Justice, Peace and Integrity in Theravada Buddhist Perspective

Dr. Veerachart Nimaong

The following concepts of ‘Justice’ (yutti), ‘Peace’ (santi) and ‘Integrity’ (ajjava) are known
as ‘Ethical Dhammas’ (cariyadhamma), the foundation of which is the ‘Eightfold Noble Path’
(atthanggikamagga) or known as the Middle Way in Buddhism. People, who possess the afore-
mentioned virtues, would be able to ex-exist with other fellow-beings in the society, justly,
peacefully and honestly.
Every corner of the world or in every country, mal-practice towards each other, and
impartiality among fellow-beings in the family and society, and the exploitation of environment are
occurring apparently, which finally will lead to the destruction of humankind. It is the time for all
religions to come to work together in order to cultivate the antidotes of theses problems; we need to
grow justice, peace and integrity among different societies, nations and religions. My attempt is
made in this paper to search for the Buddha’s teachings concerning justice, peace and integrity and
preservation of nature as appeared in the Tipitaka and other commentaries.
The purpose of which is to contribute the Buddhist teachings of all those doctrines to help
solve such problems and to work together with other religions of the world called ‘dialogue’.
Dialogue serves as the method for all faiths to discuss with one another for mutual understanding
and collaboration. The dialogue can be possible on the basis of not only similar teachings but also
different teachings of all religions. Even though, all religions may have different understanding and
interpretation of all those three principles of justice, peace and integrity, but they can work together
for the sake of humankind. Sometimes the dialogue on ‘diversity in unity’ could work better than
that of ‘unity in diversity’.
I. Meanings, Theories and Practices of Justice, Peace and Integrity: Buddhadatta
Mahathera in his ‘English-Pali Dictionary’, (1995) defines the following Pali terms of ‘Justice’,
‘Peace’, and ‘Integrity’, in consonant with what the Buddha said in the Tipitaka as follows:
1.1. Meaning, Theory and Practice of Justice: Hopefully, through the thorough exposition of
the meaning, theory and examples of ‘justice’, we could understand the differences and similarities


N.B.: Dr. Veerachart Nimanong, Pali-Dhamma Studies VI, B.Ed., B.A. (Buddhist Philosphy), M.A.,
M.Phil., Ph.D. (Philosophy), Head of Philosophy Department, Graduate School of Philosophy and Religion,
Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand. Tel. (662) 300 4543 Ext. 1325; Fax. (662) 7191521; House Tel.
(662) 945 2516 Or Cell Phone: (666) 515 2891 Email: vnimanong@yahoo.com; www.veerachart.au.edu
This paper is presented as part of the seminar on the theme: “Enriching Perspectives from the
Sacred Texts on the Issues of Justice, Peace and Integrity of all Creation”, co-organized by the John Paul II,
Catholic Social Thought Center, Assumption University, in conjunction with Graduate School of Philosophy
and Religion, Assumption University, during January 24-25, 2008.
 2
of which among different faiths. What is the meaning of ‘justice’ in Buddhism? The Buddhist
Dictionary defines the Pali term ‘yutti’ as ‘impartiality’. The word ‘yutti’ can also stand for other
different meanings of the Buddha’s teaching, such as ‘dhammikatta’, which means ‘a man of virtue’
Buddhadatta, 1995, p. 203). The word ‘yutti’ normally could be seen accompanying with the word
‘dhamma’ as ‘yuttidhamma’, meaning ‘a virtue of impartiality’. The opposite of ‘yuttidhamma’ is
‘ayuttidhamma’.
What is the theory of ‘justice’ in Buddhism? It is said that the opposite characteristic of
justice is partiality, prejudice (agati) or injustice. Those who have justice in mind will never have
partiality in dealing with other people through their physical, verbal and mental actions. Because
this kind of impartiality is to be taken as the golden rule for all religions, which is understood in the
like manner that we shall not do any injustice to others in the way that we do not want others do the
same injustice unto us. To practice justice one has to avoid from falling into ‘four prejudices or
wrong causes of behaviors’ (akati), that appeared in the Tipitaka (D.III.182) thus: (1) prejudice
caused by love, (2) prejudice caused by hatred or enmity, (3) prejudice caused by delusion or
stupidity, and (4) prejudice caused by fear. The Buddhist concept of justice can actually cover the
meanings of it as given by Peter A. Angeles in his Dictionary of Philosophy, in which he defines
justice as: “1. Fairness; Equitableness. 2. Correct treatment; merited reward or punishment. 3.
Rectitude; Correctness and impartiality in the application of principles of rightness and of sound
judgment. 4. The embodiment of the virtues (ideals, values, principles) of a society. 5. The
establishment of a harmony between one’s right and the rights of others (society, the public,
government, or individuals). The Buddhist concept of ‘justice’ can be understood in many aspects,
some important aspects of which can be explained here as follows:
Justice based on action (Kamma): In Buddhism the theory of natural justice is consisted in
the concept of kamma. When referring to the law of kamma, Buddhists are always reminded by the
well-known stanza, “According to the seed that sown, ones will reap the fruit thereof, do well
receive well and do evil receive evil.” Actually, what we will reap is in accords with what we had
sown; the results of our action cannot be derived exactly from what we did, for which we can
improve our future. Our action can be counted as wholesome or unwholesome depending on our
intention based on ignorance, the root cause of which is greed, hatred, and delusion. The Tipitaka
(A.III. 40) says that Greed, hatred and delusion are conditions for the emergence of kammic activity.
The unwholesome actions conditioned by these three conditions, such as killing, stealing, illicit
sexual relations, uttering falsehood, slandering, rude speech and foolish talk, have bad
consequences. In terms of consequences in the next birth, it is said that he who indulges in these
unhealthy activities may encounter, for instance, disease and poverty, whereas if he practices
wholesome activities he will be rewarded with wealth and health. It is also said in the Tipitaka that
 3
some kammic consequences will ripen during one’s lifetime, others in the next birth and still others
in subsequent births (A.III.98).
That the concept of kamma must imply a concept of objective right and wrong was made
clear:
The law of kamma is a special application of the law of universal causation, an
application which uses the metaphysics of causation both to explain a moral
phenomenon and to vindicate the moral order by applying universal justice to human
moral actions…. This vindication accords with the fact that the law of kamma
presupposes an objective ethic. It affirms that intentions and actions can be
objectively determined to be right and wrong, so that the proper or just consequences
can result or be apportioned. (Reichenbach, 1990, p.2)
It was very important to the Buddha to distinguish Buddhism from moral nihilism by
presenting Buddhism as teaching that the universe is a place in which appropriate consequences
follow from one’s actions, in this lifetime or a future one. Thus, the universe is portrayed as a place
of justice, of merited consequence. In this sense, Buddhism does reach that there is an objective
standard of good and bad, right and wrong, in the universe. Moreover, without God or any other
being making a choice or judgment as to what consequence should ensue from a given behavior, the
mechanisms or processes of justice are as objective and impartial as can be conceived.
Buddhadasa Bhikkhu refers to this very objectivity and impartiality as constituting the
justice of kamma and other aspects of the Dhamma:
In this world it is sometimes the case that “might is right,” or that expediency is
right, or that the evidence given by a witness is made the basis for rightness and
justice. But if the witness is lying or mistaken regarding the accuracy of the evidence,
then the supposed justice based on it is totally deceptive. Real justice can be based
only on dhamma. … Justice based on dhamma is totally independent of human error.
It is absolute. Examples are the law of kamma and laws of impermanence (anicca),
suffering (dukkha), and not-self (anatta). The truths of suffering, the cause of
suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the way leading to the cessation of suffering:
these are absolute and totally just. They favor no one; no one has any special
privileges in regard to them. Thy are laws of nature and they apply absolutely.
(Buddhadasa, 1989, p. 77)
If kamma is a concept of natural justice, what are its implications for social action? It is
quite true that the Buddhist sense of kamma as natural justice does remove to some degree, perhaps
a great degree, the sense of urgency and necessity to intervene in a situation that was perceived as
unfair or harmful. Engaged Buddhist work in society may be seen as complementary to the natural
 4
justice of kamma and motivated by compassion in a context in which kamma may work justice very
slowly. Moreover, inasmuch as kamma is not fate but a system of cause and effect, activists such as
Sulak see kamma as a system within which activists can and should work, applying the right kind of
conditioning, or causes, to get the desired effects.
It is clear that Buddhism has always embraced impartiality as an important virtue. First,
Buddhism recognizes impartiality as an attribute of wisdom. Prayudh Payutto writes,”The attitude
that results from the possession of mindfulness and clear comprehension … is one of neutrality,
objectivity, and freedom, a state unfettered by unwholesome tendencies that can be lined to desire
or disappointment.”
Justice based on compassion: Justice must be accompanied by compassion and mercy. If
there is a conflict, it seems, we should hang on to compassion and mercy and let ideas of justice go.
Why? Because the basic framework for thinking about human relations, human social life, is he
Four Noble Truths, the fundamental aim of which is to eliminate suffering. The means should fit
the end. If the goal of Buddhism is to eliminate suffering, one should not act in such a way as to
increase suffering in service of some end conceived as “justice.”
Social justice based on nonviolence: Justice, or social justice, is a synonymous with
nonviolence. All types of violence are for Buddhism taken as injustice and must be avoided. So,
nonviolence is at least a necessary condition for justice. In Buddhism, no one has the right to do
some injustice or harmfulness to others.
We have been discussing about the meaning and kinds of justices already, and now it is the
time to discuss about the example and practice of the justice. Here, a story of “Not Hatred for
Hatred” , which originated in the city of Savatthi in India at that time (DhA. 291), deserves to be
mentioned to illustrate the question in point. In the past, a girl eats the eggs of a hen. The hen
conceives a grudge against her, and prays that she may be reborn as an ogress, able to devour the
children of her enemy. When the hen died and was reborn again as a cat and the girl who consumed
the hen’s eggs died and was reborn as a hen, then the cat eats the eggs of the hen. Later, the hen
died and was reborn as a leopardess, and the cat died and was reborn as a doe, then the leopardess
eats the young of the doe. In five hundred successive states of existence, they return hatred for
hatred. Finally the girl who ate the eggs of a hen is reborn as a young woman of Savatthi city, and
the hen is reborn as an ogress. The ogress devours two children of the young woman, and is about
to seize the third child, when the young woman seeks refuge in the monastery, where the Buddha
was sitting and preaching his sermon. The Buddha after seeing them running to him called them
and admonishes them to return good for evil. They believed in the Buddha’s words and became his
disciple. From then onwards, they become friend to each other due to the principle of forgiveness,
without which there will not be any peace. The Buddhist principle of forgiveness can be compared
 5
to what Pope John Paul II also says: “There will not be any peace without justice, and there will not
be any justice without forgiveness.”
The above-mentioned story teaches us, “Hatred can never be pacified by hatred”. This is to
support of what the Buddha says, “Righteousness always conquers unrighteousness”, (Dh. 5),
which is corresponding to the Thai saying, “The defeated is monk but the defeater is devil.” All of
this is meant Buddhism encourages people to win themselves through self-control process based on
mindfulness. Mindfulness signifies true understanding of life as subject to the law of impermanence,
suffering, and non-self. Mindfulness will help one to be able to forgive wrong doing of other people
and that they can live peacefully in the society. Moreover, the law of kamma can work well with the
belief in the wheel of life or rebirth. We could see the Buddha’s role in the above story as social
activist, who rescued two women who rendered ill-will towards each other time and again. When
they forgave wrong deed of one another, then their vicious circle of life was cut asunder.
1.2. Meaning, Theory and Practice of Peace
The Pali term ‘santi’ means ‘peace’, which, in a more fundamental sense, referring to the
absence of ‘conflict’ in an individual. In the positive meaning, peace in Buddhism could be
understood as ‘happiness’. Those who have peace in minds, in their lives, will have only both
physical and mental happiness, as we have heard a saying that ‘sound mind in the sound body’.
The opposite idea of Peace is conflict or violence: The Tipitaka (Dh. v.182) says, “There is
no higher happiness than peace ‘natthi santiparam sukham’ ”. There is a reference to Nibbana as
‘place of tranquility’ (santipada), (A.II. p. 18). The other standpoint is that of the righteous
householder who gets a degree of ‘ease and pleasant’ by way of the senses. In Buddhism there are
two ways of practice to gain peace for both layman and monk, (A.V.176). So peace becomes the
highest aim of life in Buddhism. In Buddhism, the concept of ‘peace’ signifies both inner and outer
peace (Vin.4.11). The inner peace is the peace of mind from all kinds of mental impurities and the
outer peace is that of society and the world at large. According to Buddhism, the peaceful minded
person can help pacify the society. The inner peace of each individual will be the starting point of
outer peace of the world. The Buddhist idea of peace corresponds to the UNESCO preamble of
peace, which is read: “Since war begins in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the
defenses of peace must be constructed”.
The Tipitaka (M.III.268-9) tells us how to cultivate inner peace through tolerance (khanti) in
order to pacify the outer conflict. The story of Punna Bhikkhu deserves mentioning here as a
process for cultivating peace through tolerance.
One upon a time, Punna Bhikkhu approached the Buddha to say farewell
with his intention to go and stay with people of Sunaparanta country.
 6
The Buddha admonished him by asking, “Punna, if you will be threaten by
the Sunaparanta people, who are fierce and rough, what then will you think of that?
Punna Bhikkhu respectfully replied, “Venerable sir, if the people of Sunaparanta
threaten and abuse me, I shall think, “these people of Sunaparanta are still excellent
in that they did not attack me with the first.”
The Buddha then asked, “Punna, suppose the people of Sunaparanta do attack
you with the stick, what will you think of that?” Punna Bhikkhu respectfully replied,
“Venerable sir, if they attack me with the stick, I also shall think, “they are still
excellent in that they did not attack me with the knife.”
The Buddha then asked him further, “Punna, suppose that they do attack
you with the knife, what will you do about that?” Punna Bhikkhu again said,
“Venerable sir, if they did so, I shall still think, “they are still excellent in that they
did not take my life with a sharp knife.’”
The Buddha kept on asking further, “Punna, suppose they do attack you
with sharp knife, what will you do about that?” Punna Bhikkhu replied quite clearly
thus, “Venerable sir, if they did so, I shall think in the same line that, “there have
been some disciples of the Buddha, being repelled, and disgusted by the body and
life, have sought weapons to commit suicide. But I have been obtaining this weapon,
and have been killed even without myself laboring any effort.”
The Buddha then admired Punna Bhikkhu thus, “Very Good, Punna,
Possessing such self-control and peacefulness, you will be able to live in the
Sunaparantapa country.”
The above quotation of Buddhist doctrine can be compared to that of love in Christianity,
especially when the Bible is read thus, “If one beats you on the right cheek, please turn your left
cheek for him or her to be beaten”, which signifies the doctrine of forgiveness. To understand
certain virtues is to use the method of dialogue. Dialogue is fruitful not only for intra-religious
dialogue, but also the inter-religious one.
1.3. Meaning, Theory and Practice of Integrity
The Pali term ‘ajjava’ means ‘integrity’ or ‘honesty’, or ‘rectitude’. The opposite concept
of integrity is non-integrity or imperfection: The Tipitaka (Jataka.V.378) mentions about the
doctrine of ‘integrity’ as one constituents of the ‘Ten Virtues or Duties of King’
(dasapitharājadhamma). The king must possess the virtue of integrity, so he can be just to himself
and his men. The Tipitaka (Vin. I. 9; S.V.421) mentions the doctrine of the Fourfold Noble Truth
(ariyasacca) as the qualification of the person of integrity. One who knows the reality of his life is
called a person of integrity. In other words, the Tipitaka (A.III.106) elucidates the Buddhist concept
 7
of ‘integrity’ to mean ‘human development’, which is consisted of four aspects concerning
‘physical’ (kāyabhāvanā), ‘social’ (sīlabhāvanā), ‘mental’ (cittabhāvanā), and ‘intellectual’
(paññābhāvanā) ones. The doctrine of Bodhisatta can make the matter clear. The stories of the
Buddha himself, who discovered the dhammas, will have to follow the dhammas. Dhammas or
kammas taken as life-constitution, for which every Buddhist has to follow as the way of life;
themselves will protect and render their consequences in accords with what people practiced.
The Jataka Stories mentioned more than 500 examples of those who possess the doctrines of
justice, peace and integrity, for which we are going to discuss as follows: The Dhammapada
commentary (DhA. 223) narrates a story of the poor man and his daughter, which could be taken as
the example of the doctrines of justice, peace and integrity in Buddhism. This story is divided into
two parts, the first talks about Punna’s acquiring merit and the second part is about quarreling
between Uttara and Sirima, as follows:
Part I: Punna acquires merit: A poor man named Punna worked for the treasurer
Sumana, and his wife and daughter Uttara were servants in the treasurer’s household.
On a certain holiday Punna directs his wife to prepare a double portion of rice, and
spends the morning plowing as usual. Sariputta goes to the field where Punna is
plowing, and Punna gives him a tooth-stick and strains water for him. Punna’s wife
acts out for the field with her husband’s meal, but meeting Sariputta, gives him the
rice. Returning home, she prepares a second portion of rice for her husband, takes
the rice to him, and explains the reason for her delay. Punna, overjoyed at what he
has heard, but utterly weary, lies down and goes to sleep.
When Punna awakens the following morning, he discovers that the field
which he glowed the previous day has turned to gold. He informs the king, who
orders that the gold be hauled to the palace. As the king’s men gather up the gold,
they say, “This is the property of the king’”. Immediately the gold turns to dust. The
king orders them to say, “This is the property of Punna,” and immediately the dust
turns to gold again. The king appoints Punna treasurer, bestows all of the wealth
upon him, and gives him a site for a house. Punna builds him a house, entertains the
Buddha, and together with his wife and daughter Uttara, attains the Fruit of
Conversion.
In the part one, an observation could be especially made of the King’s practice of “integrity”
as justice towards the Punna’s property. Another principle that can be noticed is “charity”, that was
offered by Punna’s wife to Sariputta Thera, senior monk and the right hand side attendant of the
Buddha. The idea of “charity” can be understood as inner and outer aspects. The inner aspect of
charity means giving away your selfishness through the outer charity of offering food to the monk.
 8
By doing so, the doer could pacify his or her mind and be happy with it. Let’s consider the second
part of the story as follows:
Part II: Uttara and Sirima: Uttara becomes the wife of the treasurer Sumana’s son.
Now the treasurer Sumana and all the members of his household were unbelievers;
and Uttara was unable for some time to perform any of the duties of her religion.
Finally, at the suggestion of her father, she installs the courtesan Sirima in her
household as her husband’s mistress, and her husband consents to the arrangement.
Sirima lives in the house for a fortnight, quite ignorant of her real position in the
household, imagining her to be the real mistress of the household. Uttara spends her
time in the kitchen, preparing food for the monks. Her husband sees her and laughs.
Sirima sees him laugh, and furiously jealous of Uttara, enters the kitchen and throws
boiling ghee on her head. Uttara escapes injury by making an Act of Truth. The
serving-women belabor Sirima with blows, but Uttara rescues her and bathes her
with hot water and oil. Sirima then realizes that her position in the household is that
of a concubine, repents of her act, and asks Uttara to pardon her. Uttara promises to
pardon her if the Buddha will pardon her. The Buddha admonishes Sirima that anger
should be overcome with kindness, and pronounces a stanza, establishing her in the
Fruit of Conversion.
The second part of the story displayed the principle of “forgiveness” as practiced by both
Uttara and Sirima and both finally became friends in Dhama with each other, for which the
principle of integrity can be reaffirmed side by side with “forgiveness” (ahosikamma).
II. Foundation of Buddhist Justice, Peace and Integrity
2.1. Middle Way as Meta-culture, Auto-culture and Eco-culture: The Buddhist
doctrine of ‘Eightfold Noble Path’ (atthanggikamagga) is essentially taken as the foundation of all
these wholesome Dhammas. The eightfold noble path appears in boht Dhiga Nikaya and Majjhima-
Nikaya of the Theravada Buddhist Tipitaka, (D.II.312, M.I.61, and M.III.251:Vbh.235). A person
who could control his or her mind by not involving with ‘sensuous indulgence’ and ‘self-
mortification’, which taken as two extreme practices according to Buddhism, is entitled as
following the middle way. The Middle Way is the way that the Buddhists use to culture themselves.
According to Ven. Piyasilo Bhikkhu, the Middle Way is the Noble Eightfold Path which, in its
modern expression of eco-culture, auto-culture and meta-culture, is the basis of Buddhist culture,
(1988, p. 12). The classification of this threefold culture in relation to the factors of the Noble
Eightfold Path is as follows: (1) Eco-culture, which is consisted of “Right Speech”, “Right Action”,
and “Right Livelihood; (2) Auto culture, which contains “Right Effort”, “Right Mindfulness”, and
“Right Concentration”; and (3) Meta-culture, which stands for “Right Understanding”, and “Right
 9
Thought”, (Piyasilo, 1988, p. 12). Buddhism treats meta-culture as the center point for balancing
eco-culture and auto-culture, because meta-culture is taken as wisdom (paññā), while auto-culture
and eco-culture are regarded as ‘concentration’ (samādhi) and ‘precept’ (sīla) respectively. And
between the auto-culture and eco-culture, the second is rooted in the first. Even though Buddhism
emphasizes wisdom as the top-most important doctrine, nevertheless, Buddhism does not give less
importance to ecological development than other two developments. The eco-culture in other words
is known as ‘social culture’, because it deals with communication (right speech), universal values
(right action) and economics (right livelihood), that contribute to the quality of our life and
environment.
2.2. The Essence of Eco-culture as Justice: He or she, who practices the eco-culture
known as the middle path, will possess the ethics of justice, peace and integrity. The principle of
‘integrity’ (ajjava) can be understood as an aspect of ‘wisdom’ (paññā), because the integrity plays
its role of balancing justice with peace. It can be said that peace at first results from auto-culture,
and later gives rise to justice, the characteristic of which is compared to eco-culture. Man should
behave justly toward nature. Kalupahana comments: “The Buddha’s conception of justice had to
emerge from his understanding of the nature and status of both the individual and the society,”
(1995, p.135). Accordingly, the essence of justice is to promote mutual self-interest. A view similar
to that of the Buddha has been presented in more recent times by John Rawls. His view of justice as
fairness emphasizes human interest. According to Kalupahana, Rawls’ justice is based on Kantian
theory of freedom, which tends to place more emphasis on conception of autonomy than generality
or universality. Kalupahana opines: “The Buddha’s conception of freedom is less absolute and
emphasizes the importance of another aspect absent in most Western conceptions of justice, namely,
purity (visuddhi). This combination of rationality and purity is clearly expressed in the Buddha’s
exhortation to his son, Rahula,” (1995, p. 136). Kalupahana (1995, p. 136) quotes the Buddha’s
words to support his idea thus:
If you, Rahula, reflecting thus, should find, “That deed which I am desirous of doing
with the body is a deed of my body that would conduce to the harm of self, to the
harm of others, and to the harm of both, this deed of body is unwholesome, is
productive of suffering, … a deed of body like this, Rahula, if indeed possible should
not be done by you. … but, that deed which I am desirous of doing with the body is a
deed of my body that would conduce neither to the harm of self, nor to the harm of
other, nor to the harm of both, this deed of body is wholesome, productive of
happiness, … a deed of body like this, Rahula, may be done by you. (M.I.414, 420).
Regarding justice as social or eco-culture, we find that The Mahavanija Jataka (no. 493)
teaches us to grow compassion and gratitude toward the nature especially the tree thus: “The tree
 10
that gives you pleasant shade, to sit or lie at need, you should not tear its branches down. One who
harms his friend (the Banyan tree) is cruel indeed.” The Paramatthajotika (15/147) indicates exact
virtues supporting the preservation of nature as consisting of three main principles of ‘wisdom’,
‘purity’, and ‘compassion’, thus: “Wisdom (paññā) is the awareness of everything in the world as
interdependent; Purity (suddhi) is the state of mental purification from desire, which causes
environmental pollution and over-exploitation of the natural resources; and Compassion (karunā) is
the sympathetic joy toward animals and the natural environment.”
In the Samyutta Nikaya (S. I. 33), planting of trees was considered to be a good deed which
brings about birth in heavenly worlds. As it has been known that the Buddha spent a good part of
his life in a place called Jetavanārāma (the temple of Jeta’s forest grove). In the Petavatthu (Pv.
259), to destroy a tree that has contributed much to the cleansing of the air that we breathe and has
provided delightful shade during the hotter part of the day is looked upon as the betrayal of a friend
(mittadubbha). The idea of integrity is put into practice even with the nature.

III. Concluding Remarks

The concepts of justice, peace and integrity in Buddhism have to be understood in their own
contexts, Buddhism considers these virtues from within the mind of each individual. However,
these virtues can be taken as common for all religions, and through which all religions can
collaborate with each other. Actually, in working together we as followers should not attach too
much to the names of ours religions.
Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, the modern thinker of Thai Buddhism, cautions us to not cling too
much to mere names of our religions for fear of being an obstacle for mutual understanding, as he
puts it thus:
The ordinary, ignorant worldly person is under the impression that there are many
religions and that they are all different to the extent of being hostile and opposed.
Thus one considers Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism as incompatible and even
bitter enemies. Such is the conception of the common person who speaks according
to the impressions held by common people. If, however, a person has penetrated to
the fundamental nature (dhamma) of religion, he will regard all religions as
essentially similar. Although he may say there is Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and
so on, he will also say that essentially they are all the same. If he should go to a
deeper understanding of dhamma until finally he realizes the absolute truth, he
would discover that there is no such thing called religion, that there is no Buddhism,
Christianity, or Islam. (Me and Mine, 1989, p.146)
 11
From the above quotation, a conclusion can be drawn in the way that if we could transcend
the brand names of our religions as such, then conformably we can see points of convergences and
arrive at a common agenda or praxis that can contribute to authentic transnational civilization
geared towards integral development of every person and the whole of creation as being stated in
one of our conference’s objectives.

References
I. Primary Sources in Buddhism

1. Anguttara-Nikaya (A), ed. By R. Morris and E. Hardy, vol. 4, PTS, 1885-1900, tr. By E.M.
Hare and F.L. Woodward, The Book of Graual Sayings, vol. 4, PTS, 1932-1936.
2. Anguttara-Nikaya Atthakatha: Manorathapurani(DA). Ed. By M. Walleser and H. Kopp, vol.
1., PTS, 1924-1956.
3. Dhammasangani, ed. By E. Muller, PTS, 1885; tr. By C.A.F. Rhys Davids, A Buddhist Manual
of Psychological Ethics, Oriental Books Reprint, 1975.
4. Dhammapada, Ed. S. Sumangala Thera, PTS. London, 1914.
5. Digha-Nikaya (D), ed. By T.W. Rhys Davids and J.E.carpenter, vol. 2. PTS, 1932-1947; tr. By
T.W. and C.A.F. Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, 3 vols., Sacred Books of the East.
6. Jataka, Ed. V. Fausboll, 6 Vols. And index, London, 1895-1907.
7. Majjhima-Nikaya (M), ed., by V.Trenckner and r. Chalmers, 3 vols.,PTS, 1948-1951; tr.by I.B.
Horner, The Middle Length Sayings. 3 vols. PTS. 1975-1977; tr. By R. Chalmers, Further Dialogues of
the Buddha, 2 vols. PTS, 1888.
8. Paramatthajotika II, Comy. To Suttanipata, Ed. H. Smith, 3 Vols. In II, PTS. London, 1916-1918.
9. Samyutta-Nikaya (S), ed. By M.L. Reer, 6 vols., PTS.1884-1904; tr.By C.A.P.Rhys Davids and
F.L. Woodward, The Book of Kinddred Sayings, 5 vols. PTS, 1917-1939.
10. Vinaya Pitaka, Ed. H. Oldenberg, 5 Vols., London, 1879-83.
11. Visuddhimagga(Vsm.), ed.By C.A.F.Rhys Davids, 2 vols.,PTS,1920-1921; tr. By Bhikkhu
Nanamoli, The Path of Purification, BPS, 1979.

II. Books and Articles

12. Abe, Masao. (1995). Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue. Houndmills: Macmillan Press Ltd.
13. Buddhadatta, A.P. Mahathera. (1995). English-Pali Dictionary. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
14. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. (1967). Christianity and Buddhism. Bangkok: Samakeesarn Press.
15. ____________.(1972). Two Kinds of Language. Bangkok: Sivaporn.
16. ____________.(1979). No Religion. Bangkok: Choom Noom Chang Co., Ltd.
17. ____________.(1989). Me and Mine: Selected Essays of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa. Donald
Swearer Ed. Albany, New York: Suny Press.
18. ___________.(n.d.). Toward the Truth. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.
19. Kalupahana, David, J. (1995). Ethics in Early Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
20. Lopez, Donald S. (Ed.). (1988). Buddhist Hermeneutics.Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
21. _____________. (2002). Buddhist Propagation for World Peace. A collection of papers in A
Buddhist World View. Bangkok: Mahachula Buddhist University.
22. Nimanong, Veerachart. (2002). Educational Inequality of Buddhist Monks and Novices in
Thailand. Bangkok: The National Council for Research.
23. Payutto, Prayudh, Bhikkhu. (1993). A Buddhist Solution to the Twenty-first Century. Bangkok:
Sahadhammic.
24. Piyasilo Bhikkhu. (1988). Buddhist Culture. Malaysia: The Friends of Buddhism.
25. Phra Thepsophon (Prayoon Mererk), Prof. Dr. (2003). International Recognition of the Day of
vesak. Bangkok: Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University Press.
26. Reichenbach, Bruce R. (1990). The Law of Karma: A Philosophical Study. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press.
27. Sriwarakuel, Warayuth. Religious Pluralism as a Middle Way. A paper presented at
Graduate School of Philosophy and Religion, Assumption University, Bangkok, Nov. 21,
2000.
 12
28. Yusuf, Imtiyaz. Ed. (2006). Understanding Conflict and Approaching Peace in Southern
Thailand. Bangkok: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V.