering of beings. A person who wants to cultivate Karuna should begin by contemplating upon the evils of unkindness and the virtues of kindness. To begin with, a personal should direct his compassion to another person whom one sees to be in pitiful condition such as misfortune, sorrow, or sill. It is conceivable that the beneficial condition for the development of compassion (karuna) is the sight of a disabled person. When individuals see or hear someone who has met with some misfortune or any form of calamity, he should feel pity and kindness and direct his compassion towards that person. Hence karuna is to be practiced in words, deeds, and thoughts. Komatsu (1989) claims that the Buddhas mind as great compassion is an extremely important concept. Compassion is twofold: maitri, which is giving joy to others, and karuna, removing the suffering of people. Objectless great compassion is like the sun which shines upon all naturally and unconsciously, without thought of differentiation. Compassion does not choose its objects: it takes away suffering and gives joy completely naturally (p.261). We can see that compassion as maitri (from the word friendship) and compassion as karuna (from the word voice of suffering and pain) are two basic meanings. As friendship works on the same level, there are no hierarchical differences in compassion. It works on the level of equality with trusting each other and helping each other. From this, maitri means giving happiness to others equally. As we hear the voices of suffering and pain, share and understand the suffering and pain. From this, karuna means to get rid of suffering and pain. In addition to these two definitions, compassion or the aspect of benefiting others. Gombrich (1988, p.64) states that the Buddha preached to the world out of his great compassion (karuna), and Buddhists value kindness, which must, however, be selfless and disinterested.
( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

The positive values of kindness and

115

unselfishness characterize Buddhism. Florida (1998) notes that compassion is one of the most fundamental Buddhist categories, so fundamental that the entirety of the tradition can be described as compassion (karuna) and wisdom (prajna) working together. It is important to keep in mind that the two are linked and one without the other is dangerous. For example, a person is not wise may cause enormous problems by witlessly attempting to be compassionate, and a person who has penetrating insight without compassion is dangerous indeed. To conclude, for Theravada Buddhism, metta-karuna is a means for attaining a happy present life. Theravada Buddhists approach violence by the practice of compassion and loving-kindness directed to any violence. Cultivating the mind of violence will control anger, hatred and aggression, and from this sequence, one will control violence that comes out of anger, hatred and aggression. Encouraging the performance of wholesome acts is very important in Buddhas teachings. Metta-Karuna is essential in Theravada Buddhist practice. When the Buddha talks about actions, there are three kinds of actions: action with the physical body, action with the mouth, and action with the mind. This is the practice of compassion and the cultivation of the mind of loving-kindness for all beings. The practice of compassion or thinking of others happiness, peace, and well-being is based on the idea of the interdependence or interconnectedness of our existence. One exists because of everything else, and nothing exists Both are independently. The benefits that Buddhism talks about are always of two aspects: self-benefit (or wisdom) and benefiting others (or compassion). important. The following section will compare the similarities and differences with regard to the concepts of ahimsa in Jainism and metta-karuna in Theravada Buddhism.

116

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

4. Comparative aspects of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism This section compares the concept of ahimsa in Jainism and metta-karuna in Theravada Buddhism in the light of non-violence and non-hurting as follow. Koller (1982) claims that although Buddhists recognise the principle of nonhurting as a fundamental rule of life, the Jainas have developed this principle most fully and have carried its application the furthest. The term nonhurting is negative, but the principle is entirely positive, being rooted in a philosophy that recognises the community of all living organisms and sees love as the basis of a relationship between all the members of this community. The prohibition against hurting has nothing to do with the fear of eating ones own grandmother (who now may have been re-born as a pig or a cow). Rather, it embodies the realisation that all life is one and that to hurt others is to destroy the community of life, which is the basis of all sacredness. Since meat eating requires the slaughter of animals, Jainas are strictly vegetarian. Indeed, they criticised the Buddhists severely for allowing meat eating, pointing out that, although Buddhists were prohibited from killing animals for food or from eating meat from animals that had been killed especially for their food, still eating meat at all made them partially responsible for the sins of the butchers: if they refused all meat, the butchers would cease killing animals. We can see that Jainism is extremely critical of the Buddhists being allowed to eat meat on the ground that they themselves do not kill the animals but they are getting the meat from the butchers. The Jaina view is that but for the meat-eaters the butchers themselves would not indulge in the evil act of killing the animals and that such meat-eaters are responsible (though indirectly) for killing. Bhargava (1975, p.121) claims that Jainism has carried the doctrine of ahimsa to its logical conclusion and has thus made it impracticable for ordinary laymen. It is true that Jain monks are expected to observe this vow in an extreme
( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

117

form. However, the rules of Ahimsa for laymen as prescribed by Jainism are by no means impracticable or unreasonable. Jainism no doubt prohibits deliberate and calculated injury to any being or wanton slaughter of animals. But for laymen it has made three exceptions. A householder or a housewife has to keep his or her house neat and clean and the body and soul together. For this the household has to be swept, the grain has to be ground or pounded and finally cooked, and water has to be stored in jars. If all this involves unintentional killing of minute creatures, there is no violation of the principle of Ahimsa. Similarly though one should not adopt a profession like that of a butcher or a fisherman which is founded on himsa or killing of animals, one may sometimes be led to unavoidable injury to animals in other professions. A farmer, for example, has to protect his crop from pests. This kind of injury to life is also not regarded as a violation of the principle of ahimsa. The third exception of Jainism has made for laymen is the injury which one inflicts on another being in self-defence. If somebody attacks you and you injure or kill the aggressor in self-defence, you do not violate the principle of ahimsa. When these three exceptions are taken into account the Jain concept of ahimsa remains by no means impracticable. Jayetilleke (2006), however, claims that Jainism, which was 20 years senior to contemporary Buddhism, during the time of the Buddha in India in the sixth century B.C., hinged on soul-theory and self mortification and extreme ahimsa (non-violence). Buddha rejects the soul-theory and self mortification and his doctrine of ahimsa was primarily based on mental states than on bodily action, through developing the sublime states of mind (Brahma Vihara) of metta (loving kindness), karuna (compassion), mudhita (blissful joy) and upekkha (equanimity).

118

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

5. Conclusions and recommendation It is clear that although these concepts of ahimsa in Jainism and mettakaruna in Theravada Buddhism are slightly different in terms of killing of animals, they share common aspects of non-violence, loving-kindness and compassion. We can see that when peoples minds are guided by good qualities, the resulting events within society will take on a different direction. And so we have the attempts to rectify the problems in society and create good influences. Human society for this reason does not become completely destroyed. Sometimes human beings act through ahimsa, metta, and karuna, giving rise to relief movements and human aid organisations. As soon as kindness enters into human awareness, human beings will undertake all sorts of works for the purpose of helping others. I strongly believe that Jains and Buddhists approach of ahimsa, metta, and karuna are relevant in many ways for our present day situations regarding war on terrorism, social and political unrest in different countries, as well as, the global climate change due to humans exploitation of natural resources. Although violence of wars may never disappear from human history, we need to continue to make efforts to practice non-violence by transforming violence into peace by actively involving ourselves in dialogues, social and political actions. Though such movements may still be in a small scale, Jainas and Buddhists definitely need to contribute more to peace the movement in the present world, as the teachings of these two great religions have a lot to offer in terms of non-violence and peace. They should actively share their wisdom with others, actively participate in various opportunities for peace, and should be more responsible to our world as members of the whole human race. May peace prevail on the earth. May all beings learn to respect all lives. May we all practice ahimsa, metta, and karuna. May all beings be content, well, and peaceful.
( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

119

References Bhargava, D.N. (1975) Some chief characteristics of the Jain concept of nonviolence, in Dwivedi, R.C. (ed.) Contribution of Jainism to Indian Culture, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, pp. 122-125. Bhargava, P.L. (1975) The Jain concept of Ahims, in Dwivedi, R.C. (ed.) Contribution of Jainism to Indian Culture, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, pp. 120-121. Chapple, C.K. (2006) Jainism and ecology: Transformation of tradition, in Gottlieb, R.S. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Ecology. Oxford: OUP., pp.147-159. Clothey, F.W. (2006) Religion in India: A historical introduction. London: Routledge. Florida, R.E. (1998) The Lotus Stra and Health Care Ethics, Journal of Buddhist Ethics, pp.170-189. Gombrich, R. (1988) Theravada Buddhism: A social history from ancient Beneres to modern Colombo. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Gopalan, S. (1973) Outlines of Jainism. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern Private Ltd. Jain Bhaskar, B. (2001) Ecology and spirituality in Jaina tradition, in Rangarajan, H., Kamalakar, G., and Reddy, A.K.V.S. (eds.) Jainism: Art, Architecture, Literature & Philosophy. House, pp. 25-32. Jayetilleke, R. (2006) A comparative study in Jainism and Buddhism, (On-line: www.lakehouse.lk/budusarana/2006/09/07/Budu23.pdf, accessed 18/06/08) Koller, J.M. (1982) The Indian Way. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. Komatsu, C. (1989) The Way to Peace: The Life and Teachings of the Buddha. Kyoto: Hzkan Publishing Co. Delhi: Sharada Publishing

120

A Comparative Study of Ahimsa in Jainism and Metta-Karuna in Theravada Buddhism

Malasekera, G. P. (1997) Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. Vol.I, Ceylon: Government of Ceylon. Narasabho, S. (1971) Buddhism: A Guide to a Happy Life. Bangkok: Kurusapha Ladprao Press. Payutto, P.A. (1993) Good, Evil and Beyond: Kamma in the Buddhas Teaching. Bangkok: Buddhadhamma Foundation Publications. Saddhatissa, H. (1970) Buddhist Ethics: Essence of Buddhism. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. Samtani, N.H. (1975) Non-violence vis--vis Maitri: Buddhist and Jain approach, in Dwivedi, R.C. (ed.) Contribution of Jainism to Indian Culture, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, pp. 135-145. Sumedho, A. (1991) The Way It Is. Hemel Hempstead: Amaravati Publications.

( 2 2, 2551) : 107-121

121