Re: Buddhism and contracts
I would like to ask Peter Junger to reply to Peter Harvey's mention of the //Agga~n~na Sutta// (//Diigha Nikaaya//III.92). It is often remarked that early Buddhism grew up in an urban, mercantile setting that is reflected in much of the way the sangha is ordered (e.g., Thaper's well- known article from Daedalus), esp. regarding this sutta and the notion of exchange that is so central to the workings of merit and karma. Does this give a way to derive a contractual sense of rights, if not going so far as the notion of inherent ownership?
Jamie
Jamie Hubbard asks:
>Does this give a way to derive a contractual sense of rights, if not >going so far as the notion of inherent ownership?
HR are not generally thought to derive from contract. Instead, they are thought to derive, by some, from their god, or, by others, from the inherent nature of being human. Others view them as positivist - they are what we say they are and that is that - whether this is contractual or legislative I think takes us a bit far afield.
So if we are to look for a bargain-type underpinning, I think we lose a very important part of the fundamentalist and universalist nature of HR. (This is the same problem I have with the positivist approach to HR.) I think Buddhism does not really create a legal system and so the idea of contract is not really part of Buddhism per se, unlike the in the three western traditions where it is explicitly recognized.
Cheers,
Steve Jamar
Howard Law