Make Love not War: The Buddha's Response to Conflict

So, what might the Buddha have said nearly 2500 years ago as a means to resolve conflict, disputes and arguments? The solution to that question is perhaps even more relevant today, with a perceived increase in polarisation amongst groups as well as in our interpersonal relationships. 

Well, there is an account in a lesser known Sutta within the Pali Canon which may provide pointers. In the Kosambiya Sutta the Buddha is called upon to resolve a dispute which has arisen within the sangha of monks. In this essay there will be an attempt to investigate the Buddha’s prescription to the monks, to observe any resonances to the Chan teachings and also explore any links to our modern predicament. 

The Kosambiya Sutta is set within the Majjhima Nikaya (MN), which is the second collection of the Buddha’s discourses found in the Sutta Pitaka of the Pali Canon. For the purposes of this essay the translation and primary reference to the Sutta is that of The Middle Length sayings of the Buddha by Bhikkhu Nanamoli.¹ What is of note is that the MN can be distinguished among other books in the Pali Canon as it combines the richest variety of contextual settings with the deepest and most comprehensive assortment of teachings² (as opposed to shorter self-contained utterances found in, for example, the Dhammapada). The Buddha is noted here, in particular, for his wisdom and skill in adapting his teachings to meet the needs and dispositions of his audience. And so it is shown here in the Kosambiya Sutta.

In the Sutta we find ourselves in the ancient city of Kosambi (modern day Kaushambi in the state of Uttar Pradesh), an important city in ancient India. On this occasion it is reported that the Buddha was residing there in Ghosita’s Park when he was informed of a dispute that had arisen within the local monastic community. It is simply stated that the monks had taken to quarrelling and brawling and were deep in disputes “stabbing each other with verbal daggers”. They could not resolve the issues between themselves or be persuaded by others. 

There is no indication within the Sutta itself as to the cause of the conflict and the Buddha does not appear to be interested in the specific detail of whatever arose. This is considered wise and skilful in the context of the account in that the listener (via the earlier oral transmission of the story) or the modern reader might invest their own opinion as to the rights or wrongs of whatever the initial incident was. In turn, this might involve details of any subsequent arguments, justifications and re­actions (including perceived righteous ones). Such extended narrative might well have clouded the Buddha’s core message. 

However, what has been reported elsewhere,³ and is relevant to this discussion, is that a quarrel, which began with a casual misunderstanding of a minor disciplinary rule, quickly flared up and divided a large part of the sangha and laity into hostile factions. It is also an example of cause and effect and reflects how in recent times arguments and disputes can be amplified exponentially via social media, creating societal discord. 

Now, this was not the only reported dispute within the monastic sangha. In the Samagama Sutta, again within the body of the MN,⁴ the Buddha primarily described procedures for resolving disputes specifically within the monastic community. Indeed, it could have been the Samagama Sutta to which this essay makes primary reference. It appears to be an entire discourse on conflict management. Starting with a root cause analysis deeply resonant with modern conflict resolution theory, it offers seven working models for the settlement of disputes.⁵

But instead, here at Kosambi, the Buddha encourages the monks to regard each other with loving kindness. His first response to the issue is to ask the monks if they have been able to maintain acts of loving kindness. It can be assumed that the attitude of loving kindness is a given within the spiritual community. When the monks respond that they have not been able to do so the Buddha advises them that they are misguided and it will lead to long term harm and suffering. He then sets forth his prescription. 

The Buddha first outlines six “principles of cordiality” conducive to reverence, unity, friendliness and love for each other. These are:

1. Establishing bodily actions of loving kindness towards each other both openly and secretly
2. Establishing verbal actions of loving kindness towards each other both openly and secretly
3. Establishing mental actions of loving kindness towards each other both openly and secretly
4. Sharing things with one another (with other monks in this case)
5. Possessing virtues that lead to concentration and are liberating
6. Possessing that view which is noble and emancipating, and leads to complete destruction of suffering 

The first three principles relate directly to the acts of loving kindness which, together with the fourth principle of sharing, would seem to be 

obvious behaviours conducive to good relationships. But it is perhaps less directly so with the fifth and sixth principles of virtues leading to concentration and noble view. It is assumed here that the noble view equates to the right view belonging to the Noble Eightfold Path. 

In fact, the Buddha goes on to say that noble or right view is the most important of these principles. The remainder of the Sutta involves the Buddha outlining a series of rhetorical questions monks should ask themselves, on how to practise the development of this right view which leads to the destruction of suffering. The Buddha’s responses to his own questions detail seven knowledges that a monk would ascertain about themselves if they are to meditate and investigate the questions. These knowledges are summarised below for reference but in the Sutta he particularly expands (without explicitly elevating) on the first personal insight that an obsessed mind is an obstacle to seeing and knowing things as they actually are. 

• To know that the mind is free of obsessions and so can see things as they really are and is therefore well-disposed for awakening to the truths.
• To know that with development of right view one’s mind attains serenity.
• To know that one’s view is in accordance with the Buddha’s dispensation, not that of other teachers.
• To know oneself to be open in character so that one will immediately confess any breach of monastic rules and practice restraint in the future.
• To know oneself to possess the character that would remain diligent to training in virtue, meditation and wisdom despite being active in monastic affairs.
• To know oneself to have the strength to remain eagerly attentive and engaged when listening to the Dharma and Discipline taught by the Buddha.
• To know oneself to have the strength of someone who gains inspiration and gladness when hearing the Buddha’s teaching of the Dhamma and Discipline. 

And the Buddha ends his teaching in this Sutta by stating that when the noble disciple is endowed with these seven characteristics, they will be ready to realise the fruits of stream entry. 

So the question might well arise as to whether the Buddha managed to resolve the conflict. Well, the Sutta does end by saying that the monks were satisfied and delighted by the Buddha’s words,⁶ but it does not elaborate and we are left with no definitive answer. As stated previously, neither are we provided with any details of the cause of the conflict. Reminiscent of a Zen koan we are left to contemplate these matters. But it has been reported elsewhere that the dispute continued despite the Buddha’s intervention.⁷ This may not be the happy ending we expected. Perhaps this too is an important lesson that sometimes we can only do our best when attempting to resolve conflict, and not invest or overlay our desired outcomes upon the situation. 

We may ask then why the Buddha chose to expound these seven factors or knowledges here, as a prescription to the discord amongst the monks. Similarly, why might the Buddha have prescribed the six principles of cordiality? As mentioned previously, it is a characteristic of the MN to show the Buddha using skilful means to expound his teachings in a way that is most appropriate to the circumstances and needs of the particular situation. Here, he is addressing the monastic community and appears to be appealing directly to the monks’ interests and idealised way of life, in fact to the life to which they have dedicated themselves, the goal of enlightenment. He emphasises this by stating that the most important principle of cordiality is possessing that noble view which is emancipating and leads to the complete destruction of suffering. And then by elaborating this principle of noble or right view further, via the seven knowledges, he is strengthening the connection the monks would have with their practice. Ultimately, as stated in the final paragraph of the Sutta, there is the fruit of stream entry offered to those who possess these seven knowledges. 

How then might these teachings be more widely used and applied? The Buddha’s initial response to the divided monks referred to loving kindness in body, speech and mind as a remedy. Whilst he was addressing his own monastic community we might consider what may be applicable to our own practice and that of the wider community. The loving kindness meditation technique known as “metta bhavana” is practised in many traditions. The Buddha repeatedly refers to metta within the MN as well as other early Suttas, but actual meditation instructions on how to develop and maintain metta can be found in the early meditation manual, the Visuddhimagga or “Path of Purification”.⁸ Of particular interest here is the instruction to develop metta towards persons with whom we are in enmity. Traditionally, as a staged approach we are instructed to direct this metta first to ourselves, a friend, a neutral person, and then the difficult person or enemy (before directing in equal measure to all beings). It would seem self-evident that the repeated mental projection of positive or friendly thoughts towards a person we are having difficulty with would be likely to at least improve the quality of personal relationships with that person. 

For many it is likely that the repetition of positive and friendly thoughts and feelings towards an antagonistic person or group will break down barriers. However, it is also suggested that taking on such a practice might be best discussed with a skilful teacher. It has been reported that there are potential dangers with such a practice . By di­recting loving kindness to a person we may unintentionally be imposing our own wishes on them. And, more importantly, there is the issue of spiritual by-passing where, satisfied with the behavioural effects of loving-kindness meditation, we may fail to pursue more deeply our inquiry into the origins of our antagonism to the perceived enemy or opposing group.⁹ Perhaps complementary, or as an alternative, to the traditional metta bhavana meditation it might be more appropriate to engage the practice of emotional awareness. This practice has been advocated by Ken Jones, who suggests that emotional states find cognitive expression in views, opinions, beliefs and ideologies, of whose origin we need to be aware. So emotional awareness practice could help us see the root cause of any enmity that we may have. It is also a practice which would seem quite compatible with the Chan practice of Silent Illumination as well as within mindfulness meditation practice in general. 

But what about groups of people, especially those associated with an ideology that we do not agree with, or may in fact find abhorrent? As a result of globalisation and particularly the internet, polarisation in respect of group ideology has increased the opportunity for disputes and “stabbing each other with verbal daggers”, as with the monks in ancient Kosambi. We could consider using the metta bhavana meditation practice perhaps to soften any extreme feelings of anger that may arise. How­ever, as stated previously the practice of emotional awareness may lead us to deeper investigation of our views. 

Further, the modern practitioner has the conditioning, arguably a double-edged sword, of scientific knowledge and the increased understanding of modern psychology. Journalist and author, Robert Wright, has recently attempted to merge the understandings of ancient Buddhist teachings, in particular, with the field of evolutionary psychology.¹⁰ Understanding the origins of our cognitive biases helps us see how these tendencies play out in our own lives as well as in groups. This hopefully might in­crease the possibility of transforming these distortions and help us see the world more clearly. 

At Kosambi the Buddha used skilful means to engage the factional monks, using their practices at the time, to enable them to investigate themselves so that they could see their own obsessions. This is how he taught them to be free of self-imposed suffering, and maintain an attitude of loving kindness. 

To study the Way is to study the self.
To study the self is to forget the self.
To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things.
To be enlightened by all things is to remove the barriers between one’s self and others. 

Dogen 

Notes

1. Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, (Wisdom 2009), MN 48 The Kosambiya Sutta
2. Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, (Wisdom 2009), The Introduction by Bhikku Bhodi
3. Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Life of the Buddha: According to the Pali Canon, (Pariyatti 2001) pp 109-119
4. Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, (Wisdom 2009), MN 104 The Samagam Sutta
5. See Somaratne for further details and commentary
6. Words expressing gratitude or praising the Buddha’s teaching seem to appear at the end of every Sutta within the Majjhima Nikaya
7. Vishvapani 2011
8. Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Path of Purification, Visuddhimagga, (Buddhist Publication Society 2011) pp 291-307
9. Ken Jones, Beyond Mindfulness: Living a life through Everyday Zen – Talks and Writings (Alba 2015), p144
10. See Wright for further details and commentary