All religions throughout the world have a moral code by which values are generated for social living. This is completely understandable when we consider that people, both in the past and present, tend to look to their religious leaders for guidance on complex behavioural and moral questions such as "those concerned with war and marriage, social and political realities, and any number of matters that may be called purely personal." 1 These moral codes are a vital part of the ongoing harmony and agreement of a socio-religious group. I will address the issue of moral codes by the comparison of Theravada Buddhism to Islam, showing the strong similarities that exist in two seemingly different religious traditions.
Both Islam and Buddhism have a traditional doctrine of moral behaviours, of what is acceptable in the society and what is not, based on an underlying principle. The principle in Islam is that of Allah's will. The Muslim must follow the will of Allah as described in the Koran and the Sunnahs, in order to show his faith and devotion to his God, the central Pillar of Islamic society 2. The foundation of Buddhism is slightly different, in that it does not rest upon the will of a god. Instead, the belief in karma is that upon which the moral code is based. A Buddhist must adhere to the moral code in order to try to prevent the accumulation of karma, which would keep him from attaining the Buddhist spiritual goal of enlightenment.
The basic Islamic moral code is quite extensive, but there are certain crucial factors that can be extracted. The basic obligations that Muslims bear are the Five Pillars. These are:
"(1) affirming belief in the unity of God and recognizing Mohammed as God's messenger, (2) praying five times daily, (3) fasting during the designated month of the lunar year, (4) paying the zakat - a tax for relief of the poor and needy, and (5) visiting the holy city of Mecca at some point within one's lifetime (if financial means and family obligations permit)." 3
These obligations provide the basis of social stability and coherence, enabling the entire community to live in harmony. These basic obligations are followed up by more specific moral laws, such as the prohibitions on fighting, illicit sexual relations, drinking intoxicants, gambling, killing (except for a just cause), certain foods, and the hoarding of wealth. There are also the duties of charity, humility, generosity, patience, forgiveness, courage and repentance.4 All of these things are a vital part of upholding the religious life and values in accordance with Islamic law and society.
Buddhism has a similar system of moral codes. These codes find their place within the Buddha's doctrine of the four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold path, especially in the specifically moral steps of right speech, right action and right livelihood, known as sila. This includes the five precepts, which are:
"1. Avoid taking life (animal or human).
2. Avoid stealing (taking what is not offered).
3. Avoid illicit sexual relations.
4. Avoid lying.
5. Avoid intoxicants." 5
There is also the crucial Buddhist doctrine of dana, (giving or generosity to those who are poor or needy)6, which, along with adherence to the five precepts and other moral laws, plays an important role in maintaining a fully functional society.
So, by looking at these two religions as an example, we can see that they both have important similarities existing in the moral codes by which they generate the values used for social living; thereby reflecting the necessity of these moral codes to the harmony and agreement of a socio-religious group.
1 James F. Smurl. Religious Ethics: A Systems Approach. (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1972), p.1.
2 David Waines. An Introduction to Islam. (Cambridge: University Press, 1995), p. 89.
3 R. Murray Thomas. Moral Development Theories - Secular and Religious: A Comparitve Study. (London: Greenwood Press, 1997), p. 195.
4 R. Murray Thomas. p 195-197.
5 David Little and Sumner B. Twiss. Comparative Religious Ethics. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978), p. 215.
6 David Little and Sumner B. Twiss. p. 227.