💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › flow-buddhist-anarchism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:52:32. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Buddhist Anarchism
Author: flow
Date: January 5th 2020
Language: en
Topics: Buddhism
Source: http://dhammaflow.org/2020/01/buddhist-anarchism/

flow

Buddhist Anarchism

The question, “Is Buddhism compatible with Anarchism?” pops up sometimes

in r/Anarchy101. Given Buddhism’s growth in the west and potential

attraction to nontheists, this remains an important question.

Buddhism is both compatible with and supportive of Anarchism as an

ideology opposed to coercive hierarchies. Primarily in that the five

precepts, moral codes followed by both lay people and monastics, are

antithetical to capitalism and the state. The five precepts are:

Not to kill

Not to steal (take what is not given)

Not to commit sexual misconduct (cheating, abuse, etc.)

Not to lie

Not to use intoxicants

Killing and the broader infliction of violence is anathema, with only

small room given when someone strikes a blow “desiring freedom” (such as

being grabbed by a kidnapper), which does not include the violence

committed in wars or the violence routinely committed by police. The

state and capitalism ultimately require a monopoly of force to be held

by the state and its enforcers (police, military). If that violence is

never a possibility (as in well practiced pacifism) then the state and

capitalism can not reasonably function.

To take what is not given includes also the theft of surplus labor

value. Meaning that whenever a worker does not fully receive the product

of their labor, the capitalist effectively steals it. Being threatened

with starvation, homelessness or lack of medicine otherwise the worker

often has little recourse.

The state likewise often relies upon the usage of espionage in terms of

both domestic and foreign spying, not to mention in-state propaganda.

Naturally this is also present within corporations. Take a look at

deceitful advertising and corporate espionage for starters.

In this way, if all beings were to follow the basic moral guidelines of

Buddhism it would effectively neutralize the military, police and

capitalism. The Buddha himself directly considered if a state could ever

be justified in SN 4.20:

“Is it possible to exercise rulership righteously: without killing and

without instigating others to kill, without confiscating and without

instigating others to confiscate, without sorrowing and without causing

sorrow?”

SN 4.20

Here Buddha states a few things which are aspects of unjust states:

killing, confiscating materials, sorrowing or causing others to do any

of these things (such as a monarch ordering an execution or seizure of

land). Taking this together with the above restrictions of the precepts

I cannot conceive of a state which is able to exist justifiably.

Counter arguments

In the aforementioned Anarchy101 discussions two main objections are

usually raised:

the law of kamma (karma) is an unjustified hierarchy

Buddhist institutions are hierarchies

To the first, the line of reasoning often goes that because kamma can

determine one’s place of birth that this serves as justification for

oppressive hierarchies. Such as someone being born into royalty being a

factor of their kamma and therefore being legitimized in whatever they

do. This argument misses important understandings of kamma and it’s

relation to virtuous action.

Namely that the effects of previous actions do not justify or absolve

current evil actions. No amount of compassion makes murder permissible.

In this way whatever actions led to an individual taking birth in a

position of power do not legitimize any actions taken thereafter. In the

same way ordination does not legitimize any behavior done by a monastic,

as any monastic of any seniority can be expelled for committing some

offenses.

In respect to Buddhist institutions being hierarchical, I don’t dispute

this necessarily as Ven Sujato says in his essay Hierarchies

“Unlike most religious organizations, however, the guidelines for the

Buddhist monastic community are anti-hierarchical. Despite this, modern

Buddhist organizations tend towards a strongly hierarchical model”

Hierarchies

Realistically many Buddhist organizations function as rigid hierarchies

with those at the top exercising strong control over others. However,

this isn’t a necessary facet of Buddhism per se as Ven Sujato shows by

example:

“Within the Sangha, a hierarchy of power is only established in certain

limited circumstance, namely, in disciplinary proceedings and in the

appointment of Sangha officers. In the case of disciplinary proceedings,

the authority stems not from any individual but from the Sangha as a

whole. This is the normal state of affairs in Vinaya. Only the Sangha,

in the sense of the monastics present within a particular monastery

boundary, has the authority to make enforceable decisions, and only then

when it operates in accordance with the Dhamma and Vinaya.

In the case of Sangha officers, the Sangha delegates its power to an

individual. When there is a job needing to be done in the Sangha, for

example looking after the monastery stores, the Sangha may appoint a

monastic to do the job. That monastic should be competent and capable of

doing the job properly. Since it is the Sangha’s duty to ensure that the

candidate is competent, once they have taken office, their decisions

should be respected within the scope of their job. They do not need to

refer back to the Sangha for every little decision.

An individual monastic should not criticize or disobey the Sangha

officer within the scope of their duties. For example, if a requisite is

scarce and the Sangha officer allocates it to the monastics via a

lottery, someone who has missed out should not just take what they want

from the stores, nor should they groundlessly accuse the Sangha officer

of bias. But if a genuine conflict or difficulty arises, the Sangha can

raise the issue and make a decision.”

Hierarchies

In fact, if you look at the Vinaya, the shared rule on consensus (158

for nuns, 80 for monks) says:

Should any bhikkhuni, when deliberation is being carried on in the

Community, get up from her seat and leave without having given consent,

it is to be confessed. (this blocks all decision making because sangha

matters have to be decided unanimously)

Pācittiya 158

This originally nonhierarchical structure has however been curtailed by

the state itself. In many Buddhist majority countries, the monastic

community is regulated by secular law, in such a way as to create rigid

hierarchies more easily utilized by the state to maintain power.

In Thailand there are a number of such laws that directly regulate the

Sangha. An important aspect of these laws is the creation of a Sangha

hierarchy that to some extent overrides the independence of individual

monasteries as established by the Vinaya.

Ajahn Brahmali

In terms of seniority, I think this can be reasonably classified as an

influence rather than a hierarchy because no monastic no matter how

senior has the ability to violently threaten another monastic’s

livelihood. A monastic is both free to leave a particular teacher or to

disrobe altogether, as is any layperson likewise free to find a new

teacher or community, free from coercive reprisal. For example, the

start of the Thai Forest Tradition (Dhammayut Order) was a departure

from the watering down of Buddhism in Thailand. Otherwise, Ven Sujato

speaks to the seniority dynamic:

“A senior is felt to be respected and worthy of honor. However, when you

look closely at the Vinaya, this is applied in only a few minor

instances; for example, the order in which monastic eat is often in

accordance with seniority. And the Buddha is very careful to point out

that the true meaning of a senior is one who acts is a respectable way,

undermining the notions of automatic authority due to seniority.”

Hierarchies

In conclusion, Buddhism philosophically frustrates the coercive

hierarchies of capitalism and the state. While organizationally the

monastic codes create a community without coercive control over others.

Issues commonly raised are primarily misunderstandings of kamma and how

it works or refusing to see nuance within the Buddhist community.

Buddhism is both compatible with and in support of Anarchism, most

especially in strict interpretations of the Dhamma-Vinaya.