6. The Perfection of Forbearance
The Chronicles of the Buddhas (Bv 2.144) exhorts one to bear praise and disdain with patience (sammānāvamānakkhama). One should neither be elated when meeting with pleasant objects nor upset when encountering unpleasant objects. It is no tolerance of pleasantness if we develop greed under fortunate circumstances or of unpleasantness if we develop hate under unfortunate circumstances. The essential meaning here is: We are truly patient only when favourable situations are faced without greed and unfavourable ones without hate.
However, with regard to the perfection of forbearance, in illustrative stories the commentaries generally use the term perfection of forbearance (khanti-pāramī) only for tolerance to acts of physical or verbal aggression by others without giving way to anger. The commentary to the Basket of Conduct (Cariyā-piṭaka) expounds in the Chapter on Miscellany: The group of consciousnesses and its concomitants associated with tolerance of wrongs done by others, predominated by the mental factor of non-aversion (adosa-cetasika) and grasped by compassion and skill in means is called the perfection of forbearance (karuṇūpāya-kosalla-pariggahitaṁ satta-saṅkhārāparādha-sahanaṁ adosappadhāno
The sub-commentary to the Path of Purification (Visuddhi-magga) in commenting on the five restraints of morality, mindfulness, wisdom, forbearance and energy, briefly explained in the Abundance of Meaning (Aṭṭha-sālinī, DsA), defines the restraint of forbearance as: Forbearance means enduring; that forbearance is actually the four mental aggregates formed in such a mode of tolerance; some teachers say it is wisdom (paññā) or only the mental factor of non-aversion (khantī ti adhivāsanā, sā ca tathā-pavattā khandhā; paññā ti eke, adoso eva vā).
Some scholars take the view: “The exhortation in the Pāḷi texts to bear praise and disdain with patience, seems to imply that one should tolerate praise as well as disdain. But, in actual experience, one is liable to be displeased and angry only when one is insulted and despised; no one shows such emotions when treated with honour and veneration. Therefore, the term forbearance should be used only when one shows no anger in a situation which would normally provoke anger to many others. To take the Pāḷi text exhortation literally is to equate the perfection of forbearance with the perfection of equanimity, seeing no difference between the two.”
As the authority quoted by these scholars is the aforesaid commentary to the Basket of Conduct (Cariyā-piṭaka) and the sub-commentary to the Path to Purification (Visuddhi-magga), their view may not be set aside.
It should be noted, however, that forbearance is considered to be tolerance of others’ treatment whereas equanimity is indifference towards beings, without hate or love.
Ven. Ledi Sayādaw, in his Assistance to the Discourse on the Blessings (Maṅgala-sutta-nissaya), defines forbearance as: “Not feeling exalted when encountering pleasantness and remaining patient without giving vent to anger when encountering hardships.” This definition is in agreement with the exhortation to bear praise and disdain with patience (sammānāvamānakkhama).
To reconcile the commentary’s exposition and the text: Bodhisattas are by nature serious-minded; pleasant experiences or happy circumstances do not make them excited with greed; they are accustomed to remaining unmoved by them without having to make a special effort to discipline their mind. When faced with an unhappy turn of events, however, they have to make special endeavour to bear it patiently so as to fulfil their perfection of forbearance.
Bodhisattas, who are fulfilling the perfection of forbearance, have to put up with both pleasant and unpleasant experiences so as not to develop greed and ill-will, hence the exhortation given in the text to bear praise without developing greed and to tolerate insults and ill-treatments without generating hate. But it is nothing strange for Bodhisattas, who are serious-minded, to experience pleasantness without being moved by greed; therefore, the commentary comments only upon tolerance, which is to be cultivated as the perfection of forbearance in unpleasant situations which are unbearable to ordinary persons. Viewed in this way, there is no disagreement between the exposition in the commentary and the teaching in the text.
The Nature of Forbearance
Forbearance being the group of consciousnesses and its concomitants led by the mental factor of non-hate (adosa-cetasika), which has the characteristics of lack of ill-will or anger, is not a separate ultimate reality like wisdom or energy. However, when considered by itself as non-hate, it is of course an ultimate reality like wisdom or energy.
Although forbearance (khantī) is non-hate (adosa-cetasika), every case of non-hate is not forbearance. The non-hate accompanies every arising of a beautiful (sobhana) type of consciousness, but it is called forbearance (khantī) only if it serves as a deterrent to anger when provoked by others. If the beautiful consciousness arises due to any other cause, the non-hate that accompanies it is not called forbearance.
Ven. Puṇṇa’s Forbearance
Ven. Puṇṇa’s mental attitude serves as a good example of the forbearance one should develop. It is, therefore, briefly described here, based on the Discourse giving Advice to Puṇṇa (Puṇṇovāda-sutta, MN 145).
Once during the Buddha’s time, Ven. Puṇṇa approached and informed the Buddha that he would like to go to the Sunāparanta district and live there. The Buddha said to him: “Puṇṇa, the people in Sunāparanta are rough and brutal. How would you feel should they abuse and revile you?”
The venerable replied: “Venerable sir, should the people of Sunāparanta abuse and revile me, I would regard them as good people, control my temper and bear it patiently with the thought: ‘These are good people, extremely good people; they merely abuse and revile me, but they do not assault me with their fists and elbows.’ ”
The Buddha asked him further: “Puṇṇa, suppose the people of Sunāparanta assault you with their fists and elbows, how would you feel?” – “Venerable sir, I would regard them as good people, control my temper and bear it patiently with the thought: ‘These are good people, extremely good people; they merely assault me with their fists and elbows, but they do do not stone me.’ ”
The Buddha asked him further how he would feel if people stoned him, beat him with a stick, cut him with a sword or even kill him.
The venerable replied: “Venerable sir, I would control my temper and bear it patiently with the thought: ‘The disciples of the Fortunate One, such as Ven. Godhika, Ven. Channa, being weary and ashamed as well as being disgusted with the body and with life, had to commit suicide (satthahāraka-kamma); how fortunate I am. I need not kill myself.’ ” The Buddha then approved of his replies and blessed him.
Again, in the Birth Story about the Teacher Sarabhaṅga (Sarabhaṅga-jātaka, Ja 522), Sakka, the Lord of the Devas, asked the recluse, Sarabhaṅga:
“Recluse of Koṇḍañña ancestry, what may one slay without having to repent? What may one abandon to gain praise from the virtuous? Whose abusive, harsh words should one bear with patience? Give me answers to these questions.”
The Bodhisatta, Sarabhaṅga the recluse, replied:
“One may slay anger without having to repent; one may abandon ingratitude to gain praise from the virtuous; one should bear with patience abusive, harsh words from everyone, whether superior, equal or inferior; the virtuous call this the highest form of patience.”
Again, Sakka asked:
“Recluse, it may be possible to put up with the abusive, harsh words of those who are superior or one’s equal, but why should one tolerate the rude words coming from one’s inferiors?”
The Bodhisatta answered:
“One may bear with patience the rudeness of one’s superior through fear or the abusive language from those who are equal to ward off the danger of rivalry. Both cases are not superior types of patience. But the wise say that to put up with the rude language coming from one’s inferiors, with no special reason to do so, is the supreme form of forbearance.”
Sakka’s Forbearance
Once, in a battle between the Devas of Tāvatiṁsa and the Asuras, the Devas captured
Then Mātali, Sakka’s charioteer, asked his master why he remained calm, without showing any resentment in the face of such insults. Sakka’s reply in verse included the following:
Sadattha-paramā atthā, khantyā bhiyyo na vijjati,
yo have balavā santo dubbalassa titikkhati,
tam-āhu paramaṁ khantiṁ.
Of all kinds of interest, self-interest is supreme, and amongst acts that promote self-interest, forbearance is the best. He who is strong himself endures the weak; the virtuous call this the supreme forbearance.
Explanation with Quotations from the Texts
Although the above quotations, from the Thematic Discourses about Sakka (Sakka-saṁyutta, SN 11) and the Birth Story about the Teacher Sarabhaṅga (Sarabhaṅga-jātaka, Ja 522), refer particularly to forbearance to verbal insults, it should be understood that enduring physical assaults is also meant. The texts mention verbal insults because these are more commonly met with than physical attacks. This is borne out by the example of the aforesaid story of Ven. Puṇṇa, which included physical ill-treatments in ascending order of grievousness.
Also, in the Birth Story about Khantivādī (Khantivādi-jātaka, Ja 313), is found the story of the recluse Khantivādī, who set an example of supreme forbearance when King Kalābu tortured him, not only verbally but also physically, causing his death.
Anger and Forbearance
As has been stated above, forbearance is controlling oneself not to resent it when being attacked by others, either verbally or physically. But there is another form of anger which is not connected with verbal or physical wrongs done by others. Suppose a man employs someone to do a certain job and the workman performs it to the best of his ability. But the employer is not satisfied with his work and bursts out with anger. If one controls one’s temper in such a situation, it is not forbearance (khantī) it is just giving no vent to anger (akkodha).
In the Long Birth Story about the Golden Goose (Mahā-haṁsa-jātaka, Ja 534), the Buddha teaches the ten duties of kings (dāsa-rāja-dhamma), which include both non-anger (akkodha) and forbearance (khantī).
In carrying out various orders of a monarch, his executives may have performed their tasks well with the best of intentions, but not to his satisfaction. Non-anger (akkodha), as one of the ten duties of kings, forbids him from giving way to royal anger in such a situation. In contrast, forbearance (khantī) which is bearing verbal or physical insults without losing temper is laid down separately as another duty of the king.
Nine Causes of Anger
There are nine causes of anger which arise in relation to oneself, to friends, loved ones or to one’s enemies. It may also arise regarding actions in the past, present or future. Thus there are nine causes of anger arising with regard to individuals and with regard to time (Āghāta-vatthu-sutta, AN 9.29):
1. One is angry in relation to oneself, thinking: “He has caused damage to my interests.”
2. One is angry in relation to oneself, thinking: “He is causing damage to my interests.”
3. One is angry in relation to oneself, thinking: “He will cause damage to my interests.”
4. One is angry in relation to one’s friends, thinking: “He has caused damage to the interests of my friend.”
5. One is angry in relation to one’s friends, thinking: “He is causing damage to the
6. One is angry in relation to one’s friends, thinking: “He will cause damage to the interests of my friend.”
7. One is angry in relation to one’s enemies, thinking: “He has promoted the interests of my enemies.”
8. One is angry in relation to one’s enemies, thinking: “He is promoting the interests of my enemies.”
9. One is angry in relation to one’s enemies, thinking: “He will promote the interests of my enemies.”
In addition to the above nine causes of anger, one can also become angry if it is raining too heavily or if it is too windy, too hot, etc. Losing one’s temper over matters about which one should not get angry is called irrational anger (aṭṭhāna-kopa). It is the mental factor of ill-will (dosa-cetasika), which arises mostly in those having no reasoning ability. To restrain such irrational anger (aṭṭhāna-kopa) is to remain without anger (akkodha).
Eight Kinds of Strength
In a list of eight kinds of strength of the noble and virtuous is included forbearance (Paṭhama-bala-sutta, AN 8.27). The eight kinds of strength are:
1. Crying is the strength of children.
2. Anger is the strength of women.
3. A weapon is the strength of robbers.
4. Sovereignty over wide territories is the strength of kings.
5. Finding fault with others is the strength of fools.
6. Careful scrutiny is the strength of the wise.
7. Repeated consideration is the strength of the learned.
8. Tolerance to wrongs done by others is the strength of ascetics and Brahmins.
Ascetics and Brahmins
With reference to the terms ascetics and Brahmins (samaṇa-brāhmaṇa) in number 8 of the above list, it may be asked whether ascetics are of equal status.
Outside of the teaching, samaṇa means an ascetic. Within the teaching, it is understood as a monastic, a member of the Saṅgha, a son of the Buddha. The term samaṇa is thus well-known and needs no further explanation.
What requires elaboration is the word brāhmaṇa. The Discourse on the Highest Knowledge (Aggañña-sutta, DN 27) gives an account of how the appellation Brahmin (brāhmaṇa) came to be used first.
At the beginning of the world, after humans had lived on earth for aeons, evil ways had appeared amongst them, and they elected a certain individual to rule over them as King Mahā Sammata “the Great Elected One.” At that time, some people, saying: “The world is being overwhelmed by forces of evil; we do not wish to live in association with people who are so corrupt as to be governed by a king. We will repair to the forest and drive away, wash away, these evil ways,” went to the forest and stayed there meditating and being absorbed in absorption (jhāna). Because they lived in this manner, they were called Brahmins (brāhmaṇa).
Brahmins (brāhmaṇa) is also a Pāḷi word which means “one who has done away with evil.” Brahmins (brāhmaṇa) did not cook their own food; they lived on fruits which had fallen from trees or on alms food collected from towns and villages. They were called Brahmins (brāhmaṇa) because they led a pure, holy life in keeping with the literal meaning of the Pāḷi word “one who has done away with evil.” They were
After a lapse of many aeons, some of these Brahmins by virtue of their holy practice failed to keep up the practice of meditation and absorption (jhāna). They settled down on the outskirts of towns and villages; they composed and taught the Vedas to those eager to learn them. They no longer practised meditation to attain absorption (jhāna) and to cast off evil. But they still retained the name of Brahmins, but they were not Brahmins of strict practice (guṇa-brāhmaṇa) since they no longer possessed the attribute of holy practice.
They could only claim to be Brahmins by birth (jāti-brāhmaṇa), being descended from the Brahmins of strict practice (guṇa-brāhmaṇa). As they could not practice meditation to attain absorption (jhāna), they are regarded to be of an inferior class. But with the lapse of time, writing Vedic books and teaching, they came to be considered as quite respectable and noble. Although these Brahmins by birth would not actually cast off and wash away mental defilements by cultivation of absorption (jhāna), they immersed themselves in the waters of rivers and streams to deceive people, calling their deceptive performances acts of ablution to wash away impurities.
A reference to this practice of washing out one’s sins by Brahmins is found in the Birth Story about Prince Bhūridatta (Bhūridatta-jātaka, Ja 543). Bhūridatta, King of the Nāgas, used to visit the human world to observe the precepts. On one such visit, he failed to return to the Nāga land at the expected time. His two brothers went in search of him.
They were able to retrieve him in time from the captivity of a snake charmer who ill-treated him. He was betrayed by a Brahmin named Nesāda, who saw him observing precepts on top of an ant-hill.
His younger brother, Subhoga Nāga, while following the course of the River Yamunā in search of him, came across the Brahmin Nesāda who was responsible for his capture by the snake charmer. The Brahmin was found immersed in the River Yamunā in order to wash out the impurities of his betrayal.
The Buddha had in mind only Brahmins of strict practice when he said that tolerance is the power of ascetics and Brahmins. The ascetics of the Discourse on the Origins (Aggañña-sutta, DN 27), who, wearing white clothes, practised to rid themselves of defilements were ordinary Brahmins or Brahmins by birth. But when the Buddha made his appearance and started teaching, he described the attributes only by virtue of which one may be called a Brahmin. In the Dhamma Verses (Dhammapada), the Buddha devoted the entire Division about the Brahmin (Brāhmaṇa-vagga) of 41 verses (Dhp 383-423) to fully explain the noble qualities possession of which would entitle one to be called a Brahmin. Such Brahmins are all Brahmins of strict practice (guṇa-brāhmaṇa); there is no division of this class. The Brahmins by birth, however, are split into many divisions. The last four paragraphs dealing with the etymology of the Myanmar word for brāhmaṇa are left out from our translation.