| |
Dana
The Practice of Giving
Selected essays edited by
Bhikkhu Bodhi
Giving from the Heart
By M. O'C. Walshe
Giving comes very naturally to some people -- they enjoy giving
and are unhappy if they cannot do so. And though it is obvious
that one can give foolishly, it is in general a very good and
meritorious thing to give. This is recognized in, probably, all
religions: in Christianity we are told that it is more blessed
to give than to receive, and in Islam there is a positive
injunction to give part of one's wealth to the poor. Perhaps,
however, we ought to start by squarely facing a point which may
worry some people: the question of giving to the Sangha. In a
phrase which lay Buddhists may frequently hear chanted, or even
chant themselves, the Sangha is described as anuttaram
punnakkhettam lokassa, "an unequalled field of merit-making for
the world," meaning that the merit to be gained by giving to the
Sangha is unequalled.
Well of course, not all the lay people who hear or join in such
chanting know what the words mean, but of those who do,
Westerners who are Buddhists or Buddhist sympathizers sometimes
react to this notion with a degree of indignation, considering
the words tactless or worse! In fact some, whose conditioning
was at least partly under the influence of the Lutheran
Christian tradition, are reminded of the abuses to which Martin
Luther objected in the Church of his day, when "good deeds" were
very largely associated in the popular mind with maintaining
priests and monks, who in some cases at least were idle and
corrupt, in the style to which they were accustomed.
Such misgivings are perhaps understandable, but can be countered
by a proper explanation, and will in any case not take root
provided the Sangha is patently seen to be well conducted (supatipanno).
The traditional Buddhist community consists of four groups:
monks, nuns, male and female lay followers. Though the original
order of nuns has died out, there are women who have undertaken
the holy life and live virtually as nuns, and there is every
indication that their numbers will grow. The relation between
the first two groups and the latter two is one of symbiosis.
After all, the Sangha has a priceless gift to give, the gift of
the Dhamma. Sabbadanam dhammadanam jinati: "The gift of the
Dhamma excels all other gifts" (Dhp. 354). Members of the Sangha
also have an inescapable obligation to live according to the
Vinaya and to strive continuously for enlightenment. It is in
fact only by so doing that they can claim to be "an unequalled
field of merit-making," and if they fail in this obligation they
are letting down not only themselves but also the laity who
support them. A monk or nun who cannot observe the rules should,
and in certain cases must, leave the Order. This could be
regarded, at least in part, as the price to be paid for abusing
the generosity of lay supporters.
It was mentioned above that, according to the Bible, it is more
blessed to give than to receive. It is interesting to note that,
just as in the practice of metta-bhavana, the meditation on
universal love, there is given an actual method for fulfilling
that difficult Judaeo-Christian injunction "love thy neighbor as
thyself," so too Buddhism can give a precise technical meaning
to this biblical statement. If we receive something pleasant,
this in Buddhism is considered to be vipaka, the result of
previous meritorious conduct. It is nice while it lasts, but
when it is finished, its virtue is exhausted. To give, however
is kusala kamma, skilled action, which will be productive of
some pleasant vipaka or result for the giver. In this way it can
be clearly seen to be more "blessed" to give than to receive.
True, this "blessing" remains purely
mundane and limited, being "merit-making for the world" (lokassa).
But as all our actions are habit forming, giving once inclines
us to give again, so that the result tends to be cumulative.
Also, of course, this king of kusala kamma can lead on to other
things, and it is not for nothing that dana is listed as the
first among the ten paramis or "perfections," coming even before
sila or morality. It is, after all, possible for an immoral
person to be generous!
The late Dr. I.B.Horner selected ten Jataka stories to
illustrate the ten perfections, in a little book that is widely
used as an introductory Pali reader, and she used the delightful
story of the self-sacrificing hare (No. 316) to illustrate the
perfection of giving. Strangely enough, thought, to the Western
mind at least, the most popular Jataka story on this them is the
very last, the Vessantara Jataka (No. 547), in which the
Bodhisattva gives everything away including, finally, his wife
and children -- a distinctly dubious moral, one might think! But
in Thailand this story has been singled out and is regularly
made the subject of special readings and sermons for the
edification of the laity.
Giving is something that comes from the heart, and as I have
said, there are people who enjoy giving for its own sake --
which is fine provided the giving is balanced with wisdom. There
are of course other people who are reluctant givers, and they
are often the same people who find it difficult to say "please,"
"thank you," "I'm sorry," and so on. For all such types the
brahmavihara meditations on love and compassion would be
beneficial, to enable them to open up their hearts.
Recently, in Britain, we have had a magnificent example of the
power of giving from the heart, and from what to many must have
seemed an unexpected source. Moved by the plight of the starving
people in Ethiopia, the rock star Bob Geldof organized the
fantastic international Live Aid concert which raised millions
of pounds -- in its way, and with the aid of modern technology,
the most spectacular act of generosity in history, touching the
hearts of millions, and transcending the boundaries not only of
politics and religions, but also that gulf that exists between
those addicted to this particular form of entertainment and
those who dislike it.
It is perhaps hardly necessary to point out that dana has to be
exercised with discretion, and is as much subject to the rule of
the middle way as everything else. It is not the best way to
bring up a child, for instance, to give it everything it wants
-- or thinks it wants. Contrary to some trendy theories recently
current, it does no harm to frustrate a spoilt brat
occasionally! Nor, of course, is it the highest kind if giving
if one expects something in return -- even a nice rebirth in
some heavenly realm! That is a kind of giving which is basically
rooted in attachment and is therefore of limited kammic value.
In point of fact, one of the true benefits to the giver is
precisely that the act of spontaneous giving is a very fine way
of helping to overcome attachment. And that is the intended
point of the Vessantara story. We Westerners think of the
unfortunate wife and family the Bodhisattva "sacrificed" (though
of course there was happy ending and they came back to him, in
the story!), but the intention is to regard them as objects of
attachment, to be given up as such. As a matter of fact, despite
the popularity of this particular story, modern scholars
consider that it was not originally a Buddhist tale at all, and
was somewhat unskillfully adapted to provide a "Buddhist" moral.
The more we consider the question of dana, the more aspects
emerge, and we see that there are many ways of giving,
skillfully or otherwise. We may conclude with an amusing
canonical example of the alleged results of relatively
unskillful giving. In the Payasi Sutta (No. 23 of the Digha
Nikaya) we read of the debate between the skeptic Prince Payasi,
who did not believe in an afterlife, and the Venerable Kumara-Kassapa.
After listening to a brilliant series of parables from the monk,
Payasi declares himself converted, and decides to establish a
charity "for ascetics and Brahmins, wayfarers, beggars and the
needy," and he appoints the young Brahmin Uttara to organize the
distribution. (N.B. This is the correct version -- there is an
error in the Rhys Davids translation at his point.) Uttara
complains that the food and clothing he is called upon to
distribute are of such poor quality that Payasi would not touch
them himself, and Payasi finally gives him leave to supply "food
as I eat and clothes as I wear." At the conclusion of the sutta,
we are told of the rewards the two men received after death.
Payasi, who had established the charity grudgingly, was indeed
reborn in a heavenly world, but in the very lowest, that of the
Four Great Kings, where he was lodged in the empty Serisaka
mansion (vimana). Here, indeed, he was visited by the Venerable
Gavampati, an Arahant who made a habit of taking his siesta in
the lower heavens. And so the story was brought back to earth.
But Uttara, who had reorganized the charity and given from the
heart, was born in a higher heaven, among the Thirty-three Gods.
Probably few Westerners will give in order to be reborn among
the Thirty-three Gods, and perhaps the only reward some people
look to is an easing of the conscience: being aware of some
particular need -- of which the case of Ethiopia is the
outstanding current example -- people feel unable to live with
themselves if they do not give something. This is certainly
better than hoping for a heavenly reward, but an easy
conscience, too, may perhaps sometimes be purchased a little too
easily. Best let the giving itself be its own reward, and leave
it at that!
May the merits of this gift
of the Dhamma
be shared by all beings! |