Hello everyone,
The last sloka of the Cakkavatti Sutta (32) does indeed states that "in terms of birth or caste the Khattiya are best". But what does it mean in the social and anthropological context of the time? According to some, among which DD. Kosambi (Culture and Civilisation of Ancient India) at the time of the Buddha, the brahmins were barely beginning trying to assert their superiority and impose their moral dominance on Indian (Aryan) society. They were of course opposed by many non-brahmin groups, non -Aryan and even Aryan, among which the Khattiya (better translated by "knights" than by "warrior" perhaps) who had to that point been dominant. The Cakkavatti Sutta also notes the "egalitarian ethos" of the Khattiya : among them the best (strongest but also most clever) is elected as the leader or King ( mahasamata or Great Elected). The Khattiya at that time may have been not only more equalitarian but also, as a caste, more porous. Some even wondered if the
Sakyas, the clan of the Buddha, had not been first of some aboriginal, non-Aryan stock (cf EJ.Thomas, Life of Buddha, Legend and History). Belonging to the Khattiya was perhaps at the time not only and necessarily the result of birth but of a moral might gotten from merit, strenght, courage, intelligence. It is also possible that the contemporary kings of the janapadas making up India at the time, and the kings of Magadha later, all Khattiyas, though perhaps sincere in their allegiance to the Buddha, also thought his doctrine politically opportune in fending off Brahmines' pretensions.
What matters is that for the Khattiya, as for the Buddha, one of them, dominance is not inherited but obtained through merit.
With Metta
J. Huynen
--- On Thu, 10/29/09, frank <fcckuan@...> wrote:
From: frank <fcckuan@...>
Subject: why warrior is the best clan RE: SV: [Pali] Re: Buddhist Imprimatur?
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 5:22 PM
_____
From: Pali@... com [mailto:Pali@... com] On Behalf Of Kumâra
Bhikkhu.
[snip]
Hmm.... never thought of that before. I wonder if elements of that could
have infiltrated into the suttas. I personally find it odd that in one sutta
the Buddha claims that the khattiya/Kshatriya is the best of all clans.
Greetings Venerable Kumara,
I heard a talk from a monk last year that explained this in a way that made
a great deal of sense to me. I will relate what I heard but be warned it is
embellished with many of my own opinions which may be completely erroneous.
If the Buddha is enlightened, by definition they are beyond identifying with
any clan, political affiliation, class, race, country, etc. Nor would they
praise warriors for killing their enemies. The only killing that enlightened
beings endorse are the metaphorical “killing” of one’s own delusions and
defilements (one sutta the Buddha praised the killing of anger for example).
The Buddha proclaimed the warrior class as the best (as opposed to Brahmins
or other castes) because the warrior is trained and accustomed to dealing
with extreme adversity and finding a way to overcome whatever obstacles and
difficulties that arise. For context, consider all the difficulties that
arise in meditation. The hindrances, boredom, agitation from facing the
demons of one’s mind would lead to excuses by most castes (including
Brahmins) to stop meditating. In stark contrast, the warrior sits as long as
it takes, enduring physical pain, mental agony, patiently fighting through
it all until they triumph and attain whatever can be attained by manly
strength, manly energy. Perhaps the Buddha saw some of the Brahmins in his
day who were intellectually gifted and could give brilliant sermons and
debate with impressive flair and confidence, but did not have the
attainments to back up the talk, whereas the warrior didn’t waste time
talking and would just get things done that needed to be done. It makes
complete sense to me why the Buddha praised certain qualities of the
warrior. The dedication required to steadfastly adhere to the 4 foundations
of mindfulness at all times, it takes a warrior spirit. In the suttas, you
can see the monks never give in to sleep without a fight. When they engage
in activities such as eating which is perilously close to the 5 cords of
sensual pleasure, with the warrior spirit they vigilantly guard every moment
against delighting in taste and hankering for the continuation of
stimulating taste, knowing that failure to do so leads to their defilements
exponentially increasing and compounding over time like credit card debt
that quickly compounds and spirals into bankruptcy. The factor of right
effort, persistence, energy, expressed by the pali word Viriya, has the root
meaning “hero” or “warrior”. The pali word Tapas(?) which frequently is
translated as “ardent”, occurring frequently in the 4 foundations of
mindfulness sutta, also brings to mind the heroic effort required to
maintain mindfulness. One commentator wrote that “ardent” was too mild of a
translation, that failed to capture the power behind the word. The
Visuddhimagga I believe used the simile of Tapas being like the intense heat
of the sun (mindfulness) that can incinerate all defilements. Such is the
extraordinary power of mindfulness done with heroic warrior spirit.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]