The Buddha I believe in

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Not being a believer in past Buddhas or future Buddhas, there is only one Buddha I believe in, and have no problem with the term Buddha either, though many synonyms are associated with this great personality. G A D Sirimal, who has a keen interest in Buddhism, has directed a few questions, after reading my piece “Imagining what the Buddha looked like” (The island, 12 February) and the preceding is my response. Sirimal is of the opinion that as the term Buddha is derived from the Sanskrit term Buddhi which means wisdom, there is a Buddha in all of us and the historical Buddha should be referred to as Gautama Buddha. Even Mahayana does not go to the extent of calling all of us Buddhas though it claims that as one cannot attain enlightenment by Arhathood, all should be Bodhisattvas. Though I cannot find fault with the term Gautama Buddha, some others may argue that it would be more accurate to call Him Siddhartha Gautama Buddha, as Gautama is the family name, not the given name. All this is superfluous as, by consensus, we know who we are referring to by the term Buddha. For me, there is no other Buddha.

It is very unlikely that Siddhartha Gautama was referred to as the Buddha during his lifetime and is likely to have been called Sakyamuni, the ascetic of the Sakya clan, or simply by his name Siddhartha Gautama. The first surviving reference as the Buddha is in the third century BCE Edicts of Ashoka. The Lumbini pillar inscription, which marks Emperor Ashoka’s pilgrimage to the birthplace of Prince Siddhartha, refers to Buddha Shakyamuni. There are many epithets used including Samana Gothama in some Sri Lankan and South Asian texts. Whatever descriptive epithets are available it is simple enough to refer to the Buddha as such. Anyway, the Buddha never referred to himself as the Buddha, referring to himself as Tathagata. There is no definition of the word Tathagata but roughly means one beyond all transitory phenomena.

From an evolutionary perspective, considering the relatively brief period of human existence, it is extremely unlikely there would have been previous Buddhas unless in parallel universes, the existence of which is yet to be proved. Believing in a Maitreya Buddha necessitates a belief in predetermination and if everything is predetermined, the cause-and-effect theory of Buddhism is invalidated. It is because of these facts that I believe in only one Buddha. Further, if as some Buddhist priests continue to refer to us as we aspire to achieve enlightenment in the Sasana of Maitreya Buddha, are we not insulting The Buddha? The path He showed is still open and all that is needed is to follow rather than wait for a future Buddha!

Sirimal also questions whether the Buddha was enlightened, as an enlightened one cannot make mistakes and cites two important examples; the ordination of Prince Rahula and the much-discussed question about the Buddha’s attitude towards the ordination of women.

Though the Buddha found the reason for the ever-pervasive dissatisfaction and the way of overcoming that, there was no claim of infallibility. Problems have arisen due to the process of deification that had taken place but if one treats the Buddha as a human being, though he possessed a super intellect, all this could be explained. When it was pointed out by King Suddhodana that ordaining Rahula without consent was irregular, the Buddha never claimed that what he had done was correct or he could do no wrong as he was enlightened. Instead, He admitted his fault and laid down rules.

The Buddha was a true democrat introduced rules on consensus. The Vinaya Pitaka is the best example of how rules should be laid down. When any offence was committed, the punishment was laid down but it was not applied retrospectively, thus establishing the principle that retrospective justice is invalid, long before lawyers did!

Ordination of women or how it is stated in the texts is an interesting topic for debate and I have written about it previously at length. It is full of distortions but to this date many who believe in male supremacy take it as gospel truth, ignoring the fact that we are reading accounts as recorded by males. The Buddha propounded the equality of all, denouncing the caste system propagated by the Brahmins. Is it believable that His concept of equality did not extend to women? Did Ananda have to remind him that Maha Prajapathi Gothami suckled him? Did the Buddha get it completely wrong that by ordaining women the duration of his doctrine would be reduced from 1,000 to 500 years? All these fallacies make it very likely that most of these were distortions. Unfortunately, because of these distortions Meheni Sasna is still under threat in Sri Lanka though we shout from rooftops that we are the guardians of the Buddha Sasana!

The Buddha was a human being, not supernatural, with an intellect so far unsurpassed in human history. He laid the foundation for scientific thought as well stated in the Kalama Sutta. His analysis of our dissatisfaction in the form of the Four Noble Truths, continues to be the way all scientific facts are elucidated. The Middle path, the Buddha showed, is recognised even in politics of modern times. His analysis of the human mind has not been bettered by scientists so far. His explanation of how senses work, including the mind as the modifier sense explains things much better than the accepted scientific explanations based on five senses. Afterall, we see what we want to see and we hear what we want to hear!

What is important is not splitting hairs on what to call Him but to follow the path the Buddha showed us.