Abstract
The relationship between Buddhism and human rights represents one of the most significant and challenging intersections of traditional religious ethics and contemporary political philosophy. This comprehensive academic inquiry examines the concept of human rights through the lens of the Karaniya Metta Sutta, the Buddha's discourse on loving-kindness, investigating how this foundational Buddhist text provides a framework for understanding and protecting universal rights. Through systematic analysis of the Metta Sutta, engagement with contemporary scholarship on Buddhism and human rights, and examination of practical applications in Buddhist societies, this article demonstrates that while traditional Buddhism lacks an explicit concept of rights, the Metta Sutta offers a profound ethical framework that implicitly supports human rights principles. The investigation reveals that the Metta Sutta's emphasis on universal loving-kindness, the protection of all beings from harm, and the cultivation of boundless compassion provides a foundation for human rights that is both deeper and more comprehensive than modern secular frameworks. The article examines the Sutta's teachings on contentment, sensory restraint, non-harming, and universal compassion, demonstrating how these principles translate into practical protections for human rights. The study engages with the scholarly debate on whether Buddhism is compatible with human rights, considering arguments that Buddhism's actor-centered ethics and lack of a rights discourse create tensions, while also exploring how Buddhist modernists have successfully harmonized Buddhist values with human rights frameworks. The article concludes that the Metta Sutta provides a superior foundation for human rights because it extends beyond anthropocentric concerns to encompass all sentient beings, grounds rights in the cultivation of compassion rather than legal entitlement, and offers practical methods for transforming individuals and societies toward greater justice and peace.
1. Introduction
As human beings, we have achieved a level of material progress we would not have even dreamed of barely a century ago. The marvels of modern technology have given us enormous power over the forces of nature. We have conquered many disasters, but the ultimate question remains: Are we happier than our ancestors were in the past? The answer is no. The abuse of women, children and the underprivileged, religious and racial discrimination, color bar, and caste distinction continue unabated.
As the results of these criminal activities, powerful people establish organizations like Human Rights associations. Yet modern human rights are also sold to money as well as power, and therefore many innocent people continue to suffer in society. This assignment will be the best effort to clarify that Buddhism offers a more comprehensive framework for human rights than modern human rights discourse.
The purpose of human rights is to create a peaceful society as well as equality of life for everyone in society. Buddhism also discusses peace but in a more advanced manner than modern human rights frameworks. The Metta Sutta discusses equal rights for all beings without any discrimination or division. This paper will explore the connection between the Metta Sutta and human rights, demonstrating that the cultivation of loving-kindness towards all beings provides the most effective foundation for protecting human rights.
The significance of this inquiry is particularly relevant in the contemporary world, where human rights violations continue despite the existence of international legal frameworks. As recent events in various parts of the world demonstrate, legal declarations of rights are insufficient without a corresponding ethical transformation in individuals and societies. As one scholar observes, "The Metta Sutta provides necessary basic ingredients for designing a global vision. Its message encourages people to become proactive in seeking welfare of all beings. By cultivating loving-kindness towards all, on an individual basis humans can ensure the wellbeing of all" .
This article undertakes a comprehensive examination of human rights through the Metta Sutta, proceeding through several interconnected dimensions of analysis. It begins with an introduction to the Karaniya Metta Sutta, its place in the Tipitaka, and its historical significance. It then examines the qualities and practices advocated in the Sutta that contribute to the protection of human rights. The analysis compares the modern human rights framework with the ethical framework of the Metta Sutta, identifying both similarities and significant differences. The article engages with the scholarly debate on Buddhism and human rights, considering both the tensions and harmonies between these frameworks. Finally, the article presents personal reflections on human rights through the Metta Sutta and concludes with a synthesis of the findings.
2. The Karaniya Metta Sutta: Introduction and Context
2.1 The Place of the Sutta in the Tipitaka
The Karaniya Metta Sutta, commonly known as the Discourse on Loving-Kindness, occupies a significant place in the Buddhist canonical literature. It is found in the Sutta Pitaka, specifically in the Khuddaka Nikaya, within the Sutta Nipata, in the Uraga Vagga, as the eighth sutta. The title "Karaniya" means "what should be done," indicating that this discourse provides practical guidance for conduct and mental cultivation.
The Sutta is one of the most frequently recited texts in Theravada Buddhist traditions, often chanted for protection and blessing. As one scholar notes, "The Metta Sutta or 'Discourse on Friendliness' is a text which has been chanted in Theravada Buddhist ritual to bring protection and safety (paritta) for perhaps more than 2,000 years" . This long history of recitation testifies to the Sutta's enduring significance and its perceived power to bring peace and protection.
The Sutta begins with these verses:
"Karaṇīyamatthakusalena, yanta santaṃ padaṃ abhisamecca;
Sakko ujū ca suhujū ca, sūvaco cassa mudu anatimānī..."
"This is what should be done by one who is skilled in goodness and who knows the path of peace: Let them be able and upright, straightforward and gentle in speech, humble and not conceited..."
### 2.2 The Historical Context and Narrative Background
The narrative background of the Metta Sutta is significant for understanding its purpose and application. According to tradition, a group of monks, sent by the Buddha to meditate in a forest, found a beautiful grove but were disturbed by tree spirits who resented their presence. When they returned to complain to the Buddha, he told them to return and show true loving-kindness to the tree spirits .
The monks followed the Buddha's advice, cultivating loving-kindness towards all beings, including the tree spirits. As a result, the demons were won over, and the monks were able to meditate in peace. This story illustrates the practical power of loving-kindness to transform conflict and create harmonious relationships, even with beings who are initially hostile.
The Buddha's response to the monks' situation was not to eliminate the spirits or to assert the monks' rights over the forest, but to transform the situation through the cultivation of loving-kindness. This approach reflects the Buddhist emphasis on inner transformation as the basis for outer peace. As the Buddha taught, through loving-kindness all fears and conflicts will disappear.
The Sutta has been used throughout Buddhist history for multiple purposes, including protection from danger, healing, and the cultivation of meditation. In contemporary Buddhist societies, "the chanting of Karaniya Metta Sutta (words on loving-kindness) happens daily over loudspeakers" in temples and public spaces, serving as a constant reminder of the importance of compassion and peace .
2.3 The Structure and Content of the Sutta
The Metta Sutta can be divided into three main sections, each addressing different aspects of the cultivation of loving-kindness. The first section describes the qualities that one should develop as a foundation for loving-kindness practice. The second section extends loving-kindness to all beings without exception. The third section describes the benefits and culmination of the practice.
The first section emphasizes ethical qualities such as capability, uprightness, straightforwardness, gentleness in speech, humility, contentment, being easily supported, having few duties, living lightly, having peaceful faculties, being masterful, modest, and not greedy for supporters. These qualities establish the ethical foundation necessary for genuine loving-kindness.
The second section extends loving-kindness to all beings, without any exception:
"Whatever living beings there may be: whether they are weak or strong, omitting none, the great or the mighty, medium, short or small, the seen and the unseen, those living near and far away, those born and to-be-born — may all beings be at ease!"
The third section describes the boundless nature of loving-kindness:
"Even as a mother protects with her life her child, her only child, so with a boundless heart should one cherish all living beings, radiating kindness over the entire world: spreading upwards to the skies, and downwards to the depths, outwards and unbounded, freed from hatred and ill-will" .
3. Human Rights Through the Karaniya Metta Sutta
3.1 Defining Human Rights in the Modern Context
Before examining how the Metta Sutta addresses human rights, it is essential to understand what is meant by human rights in the contemporary context. Human rights can be defined as the rights you have simply because you are human. A person is inherently entitled to these rights simply because she or he is a human being. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, established a comprehensive framework of rights that all human beings should enjoy.
However, the concept of human rights is not without its critics and limitations. As Schlieter notes, "In Buddhist anthropology, the idea of a 'person', who is the decisive bearer of rights in the Western concept of human rights, can be read as an illusion to be overcome" . This fundamental difference in understanding the nature of the person creates significant challenges for reconciling Buddhist thought with human rights frameworks.
Furthermore, modern human rights are often violated despite their legal recognition. Powerful individuals and institutions can manipulate or ignore human rights for their own benefit, leaving vulnerable populations unprotected. This gap between legal rights and practical protection suggests the need for a deeper foundation for human rights than legal declaration alone.
### 3.2 Contentment and the Protection of Human Rights
The first quality mentioned in the Metta Sutta that contributes to the protection of human rights is contentment: "Santussako ca subharo ca" — "Contented and easy to support" . This quality has profound implications for human rights, particularly in addressing issues of inequality, exploitation, and conflict over resources.
Buddhism teaches contentment according to three principles: Yatha Labha (the wealth that we get), Yatha Bala (the wealth that we can get), and Yatha Saruppa (the wealth that suits us). We have to be happy with this wealth. If anyone can cultivate these qualities, then we can find that human rights are well protected. Contentment reduces the greed and craving that drive exploitation and conflict. When people are content with what they have, they are less likely to violate the rights of others in pursuit of more.
The quality of being "easy to support" further contributes to the protection of human rights. When individuals and communities are not demanding excessive resources, there is enough for everyone. This reduces competition and conflict over resources, creating conditions in which all can live with dignity.
3.3 Sensory Restraint and Non-Harming
The second quality mentioned in the Sutta is "Santindriyo" — having peaceful faculties or sense control. The Dhammapada emphasizes this quality:
"Kayena samvaro Sadhu, Sadhu Vacaya samvaro
Manasa samvaro Sadhu, Sadhu sabbatha Samvaro"
"Good is restraint over the body, good is restraint over speech,
Good is restraint over the mind, good is restraint everywhere."
If one controls the six faculties, one will not harm others in society. At that situation, we can see human rights are well protected. Sensory restraint prevents the kind of craving and attachment that leads to violating the rights of others. When individuals are not driven by uncontrolled desires, they are less likely to engage in exploitation, violence, or other forms of rights violations.
The Sutta also states: "Let none deceive another, or despise any being in any state; let none through anger or ill-will wish harm upon another" . This verse explicitly prohibits the kinds of attitudes and actions that lead to human rights violations. Deception, contempt, anger, and ill-will are the psychological roots of discrimination, exploitation, and violence. By eliminating these mental states, the Metta Sutta addresses the fundamental causes of rights violations.
3.4 Universal Compassion and the Scope of Rights
One of the most significant contributions of the Metta Sutta to human rights discourse is its universal scope. The Sutta extends loving-kindness to all beings, without any exception:
"Diṭṭhā vā ye va adiṭṭhā, ye va dūre vasanti avidūre;
Bhūtā va sambhavesī va, sabbasattā bhavantu sukhitattā"
"Whether they are seen or unseen, living near or far away,
Born or yet to be born, may all beings be happy at heart."
This universal scope represents a significant expansion beyond the anthropocentric focus of modern human rights. While modern human rights are limited to human beings, Buddhism discusses all beings in the universe. As Schlieter notes, "The basic notion for everything in Buddhism is a sentient being, and for that purpose, human rights, animal rights and so on are conceptualized on a non-speciesist basis" .
This non-speciesist basis for rights reflects the Buddhist understanding of the interconnectedness of all life. When we recognize that all beings share the desire for happiness and the wish to avoid suffering, we naturally extend our concern to all beings. This recognition forms the basis for a truly universal ethics that transcends the limitations of anthropocentric frameworks.
The boundless nature of loving-kindness is further emphasized in the Sutta:
"Mettañca sabbalokasmi, mānasaṃ bhāvaye aparimāṇaṃ;
Uddhaṃ adho ca tiriyañca, asambādhaṃ averamasapattaṃ"
"With good will for the entire cosmos, cultivate a limitless heart:
Above, below, and all around, unobstructed, without enmity or hate."
This boundless loving-kindness represents the most comprehensive foundation for human rights. When our concern extends to all beings without limitation, we create the conditions for universal respect and protection of rights.
3.5 The Practical Application of Metta in Protecting Rights
The Metta Sutta provides not only a vision of universal compassion but also practical guidance for protecting human rights. As one scholar notes, "In Theravada Buddhist societies, Buddhists can use meditative practices such as the loving-kindness and a variety of Buddhist scriptures that encourage other-regarding virtues to create a positive psychological framework for healthy human relationships" .
The practice of loving-kindness meditation transforms individuals from the inside out, gradually eliminating the mental states that lead to rights violations. As negative emotions such as anger, jealousy, and hatred diminish, positive qualities of compassion, empathy, and concern for others naturally develop. This inner transformation then manifests in outward behavior that respects and protects the rights of others.
The Metta Sutta's emphasis on "not doing the slightest thing that the wise would later censure" provides a practical ethical guideline that prevents even minor violations of rights. By cultivating mindfulness and self-awareness, practitioners develop the ability to recognize and avoid actions that might harm others, even in subtle ways.
4. Comparing Modern Human Rights and the Metta Sutta
4.1 The Anthropocentric vs. Universal Scope
The most significant difference between modern human rights and the Metta Sutta is their scope. Modern human rights are exclusively concerned with human beings, while the Metta Sutta extends its concern to all sentient beings. This difference reflects fundamentally different worldviews and ethical frameworks.
The anthropocentric focus of modern human rights is a product of Western philosophical traditions that emphasize the unique status of human beings. While this focus has been important for establishing protections for vulnerable human populations, it has also led to the neglect of non-human beings and the environment. As Schlieter notes, human rights are "conceptualized on a non-speciesist basis" in Buddhism, providing a more inclusive framework .
The Metta Sutta's universal scope has significant implications for environmental ethics, animal rights, and other issues that are not adequately addressed by modern human rights frameworks. When we recognize that all beings have the right to live without harm, we must reconsider our treatment of animals and the environment. This expanded scope provides a more comprehensive ethical framework for addressing contemporary challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and animal welfare.
### 4.2 Legal vs. Transformative Approaches
Another significant difference between modern human rights and the Metta Sutta is their approach to protection. Modern human rights rely primarily on legal and institutional frameworks, establishing rights through declarations, treaties, courts, and enforcement mechanisms. While these frameworks are important, they are limited in their effectiveness when not supported by corresponding ethical transformation.
The Metta Sutta, by contrast, relies on the transformation of individuals and societies through the cultivation of loving-kindness. The protection of rights flows naturally from the development of compassion, empathy, and concern for others. As Schlieter notes, "Buddhists argued that it would be much better to have as many as possible who actually know how to do what is good, and who do what is good. They said to claim rights is a wonderful answer among moral strangers, in estrangement, in societies of anonymity. But what Buddhists would like to see and what they want to conceptualise is a society of human interrelatedness" .
This transformative approach addresses the root causes of rights violations rather than merely responding to their consequences. By cultivating loving-kindness, individuals develop the mental qualities that prevent rights violations from occurring in the first place. This is a more effective and sustainable approach to protecting rights than relying solely on legal enforcement.
4.3 Actor-Centered vs. Rights-Based Ethics
Modern human rights are based on a rights-based ethics that emphasizes the entitlements of individuals. This framework focuses on what individuals can claim from others and from society. While this has been effective in establishing legal protections, it can also lead to a focus on individual claims rather than collective responsibility.
The Metta Sutta is based on an actor-centered ethics that focuses on the responsibilities of individuals. As Schlieter explains, "Buddhist ethics is perpetrator-centered and not victim-centered. In a perpetrator-centered or actor-centered ethics, the question is not so much how I may be protected against illicit, illegitimate acts by others. This is not the question that Buddhists usually ask. They ask, 'How should I behave if I take the foundation of my own tradition seriously and try to adapt to these goals as far as possible?'" .
This actor-centered approach focuses on the transformation of the individual as the foundation for social transformation. By asking "How should I behave?" rather than "What rights do I have?" the Metta Sutta emphasizes personal responsibility and ethical cultivation. This approach is more likely to lead to genuine protection of rights because it addresses the causes of violations rather than merely responding to their effects.
5. Scholarly Perspectives on Buddhism and Human Rights
5.1 The Compatibility Debate
The relationship between Buddhism and human rights has been extensively debated in contemporary scholarship. Some scholars argue that there is a basic affinity between Buddhism and human rights, and perhaps more strongly, that Buddhism can provide a basis for human rights. Others argue that there are important features of human rights that conflict with or are in serious tension with Buddhist moral perspectives.
As Gowans notes, "It is widely acknowledged that human rights were not explicitly recognized or endorsed in traditional Buddhist texts. For example, according to Goodman, 'premodern Buddhist ethics simply has no concept of rights' (Goodman 2009: 216). And yet human rights are endorsed and advocated by most (though not all) socially engaged Buddhists today" .
This apparent contradiction between traditional texts and contemporary practice reflects the dynamic nature of Buddhist ethics and its ability to adapt to new challenges. While traditional Buddhism lacks an explicit concept of rights, it provides resources that can be developed to support human rights in the modern context.
Schlieter notes that "Buddhists usually depart from the idea that all would like to be happy and would like to avoid pain and miserable experiences. And from this point, human rights are conceptualized as present in Buddhism, but only implicitly so" . This implicit presence of human rights in Buddhist thought provides a basis for developing explicit Buddhist human rights frameworks.
5.2 The Tensions Between Buddhism and Human Rights
Several tensions between Buddhism and human rights have been identified by scholars. First, the Buddhist concept of non-self (anatta) challenges the idea of a stable, autonomous individual who is the bearer of rights. As Schlieter notes, "the idea of a 'person', who is the decisive bearer of rights in the Western concept of human rights, can be read as an illusion to be overcome" .
Second, the Buddhist emphasis on karma and personal responsibility can be read as victim-blaming, making it difficult to advocate for the rights of victims. As Schlieter explains, "the idea that due to karma, victims might have a history of deeds that brought them to this miserable state... is, of course, nothing with which worldly agents may retroactively interfere because there is no concept of a God, or a notion of forgiveness, or of repentance or so" .
Third, the Buddhist emphasis on inner transformation and ethical cultivation can be seen as insufficient for addressing structural and institutional violations of rights. As Schlieter notes, "Buddhist ethics is perpetrator-centered and not victim-centered" . This focus on the perpetrator rather than the victim can lead to a neglect of the rights of victims and the need for institutional protections.
Fourth, the Buddhist absence of a concept of worldly agency for protecting rights creates challenges for developing institutional frameworks. As Schlieter explains, "Buddhists did not conceptualize a worldly agency on whose behalf to install this as a right, to declare it formally as a right" .
### 5.3 Buddhist Modernism and the Harmonization of Buddhism and Human Rights
Despite these tensions, Buddhist modernists have successfully harmonized Buddhist values with human rights frameworks. As Gowans notes, "human rights are endorsed and advocated by most (though not all) socially engaged Buddhists today" . This endorsement reflects the ability of Buddhism to adapt to new challenges while maintaining its core values.
Schlieter explains that socially engaged Buddhists "usually are informed by Western ideas of democracy, of human rights, and also of philosophical approaches such as those of Kant and others" . This engagement with Western ideas reflects the dynamic nature of Buddhist modernism and its ability to incorporate insights from other traditions.
The harmonization of Buddhism and human rights is based on several strategies. First, Buddhist values such as compassion, non-harming, and the protection of life are seen as providing a foundation for human rights. Second, the concept of human dignity is derived from the Buddhist recognition of the rarity and value of human existence. As Schlieter notes, "Buddhist cosmology entails that only from a human existence it is possible to reach final liberation. And this has in several texts been declared to be a rarity of existence as a human. It is as rare as a turtle diving in the ocean and appearing on the surface to put its head in a wooden yoke drifting in the ocean" .
Third, the Buddhist emphasis on collectives and community is seen as providing a corrective to Western individualism. As Schlieter notes, "In Asian countries in which Buddhism has a certain influence, especially East Asian countries, there was a lot of emphasis on collectives and the idea that Buddhism and other religious-philosophical traditions in Asia should overcome the individualism of the West" .
6. My Personal Views on Human Rights Through the Metta Sutta
6.1 The Superiority of Buddhist Human Rights
After examining the Metta Sutta and its implications for human rights, I personally believe that Buddhism offers a superior framework for human rights than modern human rights. The Metta Sutta discusses equal rights for all beings without any discrimination or division. Modern human rights do not discuss the rights of all beings. The Sutta's universal scope represents a more comprehensive ethical framework that addresses the interconnectedness of all life.
The purpose of human rights is to create a peaceful society as well as equality of life for everyone in society. Buddhism also discusses peace but in a more advanced manner. The Metta Sutta provides a method for generating loving-kindness towards each person and the wish for him or her to be happy. This can help transform negative emotions such as anger or jealousy, which are the root causes of rights violations.
The Metta Sutta's emphasis on contentment, sensory restraint, and universal compassion provides a more effective foundation for protecting rights than legal frameworks alone. When individuals are content, they are less likely to violate the rights of others in pursuit of more. When individuals exercise sensory restraint, they are less likely to engage in exploitation or violence. When individuals cultivate universal compassion, they extend their concern to all beings without exception.
6.2 The Need for Inner Transformation
Modern human rights are necessary but insufficient for creating a truly just and peaceful society. As I mentioned in the introduction, modern human rights are often sold to money and power, and many innocent people continue to suffer in society. This indicates the need for a deeper foundation for human rights than legal declaration alone.
The Metta Sutta provides this deeper foundation through its emphasis on inner transformation. By cultivating loving-kindness, individuals develop the mental qualities that prevent rights violations from occurring in the first place. This is a more effective and sustainable approach to protecting rights than relying solely on legal enforcement.
Generate loving-kindness towards each person and the wish for him or her to be happy. This can help transform negative emotions such as anger or jealousy. When individuals are transformed by the practice of loving-kindness, they naturally respect the rights of others and work for the protection of all beings.
6.3 A Vision for Global Citizenship
The Metta Sutta provides a vision for global citizenship that is urgently needed in today's interconnected world. As one scholar notes, "In the increasingly globalized world today all religious communities in general, but multi-ethnic and multi-religious societies in particular, are challenged more in public debates and daily encounters to find creative ways that foster positive attitudes towards others. As people who share the resources of the same planet, all humans are forced to work with each other for the common good. Having shared virtues such as the cultivation of compassionate and caring thoughts enables us relate and communicate with each other more effectively" .
The Metta Sutta's vision is inclusive of all living organisms. Its message encourages people to become proactive in seeking the welfare of all beings. By cultivating loving-kindness towards all, on an individual basis, humans can ensure the wellbeing of all. This vision of global citizenship is more comprehensive than modern human rights frameworks, which are limited to human beings.
In conclusion, I personally believe with agreeing with the Metta Sutta that other beings also have rights to live in the world and that we must protect equal rights for not only human beings but also all beings. Therefore, the Metta Sutta is the best example from Buddhism that Buddhism offers the best foundation for human rights, superior to modern human rights.
"Bhūtā va sambhavesī va, sabbasattā bhavantu sukhitattā."
"Whether born or seeking birth, may all beings be happy at heart."
7. Conclusion
The Karaniya Metta Sutta provides a profound and comprehensive framework for understanding and protecting human rights. Through its emphasis on contentment, sensory restraint, non-harming, and universal compassion, the Sutta addresses the root causes of rights violations and provides practical guidance for creating a just and peaceful society.
The comparison between modern human rights and the Metta Sutta reveals significant differences in scope and approach. Modern human rights are anthropocentric, focusing exclusively on human beings, while the Metta Sutta extends its concern to all sentient beings. Modern human rights rely primarily on legal and institutional frameworks, while the Metta Sutta emphasizes the transformation of individuals through the cultivation of loving-kindness. Modern human rights are based on a rights-based ethics that focuses on entitlements, while the Metta Sutta is based on an actor-centered ethics that focuses on responsibilities.
The scholarly debate on Buddhism and human rights reveals both tensions and harmonies between these frameworks. While traditional Buddhism lacks an explicit concept of rights, it provides resources that can be developed to support human rights in the modern context. Buddhist modernists have successfully harmonized Buddhist values with human rights frameworks, demonstrating the ability of Buddhism to adapt to new challenges while maintaining its core values.
Personally, I believe that the Metta Sutta offers a superior foundation for human rights. Its universal scope, its emphasis on inner transformation, and its practical guidance for ethical cultivation provide a more comprehensive and effective framework for protecting rights than modern legal frameworks alone. The Metta Sutta's vision of boundless loving-kindness extending to all beings represents the highest expression of human rights, protecting the rights of all beings without exception.
As the Sutta states: "Even as a mother protects with her life her child, her only child, so with a boundless heart should one cherish all living beings, radiating kindness over the entire world." This is the true foundation of human rights: the recognition that all beings share the desire for happiness and the wish to avoid suffering, and the commitment to protect the rights of all beings without exception.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Karaniya Metta Sutta, Sutta Nipata Sn 1.8. PTS: 143-152.
Dhammapada. Translated by Acharya Buddharakkhita.
Thera Gatha Pali. Khuddaka Nikaya.
Secondary Sources
Excerpted from "Loving-kindness: The Revolutionary Art of Happiness" by Sharon Salzberg, 1995, Shambala Publications.
Gowans, Christopher W. "Human Rights." In Buddhist Moral Philosophy. Taylor & Francis, 2014.
Marshall, Katherine. "Burmese Protests Transcend Politics." Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs, October 3, 2007.
Schlieter, Jens. "Buddhism and Human Rights." Interview conducted by Mathieu Cudré-Mauroux. De Gruyter Brill, 2026.
Shinseki, Hosei. "Pride Month." The Pajaronian, June 14, 2023.
Study Buddhism. "Karaniya Metta Sutta: Buddha's Words on Loving Kindness."
Thanissaro Bhikkhu. "Karaniya Metta Sutta: Good Will." Access to Insight, 2013.
UN Department of Public Information. "Education and Global Citizenship: A Buddhist Perspective." Symposium 2013.
No comments:
Post a Comment