Ethics is, in brief, the dynamic realm in which human beings relate to each other and perpetuate its value in an ongoing way.  In this respect, principles and edicts that dictate do’s and don’ts on human behavior are not the makings of true ethics; they are merely suggestions for certain behavior approved or disapproved, or codified or uncodified in any society, to perpetuate a status quo and conditions for advancement.  But the dynamic realm of human relationship is entirely different from the set rules of behavior in any society; this is because it gets to the very bottom of being a

p.272

human in the situational momentary nature of things.

　　The question that inevitably arises here is this.  Where or how does the notion of virtue arise?  Or, what can be said of a moral nature?  These are tough questions, indeed.  Why?  Because although the dynamics of human relations is the place to focus on a virtue or moral nature, the sense of it is difficult to describe or delineate, especially in any binding way that pertains to human behavior.  But delving deep into the situation, it seems quite plausible that it is in the so-called dynamics of mutuality that human relations are kept together; it is emptiness as a glue, as mentioned earlier, that provides the constant togetherness of relations to continue in a self-and-other reflective phenomenon.  The constant togetherness is equable and supportive of each other’s presence.  There is of course no confrontation but only silent concern and regard for each other.  All this may sound outlandish and bizarre, but the truth of the matter is that we have not really probed deeply enough into the very inception of what it is to be a human being in the presence of others.  In other words, to be a human being is to sense the natural dynamic bond of the self-other relationship prevailing at all times but that which is taken for granted for the most part.

　　In consequence, when we refer to terms, such as, kindness or respect, there is a so-called ontological basis for its actual relational state and the consequent realization of its presence.  The optimal nature of kindness is, of course, one that is bestowed on another but that which is unconcerned regarding any response.  A feigned  kindness is one that becomes the object of manipulation by the provider, but then, it no longer can be considered kindness.  All virtues in truth should be beyond human contrivance, pure and simple.

　　Again, love is a virtue realized between two or more individuals but, in the strictest sense, it requires no response.  The highest form of love is compassion (karu.naa) whose very word describes a

p.273

passion that covers all beings without exception, including even nonsentients.  In this respect, clear vision or insight (praj~naa) is merely another side of compassion, and vice versa.[11]

　　What our discussion has brought forth is the fact that the foundation of Buddhist ethics is unique, stemming from the Buddha’s original enlightenment and relating it to the ordinary samsaric life of individuals.  It requires the achievement of perceptual clarity by way of meditative discipline that allows individuals to see things as they are in a borderless and boundless realm of existence.  This is another way of saying that perception is now in the total nature of emptiness.  This realm is dynamic as well as a guarantor of the possibility for the generation and continuation of harmonious human relationships now and forever.

　　Perception must then be an open phenomenon.  This openness is of course a two-way street, for if not open it would not be possible to sweep the wider dimension in the perceptual field.  Indeed, without openness, there would be no mutuality, and without mutuality, there would be no dynamic nature.  Without this open, mutual and dynamic play and interplay among so called individual selves, there would be no full and meaningful relationship whatsoever, and this means, in turn, that no ethical consideration is possible at all.  And thus this unique relationship is the foundation for such common and primary ethical virtues as concern, closeness, respect, decency, honor, duty, responsibility, comradeship, integrity, truthfulness, and humaneness.

　　In a paper written some time ago,[12]　I categorized human

p.274

contacts into two types, i.e., soft relationship and hard relationship.  Soft relationship refers to the eastern perception and attitude in which individuals are not treated strictly by law and order.  It does not lend to codification or rules of conduct but is based on the very nature of what it is to be a human being.  By contrast, hard relationship refers generally to western perception and attitude in which individuals are treated by law and order.  It is amenable to codification and thus the punishment fits the crime, for example.

　　Finally, Buddhist ethics in sum entail the following: