BUDDIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS

THE SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

Instructor: - Prof. Kapila Abhayawansa

INTERNATIONAL BUDDHIST COLLEGE

Master of Art (Buddhist Studies)

Rev. Padalangala Rewatha Thero

Student Id – 1212007

ME6208 Buddhism and Society

9/19/2012

Rewatha 1

Introduction

What‟s the Buddhist attitude towards the social stratification? Answering this question we can

fine many discourses of the Buddha in the Buddhism. According to those discourses of the

Buddha, the Buddhism totally rejecting the theory of social stratification, and speaks of the unity,

the oneness of humankind.

Buddhist thinking sometimes attempts to understand people in a society by dividing them into

stratas based on the internal qualities they possess. Karma committed by an individual could

determine his birth in rich or poor circumstances. Primarily it is man's ignorance which causes

the division of society into different levels, either based on ascription or achievement. The

Buddhist approach is to understand the basis of this ignorance and realize the futility of social

stratification in human society.

Modern theories of social stratification

The scholars in sociology presented differenced kind of definition to the concept of social

stratification. One it is that it is a concept involving the classification of a person into group

based on their so-so economic condition. In a society there are different kinds of group. But in

reality all the social group cannot enjoy quality the social condition social stated economical

privilege in deferent privilege in a country. Some of the society get the higher place political

powers, different privilege, but in the meant time other class have the lower in privilege.

Sometime some classes are completely devoid of different at least different rights.

In the difference to lead to latest stated of Samper over another it is called social stratification.

With regarded to the social stated when there is considered superior and in superior that is the

Rewatha 2

social stratification. We can see in any of the society, the superior classes and in superior classes.

Super class enjoys different kind of privilege and economic, political educational and social

stated and the in superior class is devoid also. They have leaved their rights, even with regarded

to the human right and also they can‟t enjoy privilege common to all. In their experience also

difference. When the difference is lead to the areas of economic, political power and social

stated, some group over another group. It is called social stratification.

According to the scholars of sociology, the social classification is mainly based on the four

primary principles.

(1) Social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences;

(2) Social stratification carries over from generation to generation;

(3) Social stratification is universal but variable;

(4) Social stratification involves not just inequality but beliefs as well.1

In modern Western societies, stratification is broadly organized into three main layers: upper

class, middle class, and lower class. Each of these classes can be further subdivided into smaller

classes (e.g. occupational).2

Origin of the Indian caste system (apartheid)

It is argued that the caste system originated on the basis of race prejudice conceived in the

minds of the early Aryans who invaded North India. The migrant Aryan invaders had to deal

1 Macionis, Gerber, John, Linda (2010). Sociology 7th Canadian Ed. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Canada Inc.. pp. 224, 225. 2 Saunders, Peter (1990). Social Class and Stratification. Routledge. http://books.google.com/books?id=FK 004p0J_EC.

Rewatha 3

with a kind of people different in appearance and having a totally different culture. These

original inhabitants of India were named 'dasyu' and introduced as 'dark skinned' (kala varnah),

'nose less' (anasah), 'revilers of Vedic gods' (deva piyu), 'devoid of Vedic rituals' (akarman), 'non

worshippers of Vedic gods' (adevayu), 'non-sacrificers' (ayajvan), 'phallus worshippers' (sisna

devah), 'non-adherers to Vedic practices' (avrata), 'who lack devotion' (abrahman) and 'followers

of a different religious ordinance' (anyavrata).

The Vedic hymn continues: "We are surrounded on all sides by dasyu tribes. They do not

perform sacrifices. They do not believe in anything. They are not men. O Destroyer of Foes! Kill

them!"3

There was a hierarchy organized by the Brahmanic to involve social stratification over the

society. During that period the Brahmin was the powerful classes. Power shows not only the

society but also to the king. Brahmin is considered as superior class in the society. They were the

lawyer of the society. The ruler also had to obey those rule given by the Brahmin scholar. The

most dangerous aspect of the social stratification prevailing at that time was the fact that the

Brahmin has given the idea. The social stratification is based on the will of the god. Because it is

considered that the whole society was created by the god. By creating the society the god himself

organized the social stratification. According to the Brahman religious scriptures .The Rig-Veda

which is the text, the scriptures of the Vedic religion .Brahmin religion mention that how the

classes was made by the Mahapurisa.It is further confirm as the most respected higher text

Baghawathgitha by saying that

“Chathurvarna maya srustham Gunakarma vibhagasah”

3 Rig Veda X. 22,8

Rewatha 4

Chathurvana means four classes .Maya srustam made by me. (Utterance by the god)

The god said that I have made those four classes. How he made those classes. Gunakarma

vibhagasah, according to Guna, quality. What is the guna.It is not spiritual quality. It is regarded

as some element in our body

According to Rig Veda, Brahma created Viratpurusha from whose mouth Brahmin was born,

Ksatriya from his arm, Vaisya from his thigh and Sudra from his feet.4

Brahmins, occupying the highest position in society, enjoyed the privileges of conducting

sacrifices and instructing the kings. While Ksatriyas consisted of kings and warriors, Vaisyas

engaged in commerce and farming. Sudras being denied any freedom were destined to work as

slaves and labourers to the three upper castes.

The Buddhist opinion of social stratification

Buddhism, totally rejecting the theory of social stratification based on caste, speaks of the

unity, the oneness of humankind. While numerous arguments have been adduced to disprove the

conceptual basis of caste propounded by Brahmins, an example has been set by the Buddha

himself by opening up the doors of monkhood to all, despite the caste or ethnic differences of the

persons concerned5

The Buddha appeared in India when this discrimination and exploitation of the 'lower castes'

had ripened into a social evil. The Buddha went from house to house without any regard for caste

in his begging rounds and left the door of the Sasana open for all four castes, saying that just as

4 “Brahmano asya mukhamasid, Bahurajanyah krtah - Uruh tadasya yad vaisyam, Padbhyam swlro ajayata” 5 Gnanarama, Pategama. An approach to Buddhist Social Philosophy. Singapore: Ti-Sarana Buddhist Association, 1996. p 70

Rewatha 5

the waters of rivers from various directions flow down to the ocean and are known by the name

'sea water' those who entered the Sasana from whatever caste would be known as 'recluses, the

sons of the Sakya' (Samana sakyaputtiya).

The Buddha was supposed to that social attitude towards the impurity attitude forth class of

the society. So whenever the Buddha has opportunity to disprove the invalidity of this system.

Buddha tries to disprove the based on the discrimination. Different argument represented by the

Buddha to prove the misconducted of the Brahmans about this cast system. Buddha had given

various explanations to disprove the cast system.

Buddha has presented different kind of argument in his discourses. When we analyze those

arguments we can classify all those arguments in a different group.

i. Biological arguments, ii. Sociological arguments, iii. Historical arguments, iv. Ethical

arguments, v. Religious Arguments

These arguments are found interwoven in numerous dialogues. The suttas, Ambattha and

Sonadanda of the Digha Nikaya; Madhura, Kannakatthala, Assalayana, Vasettha and Esukari in

the Majjhima Nikaya and Vasala in the Sutta Nipata deal with the question of caste, where the

Buddhist standpoint on the question is explicitly discussed.(6) The arguments that Buddhism

brings forth against caste are so forceful and valid they can equally be applied against the racial

and tribal claims of superiority in toto in the context of the modem world.

Rewatha 6

I. Biological Arguments

According to Buddhism by birth there is not in any substance differences among the human

beings .All are the same. So there are not considerable differences among the human beings. The

variations in skin colour, hair, shape of nose or head found among groups of human beings are

negligible when compared to specific variations in various animal and plant species. Man is thus

biologically, one species.6 Even though the brahmin claim of superiority is represented in many a

dialogue in the same phraseology:

“brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo;

brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā

brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā‟‟‟ti”7

"Only Brahmins form the best caste, all other castes are low, only Brahmins form the fair

caste, all other castes are black. Only Brahmim are pure, not non-Brahmins. Brahmins are the

only sum of Brahma, born of his mouth, born of Brahma, formed by Brahma, heirs of Brahma."

The Buddha try to pointed out all the argument given by the Brahmin to prove their

superiority are conceptual not factual. In the Assalayana Sutta the Buddha asks Assalayana as

Brahmin women are known to have periods, conceive, give birth and breast- feed their infants

and are seen as such by everybody, Brahmins are being born like everybody else, how can they

claim that they are the only sons of Brahma, born of his mouth, born of Brahma, formed by

Brahma and heirs of Brahma?8

6 Ratnapala, Nandasena. Buddhist Sociology. D.K. Fine Art Press, Delhi, 1993. p 55 7 Assalayanasutta – Majjhima N. ii, 401, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 8 Pategama - p 74

Rewatha 7

„„Dissanti kho pana, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṃ brāhmaṇiyo utuniyopi gabbhiniyopi

vijāyamānāpi pāyamānāpi. Te ca brāhmaṇiyonijāva samānā evamāhaṃsu”9

The Assalayana Sutta deals with another argument of biological importance. A son born to a

Ksatriya youth and a Brahmin girl would be like his father or mother and be called a Ksatriya or

a Brahmin. Likewise a son born to a Brahmin youth and a Ksatriya girl would be called a

Brahmin or Ksatiya. The Buddha continues and questions Assalayana when a mare mated with

an ass gives birth to a foal (young one) would it be like the mother or like the father and

therefore should it be called an ass or a horse? Assalayana replies that because of crossed birth it

is called a mule. The argument establishes the fact that the children of inter- caste marriages are

not a cross-bred species like mules.10

„„Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, assalāyana, idha brāhmaṇakumāro khattiyakaññāya saddhiṃ saṃvāsaṃ

kappeyya, tesaṃ saṃvāsamanvāya putto jāyetha; yo so brāhmaṇakumārena khattiyakaññāya

putto uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, „khattiyo‟tipi vattabbo „brāhmaṇo‟tipi

vattabbo‟‟ti? „„Yo so, bho gotama, brāhmaṇakumārena khattiyakaññāya putto uppanno, siyā so

mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, „khattiyo‟tipi vattabbo „brāhmaṇo‟tipi vattabbo‟‟ti.11

„„Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, assalāyana idha vaḷavaṃ gadrabhena sampayojeyyuṃ [saṃyojeyya (ka.)],

tesaṃ sampayogamanvāya kisoro jāyetha; yo so vaḷavāya gadrabhena kisoro uppanno, siyā so

mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, „asso‟tipi vattabbo „gadrabho‟tipi vattabbo‟‟ti? „„Kuṇḍañhi so bho

9 Assalayanasutta - MN ii, 401, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 10 Pategama - p 74 11 Assalayanasutta - MN ii, 402, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 8

gotama, assataro hoti. Idaṃ hissa, bho gotama, nānākaraṇaṃ passāmi; amutra ca panesānaṃ

na kiñci nānākaraṇaṃ passāmī‟‟ti.12

II. Sociological arguments

The Buddha said that in the countries like Yona and Kamaboja there were only two classes

Slaver and the master. The class defends on the wealth. Whenever the master becomes poor and

then slave become the rich. “ayyo hutvā dāso hoti, dāso hutvā ayyo hotī‟” Having being master

becomes the slave. Also having being the slave becomes master. That is defending on the wealth.

Therefore sociologically it is not the universal recognize that there are four class based on the

birth.

„„Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, assalāyana, sutaṃ te – „yonakambojesu aññesu ca paccantimesu

janapadesu dveva vaṇṇā – ayyo ceva dāso ca; ayyo hutvā dāso hoti, dāso hutvā ayyo hotī‟‟‟ti?

„„Evaṃ, bho, sutaṃ taṃ me – „yonakambojesu aññesu ca paccantimesu janapadesu dveva vaṇṇā

– ayyo ceva dāso ca; ayyo hutvā dāso hoti, dāso hutvā ayyo hotī‟‟‟ti. „„Ettha, assalāyana,

brāhmaṇānaṃ kiṃ balaṃ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṃsu – „brāhmaṇova seṭṭho

vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo13

The Buddha points out to Assalayana that in Yona, Kamboja and adjacent districts there are

only two castes, the master and the slave. Having been a master, one may become a slave, and

having been a slave, one may become a master. The case being such, on what strength and

authority do Brahmins claim their purity and superiority?14

12 Assalayanasutta - MN ii, 409, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 13 Assalayanasutta - MN ii, 410, Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka 14 Pategama - p 76

Rewatha 9

In the Kannakatthala and the Assalayana Suttas the question has been attacked from different

sociological angles. The fire produced by dry teak or sal or salala or sandal wood has no

difference in heat or brilliance whatsoewer. Similarly, there is no difference in the quality of

striving and the proper effort of the so-called four castes. Hence all are equal.15

“sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṃ ādāya, aggiṃ

abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontu. Āyantu pana bhonto ye tattha caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā

venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannā, sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā

vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṃ ādāya, aggiṃ abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontū‟ti”.16

In the dialogue between Ven Kaccana and Awantiputta, the king of Madhura, the question of

caste has also been discussed, where Ven Kaccana stresses the fact that the superiority claimed

by the Brahmins is 'just only an empty sound'(ghoso), by pointing out that a wealthy Ksatriya can

employ a Brahmin or a Vaisya or a Sudra as his servant. In the same way a wealthy Brahmin or a

Ksatriya or Vaisya or a Sudra can get one of the other three castes employed as his servant.

Therefore, in reality, wealth is the deciding factor of status high and low in society. The Brahmin

claim to superiority by birth holds no water in actual social relations. The king,

Avantiputta,admits that there is no difference between the castes in that respect.

„„Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, mahārāja, khattiyassa cepi ijjheyya dhanena vā dhaññena vā rajatena vā

jātarūpena vā khattiyopissāssa pubbuṭṭhāyī pacchānipātī kiṃkārapaṭissāvī manāpacārī

piyavādī… brāhmaṇopissāssa… vessopissāssa… suddopissāssa pubbuṭṭhāyī pacchānipātī

kiṃkārapaṭissāvī manāpacārī piyavādī‟‟ti? „„Khattiyassa cepi, bho kaccāna, ijjheyya dhanena

vā dhaññena vā rajatena vā jātarūpena vā khattiyopissāssa pubbuṭṭhāyī pacchānipātī

15 Pategama - p 75 16 Assalayanasutta - MN ii, 409, Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka

Rewatha 10

kiṃkārapaṭissāvī manāpacārī piyavādī… brāhmaṇopissāssa… vessopissāssa… suddopissāssa

pubbuṭṭhāyī pacchānipātī kiṃkārapaṭissāvī manāpacārī piyavādī‟‟ti……………………”17

III. Historical arguments

Historical argument can be found in the Agganna sutta. Historically according to Buddhism,

castes evolved on an occupational basis.18

According to the agganna suttha four classes is result

of the historical developing process. Four divisions existed during the time of the Buddha .At the

beginning of the world there was not any discrimination. It is believed that all being have come

from the world of Abhassara, radian world. Considered is to be strata. They were living by their

own structure. They were self-luminance. Gradually their luminance was disappeared.

„„Hoti kho so, vāseṭṭha, samayo yaṃ kadāci karahaci dīghassa addhuno accayena ayaṃ loko

vivaṭṭati. Vivaṭṭamāne loke yebhuyyena sattā ābhassarakāyā cavitvā itthattaṃ āgacchanti. Tedha

honti manomayā pītibhakkhā sayaṃpabhā antalikkhacarā subhaṭṭhāyino ciraṃ

dīghamaddhānaṃ tiṭṭhanti………………”19

Society became complex. They started to live in value. They have a family life .They have to

earn money. Therefore they have to engage different king of activities. Some engage farming.

Some engage hunting and some engage in different position some did religious activities. Some

were the ruler. According to the need of society those division developed gradually. But at the

beginning of the arising there was not any discrimination. But when those ideas of the division

developed in the matured form. Then Brahamin gave the ideas in other word they imports the

notion of those division as the created of the god.

17 Madhurasutta – MN ii, 318,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 18 Agganna-Dīgha N. iii, 133,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 19 Agganna-DN iii, 131, Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka

Rewatha 11

The Agganna suttha explained how the later society was complex. How they invaded different

type of profession.so they lead a family life, as the requirement of family life they want to earn

money. They engaged different type of activities, professions.

Thereafter people divided themselves according to their occupation and were known by

names denoting that occupation.

Mahasammata - The Great Elect „„Mahājanasammatoti kho, vāseṭṭha, „mahāsammat……...”20

Khattiya - Lord of the Fields “Khettānaṃ adhipatīti kho, vāseṭṭha, khattiyo….…..”21

Raja - One who delights others in Dhamma “Dhammena pare rañjetīti kho, vāseṭṭha, raja….22

Brahmana - One who puts away evil and immorality “Pāpake akusale dhamme vāhentīti kho,

vāseṭṭha, brāhmaṇā………………23

Jhayaka – One who meditates “jhāyantīti kho vāseṭṭha, jhāyakā………….”24

Ajjhayaka - One who does not meditate but devotes himself to study “Na dānime jhāyantīti kho,

vāseṭṭha, ajjhāyakā………………”25

Vessa - One who engages in various trades “Methunaṃ dhammaṃ samādāya visukammante

payojentīti kho, vāseṭṭha, vessā………………..”26

Sudda - One who engages in hunting and such other menial works “Luddācārā khuddācārāti kho,

vāseṭṭha, suddā……………”27

20 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 131, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 21

Aggannasutta-DN iii, 131, (Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 22 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 131,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 23 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 132 ,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 24 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 132,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 25 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 132,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 26 Aggannasutta-DN iii, 133,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 12

This argument is developed in the latter part of the Vasettha Sutta : - One who cultivates is a

farmer „„Yo hi koci manussesu, gorakkhaṃ upajīvati…..”28

One who lives on workmanship is an

artisan „„Yo hi koci manussesu, puthusippena jīvati ……”29

One who plies a trade for livelihood

is a trader „„Yo hi koci manussesu, vohāraṃ upajīvati…...”30

One who works for another is a

servant „„Yo hi koci manussesu, parapessena jīvati…….”31

One who lives off things not given is

a thief „„Yo hi koci manussesu, adinnaṃ upajīvati……32

One who practices archery is a soldier

„„Yo hi koci manussesu, issatthaṃ upajīvati……”33

One who lives by priestly craft is a

celibate„„Yo hi koci manussesu, porohiccena jīvati……”34

One who rules a village is a rajah „„Yo

hi koci manussesu, gāmaṃ raṭṭhañca bhuñjati……”35

In the Ambattha Sutta the Buddha questions the proud Ambattha about his lineage. He replies

that he belongs to the lineage of Kanhayana. Then the Buddha, tracing the history of Kanhayana,

shows that Kanhayana is a son of a Sakya wedded to a slave girl. Since the Sakyans are the

masters of the Kanhayanas there is no substantial reason for them to claim superiority. However,

the Buddha asks Ambattha not to be perturbed and ashamed of the historical fact because one of

the greatest sages, Asita Devala, was born of that lineage.

„„Rañño kho pana, ambaṭṭha, okkākassa disā nāma dāsī ahosi. Sā kaṇhaṃ nāma janesi. Jāto

kaṇho pabyāhāsi – „dhovatha maṃ, amma, nahāpetha maṃ amma, imasmā maṃ asucismā

parimocetha, atthāya vo bhavissāmī‟ti. Yathā kho pana ambaṭṭha etarahi manussā pisāce disvā

27

Aggannasutta-DN iii, 134,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 28 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 29 Vasetthsuttaa –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 30

Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 31 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 32 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 33 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 34 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 35 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 457,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 13

„pisācā‟ti sañjānanti; evameva kho, ambaṭṭha, tena kho pana samayena manussā pisāce

„kaṇhā‟ti sañjānanti. Te evamāhaṃsu – „ayaṃ jāto pabyāhāsi, kaṇho jāto, pisāco jāto‟ti.

Tadagge kho pana, ambaṭṭha kaṇhāyanā paññāyanti, so ca kaṇhāyanānaṃ pubbapuriso. Iti kho

te, ambaṭṭha, porāṇaṃ mātāpettikaṃ nāmagottaṃ anussarato ayyaputtā sakyā bhavanti,

dāsiputto tvamasi sakyāna‟‟nti.36

IV. Ethical Arguments

In the Kannakatthala Sutta of Majjima Nikaya there have explained about ethical argument

with the emphasis on striving, where the Buddha quotes the five qualities of striving to show that

there is no difference of achievement by the striving persons despite their caste distinctions:

“Cattārome, mahārāja, vaṇṇā – khattiyā, brāhmaṇā, vessā, suddā. Te cassu imehi pañcahi

padhāniyaṅgehi samannāgatā; ettha pana nesaṃ assa dīgharattaṃ hitāya sukhāyā‟‟ti.”37

1. Faith in the Buddha “saddho hoti, saddahati tathāgatassa bodhiṃ………..”38

2. Good health “appābādho hoti appātaṅko samavepākiniyā gahaṇiyā samannāgato nātisītāya

nāccuṇhāya majjhimāya padhānakkhamāya”39

3. Not fraudulent “asaṭho hoti amāyāvī yathābhūtaṃ attānaṃ āvikattā satthari vā viññūsu vā

sabrahmacārīsu”40

4. Full of energy “āraddhavīriyo viharati akusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ pahānāya, kusalānaṃ

dhammānaṃ upasampadāya, thāmavā daḷhaparakkamo anikkhittadhuro kusalesu dhammesu”41

36 Ambattasutta – DN i, 267 ,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 37 Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 38 Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 39 Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 40 Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 14

5. Endowed with wisdom “paññavā hoti udayatthagāminiyā paññāya samannāgato ariyāya

nibbedhikāya sammādukkhakkhayagāminiyā”42

In the Sonadanda Sutta the Brahmin Sonandanda lays down five qualities to be a Brahmin:

1. Good birth from both sides mother's and father‟s “Idha, bho gotama, brāhmaṇo ubhato sujāto

hoti mātito ca pitito ca, saṃsuddhagahaṇiko yāva sattamā pitāmahayugā akkhitto anupakkuṭṭho

jātivādena”43

2. Technical training in the Vedas and Vedic lore “ajjhāyako hoti mantadharo tiṇṇaṃ vedānaṃ

pāragū sanighaṇḍukeṭubhānaṃ sākkharappabhedānaṃ itihāsapañcamānaṃ padako

veyyākaraṇo lokāyatamahāpurisalakkhaṇesu anavayo”44

3.Caste “abhirūpo hoti dassanīyo pāsādiko paramāya vaṇṇapokkharatāya samannāgato

brahmavaṇṇī brahmavacchasī akhuddāvakāso dassanāya”45

4. Virtue “sīlavā hoti vuddhasīlī vuddhasīlena samannāgato”46

5. Wisdom “paṇḍito ca hoti medhāvī paṭhamo vā dutiyo vā sujaṃ paggaṇhantānaṃ”47

But in the course of the conversation with the Buddha, Sonadanda is questioned in such a way

that he eventually on eliminates the first three qualities and arrives at the recognition of a

Brahmin by virtue and wisdom.

41 Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 42

Kaṇṇakatthalasutta – MN ii,379,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 43 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 311,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 44 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 311,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 45 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 311,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 46 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 311,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 47 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 311,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 15

“Yato kho, bho, brāhmaṇo sīlavā ca hoti vuddhasīlī vuddhasīlena samannāgato, paṇḍito ca hoti

medhāvī paṭhamo vā dutiyo vā sujaṃ paggaṇhantānaṃ. Imehi kho, bho, dvīhaṅgehi

samannāgataṃ brāhmaṇā brāhmaṇaṃ paññapenti; „brāhmaṇosmī‟ti ca vadamāno sammā

vadeyya”48

The Brahmanic claim to superiority by birth is further refuted by suggesting an ethical

etymology to the word brahmana: “Bahitapapo'ti brahmano”. One is a Brahmin because he has

abandoned evil. This tendency is found even in the Agganna Sutta where the specific role of a

Brahmin is discussed.

The entire Brahmana Vagga of the Dhammapada follows the same trend and gives an ethical

and moral twist to the word 'Brahman'. To quote one49

“Yassa kāyena vācāya, manasā natthi dukkaṭaṃ - Saṃvutaṃ tīhi ṭhānehi, tamahaṃ brūmi

brāhmaṇaṃ”50

He who does no evil through body, speech or mind; who is restrained in these three respects,

him i call a Brahmin.

The Vasettha Sutta, too, conclusively states that the moral purity of a person should be

counted as a prerequisite to be a Brahmin.51

„„Na jaccā brāhmaṇo hoti, na jaccā hoti abrāhmaṇo - Kammunā brāhmaṇo hoti, kammunā hoti

abrāhmaṇo”52

48 Soṇadaṇḍasutta – DN i, 316,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 49 Pategama - 80 50 Dhammapada –Khuddaka N. xxvi, 391,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 51 Pategama - 80 52 Vasetthasutta –MN ii, 460,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 16

The Vasala Sutta totally rejects the brahmanic claim of birth to be a Brahmin and says

„„Na jaccā vasalo hoti, na jaccā hoti brāhmaṇo - Kammunā vasalo hoti, kammunā hoti

brāhmaṇo‟‟53

None is by birth a Brahmin, none is by birth an Outcast. by deed one becomes a Brahmin. by

deed one becomes an Outcaste.

V. Religious Arguments

These are arguments based merely on the piety of a person who has left the household life.

In the Assalayana Sutta the Buddha shows that if anyone of the four castes kills creatures,

takes what has not been given, wrongly enjoys the pleasures of the senses, is a liar, of slanderous

speech, a gossip, covetous, malevolent in mind, of wrong view, he is destined to be born in a

state of woe.54

“cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātino adinnādāyino kāmesumicchācārino musāvādino pisuṇavācā

pharusavācā samphappalāpino abhijjhālū byāpannacittā micchādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṃ

maraṇā apāyaṃ duggatiṃ vinipātaṃ nirayaṃ upapajjeyyu‟nti”55

But one who lives up to the standard laid down in the Dhamma is he a Brahmin or a Ksatriya

or a Vaisya or a Sudra he is a better person and destined to be born in a heavenly world.

“cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātā paṭiviratā adinnādānā paṭiviratā kāmesumicchācārā paṭiviratā

musāvādā paṭiviratā pisuṇāya vācāya paṭiviratā pharusāya vācāya paṭiviratā samphappalāpā

53 Suttanipātapāḷi – KN i, 142,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

54 Pategama - p 81 55 Assalāyanasutta – MN ii, 404,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 17

paṭiviratā anabhijjhālū abyāpannacittā sammādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā sugatiṃ

saggaṃ lokaṃ upapajjeyyu‟nti”56

The same argument is found in the Esukari Sutta too. In the Madhura Sutta Ven Kaccana,

while discussing the issue with the king, Avantiputta, uses the same argument.57

The Brahmins held the view that demerits could be washed away by bathing in holy rivers.

Ascribing religious sanctity to bathing in holy rivers, they used to perform religious rites of

purification. Therefore the Buddha in both Assalayana and Esukari Suttas asks the question for

argument's sake: "Is it only a Brahmin who taking a back scratcher, bath powder and going to a

river is capable of cleansing himself of defilements as well as mud and not a Ksatriya, or a

Vaisya or a Sudra ?

„„Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, assalāyana, brāhmaṇova nu kho pahoti sottisināniṃ ādāya nadiṃ gantvā

rajojallaṃ pavāhetuṃ, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo‟‟ti?58

Buddhism does not approve of dipping in water to wash away one's demerits. As explained by

Punna in the Theri Gatha one would wash away not only demerits but merits as well by dipping

in water, and fish, tortoises and crocodiles would, on the other hand, go directly to heaven as

they always lived in water!59

“Saggaṃ nūna gamissanti, sabbe maṇḍūkakacchapā - Nāgā ca susumārā ca, ye caññe udake

carā”60

56 Assalāyanasutta – MN ii, 405,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 57 Pategama - p 81 58 Assalāyanasutta – MN ii, 407,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka) 59 Pategama - p 81 60 Puṇṇātherīgāthā – KN xii, 241,( Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka)

Rewatha 18

Conclusion

According to above discussed matters at here we can understand, the Buddhism totally

rejecting the theory of social stratification based on caste, speaks of the unity, the oneness of

humankind. While numerous arguments have been adduced to disprove the conceptual basis of

caste propounded by Brahmins, an example has been set by the Buddha himself by opening up

the doors of monkhood to all, despite the caste or ethnic differences of the persons concerned.

The Buddha‟s onset against the caste system of the day was not limited to oral denunciation.

The Buddha demonstrated his stance of equal treatment of all human beings by admitting as

Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis, members of all castes without any discrimination and giving positions

of importance purely on merit. Sunita, the scavenger, Upali the barber, Kumara Kassapa the

abandoned orphan, Punna the slave girl, and Sati the fisher‟s son were some of the social outcast

who lost their low identity in lay life and became respected members of the Sangha.

According to Buddhism social stratification system is caused by human beings. Such

divisions into stratas regarded as high or low in status, weak or strong in power are influenced by

biological, physical, psychological, and karmic factors pertaining to moral acts and their

consequences and laws pertaining to spiritual phenomena. Buddhist thinking attempts to

understand these influences which, coming together causes the formulation of a particular

stratification system. Primarily it is man's ignorance which causes the division of society into

different levels, either based on ascription or achievement. The Buddhist approach is to

understand the basis of this ignorance and realize the futility of social stratification in human

society.

Rewatha 19

Bibliography

A. ORIGINAL SOURCES

Dīgha Nikāya - Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0. Text copyright © 1995 Vipassana Research

Institute, Lucene.Net http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/

Majjhima Nikāya - Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0. Text copyright © 1995 Vipassana Research

Institute, Lucene.Net http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/

Suttanipātapāli - Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0. Text copyright © 1995 Vipassana Research

Institute, Lucene.Net http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/

Dhammapadapāli - Chatta Sangayana Tipitaka 4.0. Text copyright © 1995 Vipassana Research

Institute, Lucene.Net http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/

B. GENERAL BOOKS

Gnanarama, Pategama. An Approach to Buddhist Social Philosophy. Singapore: Ti-Sarana

Buddhist Association, 1996.

Rahula, Walpola. What the Buddha taught. Dehiwala: Buddhist cultural centre, 2006.

Ratnapala, Nandasena. Buddhist Sociology. Delhi: D.K. Fine Art Press, 1993.

Dutt, Nalinaksha, Early Monastic Buddhism, Calcutta (N.E.) 1960.

Saunders, Peter. Social Class and Stratification. Routledge. 1990

http://books.google.com/books?id=FK004p0J_EC.

Rewatha 20