Abstract:If
we define the word “nation” we discover that there exist many concepts
about it. But all these concepts about a group of people called “nation”
are based on the limited experience and view of a certain place and
time. In the same way as an individual identifies with a “self”, a
nation identifies with its characteristics and typical features it
proclaims. In the same way many Buddhists identify themselves with a
certain national Buddhist tradition. But the Buddha didn’t give his
teachings to a certain nation, but to everybody who asked for advice or a
teaching.
Key words:Nation concept identification universal approach
If
we want to define what the word “nation” means we will discover that
there exist many concepts. But all these concepts about a group of
people called “nation” are based on the limited experience and view of a
certain place and time and are far from reality. Many people identify
themselves with the characteristics and typical features of the nation
they belong to, and in the same way many Buddhists identify themselves
with a certain national Buddhist tradition. But the Buddha didn’t give
his teachings to a certain nation, but to everybody who asked for advice
or a teaching. He didn’t make any difference between disciples, whether
they came from the kingdom of Magadha
or Koshala, Vacca or Avanti, from the aristocratic republics of Sakya
or Malla, Licchavi or Videha, or belonged to tribes as the Kalama or
Koliya. The individual needs of every man or woman asking for
instructions always were in the focus of his teaching. But although the
Buddha taught in a very personal way according to the needs of every
single person he denied the existence of a person as an independently
existing being. Again and again he pointed out that individuals that
identify with the concept of a self or with a certain self-image will
experience suffering. Even many experiences in our own lives show that
the result of actions done in the attitude of differentiating our wishes
and needs from those of other sentient beings, or even neglecting or
fighting against them, has always been suffering: we have caused
suffering for ourselves, suffering for others, suffering for the
environment, suffering for nature.
I
want to show that the concept of a nation is very similar to the
concept of an individual self. But exactly these concepts limit every
possible development, which will come to an end at the limitations we
ourselves have erected by defining certain fixed and fixating
characteristics either of a self or of a nation. At the very moment when
we make up our minds that a person or a nation is like this or that
there isn’t any possibility to transcend these limitations.
The
Buddha taught that all these concepts are created due to certain views,
but these views don’t see the whole. They are dependent on time and
knowledge, on our senses, emotions, social background and education.
They are impermanent and therefore a cause of suffering. A nation is -
as all phenomena or “samskara - connected
with suffering. The Buddha taught that the clinging to our self-defined
ego-concept is the cause for suffering. In the same way the clinging to
a national identity and the aversion against other nations cause
suffering, too.
My
experiences and my personal situation have influenced the following
thoughts and ideas, therefore I ask for your kind patience to listen to
these examples. I was born in Silesia, now part of Poland. I live in Germany,
but I can see the Swiss Alps from my office window and many of my
disciples are Swiss. As the spiritual head of the Buddhist Mission Hungary, a Buddhist Church of the Arya Maitreya Mandala, I frequently travel to Hungary
to teach Buddhism there. I meet good Dharma friends in Europe and
worldwide, and we exchange our experiences and try to give the
Buddha-Dharma a home in Europe. I can
see that in all these various countries there are some differences in
clothing, eating and drinking, speaking and joking. But I can’t see any
difference in the important features: in the nature of people’s hopes
and fears, wishes, emotions, in the way how they assess or judge.
According to all the great masters of the past, there isn’t any
difference in the primordial nature of every being. Independent of his
or her origin, place of birth, race, gender, nationality, age etc., the
essential nature of pure awareness, clarity and insight, the innate gem
of the awakened mind is the same. In the very moment when we identify
with any nation, race, gender, status etc. we are not aware of the fact
that all these identities are transitory, impermanent, caused by karma
and therefore interdependent or empty. Precisely these limitations cause
the bondages and hindrances for the realization of freedom and
awakening.
What
is the definition of a nation? The word “nation” is derived from the
Latin term “natio” meaning “birth, breed, stock, kind, species, race,
tribe, origin, a people”. A nation is a collection of people sharing the
same national identity, based on ethnic and cultural ties. The members
of a nation define themselves as the descendants of the past inhabitants
of a national homeland or as the descendants of past speakers of the
national language, or past groups which shared the same culture. A
nation is a form of self-defined cultural and social community. We often
forget that the idea of being a nation only developed during the 18th and 19th century in Europe,
when the power of the ruling class of aristocracy was put into question
and later was taken over by the French people during the French
Revolution in 1789.
I am speaking as the representative of Buddhists in Germany.
But a German nation didn’t exist before 1870. A region in Middle Europe
was named Germania by the Romans before 100 AD, but this region was
inhabited by several peoples: Saxons, Bavarians, Prussians, Swabs,
Alemans and others. Beginning in the 10th century, these territories
formed a central part of the Holy Roman Empire that lasted until 1806.
The state known as “Germany”
was unified as a modern nation-state only in 1871, when the German
Empire was forged, with the Kingdom of Prussia as its largest
constituent. This empire was a unification of all the scattered parts of
Germany. In Germany only in 1848 the concept of a German nation arose and has been discussed, although up to the present day people in Germany
identify themselves more with their tribal dialects and customs than
with a common German identity. Their dialects differ from north to south
considerably, so that Bavarian can’t be understood at the North Sea
coast and vice versa. A German standard language developed because of
Martin Luther’s translation of the Holy Bible from Latin into the middle
German dialect of Thuringia.
Sometimes
members of a "nation" share a common identity, language and culture
although there doesn’t exist a common origin. This is the case with the
Hungarian people who moved west from the Altai region in Central Asia,
but today only a minority of 10% of the population is ethnic Hungarian.
The majority descends from ancestors who have come from different
countries all over Europe since the 12th
century. So the Hungarians aren’t an ethnic group any more, but only
share the same language, culture, and homeland. This example shows that a
nation is defined by those who belong to it, and any definition can be
given as the following example may show.
We always think that a common language and culture keeps a nation together, but the example of Switzerland
shows that this isn’t necessarily the case. The Swiss have integrated
four ethnic groups and four official languages with their respective
cultures within their state: German Swiss in the northeast, Romands in
the west who speak French, Italians in the south and Romansh in Grischun
in the southeast. Many Swiss are fluent in two or three of these
languages. Equal political rights are granted to the minorities in this
small mountain state. Political decisions in Switzerland
are a constant challenge and always require a process of mutual
consensus. But everybody is very proud that these decisions are made by
themselves in a very basic democratic way.
All
these examples show that the phenomenon “nation“ has been constructed
by a multitude of changing attributes which people have put onto this
concept. “Nation” is a similar concept as the concept of an “I”. It is a
sort of collective “I”, by which a group of people define certain
common characteristics like a common language or dialect, a certain
outlook or way of thinking, common habits, feasts, food, drinks etc. And
as all phenomena and even more all concepts have arisen in
interdependency from immeasurable quantities of conditions they are void
of inherent existence.
If
a “nation” is not more than a man-made definition, which often has been
dependent upon the purpose behind, we should be very cautious if we
create a dependency upon it. When the Aryan invaders entered the Indian
continent they defined who was an Aryan: namely the victorious tribes.
And centuries later when their number wasn’t enough to rule this country
they invented a ritual that made somebody an Aryan who had been
non-Aryan before. The unforgettable Jingis Khan united the Central Asian
tribes and made everybody a Mongol who shared his vision of a Mongol
empire and who supported him. Several times in the history of Buddhism
the religion became a state forming power and was used to be an
identification model which kept people together.
The 20th
century was a time of severe national conflicts. During World War I and
II millions of people have experienced extreme suffering caused by the
inhuman ideology of superiority of certain races and nations. Our
situation in the 21st century is a challenge for a global
change: We are going to discover the rich heritage of different cultures
on all the five continents, and especially we Westerners give up the
idea to dominate other cultures, as we unfortunately did in the past,
but begin to learn from them on different fields like medicine, arts,
philosophy and religions.
These
many models show that every definition is dependant from the intentions
of those who define it. But all these definitions and characteristics
can change in the course of time, because they are only valid on the
relative level of reality. We are more and more aware of the global
interconnectedness and responsibility. The younger generation is open
for many different lifestyles and is not any more fixated to a single
one. This is a chance and a danger at the same time.
Let us look at the dangers first. Buddhist traditions in Asia
have integrated many customs, fine arts, colourful rituals and their
cultural heritage into the Dharma practice. If the Dharma and the
different Buddhist traditions are fixated too much to national customs
and role models that had been developed during a time when the Dharma
had to be integrated into the culture of a certain nation, often many
centuries ago, many people will feel that it doesn’t fit into modern
times and modern society, and that it doesn’t match their real needs as
modern people who want to survive in the 21st century. As
long as this heritage can be understood by the next generation and is
still meaningful for them, it can be a wonderful means or upaya
to bring the Dharma to the hearts of the people. But if the cultural
influence is regarded to be essential for the Dharma then many young
people will search for religious models that are free from this
antiquity and show new paths and possibilities to master their difficult
lives in a difficult time.
Every
year the German Buddhist Union organizes a Buddhist congress and we
invite the general public. If we look at the number of visitors, it is
most evident that those topics are the most attractive which offer
answers to the everyday problems of men and women: How can I overcome my
anxieties with regard to illness, old age and death? How can I become
less aggressive and more patient and compassionate? How can we create a
peaceful future for the next generations? How can I master my
distractedness? How can I live a life without stress at work and in the
family? They never ask: How can I be a good German! Seemingly the
questions of mankind are the same as at the time of the Buddha.
It
was this universal approach towards the basic human problems - which
are the same all over the world – which made the Buddha’s teachings
blossom in every country, nation and society. The Dharma could develop
strong roots everywhere because those who propagated it were able to
understand that these very simple truths the Buddha taught are the
essence. Not everybody immediately understood the depth of these
teachings, because they are easily acceptable but hard to put into
practice. When the Buddha was asked to speak about the essence of his
dharma he said: “Doing the good, avoiding the bad, taming the mind.”
Everybody was surprised because they all thought that it wasn’t a very
special teaching and every child knows this truth. So the Buddha agreed
and answered: “Yes, every child knows it, but I have seen few old aged
people who act according to it.” This story teaches a very deep truth:
We know a lot about the Dharma, but we don’t act according to our
knowledge. At the time of the Buddha many disciples immediately acted
according to their teacher’s advice and realized the state of arhat.
When
he started to teach the Dharma he didn’t teach it to his own clan, but
to those who asked him for advice, independent from their ethnic
background, profession, caste or gender. He spoke to everybody who was
in need of spiritual guidance. His message was a message for kings and
beggars, Brahmins and untouchables, monks and householders, and it said
that our human determination is to realize indestructible happiness.
“Every being wants happiness, every being is afraid of suffering. Seeing
the similarity to oneself, one should not use violence or have it
used.“ (Dhammapada 10, 129)
At
the time of the Buddha there were no nations, but kingdoms which were
ruled by rajas and maharajas. The ideal of those times was the cakravartin
or world ruler whose task was to bring peace and wealth to everybody in
his empire as King Ashoka did a few centuries after the Buddha’s parinirvana. When Prince Siddhartha was born, a seer made the prediction that this child could make a career either as a cakravartin
or as a fully enlightened Buddha. But the prince chose to leave his
palace and his homeland. He gave up every relationship to his family, to
his clan, and didn’t identify with his role as a Shakya prince or a
member of the aristocratic kshatriya caste or varna.
The
imprints of early education in childhood create the habits of
individuals in a certain country or nation or social class and often are
causes for strong dependencies. We get used to a special food, the way
of living, dressing, and later we cling to these habits and don’t want
to change them anymore. Therefore the Buddha and Buddhist masters of all
times recommended that a practitioner should leave his family and his
homeland, otherwise the customs and habits as well as the obligations
towards the family and the clan will disable him from finding true
freedom. Many masters of the past acted according to this advice, they
left India and went to Sri Lanka, Central Asia, China, Indonesia, Tibet,
Japan and even to Western countries and dedicated their lives to the
wide spread of the Dharma.
In
every country they encountered a cultural heritage which they neither
blamed, attacked nor destroyed, as Christian missionaries sometimes did,
but they integrated the Buddha-Dharma into the vast stream of already
existing spiritual traditions. A friend of mine used to say: The Dharma
is like the Amazon River with its main
stream and thousands of feeder rivers, they flow in all directions. Some
seem to flow even back or disappear, but the whole system is
interrelated and one day all the waters flow into the sea. In the same
way only the whole stream of the Dharma shows the wealth and power of
this eternal law of reality.
When
a baby is born we can’t see its nationality, but only the human being
with the need to be loved and to be cared for, to eat and drink, to
sleep and cry. If I am asked for my nationality I prefer to answer: “I
have a German passport.” I feel hungry or thirsty, happy or sad, healthy
or ill, tired or awake, but I don’t feel “German”. And all these basic
feelings are the same whether I am German or Chinese, Swiss or Japanese,
Hungarian or Mongol. I can say that I love the German language, but
why? Because it is my mother tongue and is so familiar to me that I can
express everything very precisely: thoughts, emotions, arguments. I feel
secure and it is this familiarity and security which I love. If we
become familiar with other languages we discover their beauty and their
special style of describing reality and expressing emotions.
As
a Buddhist from my early childhood I always was very aware of the
possibility of past lives in far away countries which I have never seen
before in this lifetime. So I never came to the idea to identify myself
with the country where I am living now. I think that the connections
with any country or nation are transitory and just lasting for a few
lifetimes.
Shakyamuni
Buddha has had the vision of the universal law, but he only taught what
was essential for his time and the people who listened to his
teachings. In the same way all the enlightened masters taught according
to the mental capacity of their disciples in accordance with their
cultural background, so that they were able to understand the eternal
questions of mankind like birth and death, gain and loss, suffering and
happiness. These basic problems and questions are independent of any
nationality, and are the same for all children, men and women worldwide.
The three roots of evil: greed, hatred and ignorance are not limited to
any continent, race, country or nation. As Buddhists, we know that not
only every human, but even every sentient being is endowed with what we
call the seed of Buddhahood within or tathagatagarbha.
If
we are clinging to national Buddhist traditions and forget the essence
of the Dharma, the teachings of the Buddha can’t spread worldwide and
reach, in the East and in the West, the younger generation - a
generation that is growing up in a multicultural society, but has the
same vision of happiness as all the other generations before. The
Buddha’s message opens the gate to the path towards universal peace and
harmony between people and between nations.
Ven. Vajramàlà
President of the German Buddhist Union