Virtuous, Wise, and Righteous

Commentary on the Dhammapada–by Swami Nirmalananda Giri

Hard sayings

Great Masters are fearless, and so must those be who would benefit from their teachings. For Masters and (true) disciples see things exactly opposite to the world and the worldlings. Certainly greed and desire for control over others bring about the inner destruction of religion, but an equally pernicious factor is the insistence that the principles of religion be made to accommodate, please, and motive the crowd, and not the chosen few–the only ones to whom the Masters really speak. That is why Jesus prayed, saying: “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.…I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” (John 17:9, 14) On one occasion when Jesus had given a particularly thorny discourse: “Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?…From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” (John 6:60, 66) Now we are ready to look at one of Buddha’s “hard sayings.”

“If a man does not seek children, wealth or power either for himself or for someone else, if he does not seek his own advantage by unprincipled means, he is a virtuous man, a wise man and a righteous man.” (Dhammapada 84) Narada Thera: “Neither for the sake of oneself nor for the sake of another: he should not desire son, wealth, or kingdom. By unjust means he should not seek his own success. Then such a one is indeed virtuous, wise and righteous.” The translation of the Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu says that such a one “is righteous, rich in virtue, [and] discernment.”

Applied to everyone

Although it is so common to hear someone say regarding an unpalatable discipline: “Oh, that is just for you monks,” in this case it has to be pointed out that Buddha’s teaching is not just for non-monastics. For sad to say a lot of monastics are greedy and scheming supposedly for the sake of others–family, friends, church, monastic order, etc. Under the guise of personal poverty, Christian monks for centuries have amassed fantastic amounts of money and land holdings, often owning slaves and bond servants–even peasants in Russia One famous monk in Thailand actually raised enough money to pay off the national debt, then realized that everyone in the government were such crooks that they would grab it and not pay off the debt. So the money sits idle to no purpose. Monks are often matchmakers. I knew a Greek Orthodox nun that travelled around raising thousands of dollars for her nieces’ dowries.

Even more absurd, consider the number of monks (especially in India) who are credited with the miraculous power to ensure preganancy, gain wealth for devotees, and get employment and university degrees for others. Some activity for world-renouncing teachers of dispassion and non-materialism! Buddha never did such things. He is a perfect example for all humanity. In the case of this eighty-fourth verse, one size truly does fit all.

Children, Wealth, and Power

In themselves these three items have no defect. After all, if we had not been children we would not be here at all. And if we had no money, what kind of existence would we have? It is the same with some power or influence–it would be impossible to live a worthwhile human life without it. What, then, is the problem? As always: the ego. The trouble is with the rascal that says: My children, My money, My influence. Or an ego so twisted that it thinks getting those things for others–which will all be labeled Mine in some way–is acceptable. Ego is at the bottom, the middle, and the top.

Buddha is warning us away from actively seeking those things in an ego-involved way. Actually, he is warning us about seeking anything “on our own” rather than to approach life as a worthy karma yogi–do our best and leave the rest to the cosmic laws. It is true, as the Gita points out to us, that there is a positive form of indifference to these things that renders them safe for us. Buddha does not want us to hate or despise them, for then we would be thinking and obsessing about them. The idea is that we should live life with the central purpose of spiritual evolution and let these other factors be–or not be–as they are. We are to seek the Paramartha, the Supreme Attainment, of enlightenment.

Let us not forget that Buddha gave up all these three. And because of his renunciation billions have understood the truth about this life and have attained higher consciousness. Just think: one man has done all this through his renunciation!

Unprincipled means

The end does not justify the means. Rather, the end can invalidate or corrupt the means. Buddha is aware of the slippery nature of the ego. It may seem to agree to not seek for vain things, but it will certainly consider that it can adopt any strategy it wants for the accomplishment or gain of something that is seen as necessary or beneficial. The ego loves to Do Good in a Not Good manner, thinking it is justified to do so. This type of hypocrisy is common on all levels of life. Sometimes the religious people are the worst. In the 1960’s an acquaintance of mine discovered that officials of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York City were paying someone who lived right there in New York City to write accounts of fictitious “new martyrs” in Russia (as if the Communists were not continually “making” enough real ones!). These fabrications were then presented as “accounts recently smuggled out of the Soviet Union.” When the priest (later a bishop) in charge of the fraud was challenged by her regarding this, he responded with polished cynicism: “It accomplishes what we want.” And the conversation was at an end.

But the good and true person will never cut corners or compromise integrity or moral principles to gain something that of itself may seem desirable. As an Eastern Christian writer has said: “If you have to employ an unjust means, then the end is unjust, as well.”

Virtuous, wise, and righteous

Diogenes may have searched for a good and wise man with a lantern, but only two things will enable us to find usch a one: a) by that person really being good and wise; and b) by ourselves being good and wise so we can recognize them. It is true: it takes one to know one.

Those who live according to the principles so clearly presented by Buddha will be all those things: virtuous, wise, and righteous. It is easy for the real person, but impossible for the ego.