Justice as Fairness (John Rawls) and Justice as Sadaya Hrdaya Darsana (Bhagavan Buddha)

Abstract

John Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness is very popular. If in our society the concept of justice is to apply, then the brain of Rawls should be supplemented by the heart of Buddha. So we have preferred to discuss the two conceptions of justice-justice as fairness and justice of the sadaya hçdaya (kind heart). Rawls turned to the liberal and democratic social contract tradition built up by Locke, Rousseau and Kant. The doctrine of social contract says that laws can be called ‘just’ when they could be admitted by free persons from a position of equal right. This argument had the consequence that, to be just, laws must benefit not simply a majority but everyone, arranging for common good. Rawls assumes an ‘original position’ in the state of nature of an individual. In this position men live in a ‘veil of ignorance’. This ‘original position’ is related to an individual of any caste or class of a society. Fair distribution of natural assets, wealth etc. is possible behind a ‘veil of ignorance’, that is, in ‘original position’ and nobody will be deprived of by this system. Rawls’s principle of justice are applicable to all persons of the world. On the other hand, Buddha also arranged for justice of the persons of a casteless and classless society i.e., Sangha. The principles of justice advocated by Buddha are applicable to the members of a Sangha or to all i.e. non-humans also-nature and animals. Buddha framed rules for democracy and he cancelled, like Sri Caitanyadeva, caste-distinction between man and man and he struggled for their equality and achieved social justice in the framework of his Sangha.