In the latest movie depiction of the most turbulent years in the life of ‘Confucius’, there was a scene where Confucius spoke up for a sacrificial bird in court. There was a discussion over whether the bird, who bit off its main tail feather, ought to be killed as scheduled for the gods or liberated into the wild – since it seems pretty inauspicious that such an ‘offering-to-be’ is not incomplete. Now, the fact that there was killing intended is already inauspicious – for the bird! And the killer would create inauspicious negative karma for intentional killing too.
Confucius then seized the opportunity to speak against the custom of sacrificing humans for the rich and powerful who are deceased. When a minister expressed indignation against his proposal, Confucius remarked that since that minister is concerned, and that he is dear to the deceased, it would be more sincere if he could sacrifice himself! Indeed, true sacrifice must be of oneself or something from oneself; instead of external things, animals or even people. Of course, the Buddha does not advocate sacrifice of one’s life for minor purposes or when one is not ready like a well-trained Bodhisattva. The most immediate items to sacrifice, as encouraged by the Buddha, are our defilements of greed, hate and delusion.
It is a common misunderstanding that Confucianism is totally aligned with Buddhism – when there are a number of Confucian teachings that are anti-Dharma. For instance, in one scene, Confucius sees a lazing student and made a famous remark – that ‘rotten wood cannot be carved.’ Well, a human, being a sentient being, is not a block of wood. All sentient beings have the potential to change, to awaken their Buddha-nature. This might seem to be a minor point of difference but it is not, as it is unfair to label or to be labeled ‘rotten wood’ – especially when no one is ‘rotten’ all the way to the core. All the ‘rotten’ need to do is to chip away their defiled parts. This itself is already carving in process – to uncover the Buddha within. In fact, the more ‘rotten’ a person appears, the more should he or she be helped to discover Buddha-nature.
In the film, Confucius also advised rulers on warring matters that involved mass-killing, and advocated nationalistic pride of wearing one’s helmet… even if dying on the battlefield. Now, the Buddha would disagree on this pointless attachment to pride during one’s final moments. Such worldly attachment can severely disturb one’s peace of mind. In the worst case scenario, it might even lead to an unfortunate rebirth.
Interestingly, Confucius was shown to have dialogues with Lao Tze (Laozi; Laocius), the founder of Taoism. Lao Tze, who had already renounced worldly life to be a wanderer, urged Confucius to give up his mission of going against the grain of predominant ugly human-nature then. However, Confucius was bent on spreading his teachings of benevolence for kings and their people. It struck me that Confucianism is a thoroughly worldly set of teachings on ritualistic political and social conduct, that does not touch on deeper spiritual matters such as the afterlife, while Taoism in its earliest phase advocated non-contrived naturalistic individual conduct.
Taoism focuses on nature and Confucianism focuses on nurture. Buddhism, however, takes the Middle Path, and pays just enough attention on important worldly matters, while not forgetting the ultimate goal of spiritual liberation. Though the Buddha conversed with kings and queens, and advised them on all kinds of matters, he was clear about keeping a distance from politicising his teachings. Confucius, by the end of the story, finally relinquished politics after years of ‘banishment’ and disillusionment, and decided to focus only on teaching. Confucius is said to had remark that Lao Tze was profound and ‘dragon-like’. If only Confucius met the Buddha! [Please note that this article is a movie review, which might reflect the movie’s inadequacies.]
We need to be very careful with words indeed.
Indeed.
When we comment on a situation or someone, we must be thorough in our understanding of the situation and people. What works on one might have an adverse effect on another. To take something out of context and applying it wholesale in the hope that it will have the same effect can be very dangerous.That is when differentiated teaching comes in.
It is the same for a lot of other sacred text. It can be very dangerous when we attempt to interprete it without thorough understanding of the context. To misunderstand it, apply it wholesale and then blame the text for the wrong information is doing the text a great disservice. =)
As a student of the Confucian tradition I’m appalled at your assertions of Confucius, particular since your understanding seems to be limited to the particular portrayal in this film.
I believe that Confucius, had he met the Buddha, would have been appalled at his teachings. The Buddha advocated compassion, yes, but this is the end of what the two traditions have “in common.” But even what the Buddha meant by “compassion” is not the same as “humanity” or “benevolence” in Confucianism.
When the Buddha talks of compassion, he really means a compassion that comes out of the “realization” of the emptiness and detachment of all things. Although the Confucian understands quite well that all things do change, he does not do this with a sense of detachment. In fact, he understands that the opposite is what makes life truly meaningful. Attachment is important because it gives rise to one of the greatest cardinal virtues in Confucianism – commiseration, the ability to feel suffering on behalf on another person’s suffering. The Buddha, proud of himself of being freed from suffering, does not feel this in his “compassion.” Whether or not the person before him is in incredible pain and anguish or incredibly joyful, he is unmoved. That, to the Confucian, is not humaneness.
Also, you are quite wrong in your assertion that Confucius had a great deal of respect for the Daoists, as was the film itself. Not only is it doubtful that he ever met Lao-Tzu, historically speaking, but he clearly has been cited over and over again saying that he has never met a true Sage (a person who has reached the highest level of cultivation in the Confucian tradition) nor does he hope to in his lifetime.
The Buddhist understand of morality and ethics is, I will boldly assert, shallow and crass. If you study the Buddhist texts, the reason why you avoid certain actions and commit others is because the “wrong actions” will cause you pain and suffering and the “right actions” will result in your happiness later on. This karma-based morality is not true virtue, because true virtue (in the Confucian tradition, as well as Christian) compels one to do good acts regardless of whether that act makes one suffer or not. One should be willing to suffer to do the right thing; but the Buddha in his discourse ignores this. In fact, I liken this reward-and-punishment attitude toward reducing morality to getting a job and avoiding breaking the law; you get a job not to help people but to attain the reward of money, and you avoid breaking the law to avoid punishments. However, real ethics involves being willing to inevitably suffer for another person’s good, which is either implicitly or explicitly denied in Buddhist teachings.
Frankly, Buddhists do not understand love. To love another person entails suffering in order to care deeply about that person. This means feeling awful when they are feeling awful, finding happiness when they are rightfully happy, and wanting the person to cultivate deeper virtue. Manifestly, this means that one cultivates a living relationship with the other person. This is why Confucians have always held close friends, begun families, and gotten involved in either academics, politics, or both. All of these ideas are fundamentally denied by the Buddha.
Before you assert that I have not studied Buddhism deeply enough, I will point out that I have attended a local Zen temple for the last two years and have intensely studied scriptures from the 42 Chapters Sutra, elements from the Pali Canon, and read the entire Surangama Sutra (and by the way, the mantras don’t work. Sorry.) I’ve also tutored several monks one-on-one as well, and have had intense conversations with them.
1. As a student of the Buddhist tradition, I’m appalled at your assertions of Buddhism, particular since your understanding seems to be limited to your limited experience. Here are reasons why:
2. What the Buddha meant by compassion had much greater breadth of meaning that benevolence in Confucianism. ‘… there is much to emulate of the Buddha’s example – who remains the world’s most enduring and iconic spokesperson against violence, sexism, racism, casteism, ageism, speciesism, dogmatism… He even spoke of the need to uphold inter-religious harmony!’ – http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2010/11/was-the-buddha-a-free-thinker This is universal compassion. Confucianism is however often accused of being sexist, supportive of animal sacrifices and such rituals.
3. To learn about how the Buddha is able to be deeply compassionate while having a healthy sense of detachment, please see http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2010/07/is-there-tension-between-compassion-detachment The complete realisation of emptiness actually makes one more actively engaged in transforming society. You should study the Heart and Diamond Sutra to learn about this. From a qualified teacher please.
4. The Buddha spoke to countless members of royalty on how to better rule their countries – while not involving in politics regretfully, which Confucius did at some point due to lack of wisdom.
5. The Buddha advocated the teachings of empathy to a great deal. You must have yet to study foundational Buddhist teachings such as the Four Immeasurable (Sublime) States of Mind, which speak of cultivating limitless loving-kindness, compassion, rejoice and equanimity for all beings. This the Buddha perfected in thought, word and deed. You can see more about this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmavihara for a brief introduction.
6. It is ridiculous to say the Buddha was ‘proud of himself of being freed from suffering’ because he realised the truth of non-self. Where is the ego to speak of? The idea that the Buddha remained unmoved when seeing someone in incredible pain is more ridiculous. Look like you never came across touching accounts such as this –
https://moonpointer.com/new/2010/09/medical-analogy-of-triple-gem – the Buddha healing an abandoned monk personally, and telling others they should not abandon anyone in suffering.
7. About this – ‘The Buddhist understanding of morality and ethics is, I will boldly assert, shallow and crass’ – This is truly foolish – because Buddhist morality is the most universal among religions and philosophies in the sense that it covers all beings – even encompassing beings with great ignorance, suffering and evil. Hell! There are even Bodhisattvas working there to guide beings to enlightenment.
8. The thinking that Buddhists do this and that just for personal happiness is faulty – only for those who do not understand that one should be selfless like the Buddha in his word and deed. The Buddha heavily taught on the importance of non-attachment to personal benefits while being of service to as many beings as possible. The teachings of karma are compassionate because they guides beings to avoid evil and to do good for one another’s sake.
9. If the Buddha was unwilling to suffer to do the right thing, what did he have to gain from walking barefoot for 45 years in India to spread his teachings of universal compassion and wisdom? The Buddha taught about the value of friendship and family too. You must have missed one of the basic teachings – the Sigalovada Sutta – http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html
10. It’s funny to say Buddhism does not involve itself in academic stuff. You can do a search to know how many Buddhist schools there are offering various degrees. Buddhism founded the world’s first open university that hosted thousands of students – at the great Nalanda University. Being involved in politics is fine too, as long as compassion and wisdom is exercised. If politics is a no-no, the Buddha would not had advised kings and such, but told them to abandon their posts instead.
11. On this idea – ‘he [Confucious] has never met a true Sage (a person who has reached the highest level of cultivation in the Confucian tradition) nor does he hope to in his lifetime’ – If true, well, as the article suggested… if only he met the Buddha!
12. Buddhist mantras have been working for centuries for countless practitioners. You probably didn’t practise them properly. Practice with right understanding makes perfect. You should be able to tell by now that your understanding of Buddhism is severely in want. You should consider learning Buddhism more deeply – from another temple or a qualified teacher, and/or change the way you learn. It would be good to be humble to learn all over again, instead of asserting your misconceptions here. ‘May all beings be well and happy!’ (This is one of the most common Buddhist wishes.) Namo Amituofo
The moderators retain the right to delete any comments deemed inappropriate, and to end this thread of discussion if deemed appropriate. Here are responses on deleted comments of a reader.
01. Deletion was to prevent misconceptions and ill will from spreading.
02. Deleted comments included arrogant, intolerant and unpeaceable insults of the Buddha (many times), Buddhists, Christians and Muslims, along with unreasonable demands. In countries like Singapore, the government authorities take a serious note of such disrupting actions. A recent example is this case: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_490426.html
03. The reader criticised Buddhism erroneously due to limited study and practice.
04. Complaints of movie misportrayals should be sent to their makers.
05. True Confucians are gentlemanly, not harsh, rude or disrespectful of religious harmony.
06. The Buddha is the first to receive full-time female clergy in a religious order.
07. Rules to respect males are also to safeguard females in a still very sexist society.
08. There is no double-speak in the Diamond and Heart Sutra.
09. Empathy with helpful action is practical compassion. Sorrow is not helpful to anyone.
10. Politicising religion is dangerous. Think of ‘(un)holy wars’.
11. Monastics are to be connected to society even if they go on retreats at times for spiritual cultivation.
12. The Buddha taught the importance of filial piety – even for monastics. Those with family in need should not become monastics.
13. The Buddha taught the importance of all relationships in the Sigalovada Sutta.
14. HHDL is still well-loved by the Tibetans. One can talk to Tibetans to know this.
15. The perfect realisation of emptiness in Buddhism links one back to active compassion as emptiness is form too.
16. The Buddha’s heart is always moving with the Four Sublime States of loving-kindness, compassion, rejoice and equanimity. He does not function like a robot or machine.
17. The Buddha refers to himself in the third person exactly because he is not attached to an illusory ‘ego’, while he has to refer to himself at times for the purpose of communication.
18. Many of the Buddha’s titles are conferred by followers to honour him.
19. Prince Siddhartha left his family to find the path to liberation for all beings, including his family. He returned and taught this path to his family, which led them to various attainments, including liberation.
20. The Buddha never encourages those who are not ready to be monastics to leave home.
21. Buddhist ethics are based on sound reason and heart – to protect one and all from harm.
22. Giving in Buddhism is about giving what is useful to others, not because the given is worthless. Generosity in Buddhism includes the giving of truth, fearlessness and the material.
23. The Buddha stayed at Jeta Grove for less than half of his teaching time.
24. Part of present day Nepal is part of ancient India.
25. The Buddha is not an unloving egoistic coward. He even stopped a war in person when two groups of people wanted to kill one another over water.
26. The Buddha spoke of attachment to anything as a source of suffering, because departure from the attached is always unpleasant. However, he never asked any to be a monastic to reduce attachment to family if they are not ready. The Buddha gave many teachings on how to have happy and spiritual families too.
27. Confucius was politically unable to prevent many deaths in war too. He himself was a victim of politicking.
28. Buddhism teaches universal filial piety to all beings as all have been our kin in the past.
29. Even Mogallana who had great supernormal powers could not save those killed in a war with heavy negative karma.
30. Buddhism aims to help one another end suffering, and to realise true happiness.
31. Buddhism does not teach that efficacy of mantras can be proved with coin tossing.
32. Mantras have to be chanted with concentration, faith and understanding.
33. Chanting mantras do not give immortality. Healing is possible only when other right conditions are there too. There are countless cases of healing via mantras.
34. The practice of the Four Sublime States of Mind are to be heartfelt.
35. The Buddha expressed the active compassion in his everyday actions, such as the personal nursing of Tissa the sick and abandoned monk, and teaching the other monastics to do likewise, to care for one another.
36. Crying does not help anyone. It might be natural but betrays lack of calm and peace.
37. The Buddha tried to save his clan thrice, but could not due to their strong negative karma.
38. The Buddha never expressed pride.
39. The most popular and reproduced image in the world is that of the Buddha smiling compassionately with wisdom. It is loved even by many non-Buddhists. It is good to find out why this is so, by learning Buddhism all over again, with an open heart and mind – from a more qualified Buddhist practitioner. The reader seems very angry in nature. Reading this is a good start for changing his mind while learning more about ‘The Art of Happiness’ from a Nobel Peace Prize winner: http://www.amazon.com/Art-Happiness-Handbook-Living/dp/1573221112
40. May all be free from the fires of attachment, aversion and delusion. May all be well and happy.
Hatred can never be ceased by hatred.
Hatred can only be ceased by love.
This is an eternal law.
– The Buddha (Dhammapada)