2.5. Right Livelihood (Sammā-ājīva or Samyag-ājīva)

[Full title: The Noble Eightfold Path (Ariya-aṭṭhaṅgika-magga)—(5): Right Livelihood (Sammā-ājīva or Samyag-ājīva)]

The fifth of the noble eightfold path is right livelihood which entails not dealing in arms and lethal weapons (satthavaṇijja), animals for slaughter (maṃsavaṇijja), human beings (sattavaṇijja), intoxicating drinks (majjavaṇijja), and poison (visavaṇijja). Though the Buddha mentioned only these five, there are, as we know, many other wrong ways of earning a living. We must bear in mind that the Buddha was addressing Indian society in the sixth century B.C., which consisted for the most part, even as it does today, of farmers, herdsmen and traders. It is interesting to note that there are, in the Pāli canon, sections which graphically show the life of the farmer and the herdsman. The second and fourth discourses of the Sutta-Nipāta^[1] bear sufficient testimony to this fact. India was an agricultural land and its government was not ‘democratic.’ Most of the states were feudal being under a rājā (king) as in the case of the Buddha‘s own clan, the Sākyas, but there were also republics such as that of the Licchavīs which were governed by a senate of elders and leading men. In the kingdoms, the rājā was the ruler to who all were obedient and due their allegiance. Life seems to have been quiet compared with that in many lands today. Since the ways of earning a living were limited, the Buddha only warned against five of them.

We must not think that the Buddha spoke only to the common people on the evil consequences of wrong and the advantages of right living. In the Dīgha Nikāya and Aṅguttara Nikāya, we find ser-mons on the life that the ruler or administrator ought to lead. It is sta-ted categorically that the king should rule righteously (dhammena) and not unrighteous (adhammena). Rulers in addition to keeping the same precepts as their subjects were expected to possess all the wholesome qualities that go to make a good head of the state.

The Buddhist books mention ten duties or principles of a king (dasarājadhamma): Generosity in giving (dāna), morality (sīla), selfsacrifice or unselfishness (pariccāga), honesty (ajjava), gentleness (maddava), not being giving to luxurious living (tapa), self-restraint (akkodha), no anger (avihiṃsā), no violence (khantī), patience and agreeability (avirodha).^[2]

As the Buddha points out, it is the ruler who should first establish himself in dhamma, in piety and righteousness, avoiding the vices, and so give the lead to his subjects. He says: ‘If he who is reckoned best among men does not live righteously, need we speak of the others? They will follow suit. If the rājā is unrighteous the whole realm lives in woe. If he lives aright, the others follow him and the whole realm lives in happiness.^[3]

Never resting on his success, the king or ruler is expected to be kind and dutiful to his subjects: ‘like a benevolent father to his children.’^[4] The king given to self-indulgence, and intoxicated with the thought of authority (issariyamadamatta), is not praised, but looked down upon.^[5] In order to be just, honest and upright to all, without partiality or favoritism, the ruler is expected to avoid the four wrong ways of treating people: that is with desire (chanda), anger (dosa), fear (bhaya) and delusion (moha).^[6]

The precept about right livelihood was designed to bring true happiness to the individual and society and to promote unity and proper relations among people. Unjust and wrong ways of living apply to individuals, families and nations. A wrong and unrighteous way of life brings in its train much unhappiness, disharmony and trouble to the whole society. When a person or community succumbs to the evil of exploiting others, it interferes with the peace and harmony of society. It is pure selfishness and greed that prompt a man to adopt wrong and unlawful ways of life. Such folk are utterly indifferent to loss and pain caused to their neighbours and to society. Therefore says the Buddha: ‘Neither for one’s own nor for others’ sake should one do any evil. One should not want a son, wealth or a kingdom, nor wish to succeed by unjust means. Such a man is indeed virtuous, wise and righteous.^[7]

The Buddha was not unaware of the burdens borne by a layman with a wife and children, hence he did not expect from him the same ethical conduct as he did from the monks. But he emphatically stressed that the layman should strive hard to observe at least the five training precepts, the minimum moral obligation of the ordinary person, and that he should try to earn a living by right means, by right conduct (dhammacariya) and thereby support his wife and children. What is earned by unjust and unrighteous means -by killing, stealing, cheating, through dishonesty and deceit, cannot be regarded as tight living. Ethically it is unrighteous living (adhammacariya), an uneven life, a life of disharmony (visamacariya).

The Buddha does not criticize the layman, but sympathizes with his frailties and shortcomings. Society after all consists not only of ascetics and recluses who have left home to be homeless, but of lay men and women who form the mass of society, which ultimately is an assemblage of ‘sociological units’ so that the welfare or ill fare of society depends on the individuals. If the individuals are good and lead a polite life, society naturally cannot be bad.

Some of the discourses like Siṅgāla Sutta^[8] which is rightly called the layman‘s code of discipline (gīhivinaya), Vyagghapajja sutta,^[9] etc. given by the Buddha especially for the laity, clearly show the Buddha‘s concern for both the material welfare and spiritual development of his lay disciples. In the discourse to young Siṅgāla the Buddha explains in plain language the full duties of a layman to all with whom he has relations: The mutual duties of parents and children; teacher and pupil; husband and wife; friends and relatives; master and servant; and duty to the religious that is to recluses and Brahmins. In this way the Buddha encourages the layman to live a righteous life, doing his duty to the best of his ability and leaving nothing undone.

As we well know, after attaining full enlightenment the Buddha did not all the time confine himself to a cell, but wandered from town to town and village to village through the highways and by ways of India. He moved more with the commoner than with the aristocrat. Kings and princes came to him for guidance and instruction, but the Buddha went to the poor, lowly and lost to help them. He knew the people, from the lowliest walks of life to the highest, and was well aware of the political, social and economic conditions of India during his time. So he did not restrict his sermons and discussions to matters of high philosophy and advanced psychology. As a practical teacher of infinite compassion and understanding he was mindful of the social and economic well-being of the masses and always wished by his advice to improve the misery of people, and see that they lived without too much unhappiness. It is true that real happiness is derived from a life of purity and peace; but it is obvious that without a certain degree of material and economic security no moral and spiritual progress can be achieved.

So far as a monk is concerned there are four requisites (catu paccaya) for progress on the path to purity and freedom. They are robes (cāvara), food (piṇḍapāta), a lodging (senāsana) and medicine (bhesajja).

‘These are the bare necessities without which no human being can live. Basically they are also the fundamental needs of a layman.’

It was the Buddha‘s custom to ask the monks on meeting them:

‘How is it with you; how are you faring? I trust you are well, and that you are not short of food.’^[10]

The Buddha said:

‘Hunger is the greatest malady,
The aggregates are the greatest ill,
Knowing this as it is (the wise know)
Nibbāna, the bliss supreme.’^[11]

Although the Buddha did not attach much importance to material progress in the modern sense, nor to mundane welfare, he did not entirely ignore it, because it is the basis for man‘s mental or spiritual progress as pointed out above. So the Buddha was very outspoken with regard to certain aspects of material conditions and social welfare.

It is an admitted fact that poverty is the main cause of crime. If people are deprived of the four requisites mentioned above, the bare necessities, or if these are limited, especially food, people‘s minds are not at rest. They cannot and do not think of moral behavior, or give a thought to righteous living. Necessity has no law, and they stoop to unjust and unrighteous ways of gaining subsistence. Owning to lack of economic security, and of money, people are led to commit theft and other crimes. The Kūṭadanta sutta^[12] states how in order to raise the social and economic conditions of a country, the farmers and traders should be given the necessary facilities to carry on their farming and business, and that people should be paid sufficient wages. Thus when they have enough for their subsistence and are economically secure, crime is lessened and peace and harmony prevail.

The Buddha‘s instructions and advice on right livelihood are addressed both to the layman and to the members of the Saṅgha. He has clearly explained to his disciples that the monk‘s life should be absolutely pure and free from deception.

The Buddha is indeed very emphatic on this matter, for he says:

‘Monks, whatsoever monks are cheats, stubborn, babblers, wiliness, passionate, proud, uncalmed -such monks are no followers of mine. They have fallen away from this Dhamma-vinaya (Doctrine and Discipline), nor do they grow, increase and prosper in this Dhamma-vinaya.’^[13] Further says the Buddha: ‘Monks, this holy life (brahmacariya) is lived neither to cheat people nor for scheming, nor for profit and favour, nor for the sake of honour. It is not for gossiping and prattling, nor with the intention: “let people know me as so-and-so.” But, monks, this holy life is lived for the sake of restraint, for abandoning, for dispassion, for cessation.’^[14]

As the discourse on ‘Going Forth’^[15] points out, the Buddha himself gives the lead and example to his disciples when he says:

‘Leaving home I gave up
All evil words and acts,
Pure was my livelihood.’

The question of abstention from the five kinds of wrong trades (pañcavaṇijja) does not arise in the case of the monk, for he should not be in business, and he has not the responsibility and care of a family life. He has left home and is simple in his ways, with few wants. As the Buddha says, it is the duty of the devout layman to provide him with the four requisites: Robes, food, lodging and medicine.^[16]

The monk, as one who has entered upon the holy life, should avoid all wrong means of living, for if he is not clean and pure in this he cannot follow the path of purification with any degree of confidence and satisfaction.

Hence the Buddha says:

‘Verily one path is for gain, but that which leads to nibbāna is quite another. Let the monks, the disciples of the Buddha, having understood it thus, not delight in worldly favours and honours, but cultivate detachment.’^[17]

Right living is, therefore, not only a life which is harmless (ahiṃsā), but a life which is free from greed and selfishness, which is not isolating itself in self-satisfaction, which is not opposing itself to others by comparison, or placing itself above others by judgment. Right living is a life of simplicity, which, however, is not the same as renunciation. Not the fewness of possessions make a life simple, but the freedom from possessions. True simplicity does not necessarily give up all possessions but it is not possessed by them. Right living is a life without acquisitiveness, without specialization, without rights and privileges which are all expressions of self-deluded isolation. And when there are not rights, there are no duties either.

Such is the freedom of living which arises in the understanding that all complex is a conflict (sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā), that rights and duties arise from opposition, that all opposition is delusion. And with that understanding come also contentment, happiness and fullness of life. Then life does not mean any more the manner of living; it ceases to be a toy thrown about by the ups and downs of circumstances; for, then it will have transcended all pettiness, all phenomenality, all misery and conflict, all isolation, opposition and delusion. And that indeed is right living on the noble eightfold path.

Finally, words and acts are thoughts manifested. In Buddhism both motive and effect should be taken into consideration. However good the motive may be, if the effect is not going to be healthy, we should refrain from such misguided words and deeds.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Suttanipāta, p. 2 (Dhaniya sutta); p. 12 (Kasibhāradvāja sutta)

[2]:

Jātaka Aṭṭhakathā I, p. 260

[3]:

AN II, p. 74

[4]:

DN II, p. 178

[5]:

SN II, p. 100

[6]:

These four are called ‘agati’ or wrong ways of treating people.

[7]:

Dhammapada, Verse 84

[8]:

DN III, p. 179; SN, p. 8

[9]:

AN II, p. 195

[10]:

MN II, p. 105; SN I, p. 31; AN 1, p.70

[11]:

Dhammapada, Verse 203

[12]:

DN I, p. 126

[13]:

AN II, p.21

[14]:

AN II, p.21

[15]:

Suttanipāta, Verse 407 (Pabbajjā sutta)

[16]:

AN II, p. 65

[17]:

Dhammapada, Verse 75