Buddhism and slavery
Buddhism and slavery
The eightfold path forbids trading in life ©
Slavery would seem to be incompatible with a fundamental idea of Buddhism; that of freeing oneself of attachments:
Thus the ideal community of the selfless arahants form an ideal, or a standard on which ethical and moral judgement of lay societies are based.
Thus such violations of human rights as slavery, torture, etc. could only be a movement in the opposite direction to the ideal, for these violations all result from strong attachment to the self of the violators of human rights.
Wayne R. Husted, Damien V. Keown, Charles S. Prebish, Buddhism and Human Rights, 1998
Buddhist teachings don't explicitly forbid slavery, but the eightfold path says that engaging in trade in living beings is not a right form of livelihood. This appears to ban Buddhists from engaging in the slave trade.
...a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in living beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.Eightfold path
Other texts seem incompatible with many aspects of slavery itself.
For example, this quotation requires Buddhists to ensure that their workers and servants are properly treated:
In five ways should a master minister to his servants and employees:
by assigning them work according to their ability,
Sigalovada Sutta
by supplying them with food and with wages,
by tending them in sickness,
by sharing with them any delicacies,
by granting them leave at times.
Despite these texts there's no doubt that slavery was part of some Buddhist cultures, although many of these slaves were servants, rather than slaves of the sort traded across the Atlantic.
Richard Gombrich has argued that the Buddha did not intend to do away with slavery:
Though it could well be argued that the Buddha made life in the world more worth living, that surely was an unintended consequence of his teaching. To present him as a sort of socialist is a serious anachronism.
He never preached against social inequality, only declared its irrelevance to salvation.
He neither tried to abolish the caste system nor to do away with slavery.
While a famous sermon, the Sāmañña-phala Sutta, stresses the practical benefits for a slave in leaving his servitude and joining the Order, in fact runaway slaves were not allowed to join the Order.
Moreover, though in ancient India there was no caste or other form of social ranking within the Order itself, the Order soon came to own (lay) slaves.
Richard F. Gombrich, Theravada Buddhism: A Social History from Ancient Benares to Modern Colombo, 1988
In fact the restrictions placed on monks required them to have some form of servant in monastic communities. So for example if monks were to obey the rule barring the cooking and storing of food, they would need somebody to do it for them. Some Buddhist commentaries warn that slaves are not allowed, unless they are called "called monastery servants (ārāmika) or legalisers (kappiya-kāraka)".
Gombrich also notes that:
at one point the Vinaya commentary says in so many words that kings gave slaves to monasteries, and that they could not be ordained unless they had first been freed. Inscriptions record that people gave money for the specific purpose of maintaining monastic slaves – and offered the resulting merit to all living beings.Richard F. Gombrich, Theravada Buddhism: A Social History from Ancient Benares to Modern Colombo, 1988
If granting endowments to maintain slaves at monasteries was considered meritorious, freeing them from slavery was considered even more meritorious. Thus the device of offering slaves to monasteries provided a two-fold way for the acquisition of merits.Rahula, Walpola (1956), History of Buddhism in Ceylon: the Anuradhapura Period, Colombo. Quoted in Gombrich
Some kings in Ceylon offered themselves to the monastic community "as slaves and then redeemed themselves, thus combining a symbolic gesture of total humility with extreme munificence".
In 9th century China Buddhist institutions are reputed to have employed 150,000 slaves , who were taken over by the Taoist Emperor Wu-tsung in 845 as part of his action against the Buddhist community.
In some parts of South East Asia Buddhist locations were a sanctuary for those fleeing more oppressive forms of slavery:
Where Buddhist monastic orders had claimed political retreats from state military power, their estates and temple complexes became sanctuaries where peasants sought the exemption from state conscription and corvée that 'slavery' to a privileged individual or institution provided.Gwyn Campbell, The Structure of Slavery in Indian Ocean Africa and Asia, 2004
Pagoda slaves
In some Buddhist cultures a male slave would become free if their owner allowed them to become a Buddhist monk.
In Kampuchea a person could be made a 'Pagoda Slave' if they were found guilty of certain crimes - as could members of their family up to seven degrees removed. Pagoda slaves did domestic and maintenance work on temple sites. While pagoda slaves might have a relatively easy life for a slave they ranked very low on the social ladder and had an extra disadvantage:
Pagoda slaves, who were supposed to belong only to Buddha, could not be redeemed.Gwyn Campbell, The Structure of Slavery in Indian Ocean Africa and Asia, 2004
Because pagoda slaves could not be redeemed their children inherited slave status. Pagoda slaves were found mostly in what are now Burma and Thailand.
Pagoda slaves weren't only 'criminals' or the descendants of slaves; people could be given to monasteries for slave use.
Among Buddhist reformers of slavery was King Thibaw of Burma, a former monk. He paid 40,000 rupees in 1883 to buy the freedom of many slaves; 1,000 of those he freed are said to have become Buddhist monks and novices.
Slavery and karma
Some writers think that slavery is justified by the doctrine of karma. They argue that people are born into slavery or become slaves because of their bad actions in a previous life. The way for a slave to progress towards salvation was to obey his or her owner, and do so willingly and without any bad feelings.