CHAPTER IXBuddhism; How Maintained
Thehoary system of Buddhism must have some elements of vitality to keep it in existence through the twenty-six centuries of its history. That it has long since passed the stage of its greatest power is quite easily believed. That such a system could remain the religion of progressive races under the light of the present and the future, as indicated by the present, few will maintain. That the number of its present adherents has been greatly exaggerated, there is no doubt. Some of the peoples which have been classed as Buddhistic in religion are clearly not distinctively of that faith.
Sir Monier Williams, in his great work on Buddhism, says that of real Buddhists, who are not more identified with some other religion than with it, number not over one hundred millions of adherents, instead of five hundred millions, as some have claimed. He declares that Christianity, and not Buddhism, is the strongest religion numerically in the world.
But a religion with even one hundred millions of reasonably faithful adherents of its doctrines and practices demands our respectful study. Itis not possible within the limits here defined for the writer to discuss the many-sidedness of Buddhism, for all the elements of a faith must have consideration in an attempt to set it forth comprehensively. It is the writer’s intention merely to outline some features of Buddhism most apparent to a missionary whose work lies in a Buddhist country. Buddhism is said to be in its purest form in Burma and Ceylon.
A few general statements may be made. Buddhism never claimed to be divine in its origin. It was originally entirely atheistic. It is hardly entitled to be called a religion. It is the most pessimistic philosophy ever taught among men, or even conceived as yet, by any teacher. It inveighs against all natural desires or emotions however exalted, and disallows the holiest relationship. Society itself could not exist if the fundamental teachings of Buddhism were observed. All innocent joys are prohibited among those who would attain toNirvana. It makes self-destruction the highest aim of man. To cease to be born, and to extinguish personal consciousness, is set before its followers as the final goal to be sought. How can such a system, so opposed to all that men love, find millions of adherents?
There certainly is a fascination about the supreme renunciation in the system. Gautama certainly renounced much; and doubtless many of his followers have made such a sacrifice of desires as he. It is not here maintained that this renunciation is wholly unselfish, but that it lies at thefoundation of Buddhism; and however unhealthful a sentiment it is, it has always appealed to many minds. Those who will not make such renunciations themselves revere those who do, and help sustain a system that teaches such tenets.
Another source of the power of Buddhism is found in the system of doctrine taught. It is all the stronger in that, as a system, it is connected with a great teacher. It is true that Buddhism has more in it which Gautama did not teach, than of that which he did teach. But it is very easy for the Buddhist to connect any teaching of his religion directly with his idea of Gautama. When a religion with a system of doctrine meets with the nebulous beliefs and incoherent practices of demonology, or like beliefs, it must steadily gain adherents. Buddhism has a literature of much importance. To have sacred books, which can be appealed to in support of the voice of the living preacher, or teacher, is a great source of power. We see in Burma that the more backward races are becoming Burmanized and converted to the Buddhist religion. When they have become Buddhists, as in the case of Karens, it is the testimony of all missionaries that they are much more difficult to convert to Christianity. This Buddhist “law” is one of the three objects of reverence, or worship, enjoined by Gautama.
Gautama exalted the brotherhood of monks. They have become one of the three objects of veneration. Dressed in their yellow robes and admitted to the monastic order, they are therebyexalted in the minds of Buddhists far above the ordinary man. So much so, that in all addresses to them the highest terms of honor are used. On some occasions they are actually worshiped. When a monk, orpoungyi, leaves the assembly of monks, which is frequently the case, he at once drops to the level of the ordinary man. But while he is a member of the order, he is regarded as a superior, worthy of all reverence even by his own family. These monks, with their yellow robes and beads and boy attendants, are everywhere, except at weddings and festivals, though often gathering in crowds a little apart from the latter. The daily going forth with the begging bowl to receive the food given by the devout, or even respectable laity, is an object-lesson in Buddhism. The distinctive buildings calledchoungs, in which the monks always live, are found in every village; and whole blocks of these buildings in all towns and cities proclaim the teachers of Buddhism. These houses of the monks are invariably the best buildings in the village. This conspicuous advertisement of the monastic teachers does much to keep the system which they represent ever before the people in a conspicuous way.
Buddhist Monk and Attendant
Buddhist Monk and Attendant
But the monks do two distinctive services for their faith of a more positive kind. They teach practically every boy in Burma. They teach the boys to read, and they indoctrinate them. No boy is considered to have a human spirit at all. He must remain an animal until he has spent at least one day in the monastery. But aside from thisapproach to the sacred order of monks, all Burmese boys attend school for some length of time, and usually learn to read their language passably well. They certainly learn the Buddhist doctrines. So it comes to pass that most Burmese know what they believe, however inconsistent with this belief they live. They also learn the elements of arithmetic, as well as the grotesque teachings of Buddhism in geography of these teachers. In estimating the strength of Buddhism, and its ability to maintain itself, the monastic school, uniting a religious order with the instruction of all the male childhood and youth, stands easily first of all its sources of power.
There are schools conducted by laymen in almost every large village. These schools do not generally have a continuous existence, but so long as a teacher can get scholars he keeps his school going. In these lay schools also some Buddhistic instruction is imparted. So that the Buddhist youth is the exception who has not been indoctrinated with Buddhist teaching. Without knowing why he is a Buddhist, nevertheless he proclaims himself as a Buddhist, and will give a fair statement of his belief. The missionary must bring his message to a mind pre-empted by Buddhist doctrine taught by the yellow-robed monk.
From this statement of the Buddhist school system of the Burmese, and to its power as a religious agency, the reader, as does the missionary, will see the imperative need of Christian schools to take the place of the Buddhist schools. Their efficiencyas a missionary agency can not be over-estimated. Each of the large missions now operating in Burma has adopted this strategic agency with very encouraging results. Many Buddhists do not hesitate to send their boys to a mission school if it is equipped to do superior work. Here, then, is Christianity’s greatest opportunity among the young. That mission will show greatest wisdom which gives Christian schools of the higher grades special attention.
There are doctrines of Buddhism, aside from the moral precepts or regulations for the conduct or belief of its adherents, which may be, all unconsciously to the Buddhist, of great attraction. Buddhism, as has been noted, like most other Eastern philosophies, teaches that men pass through many births through countless ages, and transmigration through men, animals, and spirits. This transmigration may be endless, and will be, if the individual does not attain toNirvana. Now, while a man’s place in the scale of being is determined by the conduct of the life that now is, there is nothing final in this life as affecting destiny. If he sinks in the scale of being, he can rise in the same by his conduct in another existence. The time taken to make his recovery from the consequences of his demerits in this life may be ages; still he can retain all that he has lost by a bad life here. It therefore comports with men’s wish that they can commit acts not wholly agreeable to the known or believed rules of conduct, and yet they believe they can escape after a long time the consequencesof such trifling with their moral code. It is a pleasant belief of human nature, wishing to indulge in that which is forbidden, to sacrifice some future blessedness for a present gratification, if at the same time the man can believe that the loss may at some future time be recovered. To a temporizing conscience this is a very comforting doctrine.
Buddhism teaches that character and states of existence are determined finally by a man’s unaided efforts. Human nature in all lands takes kindly to such teaching. If men could purchase salvation at a price in payment or sacrifice of even life itself, there would be many applicants for eternal life, who will not receive it as a gift. Buddhism is very complimentary to self-conceit when it teaches that we need no God to enlighten us, no Savior to save us, but that we can recover ourselves. That only our own acts can affect our scale of being and ultimately determine our destiny, in every varying merit or demerit, is believed. Building and gilding a pagoda lays up a great store of merit, and to engage in meditation is the most meritorious work of all. Their whole system of the merit of works breeds inordinate conceit, and hence is a very pleasant doctrine to men. To save themselves, and not to be saved by the vicarious sacrifice of another, is pleasing to pride. I think all agree that this belief in self-acquired merit is one of the strongest bulwarks of Buddhism.
The student of religion who looks for its effect on the people, is at first perplexed at a singularparadox among the Burmese Buddhists. He finds a religion that frowns upon the innocent joys of life, and much more upon all spectacular demonstrations. It especially discourages theatricals and feasting. The natural effect of such a religion would be to depress the spirit and overshadow the life. It would pluck up all gayety from a people. But we find the Burmese Buddhists the gayest and most light-hearted race of the Orient. Their religion to the contrary, they have more music, dancing, and theatricals than any other people. And in all this they regard themselves as the most consistent Buddhists. They even connect a festival with almost every special religious duty. It therefore comes to pass that they harmonize festal joys with the utter prohibition of them by their religion, and count the practice and the “law” that interdicts it equally “good.” By observing this fact, it is clear that the drastic prohibitions of Buddhism have no place at all in life practice. If, therefore, this contradiction of Buddhism does not add to its strength, it at least allows the adherent to accept and reject such portions of the Buddhist law as may be convenient, and as suits his fun-loving and easy-going disposition. In this way the Burman comforts himself with the belief that he is a devout Buddhist, and at the same time escapes all the depressing effects on his nature that would result if he actually undertook to keep either the letter or spirit of the Buddhist law. So it appears this paradox is explained.
Funeral Pyre of a Burmese Priest
Funeral Pyre of a Burmese Priest
Examples of their ability to turn any circumstanceinto a festival is seen at their funerals. When an ordinary man dies the friends gather and bring food, and keep up a several days’ feasting. On the day of the funeral long lines of oxcarts are drawn up, each with some offering for thepoungyis, or priests. These gifts to the priests seem to be about the only religious part of the ceremonies. Then with bands playing, and often dancers and buffoons performing at the head of the procession, they move away to the burial ground. On several occasions I saw half-drunken men carrying the coffin on a tall, loosely-constructed framework, dancing with all their might under their burden. Sometimes it seemed the coffin would fall to the ground.
I have seen the burial of a Buddhist nun where the procession contained sixty-one stands of presents, one for each year of the nun’s life, carried in front of the corpse. These presents were intended for the priests, and they enabled the donors to gain merit, make a show, and enjoy a festival all in one. The presents were of plates, towels, and carpets, amounting to about ten dollars a stand, or over six hundred dollars in value in all. Thepoungyisoften preach against the festivals, but I have never heard that they ever refused to receive the presents, an indispensable feature of the display.
There are great festivals gotten up at the burning of a priest who has been much venerated. He may have enjoyed a reputation for great learning, and perhaps lived to a good old age. The body iskept, if the priest should die in the rainy season, until the dry weather brings a time suitable for camping in the fields. Arrangements having been completed, a place, usually a cleared rice field, is selected, and booths are constructed to accommodate the gathering people. Material is procured, and a very large skeleton framework of dry poles is constructed in imitation of the seven-fold roof of a monastery. This framework is covered over with matting and paper, on which is much ornament, usually of a pictorial character. Great ropes are drawn high up into the framework, where it is designed the coffin shall be placed before the burning. A procession is formed to bring the body in great state, with all kinds of symbolical banners and imitations of the sacred elephant. The casket is placed on these great ropes, and skillfully drawn into the tower of the structure. When the body is once in its place, the younger men hastily take up burning spears, as fire brands, and hurl them into the combustible material, and in an instant all is aflame. Soon there is nothing but ashes. The camp is broken up, and the people return home. They have had a great festival lasting in preparation over many days, and have performed a pious work of merit. They have violated much of Buddhist teaching; but by their spectacular festival they have helped to perpetuate Buddhism in the community. I witnessed preparation for one such burning near Rangoon. The firing of the pyre occurred on Sunday, amidst a great throng of all the nations represented in Burma. The full accountwas given in the daily papers, and it is said that thirty thousand dollars was spent in cremating the one body, that of a noted monk. Recent word from Mandalay tells of the cremation of the body of the chief bishop of Buddhism in Burma. It is said twenty thousand people were present at this festival. Yet the bishop had always preached that all festivity was wrong, and the whole Buddhist people declared the “law” was good.
The same contradictions are apparent in their theological teaching. One instance will suffice as an illustration. Fish is a common and much appreciated article of food in Burma, and has been for centuries. The people have come to regard fish as necessary to their food as rice. This creates a great demand for fish, and consequently calls for a multitude of fishermen. But by Buddhist teaching the fishermen, or the hunter, is doomed to the deepest hell for taking life. They teach that there are four great hells, one below another, and the fisherman is doomed to go to the bottom of the lowest hell, and can not get out till he spends fifty million years in each of the four hells. And only after that could he hope to be born a man again on earth. Meantime the well-fed Burman who fattens on the fish, who made the fisherman necessary, thinks he not only has no responsibility for the other’s sin, but is making good headway towardNirvana! The fisherman, when interviewed, is quite at ease. Question him of the sin of taking the life of the fish, and he will confidently tell you: “I do not kill the fish. I only drag it outof the water, and the hot sun kills it.” Both declare themselves good Buddhists, and that “the Buddhist law is good.” It leaves liberty enough for any number of specious pleas to avoid personal responsibility for violating the Buddhist prohibitions, while the votaries of Buddhism are still pretending to keep the “law.”