Compassionate Achievements

Many people believe that the significance of historical achievements is subjective, and that to try and list such achievements of people like Sun Zi, Isaac Newton, and Mahatma Ghandi are objectively futile. This was the case with Michael H. Hart and his book The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History. Undoubtedly many have disputed his ranking of Muhammed, the last Prophet of Islam, as the number one most influential person in human history. Some will be surprised at why Jesus is ranked below Isaac Newton, and some may perhaps argue that Augustus Caesar should either be ranked even lower than Shi Huang Ti, the first Emperor of the Chinese nation. The disagreements are endless (and rightly so). One who is a great advocate of science may have preferred Hart to have given Newton the privilege of number one. A lover of music will despair ar Hart lists Beethoven at number 45 – below men like Adolf Hitler and Ghenghis Khan. However, suppose someone were to modify the book slightly. Rather than ranking of the most influential people in history, he would write a book ranking the most influential musician in history (which has undoubtedly been done before). Doubtless men like Beethoven and Mozart would top the list. Muhammed, Isaac Newton, and Jesus would not even be on the list. Likewise, should one write a book about the most influential political military leaders throughout history. Shi Huang Ti would be amongst the top – and Muhammed may just slide to number 3 or 4.

Since it is the purpose of humans that give their lives and memory true significance, then we may assume the Buddha - a very compassionate enlightened being - would have been satisfied with what he achieved during his last rebirth. I sincerely believe that any philosophy or religion that does not bring long term happiness and peace to living beings is not truly worth it. In this respect, Buddhism as a global movement has perhaps been the most influential - relatively little wars have been waged in its name, and its leaders from various cultures have more or less set a good example as Buddhists. given its highly compassionate nature, Buddhism shall remain in the world for a long time.

As long as there is still suffering and anguish in the world, fragments of Buddhism will always remain. As long as there are still those who need care and compassion, a compassionate ethos will remain in the world to fulfil its mission. Buddhism was founded by the historical Sakyamuni Buddha for the sole purpose of alleviating suffering and ultimately transcending it – nothing more. Doubtless then much work remains to be done. Most of the world lives in poverty and war. The environment is undergoing major changes for the worse due to human interference and it is clear that we are paying a heavy price for our arrogance. Even in the so-called First World most of us are not as happy or contented as we would like to be. There is a significant moral vacuum in the cores of our hearts, and we attempt to replace it via consumerist and hedonistic values, but it will also prove to fail, in time. As a result of all these painful realities, many have despaired. And while there is despair, Buddhism will remain one of the forces that attempt to rectify such problems, and at the very least, give counsel, support and comfort to the afflicted and distressed. Only when the samsaric universe is free of suffering will Buddhism truly disappear, its purpose fulfilled. This is in line with the sacred Buddhist scriptures of Maitreya, the next Buddha who will manifest in the world when Gautama's message is completely extinct, and the role of the bodhisattvas, who have postponed Enlightenment until all sentient beings have been liberated from suffering.

Worldly Buddhism, like applied democracy, is not without its flaws. We must make an important distinction. Many believe the Buddha is a perfectly compassionate being, and go on to believe that Buddhists are also perfectly compassionate and aloof and never get worried, anxious, or angry. That is completely ridiculous. Buddhists are human too, while the Buddha is not. Buddhists are also caught up in the samsaric cosmos, with only the Dharma as their guide. However, for these people trying to navigate through life, the Dharma is what they have chosen to live by. Likewise, we can see today that the United States is an internationally disliked - often hated - country. How did the self-proclaimed moral guardian of the world turn out this way? It is not because of its political ideals - namely democracy, which is a noble enough notion - but because of those in power. This is straying into the realm of politics, however, so I shall leave it at this for now.

I think we can safely say should one write a book about the 100 most compassionate people of the world, the Buddha would most certainly be among the top five.