Hello upekkha! For those who don’t know her, upekkha used to post regularly a few years ago.
Following is my comment on that thread (upekkha referred to):
“It is not about kusala and akusala kamma.
- For a puthujjana to start comprehending Buddha’s teachings, they must first live a “moral life,” where the base level of “morality” is to abide by society’s standards. That is the only “morality” they know. The key point is to have a calm mind to start understanding Buddha Dhamma.
- When a puthujjana engages in an action not approved by society, their minds become agitated, which is not conducive to learning. Thus, if society approves having multiple wives, they don’t need to worry about having multiple wives.
- If the Buddha had started changing societal norms, that would have taken most of his lifetime. Of course, once one becomes serious about attaining Nibbana, it may be better not to have a single wife (i.e., to become a bhikkhu).
- In that context, even keeping slaves was accepted by society at the time of the Buddha. While the Buddha did not consent to that practice (obviously an immoral practice by any standards), he did not try to change it, which would have taken most of his time.
One’s moral values will change as one advances on the Path, but this change cannot be forced in some cases.”
______
I just revised the highlighted sentence to make things a bit more clear.
- Of course, the Buddha would not encourage polygamy or slavery. But those were standard practices in that region in those days.
- As I mentioned above, If the Buddha had started changing societal norms, that would have taken most of his lifetime.
Upekkha asked: “1. Can that comment be backed up in the Pali Canon?”
- Yes. Visaka was a wealthy woman who attained the Sotapanna stage at age seven. She had slaves. Anathapindika was another wealthy Sotapanna who had slaves.
- King Bimbisara was a Sotapanna, too. He had a harem with many women (as was the practice those days.)
- It is hard for us to believe, but those were standard practices.
- There were also instances when the Buddha asked some slaves to become bhikkhus because he saw they could attain magga pahala. No one got in the way in such cases.
Upekkha asked: “2. The Buddha is a symbol of morality and knows more than anyone right from wrong. Thus how could it be that he defined morality based on societal acceptance?”
- The practice of polygamy or keeping slaves is not moral, according to the Buddha.
- But if he started changing societal practices, that would have taken most of his time.
- Instead, people changed their practices over time, even though this probably happened long after the Buddha. Some kings, for example, gave up their harems to become bhikkhus. Rather than forcing morality, teaching how to be moral is better.
Upekkha wrote: “3. I highly disagree that the Buddha defined morality based on societal acceptance.”
- I agree with you. He never defined morality that way, and that should be clear to anyone familiar with Buddha’s teachings.