Model Essay: Examine Ashoka's view of other faiths with reference to his 12th Edict.

 

1. Examine Ashoka’s view of other faiths with reference to his 12^th Edict. [10 marks - AQA]

Plan:

·        Introduce Ashoka and explain his conversion/the role of edicts in his empire.

·        View of 12^th edict – contact between religions is good and helps people to understand their own dharma.

·        All religions are equally worthy of respect and equal protection.

The Emperor Ashoka ruled almost the entire Indian subcontinent from 268-232BCE, and is regarded as the first Buddhist ruler of India who used his beliefs in his political policies. Ashoka’s conversion is recorded in edicts that he published throughout his kingdom, and he professed to have converted to following the Buddhist dharma after seeing huge amounts of bloodshed and suffering in the Kalinga war, which he waged to occupy territory. It is suggested that after seeing and causing so much suffering, Ashoka had a change of heart and began to seek the end of suffering, leading him to the spiritual dharma (truths or teachings) of Siddhartha Gautama, which were growing increasingly popular within India at this time. This then led Ashoka to radically change his policy and leadership style, embracing ahimsa through vegetarianism in his palaces, and bringing an end to his political control being achieved through violent military conquests. Ashoka made his beliefs and the laws he passed known throughout his kingdom by having huge rock edicts transcribed and erected throughout his kingdom, in order to spread his wishes to those under his command, the 12^th edict deals with his attitudes to other religions.

Ashoka, in the 12^th Edict, suggests that other faiths are worthy of respect and tolerance, and encourages contact between different religions in his kingdom. His reasoning for this is that one’s own understanding of their dharma can be aided by hearing about the truth claims of other religions. He professes that his greatest desire for the “growth in essential of all religions” within his kingdom, suggesting that he wants all faiths to be able to flourish in India. He also suggests that those of different religions can learn from one another, stating plainly that “contact between religions is good.” It is evident that Ashoka has taken some time to consider and compare similarities between different religions, identifying in the edict that many share the same moral practices, for example Ashoka suggests that rejecting false speech is a common moral standard in all religions. It seems that Ashoka is providing common ground to start interfaith dialogues within his kingdom, and that he wanted his followers to discuss with each other and find further similarities between their religions to help them gain a better understanding of both others and themselves.

Ashoka does also seem to recognise that there may be times when religions may not agree, but his edict gives guidance over how to deal with this criticism. Ashoka commands in his Edict that those who want to criticise another’s faith should only do so “mildly”, which could be seen to link to the Buddha’s sila teachings about right speech and right action. This shows that Ashoka did not encourage disparagement or rejection of other faiths, but wanted open discussions between these religions in his kingdom. Overall, it appears that Ashoka is very tolerant of the variety of religions within India at this time, and that he encouraged contact between the religions to help people become wiser in their own faith and matters of other faiths, likely as a way of maintaining peace and harmony within his kingdom.

 

 

 

 

Model Essay: "Buddhists are supportive of freedom of religion in Britain today." Evaluate this statement.

 

“Buddhists are supportive of freedom of religion in Britain today.” Evaluate this statement. [15 marks - AQA]

Religious pluralisation has led to most people in Britain holding the view that all religions are equally valid, and that they should all be respected and valued. There is much debate in Buddhism as to whether religious pluralism is a good thing, leading many to believe that Buddhists may not support pluralisation of religions in society. In this essay I will conclude that Buddhism’s peaceful outlook would not lead the majority of Buddhists to repress freedom of religion in British society, therefore accepting religious pluralism within Britain.

The Buddha, regarded as the founder and first proponent of the dharma, appears to offer many teachings that suggest that Buddhists would support the freedom of religious expression in society. For example, his teachings on ahimsa (peace) and karuna (compassion) suggest that Buddhists oppose conflict, and moral precepts such as right speech and right action show that Buddhists are unlikely to condemn those who follow other religions. Historically, there has been little conflict between Buddhist traditions, despite them upholding different goals (such as the Theravada arhat path and the Mahayana bodhisattva path). Therefore, Buddhists may support the freedom of religious expression out of a desire for peace and morality (sila).

However, this view was opposed in the 13^th Century by Japanese Buddhist Nichiren. Nichiren vehemently rejected other forms of Buddhism and other religions alike, suggesting that they were contributing to the “age of mappo” (the end times), leading to the perversion of the Buddha dharma and natural disasters such as earthquakes. He argued that the only right form of Buddhism is Nichiren Buddhism, a form of Mahayana Buddhism that sees the Lotus Sutra as the only authoritative text – leading him to describe it as the Latter Day of the Law. Nichiren’s struggles against the Japanese ruling classes and his rejection of other forms of Buddhism show that he would not support the freedom of religious expression in society today, further evidenced through the fact that he believed that those who followed texts other than the Lotus Sutra would go to hell. In Nichiren’s eyes, the only religion that should be allowed in society was his own tradition.

Prior to the work of Nichiren, Ashoka the Great, an Emperor who died in 232BCE, was well known for his conversion to Buddhism and transformation of the laws of his kingdom to reflect the dharma. Ashoka’s edicts show a vastly different view of other religions – his 12^th Edict promoted contact between different religions, encouraging all people not to condemn other religions, and if criticism was necessary, to only do this “mildly”. Ashoka argued that all religions had the common root of right speech, and suggested that it could actually harm one’s religion to compare it to others. Instead, he encouraged people to learn the teachings of other religions to better themselves. It is therefore obvious that Ashoka supported people freely expressing their beliefs, and this can also be applied to the context of British society today.

Furthermore, the 14^th Dalai Lama, an authority for many of the world’s Mahayana Buddhists, is well-known for his advocating of religious freedom, particularly in relation to Tibet. He sees all beings as being equal in their right to pursue happiness and end suffering, and has stressed in his work the equality of all people – rich and poor, educated and uneducated, and religious and non-religious. Whilst Buddhists may view other religions as only having a partial grasp of the dharma, it is evident that Buddhists see value in all beings having their own views. Therefore, Buddhists appear to support the pluralisation of religion and the freedom of religious expression in today’s society.

In conclusion, I believe that Buddhists believe that peace and tolerance are so important that they generally support the freedom of religious expression in today’s society. This is evidenced through Ashoka’s belief that other religions can help people have a greater understanding of the Buddha’s dharma, and the Dalai Lama’s contentions that all beings should be equally allowed to pursue happiness, regardless of their religious beliefs. However, it is important to remember that this is not a unified view in Buddhism, and would be rejected by Nichiren Buddhists who uphold only their own tradition.

Buddhist Philosophy: Attitudes to the truth claims of other religions

 

The Truth Claims of Other Religions, A02

·        How far the belief is reasonable:

1.      According to the doctrines of Classical Theism/Philosophy of Religion.

Buddhism could be seen as more likely to embrace the truth claims of other religions than religions such as Christianity or Islam. This is because Abrahamic religions view themselves as offering the only correct way to salvation (Christianity through believing in Jesus and Islam through following the Qur’an). This means that most Christians and Muslims view the dharma as being wrong, and may even see it as being dangerous as it turns people away from the correct way to salvation. Buddhism in comparison accepts that other religions have partially realised the dharma and so there is some value to their teachings, and Buddhists prioritise ahimsa meaning that they are less likely to aggressively oppose the teachings of other religions.

However, it could be argued that Nitchiren Buddhists are more like classical theists in the way that they view their doctrine as the only right doctrine, and that their method of salvation (following the Lotus Sutra) is the only way to practice religion. But, this common ground does not mean that there can be and effective dialogue between Nitchiren Buddhists and classical theists, because they all view their own religions as being the only right way to eternal life/salvation.

2.      According to modern science and empiricism.

Militant atheists such as Dawkins see all religions as something to fight against, which are a mark of human unintelligence in an age where science and empiricism is increasingly revealing the true nature of the world around us. This means that as the world, particularly the developed West has become more secular, the truth claims of all religions including Buddhism have been rejected.

·        How coherent the beliefs are:

1.      Do they make sense rationally?

It could be said that Buddhist attitudes to other religions are rational because of the Buddha’s interactions with others: he taught peace, respect, kindness, and above all that it is important for people to realise the dharma for themselves. It can therefore be argued that Buddhists embracing other religions as being valuable and worthy of respect fits with the rest of the dharma, making it appear reasonable.

In a secular/pluralised society where all religions are seen as being equal in worth, Buddhism also appears to take a very rational approach to other religions, particularly Buddhists such as Ashoka who sees other religions as offering valuable insight that people can learn from. This may be more attractive that extreme classical theist or atheist beliefs that actively seek to discredit the truth claims of other religions to show that their belief system is the best.

However, it should be questioned if the Buddhist attitudes to the truth claims of other religions can be phrased in a way that is empirically verifiable – it is possible to say that “all religions are a way to the dharma” but this cannot be verified through science or empirical testing (at best it can only be verified through eschatological verification) so Logical Positivists would still view these statements as meaningless.

2.      How consistent are they with other beliefs within the belief system?

The largest point of inconsistency comes from the views of Nitchiren Buddhists in comparison to other Buddhists. Nitchiren taught actively and aggressively against other religions, and even other forms of Buddhism, showing that peace towards other religious believers and tolerance of beliefs as taught by Ashoka is not shared by all Buddhists.

There are also tensions between Secular Buddhists and other forms of Buddhism – Secular Buddhists view Buddhism as a moral philosophy meaning that they may even practice another religion whilst carrying out Buddhist behaviours like mindfulness meditation. Scholars such as David Brazier would actively oppose this and argue that Buddhism is a religion in its own right that should not be practiced alongside other religions as it has its own faith claims.

3.      Are they meaningful for everyone?

All Buddhists: believe in peace, ahimsa, doing no harm.

Secular Buddhists: Disagree with the miraculous and supernatural aspects of Buddhism and see it only as a way of life, meaning that the truth claims of other religions could be more meaningful to individual Secular Buddhists that the Buddha-dharma.

Nitchiren Buddhists: reject those who are accepting towards other religions and forms of Buddhism as the plurality of religions in society has contributed to the “Age of Mappo” – leading people to hell rebirths and increased suffering.