WORLD FELLOWSHIP OF BUDDHISTS
25TH GENERAL CONFERENCE
COLOMBO, SRI LANKA: NOVEMBER 13-17, 2010
THE BUDDHA ON RECONCILIATION
KEYNOTE ADDRESS TO THE SYMPOSIUM
BY ANANDA W. P. GURUGE
November 16, 2010
THE BUDDHA ON RECONCILIATION
By Ananda W. P. Guruge
1. Introduction
Reconciliation is the process of maintaining or restoring amicable relations between opponents in the event of a dispute or conflict. Dispute and conflict have been inherent to human society at all times and they have been as much motivators of progress and development as perpetrators of destruction and disaster. Acknowledging their ineluctability, the need has been felt to ensure that their deleterious efforts are minimized, if not eliminated. The ideals to be achieved as counterpoints to dispute and conflict are amity, unity, harmony and peace. As an outstanding religious leader playing simultaneously the role of an active social reformer, the Buddha had much to say on reconciliation.
2. Amity, Unity, Harmony and Peace
Unity as the Buddha conceived was for opposites to coexist without discrimination. At the macro-level, the Buddha was emphatic in Vasetthasutta (MN 98) that humans as opposed to flora and fauna belonged to one single unified species. Stratification or discrimination of humans on grounds of birth was rejected by him as unacceptable. If any grading was required, the only criterion was a person’s actions and conduct. He demonstrated his profound commitment to the oneness of humanity by opening the doors of the Sangha on equal terms to each and every caste and class of the contemporary Indian society. Coexistence with the violent, the hateful and the ignorant without being affected by their lowly qualities was advocated by the Buddha when he said,
Happily we live indeed without hate with the hateful,
Happily we reside without hate with people who are hateful.
Happily we live in good health with the sick,
Happily we reside in health with people who are sick.
Happily we live without yearning with the yearning,
Happily we reside without yearning with people who yearn. (Dhp. 197-
199)
If coexistence, thus illustrated, implied coping with the opposite, unity for the Buddha was a positive state in which amity or friendship was extended without reservation to everyone. It is significant that the term that the Buddha used most emphatically was metta – a nominal derivative of mitta, a friend. But his definition went beyond mere friendship and extended to loving kindness, when he compared the sentiment to be equal to what a mother felt towards her only son whom she would save at the risk of her own life. In a telling comparison of possible forms of merit, the Buddha stated that a moment of contemplation on metta exceeded the merit of offering alms to a hundred of Buddhas. Metta had to be extended to all sentient beings whom the Buddha encompassed as the stable and the moving without exception, long, huge, middling and tiny as an atom, seen and unseen, living near or far away, and born or seeking to be born. The definition excluded no one.