Buddhism and Modernity [4] 9789553118219

Table of contents :
1. Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical Survey ............................ 1
2. Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: 1948-1998 .................. 37
3. Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two Buddha
Jayantis (2500–2550) and Beyond........................................... 57
4. Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future......................... 79
5. Emerging New Trends in Buddhism and Their Doctrinal
and Organizational Implications ............................................. 90
6. Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge of
Remaining Relevant: Buddhism in Sri Lanka Examined ..... 111
7. Globalization and Religion in Asia: Is Religion an Equal
Competitor?............................................................................ 131
8. Buddhism and Gender: A Textual and Contextual Study.... 148
9. Religious Ethics and the New World Order: A Buddhist
Critique and Reconstruction................................................. 168
10. The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Ethnic
Conflict in Sri Lanka .............................................................. 183
11. Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions in Sri Lanka:
Doctrinal Position and Role of Buddhism............................ 202
12. Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization on
Buddhism: A Study of Contemporary Sinhala Buddhism
in Sri Lanka............................................................................. 213
13. Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu: the Challenge of
the Future ............................................................................... 234
14. Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera: A Quest
for the Ideal Theravada Bhikkhu ........................................... 243
15. Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of a Global
Buddhism ............................................................................... 260
16. Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and
the Buddhist World ................................................................ 274
17. Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years: Continuing the Journey...... 279
18. Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka: 1972-1997..... 312
19. Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and Madihe
Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera: Their Contribution to
the Buddhasasana ................................................................... 348

Citation preview

Collected Papers : Asanga Tilakaratne Volume IV

Buddhism and Modernity

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in a review Sarasavi Publishers (Pvt) Ltd: [email protected] Collected Papers : Asanga Tilakaratne, Vol IV - Buddhism and Modernity First Print 2020 © Asanga Tilakaratne ISBN: 978-955-31-1821-9 Introduction Anne M. Blackburn Editors Raluwe Padmasiri Thera and Wimal Hewamanage Book and Cover Design by Bertram G. Liyanage Printed by Sarasavi Publishers (Pvt) Ltd No - 601, Athurugiriya Road, Malabe Published by Sarasavi Publishers (Pvt) Ltd No - 23, Ekanayaka Mawatha, Nugegoda www.sarasavi.lk and Sri Lanka Association of Buddhist Studies

COLLECTED PAPERS : ASANGA TILAKARATNE Volume IV

Buddhism and Modernity

Introduction Anne M. Blackburn

Editors Raluwe Padmasiri Thera Wimal Hewamanage Editorial Assistant Thich Nu Khanh Nang Bhikṣuṇi

2020

SRI LANKA ASSOCIATION OF BUDDHIST STUDIES

COLLECTED PAPERS : ASANGA TILAKARATNE Volume I - Buddhist Philosophy Volume II - Buddhist Ethics Volume III - Theravada Studies Volume IV - Buddhism and Modernity Volume V - Inter-Religious Understanding Editorial Board Prof. Raluwe Padmasiri Thera, MA. Prof. Miriswaththe Wimalagnana Thera, MPhil. Wimal Hewamanage, PhD. D. Denzil Senadheera, PhD. Ashoka Welitota, PhD. Bertram G. Liyanage, MA. Sheila Fernando, PhD.

Editorial Assistants Thich Nu Khanh Nang Bhikṣuṇi, PhD. Sewwandi Marasinghe, MA. Nuwanthika Ariyadasa, MA.

Contents Editorial Note ................................................................................. vii Acknowledgements .......................................................................... x Introduction .................................................................................. xiii 1. Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical Survey ............................ 1 2. Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: 1948-1998 .................. 37 3. Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two Buddha Jayantis (2500–2550) and Beyond........................................... 57 4. Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future......................... 79 5. Emerging New Trends in Buddhism and Their Doctrinal and Organizational Implications ............................................. 90 6. Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge of Remaining Relevant: Buddhism in Sri Lanka Examined ..... 111 7. Globalization and Religion in Asia: Is Religion an Equal Competitor?............................................................................ 131 8. Buddhism and Gender: A Textual and Contextual Study.... 148 9. Religious Ethics and the New World Order: A Buddhist Critique and Reconstruction................................................. 168 10. The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka .............................................................. 183 11. Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions in Sri Lanka: Doctrinal Position and Role of Buddhism............................ 202 12. Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization on Buddhism: A Study of Contemporary Sinhala Buddhism in Sri Lanka............................................................................. 213 13. Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu: the Challenge of the Future ............................................................................... 234

vi

14. Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera: A Quest for the Ideal Theravada Bhikkhu ........................................... 243 15. Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of a Global Buddhism ............................................................................... 260 16. Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World ................................................................ 274 17. Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years: Continuing the Journey...... 279 18. Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka: 1972-1997..... 312 19. Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera: Their Contribution to the Buddhasasana ................................................................... 348 20. The Heritage of the Bhikkhu................................................. 362 Primary Sources and Abbreviations ............................................ 366 Secondary Sources and Translations............................................ 370 Index of Subjects .......................................................................... 378 Index of Proper Names ................................................................ 387 Asanga Tilakaratne....................................................................... 394 Editorial Board.............................................................................. 396

Editorial Note

Professor Asanga Tilakaratne, who has followed the footprints of such eminent modern interpreters of Buddhism as KN Jayatilleke and David J Kalupahana, has played a prominent role in the field of Buddhist studies in Sri Lanka. The idea about this whole project of compiling the academic papers of Professor Tilakaratne emerged at a casual discussion among a group of us at the occasion of his retirement in 2018 from the university service as the senior chair professor of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Colombo. As a tribute to his services to the field of Buddhist Studies, we decided to edit and compile his papers scattered in various journals and books. At first, we presumed that the collection would run into a few volumes only. But to the amazement of us and the author himself it far exceeded our initial calculations, now the whole series running into eight volumes altogether, three in Sinhala and five in English. The five volumes in English are Buddhist Philosophy, Buddhist Ethics, Theravada Studies, Buddhism and Modernity and Inter-Religious Understanding. Turning to the scholarship represented by Professor Tilakaratne, he rightly marks a transition from the traditional to the modern Buddhist studies, exhibiting in the course of his academic career expertise in both aspects. On the one hand, there are the traditional Buddhist studies continuing more than two millennia in this country celebrating the expertise in the Pali textual tradition, which Professor Tilakaratne mastered at Buddhashravaka Dharamapethaya, Anuradhapura. On the other hand, there is the modern Buddhist academic tradition pioneered by such eminent savants as GP Malalasekera and continued by numerous scholars such as Jayatilleke and Kalupahana who interpreted the teaching of the Buddha in the light of western analytical and empirical philosophical thought, which Professor Tilakaratne inherited first at

viii

University of Peradeniya and subsequently at University of Hawaii. Although Prof. Tilakaratne has his professional academic training in the Buddhist philosophy of language and philosophy of religion his wideranging interests and the needs of the Buddhist academic field in the country have made him venture into many aspects of Buddhist studies as this multi-volume collection would testify. This has indeed made the task of the editors pretty challenging. We sincerely thank, therefore, Professor Tilakaratne for trusting us to handle this task and supporting us all the way through. Our editorial function was mainly confined to three aspects of these collected articles. With the consent of the author, first, we updated some facts where they were necessary. In most cases, following our suggestions, the author himself came up with innovative ideas to revise them with new materials. Secondly, we highlighted instances that we felt needed clarifying which, again the author was kind to comply with us. Lastly, in order to fit the individual papers to a collected whole, we removed from some papers particulars unique to specific contexts (excepting book reviews). Since the articles appearing in any particular volume are not written in regular order, we did not see a point in arranging them chronologically. Since overlapping of some information is unavoidable in a collection of this nature, we have only managed to remove some such repetitions with the least possible damage to the order and the content. We must, nevertheless, confess that we opted to leave some such recurrences untouched due to the structure of the given article. At the beginning of each article, we have mentioned the original publication in a footnote, which refers only to the first version of the corresponding article. Almost all papers in these collections are revised versions of these originals. Where there is not any remark about the first publication, the paper is either a fresh one written especially for the collection or a revision of an earlier article with a good amount of new materials. A marginal note is due here on the usage of diacritical marks and the citation style. Some of the Buddhist terms such as nirvana, karma, samsara are familiar to all English readers and hence we have treated them as ordinary English words. When it comes to proper nouns, particularly personal names, the author’s preference was to leave well-known names like Ananda, Sariputta, Mahakassapa without diacritical marks, expecting that the reader would find no difficulty of pronouncing them. If the given name sounds unfamiliar to the English tongue, we have inserted the diacritics (e.g. Vaṭṭagāmiṇi, Koṇḍañña). For the secondary sources, we followed the Chicago style in citing references. For the primary

ix

sources, we have developed a consistent method catering to the actual editorial requirements. Moreover, we have to concede that we ignored spelling variations, British or American, insofar as they did not interfere with the comprehension of the content. Whenever spelling variation of a word appears critical to its meaning, we have rightly corrected it. In the course of this work, we have incurred many intellectual and emotional debts paying back for which our words will never be adequate. In addition to those kind-hearted individuals mentioned in the acknowledgement note of each volume, we must acknowledge sincerely and gratefully some individuals for their guidance, support, and assistance to the overall project. Of course, first comes Professor Asanga Tillakaratne, who entrusted this task on us without any hesitation. We are grateful to all editors and publishers of all original articles. We, nevertheless, regret our inability to take permission from individual editors and publishers. Since each volume represents a specific area of Buddhist studies, we invited five scholars to write introductory essays for the five volumes. We sincerely thank those distinguished scholars, Damien Keown, Rupert Gethin, Anne Blackburn, Abraham Velez and Ven. Soorakkulame Pemaratana, for their valuable contribution to the project. Our sincere thanks are due to Mr HD Premasiri, Chairman of Sarasavi Bookshop [Pvt] Ltd, Mr Chandu Haputhanthri, its Managing Director, and Mr Sripali Perera, its Publishing Manager, who undertook the substantial task of producing and publishing this series of volumes. In this context, we cannot fail to mention the Most Venerable Bellanwila Dhammaratana Mahathera, the chief incumbent of Bellanwila Rajamaha Viharaya from whose magnanimity this project has gained much. A bulk of the editorial work was done at Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya. We owe a great debt of appreciation to its academic and non-academic members, for their kind cooperation and understanding. Madihe Sugatasiri Thera of the academic staff of the University of Colombo deserves our thanks for his initiative to collecting and making copies of the papers to be edited. Finally, in his retirement, we wish Professor Asanga Tilakaratne, who has devoted more than 40 years of his academic carrier for the field of Buddhist studies, longevity, good health and happiness! Editors 2020

Acknowledgements

Buddhism and Modernity is the 4th in the series of English medium volumes titled ‘Collected Papers: Asanga Tilakaratne,’ which is an outcome of the efforts of many dedicated people. Professor Asanga Tilakaratne deserves much thanks for permitting us to edit and republish some of his well-argued academic articles produced in different stages of his academic career. These articles address many complexities pertinent to some dire predicaments Buddhism faced in recent years; somehow, they seem not to be pursued by scholars of Buddhist modernity as closely as Professor Tilakaratne has done. These articles, moreover, underscore some of the creative, pioneering and far-sighted steps taken by modern Buddhists to alleviate these challenges. We invited Professor Anne M. Blackburn of Cornell University, a distinguished scholar in Buddhist modernity, to write the introduction to this collection. With a deep sense of gratitude we thank her for willingly accepting our invitation and writing a comprehensive introduction. We appreciate and acknowledge following colleagues and friends of ours for their valuable contribution to accomplish some assumed tasks: Dr. TMWP Tennakoon for reading the collection to improve language style and to correct typographical mistakes; Bhikshuni Thich Nu Nang, the editorial assistant, for her live contribution whenever required irrespective of the fact that she stayed far away from Sri Lanka; Ms. Nuwantika Ariyadasa for assisting indexing articles; and Ms Sewwandi Marasinghe, Ms. Nuwantika Ariyadasa, Ms. Thanuja Dilrukshi for finding and completing some missing and incomplete primary and secondary sources. The Library staff, and Mr. Mahesh Seneviratne, Mr. Sadis Kumar and all others from the non-academic staff of Postgraduate

xi

Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, and Ms. RWSN Sanari, Ms. KLM Hansani, Ms. DS Mekhala, trainee computer assistants, assisted us in numerous ways. We sincerely thank all these good people for their contribution to complete this project smoothly. Moreover, we are thankful to our editorial board for being true partners to this rewarding project. Finally, we wish Professor Tilakaratne good health and longevity for the continuation of his academic service for the benefit of the future generations. Raluwe Padmasiri Wimal Hewamanage

Introduction Anne M. Blackburn Professor of South-Asian Studies and Buddhist Studies Department of Asian Studies Cornell University

This collection of essays by Professor Asanga Tilakaratne is a timely and welcome addition to scholarship on Buddhism in Sri Lanka and, more widely, on the study of Buddhism in relation to modernity. Tilakaratne, Sri Lanka’s leading scholar of Buddhism, is rightly well known for his many contributions to research and teaching on historical and contemporary Buddhism. As Director of the Post-graduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, Prof. Tilakaratne fostered an important and internationally recognized location for the training of scholars in Buddhist languages, literature, philosophy, history, and sociology. Subsequently, Asanga Tilakaratne’s establishment of the MA degree program in Buddhist Studies at the University of Colombo was another central and welcome contribution to Sri Lanka’s Buddhist Studies scene, with a syllabus remarkable for its skillful use of readings drawn from multiple sub-fields within Buddhist Studies. Throughout Prof. Tilakaratne’s career, his work has been distinguished by its inter-disciplinarity and temporal breadth. While very much at home in studies of “Early Buddhism,” foundational Pāli textual materials, etc., Tilakaratne has distinguished himself through his strong interest in later histories of Sri Lankan and global Buddhism. Moreover, Tilakaratne is unrivaled in Sri Lanka among Buddhist Studies scholars for his wide ranging methodology. Many of his presentations and publications draw on a combination of history, philosophy, sociology, and anthropology, along with the close examination of Buddhist texts. Such inter-disciplinarity is relatively rare within the field of Buddhist Studies as followed in Sri Lanka, where scholars have often tended to focus primarily on close study of tipiṭaka and early commentarial materials from a doctrinal/philosophical and philological perspectives.

xiv

Anne M Blackburn

Moreover, owing to reading in such wide-ranging areas, and to and his intellectual creativity, Prof. Asanga Tilakaratne has served as an important intellectual bridge between Buddhist Studies as taught and researched in Sri Lanka and in other locations. His contributions have helped to ensure that Sri Lankan students and scholars of Buddhism both contribute to and benefit from advances in the study of Buddhism occurring elsewhere. The essays collected in this volume are ample witness to Prof. Tilakaratne’s reflectiveness, intellectual dedication, and concerns about the future of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. They manifest at least three aspects of Tilakaratne’s intellectual oeuvre: his drive to consider modern and contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhist phenomena among wider comparative and global developments in the Buddhist world, a commitment to study of the 19th- and 20th- century histories of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, and an interest we might call normative. In this last aspect of his work, Tilakaratne draws on the intellectual investigation of Buddhist histories and texts in order to make both explicit and implicit recommendations about the future character of Buddhism and Buddhist practice in Sri Lanka. Although I discuss these three aspects separately below in relation to examples from this volume of Prof. Tilakaratne’s collected papers, it is important to emphasize that in actuality many of these papers reflect two or three of these aspects combined together. It is a hallmark of Asanga Tilakaratne’s work that he moves fluidly between studies of Sri Lanka and studies of wider global Buddhism, and that he often links the history of colonial and post-colonial (modern) Buddhism to his reflections on needs and problems in contemporary Sri Lankan society.

Modern Sri Lankan Buddhism in Comparative and Global Contexts These collected papers underscore Asanga Tilakaratne’s interest in identifying themes characteristic of twentieth - and twenty-first century Buddhism in global contexts, and relating to them modern and contemporary Buddhist developments occurring in Sri Lanka. Tilakaratne identifies one of these key themes in twentieth- and twentyfirst-century Buddhism as what he calls “trans-yanic Buddhism,” a global movement towards Buddhist thought, practice, and institutional action that involves crossing the borders of Theravāda, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna Buddhism. For instance, as Tilakaratne puts it in

Introduction

xv

Chapter 3, “Today globalization…has enhanced physical proximity and communication among different schools of Buddhist monks in an unprecedented manner…. It is customary today to hear a Mahayana or a Vajrayana teacher referring to Pali Canon and a Theravada teacher narrating a Zen Buddhist story or quoting from Mahayana or Vajrayana texts (Chap. 5; 91). Tilakaratne rightly observes that these trans-yanic activities are distinctive from earlier forms of united saṅgha activities visible in historical Sri Lanka. Whereas in the past Lankan monastics sometimes collaborated across nikāyas, vihāras, and āyatanas (or across sub-divisions within a single nikāya), trans-yanic Buddhism reveals that: “When the three traditions come together they do some as unique groups maintaining their identity, but tend to work together upholding commonalities at a higher level” (Chap. 5; 106) It is not surprising that trans-yanic Buddhist activities respond to what we might consider the most urgent social problems of our day. Thus, for instance, as Prof. Tilakaratne points out, Buddhists are active across the boundaries of Theravāda, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna traditions in order to address questions of Buddhism’s relation to the environment (“EcoBuddhism”), social inequality (“Socially Engaged Buddhism”), and gender. Much has been written about the reintroduction of bhikkhunī ordination in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia but most scholars have focused on this topic by foregrounding questions of feminism or Vinaya studies. Strikingly, Asanga Tilakaratne uses the bhikkhunī ordination movement itself as an example of trans-yanic Buddhism. As Tilakarante puts it in Chapter Five of this volume: “The very reintroduction of bhikkhunī upasampadā… (p. 99-100) to Sri Lanka is an example for the emerging trans-yanic Buddhism. … The recent reintroduction of bhikkhunī order to Sri Lanka was made possible when the prospective candidates first received higher ordination (upasampadā) from Korean Mahayana bhikkhunī tradition and subsequently received the same from (a group of) the Sri Lankan Sangha as the traditional Vinaya requires…. Strictly speaking the present bhikkhunī organization in Sri Lanka, which was a joint effort by both Mahayana Bhikṣhunis and Theravada bhikkhus is both Mahayanic and Theravadin. … This is a clear case of two different Buddhist traditions accepting the validity of each other while maintaining their own identities” (Chap. 5; 99-100). Tilakaratne’s interest in pressing problems facing contemporary Buddhists is by no means limited to the trans-yanic dimension of modern Buddhist activities. As exemplified by the papers collected here, he

xvi

Anne M Blackburn

joins other twentieth and twenty-first-century interpreters of Buddhist tradition, looking for ways to apply early Buddhist philosophical principles to more recent challenges such as the environmental crisis. In Chapter Three, for instance, we see Tilakaratne applying the foundational Buddhist teaching of co-dependent origination to questions of environmental sustainability and social justice. “If we understand the entire universe including its many varieties of beings as an inter-dependent whole the question of one having precedence over another will not arise. Neither would arise the need for self-sacrifice for the sake of nature. In other words, the Buddhist care for nature and ecology is not unconditional altruism” (Chap. 5; 108). The distinction from “unconditional altruism” shows Asanga Tilakratne’s engagement with wider ethical discourse among contemporary Buddhist interpreters. Ethicists seeking to apply Buddhist teachings to contemporary problems including environmental sustainability, climate change, etc. make use of varied philosophical frameworks. In the above quotation, Tilakaratne re-orients the debate using a particular Buddhist conceptual tool.

Colonial and Post-colonial Histories of Buddhism in Sri Lanka The papers gathered below investigate the colonial and post-colonial histories of Buddhism in Sri Lanka through a number of different foci. This includes analysis of the bhikkhunī ordination movement referred to above, as well as analytical biographical discussions of leading Sri Lankan Buddhist monks, documentation and analysis of changes in the ritual and teaching practices of modern and contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhists, and commentary on the changing relationships between Buddhist institutions and the colonial, and then independent, island polity. Chapter 12, for instance, “Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization on Buddhism: A study of Contemporary Sinhala Buddhism in Sri Lanka” can be profitably read together with Buddhism Transformed: Religious Change in Sri Lanka, authored by Richard Gombrich and Gananath Obeyesekere (Princeton University Press, 1988). In his essay, Asanga Tilakaratne describes new forms of Buddhist practice – pūjā, sermon styles, forms of Buddhist teaching for youths, etc. – in contemporary Sri Lanka, analyzing them in terms of a particular social context he understands as shaped by the effects of war, globalization, and economic experiences, effects which have created

Introduction

xvii

challenging human conditions including uncertainty, insecurity, fear, frustration, alienation, and a sense of hopelessness. In this chapter Tilakaratne explores innovations by monks such as Gangodawila Soma Thera and Kiribatgoda Nanananda Thera, as well as lay Buddhist organizations. Chapters 14 and 20 are studies of Ven. Walpola Sri Rahula, while Chapters 16 and 15 examine the Anagarika Dharmapala. In my view, Chapter 19, “Pelene Siri Vajiranana Thera and Madihe Pannasiha Thera: Their Contributions to the Buddhasasana,” is a particularly important contribution. In the study of modern and contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhism there are still far too view sustained examinations of leading Buddhist monks. Developing a robust intellectual history of Sri Lankan Buddhism requires that we investigate the conceptual worlds and intellectual positions taken by monastic as well as non-monastic scholars. We need to see how a scholar’s intellectual output can be analyzed in relation to the forms of institutional affiliation and action undertaken by that person. Moreover, in the wider field of Buddhist Studies, very few Sri Lankan Buddhist intellectuals are recognized as contributors to global modern and contemporary Buddhist histories and institutional developments, precisely because so few have received academic treatments in English, though many have been the focus of valuable discussion in Sinhala-language books and articles. Prof. Tilakaratne’s chapters on Walpola Rahula, Anagarika Dharmapala, Pelene Sri Vajirajnana, and Madihe Pannasihe are thus a very welcome addition to the small body of Anglophone studies of modern and contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhist thinkers (e.g. Sarath Amanugama, The Lion’s Roar, Vijitha Yapa 2016; Anne M. Blackburn, Locations of Buddhism, University of Chicago Press 2010; Steven Kemper, Anagarika Dharmapala, University of Chicago Press, 2015; H.L. Seneviratne, The Work of Kings, University of Chicago Press, 1999).

Normative Recommendations for Sri Lankan Society and Buddhism In the essays collected here, we see Asanga Tilakaratne writing not only as an academic scholar and teacher of Buddhism, but also as a Buddhist reflecting deeply on what he sees as challenges facing contemporary Sri Lankan society and the role of Buddhist ideas, monastics, and institutions in this society. This aspect of Prof. Tilakaratne’s work is particularly evident in Chapters 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 17, but reflected

xviii

Anne M Blackburn

in earlier chapters also. These chapters address many interesting and important topics. While readers may not always agree with Tilakaratne on a particular topic or recommendation, it should be possible to recognize the depth of his concern for the matters under discussion, as well as the reflectiveness with which he develops his positions. Chapter 6, “Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge of Remaining Relevant: Buddhism in Sri Lanka Examined,” contains the following passage that well illustrates the complexity of Asanga Tilakaratne’s thinking about one of the most challenging questions for twentieth- and twenty-first-century Sri Lanka (and indeed other Buddhist communities): is it appropriate for Buddhist monastics to espouse or support violence, including acts of war? Tilakaratne writes: “In order to understand the position of the Buddhist monks regarding Sri Lanka, Buddhism, and the Sinhala community we need to understand how their religious and national consciousness developed out of historical circumstances… Although those monks who supported war against terrorism may have been less than the ideal Buddhist monks in a situation in which the survival of one’s own religious and cultural tradition was at stake dispassionate inaction would have proved fatal. Judging by the context dependent and culturally involved character of the Sinhala Buddhist monk it is hard to imagine that they would have behaved differently” (Chap. 6; 124). While I do not myself agree that “the survival of one’s own religious and cultural tradition was at stake” in the Sri Lankan wartime context to which Tilakaratne refers, this quotation from Prof. Tilakaratne provides an excellent example of the ways in which Tilakaratne’s historical and sociological analytical interests engage with some of the most fraught topics of modern and contemporary Sri Lanka. In his view, “the context dependent and culturally involved character of the Sinhala Buddhist monk” makes it possible to understand analytically the choices made by some Buddhist monks to support the war, whether or not one agrees with the choices made by such monks. Moreover, moving in an intriguing and somewhat unexpected direction, Tilakaratne goes on to make the following point about the missed opportunity to expand the Buddhasāsana in Sri Lanka to include Tamil persons as well as Sinhala persons. Drawing on the Buddhist concept of anicca, or impermanence in an interesting manner, Tilakaratne continues the last quotation with the following words:

Introduction

xix

“Having said this I would further argue that historical consciousnesses themselves are impermanent… and those (consciousnesses) do not have to remain unchanged or unchallenged. Although historically the Sinhala community has been the protectors of Buddhism there is nothing intrinsic about them to be so; the Tamils equally could be the protectors of Buddhism had they been approached by the Buddhist monks. If there is no Tamil Buddhist community in Sri Lanka the primary responsibility has to be borne by the monks themselves for this deficiency” (Chap. 6; 124, 125). In Chapter 11, “Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions in Sri Lanka: Doctrinal Position and Role of Buddhism,” which again takes up questions related to Buddhism and violence, Tilakaratne again appears to advocate an historical analysis as the context for interpreting twentiethcentury monastic activities, suggesting that the viewpoints of some saṅgha members relating to use of violence, etc. have not yet been adequately analyzed. In Tilakaratne’s words, “[t]he scholars who have studied the role of Buddhism seem to under value the historical background which shaped the attitude of the Buddhist Sangha in the country” (Chap. 11; 210). To this point I would add that we still lack a robust intellectual history of 20th- and 21st-century Sri Lanka, the kind of history that would help us to understand the conceptual inheritance and interpretive frameworks of diverse Buddhist thinkers and thus the position they took on a range of political questions in Sri Lanka and also globally. Yet, even while suggesting in the passage above that monastic advocacy of, or assent to, violence might be intelligible in historical context, he goes on to explicitly question more recent violent acts by members of the saṅgha. Referring to what he calls “the misguided contemporary activism of some bhikkhus in Sri Lanka,” Tilakaratne writes: “This is basically a post-victory development among some members of the Sangha, who seem to think that they have the liberty to use their physical power to vanquish what they perceive as ‘threats’ to Buddhism. This is not to deny that there are threats to Buddhism in this country. But the crucial issue is: whether it is possible to protect a religion by violating its own precepts? Buddhism is a religion with a rich philosophical thoughts which enables one to formulate a system of resolving conflict without resorting to sheer physical force. One does not need a sophisticated religious system of the nature of Buddhism to follow the path of physical force” (Chap. 11; 213).

xx

Anne M Blackburn

This final sentence should be thought-provoking for many Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism around the world. Another area of considerable reflection by Tilakaratne is the organization and administration of the Sri Lankan saṅgha. This topic is central to Chapters 1, 2, and 3 of the present volume, though it emerges in the context of wider historical treatments of colonial and post-colonial Sri Lanka. In sections of these chapters, Tilakaratne explores aspects of the history of saṅgha organization in the first generation after Gotaman Buddha’s death using this as a springboard to reflect on challenges posed by the radically decentralized character of modern and contemporary Sri Lankan monastic life. For instance, Tilakaratne argues that the unsettled matter of bhikhhunī ordination is due in part to the absence of a central saṅgha authority on the island, since there is no body with the definitive authority to determine whether such ordination should be held as valid within the island’s entire monastic community. As Asanga Tilakaratne notes, “[t]his is different from the South-east Asia Theravada tradition in which the concept of one supreme head of the Sangha is still functional” (Chap. 1; 32 see also Chap. 2). Of course, as some observers of the Burmese and Thai Buddhist and political scenes might readily observe, there is no guarantee that a central saṅgha authority would be untainted by financial and/or political corruption, or that it would support the diffusion of economic resources across sectors of the saṅgha and wider Buddhist society. On this topic, as on so many others, Tilakaratne’s position is thought-provoking: “One fundamental measure still needing to be stressed is the crucial necessity of restoring the original sanghika system among the Sangha. It is very clear that there is a problem of distribution of wealth among the Sangha. While some monasteries and the individual members of the Sangha seem to have surplus wealth there are many other monasteries and monks suffering from serious economic deficiencies” (Chap. 3; 76). The chapters collected in this volume indicate Asanga Tilakaratne’s conviction that the Buddhist tradition contains ideas that can continue to make a positive impact in the contemporary world, and that he values serious deliberation about how Buddhist ideas and persons can – or in his view should – contribute to the major problems of our day, including not only violence, but environmental degradation, social inequality, etc. In Chapter 7, “Globalization and Religion in Asia: Is Religion an Equal Competitor?,” Tilakaratne states: “I see two important areas where the impact of globalization on religion has to be assessed, namely how religions have adapted or

Introduction

xxi

not adapted themselves to globalization and how religions need to redefine their role as a viable factor in human individual and social behavior in the 21st century” (Chap. 7; 133). Other essays too reveal Asanga Tilakaratne’s strong interest in the question of how religious traditions and religious personnel could, and should, retain a significant role in contemporary social environments. Chapter 13, “Redefining the Role of the bhikkhu: the Challenge of the Future,” addresses this in intriguing ways, arguing against the idea that redefining the monastic role in terms of social service will secure the ongoing importance of Buddhist monastics to social life. Tilakaratne writes: “A religion which thrives on social service does not have a future as a religion. … The unique role of religion is to provide a rationale for the ethical and moral life of people. In other words, a religion needs to contain a rational analysis of human predicament and a satisfactory solution to it. I do not mean the existence of this aspect theoretically; but I mean that the adherents of a Religion are truly convinced of it” (Chap. 13; 243). This perspective would be of interest not only in comparative discussions of ideal monastic and clerical roles among Buddhists and Christians, but also in intra-Buddhist conversations about the most desirable approach to Buddhist monasticism for the 21st century, since some forms of Buddhist organization, including in Taiwan, have moved strongly in the direction of combining monasticism and social service (e.g. see C. Julia Huang, Charisma and Compassion, Harvard University Press, 2009). In response to the complex and demanding world we now inhabit, Asanga Tilakaratne advocates thoughtful and ongoing discussion about how Buddhist traditions should be interpreted to address our current scenarios. I close this Introduction with Prof. Asanga Tilakaratne’s own words, taken from Chapter 5, “Emerging new trends”: “New situations force us to look for new solutions. As far as Buddhism is concerned, the new solutions needed may not be really new. What is needed is creativity and innovation in order to adapt the ancient teachings to contemporary situations. There is an extensive discussion on these issues, particularly on engaged Buddhism and Buddhist environmentalism, in the West. Nothing comparable is seen in traditional Buddhist societies. What is important, on the part of those who are in the traditional Buddhist societies serious about the applicability of the teaching of the Buddha to current social problems, is to have continuous discussion on these issues, rather than letting things happen on their own” (Chap. 5; 109).

1. Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical Survey*

Introduction Sri Lanka has been traditionally considered a stronghold of Theravada Buddhism. Since its first official introduction to Sri Lanka in the third century bce, Buddhism has remained the leading religious tradition of the people of the country although at times this historical position was threatened by political and ideological forces coming from outside. The history of the island is inseparable from the history of Buddhism, and Buddhism has been the defining factor of the culture of Sinhala society in particular and of the entire Sri Lankan society in general. A study of Buddhism of Sri Lanka forms an important aspect in the study of world Buddhism for the reason that it is in this country that Theravada Buddhism reached maturity and evolved its own ideology in spite of the fact that Theravada started in India immediately after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha. Ever since the Theravada tradition1 was established in Sri Lanka in the third century bce, we do not hear much about its Indian counterpart. Although there is sporadic evidence to the existence of the Theravada tradition in India over the next seven to eight centuries, the arrival of Buddhaghosa, the great commentator who translated Sinhala commentaries into Pali in the fifth century ce, 1 Although the term ‘theravada’ occurs in the discourses, exactly when it was used to refer to the Sangha organization is a matter of debate among the scholars. See Skilling et al (2012) for details.With reference to its doctrinal position the Theravada tradition has also been named “vibhajja-vāda” or the doctrine of analysis. Read for a discussion: Karunadasa 1983, l ff * “Buddhism in Sri Lanka” (With Nabirittankadawara Gnanaratana Thera, and Sanath Nanayakkara) in 2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening, Colombo: The Government of Sri Lanka, 2012.

2

Asanga Tilakaratne

suggests that Sri Lanka, which was more often known as the “Island of the Sinhalas” (Sīhala-dīpa), had become the centre of the Theravada tradition. The great monastic centre of Anuradhapura, Maha-vihara, had become by this time the leading Theravada monastic centre for the entire Buddhist world. As we will see in the course of this essay, the Sri Lankan school of Theravada tradition played a crucial role in determining the character of the same school in the South-east Asia region. Consequently, a study of Buddhism in Sri Lanka is essentially a study of the evolution of the Theravada school. In this essay we will discuss the arrival and the spread of Buddhism in the island, and its current situation. As the context for this discussion, we will review briefly the evidence to the existence of various other religious beliefs and practices prevalent at this very early stage of the history of the island. We will move on to outline the key events and the developments in the history of Sri Lankan Buddhism from the Anuradhapura period2 to the time of the arrival of Europeans and their religion, Christianity, in the early sixteenth century (1505 ce). The nearly four and half centuries of Western colonialism starting in the sixteenth century and continuing till the middle of the twentieth century constitute a decisive period in Sri Lankan Buddhism. The last part of the discussion will be focused on the post-independent period up to the present. The discussion will be concluded with an assessment of the state of Buddhism in Sri Lanka both in its local and global contexts.

Introduction of Buddhism to Sri Lanka Buddhism reached Sri Lanka in the third century bce, during the reign of King Devanampiyatissa, a contemporary of King Asoka (third century bce) in India. The latter patronized what Buddhist history records to be the third saṅgāyanā (council). The Mahāvaṃsa (“great chronicle”), the key historical source3 of Sri Lankan Theravada tradition written by a 2 The periods in the history of Sri Lanka are counted following the capital cities where the kings usually had their seat of administration. What follows are the periods/capitals (some of which coincide with others) recognized in Sri Lanka history: Anuradhapura (fourth century bce- 1029), Polonnaruwa (1054-1236), Dambadeniya (1215-1272), Yapahuwa (1272-1300), Kurunegala (1300-1341), Gampola (1341- 1451), Korte (1371-1597), Sitawaka (1521-1594), Mahanuwara (1591-1815). Ever since the British take-over, Colombo has remained the capital city. 3  The information on the early history of Sri Lanka is found mainly (but not exclusively, for other sources such as inscriptions, archaeological monuments etc., are not mentioned here) in the literary sources written in the Pali language. There is evidence to believe that such infomation was originally kept in the Sinhala language and

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

3

Maha-vihara monk named Mahanama in the sixth century ce, says that after this saṅgāyanā the messengers of the Dhamma (Dhammadūta) were dispatched to nine different regions within and outside India. Sri Lanka, or the “Island of the Sinhalas” (Sīhala dīpa),4 is one among these nine regions/countries to receive Buddhism. According to the Mahāvaṃsa, arahant Mahinda, a son of Asoka, came to the island with a group of fellow missionaries. Archaeologists have shown that there is reliable inscriptional evidence to establish the historicity of this event. Although this particular event is described as the first-ever introduction of Buddhism to the country, many historians believe that Mahinda’s arrival was only the official introduction of Buddhism, and that it is very likely that people knew about Buddhism earlier. The was later edited and translated into Pali as they are available presently. Subsequently, these works have been re-translated into Sinhala from the Pali sources. The Pali commentaries for the three baskets, Sutta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma, were finalised in Sri Lanka by Buddhaghosa, and they contain valuable information on the history of Buddhism in the island. The ancient and medieval Sinhala literature dealing basically with Buddhist religious themes may also be included in the same category. Apart from these ‘indirect’ sources (providing historical information was not their main purpose), there is what may be called “lineage stories” (chronicles) (vaṃsa-kathā) the direct purpose of which was to record the history. These vaṃsa-kathās are of two types: those that deal with the history of Buddhism and the country directly and those that deal with the history of particular sacred objects such as the Bodhi tree, the tooth relic, the great stūpa etc. Falling in the first category are the Dīpavaṃsa (“lineage of the island”) and the Mahāvaṃsa (“the great lineage”).The period covered by both books is the same, namely from the beginning to the conclusion of the reign of King Sirimeghavanna (301-328).The author of the Dīpavaṃsa is not known. It is believed that the Mahāvaṃsa, which was written in the fifth century, was meant to replace the former which is less organized and repetitive at times. The tradition of the Mahāvaṃsa was continued by subsequent authors: the second part covers the history up to Great Parakramabahu I of the Polonnaruwa period, the third up to Parakramabahu IV in the Kurunegala period, the fourth up to Kirti Sri Rajasimha of the Kandy period, and the fifth covering up to the British period. Updating the Mahāvaṃsa has been an on­going process up to the present. In addition, there are many chronicle s dealing with the history of sacred Buddhist objects such as the Bodhi tree, the tooth relic, the great stupa, etc., which provide valuable historical information not only of those particular objects but also on the history of the island and Buddhism in general. Apart from these works there are works such as Nikāya-sangrahaya and Rājāvaliya, belonging to the medieval period and written in Sinhala, which serve as valuable sources for the study of the history of Buddhism in the country. 4  The island was also known as tambapaṇṇi-dīpa (“the island of copper palm”) in ancient literature. This usage alludes to the existence of copper­coloured beaches in some parts of the island.

4

Asanga Tilakaratne

fact that the Mahāvaṃsa mentions the presence of many religious beliefs in pre­Buddhist Sri Lanka, including certain Indian religions, is taken as evidence supportive of this belief. Among such religions, in addition to the various guardian deities of hunters, smiths etc., there are references to Brahmins, Ajivakas (followers of Makkhali Gosala, one of the six religious teachers who were contemporaries of the Buddha) and Niganthas (Jain followers)5 of the religions popular in India along with Buddhism. Although it is likely that Buddhism too may have been present during this period, there is no mention of any Buddhist shrines or of any Buddhist monks or nuns in pre-Buddhist Sri Lanka. The reason of this may be that while there were many religious beliefs during this period, both of local and Indian origins, there was not any particular religion with wide-spread popularity. It is Buddhism, with strong patronage from both India and Sri Lanka which was brought by arahant Mahinda that filled this gap. According to the chronicles, arahant Mahinda arrived in the country during the reign of King Devanampiya­tissa (247-207 bce). It is said that the king and the bhikkhu met at Missaka-pabbata (now called Mihintale), a place east of Anuradhapura. Having listened to the Dhamma taught by arahant Mahinda, the king and his group took refuge in the Triple Gem, the formal procedure of becoming a follower of the Buddha. All records suggest that the new religion rapidly became popular. The absence of any organized form of religious life till this point of time may have been one of the major factors that contributed to this rapid popularity. Furthermore, it seems that the people followed the lead of their king: first it was the immediate family and the attendants of the king; subsequently it was people at large of the island. Among the important preliminary measures taken by the king with regard to Buddhism were the offering of the Mahameghavana, a park within the city limits, for the use of the Sangha, the building of the first ever stūpa (pagoda), namely, Thūpārāma, enshrining the bodily relics of the Buddha, demarcation of the boundary (sīmā) for the performance of monastic functions of the Sangha, and provision for the rehearsal of the Vinaya by bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, a Sri Lanka native who was given initial and higher admission6 by arahant Mahinda and studied the Vinaya in 5  Mahāvaṃsa Ch. X. For modem academic discussions on the religions in the preBuddhist Sri Lanka, read: Paranavitana (Journal of Royal Asiatic Society Vol. xxx i), Adikaram (1946/1994) and Rahula (1956). 6  I use “initial and higher admission” to refer to what is popularly and inappropriately termed as “ordination” and “higher ordination” respectively.

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

5

this country. The last two events need some further clarification. The significance of the first event, namely, the demarcation of a sīmā for monastic functions, signifies the formalization of the establishment of the Buddhist monastic order in the country. Without the monastic order it is impossible to think about the presence of the Buddha sāsana (“organization” of Buddhism) in any location. In arahnat Mahinda’s own words, the establishment of a sīmā was tantamount to locating the sāsana of the Buddha firmly in the country. The king supported the act wholeheartedly by allocating necessary space and other requirements for the function. The second, the act of a native of the country studying the Vinaya in the country itself and rehearsing it, signified the real beginning of the Sri Lankan Sangha.7 arahant Mahinda described the significance of this act as “the sāsana taking roots in the country”. In other words, this act meant that both the Buddha sāsana and the Sangha were made national institutions with distinct local identities. Among the other important events that took place during the life-time of arahant Mahinda and King Devanampiya Tissa were the arrival of bhikkhunī Sanghamittā in order to start the female monastic (bhikkhunī) order, and the planting of the branch of the Bodhi tree brought by Sanghamitta in Anuradhapura. The conferment of initial and higher admission on Queen Anula, the sister-in-law of the king, and her retinue, and the simultaneous planting of the Bodhi sapling marked the beginning of the bhikkhunī sāsana in the country. Along with the Bodhi tree8 there came a large group of people specialized in various arts and crafts who were assigned to undertake the physical protection of the sacred tree. The subsequent history of Sri Lanka shows that this group of people occupied a prestigious position in the society that continued for centuries; the task assigned to them contributing immensely for the growth of Buddhist culture. The Bodhi became a symbol of Buddhism and Buddhist culture in Sri Lanka and remains a testimony to the dedication of the people who protected it through the centuries from enemies, animals and natural calamities in spite of the various upheavals Buddhism had to face in its long chequered history. The alms-bowl of the Buddha that was brought to Sri Lanka along with his bodily relics 7  arahant Mahinda’s stress on the Vinaya in this context signifies a strict adherence to the Theravada emphasis on the Vinaya, established at the first council (saṅgāyanā), as the life of the sāsana (organization). 8  The Bodhi tree still remains where it was planted originally, and is considered the oldest tree in the world with a recorded history. It is venerated by the entire Buddhist world as the most sacred tree and symbol of the enlightenment of the Buddha.

6

Asanga Tilakaratne

to be enshrined in Thūpārāma was another sacred object received and kept with utmost respect in his palace by Devanmpiya Tissa. As the subsequent history reveals, this relic was considered a symbol of the ownership of the country and consequently became an object closely connected with the vicissitudes of the history of Sri Lanka. All historical records are unanimous about the rapid spread of Buddhism all over the island. Subsequently, Bodhi saplings were planted in all four directions of the island. This distribution may be taken as a symbol of the spread of Buddhism in the country as well as the unification of the country. The chronicles are unanimous in claiming that the Buddha visited the island three times. In these visits, it is believed that the Buddha sanctified some places in the island by visiting and sitting in meditation with the bhikkhus. There are eight such places which are revered by Buddhists even today; subsequently the number has increased to sixteen. These places are scattered all over the island. The significance, again, is more symbolic. It is only a matter of religious belief that the Buddha visited the island thrice. Whether or not these places were really sanctified by the Buddha is contingent on the veracity of the earlier claim. What is important in this context is not whether or not the Buddha visited the island, but that the Sri Lanka Buddhist tradition wished to identify itself with this historical narrative without any major revision. Both arahant Mahinda and his sister Sanghamittā dedicated their lives to the upliftment of the sāsana of the country. arahant Mahinda passed away in the eighth year of the reign of Uttiya, the brother of Devanampiya Tissa, and the Sanghamitta Therī the next year. The bhikkhunī sāsana initiated by the Sanghamitta Theri flourished during the Anuradhapura period, and there are references to great Theris who excelled in knowledge and virtue. The Dīpavaṃsa:9 contains a list of such great bhikkhunīs such as Saddhammanandī, Somā, Giriddhi, Dāsiyā, Dhammapālā, Mahilā, etc., who lived during the early period. Chinese Buddhist history refers to a bhikkhunī named Devasarā who went from Sri Lanka and established the bhikkhunī order in China.10 Toward the end of the Anuradhapura period, there are sporadic references to the bhikkhunī order, and it appears that the Sri Lanka bhikkhunī Sangha could not survive the invasion of Magha, which 9  Due to this special mention of the bhikkhunīs some scholars believe that the Dīpavaṃsa is a work of a bhikkhunī. Adikaram 1946/2009, 57. 10  Gunawardana, RALH, “Subtle Silk Ferrous Firmness? Buddhist Nuns in Ancient and Early Medieval Sri Lanka and Their Role in the Propagation of Buddhism” in Sri Lanka Journal of Humanities, Vo1.14, Nos.l-2 1988, 3-5.

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

7

terminated the Polonnaruwa kingdom (see below on recent efforts to re-establish of the bhikkhunī order).

Rohana: the southern centre of Buddhism Rohana, or the southern region, has been very important in the history of the island both politically and religiously. It was one of the earliest settlements of Aryans who inhabited the island, and began as the “Rohana village” which subsequently came to signify the entire southern region. It is one of the places where a sapling of the Anuradhapura Bodhi tree was planted. As Walpola Rahula comments, throughout the history of Ceylon Rohana was the last refuge and sanctuary of freedom. Whenever there was danger at Anuradhapura, either from foreign invasions or from internal conflicts, kings, ministers, monks and others who desired freedom and protection took shelter in the south (Rahula 1956/1993, 19). The importance of the region for Buddhism was immense. The capital city of the region is often mentioned as the “great village” or Mahāgāma which gradually grew up to be a leading centre of Buddhism, where such large monasteries as Tissamaharama and Cittala-pabbata, founded by King Kavantissa in the second century bce, flourished during the Anuradhapura period. The great Sinhala Buddhist hero, King Duṭugemunu, had his beginnings in Rohana in close association with the Buddhist monks.

Period of growth and evolution The new religion introduced in this manner developed and gradually evolved to be a uniquely Sri Lankan tradition by the end of the Anuradhapura period. The history of Buddhism during this period, however, was not one of smooth flow. The Sangha society not only expanded but also became fragmented. Rulers generally supported the sāsana as a whole, but some rulers supported only certain sections of the Sangha. There were invasions from South India, and consequently several times the country was under foreign rule, usually with undesirable results for the Sangha and the religion. Overall, the Anuradhapura period marked one of development for Buddhism. Devanampiya Tissa was succeeded by his brother Uttiya, who built stupas to deposit the bodily relics of arahant Mahinda and Sanghamittā Therī, was known for his piety. However, barely seven decades had passed when the first invasion of the country occurred by forces from South India that consequently ruled the country for the next seven decades.

8

Asanga Tilakaratne

King Elara who ruled the country for about forty-five years (145-101 bce) is the best-known of these rulers, for he was the one who was defeated by King Duṭugemunu in a duel. Duṭugemunu (101-77 bce) is revered as the hero who rescued the country from foreign power, thus saving the Buddhist religion and culture that had already become the defining character of the country. Duṭugemunu’s reign was marked by intense Buddhist religious activity and flourishing of the sāsana. Among the many religious monuments built by the king was what is known as “the great stupa” (mahā-thūpa), the Ruvanmali-dagoba, which is the most revered of all the dagobas in the country. The chronicles record the religious and educational activities of both great learned Theras and Therīs who lived during this period. Adikaram, who studied the early history of Buddhism in the country, concludes his discussion of Duṭugemunu with the following words: “Rendered majestic by the limitless beneficence of the most powerful monarch Ceylon ever saw and resplendent with the brilliance of these Theras and Therīs, learned and of stainless purity of character, this period stands out unique in the history of Buddhism in Ceylon” (Adikaram 1946/1994, 70). Duṭugemunu was succeeded by his brother Saddhatissa (77-59 bce) who continued his good work and was himself known for his dedication to the religion. In less than two decades there was another invasion by a group of South Indian invaders who ousted the incumbent King Vaṭṭagāmani and ruled the country among five of them for fourteen years, untill Vaṭṭagāmani regained power again in 29 bce and ruled untill 17 bce. Much of the unfortunate interim period was also marked by a long drought, resultant famine, and intensified internal struggles. The second spell of Vattagamani’s rule is very important in the history of Sri Lankan Buddhism in particular and in the history of Theravada in general for two reasons. Firstly, what is important in the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka is that it marks the beginning of the initial division of the Sri Lankan Sangha. Up to this point the Sangha was represented by one unitary tradition called Mahavihara (“great monastery”), named after the monastery established by arahant Mahinda in Anuradhapura, which had subsequently become synonymous with the indigenous Theravada Sangha. As we will see later, Mahavihara meant not merely a tradition of the Sangha but also a textual and interpretive tradition which served as the basis for the Theravada tradition worldwide. What happened during the reign of Vaṭṭagāmaṇi was that he constructed in the precincts of the Mahavihara a monastery with a dagoba, known as Abhayagiri, and donated it as a gift to a particular monk who had helped

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

9

him during his period of exile when he was preparing to recapture power. The usual custom among the Sangha in accepting property is to accept it not as a personal gift but as one given to the Sangha as a community. The Mahavihara Sangha perceived this act as a violation of the Vinaya (disciplinary code of the Sangha), and took action against him accordingly. The proper behaviour on the part of the guilty would have been to accept his wrongdoing and hand over what is so given back to the Sangha (upon which the Sangha would return it to him to use as common property). But this was not done, and instead, he defied the order and consequently was expelled from the Sangha. His pupil, one Bahalamassu Tissa, angered by the Mahavihara act, moved to the new monastery with his followers and started functioning as a separate group. This subsequently became the “Abhayagiri-nikāya” (sect). For the first time, the Mahavihara Sangha found that they had a rival who could vie for royal support and patronage. During the period of drought, famine, internal struggles and foreign domination numerous people, including monks and nuns, died. Many monks fled the country to neighbouring India in order to save their lives and also to keep intact the teaching of the Buddha, which they carried in their memory. Some monks risked their life and remained in the country amidst hardships for the same purpose of preserving the oral tradition of the Dhamma. Once the troubles were over and the country regained normalcy those who left returned, and the first thing they did was to compare their memories, and found to their relief that their memories tallied perfectly. Nevertheless, this awakened the monks to the danger of keeping the Dhamma in mere memory, so they decided to commit the Dhamma into writing. Now, as the Mahavihara Sangha no longer had the royal support, they had to find a remote place in the hills away from the capital and had to undertake their work with the patronage of a regional chief. The decision made by the Mahavihara Sangha in Anuradhapura at a very early period of Sri Lankan Buddhist history proved to be momentous, for it gave a concrete shape to the word of the Buddha (Buddha vacana) and also marked the conclusion of the evolution and growth of the Theravada canon. It is the version thus finalized at this gathering that Theravada history recognizes as the fourth council (saṅgāyanā). What is written down at this gathering constitutes the oldest available version of the word of the Buddha and canon which is in the Pali language. Pali is the closest we have to the dialect spoken by the Buddha, accepted unanimously by the entire Theravada school found traditionally in the South and Southeast Asian regions.

10

Asanga Tilakaratne

Before commencing the writing of the texts there arose among the members of the Sangha a debate as to whether the learning of the Dhamma (pariyatti) or its practice (paṭipatti) is the “root” of the sāsana (Adikaram 1996/1994, 77 ff). Those who were “the preachers of the Dhamma” claimed it was the learning, whereas “those who wore rugrobes” (i.e. meditators) maintained it was the practice. It is said that the preachers of the Dhamma won the day. Undoubtedly this whole debate and the subsequent victory are to be understood in the context in which the relative worth of those who learned the Dhamma was highlighted. Nevertheless, it is believed that this shift of emphasis from practice to learning marked a new attitude (the desirability of which is debated) in the Theravada tradition. The next four centuries elapsed without any foreign political interference. The period as a whole marked one of development for the sāsana. A striking example illustrative of the influence of Buddhism on the political and ethical philosophy of the country comes from this early period. Amandagamani (78-89 ce) for the first time in the history of the country issued the order of non­killing (mā-ghāta) which had been followed by many subsequent rulers till the end of the Anuradhapura period. Even though kindness to animals was not unheard of before among the Sri Lanka rulers, this was the first time it came as a royal order. Among the subsequent kings who followed Amandagamani’s example are Voharika Tissa (269-291 ce), who abolished physical torture as a punishment, Silakala (524-537 ce), Aggabodhi I (658- 674 ce) and Kassapa III (717-724 ce). Although the Sangha as a whole flourished, the gap between the two schools of the Sangha, Mahavihara and Abhayagiri, grew wider during this period. While the Mahavihara, orthodox in its outlook, adhered to the Theravada canon uncompromisingly, Abhayagiri was open to other Buddhist schools and literary traditions. Along with Pali they also used Sanskrit, which was the language used by the Mahayanists in India. During the reign of Voharika Tissa (269-291 ce) the monks of the Abhayagiri brought forth what is described as “the divergent canon” (vaitulya-piṭaka) as the true doctrine. The Mahavihara monks rejected this and the king, having learned the presence of the new canon, appointed a Brahmin who was well versed in all branches of learning to investigate the matter. The Brahmin examined the new canon and found that it was not in accordance with the true doctrine and recommended

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

11

to reject it. The king caused the relevant books to be burnt and disgraced the monks who were involved in promoting this canon. Again, not long after, during the reign of Goṭhabhaya (309-322 ce) Abhayagirikas brought forth the same canon, this time, with even worse results: the king found sixty monks who accepted this teaching, branded and exiled them from the country. Meanwhile, a group of Abhayagiri monks headed by one Ussiliya Tissa, not willing to be a part of this group, left the monastery and settled in the southern Monastery (Dakkhiṇavihāra) with his 300 followers. It is from this group that later the chapter called Sagaliya (named after the teacher called Sagala) emerged making it the third and last of the three fraternities of the Sri Lanka Sangha of the Anuradhapura period 04 June, 2018. The worst with regard to “the divergent canon” was yet to happen: a young and clever monk from India named Sanghamitta, a pupil of one of those monks who were exiled by Goṭhabhaya for accepting the divergent canon, was determined to take revenge from the Mahavihara fraternity for the damage caused to his teacher and others. He came to Sri Lanka from India and won the confidence of King Goṭhābhaya who assigned him to teach his two sons, Jeṭṭhatissa and Mahasena. While the elder, Jeṭṭhatissa, remained indifferent to Sanghamitta’s influence, Mahasena was won over. When Jeṭṭhatissa (323-333 ce) succeeded his father, Sanghamitta fled to India fearing for his life. When Mahasena succeeded his brother, Sanghamitta returned and persuaded him to prohibit people from supporting the inhabitants of the Mahavihara and to destroy the entire premises. Although the chronicles say that the king subsequently realized his mistake and rebuilt Mahavihara, his support for the Abhayagiri did not diminish. He built, against much displeasure of the Mahavihara Sangha, Jetavanarama within the Mahavihara premises and gave it to one Kohon Tissa who was of the Abhayagiriya fraternity. Later this monk was found guilty of a serious violation and was forced to disrobe. The Sagaliya monks moved into the vacated monastery, and ever since have been known as Jetavana chapter (nikāya). After this unfortunate series of events the three chapters continued without much adversity. While the Mahavihara remained the orthodox centre of Theravada tradition, Abhayagiri welcomed divergent views and teachers from India and other parts of the world. Fa Hsien, the Chinese traveler monk who visited Sri Lanka in the early fifth century (400-415 ce), describes Abhayagiri as a great monastic centre crowded by learned and virtuous monks.

12

Asanga Tilakaratne

During Siri Meghavanna’s reign (301-328 ce), the sacred tooth relic of the Buddha was brought to the island. It was accepted by the Abhayagiri with great honour, and gradually became the most precious religious object of the Sri Lanka monarchy. As the subsequent history of the island reveals, the tooth relic became the insignia of the rulership of the country, and this tradition has continued unbroken through the British period to the present. This sacred object has always been in the custody of the king and consequently it was shifted to wherever the seat of the administration was moved. With the shift of the seat of administration to the Kandyan kingdom in the central hills, the last Sinhala kingdom, the sacred tooth relic has been housed there for the last 300 years in Palace of the Tooth Relic. The traditions surrounding the tooth relic are varied and complex. In addition to the vast literary tradition built around the sacred tooth relic, there is a complex web of rites and rituals exemplified in daily observances, culminating in the colourful annual procession conducted in the month of August of every year. An event which was momentous in significance for the evolution of the Theravada tradition took place at the turn of the fifth century during the reign of Mahanama (406- 428 ce). It was the translation11 of the commentaries into Pali by Buddhaghosa, the greatest Pali commentator. The legend says that Buddhaghosa, who came from India for this very specific purpose, was asked by the Mahavihara Sangha to prove his true Dhamma knowledge, and that he wrote the Visuddhimagga, which summarises the entire teaching of the Buddha, in order to satisfy this demand. Buddhaghosa says that he translated into Pali the commentaries that were in the Sinhala language for the sake of the people outside the island. Although this would have been Buddhaghosa’s true intention, it is clear that his work became instrumental for the establishment of the Sri Lanka Mahavihara tradition of interpretation of the word of the Buddha as the standard of the Theravada tradition in general. Buddhaghosa’s work also represents a new attitude toward the Pali language, upholding that it was the language spoken by the Buddha and hence it is the sacred language of Buddhists. Buddhaghosa is generally believed to have translated commentaries for the first four nikāyas of the Sutta-piṭaka, for the complete Vinaya and Abhidhamma piṭakas. Of the fifteen Khuddaka-nikāya works, the commentaries to the Khuddakanipāṭha, Dhammapada, Sutta-nipāta and the Jātaka are also attributed 11  There is a scholarly debate on the exact role of Buddhaghosa. While Buddhaghosa seems to present himself as nothing more than a translator many tend to believe that his role was far beyond that. (Kalupahana 1992, 2016-216).

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

13

to him. Dhammapala, the next commentator of much repute, wrote commentaries to the Udāna, Jtivuttaka, Vimāna-vatthu, Peta-vatthu, Theragāthā, Therigāthā and the Cariyāpiṭaka. The commentaries to the Niddesa, Paṭisambhidāmagga, and the Buddhavaṃsa were written respectively by Upasena, Mahanama and Buddhadatta. The author of the commentary to the Apadāna is not known. Although all these commentators are not contemporaries it is believed that all of them lived around two centuries from the arrival of Buddhaghosa. Buddhaghosa, in particular, repeatedly asserts that he wrote his commentaries following the interpretive tradition of the Mahavihara. The crucial importance of these commentaries is that they are tantamount to the Theravada tradition. It is in these commentaries that one is bound to find the Theravada interpretation of the word of the Buddha. For the orthodox Theravada, Buddhaghosa (and the rest of the commentators) provide the last word on interpreting the teaching of the Buddha. Critical studies on Buddhaghosa are a recent phenomenon. For the orthodox Theravada tradition Buddhaghosa remains the eye through which the Dhamma should be seen and ‘the voice (ghosa) of the Buddha’.

The last 500 years of Anuradhapura The rest of the Anuradhapura period, which lasted to the end of the ninth century, was marked by another spell of south Indian rule from 433 to 460 ce by six rulers and an invasion during the reign of Sena I, 831-851 ce by a ruler of Pandya kingdom in South India. This invasion, though, did not result in direct domination, but caused massive damage to the country, in particular to the wealth of the Buddhist monasteries. Sena II, successor to Sena I, sent an army to the Pandya country and defeated the king and recovered the wealth and the treasures that were taken there. While Buddhism continued to be the main source of inspiration for the people for their righteous life, the status of the Sangha seems to have suffered loss during this period for there are records of kings purifying the Sangha. Although the exact nature of these purifications is not known, what may have happened was that those who violated the Vinaya rules may have been removed from the Sangha-hood. The kings of this period are not known to have built any major religious monuments. But there are frequent records to the effect that kings in general renovated and maintained the ancient venerable monuments.

14

Asanga Tilakaratne

In addition, there are two other developments mentioned fairly frequently in the chronicles: one is, as we have already seen, the intermittent appearance of Mahayana doctrines and tenets, usually supported by the Abhayagiriya sect. During the reign of Aggabodhi I (568-601 ce) a learned monk named Jotipala had come from India and defeated the Mahayana views held by the Abhayagiriya and Jetavana chapters. Along with the Mahayana beliefs there is evidence to believe that Vajrayana practices, too, were introduced to Sri Lanka by the end of this period. For instance, during the reign of Sena I, Vajrayana was introduced to the country by a monk from an Indian sect named Vajraparvata (“Diamond Rock”), and that the king accepted the secret doctrines so introduced. It is recorded that his successor, Sena I, had the Ratana-sutta written on a gold plate and paid homage to it, a practice which resembles those of Vajrayana. The other development was the increase of Hindu influence in Sri Lanka society. Walpola Rahula Thera quotes the following Mahāvaṃsa account on Sena II: “(He) had a thousand jars of gold filled with pearls and on the top of each placed a costly jewel and presented them to a thousand Brahmins whom he had fed with milk rice in jeweled goblets, and also he gave golden threads” (Rahula 1956, 110). This account foreshadows what was to be expected once the shift of capital city when the work which had already begun was completed and Polonnaruwa became the seat of administration.

Polonnaruwa and after: the medieval period Polonnaruwa had been gaining significance as a major city for some centuries. Aggabodhi IV (667-683 ce), who divided his time between Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa, was the first ruler to use the new location as his residence and presumably for administrative purposes. Subsequently Aggabodhi VII (772-777 ce), Udaya I (797-801 ce) and Sena II (853-887 ce), had their seat of administration in Polonnaruwa. From Kassapa IV (898- 914 ce) the capital was shifted to the new location and Anuradhapura, which was the capital for about thirteen centuries, was replaced by Polonnaruwa which is located sixty-three miles to the east of Anuradhapura. The shift from Anuradhapura to Polonnaruwa was basically due to security reasons. By the turn of the tenth century, the country was already weak due to internal political struggles. It is in this background that the Cola invasions came. Mahinda V (982-1017) was the last

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

15

to rule in Anuradhapura. Later he died in the captivity of the Colas, symbolically marking the end of the Anuradhapura period which was already in turmoil. From the point of view of location, there was no significant difference between the two cities. Polonnaruwa was towards the north-east in contrast to Anuradhapura, and located in the north central part of the island, but the climate was basically the same, both belonging to the dry zone. The economy, which was sustained by a highly sophisticated hydro system, remained the same. In the new capital even larger reservoirs were built by its new rulers in order to strengthen the agricultural economy of the country. It was only at the end of the Polonnaruwa period that the dry zone was gradually abandoned and the southward movement of the seats of administration began. After a long struggle, the Cola power was expulsed by Vijayabahu I, whose rule marks the beginning of the Polonnaruwa period proper. His rule, including the warring times with Colas, spanned from 1055 to 1110. After his death, the country once again plunged into difficulties both internally and externally, and it was Parakramabahu the Great (11531186) who consolidated power and ushered a new era in the history of island. Both were great leaders who not only looked after the economic development of the country but also adopted many measures to resurrect and sustain the already weakened sāsana. Vijayabahu invited monks from Ramanna (Myanmar) and re­ established the higher admission (upasampadā) among the Sri Lanka Sangha. It is during this period that the king of Ramanna, Anvratha (Anuruddha) sought assistance from Sri Lanka to secure accurate Pali texts. More decisive measures to stabilize the sāsana had to be taken by Parakramabahu the Great. One such measure of long­lasting significance was the unification of the three sects that had been there among the Sangha from the early Anuradhapura period. Along with this unification the king made the leading members of the Sangha, headed by Dimbulagala Mahakashyapa Thera, to clean the monastic order of the undesirable elements. Having done so, the king established and inscribed in stone a code of good behaviour for the Sangha which is known as “the Polonnaruwa agreement” (Polonnaru katikāvata). After Parakramabahu the Great, the only other ruler worthy of mention belonging to this period was Nissankamalla (1187-96) who seems to have done much for the country and the sāsana. After a series of weak rulers and repeated Cola and Pandya interventions, Polonnaruwa was captured by Magha from Kalinga (Orissa region). The destruction caused by him was so vast that his rule marked the end of Polonnaruwa

16

Asanga Tilakaratne

period which caused much havoc to the Sinhala Buddhist civilization. During the next two centuries the centre of administration was moved to Dambadeniya (1215-1272) and from there to Yapahuwa (1272-1300), Kurunegala (1300-1341), Gampola (1341-1408), and Kotte (13711597). Among the noteworthy rulers during this period, Parakramabahu II (1236- 1270), who was known for his erudition and scholarship, was the one who saw the end of the Magha rule from Polonnaruwa and reestablished a stable administration and ruled from Dambadeniya. His long reign is marked by the rejuvenation of the sāsana and development of Sinhala and Buddhist scholarship. Like Parakramabahu the Great of Polonnaruwa, this king too effected a purification of the Sangha and established a katikāvata (agreement) which is known as “the Dambadeniya agreement” (Dambadeni katikāvata). The last of the great rulers belonging to the medieval period is Parakramabahu VI who ruled from Kotte (which is also the present capital city). His long reign, from 1411 to 1466, was a period of economic prosperity, relative peace, as well as great advancements in monastic education and Sinhala and Buddhist literature. By this time there were already regional ruling centres developing in Sitawaka, close to Kotte and Kandy which is in the central hills and which was to continue as the capital city till the English took over power in 1815. There were some very clear changes in all spheres of life in the medieval period. Religiously, the influence of Hinduism was the most visible difference during the Polonnaruwa period. The monuments dedicated for Hinduism standing alongside the Buddhist monuments is proof of this. The bull which was considered sacred in Hinduism was no longer seen in the Polonnaruwa moon-stones.12 The presence of learned Brahmins in the courts of the kings was not unusual even in the Anuradhapura period, but in Polonnaruwa the influence of Hinduism assumed a different dimension: Hinduism became a visible aspect of the popular religiosity and Hindu beliefs and practices were mixed with those of Buddhism. This, however, does not mean that the sympathy for such innovations was universal. While there were some members of the Sangha who were sympathetic to such beliefs and learned Hindu literature and “sciences”, there were others who rejected them outright. 12  A moonstone is a half-moon shaped unique creation of Sinhala architecture. It was meant to serve as the stepping stone at the entrance of a building, in particular at sacred buildings. In this complicated artwork a line of four animals, lion, horse, bull and elephant, are carved as walking one after the other. In Polonnaruwa moonstones the bull is conspicuous in its absence.

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

17

The medieval Sinhala poetry book called Budugunālankāraya is a severe attack on Hindu beliefs and practices popular during this period. As in the Anuradhapura period, the rulers continued to be Buddhists throughout the medieval period. There was, however, a difference. During the Anuradhapura period the kings used to have simple Buddhist names such as Tissa, Kassapa, etc., although some of their behaviour was not always ideally Buddhist. In Polonnaruwa and thereafter we come across names such as Vijayabahu (“Victorious Hand”), Parakramabahu (“Mighty Hands”), which have reference to the physical power and majesty of the bearer. In their flavor, these names seem to have a closer affinity with their Indian Hindu counterparts than to unassuming Buddhist names. This tendency to have self-glorifying names seems to have continued till the end of the Sinhala royal dynasty in the nineteenth century. The South Indian invasions continued, and the invasion of Magha, which marked the end of the Polonnaruwa rule, was the most disastrous. It seems that the Sinhala Buddhist culture was never able to recover fully from this attack. The religious, cultural and economic decline caused by this havoc persisted throughout the medieval period and beyond. The foreign relations which were predominantly oriented to neighbouring India from the very early periods started extending also to the South­east Asian region during this period. Unlike relations with South India, which were largely political, these new relations were centred on Buddhism. We will see later how this new direction of relations developed extensively during the early modem period.

Modern period The modern period of Sri Lankan history, with new encounters and new challenges, was also a new phase of Buddhism in the country. The seat of administration had moved close to Colombo (Kotte and Sitawaka) by the end of the medieval period. Colombo was gradually becoming an important seaport. Owing to frequent political troubles in the maritime regions, Kandy, which is located in central hills, was also evolving to be a centre of administration not much affected by such troubles. The real watershed of the beginning of the modern period is the arrival of Portuguese in the country in 1505 ce. Maritime regions of the island came under Portuguese control in 1594, and their rule lasted till1698. The Dutch took over from the Portuguese and ruled the maritime regions from 1640 to 1796 till they were replaced by the British to whom

18

Asanga Tilakaratne

the entire country was handed over by the Sinhala chiefs on the 2 March, 1815, at Mahanuwara by signing the Udaraṭa Givisuma (“Up-country Treaty”). The Portuguese brought Christianity (Roman Catholicism) to the country. By the end of their rule, they had been successful in converting a good number of people in the western and north-western maritime regions to their faith. The story of their plundering and destruction of Buddhist monasteries and atrocities in areas where people resisted conversion are too well-known to list here.13 The Portuguese were driven out by the Dutch who brought along with them Protestantism. Subsequently, the English introduced their own brand of Protestantism. This European encounter had several noteworthy features. Up to that point, the people in Sri Lanka were accustomed only to people from India or to those from Asia such as occasional Chinese pilgrims who shared cultures similar in many respects to their own. Even though Hinduism was different from Buddhism, the two religions shared a lot. In the case of the Europeans, neither the culture nor the religion had any similarities with local religions. The European culture, ways of behaviour, etc., were quite new to Sri Lankan culture. The religion, monotheism with its associated absolutism, was also new. Added to this was the attitude they brought with them about conversion. Up to this point, Sri Lankan society had not experienced any efforts at conversion, for Hinduism and Buddhism had been basically confined to Tamil and Sinhala communities respectively. Although Buddhists seem to have adopted some Hindu practices, that did not amount to conversion from one religion to the other. As Gananath Obeyesekere, an eminent sociologist, has pointed out, till the arrival of Christianity with the Portuguese, in Sri Lanka, Sinhalese were Buddhist and, to a very great extent, vice versa (Obeyesekere in Roberts 1977). This equation was changed when the Portuguese converted some Sinhalese to Christianity. Extremely harsh methods adopted by these Western colonial powers for conversion were unheard of before by the Sri Lankan people. Although they had experienced atrocities before, perpetrated by invaders like Magha, and had seen the destruction of sacred places, the motive behind such activities was not religious. At least the Hindu invaders were not keen on converting people to Hinduism. With the Europeans, the situation was completely different: conversion was an essential aspect of the whole colonization project. The Dutch and the 13  The reader may refer to: Senaka Weeraratne (June 12, 2005) “Repression of Buddhism in Sri Lanka by the Portuguese (1505- 1658)” (Portuguese Repression – Vgweb Home page accessed on August 17, 2011).

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

19

British did not adhere to such violent methods, however. Theirs were indirect and subtle to which we will refer later. The status of the religion, in particular that of the Sangha, was declining rapidly. Even before the arrival of the Europeans there were occasions where there were no bhikkhus with higher admission (upasampadā) in the country. As we saw earlier, the last time when the Sangha was flourishing was the reign of Parakramabahu VI of Kotte under whose long and stable reign religion, culture and literature reached high standards. During the reign of Buvanekabahu VI (1469-77) monks from Myanmar came to Sri Lanka in search of higher admission for the state of the Sangha in that country had deteriorated. They received higher admission on the Kelani (Kalyani) river at a place specifically demarcated for the purpose, and the consequent revival of the sāsana in Myanmar is a well­known story in the history of Buddhism in Myanmar. By the arrival of Europeans later in the century, however, the decline had begun, and with the attack by the Portuguese the monastic centres and the Sangha suffered immensely. Toward the latter part of the seventeenth century, the state of the Sangha had further deteriorated, and it is reported that king Wimaladharmasuriya II (1687-1707) had to bring the Sangha with higher admission from Rakkhanga (a region in Myanmar). This does not seem to have been very effective. By the eighteenth century again there were no monks with higher admission in the country. The monkhood had deteriorated to such an extent that only an intermediate group of people called ganinnānse, who were neither monks nor civilians, were left. It is to their credit that they preserved the monasteries, the valuable libraries and the material assets belonging to those monasteries while maintaining the minimum standards of Buddhist religiosity.

Revival of Buddhism This time the honour of reintroducing the higher admission to the Sangha and rejuvenating the religion goes to Saranankara Thera (1689-1778) who was later appointed by the king as “the king of the Sangha” (Saṅgha­rāja). Saranankara Thera could receive only the initial admission, that is, admission as a novice, and there were no monks with higher admission in order to grant him the same. When there are no monks in a particular location with higher admission, it is considered that the sāsana of the Buddha no longer exists there. This was the situation of Sri Lanka at that time. The situation was so bad that Saranankara Thera could not find any teachers to receive guidance in his

20

Asanga Tilakaratne

studies. He strived on his own and studied the Dhamma, Vinaya and the Pali language and other branches of knowledge befitting a monk. Being unable to initiate a monastic tradition, as he himself did not have proper admission to the Sangha, he organized a group called “virtuous ones” and trained them in the monastic life. Being undeterred by these adverse conditions, Saranankara Thera did everything he could to send envoys to the Southeast Asian region (Myanmar, Thailand, etc.) and bring monks with higher ordination so that the monastic tradition of the country could be revived. After one ill-fated effort in which most of those who went were perished, Saranankara Thero’s envoys succeeded in reaching Siam (Thailand) on a second occasion. This mission was arranged under the auspices of King Kirti Sri Rajasinha (1747-82). The king of Siam arranged to send a group of more than twenty senior monks,14 headed by the great elder called Upali, to Sri Lanka. The samaneras15 headed by Saranankara Thera received higher admission from this group of monks, and thus began the present “Siyam-nikaya” in 1753 which is the oldest and the largest among the three main chapters that currently exist in Sri Lanka. The two great monasteries of Mahanuvara: Malvatta and Asgiriya, were restored to their traditional foremost position.16 The revival of the Sangha in this manner led to the revival of monastic education and practice. Saranankara Thera became the leader of the Sangha in the country. The subsequent period from the latter part of the eighteenth century to the end of the nineteenth century proved to be a period of rapid development of the Sangha and monastic education. Saranankara Thera, who did not have access to any formal monastic education, and consequently, was more or less a self-taught man, strived hard to revive the almost lost monastic education system by gathering knowledge from whomever he could, writing texts and teaching students (Blackburn 2011). The students, who came from 14  In order to confer higher admission (upasampadā) on a sāmaṇera the minimum quorum is twenty monks who have reached “elder” (Thera) status, i.e. ten years after their own higher admission. 15  “Sāmaṇera” is one who has received only initial admission (pabbajjā) and not higher admission (upasampadā). 16  Malvatta and Asgiriya function as the two main groups of the Siyam-nikaya. In addition, there are six other sub-sects, namely, Mahavihara Vana vasika-nikāya (forest monks), Kotte Sri Kalyani Samagri Dharma Maha Sanghasabha, Syamopali -nikaya: Uva chapter, Syamopali-nikaya: Rohana chapter, Syamopali-nikaya: Kalyani chapter and Rangiri Dambulla chapter, the last five originating on the basis of regional divisions of the country. According to the Buddha Sāsana Ministry statistics, currently 20,303 monks belonging to these chapters occupy 5,814 monasteries.

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

21

many parts of the country, received learning and discipline and returning to their native places started themselves doing the same. One of the early monastic education centres started outside Mahanuvara, as a result of this movement, was the Paramadhamma Cetiya Pirivena (“Pirivena”, deriving from Pali ‘pariveṇa”, means “monastic education centre” in current Sinhala parlance.), Ratmalana, close to Colombo. Two of the greatest erudite scholars of the nineteenth century Sri Lanka hailed from this pirivena, Hikkaduve Sri Sumangala Thera (1826 -1911) and Ratmalane Sri Dharmarama Thera. The former started the Vidyodaya pirivena in 1873 and the latter’s teacher, Ratmalane Sri Dharmaloka (1827-1887), who also had his monastic education at Paramadhamma Cetiya Pirivena, started the Vidyalanaka pirivena in 1875. These two centres continued to be the greatest monastic education centres of the country untill the mid twentieth century, when the two centres, in recognition of their contribution to the traditional monastic and Sinhala Buddhist education were elevated to university status by the government. In their heydays in the first half of the twentieth century, students from neighbouring countries came there to study Buddhist philosophy and languages such as Pali and Sanskrit. Branches of these two great pirivenas were established all over the island, thus reviving the Buddhist monastic education system of the country. The interactions and exchanges between Sri Lanka and the Southeast Asian Theravada developed extensively during this period. While Kandy remained the capital where the king lived, the maritime regions of the south, which had been under the Portuguese, the Dutch and then the English grew in importance owing to the commerce that was fastdeveloping during this period. Consequently, there arose a group of wealthy indigenous businessmen who in turn supported religion and education. There seems to have developed during this period some kind of rivalry between “up-country” (i.e. Kandy) and “down south”. When some monastic applicants from down south were refused higher admission by the up-country monks some members of the former who felt discriminated against ventured to travel to Southeast Asian countries with the hope of receiving higher admission from the monks there. These monks were supported by the Sinhala Buddhist business elite who had by now amassed wealth by means of their business with the foreign traders. The first such group succeeded in reaching Myanmar and received higher admission from monks at the place named Amarapura. Upon their return to Sri Lanka, these monks started working as a distinct

22

Asanga Tilakaratne

group and thus was born the second chapter (nikāya) of the present Sri Lankan monks, namely, the Amarapura chapter. This happened in 1802. Subsequently many groups followed suit, and upon return they established their own sub-chapters.17 The reason for the initial refusal of conferring higher admission from Kandy was the caste division which was deeply rooted in the Sri Lankan society by this time. The Sangha in Kandy was of the opinion that the members belonging to one caste alone were eligible to receive higher admission from them and that all those belonged to other castes, which they considered to be lower, were not. The division between up-country and down south, too, may have played a role here. This situation resulted in some monks going to Myanmar and receiving higher admission. Once this process started, it continued partly due to similar caste distinctions prevalent in down south and in other areas and also, even more importantly, due to certain nagging uncertainties about the “purity” of the higher admission, resulting mainly from the procedural matters connected with the act of conferring higher admission. Protracted and bitter debates over the procedural accuracy of the procedures of higher admission were characteristic among the down south monks during this period. The last of the three chapters, the Rāmañña-nikāya, arose in 1852 exclusively due to concerns of the purity of the higher admission as practiced by the Sangha belonging to both Siyam and Amarapura sects. In that respect, the third division came with an emphasis to go back to the fundamentals.18 The members of the Sangha belonging to these divisions were identifiable only by some external marks such as ways of donning the robe etc., for there was no doctrinal or discipline-related difference behind these divisions. 17  Currently there are altogether 21 divisions of the Amarapura-nikaya: Amarapura Sirisaddhammavansa maha-nikaya, Amarapura Mulavamsika-nikaya, Udarata Amarapura-nikaya, Amarapura Sabaragamu Saddhamma-nikaya, Saddhammayuttika (Matara)-nikaya, Dadalu Paramparayatta Amarapura-nikaya, Amarapura Marammavansabhidhaja-nikaya, Amarapura Vajiravansa-nikaya, Kalyanivamsika Sri Dharmarama Saddhammayuttika-nikaya, Sri Lanka Svejin maha-nikaya, Sabaragamu saddhammavansa-nikaya, Amarapura Ariyavansa Saddhammayuttika-nikaya, Culaganthi-nikaya, Udarata Amarapura Samagri Sanghasabhava, Uva Amarapuranikaya, Amarapura Sri Dharmarakshitavansa-nikaya, Udukinda Amarapura-nikaya, Sambuddha Sasanodaya Sanghasabhava, Amarapura maha-nikaya, Amarapura-nikaya, and Sri Kalyanivansa-nikaya. According to the Buddha Sāsana Ministry statistics, currently 10,254 monks belonging to these chapters occupy 2,575 monasteries. 18  According to the Buddha Sāsana Ministry statistics, currently there are 7,458 monks belonging to this nikāya occupying 1,687 monasteries.

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

23

The second half of the nineteenth century was very important insofar as the Buddhist revival movement is concerned. After vanquishing some initial acts of resistance, the British rule had been established. The country was gradually colonized and made to follow modern British ways of administration. A system of education was being introduced mainly to produce personnel for carrying out secondary level clerical work of the administration. Even this education was a privilege of those who had been converted to Christianity, or it was used as an incentive for people to get converted to the new religion, the Church of England. The traditional Buddhist education was still confined to the Buddhist monasteries, where, in addition to the members of the Sangha, only a handful of village boys received education. These were confined only to a few areas of study such as oriental languages, native medicine and astrology. An urgent need was felt to change this system. The conditions necessary for such change were gathering momentum in the country. An important phenomenon that invigorated the Buddhist revival movement was the challenge from Christianity. The Christian clergy was very active in propagating their religion. At the beginning there was no resistance from the Buddhists against their activities. It is reported that the Buddhist monks even allowed these Christian missionaries to use the monastic assembly halls to hold their meetings. Gradually, however, as provocative acts against them increased, the Buddhists realized that such tolerant attitude was detrimental to their own religion. It is in this atmosphere that the Christian missionaries challenged Buddhists for public debates. Starting from 1865, there have been five such debates between the two groups. The last, which is known as the “Panadura debate”, was held in 1873 at the place called Panadura close to Colombo, and the Buddhist and Christian sides were represented respectively by Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera (1823-1890), who was highly recognized for his oratorical excellence, and Rev. Fr. David Silva. It was widely perceived that this debate went largely in favour of the Buddhist side. In the words of KM De Silva, a well recognized historian, Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera proved himself a debater of a very high order, mettlesome, witty and eloquent if not especially erudite. The emotions generated by this debate and the impact of Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera’s personality deeply affected the next generation of Buddhist activists. (Silva 1981, 340-41) Although Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera was the spokesman in public, he was assisted by a large group of erudite Buddhist monks, the

24

Asanga Tilakaratne

foremost among whom was Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera (1826-1911), the erudite oriental scholar and Sangha leader, mentioned already. During this same period, there were such great monks as Dodanduwe Piyaratana Tissa Thera (1826-1907), Ratmalane Sri Dharmarama Thera, who succeeded his teacher Ratmalane Sri Dharmaloka Thera as the principal of Vidyalankara pirivena, Weligama Sri Sumangala Thera (1825-1905) and Waskaduwe Sri Subhuti Thera (1835-1917). These members of the Sangha provided leadership to the society, disseminated knowledge on Buddhism, opened up branches of oriental studies, corresponded with scholars both in the East and the West and became the pillars of Buddhism during this period (for a comprehensive discussion read: Guruge 1984). A report of the Panadura debate was read by Henry Steel Olcott (l832-1907) of New York who was the president of the Theosophical Society and had developed a keen interest in Buddhism. Olcott came to Sri Lanka in 1880 with Madame Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891), a fellow theosophist, and embraced Buddhism and started working very closely with the Buddhist leaders on matters of religious and national importance. Olcott pioneered the establishment of a series of Buddhist schools for both girls and boys. Although already there were schools established for both girls and boys by Buddhist leaders such as Dodanduwe Piyaratana Tissa Thera, it is Olcott who introduced the modern school system to Sri Lankan Buddhists. The schools started in this manner soon developed to be the leading centres of learning of the country. Among his lasting contributions to the upliftment of Buddhism are the Buddhist Catechism which went into about forty reprints within the twenty years of its first publication; preparing with the help of local Buddhist leaders the sixcoloured Buddhist flag; and starting the system of Sunday Dhamma schools. In all these activities he was guided and assisted by the leading members of the Sangha including Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera. Olcott wrote in his diaries how carefully the latter scrutinized his Buddhist Catechism before he gave his approval which Olcott considered to be crucial for the public to accept his work as one representing the teaching of the Buddha accurately. Olcott’s arrival in Sri Lanka injected much dynamism and vigour to the Buddhist revival movement. Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933), Don David Hewawitarana by birth, was inspired by Olcott, and in many respects became his successor. Dharmapala dedicated a good part of his life to the upliftment of Buddhism and Sinhala Buddhist people. He gave up his name given at

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

25

his birth, which contained Portuguese and English elements, and took up the name Dharmapala, and also undertook the vow of celibacy for the rest of his life upon which he was known as Anagarika Dharmapala. Meanwhile a watershed event in Dharmapala’s life came about when he was chosen to represent Theravada Buddhism at the World Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in 1892. Dharmapala went to this conference, impressed the participants both by his oratory and personality, made some important friends, developed long-lasting international relations and came back much stronger than he went. Dharmapala’s was a Sinhala Buddhist ideology. Protecting and developing Buddhism and awakening and winning the rights of Sinhala Buddhists were key aspects of Dharmapala’s activism. In order to achieve these goals, Dharmapala went around the country addressing people, chastising them for their lack of incentive, lethargy, and moral degradation. He openly criticized those who followed the Western ways of behaviour. He started a newspaper named Sinhala Bauddhaya (“Sinhala Buddhist”) in 1906 in order to serve as a platform for his ideology. Resurrecting Buddhism in its place of birth, India, and spreading Buddhism in the Western world were two other areas on which Dharmapala focused his energy. He started the Mahabodhi Society in 1891 in order to achieve the latter two goals. Although Dharmapala became disillusioned with the local Buddhist leaders and spent the last part of his life in India, Dharmapala’s influence on the revival of Sri Lankan Buddhism was enormous. A generation of people exemplified by Gunapala Malalasekera (1899-1973), scholar, Buddhist activist and diplomat, who adopted Sinhala Buddhist names and wore Sinhala national dress took upon themselves the task of carrying forward Dharmapala’s project of safeguarding Buddhism and revitalizing the Sinhala Buddhist culture.

Independence and after Sri Lanka (Ceylon19) received independence from Britain in 1948. Although the administration was passed to Sinhala (Tamil, Muslim and Burgher) leaders, there was not much change in the ways of thinking of these new leaders who were basically Western in their upbringing irrespective of their religion. Although the majority of the new leaders were Buddhist, Christianity still played a dominant role in the life of the 19  The country was called Ceylon during the British rule and it was changed to Sri Lanka by the 1972 constitution.

26

Asanga Tilakaratne

elite. This state started to change only with the 1956 general election in which SWRD. Bandaranaike came to power with a promise to reinstate Buddhism and the Sinhala culture to their due place. Bandaranaike was supported by the “so-called “fivefold great force”,” namely, the Sangha, teachers, farmers, native physicians, and labourers. By this time there was a consensus among the leading members of the Sangha and the laity that a comprehensive study must be done on the current situation of Buddhism in the country in order to identify the problems and propose remedial measures. The Buddhists in vain expected the government to appoint a commission for this purpose. Realizing that it was not to happen, in 1953 Malalasekera in his capacity as the head of the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress proposed that a board of inquiry should be appointed to this effect. A group of leading Buddhist monks and lay people were appointed as members of this board. They travelled all over the country, met thousands of both monks and lay people and studied their views and proposals and prepared a comprehensive report which was completed in 1956. While politically 1956 marked a beginning of a new era for Buddhism and the Sinhala culture, more significantly it coincided with the 2,500th anniversary of the mahāparinirvāṇa (“great passing away”) of the Buddha. Buddhists all over the world celebrated this event which was called “The Buddha Jayanti”. The Buddhists of Sri Lanka prepared themselves for this event for several years with many short-term and long-term programmes and projects. Many Buddhist organizations and societies were started all over the country, and acts of piety and generosity were seen everywhere. Among the long-term projects sponsored by the government were the translation of the Tripitaka, the Pali Buddhist canon, into Sinhala, the compilation of the Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, and the Sinhala Encyclopaedia, the last of which is still continuing. The board of inquiry submitted its report to the public in 1956, and it was accepted by Bandaranaike, who ran for the office of prime minister later that year with the promise that he would implement its proposals if he were to come to power. As expected Bandaranaike did come to power, and being true to his promises to the Sinhala Buddhist public he made Sinhala the state language, recognized Buddhism as the main religion of the country, allocated a ministry for cultural affairs, made Sinhala language the medium of instruction of higher studies, promoted two great pirivenas (mentioned already) to the status of national universities in order to recognize the service rendered by these centres of learning to

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

27

the nation and also to open the doors of the university education to the Sinhala-medium students. Bandaranaike also took measures to appoint a commission to study the problems affecting the Buddha sāsana and make recommendations to solve such problems. The high-powered commission consisting of leading monks and laymen travelled all over the island, met a large number of monks, laymen and representatives of various organizations and social groups and came up with a report with many valuable observations and proposals. Before the proposals of the commission were implemented, Bandaranaike was assassinated by a certain group and the economic ambitions were frustrated owing to some of his decisions. It was unfortunate that the assassin himself was a Buddhist monk, an accomplice of another high-ranking Buddhist monk. Innovations and changes introduced by Bandaranaike had far-reaching effects on Sri Lanka society though some measures, such as making Sinhala the official language in the country, divides opinion. Bandaranaike’s rule marked a beginning of a new perspective in governance, education and public life with a clear emphasis on tradition and culture. A phenomenon which, among others, was instrumental in bringing Bandaranaike to power and which was becoming visible in the fourth and fifth decades of the twentieth century was the increasing involvement of the Buddhist monks in public debates including politics. Coming out from their monastic boundaries, some monks were determined to assert their role as leaders and opinion­makers of the society. As we observed in our discussion of the beginnings of the modem Buddhist revival, the monks were at its forefront as leaders, guides and resource persons. This situation, which existed even after Olcott arrived and paved the way for the Buddhist modernism, started to change gradually, particularly with the lay Buddhist activists with English knowledge and modern education. The monks with their pirivena education, which emphasized traditional knowledge, were no match to the lay Buddhists whose lifestyle and thinking were more Western and less traditional. Most of these lay Buddhists were of the view that the monks should only be concerned with their own salvation. In this atmosphere, gradually the educated younger generation of monks felt the need to reassert their historical role as the leaders of the Sinhala Buddhist society. The best example of this way of thinking is seen in Walpola Rahula Thers’s Bhiksuvage Urumaya (originally published in 194620). Rahula Thera was a spokesperson of this movement, and in the introduction he says that 20  The English translation, The Heritage of the Bhikkhu, was published by Grove Press, New York in 1974.

28

Asanga Tilakaratne

the book is an expanded version of the speech he made in a meeting in Kandy in March 1946. In this small but powerful presentation, Rahula Thera argues, based on the evidence from the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that social and political activism has been part and parcel of Sri Lankan Buddhist monks from the early beginnings of Buddhism in the country. As Rahula Thera reports there were several mass meetings in Colombo and in other cities such as Kandy to drive this point home and to reassert the “right” of the monks to engage in political activities. In addition to the public meetings, there were two main declarations by the monks asserting this right, one is the declaration of Vidyalankara Pirivena issued on February 13, 1946, and the other was the declaration of Kelaniya Rajamaha Viharaya issued in the same year. The latter was issued as a declaration of the entire Maha Sangha of the island. Behind these moves there were organizations of the monks representing various segments of the Sangha island-wide. It is mainly these monks who rallied round Bandaranaike in 1956 to bring him to power. The political involvement of the monks has been more or less a standard feature in Sri Lankan politics. Both monks and lay people are divided on the issue of the appropriateness of this involvement. But it remains a fact that many monks hold political allegiances to both liberal democratic and socialist parties, and a considerable number of them would make sure their allegiances are seen publicly. A more recent development in this trend is the formation of the political party called Jatika Hela Urumaya (JHU) (“National Sinhala Heritage”) in which monks are not mere supporters but direct stakeholders. The party was inspired by Gangodawila Soma Thera (1948-2003), a charismatic monastic leader who was outspoken on re-establishing “a righteous rule” (dharma­rājyaya) in the country and re-asserting the pure Buddhist practices against superstitious beliefs and rites and rituals. His untimely death in 2003 was the factor that ushered this new shift in monastic politics. Up to this point, the monastic political involvement, at most, was to be a member of a political party. But beyond being content with being mere supporters, they did not hold any offices in the party; nor did they hold any public offices in their capacity as members of a political party. Monks never contested at parliament elections. With the JHU this situation changed radically. The leader of the JHU himself was a monk, and in the 2006 general election, a large group of monks contested for parliamentary seats, and nine candidates were elected from this party to the parliament. Consequently, nine monks sat in the parliament of Sri Lanka, which is unprecedented in the history of any Theravada Buddhist

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

29

country.21 The main ideology of the JHU is Sinhala Buddhist nationalism although its overall aim is to create a rule of righteousness in the country. Monastic involvement in politics has never been a universally accepted or approved phenomenon in the Sri Lankan Theravada tradition: there have always been its supporters as well as detractors.22 In the absence of any hard and fast “theological” stance in the Theravada tradition, one has to wait and see how the whole phenomenon will unfold.

Future challenges Buddhism has existed in the country for more than twenty­three centuries. The preceding discussion should show that its journey through this long period of time has not been all that even. This remains even more so today with new situations and challenges, some of which are internal and some others external. The challenges arising from globalization and the widespread materialist is outlook of life are common to any religious tradition anywhere in the world today. It is the same for Buddhism. While many monks seem to endeavour to approximate the ideal monkhood, there are some others who are motivated by worldly gains such as money and fame. This problem has been there in the sāsana almost from its very beginning. As we have already observed, in many instances the rulers and the great elders have adopted rectifying measures in the form of the purification of the Sangha, and enacting katikāvatas (disciplinary agreements) etc. Although no katikāvatas have been enacted recently, the two commissions referred to above (1953 by All Ceylon Buddhist Congress and 1957 by the Bandaranaike government) may be considered as efforts in this direction by virtue of the proposals they made to improve the state of the Sangha in particular and the state of Buddhism in general. More recently a similar commission was appointed by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaranatunga in July 2001. This commission was named the “Presidential Commission of Buddha Sāsana” and comprised a group of leading monks and lay persons as its members. It was required to inquire into the following ten issues and 21  The first Buddhist monk to be elected to the Sri Lanka parliament was Baddegama Samitha Thera who represented the Sri Lanka Sama Samaja (socialist) Party and got elected at the 2001 election from the district of Galle in the Southern Province. 22  In his The Work of Kings: The New Buddhism in Sri Lanka, HL Seneviratne takes the Vidyalankara monks who took into politics and who justified and supported the political involvement of the monks to task. He does not cover the JHU phenomenon. He praises the Vidyodaya monks who took up social work as their service to the society.

30

Asanga Tilakaratne

make relevant recommendations: 1. Review the current situation of the Buddha sāsana in the country; 2. Problems and challenges faced by the Buddha sāsana and the Buddhists; 3. Procedures to be followed in newly establishing Buddhist religious places; 4. Problems and issues involved in Buddhist monastic properties; 5. Proposals to make maximum use of the Buddhist monastic properties; 6. Wilful destruction of Buddhist monasteries and monuments; 7. Difficulties faced by monks in their services to the sāsana and the measures to enhance their development; 8. The education of the monks and the training of the missionaries of the Dhamma (dharma-dūta); 9. Alleged decline of the Buddhist society, both monastic and lay; and 10. Efforts by new religious groups to convert Buddhists by questionable means. The issues mentioned in this list provide a good index to the problems and challenges of Sri Lankan Buddhism today. The commissioners submitted their report in June 2002, and proposed many corrective measures for the problems they were asked to study and examine. Three major commissions within a span of five decades (1953 to 2001) suggest that Buddhists in Sri Lanka are well aware of the problems they face as a community. But it remains a problem whether the major remedial measures proposed in these valuable documents would be adopted. For example, an important measure to regulate the behaviour of the monks and sort out all the problems related to monastic property and organization, namely, the establishment of an ecclesiastical judiciary (saṅgha-adhikaraṇa) has been proposed by these commissions, but remains neglected. The Buddhist monastic education has been a major concern of all the commissions. The perception is that the traditional monastic education system (pirivena) is not capable of catering to the needs of contemporary society. The university undergraduate education was basically meant for the lay society. Young monks who received that education were misfits within their own monastic environs, for they lacked knowledge in Buddhist philosophy. Even those who pursued Buddhist studies often were not equipped with modern language skills. Two new universities were started by the state in order to remedy this situation. Buddha- Srāvaka Dhamma Pīṭhaya (later Buddha Sravaka Bhiksu University) was started in 1968 and the Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka in 1982. Training missionaries of the Dhamma (dhamma­dūta) with necessary language skills was among the main objectives of the two universities, and it is one area where these new universities have failed in a decisive manner. None of the monks produced by these universities matched those well-known missionaries of the Dhamma such as Narada Thera (1898-1983), Piyadassi

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

31

Thera (1914- 1998) and Bope Vinita Thera who were the products of Vajiraramaya of Bambalapitiya, Colombo. K Sri Dhammananda Thera (1918-2006) who was based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and Hammalava Saddhatissa Thera (1914-1990) and Medagama Vajiranana Thera (19282006) who started their dhammadūta work in India and later went to the West. Unlike these monks who took the message of the Buddha all over the world the present­day monks go abroad basically to serve the Sri Lankan Buddhist communities living mostly in the West and in other parts of the world. Since such monks serve their own people, their lack of knowledge in an international language does not pose a big obstacle. Nevertheless, it is clear that their already invaluable service could have been even more meaningful had they possessed good Dhamma knowledge and language skills. Theravada monastic tradition in Sri Lanka retains the original ‘decentralized administration’ characteristic of the early Buddhist tradition. During the time of the Buddha, even though he was their overall leader, the monks living in different localities took care of their own activities not amounting to making basic Vinaya related decisions. After the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha we can see that Mahakassapa Thera took over as the leader of the Sangha (Sangha-thera), but not as the teacher or as a substitute for the teacher. Thus, the independent character of the Sangha continued. The history of the Sangha, in particular the occurrence of the councils (saṅgāyanā), testifies to the fact that the Sangha made decisions collectively as a whole when it came to matters that affected the entire Sangha. In the contemporary Sri Lankan Theravada tradition the monks are basically governed by the heads of the “chapter” (nikāya) to which they belong. As there are three major chapters and many sub-chapters within them, the administration of the Sangha is highly decentralized. Although the three chapters have four supreme heads, these chapters with the exception of the Rāmañña-nikāya23 have their many sub-sects which make their own decisions. This is different from the South-east Asian Theravada tradition in which the concept of one supreme head of the Sangha is still functional. While the Sri Lankan model is closer to the decentralized system that existed originally, it seems to have its drawbacks. The more recent history of the Sri Lankan Theravada tradition shows that there have been certain fundamental innovations within the Sangha, without the blessings of the supreme heads. 23  Its forest wing, Kalyani Yogashrama Sansthava, functions separately but not as a separate chapter.

32

Asanga Tilakaratne

A case in point is the re-start of the bhikkhunī-sāsana - order of nuns - with the granting of higher admission (upasampadā). Among the Theravada countries, the bhikkhunī order has existed only in Sri Lanka. Up to the end of the Anuradhapura period, there are records of the existence of the bhikkhunī order, and although the exact time is not known, by the end of the Polonnaruwa period, owing to the attacks of the invaders such as Magha, the bhikkhunī order seems to have completely disappeared. The nuns’ order that exists today in the Theravada countries is a movement started at the beginning of the twentieth century. In Sri Lanka they are called dasa sil mātā (“mother with ten virtues”) for they observe the ten precepts usually observed by people on lunar (poya) days and regularly by the novice monks and nuns (sāmaṇera and sāmaṇerī). More recently, there has been much discussion on the possibility of re-establishing the bhikkhunī order, and the standard orthodox view held unanimously by all three supreme heads is that it is impossible because the succession of bhikkhunīs is broken, and that there should be a Buddha to initiate it again. We must note in this context that the unbroken succession is very important in order for the monastic tradition to continue. This is amply demonstrated in the frequent exchanges of higher admission between the Theravada countries. When the succession of monks with higher admission is broken in one country, fortunately for the Theravada orthodoxy, it has existed in some other Theravada country. This was not the case with the bhikkhunī order for it was existent only in Sri Lanka. Amidst many discussions and debates, a group of Sri Lankan dasa sil mātās received higher admission from a group of Korean nuns at Buddhagaya in 1980. These bhikkhunīs, following the Theravada tradition, subsequently received higher ordination from a group of Sri Lankan monks (Once the bhikkhunīs have received higher admission it was not a problem for the monks to reaffirm it.). By receiving higher admission from both nuns and monks in this manner, it is considered that the tradition of the bhikkhunīs with higher admission has properly begun (Bartholomeusz 1994; Seneviratne 1999). Subsequently, there have been several similar instances and presently the joint ceremony of higher admission has become an annual event. The interesting and important issue in this whole process is that the legitimacy of this act of conferment of higher admission on dasa sil mātās by some groups of the Sri Lankan Sangha has not been accepted by anyone of the three supreme heads of the three chapters. Following their non-acceptance, the Sri Lankan state, too, does not recognise the legitimacy of this new group of bhikkhunīs with higher admission. This

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

33

non-recognition, however, has not resulted in any official banning or any other similar punitive measures on the part of the supreme heads as one would have expected. For all the practical purpose it is correct to say that the bhikkhunī sāsana functions in Sri Lanka although its official status remains still undetermined. If there were one central authority in the Sangha, the situation would have been different. Discussing challenges coming from without, Buddhists in Sri Lanka have been seriously concerned about what has been termed as “unethical conversions”.24 This has been particularly so for the last several decades. One of the tasks assigned to the 2001 Presidential Commission on the Buddha sāsana was to study this problem and propose remedial measures. The commission report devotes the ninth chapter to this issue. The commission makes a clear distinction between traditional Christianity, which has been in Sri Lanka for about five centuries, and the new evangelical movements which are out to convert. The commission discusses ways of “bribing” people to accept Christianity and finds that such measures are objectionable and unacceptable. In particular, the commission finds objectionable how the loopholes of law have been used in order to enter the country and register the organizations by camouflaging their real religious identity. The commission makes a series of proposals to remedy this situation. The proposals are not only to strengthen the law but also for monks, Buddhist organizations and the general public to positively address the social and economic issues affecting the Buddhist communities in the country. The gravity of the problem has been such that, as recently as 2008, the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC) appointed a special commission of its own to study this problem exclusively. The commission, which was appointed by the president of ACBC, was to study the extent of conversion and its modes of operation and causes and conditions that make people leave their own religion and propose remedial measures. The commission heard evidence at twenty-three locations in different parts of the country from 348 people, accepted written submissions and produced its report in 2009. It contained 121 recommendations and conclusions out of which thirty-four specific recommendations were directly relevant to the problem of conversion, 24  Aggressive efforts at conversion by some Christian groups are not confined to Sri Lanka or to Buddhism alone. These groups have been active in many parts of the world, in particular where economic conditions are wanting. While the use of violence was the ‘classical’ method of conversion, the more recent efforts are made through distributing material incentives.

34

Asanga Tilakaratne

and the rest to the areas with a bearing on the problem. Although this is not the appropriate context to make a comprehensive study of this report and its recommendations, the very fact that such a commission was appointed by a group of leading Buddhists and was welcomed by the Buddhist public, which testifies to the seriousness of the situation in the eyes of the Buddhists of this country. One of the gravest problems, not only for the entire Sri Lankan nation but also in particular to Buddhism, was the acts of terrorism perpetuated by a group of Tamil nationals through the organization called the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE). The bloody conflict which lasted nearly three decades was finally ended in 2009.25 The destruction caused to the country, to its people belonging to all ethnicities, including Tamils, is enormous. Buddhism was particularly targeted: the Buddhist sacred places such as Sri Maha Bodhi (attacked on May 14, 1985, killing 200 pilgrims) and the Palace of the Tooth Relic (attacked on January 25, 1998). Many others were attacked and some were totally destroyed. The Buddhist monks were particularly targeted, and the killing of thirty-three very young novice monks cold­bloodedly at Aranthalava in the Eastern Province on June 2, 1987, was particularly appalling. Apart from this “physical” destruction, Buddhism also had to suffer ideologically for there was a widespread belief that the Buddhist monks were actively supporting an armed intervention as the solution to the LTTE’s terrorism. It is this position of the monks that was described as a betrayal of Buddhism by Tambiah in his much discussed work Buddhism Betrayed? (Tambiah 1992). It is not altogether incorrect to say that the majority of the Buddhist monks supported the option of an armed intervention, but it is equally true that one cannot fully appreciate the position of the Sri Lankan Buddhist monks in a rather simplistic manner in which Tambiah proposes, namely, purely with reference to the fundamental teachings of the Buddha. The position of the Buddhist monks is one informed by the long historical experience of more than two millennia: throughout the history of the island until the arrival of the Europeans at the end of the fifteenth century, the invader and the usurper nearly always came from the south of India,26 “the Tamil country”, and always it was the Sinhala community that they had to rely on for the protection of the religion. Although such historical fears may not be 25  On May 19, 2009, the President of Sri Lanka announced to the world the defeat of LTTE and the consequent termination of the war. 26  There are only two exceptions, one is the invasion from the East Asian region, during the reign of Parakramabahu II (1236-70), Chandrabhanu of Tambralinga, a

Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Historical…

35

wholly realistic today, they are nevertheless fears, and the communities involved will have to work patiently for a long time in order to end such fears. The position of Buddhism in Sri Lanka was to concede to the use of power when all peaceful means fail. These remarks are not to provide an excuse for resorting to violence, but to acknowledge the seriousness of the challenge of balancing between non-violence and pragmatism.

Conclusion Historically and culturally Buddhism has been an essential aspect of Sri Lanka. In the foregoing discussion we observed how arahant Mahinda Thera insisted on establishing Buddhism in the country and its taking roots. Walpola Rahula Thera has pointed out the significance of this idea of “establishing” Buddhism in a particular locality (Rahula 1956/1993, 54-55). Throughout the history of Sri Lanka, the close relation between Buddhism and the country has been asserted in no uncertain terms. In 1815, when the country was handed over to the British by signing an agreement, it was clearly mentioned in the fifth paragraph that the new rulers should not violate, but undertake to protect and maintain the Buddha sāsana, the Sangha and the monasteries and the religion of gods. This same protection and privilege was a feature in the 1972 constitution of the Sri Lanka Socialist Republic (chapter II) as well as in the present constitution, i.e. the 1978 constitution of Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (chapter II). While allowing this special status to Buddhism, the same chapter of the constitution states that this “foremost position” has to be exercised in a manner that it does not violate the rights of the other religions practiced in the country. While the presence of many religions and many ethnicities make Sri Lanka a multi-religious and multi-ethnic society,27 its history and culture makes it a Sinhala Buddhist country and a Sinhala Buddhist society. This, however, should not be understood as supporting a theocracy, a religious state in which laws of religion are the laws of the country. In the lively debate as to whether or not Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country, even the most ardent supporter of Sri Lanka as a Buddhist country will not interpret his/her stance as supporting a religious state. It is the nature of the teaching of the Buddha that it does not support either religious state in the Malay peninsula, and before this Magha who destroyed Polonnaruwa came from Orissa region. 27  There is one exception, the invasion from the East Asian region, during the reign of Parakramabahu II (1236-70), Chandrabhanu of Tambralinga, a state in the Malay Peninsula.

36

Asanga Tilakaratne

exclusivism or religious fundamentalism, and history has shown with sufficient evidence that the Buddhists in this country have not done harm to this fundamental sense of tolerance found in their religion.

2. Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: 1948-1998*

Introduction In the entire recorded history of Sri Lanka, Buddhism has been its major religious and cultural force. There have been times when this position was challenged by other religious and cultural forces. The invasion of the country by Magha in the Polonnaruwa period is one such occasion. The history shows that the result was devastating, and the country could never recover totally from its shock. Starting from the 16th century, the country came under European power, first Portuguese, then Dutch and finally English. The four and a half centuries of the domination of these powers introduced to the country a new culture and a new religion. The story we are concerned here begins with the freedom from the last colonial ruler, Great Britain. As the events of the last five decades would show, it had not been very easy for people who had been under a totally foreign rule for more than four and a half centuries to find their own way in economics, culture, religion and education. What you find below is a cursory look at the passage of Buddhism, during the last half a century, Buddhism which had to lie low for a long period of time: its struggle to recover its identity and regain its position among the people.

Buddhism immediately before independence The period immediately before independence is marked by an intensive search by a large number of young and educated monks * An initial version of this article appeared in “Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: 1948-1998”, Dialogue Vol. XXVI, ed. Fr. Aloysius Peiris, Colombo, 1999.

38

Asanga Tilakaratne

for an identity and a role. This was necessitated by the challenges brought in by the changes of the society which were confronting the Buddhist monks in an unprecedented manner. In order to understand the background of this search for identity we need to go, at least, to the last quarter of the 19th century. A landmark event in the monks’ involvement in the public defence of Buddhism on the face of the challenge posed by Christianity is the Panadura debate in 1873 in which the Mohottivatte Gunananda Thera defended Buddhism with the assistance of such eminent members of the Sangha as the Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera. This debate marked the culmination of the process of inter-religious encounter that went back to the very arrival of Christianity in the island. It is a known fact that the reports of this debate were instrumental in the arrival of Henry Steel Olcott in Sri Lanka on May 17, 1880 with Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Ironically the arrival of Olcott also marks the beginning of a new trend in Buddhism in the country, namely, the active participation of the lay people in determining the character of the Dhamma in a decisive manner and defending it publicly. The debates which were instrumental in self-assertion of Buddhism during the earlier stage of Buddhist revival were solely represented by the monks; the lay Buddhists were there only to support them materially. The inter-religious dialogues starting in the th early years of the 19 century, first by Ola-leave tracts and books and later by face-to-face encounters and printed tracts, were basically the activities of the monks. This situation, however, changes with the arrival of Olcott. It is he who, for the first time, presented the teaching of the Buddha in a manner suited for the new situation caused, in particular, by the presence of more powerful Christianity. Buddhist Catechism, prepared by Olcott is an adaptation of a Christian method to serve a Buddhist purpose. First published in 1881 in Sinhala, this book represents a characterization of the teaching of the Buddha as a rational system of ethics. The book was used in the schools run by Buddhist Theosophical Society (BTS) which was started by Olcott. It is clear that Olcott is not the first to start schools for the lay Buddhist children, but it is with his initiative that the phenomenon of the Buddhist school became an island-wide popular enterprise. Up to this point, the school education was mainly confined to Christian families and to those of other religions who were willing to send their children to Christian schools but with the start of Buddhist

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

39

schools in Colombo and other areas gradually there arose a group of Buddhists with better and more modern education. The knowledge of English was a factor which distinguished this newly educated group from the more old-fashioned monastic group. By their modes of thinking and attitudes a large majority of these people were closer to their Christian counterparts. Anagarika Dharmapala (Don David Hevavitarana) represented the new generation of English educated lay people although he did not go to a Buddhist school. During his early childhood he had occasion to associate very closely with such prominent members of the Sangha as Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera and Mohottivatte Gunananda Thera. He received his education at a Christian school, but the home environment was very much Buddhist. As a result, he was well aware of both traditions from his early childhood. Initially, Dharmapala had a close association with Olcott and Madame Blavatsky. He served as Olcott’s translator in his lecture tours around the island. Subsequently, as an anagārika or a worldly ascetic Dharmapala dedicated his adult life for Buddhism and Sinhala society which he felt required a lot of assistance. Dharmapala knew Western religion, English, Pali and Buddhism from his Christian and Buddhist education. From his family he inherited a keen sense of business. The result was a perfect example of what has come to be called ‘protestant Buddhism’. Buddhist monks who lacked modern education and who did not have a will for social service were subjected to severe criticism by Dharmapala. While the lay Buddhist society moved forward with the help of English knowledge, the Buddhist monks were lacking notably in this respect. The reason is not difficult to explain, for English was identified as the language of moral decadence, alien power and wrong religion (mithyā drsṭhi). This attitude toward English may have been there from very early times. One reason that is instrumental for such an understanding may be the fact that some of the English educated monks defected and joined the forces of Christianity against Buddhism.1 It is interesting to note that during the 19th century revival of Buddhism, the members of the Sangha who were involved in the debates with Christians bad a good knowledge of English. In contrast, towards the beginning 1  Vain Debates by Young and Somaratne (1996 Vienna) records number of early instances of Buddhist monks defecting and joining the forces of Christianity, See in particular its chapter 12 in ‘Inter-Religious Understanding’ of this paper collection.

40

Asanga Tilakaratne

of this century, such interactions became less and less and therefore, on the one hand, there was no immediate need for knowing English and, on the other hand, the heightened phase of the westernization of the country may have persuaded the senior monks that they should never allow their juniors to learn English. The parivena education was basically traditional, and the apathy for learning English has been very much a characteristic of this system of education. A notable feature in the lay Buddhist movements started by Olcott and Dharmapala and subsequently by the others was the absence or the minimal participation of the monks. Both the Buddhist Theosophical Society founded by Olcott in 1880 and the Mahabodhi Society founded in 1891 by Dharmapala were lay organizations. The Young Men’s Buddhist Association (YMBA) started in 1898 and the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC), started in 1919 were likewise lay organizations. As the Walpola Rahula Thera would later remark, it is not that these organizations kept the monks totally away. They would have one or several of the members of the Sangha as their guide (‘anusāsaka’), invite them once a year to the annual general meeting, get him to administer five precepts and listen to a sermon, and from this participation the role of anusāsaka was over! (Rahula 1992, 132 note 1). What this indicates is that during the early decades of t h i s century, the monks were expected to be confined to their temples and to the activities of the temple, and their participation in the activities organized by elite lay groups was minimal (This, again, was an urban affair and cannot be taken as representing the situation in the village.) .The temperance movement and the organizations for village rehabilitation were some areas where the monks’ participation was seen, but even in these areas it was barely visible. For example we do not see any member of the Sangha among those who were imprisoned after the riots between the Muslims and the Buddhists in 1915.2 2  This new development can be explained with reference to the distinction between ‘kammatic’ and ‘nibbanic’ Buddhism articulated by the Western interpreters of Buddhism and accepted by Olcott and others. It was perceived that the function of the monk is to engage in nibbanic Buddhism which was considered Buddhism proper. This meant that the monks were expected to be away from any activity not directly related to nirvānic goal and meditation (bhāvanā). The kammatic Buddhism was perceived as a deviation from the correct manner of practising the religion. Although the Mahabodhi society started by Dharmapala did not have monks as its members at the beginning, Dharmapala does not seem to have subscribed to the above-mentioned distinction. He, in fact, wanted monks to

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

41

It is clear that this was a situation very different from what it was several decades ago. The reaction to this situation from the members of the monastic order came slowly. A clear expression of the dissatisfaction with the situation was the involvement by a group of the members of the Sangha in politics. Among the key figures in the movement were: Narawila Dhammarntana Thera (1900-1973), Udakendawela Saranankara Thera (1902-1966), Kalalelle Anandasagara Thera (1908-1961), Hadipannala Pannaloka T h e r a (1903-1953), Bambarende Siri Seevali Thera (1908-1985) and Walpola Rahula Thera (1907-1997). Most of these pioneering monks had their education in India and some of them were even active members in the Indian movement for Svaraj. It is interesting to note that their Indian connection began with Dharmapala who invited them to join Mahabodi centres there. In Sri Lanka the elitist Buddhist political leaders were very traditional in their outlook of religion, and they rejected the idea that monks should engage in politics. This was particularly so with DS Senanayake who was among the leading native politicians. DS Senanayake firmly believed that religion is essentially a matter of private life and, that it must not be mixed with one’s political activities. This made him oppose any involvement of the monks in politics. The state of the Sangha just before Independence may be characterized as having roughly two different groups of monks: one group (represented by such eminent members of the Sangha as Pelane Sri Vajiranana Nayaka Thera of Wajiraramaya) was the traditionally minded monks who thought that any involvement in politics is not proper for the monk. They believed in a more traditional role for monks, namely that of performing the religious services of the people and studying and interpreting the Dhamma for the laity. The other group comprised monks who believed that the monks had a historical role to play in bringing about social justice and development. The monks mentioned above represented this attitude. As Walpola Rahula Thera records, movement did not have a smooth passage; there was a serious opposition from three Maha Nayaka Theras of the Nikāyas and the leading laity who were also the influential politicians. The centre of engage in social activities, and he took concrete steps to realize it. A good example is that he took a number of young monks to India with him in order to train them in the Dharmaduta activities. The subsequent history shows that while some of these monks trained by Dharmapala continued their work in India, some others actively took part in political activities back in the country.

42

Asanga Tilakaratne

these ‘progressive’ monks was the Vidyalankara Pirivena. And it so happened that DS Senanayaka was a member of the Dayaka Sabhava which threatened the monks that it would stop all the support to the Pirivena. It does not seem that this strategy worked. The monks were firm in their conviction that it was proper for the monks to engage in politics. A historic statement entitled ‘bhikkhus and Politics’ was issued by the Pirivena on February 13, 1946 which stated that it was proper for monks to engage in any social or political activity which is conducive for the well-being of the people so long as doing so would not adversely affect one’s life as a monk. Walpola Rahula Thera was a key figure in this movement, and he addressed major rallies in different parts of the island defending the declaration. An elaborated version of one such public speech made by him in the Kandy town hall was published subsequently as a book with the title: ‘Bhiksuvage Urumaya’ (The Heritage of the Bhikkhu). The main purpose of the book was to show that politics has been a historical function of the Sri Lankan Sangha. In concluding his book Walpola Rahula Thera expressed his futuristic vision that social engagement of the bhikkhu will come to be established as the new ‘yoke’ (function) of the monks comparable to his traditional yokes of study and meditation (grantha­-dhura and vipassanā-dhura). However, the fact that all the Maha Nayakas of the Nikāyas including those of Malwatta and Asgiriya were opposed to this shows that there was a strong tradition of monks who felt differently.3 Sri Lanka received independence in 1948. It is barely two years after the historic Vidyalankara declaration, but by this time, already the heat of the monks’ movement seemed to have subsided. 3  The apparently controversial state of affairs is reported by Urmila Phadnis in the following words: The special conference which was convened by the ACBC in April 1946 at Kelaniya (near Colombo) and was attended by the priests of virtually all sects resolved that in no circumstances should a monk seek election to or be a member of the State Council, Parliament Senate and Municipal Council, Urban Council, Village Committee, or any such other institution, or any political organization. The monk should not seek registration as a voter or exercise the rights of a voter in respect of any of the political institutions mentioned above nor should he associate himself with any election in respect of these institutions. The ‘Young Turks’ of the Sangha, however, did not relent. They founded an organization called Lanka Eksath Bhikkhu Manḍalaya (Ceylon Union of Bhikkhus) and held a meeting on 29 June 1946 in Colombo to (a) censure the method adopted by certain parties obstructing the religious and national liberties and rights of both monks and laymen, (b) protect the civil and political rights of the Sangha, and (c) to declare the future policy to be followed by the Sangha for the furtherance of Buddhism. (Religion and Politics in Sri Lanka (New Delhi: Manohar). 1976, 166-7).

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

43

What happened with independence is a mere change of the guard and nothing beyond that. There was no cultural resurgence or anything similar to the emergence of national consciousness that was characteristic of independence of India. A large majority of the monks and the ordinary Buddhist laymen expected something more than this. In particular, they expected more attention to Buddhism and to the culture of the majority which were deprived of self­expression for more than four long centuries under the colonial rule. People strongly felt that the historical injustice caused to Buddhism and to the Sinhala culture needed to be rectified. 4 When this was not happening, people asked the government to take certain measures particularly with regard to Buddhism. Ultimately, when there was no response from the government, the Buddhist leaders such as GP Malalasekera, the president of ACBC, decided to appoint a commission, on their own, in order to inquire into the situation of Buddhism, the injustice that had happened to it and to propose measures to rectify them.

The Buddhist committee of inquiry The committee was appointed at the initiative taken by Professor GP Malalasekera who felt that the government was not doing its duty to Buddhism. He presented the proposal at the annual general meeting of ACBC in December, 1953 and the actual appointment of the committee took place in April, 1954. It comprised seven leading members of the Sangha representing the three nikāyas and another seven leading lay Buddhists headed by Malalasekera. The task assigned to the commission was to report on the current situation of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, what needs to be done in order to facilitate a Buddhist way of life and how it should be done. The commission issued a questionnaire of 71 questions and there were 1713 responses to this from various individuals and societies. The commission held 37 public meetings in all parts of the island, and there were 458 monks, 566 lay people, 242 monks representing various organizations of monks, 1271 lay people representing lay Buddhist organizations who gave evidence in these public hearings. The commission had travelled 6300 miles. These numbers speak for the enthusiasm people showed in the activities of the commission. The commission was welcomed warmly in all places it visited and the interest of the people was unprecedented. 4  For instance, Phadnis says that matters relating to Buddhism did not feature at all in 1952 election manifestoes of any political party (173 of the above mentioned work). This shows that religion and culture were not real issues in this period.

44

Asanga Tilakaratne

The commission completed its report by early 1956. The report started with a long introductory chapter which contained the history of Buddhism. In particular it dealt with, in detail, the plight of Buddhism during the colonial period. The first time the Sinhala readers had an occasion to read this phase of the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka was, Walpola Rahula Thera ‘Bhiksuvage Urumaya’ published in 1946. Following a similar line, the report contained a longer account of religious and education policy of colonial rulers. The main body of the report had ten chapters dealing with the following themes: (i) Education (Describes how the British rule actively supported Christian education and how it was instrumental in undermining Buddhist education .) (ii) Contemporary Society (iii) Social Service (iv) The Present State of the bhikkhus (v) Buddhist Temporalities (iv) State of Economy of Buddhists (viii) Tolerance of Buddhists (ix) Religion and State, and (x) The TempleOwned Land and Property Looted. The English translation of the report was called ‘The Betrayal of Buddhism’5 which reveals the overall tone of the report. The enthusiasm created by the commission is unprecedented for it was the first time the ordinary Buddhists, both clergy and laity, had an occasion to speak out their mind. The main emphasis of the report was that the historical injustices to which the Buddhists were subjected needed to be rectified. Apart from this, the report did not ask for any special favours for Buddhism. The request was for non-discrimination so that no particular religion is discriminated or given special favours. It is significant to note that there was no demand for making Buddhism the state religion either. There was, however, a proposal for a Buddha sāsana Ordinance under which to establish a Buddhasāsana Council which should take the overall charge of all Buddhist activities. This document goes to the history of Buddhism as the first ever effort by the Buddhists to articulate their position vis-a-vis what they felt to be injustices and deprivations suffered under the long colonial rule.

Buddha Jayanti and Bandaranaike By the time report was completed, the country was getting ready for the much awaited Buddha Jayanti celebrations and also for an early election. A large majority of the people did not trust the existing government of Sir John Kotalawala to take an active interest in the activities of Buddhism. In particular the members of the commission and the Buddhist leaders did not trust the government. As a result the report was presented to the 5  The Betrayal of Buddhism: An Abridged Version of the Report of the Buddhist Committee in Inquiry, Dharmavijaya Press, Balangoda.

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

45

people, and not to the government, at a public meeting held at Ananda College, Colombo, attended by a large number of monks and laity. It was SWRD Bandaranaike who accepted the report on behalf of the people and pledged that he will implement the report once he comes to power. The Buddhist resurgence caused by the committee of inquiry and the trust the ordinary Buddhists, in particular, those including the Buddhist monks and the educated native groups such as teachers and local physicians, placed on him was the key factor behind Bandaranaike’s victory in the 1959 election. Bandaranaike’s election campaign was greatly supported by a large number of Buddhist monks who actively participated in politics. As we saw earlier, just before the independence still the Buddhist monks were debating whether or not they should participate in politics. However, by this time we see a marked difference in the attitude of a large majority of the Sangha on this matter. Although this does not mean at all that all the monks unanimously thought that it was proper to participate in political activities, it is clear that a large number of educated and powerful monks were in active politics. Another interesting difference we see by this time is that monks had established their own exclusively ecclesiastical organizations which enabled them to take part in these activities in a more organized manner. Urmila Phadnis refers to the following organizations of this category: All Ceylon bhikkhus Sammelanaya, Eksat Bhiksu Peramuna, Lanka Sangha Samvidhanaya, Nikaya Maha Sangha Sabha, Samasta Lanka bhikkhu Sammelanaya, Maha Sangha Peramuna, Sri Lanka Eksath bhikkhus Manḍalaya, Sri Lanka Eksath bhikkhu Bala Manḍalaya, Sri Lanka Maha bhikkhu Sangamaya, Sri Lanka Maha Sangha Sabha, Sri Lanka Sangha Samvidhanaya, Tri Nikaya bhikkhu Maha Bala Manḍalaya and Tri Nikaya Maha Sangha Sabha. Although this may not be a comprehensive list, through this, one can still get an idea of monks’ activism during this period. The emergence of these organizations can also be interpreted as an expression of the will and the desire of the monks to counter the exclusive lay Buddhist activism. The single most important incident for Buddhists, not only in Sri Lanka but also in the entire Buddhist world, was the Buddha Jayanti celebrations in 1956. In spite of their professed aloofness from religious affairs, the UNP government set up a special organization, Lanka Bauddha Manḍalaya, to make arrangements for this occasion and everything was being prepared to celebrate the occasion. However,

46

Asanga Tilakaratne

the UNP lost in the election of April 1956, and Mahajana Eksath Peramuna headed by Bandaranaike came to power. Therefore it was up to Bandaranaike to actually celebrate the Buddha Jayanti. The incident gave a new lease of life to Buddhism in the country. There was a phenomenal increase of Buddhist societies and organizations, and the people’s involvement in Buddhist activities increased dramatically. It is needless to say that, naturally the strength of the monks increased with these new developments and as a result, monks’ involvement in political activities too increased. An important step taken by the Bandaranaike government was to appoint a Buddha Sāsana Commission to study and make specific proposals to implement the report of the Committee of Buddhist Inquiry. The commission comprised ten leading monks representing all the nikāyas and five leading lay Buddhist leaders and a secretary. The interest and enthusiasm created by this commission too was of very high degree. It had received 569 responses to the questionnaire it sent out. The commission met in Colombo for 35 times and 667 people had given evidence in those meetings. Outside Colombo it held 29 meetings and hundreds of people, both lay and clergy, gave evidence in those meetings. In addition, the commission invited 13 Buddhist leaders, lay and clergy, to give evidence. The commission also travelled in several Theravada and Mahayana Buddhist countries in order to study the organizational aspects of Buddhism in those countries. The report came out in 1959, but Bandaranaike did not live to implement the proposals. Among the proposals of the Commission, take over of all the privately owned schools, establishment of an ecclesiastical Judiciary and a Buddha Sāsana Council were very important. The first proposal was implemented by Bandaranaike government in 1960; the other two still remain unimplemented. As is well-known, some of the demands of certain monks who assisted Bandaranaike politically were not related to Buddhism but to further their own interests. When they realized that Bandaranaike was not cooperating, finally one of them got Bandaranaike assassinated. This happened in 1959 and this marks a rapid down-fall of political activities of the monks too. In the course of this decade we witness the monks’ involvement in political activities reaching the peak and we also see it falling down abruptly by the end of the decade with the assassination of the Prime Minister by a bhikkhu. This incident, as George Bond correctly observes, helped vindicate the position of the traditional monks who kept aloof from involvement in political activities (Bond 1992, 94-5).

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

47

The pioneers of the monks’ political movement such as Walpola Rahula Thera envisaged the possibility of political monk hood becoming a very respectable engagement. However, what the ordinary Buddhist could not accept in it from the beginning was that this particular engagement will cause damage to the image of the monk hood cherished through generations. From the very ancient times, we know that there were monks who spent their life in seclusion and meditation (forest-dwellers or āranya-vasins who practised vipassanā-dhura or insight meditation) and monks who lived among people looking after their religious needs (village-dwellers or grāma-vāsīns who practised granthadhura or learning). However, this new development was much more than that. In particular, from the early times of this century when universal franchise was given, there were contests for political power and those contests were marked by corruption of various degrees. Therefore, the general impression was that politics in that fashion was not becoming of a monk who has renounced household life. However, it is not necessary to understand this dislike as a rejection of monks’ being guides and advisors to rulers. It is not necessary to think that the only way to get involved in politics is to support one particular party against another by addressing public rallies and engaging in other forms of activities that go against the essentially calm and quiet character of the monastic life. A good contemporary example of engaging in politics, in a quite different manner, is the Madihe Pannasiha Thera (1913-2003) who has been very much active in the political life of Sri Lanka from the early 50’s. He was a member of both the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry and the Buddha Sāsana Commission. He was very much in the fore-front of the campaign to take over the religiously affiliated schools and in getting the (short-lived) Poya holiday established. The unique character of his involvement was that he has never identified himself with any political party and he has never addressed public rallies in support of any particular political party against another. His involvement has always been on policy matters and the mode of involvement has been one of detachment to any political ideology. Although Madihe Pannasiha Nayaka Thera is very much a political monk in a broad sense, he has never been considered a political monk in the popular sense. In fact, it is important to note that, when the monks ran into difficulties with the assassination of Bandaranaike, it is Madihe Pannasiha Nayaka Thera who came out in public in defence of the Sangha. It seems that the people listened to him for his credibility was intact as a non-political monk. Therefore, in the eyes of the public, what is important is not that monks get involved

48

Asanga Tilakaratne

in politics, but how they get involved in it (Tilakaratne 1998, 317-324).

Monastic education and its discontents Education of the Buddhists is an area seriously affected by the colonial rules and practices. The nature of the British policy and the involvement of Christianity in this field has been well-documented. As is clear from the reports of the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry and Buddha Sāsana Commission, getting the education free of religious involvement was very crucial for Buddhists. In this regard, what the report proposed is not to initiate a Buddhist lay education system to counter that of Christian but to make the system secular having the religion as a subject. The Buddhists achieved this in 1960 under Bandaranaike’s government, and both lay and monastic leaders worked hard in this endeavour (Tilakaratne 1998, 282-307). The story of the monastic education in Sri Lanka is a different one. The colonial rule may have caused the general decline of the monastic order of the country and as a result the education may also have got affected, but the monastic education, once given direction by Asarana Sarana Saranankara Sangharaja during the middle of the 18th century, grew up through the last century and the early this century without interruption. A landmark in the monastic education in Sri Lanka is the beginning of Vidyodaya Pirivena in 1873 by Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera and the Vidyalankara Pirivena in 1875 by Ratmalane Sri Dhammaloka Thera. By the middle of the 50’s these two Pirivenas had become great centres of traditional monastic education, attracting students even from other South Asian countries. It is as a mark of recognition of these two centres that the Bandaranaike government decided to elevate them to the university status. Besides, there was a need for providing facilities for higher education in Sinhala medium. For a government which made Sinhala the state language as its priority, this move was only appropriate. The experience of running a university may have been something new for the senior monks who were assigned to run these universities. Most of them did not have any exposure to the modern university system. The ideal situation would have been to develop a vision of a higher education system which is high in quality but different from the regular lay universities. This does not seem to have been accepted as the right path. What they tried to do from the very beginning was to try to imitate the lay university system. Gradually, the doors were open to both male and female lay students and the curriculum too became

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

49

one common to both lay and clergy students and nothing much of the Buddhist-ness was left except for the fact that there were a large number of monks among the students and the teachers. This situation too did not last long. It did not take too long for people to raise questions about the appropriateness and the validity of this kind of education for monks. Because the Bandaranaike government had started employing monks as school teachers, a considerable number of graduates from these universities were given appointments in public schools. Since the Buddhist monks have been teachers traditionally, this move was not seen too problematic, but the idea of making the monks the employees of the government was not in accordance with the traditional Buddhist Vinaya. As far as the two universities were concerned, they became gradually fullfledged non-religious universities and, the process was completed when they were renamed after the localities where they are located. As a result of the failure of the two universities as monastic education centres, there were proposals to start a higher education institute exclusively for monks. It is to respond to this demand that Buddha Sravaka Dharma Pithaya was started in 1968 (Act No. 16 of 1968) by the UNP government (1965-70) in Anuradhapura.6 The inauguration of the Dharma Pīthaya took place in the presence of a large number of monks who were invited particularly for the occasion. In his speech at this occasion, IMRA Iriyagolla who was the then minister of education criticized the monks who received their education at national universities for their laxity in morality. This created an unpleasant situation when the monks protested to the speech then and there. The incident, however, was symbolic in the sense that it highlighted the failure of trying to create what was perceived as a new breed of monks who were more virtuous than the rest. From the beginning Dharma Piṭhaya was both physically and ‘mentally’ isolated. The very status of the institute, whether or not it is a university, was not even clear. It could accommodate only about 150 students, a mere fraction of the young monks who wished to receive higher education. Although at the beginning it could attract some quality students, gradually, the situation seems to have deteriorated. The young monks preferred national universities where the degree had a recognition and offered more prospects for employment and further education. Dharma Pīṭhaya became inactive gradually, and remained in 6  The two major political parties had the proposal in their respective election manifestos. The UNP government which came to power during 1965-70 established the university.

50

Asanga Tilakaratne

that state for a several years before it was reopened under a new university act (Act No. 20 1996) in 1997. It is still located in Anuradhapura and meant exclusively for monks. In the new act, its status as a university was assured; but whether or not it can become a centre of higher learning remains to be seen. The Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka is another effort by the state to promote the monastic education. The university’s architect was the late Walpola Rahula Thera. It was started in 1981 by the Buddhist and Pali University Sri Lanka Act No. 74 of 1981 by the JR Jayawardene government. The university was initially meant to be a non-residential one with several colleges located in the monasteries. The idea was, on the one hand, to prevent the troubles of running a residential university and, on the other hand, to allow the young monks to be in an actual monastic setting. The system was running for several years without much problem. However, the students grew more and more unhappy about the set-up of the university. They were asking for a university located in one place running under the University Grants Commission (UGC). In 1995 (Act No.37/1995), this demand was partially met when the four colleges of the university were closed and the university was reopened at Homagama as a residential university. It is not exclusively for monks although women are not admitted as internal students. The university comes under the Ministry of Higher Education but not under the UGC. One problem that has been there with both these higher education centres meant predominantly for monks is that, in the presence of national universities which are better established, it has been difficult to draw the best qualified students always. Since the Buddhist monks are free to choose where they receive higher education, the new Buddhist universities have to be competitive and have to focus more on quality in order to do better.

More recent involvements of monks in national issues The mode of monks’ involvement in politics has undergone changes over the last three decades. Starting from 1970 general election, there is a gradual decrease in monks going to political stages and addressing public rallies in support of a particular political party. This does not necessarily mean that they are totally keeping away from politics. A notable example is the involvement of a segment of young monks in Janata Vimukti Peramuna (JVP) political activities. There were young monks

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

51

who were active participants in JVP activities, first, during the period of 1971 April uprising and again in late 80’s. These two phases of activism, marked by the use of violence on the part of JVP, were terminated by the respective governments by returning violence with violence. In 1971 the government had to do so when it was openly attacked; in the 1980’s however, the movement including a large number of young monks was crushed way before it developed to be an open insurrection. Today, the party claims that it has renounced its earlier strategy, armed struggle. Participation of monks in JVP politics is still a significant factor. One can see a group of young Buddhist monks marching in JVP May-day parade. Whether or not this degree of involvement in political activities is proper depends on many factors. Nevertheless, it indicates something about how these monks perceive themselves. Ultimately, this leads us to the deeper issue of self-perception, identity and the role of the monk in contemporary Sri Lanka. If monks’ involvement in JVP activities has been limited to a relatively small number of younger members of the Sangha, there has been an increasing participation of monks belonging to all age groups in broader national issues which are not connected necessarily with politics of any particular party. Starting from the 80’s, monks have been in the fore-front of the debate over the national crisis precipitated by the armed struggle of the LTTE demanding a separate country within Sri Lanka. The role of the monks in this problem has been discussed in great detail by, among others, Peter Schalk (1989, 55 - 82) and S Tambiah (1992). The impression given of the Buddhists and particularly of the monks who take part in these activities is that they are militant and that they condone violence. Tambiah says, “the majority of monks explicitly and privately supported and condoned the Sinhalese army’s killing of Tamil guerrillas and had not felt moral imperative to object to the tribulations imposed on Tamil civilians”. He further says, “they are totally opposed to any devolutionary solution to the conflict” (Tambiah 1992, 95/85). I do not plan to discuss in detail the merit or otherwise of this popular characterization of the monks in particular and the Buddhists in general for I have discussed the matter in detail elsewhere.7 It must, nevertheless, be said that, while Tambiah’s characterization may have been applicable to a very small minority of the members of the Sangha, it is definitely not true for a larger majority. 7  See Madihe Nahimi: Caritaya ha Cintanaya. Colombo. 998. ch. III (160-232) and ‘Role of Religion in the Current & Ethnic Crisis in Sri Lanka’: Paper presented

52

Asanga Tilakaratne

There are some interesting differences in this phase of political involvement of the Sangha. Unlike in 50’s and 60’s the monks who are involved in this broad national issue do not get identified with party politics. The public perception is that these monks are not motivated by personal gains. Another characteristic is that both clergy and the laity have got together, jointly or separately, to voice their opinion. For instance, Mawubima Surakime Vyaparaya which was very active in 80’s and the Sinhala Bala Mandalaya which is active up till now are umbrella organizations which cover a large number of individual organizations lay, clerical or mixed. Today Jatika Sangha Sabhava, started in 1997, has become the largest single organization representing the monks of all Nikāyas. Although the immediate cause of the arising of this organization is the national crisis, it has long-term goals and interests covering broader national and religious issues.

Lack of a central authority: vice or virtue? The need for some kind of central authority in Buddhism was first voiced in the report of the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry. This proposal drew more attention of the commissioners appointed by the Bandaranaike government in order to make specific proposals for the implementation of the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry’s report. The committee proposed a council called ‘Buddha Sāsana Mandalaya’ and it was anticipated that this council representing all the Nikāyas would be the ultimate authority in the matters of the sāsana. However, up till today this proposal remains unimplemented. The ‘Uttaritara Sangha Sabhava’ (Supreme Sangha Council) established during the Jayawardene regime is represented by all the four Mahanayaka Theras, (Malwatta, Asgiriya, Amarapura and Ramañña) and some other leading members of the Sangha. However, it is not the council proposed by thee Inquiry Committee. Although this Sangha council is functioning, the experience shows that not all members of the Sangha seem to feel that they are bound by the directives of it. The issue of a central authority has a theoretical and a historical aspect. Theoretical aspect is the following: According to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta of the Dīgha-nikāya which deals with the last days of the Buddha, the Ananda Thera, the attendant of the Buddha is told by the Master that his disciples should treat the Dhamma at the seminar organized by the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies: Colombo. February 25-6, 1999.

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

53

taught and the Vinaya prescribed by him as the Guide once he is no more. He did not name a successor. Why he did not do so has to be understood by understanding what the Buddhahood stands for. The Buddhahood is not an organizational position that can be passed on from person to person, but a stage of spiritual development which is unique to one who has achieved it. The Buddha viewed himself as a guide and not as a saviour. In this sense, it was understood that the ultimate arbiter in one’s liberation is oneself. In this context, it makes perfect sense to say that the Dhamma and the Vinaya would fill the gap created by the absence of the Buddha, but this does not need to be understood as implying that the Buddha did not want his organization to have a head. Although the Buddha did not name a successor in this organizational sense, with the Parinirvāṇa of the Buddha there was a clear understanding among the Sangha that it was the great elder Mahakassapa who was the head of the group (sangha-thera). It is he who presided over the first council that met after three months of the Parinibbāna of the Buddha. The tradition of having a leader for the Sangha was very much in practice in the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. The last ‘Sangha-raja’ (king of the Sangha) was Welivita Asarana Sarana Sarnnankara Maha Thera who was instrumental in bringing back to Sri Lanka the higher ordination from Siyam in the 18th century. However the office did not continue after him. The present situation in Sri Lanka is that although there are Nayaka Theras and the Maha Nayaka Theras in the Nikāyas, there is no central authority which covers the entire Sangha of the country, comparable to the Sangharaja position in Thailand. The proposed Buddha Sāsana Council is meant to fill this gap (The Uttaritara Sangha Council referred to above does not seem to fulfil this requirement.). Why this has not become materialized is basically the lack of interest on the part of some of the leading members of the Sangha itself. A more disturbing fact is that the membership of the Sangha is not necessarily bound by the directives of the Maha Nayakas. In the recent history there are some precedents. For example, when ACBC appointed the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry and when the Bandaranaike government appointed the Buddha Sāsana Commission they were to be composed of the representatives of all the Nikāyas. It is recorded that both the Malwatta and the Asgiriya Maha Nayaka Theras opposed these commissions on the ground that they were appointed by lay people who do not have a right to intervene in the activities of the Sangha, and asked their membership not to cooperate (Phadnis, 179). However, the senior monks who had been invited defied

54

Asanga Tilakaratne

this directive and participated on their own. It is not recorded that any official disciplinary action was taken against those monks. Earlier, in the 40’s, a similar situation arose when the Maha Nayaka Theras issued directives against monks’ participating in politics. A more recent happening is the so-called re-introduction of the nuns’ order to the Sri Lankan Buddhism. There has been debate over the possibility of re-introducing the nuns’ order for a long time. The orthodox view which is very much in agreement with the Theravada tradition.8 is that it cannot be started again for its continuity has broken. All the Maha Nayaka Theras of the Nikāyas representing the Uttaritara Sangha Sabha opposed any idea of re-introduction on this ground, but, in spite of all such opposition, a group of monks actually ordained a group of Sri Lankan women, trained them in India and finally brought back to the country. The newly ordained nuns held their own ceremony of ordination for another group of local women. In addition to issuing protest statements, the only other reaction of the Maha Nayaka Theras was to ask the government not to recognize this group. It is important to note that in a very important issue like this there was no face to face dialogue between the opponent and the proponents. However, the reintroduction has already taken place. The fate of the new movement is very likely to depend, not on the wish of the Maha Nayaka Theras but on how it actually fares. In any of these instances, it is clear that the relevant members of the Sangha did not obey the orders of their superiors, but no action was taken against the violators. It does not seem possible or even proper to interpret this form of behaviour on the part of the members of the Sangha as validated by the Buddha’s aforementioned advice to Aanada, but on the other hand there is a positive side to the picture: namely, that alternative or dissenting views can exist within the tradition although they are not totally condoned by the leadership or even by the majority of its membership. The question, however, is: if any such new move is really against the spirit of Buddhism or clearly opposed to the Vinaya what guarantee is there that the system is capable of safeguarding its interests?

Concluding remarks The story of Buddhism during the last fifty years shows how it emerged 8  It is important to note that, at the first council held by the elders after the Parinirvāṇa of the Buddha, Ananda Thera was blamed for persuading the Buddha to allow women to receive pabbajja and upasampadā (ordination and higher ordination): Vinaya Cullavagga.

Fifty Years of Buddhism in Sri Lanka...

55

from the struggle of more than four hundred years with three different colonial powers. The Independence itself did not give any hope of recovery because those who took the guard were not very sympathetic to the mainstream Sinhala Buddhist tradition. Their Buddhist-ness did not have a public dimension for they considered religion strictly a private matter. This was reflected in their public policy quite clearly. When the members of ACBC approached DS Senanayake to persuade him to appoint a commission of inquiry, it is said that DS Senanayake asked from them whether they needed a fourth refuge (of government) (‘anḍuva saraṇam gacchāmi’) in addition to the three they already had (Phadnis, 122). It is during the Bandaranaike’s time that Buddhism started getting the recognition due to it, but this does not mean that everything has been perfect ever since. As we saw in the present discussion, the recent history of Buddhism in the country has been full of uncertainties. The close relation between the state and religion has been a fact in Sri Lankan history for a long time. The kingship and Buddhism have been interconnected for such a long time that it is difficult for Buddhists, particularly, for the monks, to think of the existence of Buddhism in Sri Lanka without state patronage. This mentality has come under a lot of criticism. Nevertheless, we need to understand the historical background and the cultural significance of this state of mind. What the Buddhists are asking for does not need to be necessarily interpreted as a demand to make Buddhism the state religion in the sense of creating a fundamentalist Buddhist state. A careful study of the two reports mentioned above will show that the Buddhist demands were quite moderate and reasonable. To give these demands an extreme interpretation is to refuse to recognize them. Ever since Christianity was introduced to the island, the interreligious existence has been a continuous challenge for both the newly coming religion and the religions that have been already here. Buddhism as the major religious tradition of the country” naturally had to look for ways to cope with the situation. During the entire period of colonialism, first it was Roman Catholicism and subsequently, Protestantism that were favoured by the successive governments. Once Independence was received the Buddhists expected to return to the former position of state religion which they had lost. The period immediately after the Independence proved that this hope to return to the past glory was not to be realized easily. The concerns and the debates over this are not over yet. Still there are some Buddhists who cannot accept the fact there is a group of Sinhala people who are Christians by birth. Equally, there

56

Asanga Tilakaratne

is still a group of Christians who cannot accept the fact that the major factor in the Sinhala culture is Buddhism. The two groups have to face the reality and learn to reconcile within themselves first, and between themselves subsequently to accept each other and live peacefully. The same is applicable to the other religious traditions namely, Hinduism and Islam. As is evident in the history of Buddhism in the island well over two millennia, it has neither been a mere philosophy nor has it been a mere combination of rites and rituals. Buddhism has evolved to be a living religious tradition which affirms life, not leaving out the goal of freedom from Samsaric existence but keeping it to be achieved at the end of enjoying all the worldly pleasures (‘dev minis degatiyehi sapat kelavara nivan suva’). As George Bond has discussed in detail (Bond 1992) there have emerged new Buddhist movements, during the last fifty years, which take vipassanā meditation or study of Abhidhamma as the only proper forms of practising religion. These reinterpretations are meant to suit the elitist needs, but the historical Buddhism as it has evolved in Sri Lanka is not exactly the Buddhism in the books. It is the lack of this understanding or refusal to see it that lies behind such projects as Tambiah’s ‘Buddhism Betrayed?’ As a living religious tradition, Buddhism, like any other similar tradition, will have to determine its passage through time. Each phase of it has to be understood in its specific historical context and not through a theory meant to be universal and all-encompassing.

3. Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two Buddha Jayantis (2500–2550) and Beyond*

Introduction The year 2006 marks the completion of five decades since the 2500th Buddha Jayanti was celebrated in 1956, a year which marked a very important occasion for the world-wide Buddhism. Not only the people of Sri Lanka but also the people in the Buddhist world celebrated the 2500th anniversary of the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha in 2007. In countries like Sri Lanka, it furthermore marked the arising of a new awareness among the Buddhists about the need for organizing themselves to face the challenges of modernity. It is opportune at this juncture, to review the past fifty years in particular and try to understand how Buddhism has fared during this period within this country. Doing so will be helpful for us to look for the future of Buddhism in the country in a constructive manner. The present discussion is basically focused on the present and the future, both descriptive and prescriptive. In this effort, it is very important for us to have an idea of the historical path of Buddhism during the past fifty years. We propose to do this by examining several historical documents, the significance of which does not seem to have been always fully appreciated by the students of the recent history of Buddhism in the country. These are the reports of the Buddhist Commission of Inquiry appointed by All Ceylon Buddhist Congress in 1954 and the report of Buddha sāsana Commission appointed by Bandaranaike Government in 1957. As a source for the more recent period, we have the report of the * An initial version of this article was first published in “Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two Buddha Jayantis (2500 – 2550) and Beyond”: 2550 Buddha Jayanthi: Watershed in Human Development. Buddha Jayanti Secretariat. 2007.

58

Asanga Tilakaratne

Buddha sāsana Commission appointed by the President of the country in 1990. These reports are indicators of what worried the Buddhists during this period as well as what they perceived as problematic situations connected to the Buddha sāsana and the solutions. In addition to studying the local picture, viewing from a broader perspective, today, Buddhism in its all three major forms, Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana, has spread in many parts of the world. What was perceived fifty years ago as strange and unfamiliar by the people in these non-Buddhist countries now becoming familiar, and in some cases have even gone to the extent of developing their own individual orientations and flavors. It is important to map out these new developments and study how Buddhism is influencing the lives of people in a broader context. Accordingly, the first part of this essay will review recent history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, in particular, the last fifty years (1956-2006). In the second part, we will examine some key issues arising from the two reports referred to above and see the possible ways of addressing these issues. In the third part, we will look at what may be called global Buddhism and examine some new developments and their implications for the future of Buddhism in the world.

Fifty years (2500-2550: 1956-2006) of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A review based on the Buddhist Commissions The problems and the challenges the Buddhists in Sri Lanka had to face fifty years ago are not exactly the same as those the Buddhists are faced with today, although this does not mean that all those problems have been solved to the satisfaction of all Buddhists. Fifty years ago, the Buddhists in the country were struggling with problems they inherited mainly from colonial rulers. After five decades, today these problems still persist with different degrees of magnitude and intensity. By the 2500 Buddha Jayanti, the country had received independence from Britain just about eight years back, and the society was still looking for new directions to move. Making historical injustices and mistakes correct was an urgent need. Many Buddhists had started feeling that they had to regain the self-respect they had lost in the hands of the colonial rulers. One of the most crucial steps in this direction was the establishment of the Buddhist Commission of Inquiry by All Ceylon Buddhist Congress in 1954. Although the Buddhist leaders expected the government to appoint this commission, the move was turned down on

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

59

the ground that the government did not want to be associated with any one religion in particular. Contrary to this view, the larger majority of the Buddhists felt that it was incumbent on the government to safeguard the interests of the Buddha Sāsana. When the government declined, the Buddhist Congress headed by its president Professor Gunapala Malalasekera appointed a commission. A Group of Buddhist scholars and leaders were appointed as commissioners.1 The commissioners were asked to examine the current state of Sri Lanka and propose measures do be followed in order for the Buddhists in the country to live a life complete in aspects according to the teachings of the Buddha in a Buddhist environment and on how to implement such proposals. The Commission had circulated a questionnaire with 71 items and it had received 1713 submissions by way of response. In meetings held in 37 major cities of the country, some 458 individual monks and 242 monks representing various monastic organizations, some 560 individual lay Buddhists and 1271 representing various lay Buddhist organizations had given evidence before the Commission. It is clear from the report that the Commission had considered as its function to review the colonial history of the past 450 years and highlight the suffering and injustices undergone by the Sinhala community and the Buddha sāsana under three colonial rulers. The Commission has dealt with this subject fairly substantively yet accurately, as based on historical documents. The thrust of the long introductory chapter is to highlight the injustices perpetrated on the Sinhala Buddhists. In the report proper the first and also the longest chapter is on education. It brings out how education was dominated by the religion of the colonial rulers and how it was used as a means of conversion and discrimination. The key proposal of the commission was to absorb all the government funded private schools to the government and let the private schools, if any, to run on their own without the state support. The aim of these proposals was 1  Ambanwelle Sri Siddhartha Dhammananda Nayaka Thera, the Anunayaka of the Malwatta Chapter, Halyale Sumanatissa Nayaka Thera, the Secretary of Asgiriya Chapter, Palonnoruwe Wimaladhamma Nayaka Thera, the Vice-Principal of Vidyodaya Pirivena, Balangoda Ananda Maithreya Nayaka Thera, Principal of Sri Dhammananda Pirivena, Balangoda, Hapuwalane Gnanaloka Nayaka Thera, the Vice-Principal of Sarasvati Pirivena, Balagalla, Kotahene Pannakitti Thera, teacher at Vidyalankara Pirivena and Madihe Pannasiha Maha Nayaka Thera (who was invited later) were the members of the Sangha. Among the lay members were: GP Malalasekera, P de S Kularatne, LH Mettananda, DC Wijewardhana, Tennakone Wimalananda, TB Ellepola (resigned later), and CDS Siriwardhana. Messers TU de Silva and MDS Aberatne functioned secretaries.

60

Asanga Tilakaratne

to make an end to the use of religion to discriminate against Buddhists (and other non-Christians) and to make education as secular as possible. Correcting historical injustices suffered by the Buddhists in the country was a significant concern of these proposals. The poor social and economic state of the Buddhists, the unsatisfactory state of the monastic education and the weakening of the Buddhist religious organization by willful disruption of the monastic administration and usurpation of monastic property by the colonial powers were the other main areas on which the Commission examined and made recommendations. The Commission, following the mandate given to it, explored the root causes of social and economic ills of the society and made proposals meant to uplift the Sinhala Buddhist community socially and economically. In the sphere of religion, the commission recommended the restoration of special status of Buddhism accepted by the Kandyan convention, but the main thrust of the proposal was to correct all the injustices to all nonChristian religions and avoid any preferential treatment to any religion. Viewing the report as the first ever effort on the part of the Buddhists to come into terms with the their colonial past and forging their future in the independent Sri Lanka, the document itself is quite revealing; it is rational in its articulation and reasonable in its recommendations. What is recommended is not to do in return injustice on those perceived to be responsible for such acts but to correct them and assure that the proportionate representation of the majority community is recognized in all spheres of public life. The report specifically refers to the governments’ unwillingness to appoint a commission of inquiry and records its displeasure at this failure on the part of the government. It is in this background that 1956 election becomes significant in the history of Buddhism in the country. The report of the commission was ready by this time and the Buddhists announced that they will support any political party that will pledge to implement the proposals of the commission. The newly formed Mahajana Eksath Peramuna, headed by SWRD Bandaranaike, accepted to implement the proposals and this brought the decisive voter base for Bandaranaike. Once in power, one of the first things done by Bandaranaike regime was to establish Buddhasāsana Commission comprising the leading members of the Sangha from the three chapters and some prominent lay Buddhist leaders. The Most Kalukondayave Pannasekhara Nayaka Thera was the chairman of the commission appointed by the Governor General

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

61

on 4th March, 1957.2 The purpose of the commission was to make specific recommendations for implementing some of key proposals of the earlier commission. These proposals were on establishing a Buddha Sāsana Mandalaya, Sangha Adhikaranaya (ecclesiastical judiciary system), proper maintenance of the Sangha property, monastic education, prevention of pseudo-monks from entering the Sangha, registration of Buddhist holy places and any other matters that the commission deemed worthy of making recommendations on. In its mandate, the new commission was essentially a continuation of the earlier commission. Nevertheless, the new commission seems to have aroused even more enthusiasm among both Buddhist clergy and the laity. The participation was very high and the interest shown by the general public was unprecedented in any similar activities before.3 The document itself is one of the most important on the past and the present of the Sri Lankan Buddhist Sangha. The addendum to the report, a list of all the Buddhist religious places organized according to their distribution in various districts, along with the map of each district, is invaluable. To the utter dismay of all Buddhists, the brutal assassination of Bandaranaike almost put a stop to all Buddha-Sasana related activities for the suspects of the murder were two Buddhist monks, one being an ardent former supporter of the slain Prime Minister himself. With this event, the Buddhist monks had to keep a low profile for some time untill the public sentiments were appeased. 1960s marked enhanced activity on the part of the Christian church to reaffirm its grip on the ruling elite of the country. The movement that came to be known as the Catholic Action was active overtly and covertly to reestablish as the ruling elite as was the norm in the colonial period and during the period immediately following independence. The failed coup against the government in the early this decade marked a highest point of these movements. Two significant milestones of the Buddhist social activism represented by the leaders such Madihe Pannasiha Maha Nayaka Thera, were the taking over of (almost) all the schools run mainly by Christian organizations 2  The other members of the Commission were: Mottunne Indasara Nayaka Thera, Keselvatugoda Sri Ratanajoti Thera, Haldanduvana Dhammarakkhita Thera, Balangoda Ananda Maithreya Thera, Dambavinne Sumanasara Thera, Kotahene Pannakitti Thera, Induruve Uttarananda Thera, Madihe Pannasiha Thera and Henpitagedara Nanasiha Thera, and Messers. HB Kirimetiyave Disava, P De S Kularatne, TBS Godamune, CDS Siriwardhana, PP Siriwardhana. Laksman de Mel from the Ceylon Civil Service was the secretary. 3  590 had responded to the questionnaire; 667 had given evidence at Colombo alone; in 29 sessions outside Colombo a similar number had given evidence.

62

Asanga Tilakaratne

and replacing week-end holidays by Poya days as weekly holidays. Both these moves had been proposed by the commissions mentioned above, but the first was something that engaged the entire nation and sparked substantial amount of inter-religious debates and animosity. 1970s started with the JVP uprising and youth insurrection and ended with introduction of free market economy to the country. In 1982 Sri Lanka played host for World Conference of Buddhist Leaders and Scholars in which some ten areas of both local as well as global interest were discussed. The ten issues are as follows: i. Peace, human rights and disarmament ii. Preserving the integrity of Buddha Dhamma through prevention of distortion and misinterpretation iii. Studies and research and missionary services iv. Inculcation of Buddhist values and practices in daily life v. Effectiveness of the Sangha vi. Need to organize and mobilize Buddhist women vii. Channeling the power of the youth viii. Buddhist communities in disadvantages conditions ix. Protection of Buddhist monuments and prevention of the desecration of sacred symbols and objects x. Improving the economic capacity of Buddhist communities These issues have been articulated in a broader global context and specific matters relating to the Buddha-sasana of Sri Lanka are not mentioned for that reason. The significance of the event is that it marked the Sri Lankan Buddhism’s coming of age as a leading Theravada centre of Buddhism in particular among its South and South East Asian counterparts. The Presidential Commission for Buddha sāsana, appointed by the President Chandrika Bandaranaike Cumaranatunge, on 18th July 2001, provides us with a good piece of evidence on how the leading Buddhists of the country perceived the situation of the Buddha sāsana at the turn of the 21st century, the third millennium, a little more than four decades after the last commission. The Commission headed by Bellana Nanawimala Nayaka Thera4 was asked to make suitable 4  The other members were: Niyangoda Wijitasiri Nayaka Thera (Secretary to the Malwatta Chapter), Warakawe Dhammaloka Nayaka Thera (Secretary to the Asgiriya Chapter), Kotugoda Dhammawasa Nayaka Thera (Secretary to the AmarapuraNikāya), Welamitiyave Kusaladhamma Nayaka Thera (Head of Vidyalankara

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

63

recommendations in the following areas: i. Make a survey of the current state of the Buddha sāsana in the Country. ii. Identify the problems faced by the Buddha sāsana and the Buddhists as well. iii. The proper procedures to follow in establishing new Buddhist religious centres and Viharas. iv. Ways to make maximum use of property owned by the Buddhist Viharas. v. Destruction inflicted on the Buddhist religious places and objects and measures to prevent such occurrences. vi. Difficulties faced by the Sangha in their religious life and measures to improve the condition. vii. Improve the quality of ecclesiastical education and Dharmaduta training. viii. Measures to arrest the alleged decline of both Sangha and the laity. ix. Measures to prevent attempts by non-traditional and newly established religious groups to register themselves by making use of loopholes of laws and connive to convert people to their religion. In this list of areas and issues to be studied there is both continuation of some issues since the first commission, a little more than a half century ago, and also some fresh problems that were not mentioned in the two earlier commissions. For example, the issues connected to monastic education and monastic property form an important aspect of inquiry in this commission as they were in the earlier commissions. Two issues that were not mentioned in the earlier commissions are destruction of Buddhist religious places most of which are with archeological significance and attempts at conversion of Buddhists (other nonChristians) by some newly established evangelical groups, an act that has prompted substantial opposition by non-Christian groups in general and Buddhists in particular. Pirivena), Balangoda Pannawamsa Nayaka Thera (Anunayaka of the RamaññaNikāya), Olcott Gunasekera (Retired Civil Servant), Nehru Sarath Alwis Gunatilake (President’s Councel), Dilkushi Anula Wijesundera (Specialist Physician), Professor Mandis Rohanadheera and Pinnawela Aracchilage Senaratne (Former Secretary to Ministry). Somaratne Kariyawasama served as the secretary to the Commission.

64

Asanga Tilakaratne

The fact that some of the issues mentioned in the first commission are not mentioned in the latest is not necessarily that they have been settled ever since. For example, the need for an efficient judiciary system for the monks was highly emphasized in the second commission. Ever since, so much has been written on the need by some leaders of the Sangha as the Madihe Pannasiha Maha Nayaka Thera, but this remains undone even up to date. The concerns expressed about education in general and the particular need for making general education free from religious interference have been addressed for the most part. Although a good number of leading schools owned by Christian, Hindu and Islamic institutes were not taken over, a larger majority of the schools were taken under the government. The system of education remains today largely a matter of national interest. Nevertheless, there are new problems such as the practice of allowing so-called international schools to start and run without any supervision or quality assurance from the government or any other competent authority. Five decades ago, the concern for the Buddhists in the country was to liberate the system of education from the Christian religious bias. After five decades, today, the concern not only for the Buddhists but also for many others is to liberate education from being made a commodity for profit making. This shows that the threats for general education of the country are by no means over - with passing of time they have only assumed different shapes.

Some challenges for Buddhism in Sri Lanka discussed As we witnessed in the previous discussion the challenges for Buddhism in Sri Lanka are many. The commissions that we referred to in the course of this discussion highlight what the Buddhist leaders and scholars have perceived as threats, problems and challenges for Buddhism. In this section, I propose briefly to study a few problems currently affecting that affect Buddhism in the country. A. Buddhist monastic education It is true to say that education has been an essential aspect of monastic life from its early beginnings during the time of the Buddha. According to a tradition that goes to the Buddha himself, the ‘sāsana’ (message or the teaching) of the Buddha has three interconnected aspects, namely, pariyatti/learning, patipatti/practice and paṭivedha/realization. The understanding is that three are connected in such a way that the totality of the three indicates a gradual process. Although mere learning for its own sake has been discouraged, learning meant as a condition necessary

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

65

for practice has not been underestimated.5 The first Council held after three months from the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha, marks the beginning of the Buddhist academic tradition with its organization of the word of the Buddha into most probably sutta and vinaya ‘baskets’ and assigning constituent aspects to senior arahants and their pupils for maintenance and protection (Cullavagga: pañcasatika-khandhaka; Vin II, 284-293). The word of the Buddha protected in this manner was later transmitted to Sri Lanka where it was continued through what came to be known as the ‘bhānaka’ (oral) tradition. Learning the Dhamma under a competent teacher was perceived as essential. According to a story in the Visuddhimagga, an elder named Abhaya was not allowed to preach the Dhamma in the main hall of the Mahavihara on the ground that he had not studied it under a teacher (Vism 95). This testifies to the rigorous academic tradition the Sangha in the country had. The vicissitudes of this tradition through centuries is a long story that we are not allowed to deal with in the present context. The modern renaissance of the monastic education started with the last Sangha-raja, Asarana Sarana Saranankara Maha Thera in the eighteenth century (1698-1778). Towards the end of the nineteenth century Vidyodaya (1875) and Vidyalankara Pirivena (1877) were started respectively by Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera and Ratmalane Sri Dharmaloka Thera. These two centres of monastic education had reached their zenith by the turn of the twentieth century. The studies were centred on Oriental languages, and the Pali Canon. Those who had received their education from these two centres had started pirivenas at their local settings essentially following the same courses of studies. 5  The two Dhammapada stanzas capture this meaning: Bahumpi ce sahitaṃ bhāsamāno – na takkaro hoti naro pamatto Gopova gāvo ganayaṃ paresaṃ – na bhāgavā sāmaññassa hoti (v. 19) (Though much he recites the Sacred Texts, but acts not accordingly, that headless man is like a cowherd who counts others’ kind. He has no share in the fruit of the Holy Life.) Appampi ce sahitaṃ bhāsamāno – dhammassa hoti anudhammacāri Rāgañca dosan ca pahāya moham – sammppajāno suvimutta citto Anupādiyāno idha vā huraṃ vā – sa bhāgavā sāmaññassa hoti (v. 20) (Though little he recites the Sacred Texts, but acts in accordance with the teaching, forsaking lust, hatred and ignorance, truly knowing, with mind well freed, clinging to naught here and hereafter, he shares the fruits of the Holy Life.) The Alagaddūpama-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya (22) refers to monks who learn the Dhamma ‘for the sake of criticizing others and winning in debates’.

66

Asanga Tilakaratne

The Oriental Studies Society (initially ‘Committee on Oriental Studies’) was started in 1902 as a part of the Department of Education for “the promotion of the study of Oriental literature in Ceylon with the history and antiquities of the Island”. Within several decades, the completion of the final examination conducted by the Society became the hallmark of traditional scholarship of the country. Those who offered to sit for this examination were largely Buddhist monks. It is clear that the pirivena tradition and the Oriental Studies Society produced the kind of monks equipped with traditional knowledge that were needed by the pre-independent Sri Lankan society. Even after winning independence from the British, the ‘colonial character of the Sri Lankan elite’ remained intact to a large extent. 1956, however, marked a significant change. The transfer of power to a group of people headed by SWRD Bandaranaike, who were supported by the indigenous rural elite with the Sangha as its main component, there was a need for the monastic education to be reformed to suit the changing social conditions. The significant and decisive role played by a leading group of the Sangha in bringing Bandaranaike into power in 1956 is well documented.6 Just around this time there was an intense debate among the members of the Sangha and laity on the proper social role of the monk. Vidyalanka Pirivena gave the lead to the faction that strongly believed that the Sangha should engage in ‘politics’. What is meant by this, as one of its most eloquent supporters, Walpola Rahula Thera, maintained, is broad social engagement which he anticipated to be on par with traditional categories such as gantha-dhura (‘yoke of books’) and vipassanā-dhura (yoke of insight meditation), the modes of life the monks were expected to choose from as their main preoccupation (Rahula 1974). This ideology was held mainly by the group of monks who supported Bandaranaike and brought him to power. Ideologically Vidyodaya was different from its counterpart in Kelaniya and maintained that political engagements are not proper for the Buddhist monks.7 The whole debate exemplified the fact that the Sangha was passing a crucial time and they were faced with the challenge of determining their identity and the role. It is in this background that we need to understand the ‘crisis of monastic education’ that was brewing by this time. The two pirivenas were 6  See Howard Wrigins (1960) Dilemmas of a New Nation, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press). 7  See Work of Kings by HL Seneviratne (1999) for an account of the divergent positions of the two Pirivenas, comprehensive but clearly biased towards Vidyodaya and unkind to Vidyalankara.

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

67

elevated to the status of universities by the Bandaranaike government. This was done as a priority and the monks were naturally happy. On the one hand, the two pirivenas were expected to maintain their traditional status as monastic education centres of very high repute and on the other hand, they had to be transformed into modern centres of higher learning. The subsequent vicissitudes of the two new universities show that those who led these activities did not have clear understanding how to fuse modernity into the monastic education system without doing harm to it. What gradually happened was to fade away the monastic character of not only the education but also of the institutes themselves, and today, after almost five decades, the two institutes have evolved to be full fledged secular educational centres shedding even their original names. The end result is that the higher education of the Sangha in the country remains secular in its character. There have been two instances at which the subsequent governments have tried to address the issue by establishing higher education centres exclusively for the monastic community. The first instance is the approvel of the 1968 Buddha Sravaka Dharma Pitha Act by the Dudly Senanayaka government (1965-70) and the subsequent establishment of Buddha Sravaka Dharma Piṭhaya at Anuradhapura. The institute has existed for almost the last four decades, but still in the process of becoming a substantial monastic university. The second instance is the establishment of Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka by the JR Jayawardene government in 1982. Although a little bigger in size and scope, this university too has remained essentially confined to a small group of students. A larger majority of these students are those who were not able to secure entrance to the national universities, and consequently, most of them are naturally lower in quality and seem to suffer from some feeling of inferiority. A significant majority of these students as well as some teachers seem to wish that these universities become national universities so that they can merge with the mainstream secular system of education. The real beginning of the problem has to be traced to the primary pirivena education system conducted by the government.8 This education is scheduled to start with ‘Samanera Ayatanaya’ where a newly ordained monk receives his primary introduction to the monastic 8  There are isolated efforts by individual leaders of the Sangha at experimenting with alternative monastic education systems. One good example is bhikkhu Training Centre at Siri Vajiranana Dharmayatanaya pioneered by Madihe Pannasiha Maha nayaka Thera. This centre does not come under the government pirivena system and

68

Asanga Tilakaratne

way life. The duration is two years and at the completion of it, the student is sent to ‘Mulika (primary) Pirivena’. The five year residential course is planned to give a basic introduction to the Dhamma, the languages including English, and mathematics. ‘Maha (high) pirivena’ and ‘vidyayatana (college) pirivena’ provide facilities for studies leading to Advanced Level examination from which students are selected for university education, or prācīna avasāna examination, the third and final stage of Oriental Studies Society (OSS) curriculum. In actual fact the number of students who sit for OSS examinations comparatively are very few and a larger majority aim at university entrance, failing which some opt to enter either of the two universities mentioned above, meant exclusively for monks; some others choose centres established to train pirivena teachers such as Pirivena Teacher Training College at Mirigama, Sariputta Adhyapana Piṭhaya. The only stage when the new recruits to monkhood could get the monastic training they need is the beginning stage of Samanera Ayatana and Primary pirivena. Depending on the age one enters the monkhood, however, one may easily avoid going through these two stages. Even if one goes through these two institutes the emphasis is on university entrance where one usually receives a secular education at a secular setting. What is really needed is a system of education under which a monk gets necessarily an education specifically designed for his role as social and spiritual leader capable of dealing with the challenges posed by globalization. This may be done by improving the curricula of the two monastic universities and leading all the monks to either of these universities where they are expectd to complete their essential monastic education. Only when this basic education is complete, a monk may be free to pursue any other field of study at a higher education centre secular or otherwise. What is needed for the young members of the Sangha today, is to have a system of higher education which every single member who wishes to have such education should follow necessarily. In so far as this remains a mere option the two monastic universities will continue to remain at this not so satisfactory condition. In the present monastic education system, a member of the Sangha can get a university degree without practically having any monastic education. In fact there are a hence does not receive government support. It follows its own curriculum moulded by the vision of its initiator. There are a handful of similar centres in the country which remain very much personal initiatives though they may represent a better alternative to the system.

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

69

good number of such young monks who are employed as state employees without sufficient knowledge and experience of their own monastic tradition. It is only the Sangha who is responsible for this situation and therefore it is the Sangha itself that has to forge a system of education for its young members befitting their religious role. A larger question at the heart of the issue is the need to determine the kind of ideal monk capable of meeting religious requirements of the modern society. The debates on the nature of the role of the monk started in the pre-independent era of Sri Lanka remain essentially unfinished even at the turn of new century and new millennium. The uncertainties associated with the monastic education system will be hard to address till such large questions are settled. Unfortunately, at the moment one does not see any type of intellectual debate among the Sangha on such issues as these. B. Administration of the internal matters of the Sangha Associated very much with the problem of monastic education and the other issues discussed above is the overall unsatisfactory state of governance of the Sangha, characterized obviously by the lack of authority or organization. The commissions that came under our study contain extensive discussions on such issues as the problems and difficulties faced by the Sangha, uncertainties of monastic education, and lack of effective administration of monastic property, and come up with various proposals as remedial measures. There is no need to repeat the findings and proposals of the commissions here. What I would like to do is to address some broad issues underlying this unsatisfactory situation. The Sangha from its beginning in the 6th century bce, seems to have enjoyed a decentralized form of governance guided by the broad principles based on the teaching of the Buddha. The system clearly was meant for a group of people quite advanced in its moral behaviour and integrity. Power was not vested on any particular individual but was exercised by the body of the Sangha. This, however, did not mean that there was no leader for the Sangha. That the Buddha provided the leadership to his disciples does not need to be mentioned specifically. The Mahāparinibbāna-sutta account reveals how Mahakassapa Thera took over the leadership of the Sangha right after the parinibbāna of the Master. It is necessary to understand this development in the context of the assertion made by the Buddha before his parinibbāna, namely, that after him the Dhamma he taught and the Vinaya he promulgated will be

70

Asanga Tilakaratne

the teacher of the Sangha. The statement is as follows: Ananda, it is possible that the following could occur to you: “the teaching no longer has a teacher, there is no teacher for us (atītasatthukaṃ pāvacanaṃ natthi no satthāti). Ananda, it should not be understood in that manner; Ananda, the doctrine I have explained and the discipline I have prescribed will be your teacher at my passing Sometimes this is understood as the Buddha rejecting a leadership for the Sangha in the form of an appointed person. I think this is a misunderstanding. The context of this statement is the imminent parinibbāna of the Buddha. Some members of the Sangha might have felt that once the Buddha had passed away they will be helpless and that they will be left without a guide (satthā). Obviously these members needed a leader to lean on, but such an emotional attachment and dependence was disliked by the Buddha. When Ananda Thera showed his concern that the Buddha will not attain parinibbāna without making some final statement to his disciples, the Buddha’s response was that he is required to do so only if he thinks that the disciples live for him and he lives for disciples, but since neither lives for the other he does not have to do so. Although the Buddha did make some departing statements including one final, he did not consider that as a requirement. This is in accordance with the well-known statement made by the Buddha: Striving should be done by yourselves; the Tathāgatas are only teachers: (tumhehi kiccaṃ ātappaṃ – akkhātāro tathāgatā: Dhp v. 276). Although not naming a senior disciple as successor to himself may have gone against the dependent mentality of some disciples, the Buddha was, nonetheless, working according to the ideals of independence he upheld. One has to be one’s own refuge and seek any external refuge (attasaraṇā anañña-saraṇā) and one has to have the Dhamma as one’s refuge (dhamma-saraṇā). If the Buddha did not wish his disciples to depend even on himself, it is unlikely that he will name another person on whom to depend. There is another reason, which is ‘philosophical’ for such a standpoint as this. In fact, none including the Buddha could ‘appoint’ another as the ‘Buddha’. This is simply impossible for the Buddhahood is achieved and realized but not inherited. The Buddhist tradition maintains that the Buddha himself regarded the Dhamma realized by him as his teacher (A II, 20; Bodhi 2012, 406-407). This event, which is presented as a simple fact, contains a deep philosophical significance. The Buddha is regarded as the Buddha owing to the Dhamma he realized and

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

71

the Buddha is an embodiment of the Dhamma, incapable of behaving in any manner other than what is prescribed by the Dhamma. This shows that ultimately all including the Master himself come under the guidance of the Dhamma. The Buddha’s move to name the Dhamma and the Vinaya as his successor has to be understood in this context. A revealing discussion occurs in the Gopaka Moggallana–sutta (M II, 7-15) initially between Ananda Thera, and Brahmin Gopaka Moggallana and subsequently between the former and Vassakara, the Chief Minister of King Ajatasatthu. Gopaka Moggallana asks from Ananda Thera whether there was any single monk “who possesses in each and every way all those qualities that were possessed by master Gotama” To this Ananda Thera replies in the negative. Subsequently, Vassakara enters the discussion and asks Ananda Thera whether there is any one monk appointed by the Buddha or by the Sangha as the refuge of the Sangha once he is gone. To this Ananda replied in the negative and explained that this did not mean that they were without refuge, and that they had the Dhamma taught by the Buddha as their refuge. Being satisfied with the explanation, the Brahmin asks a further question, namely, Is there, Master Ananda, any single bhikkhu whom you now honour, respect, revere and venerate, and on whom you live in dependence honouring and respecting him? Ananda Thera’s response to this question was in the affirmative. What this discussion makes very clear is that although there is no any other person equal to the Buddha, there were many who were revered as virtuous monks whom the rest of the monks respected and depended on. The senior disciples such as Maha Kassapa, Sariputta and Moggallana Theras were regarded by the brethren as endowed with such qualities.9 Some could find fault with the Buddha’s not appointing a successor after him, and trace to it all the maladies of the Buddhist tradition. This is not reasonable for what the Buddha did not appoint was a teacher replacing or on behalf of himself, which is technically impossible. As Ananda Thera himself admits, there was none equal to the Buddha in all respects for such a person has to be none other than a SammāSambuddha. What is possible, however, is that there can be a leader for the Sangha. 9  Ref. the Saṃyuttanikāya statement where the Buddha refers to some great disciples as worthy of emulation: esa bhikkhave tulā etaṃ pamānaṃ mama sāvakānam bhikkhunaṃ yadidaṃ Sāriputta Moggallānā (S I, 235).

72

Asanga Tilakaratne

As an ideal, the Sangha was always one group which extended beyond the limits of time and space. This is exemplified in the often mentioned phrase: agatanāgata catuddisa sangha: Vin I, 305, the Sangha of the four directions gathered and not gathered (at a particular place or time), but when it came to practical matters of administration and other organizational aspects, Sangha always meant a particular group of Sangha living in a specific area. Later in the Gopaka-Moggallana discussion, Ananda Thera explains that the Sangha in each locality comes together under the leadership of a sangha-thera of the group and recite the Vinaya in every fortnight and abide by it. This allows the decentralized self-rule among the various groups of the Sangha each local Sangha attending to its own matters and resolving its own problems. There is in fact provisions in the Vinaya for these individual groups to work together when need arises. All individual members as well as the groups are regulated by the rules of the Vinaya and the spirit of the Dhamma, and none is empowered to go beyond the Dhamma and the Vinaya. It is this adherence to the Dhamma and the Vinaya that keeps the organization within its proper path. This means that we cannot confuse the two issues of the Buddha’s not appointing a successor and having leader for the Sangha. In a given situation, this shows that the Sangha can appoint a leader to all local leaders. Insofar as all members of the Sangha, including the leaders and the leaders’ leaders, come under the jurisdiction of the Dhamma and the Vinaya, this cannot pose any problem. This should not be misunderstood as a proposal for introducing some type of centre with absolute power. In other words, for the Buddhist Sangha there cannot be a Pope who is infallible. It is possible, however, for the Sangha in particular setting to have a leader who is responsible for the implementation of the decisions made by the Sangha. As we discussed earlier, in the ancient times, the unit of the Sangha was fairly small and was confined to one locality (or village in the setting of the ancient India), but this is not the reality in which the Sangha finds itself today. In particular, in a globalized context, the Sangha no longer can be confined to its own localities for the very boundaries of localities are being gradually blurred. Space and time have contracted and consequently the Sangha no longer can draw decisions effective only within their narrow localities. At least, regarding more important decisions, the Sangha has to be aware that they function in a globalized society.

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

73

There are many areas in the Vinaya that require its followers to take a new look at. For example, in the most serious disciplinary offences, namely, pārājikā violation, one on theft has many issues to be clarified in the context of the present economic environment. In the traditional Vinaya rule, one becomes guilty of ‘defeat’ of stealing if he/she (bhikkhu or bhikkhunī) steals anything of the value of one māsaka (A small coin of very low value, according to PTS dictionary) or more. It is obvious that this measure does not make sense for the present. There is a need for the Sangha to come to some consensus on this if not among all the Theravada monks, at least within the Sangha in each country, but nothing such has happened at least insofar as Sri Lanka is concerned even if everyone knows that determining the value of a māsaka as applicable for the present is quite crucial for this is a very serious Vinaya offence. This is just one example and there are many other areas needing clarification and consensus. In such cases as these what is lacking is a public discussion or debate among the Sangha itself. Another very important area that demands a lot of organization and consensus among the Sangha is dharmaduta activities conducted by its members in foreign countries. The introduction and propagation of the Dhamma to non-traditional Buddhist societies require a lot of skills and organization. In our own history, we see that arahant Mahinda, who introduced the Dhamma to Sri Lanka was well prepared for his task. That within his own life time, the religion he brought was handed over completely to the host culture and to its people is an excellent example for his right dhramaduta-ship. He seems to have known the language of the host society and also looks that he had thought a lot as to how to introduce the new religion to the new society. All these indicate how well the forefathers of the Sangha had fared in this very important area of religion. Unfortunately, today one sees hardly any organization or consensus on dharma-duta work although a large number of monks leave Sri Lanka every year for so-called missionary work. The experience is that each individual behaving as he thinks proper and presenting the teaching as he thinks right. This ‘trial and error’ method does not befit an ancient organization like the Sangha which could ideally have accumulated much experience in this regard. All these examples discussed so far indicate to a serious organizational deficiency within the Sangha as an organization. What is needed is going back to the seven factors of non-decline (satta-aparihāniya-dhamma) taught by the Buddha, in which, meeting frequently in unity and

74

Asanga Tilakaratne

discussing matters of organizational benefit are underscored. The Sri Lankan Sangha of the present day seems to be gradually drifting away from the ancient tradition of meeting in every fortnight where the issues relating to the individual members and the organization were discussed and decisions were made. Gathering in seminars, conferences and workshops is quite an integral part of modern organizational management, and it is a question why the Sangha does not seem to be willing to avail itself of these modern concepts for its wellbeing. From the very beginning, the Sangha has been governed by a sānghika (community-based) system in which the private ownership was limited to some very basic items of personal use and everything else was owned by the Sangha as a community. The Vinaya has detailed procedures on how to preserve this system. Under these procedures, it is not allowed for a member of the Sangha to own any properties such as land, buildings, etc. A member of the Sangha may act as the caretaker on behalf of the Sangha but not as the owner of the property. The subsequent history of Buddhism in various parts of the world, however, shows that the original sānghika system had to undergo many changes. In Sri Lanka, for instance, the early cave-inscriptions testify to the fact that these caves were given to the Sangha as lodgings having in mind the ‘Sangha of the four quarters physically present and not present”.10 The well-known dispute that ultimately resulted in the split of the Mahavihara Sangha paving the way for the origin of Abhayagiriya fraternity arose initially from the alleged act of donation of Abhayagiriya monastery as a personal gift by King Vattagamini Abhaya to one of the monks known to him. Towards the end of the Anuradhapura period we know that Buddhists monasteries had become places with substantial wealth.11 While some records suggest that the members of the Sangha were trying hard to preserve the sānghika spirit in the system, we at the same time have to admit that the abundance of wealth owned by the monasteries and the changed role of the monks as controllers of such wealth may have naturally done some damage to the ideal of the Sangha as exemplified by such virtues as having less wants and being content with what one has (appicchatā and santuṭṭhitā). 10  As found in many cave-inscriptions in Sri Lanka: agata anagata catudisa sagasa dine: given to the Sangha of the four quarters physically present and not present. 11  For a comprehensive discussion on monastic property, see Robe and Plough: Monasticism and Economic Interest in Early Medieval Sri Lanka, RALH Gunawardana, Arizona: The Unversity of Arizona Press.

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

75

The Commissions we have referred to earlier discuss in detail the plight of the monastic property during the colonial period, and the reports propose many valuable measures to be followed in order to make the maximum use of these properties. One fundamental measure still needing to be stressed is the crucial necessity of restoring the original sānghika system among the Sangha. It is very clear that there is a problem of distribution of wealth among the Sangha. While some monasteries and the individual members of the Sangha seem to have surplus wealth, there are many other monasteries and monks suffering from serious economic deficiencies. As we will be discussing in the next section, there is wide-spread poverty among the Buddhist lay brethren and there is a wide-spread belief that this unfortunate situation is exploited by some religious groups in order to enlist converts to their religions. The overall economic situation of the country remains far from being unsatisfactory. Even after more than five decades from winning independence, Sri Lanka is counted as one of the poorest countries in the world. At least the Buddhist Sangha can do their part to improve the situation by making maximum use of the monastic property and sharing it evenly among its own members. This, in other words, is a plea for restoring the sānghika system within the Sangha. C. Unethical conversions The arrival of Christianity in the 16th century marked, as has been pointed out by Gananatha Obeyesekera (1997), the end of a period when being Sinahala meant being Buddhist. It also marked the beginning of European religion in a country where only Buddhism and other Indian religions with local beliefs prevailed from the beginning of known history. The Buddhist Commission of Inquiry Report completed in 1956 has a substantial account of what the country went through at the hands of Western powers. The report, in particular, contains a detailed account of the measures adopted by the successive Portuguese, Dutch and English governments in order to undermine the Buddhist culture, religion and the education of the country. The report sought to highlight the gross violations on the culture and the religion of the country by these powers. This was the first time a full length report was produced on the damage done by the foreign powers to the local religion and culture. The 1956 report particularly reveals how the education system of the country was Christianized, and how, in particular, education was used as a means to convert people into Christianity. Consequently, a key question that the Commission meant to address was the predominantly

76

Asanga Tilakaratne

Christian system of education that had been established in the country. Interestingly, the Commission’s recommendation was not to make the education Buddhist but to stop education from being used as a tool of Christian (or any) religion. In fact, the Commission envisaged a system of non-sectarian public education for the whole country. The recommendation of the Commission required a lot of hard work on the part of the Buddhists for it to be materialized. Finally, after protracted debates of several years between the leaders of the two religions, religious schools were absorbed into the State education system in the early 60s’. Although this was a victory for the Buddhists, it definitely added to the already strained relationship between the two religions. The perception of the Buddhists was that Christians were working mostly covertly to undermine Buddhism. This was described with the then well-known term “Catholic action”. Although conversion was not completely non-existent at this point of time, the struggle for the Christians was to maintain their privileged position while the Buddhists were trying to regain their historical legacy from which they had been deprived of by the colonial powers. This was the general picture till the end of 70s, when the open market economy was introduced to the country under JR Jayawardene’s administration. What is called “unethical conversion” became a wide-spread phenomenon from the 80s’ during which time a large number of Christian religious organizations entered the country under the pretext of engaging in business ventures. As against the more conventional methods followed by the traditional churches, the newly arrived groups started using different methods and proselytizing mainly the Buddhists, the Hindus and Muslims and even the Christians who followed the traditional schools. By the 90s’ the intensity of the proselytizing movement had dramatically increased causing concerns among the other religionists. How this affected the Buddhist community is clear from the report of the last commission. The widely held belief among the Buddhists that the Sangha and the sāsana were under the threat of various non-Buddhist organizations was one of the reasons why the Commission had to be appointed. The threat which is one of the matters to be inquired into has been articulated in the following words: Measures to prevent attempts by non-traditional and newly established religious groups to register themselves by making use of loopholes of laws and connive to convert people to their religion.

Buddhism and Modernity: Between the Two…

77

In more than one occasion it had come to light that these organizations were engaged in social activities merely as cover for their covert proselytizing activities. Once these hidden motives were revealed, naturally there were reactions from people and such incidents were reported in certain media as attacks against Christianity. Although these incidents should not have happened, it is necessary that they have to be understood in the particular hostile and secretive context created by these organizations. The presence of Christianity has been a fact of life for the Sri Lankan society for the last five hundred years. Although the religion of colonial powers was introduced to the country through violent means, overall history of the multi-religious presence in the island may be described as peaceful. It is noteworthy that the recent incidents of violence were not against the traditional Christian religion. It is not right to portray the ordinary Sinhala Buddhists, whose history of religious tolerance has been well documented in the 1956 Commission report, as religious fanatics. The Buddhist opposition to what is perceived as “unethical conversion” has been branded as efforts of invasions on freedom of region, in particular, the so-called anti-conversion bills presented to the Sri Lanka Parliament including the one by JHU as infringing on religious freedom. In fact the thrust of the proposed JHU12 bill is to prevent any religious conversion by any religion outside proper procedures. I do not see why any religious organization needs to fear agreeing on some basic rules for this exercise. What is really needed today is what I would like to call ‘ethic of conversion’ as against the ‘logic of conversion’ adopted by these new religious groups to increase their numbers. It is true that all religions believe that their religion alone is true and others are false in some sense or other. It is also natural for these religions to feel that they should give as many people as possible what they consider to be true or right. Now this situation necessarily calls for conflicts among religions. It is because of this that there must be an ethic of religious conversion adopted by religions occupying this globalized universe.13

Emerging new Buddhism in the world today A discussion of Buddhist modernism is not complete unless there is a discussion of what has happened to Buddhism at global level. What 12  Jatika Hela Urumaya (JHU): The Political party that fielded Buddhist monks as candidates and secured several parliamentary seats in 2004 general elction. 13  I have dealt with this subject in detail elsewhere. Pls. refer to Dialogue (New Series) Vol.XXXII & XXXIII 2005 & 2006, Colombo. 58-82.

78

Asanga Tilakaratne

follows is not a comprehensive account of all the new developments that have taken place over the past five decades, but it will try to capture some of the main trends of world Buddhism today. This includes brief discussions on what I would like to call ‘trans-yanic Buddhism’, ecoBuddhism (green Buddhism) and socially engaged Buddhism. (Editorial Note: Kindly refer to chapter 05 for a detailed discussion on these matters.)

Conclusion The five decades between the two Buddha Jayantis seem to have been crucial for the Buddha sāsana both locally and globally. Locally, on the one hand, Buddhism in Sri Lanka has asserted itself in the cultural context of the country. On the other hand, however, the problems Buddhism was facing fifty years ago seem to persist in some form or the other challenging its advocates for action. I think that the leaders of Sri Lankan Buddhism need to make a comprehensive reappraisal of the state of their religion honestly and courageously. Globally, Buddhism seems to be doing fairly well, even to the extent of being described as the “fastest growing religion” in certain parts of the western world, but this in itself is not enough. The far more challenging thing for the Buddhists is to forge a common approach to human problems based on the principles of the Buddha. For this purpose, the Buddhists all over the world need to come together and envision a common future for the all sentient beings in the world.

4. Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future*

Introduction Theravada is the oldest extant school of Buddhism. The tradition holds that Theravada is the oldest school of Buddhism which descends from the earliest members of the Sangha who were direct pupils of the Buddha. Its history (of the earliest phase) is recorded in the Tripiṭaka itself (in Vinaya in particular) and in the later commentaries written and preserved in Sri Lanka. It was introduced to Sri Lanka during the reign of Asoka in India, 3rd century bce, and ever since has existed there without any serious interruption. Theravada was re-introduced to the South East Asia (areas known today as Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia) around the 11th century AD and has been established in the region ever since. Today, no longer confined to its traditional localities in South and Southeast Asia, Theravada is a global phenomenon found in all over the world. Evolving through centuries within several countries, Theravada has today reached a crucial stage in which it has to re-determine the path for its future existence. Changes in the circumstances in its traditional localities as well as the changes in global context are so crucial that the tradition is forced to examine its own course of activities not only from the point of view of each traditional locality but also as a whole. For instance, more recent incidents of violence allegedly endorsed or justified by the Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka and in Myanmar have raised new questions about the age-old image of Buddhism as a peace loving religion. Recent emergence of new interpretations and new movements too has caused * This article was initially published in Buddhi Prabha-Ven. Watagedara Vimalabuddhi Felicitation Academic Volume. ed. Ven. Watgedara Wimalasara et al. 2014. 173-191.

80

Asanga Tilakaratne

much internal unrest within Theravada itself. All these point to the need for re-examination of the historical path of the tradition. This gigantic task is not tried here, but an effort will be made to examine Theravada both as a local tradition in Sri Lanka and a global phenomenon as well.

Theravada as a historical phenomenon Whether or not the tradition called ‘theravada’ was ever described so by those who belonged to it at any period of its ancient history remains a question. Most probably the term came into vogue and wide use with modem academic studies in Buddhism by Westerners. Before the start of modem Buddhist studies by Europeans, there is hardly any evidence to suggest that the term was popular in the traditional Buddhist societies. Usually a need for defining and naming of any phenomenon arises in a context of multiplicity of contending fractions. As in most of the countries where Theravada prevailed, particularly in Sri Lanka, there was only one school of Buddhism, and hence there was no need for naming for the purpose of distinguishing it from other traditions (Although it is popularly held that Abhayagiri sect was Mahayana, this does not seem to be true. There is no doubt that they were open to new ideas, texts and movements. But that alone does not qualify them to be called so.). In this context, it is not out of place to point out that the term ‘theravada’ is not similar to the term ‘hīnayāna’ which was again made popular by early Western students of Buddhism who seem to have taken the only extant non-Mahayana form of ancient Buddhism as Hinayana. Although Theravada may be called hīnayāna in its emphasis on arahanthood as the final form of liberation, Theravada seems to have had almost an independent existence up to the tenth century, in the southern part of India and in Sri Lanka, and subsequently also in the region of Southeast Asia, away from the other parts of India where the early schools of Buddhism flourished. Although the term ‘theravada’ may have not been used by Theravadins themselves in a self-conscious manner, the term by any means was not unfamilier to them. In the canonical discourses it occurs apparently to refer to something other than a historical tradition (... ñāṇavādañ ca theravādañ ca vadāmi: Ariyapariyesana-sutta, M I, 167). The Cullavagga account of the first saṅgāyanā uses the term ‘therīya’, meaning ‘that which belongs to theras’, to refer to the tradition created by this historical gathering. Buddhaghosa uses the term ‘theravada’ apparently to refer to the views of the theras, taking the theras as a specific

Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future

81

group of monks with its own doctrinal identity (Tato pi antogadha theravādaṃ - saṃvaṇṇanaṃ sammā samārabhissaṃ: VinA I, 2). Whether or not the Theravada tradition identified itself by that term, what is clear is that the tradition had its identity created at the first council which has continued through centuries. Although there can be questions about what is traditionally attributed to the first saṅgāyanā, particularly what is attributed to it by way of determining the Pali canon, there cannot be doubt about the gathering itself and the decisions made at this gathering on matters pertaining to the character of the tradition. What is particularly significant in this regard are the charges brought against Ananda thera and the decisions made consequently. According to the Cullavagga account of the saṅgāyanā, at the conclusion of the gathering, Ananda thera was charged with the following alleged wrong-doings: that he allowed woman to soil the body of the deceased Buddha when he allowed them to pay respect to his body before others did; that he stepped on the robe of the Buddha when he sewed it; that he was instrumental in getting the Buddha to give higher admission (upasampadā) to women, which amounted to the introduction of female monastic order into Buddhism, and that he failed to get a clarification from the Buddha on minor rules when he indicated (as recorded in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta, Dīgha-nikāya) that his disciples may make changes after his demise to ‘minor rules’ if they so wished. Specifically significant are the decisions made with regard to the minor rules and the women’s admission to the monastic order. On the first, the decision was to keep what was prescribed by the Buddha intact and not to introduce any new rules not prescribed by him. It is interesting to note that, although, as far as the observance of the monastic rules are concerned, much has changed ever since, the Theravada tradition is still bound by this early decision for it has not revised this ruling at any other known gathering. On the second, Ananda then had to tender an apology although he himself did not believe that what he did was wrong. These two issues have exercised a decisive influence on the overall character of the Theravada tradition. It is interesting to note that even up to date the Theravada orthodoxy in the entire traditional Theravada world has remained true to the spirit of these decisions. The strict observance of the Vinaya has been identified almost as the defining character of Theravada tradition. The first council which was headed by the great elder Mahakassapa Thera was an early occasion in

82

Asanga Tilakaratne

which this identity took shape. The records of the saṅgāyanā show that when the question arose as to what should be recited first, Dhamma or Vinaya, the participants agreed on Vinaya claiming that it is the life of the sāsana (vinayo nāma sāsanassa āyu). What is meant by ‘sāsana’ in this context seems most likely to be the monastic organization. It makes sense to maintain that an organization would need adherence to a code of disciplinary rules for its existence. If the term ‘sāsana’ is understood in its broader sense of the message of the Buddha it is questionable whether Vinaya is its life. The centrality of Dhamma is undisputed in the religious life advocated by the Buddha (Dhirasekera, 1982/2007, 21-76). It is equally undisputed that the Vinaya has its origin and the rationale in the Dhamma. Strictly speaking, Vinaya, first and foremost, is a code of rules promulgated for the maintenance of the Sangha organization. It is different from sīla, which is the first step in the path leading to the final emancipatory goal. In addition to such ‘philosophical’ considerations as what is just mentioned, Theravada has its historical existence and practice in specific traditional localities such as Sri Lanka in South Asia and Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and Laos in Southeast Asia. It is difficult to dissociate Theravada from this historical legacy. Theravada today is basically this historical and traditional organization which has undergone vissicitudes of these particular cultures. One may say that there are two forms of Theravada in the contemporary world; one is this culturally shaped Buddhism which identifies closely with certain cultural traits of where it was established and grown. The other is a more recent phenomenon, which is, Theravada found among the Westerners in the Western world representing and interpreting the earliest teachings of the Buddha to the modem globalized world, transcending traditional cultural boundaries. The former is identified with particular Asian locations whereas the latter is a recent phenomenon of the West. Although this second aspect is very important in many respects, it will not be discussed in the present context. We will focus on the traditional Theravada in general and the Theravada tradition in Sri Lanka in particular as a representative case.

Challenges to the Theravada tradition in Sri Lanka Any form of religious life which requires a form of behaviour different from what is ordinary is a challenge to ordinary human nature. This is more so with Buddhism which was described by the Buddha as ‘going against the stream’ (paṭisotagāmi: Ariyapariyesana-sutta, M I, 167) and

Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future

83

which requires its adherents to adopt a view radically different from that of ordinary people. Apart from this inner challenge, which is shared by all religions in varying degrees, there are challenges for religions arising from within their own traditions. Such challenges to contemporary Theravada in Sri Lanka are numerous. Challenges, both internal and external, have been part and parcel of the Buddhist tradition ever since its introduction to the country. The Theravada tradition was brought from India into the island in the 3rd century bce during the reign of Devanampiya Tissa. According to the tradition, the mission of arahant Mahinda was sent to Sri Lanka as a part of the missionary activities organized by Emperor Asoka. Although one might be tempted to think that Buddhism grew in the country, being an island, without any external influence or interference, the 23 century long history of Buddhism in the country shows that there were constant interactions between the two countries throughout. The proximity of the Southern India was a key factor in political and religious life of the island almost from the 2nd century bce to the 16th century when Europeans started arriving in the country. South Indian invasions were basically motivated by political reasons. But such invasions always had religious repercussions. To be more precise, it is Buddhism that suffered always both physically and institutionally. Encounters with South Indians during the reign of Duṭugemunu and that of Vaṭṭagamani Abhaya are relevant cases from early Anuradhapura period. At both these instances, external political challenges seems to have caused internal problems within the Sangha. During Duṭugemunu’s time, the monks had to make a difficult decision to support war in order to save the culture and the religion in addition to the political integrity of the country. The attacks from the South India, the famine and the interpolitical conflicts ultimately made the monks to wonder as to what was more important in religious life, learnedness (pariyatti) or practice (paṭipatti). The records show that those who upheld pariyatti over paṭipatti won the debate. However, as scholars such as EW Adikaram have pointed out, this was a momentous decision which had long-lasting implications on the future of the Sri Lanka sāsana. The attacks during the Polonnaruva period, which culminated in Magha’s invasion and consequent destruction of Sinhala Buddhist culture, were more decisive and had long-lasting effects. Although the Buddhist culture was weakened, it was never destroyed. With the arrival of Portuguese at the beginning of the 16th century, Buddhism had to

84

Asanga Tilakaratne

face an enemy of a different sort. Christianity with its central belief in monotheism was different from both pantheistic Hinduism and nontheistic Buddhism. Hostilities to Buddhism were more than political side effects. Buddhism underwent hostilities from the three European powers for about four and half centuries until political freedom was given by the British, the last of three colonial rulers, in 1948. Today, in the second decade of the 21st century, however, the problems and challenges faced by Buddhism in Sri Lanka are not exactly the same as those of the past. Invasions from South India ceased after the 15th century, and there is no imminant threat of any invasions from the West. This, however, does not mean that there are no threats and challenges to Buddhism as a religion, challenges which have their roots in the colonial past or even in the past prior to Europen colonialism. In this discussion, I will focus on some major challenges faced by contemporary Buddhism in Sri Lanka. Challenges arising from within are to be considered even more serious than challenges from without. Internal challenges are what come from the members of the tradition itself that undermine the very basis of the organization. Such challenges may arise out of ignorance or negligence of the basic foundation of the organization which is nothing other than the Dhamma or the teaching of the Buddha. In the Vinaya the Buddha has listed five conditions that would usher downfall of the sangha. One among those conditions is what is described as ‘lābhaggamahattatā’ or excessive material gains made by the members of the organization. What I would like to describe here as an internal challenge is related to this. It is not the situation of the Sangha receiving many worldly gains simply because the organization has become so loved by people; but it is that some members of the Sangha making use of the organization as a means of generating worldly material gains for themselves. It is not a new phenomenon in the history of the Sangha that some members of the Sangha have used unacceptable means to improve their material conditions. What I am referring to in this context seem to go beyond the individual interests to affect the very egalitarian and simple and community (saṅghika) character of the Sangha as a whole. In contemporary Sri Lanka Theravada, some try to improve their material status by introducing new forms of mass devotional activities, such as ‘perahera’s (processions) for King Suddhodana and Queen Mahamaya, the parents of the Buddha, and Ravana, the mythical king of pre-historic Sri Lanka etc. which attract the hearts of the ordinary

Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future

85

people. In addition to being good avenues for money-making, these new introductions bring into Buddhism a form of devotionalism which is uncharacteristic of the Theravada tradition. Delivering dhamma sermons, which has been a simple duty of the Sangha toward householders who support them in their material needs, today has become a substantial avenue for monetary gains both for the preachers as well as the organizers whether they are monasteries or organizations including TV and radio stations. The gift of Dhamma has always been reciprocated by gifts of material nature as an expression of appreciation on the part of the receiver. But this material gift was understood as something within the means of any ordinary person irrespective his or her social or financial status. What has happened today with some members of the Sangha and some organization is to fix a price for a dhamma sermon which is usually beyond the means of ordinary people. The priceless Dhamma cannot have a price. Whether small or big, once a price is attached to what was to be delivered free, it is inevitable that it becomes a commodity to be purchased by those who have means to do so, not necessarily by those who have a genuine need for it. An internal threat of more serious nature is the emerging ultranationalist Sangha organizations which seem to rely on sheer physical power to solve problems. There is no doubt about that there are problems and challenges coming from outside to Buddhism in Sri Lanka and that these problems need to be addressed. What is at stake, however, is the integrity of the teaching of the Buddha which is looked upon by the world, both Buddhist as well as non-Buddhist, as presenting a social and political philosophy which is rational and peaceful. Those who argue for intimidating, aggressive and violent methods for solving national and religious threats maintain that what is bad needs to be met with what is equally bad. In other words, what these activists say is that the age-old Buddhist wisdom is no longer applicable to our contemporary situations. The confrontational methods adopted by these organizations may be more effective and less time consuming. But such short-term effectiveness cannot be a guarantee of the correctness of the measures adopted. This analysis should not be understood as an advocation of inaction or total abandonment of force as absolute principles. What is means is that for Buddhist Sangha to rely on confrontational methods without any consideration of the Dhamma taught by the Buddha is only the easy way out which is being nothing more than ordinary and popular. The larger philosophical problem is: is it permissible for Buddhists to use

86

Asanga Tilakaratne

methods that go against the Dhamma in order to protect the Dhamma (This should be applicable to all religions.). Protecting the Dhamma from external undesirable elements has been a historical concern in Buddhism in Sri Lanka. The Mahāvaṃsa records several instances when the beliefs and the works of what is called ‘vetullavāda’ (vaitulyavāda), which is Mahayana, were brought to the country and suppressed by the rulers at the request of the Mahavihara Sangha. At the same time, historical and archaeological evidence scattered in the country suggests that the efforts of Mahavihara Sangha were not totally effective. The so-called vetullavāda views and practices have been in Sri Lanka for a long time and some have even been incorporated into the mainstream Buddhist practice. We also have instances of book burning and similar physical destruction of dissent views in Sri Lanka Buddhist history. The fact that such measures were adopted by the tradition does not provide a guarantee that they were the right measures to be adopted. The discussion on ‘wrong views’ about Buddhism has emerged anew. And it is heard that at the suggestion of some Buddhist activists and organizations the government is going to bring out an act to establish a ‘censure board’ for publications on Buddhism. Although seemingly attractive at the first glance, such a move has some serious implications on the very philosophy and freedom of thought cherished in the Buddha’s thought. The presence of multiplicity of views on what the Buddha taught has been an age-old tradition in Buddhism. The ancient Buddhists, as exemplified in the works such as the Kathāvatthuppakaraṇa, have debated over such ideas and views in a very decent manner; but they have not disparaged or suppressed such divergent views. There is no doubt about the ‘good’ intention of those who advocate such moves. The problem, however, with such moves is that they originate from ignorance or disregard of the salient features of the teaching of the Buddha as one of the most rational and humanist systems the world has ever seen.

Challenges from without There are challenges to religions in general in addition to the challenges individual religions face. Religions in general seem to guide their adherents to a direction radically different from that is imposed by such world-wide forces as secularism, materialism, globalization and consumerism. A culture of consumerism has been created all over the

Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future

87

world. The worth of individuals, societies and nations is measured by the amount they consume. The entire economic system in today’s world is dependent on how much people consume. Globalization trends, in particular, cultural and economic trends, dictate over how people should dress, eat, spend their leisure etc. The religions that advocate such virtues as contentment, simplicity, non-aggression, right livelihood, protection of nature and natural resources find themselves in a contradiction with this dominant consumerist culture. The more unfortunate factor is that religions themselves, organizations and individuals, who are expected to be torchbearers to the blinded by the dazzle of consumerism, have themselves succumbed to the demands of this dominant culture. Not unconnected with the wealth amassed by religious organizations is the influence that comes from affluent religions to the religions of the less affluent regions. Buddhism in Sri Lanka has increasingly been a victim of such influences for the past several decades. Not only Buddhism, Hinduism and even mainstream Christian churches in Sri Lanka have been victims of the aggressive proselytising efforts by new Christian religious groups. Being the majority, naturally the Buddhists feel this aggression more than the other religious groups. The Buddhists have become targets of what has been dubbed as ‘unethical conversion’ not only in Sri Lanka but also in other Theravada societies in South and Southeast Asia. It is unfortunate that this is done in the name of freedom of religion which is understood as freedom to choose a religion of one’s own preference realizing little or even ignoring the fact that the very effort violates those people’s freedom to follow their own religion. Viewing from a Buddhist point of view, it is hard to maintain that one should not teach one’s religion to others or that one should not listen to others’ religions. If conversion happens due to right reasons, Buddhism will not oppose it in the same manner as Buddhists would accept others who opt to follow its teachings. What is problematic is to adopt material incentives or deceitful means to convert. The Buddhists have a right to expose such efforts and adopt measures within their means to check such situations. There is, however, a factor that cannot be ignored by the religions who have become victims of conversion programs fortified by money and other material goods, namely, the poverty and lack of education prevalent among those people who are being targeted by invading religious groups. If people change their religion in the hope of advancing their economic conditions, although the motivation is not right, the fact

88

Asanga Tilakaratne

of poverty behind such move cannot or should not be ignored. What this means in the context of Sri Lanka is that Buddhists, while expressing their displeasure and disagreement in acceptable means, should start taking measures to address the issues of poverty, malnutrition and lack of education in more organized and systematic manners.

Concluding remarks Efforts to safeguard and protect Theravada tradition in Sri Lanka are to be welcomed wholeheartedly. It is important that a discussion is initiated at academic and scholarly level on this theme. There are several points to take into consideration in this endeavour. One important factor is that we can no longer discuss Theravada in general or in particular without taking into consideration the emergent global Buddhism and what it imposes on any particular tradition. Elsewhere, I have dubbed this ‘Miśrayāna Buddhism’ (Tilakaratne 2012, 569-585) for the very reason that what emerges is not one triumphant school of Buddhism but what encompasses features from all three schools. World Buddhist leaders today, Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Than, although belonging to Vajrayana and Mahayana traditions respectively, seem to advocate a form of Buddhism that go beyond their own traditional conceptual universes encompassing more common features. Vipassanā meditation today has gone beyond the confines of Theravada Buddhism and has become a world-wide practice among both Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. Theravada tradition, once confined its South and Southeast Asian habitats, has become world-wide phenomenon today. When Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera started Washington Buddhist Vihara in the USA in 1964, it was the first Theravada centre in the North America. After five decades today there are several hundreds of Theravada monasteries in America and Canada alone belonging to Sri Lanka and other Theravada traditions of Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. Taken together with Mahayana and Vajrayana monasteries amounting to several hundreds Buddhism no longer is a new religious movement in the West. What is important is not the mere presence of a large number of Buddhist monasteries in the West, but the fact that these Buddhist traditions meet one another in their daily religious activities cutting across boundaries that separated them traditionally. Within the Sri Lanka Theravada itself monks belonging to all three nikāyas live together and

Buddhism: Tradition, Modernity and Future

89

work together as one Theravada tradition in these new locations. This has been extended to other Theravada traditions and even to Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions. In thinking of the Theravada tradition in Sri Lanka, we have to take into consideration this emergent state of Buddhism in the world. For example, Buddhists in Sri Lanka will have to respond to the global demand for meditation, now gradually found among the Sri Lanka Buddhists themselves. Equally important are the concerns of engaged Buddhism, and in particular, the concerns for the preservation of nature and environment that are championed by the global Buddhist community including the Theravadins at large. The best way to articulate the safeguard and protection of Theravada may not be to do so in terms of its physical protection. Today certainly we do not need to worry so much about the physical destruction of the Dhamma (Tripiṭaka) taught by the Buddha as to inscribe it in stone (which are nothing other than efforts to mesmerize the pious and the ignorant!). The entire Dhamma is easily carried in a pen drive in your wallet! If we understand by Theravada a mere religious organization with its hierarchical order and material interests, then it is only a matter of parochial validity. The people will maintain the organization so long as they find some use in it. However, persistence of such ecclesiastical order does not necessarily mean safeguarding the teaching of the Buddha which the Sri Lankan Theravada tradition kept alive through centuries by their strenuous efforts. This is not to underestimate the value of the organizational structure of Theravada, but to emphasize the need for the organization to be subordinated to the salient teachings of its founder. Therefore the future and the safeguard of Theravada has to be re-thought in terms of its applicability to contemporary social and political ills and helping people to cope with difficult situations caused by vicissitudes of globalized life.

5. Emerging New Trends in Buddhism and Their Doctrinal and Organizational Implications

Introduction That all constructed phenomena are subject to change is one of the fundamental insights of the teaching of the Buddha. Usually, this concept is understood in the context of meditation, as characterizing the phenomenal existence. It is, however, interesting to see how change takes place within the Buddhist tradition itself. The teaching of the Buddha has undergone changes in the hands of its various interpreters. One sees this phenomenon taking place from the first council that took place three months after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha. Although in his self-perception a commentator would not interpret his own work of interpretation as conscious effort at changing of what is being interpreted/commented upon, what has really happened in the actual process is change, no doubt. Since the interpreters usually think that their interpretations represent the original teaching correctly, there is, on the part of interpreters and their followers, reluctance to accept the fact that the doctrine itself has undergone change in the process. This is somewhat different with regard to Buddhism as an organization. The organizational aspect of Buddhism, the sāsana, comprising the four groups of bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs and upāsakas and upāsikās, has undergone change, and the tradition cannot deny this quite obvious fact. Throughout its long history of twenty five centuries, the Buddhist tradition as a religious organization has undergone considerable change. This aspect of Buddhism has been studied by many scholars, and the present paper does not propose to deal with this vast subject. The purpose of this discussion is modest in the sense that it proposes to study some new developments in Buddhism. What follows is not a comprehensive

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

91

account of all the new developments in Buddhism that have taken place over the past few decades, but it will try to capture some of the main trends of world Buddhism today. This includes brief discussions on what I would like to call ‘trans-yanic Buddhism’ and socially engaged Buddhism. Under the, latter I will briefly examine what is called ‘ecoBuddhism’ or Buddhist environmentalism.

Trans-yanic Buddhism Today globalization (disappearance of distance and time due to rapid improvements in transport and communication) has enhanced physical proximity and communication among different schools of Buddhist monks in an unprecedented manner. Sharing of physical space and experiencing different modes of life and practice have enhanced mutual understanding among the members of the Sangha. Modern education has done its part by providing opportunities for the monks belonging to many traditions to learn about one another’s traditions. In particular, there is ever growing tendency among the non-Theravada monks to come to Theravada countries and study what is believed to be the original teaching of the Master. In a similar manner, monks from Theravada tradition go to countries such as China, Korea and Japan and learn different schools of Mahayana Buddhism. The study of Buddhism for the Buddhists has never been a dispassionate and pure academic exercise devoid of any religious significance. The end result can be mutual enrichment. It is customary today to hear a Mahayana or a Vajrayana teacher referring to Pali Canon and a Theravada teacher narrating a Zen Buddhist story or quoting from Mahayana or Vajrayana texts. Theravada Vipassana meditation is being practiced by a large number of Buddhists cutting across traditional methodologies of meditation. The very concept of ‘yāna’ or vehicle is a later development in the history of Buddhism. The Mahayanists who seem to have coined the term ‘Mahayana’ to describe themselves have used the term ‘Hinayana’ to refer to whom they considered to be of lower capacities and inclinations. Clearly, ‘Hinayana’ is not a term the non-Mahayanists would have used to describe themselves. Neutral terms such as bodhisatvayāna and śrāvakayāna were representative of the actual soteriological positions behind the so-called Mahayana and Hinayana respectively. Vajrayana (tantrayāna or mantrayāna) was the latest development in the process. Theravada which originated from the original Sangha after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha seems to have had its existence away from this yāna struggle although technically it too could have called Hinayana.

92

Asanga Tilakaratne

Despite the doctrinal differences, there has been a lot of interaction among these groups. The world-wide history of Buddhism bears evidence to how members of different Buddhist schools developed friendly and fruitful interactions through centuries. This is nowhere more evident than in the illustrious Buddhist monk-travelers from ancient China to South Asia, namely, Fa Hsian, Xuan Zang and many others who followed their lead. The Buddhist world is indebted to these Chinese monks who risked their lives for the preservation of the vast Buddhist literary heritage. In the subsequent centuries, however, this trend seems to have gradually waned. With the demise of the so-called Hinayana traditions in India, relocation of Vajrayana in the Tibetan area, and overall destruction of Buddhism from its place of birth, after the first millennium and half, interactions among yānas seem to have ceased. Nevertheless, within the yānas there were frequent interactions across boundaries. For instance, the East Asian Mahayana Buddhism in China, Korea and Japan had interactions among themselves basically unhindered until modernity. The same is true for South Asian and the South East Asian Theravada, and Vajrayana which was East and South Asian. Particularly, within the former there were frequent interactions, and give and take from the time Theravada was introduced to South East Asia from Sri Lanka untill modernity, but the three main traditions themselves do not seem to have had interactions after the celebrated Chinese pilgrims mentioned above. This state of isolation continued until the 19th century when Buddhists, like many others in the world, started moving beyond their traditional habitats. Close physical proximity of various groups of people, who were otherwise isolated, has become a reality today as a result of globalization. One of the key characteristics of the global existence of Buddhism today is close interaction not only among different schools of Buddhism but also among different religious traditions. This close physical proximity has caused religions to review their traditional isolationist policies and come up with new ways of inter-action. ‘Dialogue’ or ‘interreligious’ dialogue is a concept that has been developed quite recently in the Western religion in its effort to communicate with other religious traditions. Although Buddhism has not developed any such specific concept, friendliness and cooperation toward other religions has been there from its very inception. Usually, the reaction of one particular religion to other religions has been one of intolerance and hostility. The only purpose of studying another religion was to find fault with it. Different religions have varying degrees of intolerance toward other

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

93

religions. As Arnold Toynbee has said, “Three Judaic religions have a record of intolerance, hatred, malice, uncharitableness and persecution that is black by comparison with Buddhism’s record” (as quoted by Noel Seth SJ, 1988) Buddhism, throughout its history, has been a quite tolerant religion and it has never engaged in hostilities against other religions although occasionally the Buddhists have been unfriendly to their own dissent groups (Seth 1988, 44-66). It is interesting to note that religions have always treated their internal ‘heretics’ more harshly than they would treat total outsiders. In the pre-modern Sri Lankan Theravada tradition, for instance, there was much openness for Hindu philosophical traditions and literature and other Brahmanic systems such as medicine (āyurveda) and astrology (nakṣatra) whereas it was almost totally closed for Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions. It is only from the middle of the last century that Mahayana texts were allowed in the traditional monastic education curriculum. The same in varying degrees holds true for the other religions in the world. Inter-religious dialogue, therefore, is relatively a new phenomenon. What is even more new is intra-religious dialogue which has been growing for the last several decades. This is true not only for Buddhism but also for many other leading religions. Long gone are the days when the monks belonging to the three main sects in Sri Lanka would not even sit together to take part in a dāna. Not only among the different sects within the same tradition but also among different Buddhist traditions inter-action and cooperation is quite a common phenomenon today. This trend is developing to such an extent that it is true to say that a form of world Buddhism or a kind of trans-yanic Buddhism is being evolved.

Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907): father of trans-yanic Buddhism The emergence of this new form of Buddhism did not, however happen all at once. Untill the latter part of the 19th century, the three main traditions of Buddhism existed as disparate schools confined to their traditional habitats although each tradition had close connections with its own brethren across countries. This isolated situation started changing with certain developments that were taking place in the Buddhist countries like Sri Lanka and around the world. One event with far-reaching affects was the arrival of Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907) in Sri Lanka in 1880 with Madam Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891), who together had founded Theosophical Society in the United States in

94

Asanga Tilakaratne

1875. They came to Sri Lanka inspired by reading a report of the famous Panadura debate which took place in 1876 between Buddhists and Christians. Although this was the immediate cause, the two pioneers of theosophy were already looking up to Hinduism and Buddhism as the source of ‘ancient Asian wisdom tradition.’ Upon arrival of Sri Lanka, Olcott and Blavatsky embraced Buddhism and started working with local Buddhist leaders, both monastic1 and lay, in areas such as education of children and organization of adults. In addition to starting schools for Buddhist children, a major project of Olcott was to prepare a Buddhist catechism, obviously following the Christian model, to be used in schools and also to serve as the source for correct knowledge of Buddhism for the adults whom Olcott felt to be wanting in their knowledge of their own religion. In this project he worked closely with Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera who was the foremost of all erudite monks of the 19th century Sri Lanka (then Ceylon), and to whom he dedicated this work which was an immediate commercial success. The compilation went into several dozens of reprints and editions and was translated into many languages. What interests us in this context is not the catechism which was confined to the Theravada Buddhism but what Olcott added at the conclusion of it as ‘fundamental Buddhist beliefs’ (see appendix). Olcott concluded this list with the remark that it was ‘drafted as a common platform upon which all Buddhists can agree.’ Guided by theosophist outlook, Olcott’s main purpose was to present Buddhism as a scientific and rational system which did not have a place for superstition. The catechism was the result of this motivation, but, one could question as to why did Olcott want to develop what he believed to be the core of 1  The role of the Buddhist monks not only in this particular aspect but also in what is called ‘Buddhist modernism’ remains to be determined. The commonly accepted belief is that the monks played only a supporting role in the works initiated by Olcott and Dharmapala. Nevertheless, records left by Olcott himself reveals how crucial was the role played by Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera among other monks. Although catechism appears to be the idea of Olcott, it was so crucial for him to get the approval of Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera for his project. Olcott admiringly records how the erudite monk went word by word of the whole document with utmost care (Guruge 1986, cxxxix ff). The fourteen points of the core of the teaching of the Buddha too were given approval by Sumangala Thera. Given the vast Dhamma knowledge he had, it is probable that these points were a joint work by both Olcott and Sumangala Thera, but unfortunately, as our current knowledge stands, we are not in a position to draw a definitive conclusion on this matter (See Blackburn (2001) and Harris (2006) on the monks’ role in ushering modernism prior to the arrival of Olcott).

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

95

Buddhism acceptable to all three traditions of Buddhism? According to Elizabeth J. Harris, the answer is the following: The theosophists who came to Sri Lanka saw Buddhism as that part of the East’s wisdom best suited to aid their search for the spiritual truth at the heart of all religion. Whether they read this in esoteric terms or not, they usually opted to downplay the esoteric when in Sri Lanka in their zeal to encourage a ‘pure’, rational, exoteric Buddhism, rooted in right action, loving compassion, cosmic law. Olcott came closer than other theosophists, with the exception of Frank Lee Woodward of the twentieth century, to making Buddhism his primary love, even seeking to create a movement that would unify Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism (emphasis added). (Harris 2006, 146) In the fourteen articles Olcott presents as the fundamental Buddhist beliefs, are included the basic Buddhist teachings such as the four noble truths, karma, causation, morality and nirvana. The Buddhist nontheism, and its rational and tolerant character are emphasized at the very beginning. Olcott formulated these articles, got the initial approval of the leading members of the Sri Lankan Sangha, and got the approval of the representatives of the Mahayana Sangha having presented these articles to them at the international Buddhist conference held in Adhyar, Madras in 1891. At the end of the 1891 edition of the catechism, Olcott describes how he got the approval of the Vajrayana tradition for the document: The following text of the fourteen items of belief which have been accepted as fundamental principles in both the Southern and Northern sections of Buddhism, by authoritative committees to whom they were submitted by me personally, have so much historical importance that they are added to the present edition of THE BUDDHIST CATECHISM as an Appendix. It has very recently been reported to me by H.E. Prince Ouchtomsky, the learned Russian Orientalist, that having had the document translated to them, the Chief Lamas of the great Mongolian Buddhist monasteries declared to him that they accept every one of the propositions as drafted, with the one exception that the date of the Buddha is by them believed to have been some thousands of years earlier than the one given by me. This surprising fact had not hitherto come to my knowledge. Can it be that the Mongolian Sangha confuse the real epoch of Sakya Muni with that of his alleged next predecessor? Be this as it may,

96

Asanga Tilakaratne

it is a most encouraging fact that the whole Buddhistic world may now be said to have united to the extent at least of these Fourteen Propositions. The effort by Olcott remains the first ever in this direction, and, as his above words reveal, in addition to formulating the document, Olcott actively campaigned for it to be accepted by the Buddhists all over the world. Anagarika Dharmapala, Olcott’s protégé in Sri Lanka, seems to have inherited this holistic view from his mentor. In 1889, Olcott and Dharmapala went to Japan and this trip, as one writer describes, “was taken up in the spirit of a dawning unity among Theravadins, Mahayanists, and Vajrayanists” (Christopher S. Queen in Queen and King 1996, 23). In these travels the two leaders encouraged participation of all the Buddhists in the activities they organized. For instance, when Dharmapala established the Mahabodhi Society (1891) with the aim of restoring the Buddhist sacred places in India he had in his board representatives from Sri Lanka, Tibet, Thailand, China, Chittagong, Myanmar and the USA. For the place of the Buddha’s awakening, Buddha-gaya, Dharmapala had a grand-vision including an international university of the caliber of ancient Nalanda. As Dharmapala’s own words reveal his vision included all the Buddhist traditions: At this hallowed spot, full of imperishable associations, it is proposed to re-establish a monastery for the residence of bhikkhus representing the Buddhist countries of Tibet, Ceylon, China, Japan, Cambodia, Burma, Chittagong, Nepal, Korea and Arkan. We hope to found, also a college at Buddha-gaya for training young men of unblemished character, of whatsoever race or country for the Buddhist order (Sangha), on the lines of the ancient Buddhist University at Nalanda, where were taught the Mahayana and also works belonging to the eighteen sects. (quoted by Ananda W.P. Guruge in Deegalle Mahinda (ed): 2008, 54) Although Dharmapala later fell out with Olcott and other theosophists such as Leadbeater and Annie Besant, this holistic vision persisted in him. For both Olcott and Dharmapala, there was another avenue through which this broad outlook naturally came. For Olcott it is the globalizing background from which he came. Traveling from the United States to India and Sri Lanka passing various countries and meeting with various people, Olcott had experience needed for

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

97

a holistic approach to Buddhism. Dharmapala himself came from a family with urban culture, and with his early Christian education and entrepreneurship inherited from his family, he was quick to grasp this outlook of Olcott. Olcott’s arrival in Sri Lanka having read a report of Panadura Debate in an American news paper can be described as a result of globalization (contraction of space and time due to rapid advances of transport and means of communication). The holistic view toward Buddhism ushered by Olcott and accepted by Dharmapala may well be described as resulting from emerging forces of globalization. Although what was initiated by Olcott and followed by Dharmapala does not seem to have reached its desired conclusion in their life times, the former’s formulation of what was widely accepted as the fundamental Buddhist beliefs can be taken as the first-ever effort at formulating a ‘manifesto’ for intra-Buddhist dialogue and cooperation.

Developments in the 20th century Dharmapala’s influence was far-reaching. The World Fellowship of Buddhists (WFB) initiated by the late Professor Gunapala Malalasekera in 1950 was a direct outcome of this broad outlook. Malalasekera came under Dharmapala’s influence when he was quite a young man. Being the first Professor of Buddhist Civilization at University of Ceylon Malalasekera understandably had a good understanding of the historical evolution of Buddhism. It was his expressed opinion that there were more reasons for Buddhists to get together than to remain separated. The initial resolution for the establishment of WFB was presented to the 1947 meeting of All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC), and it said that an organization representing all the Buddhists of the world needs to be established “for the purpose of bringing together Buddhists of the world, of exchanging news and views about the condition of Buddhism, of different countries and of discussing ways and means whereby the Buddhists could make their contribution to peace and happiness.” It is with this understanding and conviction that he convened the Buddhists from all the traditions of Buddhism and established what is known today as World Fellowship of Buddhists. Today WFB is an organization serving as the gathering point for Buddhists of all traditions all over the world. After the establishment of WFB, Malalasekera embarked on a world tour covering countries in South, South East and East Asia meeting Buddhists belonging to all traditions. Malalasekera’s own account of this tour amply reveals the magnitude of goodwill and respect he commanded everywhere he went (1952 ?). One of the things he achieved

98

Asanga Tilakaratne

in this tour was to get all the Buddhists to accept the six-coloured flag, initiated by Olcott as a part of his holistic vision, as the common Buddhist symbol. In concluding the records of his travel in the Buddhist world, Malalasekera says: I had asked for unity, for the recognition of the basic agreements which exist, as I passionately believe, amongst all who call themselves the followers of the Sakyamuni Gautama. I sensed that there was this recognition by all, orthodox Theravada or not, and felt happy that my mission was not in vain. In symbolic fellowship I asked, on a mandate of the World Fellowship of Buddhists, that the six-coloured Buddhist Flag as used in Lanka be accepted by Buddhists everywhere. Wherever I went I saw that the response to the call was marvelous. On the day of Vesak, as is known in Theravada lands, or Buddha day (as asked for by the World Fellowship of Buddhists) in others, I saw the Flag continuously from Lanka to Viet Nam, the utmost confines of this my mission. (Malalasekare 1952 (?), 71) Another result of Malalasekera’s broad vision was the Encyclopedia of Buddhism project which was conceived and planned by him. The proposed encyclopedia was not confined to Theravada but was to cover Buddhism in its totality. Malalasekera served as its first editor-in-chief from its inception in 1956 to his demise in 1973.

World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC) WFB has remained predominantly a lay Buddhist organization. It took nearly two decades for a similar organization for the Sangha to develop. The World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC), started in 1966 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, with the participation of monks from all Buddhist traditions, is an organization for the Buddhist monks exclusively. The Council membership represents all the Buddhist traditions, sharing responsibilities among members across traditions. The Council has four objectives, namely, (i) developing the organizations and exchanges of Sangha worldwide; (ii) helping Sangha carry out dharmaduta activities throughout the world; (iii) enhancing harmony and relationship among different Buddhist traditions and (iv) propagating Buddha’s teaching of compassion to promote world peace. These objectives testify amply to a unified vision of the Dhamma, which was to serve as the foundation for the unity of the world-wide Sangha,

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

99

not identifying with any sectarian particularities. It is also interesting to note that the council accepts the six-coloured flag (referred to above) as its official flag. After four decades from its inauguration, today WBSC is a world-wide organization in its true sense where Buddhist monks from all traditions get together on one flat-form and work under one identity, namely, the sons of the Sakyamuni Buddha (samanā sakyaputtiyā). This is definitely a long way from the situation that existed at the turn of the 20th century when, at times, members of different sects belonging to the same tradition refused even to acknowledge the existence of the other sects.

Daughters of the Buddha: Sakyadhita A similar and even more interesting development has been taking place among the Buddhist women all over the world. Like their male counterparts the Buddhist nuns along with Buddhist female followers have initiated a world-wide Buddhist women’s organization called Sakyadhita (Daughters of the Sakyamuni Buddha): International Network of Buddhist Women. The Organization was founded at Buddhagaya in 1987 by a group of female Buddhist practitioners, including Karma Lekshe Tsomo, an American national with Asian Studies academic background and nun in the Tibetan tradition, Bhiksuni Jampa Tsedroen, a nun in Tibetan tradition, Ayya Khema, a nun in Theravada tradition and Dr. Chatsuman Kabilsingh, a university professor in Thailand and later bhikkhunī Dhammanandi, a Theravada Buddhist nun. The Organization comprises nuns and female followers from all traditions including the recently ordained nuns from Sri Lanka (Findly 2000, 97-101). The very reintroduction of bhikkhunī upasampadā (full admission for Buddhist nuns) to Sri Lanka is an example for the emerging transyanic Buddhism. The bhikkhunī-sasana in the Theravada tradition had become extinct for the last ten centuries.2 The traditional position is that reintroduction within Theravada is out of the question since there is no bhikkhunī-Sangha within the Theravada lineage to grant upasampadā to them. Consequently, it is claimed that until and unless a Buddha appears again none can initiate the bhikkhunī order. This meant that there is no room for bhikkhunī-sasana to be revived within Theravada. The stalwarts in the tradition do not wish to identify the legitimacy of the Mahayana bhikkhunīs, and the Vajrayana tradition 2  In fact, after India, it seems to have existed only in Sri Lanka where it disappeared after the collapse of Anuradhapura around 10th and 11th centuries. It does not seem that bhikkhunī order was ever introduced to the Southeast Asian region from Sri Lanka.

100

Asanga Tilakaratne

does not have a full-fledged bhikkhunī order. Consequently, they do not see any possibility of cross-breeding either. The recent reintroduction of bhikkhunī order to Sri Lanka was made possible when the prospective candidates first received higher ordination (upasampadā) from Korean Mahayana bhikkhunī tradition and subsequently received the same from (a group of ) the Sri Lanka Sangha as the traditional Vinaya requires (the bhikkhunīs to have upasampadā from both the monks and nuns). Sreictly speaking, the present bhikkhunī organization in Sri Lanka, which was a joint effort by both Mahayana bhiksunīs and Theravada bhikkhus, is both Mahayanic and Theravadin.3 Although the traditional monks4 and lay people of Theravada do not accept the validity of this new upasampadā there cannot be any doubt that the age-old boundaries across traditions are being blurred and that what is emerging clearly transcends the age-old categories.

‘American Buddhism’ The practitioners of what is sometimes referred to as “American Buddhism” derive inspiration from various Buddhist traditions simultaneously, and seem to have evolved a type of eclectic Buddhism going beyond traditional categories (Seager 1999). The phenomenon called American Buddhism is a result of both globalization and some geo-political and social problems the world has been experiencing for the last 4-5 decades. The arrival in the USA of East Asian Vietnamese Buddhists in large numbers took place as a result of the Vietnam War that ended by 70’s. The kind of Buddhism they brought was mainly Mahayana although a sizable number of these Buddhists were Theravada followers who were ‘converted’ by the Narada Maha Thera of Wajiraramaya, Colombo. Vajrayana Buddhists from Tibet arrived in the West in large numbers as a result of political problems between China and Tibet. Cambodian Buddhists started arriving in the West in the 80’s after disastrous political experimentations by Pol Pot regime. What they represented was Theravada Buddhism. In addition to these groups 3  Hawanpola Ratanasara Thera (1920-2000), a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk who lived in Los Angeles ordained and gave full admission to a group of women following exactly a similar methodology. Women’s Buddhism and Buddhism’s Women:Tradition, Revision, Renewal. Ed. Ellison Banks Findly, Wisdom Publications, Boston, 2000, 1999, 154. 4  In fact the hierarchy of the three chapters of the Sri Lanka Sangha does not recognize this joint upasampadā as valid. Consequently the Sri Lanka state too does not accept the existence of bhikkhunīs with full admission. The ordinary people, however, do not seem to worry about this theoretical issue.

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

101

there were Buddhists from the Mahayana countries for more than one hundred years in the USA and the Theravada Buddhists from Sri Lanka, Thailand and Myanmar for the last several decades. The evolution of this manifold Buddhism is a long story to be told in great detail and I do not attempt it here. What is to be noted however is the on-going process of the evolution of a new form of Buddhism drawing inspiration from all the traditions. As we noted earlier already some scholars have dubbed this as “American Buddhism”. Richard Hughes Seager tries to portray this phenomenon in the following words: The American Buddhist community as a whole encompasses an extremely wide spectrum of opinions about the nature of Buddhism. Within it, traditionalist and innovative impulses co-exist, sometimes comfortably, sometimes not. Tolerance is generally valued highly and the idea that all expressions of the dharma are in essence one is widely accepted. (Seager 1999, 232) A good example of this newly evolving Buddhism comes from the Sangha (monks and nuns) in this part of the world. The Buddhist Sangha Council of Southern California founded in 1980, initially to mediate disputes between monks and laity, grew up to be an organization bringing monks and laity from all Buddhist traditions that exist in that region. Inter-Buddhist celebration of Vesak organized by the Council is very significant for it marked the unanimity reached by all Buddhist traditions to adopt the full-moon day of the month of May, as accepted by the Theravada tradition, as the birth day of the Buddha. This shows how different Buddhist traditions developing consensus in matters of importance and creating new traditions in their new habitats. In addition to this example of organizational significance, there is another important aspect with doctrinal significance that has developed within the context of North America in particular and the West in general. It is the practice of meditation we referred to at the beginning of this discussion. The insight (vipassanā) meditation was introduced to the USA is 1960’s by the monks of Theravada school. This early meditation remained basically traditional and the teachers were usually monks form south and Southeast Asian countries. This traditional form started undergoing change with lay meditation teachers such as Sharon Salsberg (born 1952), Joseph Goldstein (born 1944) and Jack Cornfield (born 1945). Salsberg and Goldstein studied meditation under the well known Myanmar-Indian meditation teacher Goenka (born 1924) whereas Cornfield was ordained twice under Ajaan Chah (1917-1992)

102

Asanga Tilakaratne

in Thailand. They together started Insight Meditation Society in 1974 in Barr, Massachusetts, and have been teaching meditation at their centre and elsewhere. What is unique in their practice of meditation is that it has not been confined to the traditional Theravada. They have evolved a practice deriving inspiration from all the three Buddhist traditions and even from some non-Buddhist systems. This is very different from how the traditional meditation teachers from Theravada would feature their practice. Although they may have their own unique approaches to meditation and follow some of their own methods, they basically remain within the tradition. The newly evolved practice is not strictly Theravada in that sense. It is eclectic and trans-yanic in its character. Apart from this American reconstruction of meditation, some of the world renowned teachers such as Thich Nhat Hanh are well known for their innovative methods that cut across traditions. As we know, the traditional division of Mahayana and Hinayana is based on a value judgment in which the former takes the latter to be of low dispositions whereas the latter is convinced that the former is misguided. After two millennia of the controversy today, however, the traditional division does not mean exactly the same. All traditions seem to come to a consensus as to what the core Buddhism is. Traditions have displayed openness to learn from others. The Buddhists are free to follow whatever the goal they aspire to, namely, the goal of full enlightenment, that of individual enlightenment or the goal of enlightenment as an arahant. As we saw in the discussion so far, the dialogue within the Buddhists themselves has been less theoretically oriented and more practical. This however does not preclude the need to have a theoretically refined position regarding the dialogue within. What seems significant is that the substantial practical experience gained so far can shape the nature of the theory and avoid the danger of theory being empty.

Socially Engaged Buddhism Buddhism went to the Western world roughly about one and half centuries back and was perceived as matching well with rational understanding of the universe advocated by the Enlightenment movement in Europe. More recently its philosophy was interpreted by philosophers like KN Jayatilleke as embodying as advanced form of empiricism. Continuing this line of thinking, today Buddhism is identified as a religious and intellectual force that provides an alternative mode of thinking and bahaviour for those millions of people who feel that they need a change.

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

103

What is known as ‘socially engaged Buddhism’ refers to a way of thinking and behaviour characterized by active engagement by Buddhists in social and political problems that affect the society at large. Writing in 1985 on socially engaged Buddhism, Fred Eppsteiner, having described a risky effort by a group of concerned Buddhists to evacuate about 200 civilians trapped in a combat zone in Vietnam (in the mid 1960s’), says: The term ‘engaged Buddhism’ refers to this kind of active involvement by Buddhists in society and its problems. Participants in this nascent movement seek to actualize Buddhism’s traditional ideals of wisdom and compassion in today’s world. In times of war or intense hostility they will place themselves between factions, literally or figuratively… (Eppsteiner 1985, xii) Social engagement is not something new in Buddhism. In traditional Buddhist societies, Buddhists have always been living a community life looking after the needs of one another. The new-ness in socially engaged Buddhism is that it is the response of the West, where Buddhism was introduced recently, to the initial misrepresentation of Buddhism as an anti-social teaching. The difference would be that whereas in the traditional societies Buddhists looked after their own societal needs the modern Buddhists would involve in large social political issues, the effects of which go far beyond the places where they originated. This is basically a result of globalization forces. Furthermore, social activism of the Buddhists can be regarded as both responding to the pressing needs of the world today and searching for new meanings of religious life itself.

Eco-Buddhism (Green Buddhism) Eco-Buddhism or green Buddhism is presented as a Buddhist theory and practice toward nature. As theory it presupposes and is based on the Buddhist perception of reality as a dependently arisen phenomenon. As practice, eco-Buddhism represents a set of attitudes and a way of behaviour. It is activism or praxis what makes eco-Buddhism a kind of engaged Buddhism (Badiner 1990). As one advocate of this way of thinking puts it, “contrary to the popular view of Buddhism as a ‘refuge’ from the world, to become a Buddhist today is definitely political act. More specifically it is a geopolitical act (Timmerman 1994). The Buddhist ecologists identify two approaches to ecology: one is what is described as ‘appropriate management’ or stewardship of nature and its resources by man. This is understood to be a human-centred

104

Asanga Tilakaratne

environmentalism based on individualism and supporting exploitation of natural resources by human beings. In this perspective, the opponenets claim, individual greed is justified and the result is “a planet of ten billion points of infinite greed”. The other approach is characterized by protection of nature and environment from encroachment by human beings. This has been described as ‘eco-centric environmentalism’, and many find it preferable to the former. Writers such as Ken Jones (1993) criticize even this second type of approach which is relatively good. He describes views held under this category as “many varieties of deeper greenery” which are still based on subtle forms of individualism. He compares such approaches to the parable of elephant and blind men and proposes to jettison modern hyper individualism in favour of return to community. What this sketch reveals is that there is an intensive discussion and debate on the issues of engaged Buddhism including many aspects of Buddhist environmentalism. The problem of individualism which Ken Jones touches is at the heart of the whole issue. The place of the human being in the whole process of interacting with nature has to be assessed correctly with the right balance. I say something about it in the next concluding section, but it is only a suggestion which needs to be argued for.

Doctrinal and organizational implications As we saw in the above discussion, the trans-yanic Buddhism cuts across the traditional three yanas. The practice throughout the history has been that the contacts among the traditions have been kept to the minimum although we cannot say that there were no contacts at all or that they were actively hostile to one another. As Noel Seth’s paper referred to above reveals, there have been hostilities within schools of, for instance, Japan and Korea. Sri Lankan history, however, records several instances of conflict between the Mahavihara and those who held different views, vaitulya-vāda, a term denoting Mahayana views, but one finds hardly any evidence of three Buddhist traditions fighting with one another. What we witness with the dawn of modernity is something different. It is a conscious effort to assimilate and incorporate ideas and practices of one another which were naturally isolated in the past owing to practical difficulties of interaction. A question one may raise is whether there is any doctrinal or theoretical difficulty for this kind of interaction among divergent groups. Both in the early Dhamma and the Vinaya one finds frequent references to the unity of the Sangha (saṅgha-sāmaggi). The discourses

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

105

such as Cula-gosinga and Maha-gosinga of the Majjhima-nikāya heap praises on the disciples of the Buddha who interacted with each other like ‘milk and water’(khīrodakībhūta). Devadatta, on the contrary, is disparaged for splitting the Sangha (saṅgha-bheda), which is described as one of the most serious unwholesome deeds resulting the birth in the hell immediately after death (ānantariya-kamma). But it is not included in the category of ‘defeat’ (pārājikā), the most serious of all monastic offences. It is included in the next category, saṅghādisesa, which can be remedied by proper behaviour unlike the first category which are not remedied. There are two sanghadisesa rules (rules 10 and 11) applicable to one who commits the split of the Sangha and to those who support such an act. In both cases those who were found guilty may remedy their offences by proper behaviour. In the subsequent history of the sāsana we find that there were many instances when the groups of Sangha splitting from the mother group and start acting as separate groups. Symbolic to the independent activism is performance of the pātimokkha recital (bi-weekly recital of the code of Vinaya rules) as a separate group. It is not quite clear whether or not such breakaway groups were considered to have committed the offence of saṅgha-bheda. As the early Buddhist history shows, there were breakaway groups from the breakaway groups themselves, making the situation more complicated. Even in the more recent history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, this tendency of breaking away from mother groups was quite commonplace. In the Amarapura fraternity, which started in the early eighteenth century, for instance, still there are more than twenty subgroups operating as independent groups, but these groups are not considered guilty of splitting the Sangha although every act of forming a new group of the Sangha runs the risk of saṅghabheda. While the Vinaya does not approve of saṅghabheda, it does provide for the Sangha, which is split, to come together. The recital of the Patimokkha as one group is considered symbolic of the unity of the Sangha. There is a special provision for the recital when the Sangha which was split before reunites as one group. This recital is called ‘unity recital’ (sāmaggī-uposatha). A recent example of such performance is when all the branches of the Amarapura fraternity of Sri Lanka got together in 1969 and performed uposatha together to mark the newly forged unity.5 5  The branches of the Amarapura fraternity were united formally in 1956 under the name, All Lanka Amarapura Sangha Council.. In 1974 the organization was brought under a new constitution and renamed, ‘Sri Lanka Amarapura Sangha Council (Sri Lanka Amarapura Sangha Sabha).

106

Asanga Tilakaratne

This shows that the ideal situation is to have a single unitary body of the Sangha. If a group breaks away that does not necessarily mean that the breakaway group is invariably guilty for there is a possibility that the very breakaway group is the one that upholds the right position. Both the Dhamma and the Vinaya supports unity, and encourage divergent groups to unite. Strictly speaking when divergent groups come together there is no divergence any more and the uposatha is performed within the united Sangha. The situation with the three Buddhist traditions today is different. When the three traditions come together they do come as unique groups maintaining their identity, but tend to work together upholding commonalities at a higher level. For example, in the case of sakya-dhita or ‘the daughters of the Buddha’ what unites all different Buddhists groups is their identity as the female followers of the Buddha. When the first group of nuns from Sri Lanka received higher admission (upasampadā) from a group of Korean nuns and when the same group was given higher admission by the Sri Lankan Theravada Sangha, as the Theravada Vinaya requires, this becomes tantamount to accepting the validity of the Mahayana practice by the Theravada. The situation here is different from two divergent groups coming together forming one group. This is a clear case of two different Buddhist traditions accepting the validity of each other while maintaining their own identities. The resultant bhikkhunī tradition functioning currently in Sri Lanka6 is neither fully Theravada nor fully Mahayana; it is both Theravada and Mahayana (The Sri Lankan Theravada hierarchy and the Sri Lankan state do not accept the validity of this newly formed bhikkhunī Sangha. However, if they go as a new non-Theravada group with a new identity, this question does not arise.). The Vinaya observed by the Mayahana nuns is not the same as that followed by the Theravada nuns. On the other hand, however, the differences are only with regard to minor rules, and not the major ones. From the point of view of the Dhamma, we can argue that the Mahayana while upholding the Buddhahood as the ultimate goal and the path of the Bodhisatva as the method, does not reject the arahant ideal or the śrāvaka-yāna. This shows that there is really not any serious difficulty either from the Vinaya or from the Dhamma in the joint operations among the three traditions. The presence of some East Asian sects with married clergy, however, seems to pose a problem, for sex involves violating one of the central requirements of the monastic life not only in the traditional Theravada, but also in Mahayana and Vajrayana. This 6  Thailand has only a very few bhikkhunīs with higher admission.

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

107

more recent development which arose first in Japan and introduced to Korea almost by force at the turn of the last century may be ignored for the present discussion. In any case, in the Buddhist tradition in which where there is no centre where all powers are accumulated, a question of excommunication does not arise. Therefore, it seems that there is no real doctrinal or ‘legal’ difficulty for a trans-yanic Buddhism to evolve. Engaged Buddhism represents the contemporary Buddhist approaches to social issues and problems. Although social consciousness is not absent in Buddhism, what we witness today is Buddhists sharing the global awareness of the need for addressing social ills. The challenge is to apply the Buddhist principles and insights to contemporary situations which are more complex and more diverse than those of the pre-modern world. In spite of complexity and diversity of situations, since human being has remained human being from time immemorial, the teachings of the Buddha which are first and foremost meant for human beings, may be applied to these situations with success. Of the two approaches to nature and environment outlined above, one may reject the first without much debate as not representing the true Buddhist position. The second with its many varieties may be acceptable to many. The matter, however, is not that simple or clear-cut. It is clear that the greedy behaviour of one set of people endangers their own lives as well as the lives of many others who are really innocent. Such behaviour is unhealthy for oneself for one is overwhelmed by one’s own avarice. At the same time, it is ethically wrong for it is harmful to others. The real challenge, however, is to forge an ethic which takes into account our own individualism, namely, the fact that we are a group of beings motivated by self-satisfaction. In the process of self-satisfaction human beings invariably use natural resources to achieve their goals. No one will say that this is wrong. It is hard to imagine how one can argue that the existence of nature takes precedence over the existence of human beings, or that human beings need to sacrifice their happiness for the sake of preservation of nature. But the destruction of nature is surely going to be self-destructive for human beings. What this means is that human beings and nature are inter-dependent, and neither takes precedence over the other. If we understand the entire universe including its many varieties of beings as an inter-dependent whole, the question of one having precedence over another will not arise. Neither would there arise the need for self-sacrifice for the sake of nature. In other words, the Buddhist care for nature and ecology is not unconditional altruism. It

108

Asanga Tilakaratne

has to be based on compassion and wisdom, the two pillars of Buddhist social action.

Conclusion Emerging new trends in Buddhism seem to pose many problems and challenges to students and practitioners of Buddhism alike. New situations force us to look for new solutions. As far as Buddhism is concerned, the new solutions needed may not be really new. What is needed is creativity and innovation in order to adapt the ancient teachings to contemporary situations. There is an extensive discussion on these issues, particularly on engaged Buddhism and Buddhist environmentalism, in the West. Nothing comparable is seen in the traditional Buddhist societies. What is important, on the part of those who are in the traditional Buddhist societies serious about the applicability of the teaching of the Buddha to current social problems, is to have continuous discussion on these issues, rather than letting things happen on their own.

Emerging New Trends in Buddhism...

109

Appendix FUNDAMENTAL BUDDHISTIC BELIEFS (formulated by Henry Steel Olcott)

i. Buddhists are taught to show the same tolerance, forbearance, and brotherly love to all men, without distinction; and an unswerving kindness towards the members of the animal kingdom. ii. The universe was evolved, not created; and its functions according to law, not according to the caprice of any God. iii. The truths upon which Buddhism is founded are natural. They have, we believe, been taught in successive kalpas, or worldperiods, by certain illuminated beings called BUDDHAS, the name BUDDHA meaning “Enlightened”. iv. The fourth Teacher in the present kalpa was Sakya Muni, or Gautama Buddha, who was born in a Royal family in India about 2,500 years ago. He is an historical personage and his name was Siddhartha Gautama. v Sakya Muni taught that ignorance produces desire, unsatisfied desire is the cause of rebirth, and rebirth, the cause of sorrow. To get rid of sorrow, therefore, it is necessary to escape rebirth; to escape rebirth, it is necessary to extinguish desire; and to extinguish desire, it is necessary to destroy ignorance. vi. Ignorance fosters the belief that rebirth is a necessary thing. When ignorance is destroyed the worthlessness of every such rebirth, considered as an end in itself, is perceived, as well as the paramount need of adopting a course of life by which the necessity for such repeated rebirths can be abolished. Ignorance also begets the illusive and illogical idea that there is only one existence for man, and the other illusion that this one life is followed by states of unchangeable pleasure or torment. vii. The dispersion of all this ignorance can be attained by the persevering practice of an all-embracing altruism in conduct, development of intelligence, wisdom in thought, and destruction of desire for the lower personal pleasures. viii. The desire to live being the cause of rebirth, when that is extinguished rebirths cease and the perfected individual attains by meditation that highest state of peace called nirvana.

110

Asanga Tilakaratne

ix Sakya Muni taught that ignorance can be dispelled and sorrow removed by the knowledge of the four Noble Truths, viz.: (i) The miseries of existence; (ii) The cause productive of misery, which is the desire ever renewed of satisfying oneself without being able ever to secure that end; iii) The destruction of that desire, or the estranging of oneself from it; (iv) The means of obtaining this destruction of desire. The means which he pointed out is called the Noble Eightfold Path, viz.: Right Belief; Right Thought; Right Speech; Right Action; Right Means of Livelihood; Right Exertion; Right Remembrance; Right Meditation. x. Right Meditation leads to spiritual enlightenment, or the development of that Buddha-like faculty which is latent in every man. xi. The essence of Buddhism, as summed up by the Tathagatha (Buddha) himself, as: To cease from all sin, To get virtue, To purify the heart. xii. The universe is subject to a natural causation known as “Karma”. The merits and demerits of a being in past existences determine his condition in the present one. Each man, therefore, has prepared the causes of the effects which he now experiences. xiii. The obstacles to the attainment of good karma may be removed by the observance of the following precepts, which are embraced in the moral code of Buddhism, viz.: (i) Kill not; (ii) Steal not; (iii) Indulge in no forbidden sexual pleasure; (iv) Lie not; (v) Take no intoxication or stupefying drug or liquor. Five other precepts which need not be here enumerated should be observed by those who would attain, more quickly than the average layman, the release from misery and rebirth. xiv. Buddhism discourages superstitious credulity. Gautama Buddha taught it to be the duty of a parent to have his child educated in science and literature. He also taught that no one should believe what is spoken by any sage, written in any book, or affirmed by tradition, unless it accord with reason. Drafted as a common platform upon which all Buddhists can agree.

6. Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge of Remaining Relevant: Buddhism in Sri Lanka Examined

Introduction In this paper, I will discuss the following three issues: (i) The impact of modernity on Buddhism in Sri Lanka; (ii) role of Buddhism in protecting religious freedom and promoting peace and justice; and (iii) the Buddhist response to the plurality of religion in Sri Lanka. A careful look would reveal that these issues are closer to one another than they first appear. Although the discussion will be structured in the sequence in which these issues have been mentioned here, the content will be relevant to all issues in general. The context of the discussion will be religion in general and Asia as a whole. In that broader context, I will focus on the situation of Buddhism in the particular location of Sri Lanka.

Contemporary interest in the study of religion Study of religion itself is not a new phenomenon although wide-spread popular study of religion is. It is well known that in the past, religion was studied by its own people, insiders in particular, for their own edification and also for the sake of propagation of religious teachings, but the adherents of one religion did not bother to study any other religions for, since all except one’s own were considered false there was really no necessity of doing so. Besides, studying what is wrong can be harmful and leading to sinful behavior. The only possible motive behind learning others’ religions in the ancient context was to find fault with those teachings for the purpose of defeating them and replacing them with one’s own. This was basically done by the insiders, and for the ordinary followers, they had other priorities in life.

112

Asanga Tilakaratne

Study of religion as a social phenomenon with deep economic and social implications owes its origin to Karl Marx and subsequently to Max Weber who saw a direct relation between Protestant Christian work ethics and enhanced economic development in Europe which was predominantly Protestant. Although Weber saw this important relation between social issues and religion, he anticipated that with the advent of modernism and secularism religion ultimately will gradually disappear into insignificance and irrelevance. Particularly, with the advent of modernity religion was conceived to have run its course and heading toward its demise as a social phenomenon. In other words, the idea was that with modernity and scientific knowledge and resultant secularization of the society, the religion was taken as a relic from the history which was largely irrelevant to the age of science. In Western philosophy, this way of thinking was clearly articulated by the members of what came to be known as ‘Vienna Circle’ whose school of thought became popular as logical positivism. In his well known work, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus, Wittgenstein (early) divided propositions into two broad categories, sense and non-sense, and he included all claims of natural sciences and their supporting branches of knowledge, such as logic and mathematics, into the first category and reduced everything else including those of religion and ethics into the second, and removed from the domain of what can be meaningfully said. Logical positivism can be considered the philosophical articulation of this reductionist attitude. However, the demise of the verification principle by the middle of the century and the arrival of falsifiability of Carl Popper in its place (along with many other factors such as relativism and pragmatism in knowledge) signaled the beginning of post-positivist thinking which marked the shift of interest in the field of study of religion. It is interesting that what Weber anticipated has not happened, but almost the opposite has happened: religion worldwide has emerged as a force to be identified to the extent that sociologists now speak about what they call ’global religions’ (Juergensmeyer 2003). In contemporary academic studies, study of religion has become quite popular, in particular, among sociologists, anthropologists and historians who did not find much relevance in such studies some time ago. Much of the material I make use of in this study has been taken from the sociological and anthropological studies on Buddhism in Sri Lanka.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

113

Impact of modernity on Buddhism in Sri Lanka Religious modernism is a world-wide phenomenon studied by scholars in local as well as global contexts. The encounter between Buddhism and modernity is usually called ‘Buddhist modernism’ (and at some times also dubbed as Protestant Buddhism, modern Buddhism, Buddhist modernism or modernist Buddhism). Under this theme, in addition to what happened in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) with the arrival of Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907) toward the end of the 19th century, humanist Buddhism of Master Taixu (1890-1947) in China and D.T. the new interpretations of the Zen Buddhist tradition by D.T. Suzuki (1870-1966) in Japan are also being referred to as early examples of modernity. Nevertheless, Olcott’s arrival in Sri Lanka in 1880 with Madam Blavatsky (1831-1891), and their conversion to Buddhism and their subsequent activism are considered to mark the beginning of the Buddhist modernism in Sri Lanka marking thereby at the same time the beginning of worldwide Buddhist modernism. The overall situation in Buddhism in Sri Lanka under colonialism was not very good at all. All three colonial powers did their utmost to wipe out Buddhism from the country. How the colonial powers were active in this program has been widely discussed, hence I will not repeat what is already known, but an indication to the disadvantaged situation of Buddhism in the country by the middle of the 19th century is the statement made in 1850 by a well known Sinhala Christian scholar, James de Alwis, to the effect that Buddhism will disappear from the country before the end of the century (Wimalaratne 2003, 27). In 1863, a Methodist pastor, Spence Hardy voiced similar hopes (Gombrich 1988, 180). The subsequent history of Buddhism in the island, however, shows that this prediction did not come true. Olcott’s arrival in the island marked a turning point to the betterment of Buddhism in the island. Olcott’s activism in Sri Lanka had both organizational and ideological aspects. In organizational level, Olcott gave lead to start Buddhist schools which followed the structure and organization of Christian schools. Although Olcott is not the one who started schools for girls and boys in the country because already some Buddhist monks (eg. Dodanduve Piyaratana Thera and Karatota Sobhita Thera) had started schools for children. These schools basically remained very traditional in their outlook and organization and even in subjects they taught. Olcott introduced subjects including English to the school curriculum and systematic organizational and administrative structure

114

Asanga Tilakaratne

which was similar to that of Christian schools. The ideological aspect of Olcott was to reinterpret Buddhism and Buddhist practices to suit the modern scientific outlook. A milestone in this direction was his Buddhist Catechism which he compiled in 1881. This manual in question-andanswer format re-presented Buddhism and essential Buddhist practices such as taking refuge (saraṇā-gamana) in the Triple Gem as rational, logical and scientific devoid of superstitions and unfounded beliefs. The immediate goal of the Catechism was to serve as a general guide for all the Buddhists in the country while specifically serving as a text book for Buddhist school children. Along with this motive, Olcott had a much larger vision, namely, that Buddhism in all its schools and traditions represented one unitary philosophy which was shared by Buddhists all over the world. In order to realize this vision, Olcott wanted all the Buddhist leaders to accept a fourteen point document, which he prepared along with the Catechism, containing salient points of Buddhism shared by all Buddhists universally. In order to ratify this document, Olcott convened an international Buddhist conference in Adyar in 1891 to which Dharmapala was assigned to carry the document with the approval of the Mahasangha of Sri Lanka. Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933) was a young man of sixteen when Olcott landed in Sri Lanka. The former who belonged to a leading Buddhist business family in Colombo was attracted to Olcott, became his follower who accepted his interpretation of Buddhism as scientific, rational and devoid superstitions, and became his interpreter, and undertook to support Olcott in his religious, and national activities. In 1893, Dharmapala represented Sri Lanka and Theravada Buddhism at the World Parliament of Religion in Chicago with the support and blessings of Olcott. Following Olcott’s Universalist vision of Buddhism, Dharmapala greeted the gathering at Chicago saying that he brought the best wishes of 500 millions of Buddhists all over the world. He portrayed Buddhism as a rationalist, scientific system without the need of creator God. Although by no means Dharmapala was the only one to articulate this vision of Buddhism to the outer world, it is this understanding and interpretation of Buddhism that provided the rationale behind Buddhist modernism.1 1  Discussing the thinking behind Buddhist modernism, McMahan (2008) identifies the following as characteristics attributed to Buddhism by modernists: Buddhism as not involving beliefs, as rational, scientific and compatible with the modern scientific world view, as democratic and encouraging free thinking, and as not a religion, but rather a spirituality.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

115

The impact of Buddhist modernism on Sri Lankan Buddhism is complex and multi­faceted. The immediate reason for Olcott’s arrival, which marks the beginning of Buddhist modernism in the island in 1880 was the report he read in the USA of what has come to be known as ‘Panadura Debate’ (1873); debate between Buddhists and Christians, the Buddhist side represented by Migemttuwatte (also known as Mohottiwatte) Gunananda Thera and the Christian side by David de Silva, a Christian clergy (of the Wesleyan mission), two erudite scholars and orators from respective sides. Report of this debate (translated into English by EF Perera was published in the Ceylon Times by its editor John Capper) was published in book form by JM Peebles in the USA. It is by reading this debate that Olcott decided to arrive in Sri Lanka in order to help Sri Lankan Buddhists to face challenges of modernity more efficiently. Although in this sense we see that the activism of the Buddhist monks was instrumental in bringing Olcott to the country, the subsequent developments show that gradually the Buddhist monks’ role was overshadowed by lay activism. Discussing ‘Protestant Buddhism’, Gombrich and Obeyesekere, the latter being the inventor of this term, describe the fate of the role of the monk under this new form of Buddhist orientation: ...Protestant Buddhism undercuts the importance of the religious professional, the monk, by holding that it is the responsibility of every Buddhist both to care for the welfare of Buddhism and to strive himself for salvation. The traditional monastic monopoly in withdrawal from the world is called into question, while those monks (the majority) who do not become meditating hermits are criticized for lack of social involvement. The distinction between Sangha and laity is thus blurred, for religious rights are duties are the same for all. (Gombrich and Obeyesekere 1990, 7) Certainly the distinction has been blurred, as the two authors pointed out, but it has not disappeared. This is particularly so for ordinary traditional Sinhala Buddhists who constitute the larger majority of the Buddhists in the country. For them, the Sangha still remains the ‘incomparable field of merit for the world’ (anuttaraṃ puñña-khettaṃ lokassa), a role the Sangha has managed to preserve from the very inception of Buddhism two and half millennia ago. Although sociologists discuss privatization of religion which can be a natural outcome of what is just mentioned as ‘Protestant Buddhism’,

116

Asanga Tilakaratne

again it is interesting to see that in post-Protestant Buddhism2 large scale group religious activities have developed around the Buddhist practice. A typical example is ‘bodhi-pūjā’ (worship of Bodhi tree) popularized in 1970s by Panadure Ariyadhamma Thera (discussed by Gomrich and Obeyesekere and many others), still remaining popular among the masses of all social classes. The 84 thousand oil­lamp pūjās, lotus flower pujas of the same number are often heard of and seen. The huge jasmine flower pūjā organized by a charismatic monk called Kotapola Amarakitti Thera, was first started in 1990, has been for the last two and half decades an annual event taking place in the sacred city of Anuradhapura, and said to attract more than one million participants each time.3 The Sunday Dhamma schools have been in the country since the turn of the last century, but more recently both the numbers of schools and the children attending these schools have increased dramatically, some schools claiming several thousand students. In this manner, despite privatization of religion, group religious activities have been increased in a dramatic manner. Meditation by nature is an individual affair, but the recent practice is to have large or small organized meditation classes in which one is a member in a group (Gombrich and Obeyesekere 1990; Bond 1988). In these gatherings usually under the guidance of a monk or a lay person, in addition to the time allocated for silent meditation, there is much the participants jointly perform as a group. Following Weber’s characterization of monk as a private salvation seeker, many have assumed that Buddhist monks are lonely practitioners. This goes against even the very early characterization of the monastic life in the Pali Vinaya, as a life of mutual word and mutual up-lift (aññamañña vacanena aññam’añña vutthapanena: Pātimokkha). Although Olcott is credited with Buddhist modernism and resultant courses of action, the Buddhist activism was by no means dormant before his arrival. In fact it is the quite dynamic Buddhist activism that paved the way for him to arrive in the country. As we saw earlier, the schools for lay Buddhist children were already underway by this time. The story of the monastic education was more advanced. Of the two great monastic education centres, Vidyodaya Pirivena was started by a group of lay Buddhists headed by Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera (18272  A term used by Gombrich and Obeyesekera themselves in somewhat different context. Ref. Gombrich and Obeyesekera 1990, 13. 3  According to the Daily News (July 25, 2012) the event attracted 1.5 million people.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

117

1911) in 1873 and Vidyalanaka Pirivena was started by Ratmalane Sri Dharmaloka Thera in 1875. The parent institute of both the pirivenas was Parama Dhamma Cetiya Pirivena which was established by Walane Siddhartha Thera in 184l. This tradition was a direct outcome of the Buddhist religious and academic resurgence initiated by Weliwita Saranankara Thera who was instrumental in getting the higher admission (upasampadā) for the Sri Lankan Sangha, re-established with the help of the Sangha from Siam (Thailand). As Blackburn has shown, (Balackburn 2001) the Buddhist textual tradition which was revived by Saranankara Thera was continued by his pupils who were spread all over the country. The revival of Buddhism, in this manner, goes much farther into history beyond the 18th century. In her more recent work (Blackburn 2010), discussing Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera, perhaps the leading Buddhist monastic scholar in the 19th century Sri Lanka, Blackburn shows how modernism and colonialism posed not only challenges but also provided opportunities for positive religious and academic activism. The most enduring service of Olcott to Sri Lanka was the establishment of schools for children in Colombo as well as in other major cities such as Galle and Kandy. By 1889 there were 63 schools administered by Buddhist Theosophical Society (BTS) which was established by Olcott (Gombrich 1988, 187). Although Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera was the advisor to this organization, the organization was basically a lay organization run by lay people. It is believed that the Buddhist monks did not like this. According to Gombrich, Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera having invited Olcott for a lecture at his monastery had attacked him and BTS severely mainly for the former was not in favour of lay leadership (Gombrich 1988, 187) Dharmapala himself broke away from Olcott on ideological grounds, and Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera resigned-from BTS on the ground that it identified itself more with Hinduism. Olcott’s schools were modeled according to the missionary schools with prominence given to English education. It is understandable how the children of the Colombo Buddhist elite who received this education were gradually alienated from the mostly Sinhala educated Buddhist monks. The establishment of Young Men’s Buddhist Association (YMBA) in Colombo in 1898 with its branches outside Colombo was another instance of lay Buddhist leadership in religious activities. These societies were modeled according to Young Men’s Christian Associations (YMCA) with a similar outlook of laicizing religious activities.

118

Asanga Tilakaratne

The resultant Buddhist attitude and activism has been described as ‘Protestant Buddhism’, a term which was first used by Gananatha Obeyesekere as we saw earlier (Juergensmeyer 2003, 69). Although some English educated monks, for example, the pupils of Pelene Vajiranana Thera of Vajiraramaya, Colombo, a leading Buddhist monk of the early last century who founded this well known urban Buddhist monastery, managed to bridge the gap to a certain extent, the situation continued till 1956 Bandaranaike’s victory and reverting to Sinhala language for education and administration. There is evidence to show that the Buddhist monks were not against modernity for its own sake. An example is the following: The Christian missionaries had a clear advantage of having printing machines for them in order to print books and tracts against Buddhism. According to Wimalaratne, ‘while Christians were fully equipped with printing presses, Bulathgama Dhammalankara Thera with the aid of the King of Siam established a press in 1860 and Mohottiwatte Gunananda Thera purchased a press in 1862 and commenced publication of antiChristian pamphlets. Accordingly, before meeting and challenging the Missionaries face-to­face, a movement to counter Christian activities was carried successfully through publications’ (Wimalaratne (2003) in Sugataratana et al 2003, 29-36). I reproduced this example not to give the history of Buddhist Christian controversies, but to highlight how quickly the Buddhist monks who had a very traditional upbringing adopted modern technology for their contemporary use. It is useful to note in this context that the Buddhist monks have had a fairly open mind toward the technological aspects of modernity. When radio technology reached the island in the early decades of the last century, the Buddhist monks were among the first to adopt this method of transmission in order to broadcast Dhamma sermons. The first such Dhamma sermon was given as far back as 1928 by Pelene Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera, mentioned already (Tilakaratne 1998, 22). The colour television was introduced to Sri Lanka in 1980s, and it was an instant success with Buddhist monks who did not find any Vinaya restrictions against making use of this instrument for Buddhist teaching and communication. Today, there are at least three major television stations owned and run by Buddhist monks for Dhamma purposes.4 It 4  ‘Bauddhaya’ TV owned by Daranagama Kusaladhamma Thera, ‘Sraddha’ TV owned by Kiribathgoda Nanananda Thera and ‘Rangiri Dambulu’ TV owned by Inamaluwe Sumangala Thera.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

119

does not seem that there is any inhibition among the Buddhist monks in using any other modern machinery or gadgets including smart phones and computers, and modern medical scientific machinery, methods and procedures including blood transfusion and organ transplant. More recently, there is a controversy over whether or not Buddhist monks should be given license to drive motor vehicles. The ownership of motor vehicles has not been a problem for monks, but driving is. Currently some Buddhist monks drive their own vehicles with licenses they had obtained outside Sri Lanka. The position of the Sangha hierarchy is that the government should not issue driving licenses to monks. The controversy over this issue has been there for the last ten years or so. It was one Paragoda Wimalawansa Thera of Sakyamuni Viharaya, Vaskaduwa, who was a leading applicant for driving license who filed a petition in 2005 against Motor Traffic Commissioner’s decision to not to issue a driving license for him. Subsequently, in 2009 he went to the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka taking his case which again was rejected. In 2014, the Appeal Court of Sri Lanka rejected three petitions filed by Paragoda Wimalawansa Thera and two other Buddhist monks citing in their verdict two reasons, namely, that allowing Buddhist monks to drive vehicles will be damaging the Buddhist culture, and that the judiciary is bound by the Constitution of Sri Lanka (article 9) which holds that the Sri Lankan state should protect the Buddha sāsana (Buddhist religion).5 The bone of the contention is the appropriateness or otherwise of act of driving which is understood as contradicting the propriety of monastic behavior.

Role of Buddhism in protecting religious freedom and promoting peace and justice The themes contained in this sub-theme, protecting religious freedom and promoting peace and justice, may be discussed at a more general and theoretical/doctrinal level and as matters concerning specific historical and social contexts as well. In this discussion, my interest in these themes is more to the latter, namely, as matters arising from specific colonial and post-colonial contexts in Sri Lanka. Freedom of thought in matters of religion is one of the features attributed to Buddhism, to classical doctrinal Buddhism, by modernists and actually found in the doctrine itself, but as a term in contemporary religious discussion in 5  Accessed on : 31st January , 2016: “bhikkhu seeks driver’s license” (August 12, 2005), “Red light for Buddhist monks in Driving seat” Sunday Times, April 6, 2014, and “Petitions requesting for driving license for monks rejected”, Hiru News, April 1, 2014.

120

Asanga Tilakaratne

Sri Lanka in particular, ‘religious freedom’ has a different connotation: it is basically the freedom which religions other than Buddhism, in particular, Christianity and to some extent Islam, are to enjoy in practice, propagation and conversion in the predominantly Buddhist contexts. Consequently, the Buddhists are accused of being intolerant and actively hindering the freedom of other religions to exist, practice and proselytize. This charge is particularly leveled against Buddhists for their role in destroying or damaging some evangelical Christian places and opposing and hindering their activities. For the last two decades or so, ever since the influx of various multinational evangelical groups in overt and covert manners and their proselytizing activities providing monetary and other material incentives, there are records of attacks on such groups and their places. The accusation for the most part is for Buddhists while Hindus and Muslims have not been exempted. Although Christians may have passed through Sri Lanka before, the systematic introduction of Christianity was stated by the Portuguese who invaded the county at the turn of the 16th century. The horrendous crimes committed by the Portuguese to propagate Roman Catholicism in the country are too well known to repeat here. The Buddhists were helpless victims who did not have ways to counter Portuguese atrocities. The Dutch and the English were relatively better behaved in their propagation efforts although by no means blameless (Harris 2006). The relations with Christianity after Portuguese period have been peaceful except for a few incidents such as the Buddhist-Christian debates in the latter half of the 19th century, which nevertheless were conducted with utmost organization and mutual respect, and the Buddhist Christian riots at Kotahena in 1915. There are no records of Buddhist attacks on the mainstream churches or hindering their religious activities now or before. It is in this background that one has to view the more recent Buddhist reactions to evangelical Christian organizations. According to the 2009 report of commission appointed by All Ceylon Buddhist Congress, to report on converting Buddhists to other religions by means of deceptive and unethical means there were 384 evangelical organizations, mostly in camouflaged names, active in Sri Lanka. Making use of a loop-hole in the legal system, these organizations had been registered as commercial business ventures so that the actual character of these organizations could be kept concealed. What is meant by freedom of religion in the present context, in this manner, is freedom for these organizations to carry on their work without

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

121

any opposition. The modes of operation of these organizations have been described as ‘unethical’ for the reason that, for conversion, they make use of such methods as material incentives such as food, clothing, jobs, housing, door-to-door canvassing, etc., and direct and indirect threats and coercion. Therefore what is understood by freedom of religion in the current discussion in Sri Lanka is the freedom for evangelical organizations to convert Buddhists (and Hindus) without any resistance. While the response of some Buddhists and Hindus for what they perceive to be ‘unethical conversion’ was aggression, at political level, there were several attempts to address the issue from legal and constitutional perspectives. One such is an act from Jatika Hela Urumaya (JHU) presented to the parliament asking for prohibiting unethical modes of conversion.6 The bill was originally presented to the parliament in 2004 by Omalpe Sobhita Thera, a member of JHU, as a private member’s bill, and was subsequently amended in 2009 following public discussions and suggestions made by a parliamentary committee. The act was introduced as “an act to provide measures to prevent the conversion of persons belonging to one religion to another by the use of force, by allurement and by any fraudulent means and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” The key article of the act was the following: No person shall, either directly or indirectly, convert or attempt to convert any person professing one religion to another by the use of force, by allurement or by any fraudulent means. The proposed act generated much discussion among many religious and social groups. The general consensus among the Buddhists, in particular among the Buddhist monks, was disapproval of conversion efforts by evangelical groups and approval and support for the act whereas the Christian clergy in general including the established Christian church opposed the act. The key argument against the act was that such a measure will hinder the freedom of religion although the act was not specifically against converting Buddhists but against converting anyone from any religion by means mentioned in the act. The act, however, was not presented for voting, and hence still remains postponed.7 6  Although Hindu members of the parliament had prepared a similar act, later their concerns were incorporated into the JHU act. 7  Refer to: “Buddhist and Christian Views on anti-conversion Bill in Sri Lanka” by Reshal Serasinge, Dialogue New Series, vols. xxxi-xxxii 2005-2006 (Colombo: Centre for Study and Dialogue) for a discussion on the act based on the material gathered by interviewing both Buddhist and Christian clergy and lay people.

122

Asanga Tilakaratne

Conversion is a very old phenomenon in the history of religions. In Buddhism, it goes as far back as the Buddha who taught in the 6th century bce in India. It is clear that the Buddha did not have ‘Buddhists’ to listen to him, and the Buddha himself was not a Buddhist to begin with. Once he started teaching, it is clear from the texts how people belonging to different social strata started following him. They became ‘hearers’ (śrāvaka/sāvaka) of the Buddha. There are discourses reporting how some people at the end of a sermon would take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha and asked the Buddha to accept them as ‘upāsaka’ (‘person who stays close by’). This is the closest we have to denote that one was ‘converted’ to ‘Buddhism’ which was not articulated as conversion in those early days! In fact, Pali language does not have a term equivalent in meaning to conversion. Taking refuge in the Triple Gem and becoming a follower of the Buddha are both voluntary acts of a person, and they do not mean one was converted to something by someone. In the history of Sri Lanka, arahant Mahinda who introduced Buddha-Sasana to the country is described as ‘dīpappasādaka’: one who won the favour of the island. Pasāda basically means the good mental disposition towards someone, which is a characteristic of one’s mind when one develops trust (saddhā) in the Triple Gem. Again this is not identical with the act of conversion in which who is being converted is more like a passive participant. Although one could say that the end result is the same in either case, the point I try to drive here is that the attitude that people are there to be converted to one’s own creed is alien to the teaching of the Buddha. The historical Buddhist practice wherever Buddhism went should show that the tradition, even up to now, has been faithful to this basic attitude of the Buddha.8 Accordingly, Buddhism cannot be against conversion in the sense of teaching one’s religion to others who are willing to listen to (with the possible result of one changing into the new religion). That is what the Buddha did and also that is what the followers of the Buddha have been doing through ages in a good part of the world. Therefore, we can easily rule out the position that conversion cannot be practiced in Sri Lanka and that only Buddhism should be allowed to teach. Buddhism accepts and honours the ‘right’ of any religion to exist anywhere and the ‘right’ (the moral obligation) of the adherents of any religion to teach it to the others. Then how are we to understand the opposition of Buddhists to unethical conversion. The very term ‘unethical’ which specifies 8  An exception to this general Buddhist attitude is Jodo Shinshu, a Japanese Buddhist school which seems to have adhered to aggressive methods of conversion.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

123

conversion has an answer to the question. What the Buddhists are against is not conversion per se but unethical conversion. As we found in the discussion of two parliamentary acts, the Buddhists and Hindus are not asking for blanket ban of conversion. These proposed acts may be understood as demands for an ethic in conversion.9 Since conversion, as it is practiced by these evangelists is beset with difficulties and since there is no way that such conversion can be done in an unoffending way, what is acceptable/ethical in the today’s world is to adhere to the commonly available means of communicating one’s religion, namely, teaching by making use of multiple manners available today for dissemination of information. The future missionaries will be able to take an example from the manner Buddhist monks are operating in the Western societies at present: while they mainly look after their own ethnic religious communities, (which is applicable to evangelists only in a limited way) they conduct classes in their temples, deliver public lectures when invited, distribute publications, small and big, and try to provide living examples of Buddhist monkhood. If people come to a religion out of conviction no one can and should stop that, and that should be the only way in future for people to convert from one religion to another.

Promoting peace and justice Like in the case of promoting religious freedom, in promoting peace and justice too there is a specific context in which these themes are discussed. This specific context is the Sri Lankan government’s armed response against LITE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) terrorism. While the non-governmental organizations supported and funded by the Western aids, advocated peace through negotiations the local response, mostly 9  An interesting comparison may be made between the behavior Buddhists now and in early 19th century Ceylon in a similar situation: “The earliest Buddhist reaction to missionary attacks was to address petitions to the government. These petitions began to appear in the 1820s, not long after the earliest missionary tracts and pamphlets had begun to appear in print. These petitions, in general, (i) affirmed the petitioners’ deep concern for the welfare of Buddhism which had prevailed as their and their ancestors’ religion for over two thousand years; (ii) referred to the pain of mind caused to the Buddhists as a result of what was being written and preached against their religion by Christian missionaries; (iii) pointed out that the Buddhists themselves made no similar attacks on Christianity; and (iv) urged the government to uphold religious toleration by (a) ordering the withdrawal of offensive publications which had been issued, and (b) by making a general proclamation that no religious group should issue publications which are likely or calculated to offend and injure the feelings of other religious groups. (Buddhism in Sinhalese Society 1750-1900, Kitsiri Malalgoda, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1976.)

124

Asanga Tilakaratne

that of the Buddhist monks, was to support government efforts to eliminate terrorism. A larger majority of the Buddhist monks expected the government to eliminate terrorism and save the country and the religion (Buddhism), and thought that it was the duty of the government to do so. This may have resulted in portrayal of the Buddhist monks as supporters of war and anti-peace. Since this issue involving Buddhism, violence and peace has been discussed widely (Mahinda 2006). and since I have discussed my own position in detail elsewhere, (Tilakaratne 2006 in Mahinda 2006, 210225). I am not going to repeat here. In order to understand the position of the Buddhist monks regarding Sri Lanka, Buddhism and the Sinhala community we need to understand how their religious and national consciousness developed out of historical circumstances. Throughout the recorded history since the arrival of Buddhism in the island, the invaders always came from the Southern lndia10 and they invariably attacked Buddhism, and it was the Sinhala community that saved religion and the country in all such occasions. For this reason Buddhist monks identified the safety of the religion always with the safety of the Sinhala community and the country which they believed to be the final sanctuary of the pure teaching of the Buddha. Although this historical explanation is not meant to be necessarily a justification of supporting war on the part of the Buddhist monks, there was clear evidence to think that LTTE was all out to destroy Buddhism and Buddhist culture. Although those monks who supported war against terrorism may have been less than the ideal Buddhist monks in a situation in which the survival of one’s own religious and cultural tradition was at stake dispassionate inaction would have proved fatal. Judging by the context dependent and culturally involved character of the Sinhala Buddhist monk, it is hard to imagine that they would have behaved differently. Having said this I would further argue that historical consciousnesses themselves are impermanent (according to the Buddhist philosophy) and those (consciousnesses) do not have to remain unchanged or unchallenged. Although historically the Sinhala community has been the protectors of Buddhism there is nothing intrinsic about them to be so; the Tamils equally could be the protectors of Buddhism had they been approached by the Buddhist monks. If there is no Tamil Buddhist community in Sri Lanka the primary responsibility has to be borne by the monks themselves for this deficiency. Peace in the negative sense of 10 This is according to the Mahāvaṃsa account of the pre-modern history of the country.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

125

absence of war has been achieved for the last several years in the country. Nevertheless peace in its positive sense is yet to achieve and there is an important role to be played by the Buddhist monks in bringing about lasting peace among communities which are suspicious of one another. A word about justice before I conclude this section: Usually Buddhist monks are not seen as one would see Christian clergy or the western-oriented elite involved in activities meant to promote justice and rights. The reason I suspect is more cultural than due to lack of any sense of social responsibility as one would tent to interpret their behavior. Justice is basically a ‘Christian virtue’ defined as ‘eye for eye and tooth for tooth’. When John Rawls asserts that justice is the highest of all social virtues he was articulating this Western Christian bias. Although Buddhism holds justice (Dhamma) as an important virtue of a ruler, social issues are articulated not so much as requiring justice or involving rights, but as instances needing compassion, friendliness, sympathetic joy, forbearance and the like. Monks were advised by the Buddha to work for ‘the welfare of the many and happiness of the many (bahujanahitāya bahujanasukhāya). They simply did not articulate this as involving justice or rights.

Buddhist response to the plurality of religion in Sri Lanka Sri Lanka has adherents of Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam constituting respectively 70%, 15%, 7.50% and 7.50% of the population. Among the Christians, the majority is constituted by Roman Catholics (6.50%) and Protestants representing the rest including several thousand adherents of evangelical groups. Buddhism reached the island in the 3rd century bce, under the auspicious of Emperor Asoka. Before this historical arrival, it appears that there were adherents of major Indian traditions including Hindus and Jains in addition to those who believed in local gods. Scholars are of the view that even there may have been Buddhists among them, but this presence may not have been specifically mentioned in order to highlight Asokan mission as the definitive beginning of Buddhism in the country. All records including the Mahāvaṃsa, the great Chronicle of the country compiled by the Buddhist monks, suggest that Buddhism spread fast far and wide in the country forming the dominant religious identity of the island. Until the European religion reached the country in the 16th century, the two religious traditions practiced were Buddhism and Hinduism, and the invaders from the Southern India representing the latter. The history as recorded by the Mahāvaṃsa tells us that there were intermittent

126

Asanga Tilakaratne

invasions and attacks from ‘Tamils’ including one Brahmin called Tissa, perhaps from some other part of India, who attacked the country toward the end of the pre-Christian era. The Mahāvaṃsa ideology establishes a very intimate connection between the fate of Buddhism, the island as the abode of pure Buddhism and the Sinhala community as blessed by the Buddha to be the protectors of his religion. Gradually this ideology seems to have got established in the country so strongly that even the foreign invaders adhered to Buddhism once they ascended the throne. The Portuguese, the first European invaders, were all out to destroy Buddhism which they could not do comprehensively despite the great havoc caused by them. The Dutch were more tolerant and one of their rulers; Governor Falk is recorded to have sought the assistance of the Sangha in order to learn the local legal traditions. The British had to accept the place of Buddhism and the associated belief in various gods when they entered the 1815 agreement with Kandyan chiefs. Although it was contested later, the British undertook to protect Buddhism and ‘religion of gods’ when they assumed power. The country received independence from the British in 1948, and the constitution written by Sir lvor Jennings did not have anything specific on Buddhism. In 1972, under Sirima Bandaranaike a new constitution was made recognizing the historically and culturally superior place of Buddhism. Even though a new constitution was made in 1978, it too retained the foremost position of Buddhism. The article 9 of the constitution says the following: The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha sāsana while assuring to all religions the rights granted by the Article 10 and 14 (1) (e). The freedom of thought, conscience and religion is assured by the Article 10. The Article 14 (1) (e) says: Every citizen is entitled to the freedom, either by himself or in association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his region or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. The constitution with a separate article for Buddhism, is understood as giving priority to Buddhism while assuring from Article 14 (1) (e) freedom and fairness to other religions. This constitutional arrangement has come under criticism of the adherents of other religions. A Tamil perspective is the following:

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

127

The clause giving Buddhism the foremost place among religions in the country and stipulating a duty of the state to foster and protect the sāsana will make the Buddhists who form nearly 70% of the population of the country, practically a high caste ruling elite. The attempt to make it an entrenched clause signifies that a substantial section of the population is very unhappy about this position and they might try to overturn this position and this overturning has to be made very difficult. It is divisive clauses like this that lead to perpetual conflict in a multilingual and multireligious society. The Buddhists can have their organizations “to protect and foster the sāsana” and contribute to them. It is unfair to force non­Buddhists who form about 30% of the population of the country to pay for the “pleasure” of the other 70% of the population. The Buddhist clergy should agree to let the State to treat all the citizens and ethnic groups alike. (Velupillai 2006, 95; in Mahinda 2006) This quoted statement refers to multi-religiousness of the country. In fact this term has become such a contested issue that there are two camps, namely, those who claim the country to be Buddhist and those who claim it to be multi-religious. In one sense it is a simple fact that there are several religions practiced by the people of Sri Lanka. It is also truism in that sense that Sri Lanka is a multi-religious country. However, what those who claim the country to be a Buddhist country mean is not to deny this simple truism, but to highlight the key religious and cultural identity of the country. After the domination of colonialism of four and half centuries, Buddhists sought to address the injustice and loss suffered by them by restoring Buddhism to its due historical place. It is this that those who claim multi-religiousness of the country do not wish to admit and wish to repudiate. Although at times multi-religiousness of Sri Lankan society and the constitutional priority of Buddhism are taken by some as mutually contradictory propositions, as I view it, multi-religiousness of the contemporary Sri Lankan society and its accompanying claims can be accommodated while accepting the constitutional priority of Buddhism. Being fair by and not doing injustice to other religions and giving due place to Buddhism may well be considered two different things. There is an on-going debate on how to interpret the clauses relevant to religions in the Constitution. In actual practice, while admitting the foremost place of Buddhism, Sri Lankan state has taken measures

128

Asanga Tilakaratne

to treat all religions alike. The presence of ministries for each religion including Buddhism can be cited as an example. At the same time multi-religiousness (sarva-āgamika) is being recognized by the state by inviting representatives from all religions to perform religious rites at state functions. For the Sangha, however, this battle is not over. The most recent development, happening at the moment of this writing, is the demand from the Sangha and the Buddhist organizations not to touch the constitutional clause granting foremost place to Buddhism in the new constitution proposed by the new government which came to power in 2015 after defeating Rajapaksa regime which was in power for nine years.

Concluding remarks As the foregoing discussion shows, modernity has brought both challenges and opportunities to Buddhism in Sri Lanka. Prior to European colonialism, Buddhism in Sri Lanka was mainly dealing with its South Indian neighbour. The struggle was basically for political power, but Buddhism got caught in between for there was a very close relation between the Sri Lankan state and Buddhism. In addition, Buddhism had relations with Eastern and Southeast Asian Buddhist countries mainly on cultural and religious lines. With the arrival of European powers, the nature of the involvement changed drastically. Whereas the Portuguese tried to destroy Buddhism, the Dutch and the British were relatively milder in their tactics with Buddhists. When modernity proper was started with personalities such as Olcott and Dharmapala, the Buddhists had to learn fast. As we saw in foregoing, the Buddhists were quick to adapt to modern machinery and new modes of doing things. McMahan has used concepts such as de-traditionalization and re­traditionalization in order to describe changes that took place in Buddhism worldwide. In Buddhism in Sri Lanka, what we see is rather adopting new ways of doing things which is described by concepts such as ‘Protestant Buddhism’, adopting protestant Christian practices such as Christmas cards as Vesak cards and Christmas carols as Vesak bhakti-gita and occasional efforts to translate Pali stanzas into Sinhala, than totally overhauling the tradition. Another case in point is the Buddhist monks’ involvement in political activities spearheaded by Vidyalankara monks such as Walpola Rahula Thera (1907-1997) in the middle decades of the last century. While tradition-minded monks opposed these efforts, (Seneviratne 1999; Tilakaratne 2006, 210-225) those who promoted such involvement were keen to show that what they did was not something new but what the Sri Lanka Buddhist monks have always been doing.

Modernization, Secularization and the Challenge...

129

The classic work of Walpola Rahula Thera, The Heritage of a Bhikkhu, is an effort to locate the new vocation of the bhikkhu in the traditional Buddhist history. The efforts of this sort may well be described as instances of re-traditionalization. The Buddhist monks’ involvement in political movements and party-politics has continued unabated up till today, and culminated in the formation of new political party, Jatika Hela Urumaya (National Sinhala Heritage: JHU) with Buddhist monks contesting in the 2004 public elections and winning 9 parliamentary seats.11 Still the Buddhist monks are divided on whether or not monks should engage themselves in politics and, those who believe that it is proper for them to be politically active, on how or the appropriate manner of doing so. Although movements such as modernity, secularization and development of scientific knowledge were perceived as possible threat to religions, it is difficult to see how Buddhism in Sri Lanka has been affected by such movements in a wholly negative manner. Following the worldwide trends in religion, in Sri Lanka too the collective Buddhist religious activities seem to be growing in size and frequency. In addition to this tendency, which is obviously operating at a popular level, intellectual curiosity for Buddhism too seems to be on the rising. It is reported that in the annual national book fare, which is by far the biggest literary and book sale event in Colombo which draws several million people every year, the most popular are the books on Buddhism. One must also mention, along with this, dozens of Dhamma sermons and Dhamma discussions aired and televised by a number of private and state radio and TV stations every day which again attract the largest numbers of listeners and viewers. Although one may still encounter efforts to compare Buddhism with science and to say that the former far excels the latter, this tendency is on the wane. Rather the tendency is to maintain that what the Buddha said is different from science and that Buddhism does not need the support of science to stand on its own. Globalization has taken Buddhism, like all the other religions, across the world beyond its traditional boundaries. The teachings of the Buddha have won a worldwide intellectual and practical appeal. On the one hand, this has paved the way for a new trans-traditional Buddhism which Lopez (Lopez 2002) had described as “a kind of transnational Buddhism” and which I myself have described as ‘miśra11  See Mahinda 2006, 233 - 254 for a substantial discussion JHU and monastic political engagements in Sri Lanka.

130

Asanga Tilakaratne

yāna’ (Tilakaratne 2012, 571-572) Buddhism. On the other hand, due to this popularity, Buddhist practices such as mindfulness meditation have been adopted by people without any special allegiance to Buddhism for various purposes such as improving productivity of employees, promoting sales and simply enhancing awareness for purposes which the Buddha may have not originally meant. Such uses of Buddhism may ultimately serve only the material comforts of people of the present-day world whose final aim is pleasure, a goal which may not have been dear to the Buddha. Notwithstanding the sublime teachings, some adherents of religions including those of Buddhism seem to follow the path of materialism and power as their ultimate aim. The recent onslaught of evangelical movements is a good manifestation of this worldwide trend of seeking power over others by means of money. For them, religion can be only a tool to achieve their narrow goals which the founders of their religions would have abhorred. Perhaps this may be the biggest challenge of globalization and modernity for any religion well including Buddhism in Sri Lanka to cope with in future.

7. Globalization and Religion in Asia: Is Religion an Equal Competitor?*

Introduction This paper begins with a discussion of how western religion was brought to Asia several centuries back by the currents of early globalization of the west and how the traditional religion of Asia is being taken today to the western world by the modern forces of the same globalization process. Subsequently, it identifies two different challenges posed by globalization to religion in general and the religion of Asia in particular, namely, the need to identify a unique role in the globalized society and the need to retain its traditional position of being the source of morality that is being increasingly challenged by such secular organizations as United Nations and the conventions such as Universal declaration of Human Rights. In the course of the discussion, it touches on the problems of absolutism and relativism in the context of religious truth claims. Globalization has never been felt in this intensity before. Every aspect of life is being influenced by constant flow of endless information, rapid growth of modes of transport and communication and the resultant reduction of time and space. Like any other institution in society religion too has been caught up in the process, and doubts are prone to arise, at times, whether religion itself has become an equal competitor in the process. The purpose of this paper is to examine how religion, particularly in Asia, is being affected by the processes of globalization and also how religion can equip itself to face challenges prompted by globalization. * An initial version of this paper was published as “Globalization and Religion in Asia: Is Religion an Equal Competitor?,” in Social Science Review, Fall-2017, Social Science Research Institute (SSRI), Yonsei University, Korea, pp. 77-95.

132

Asanga Tilakaratne

Globalization and religion in Asia1 A glance at history will show that most countries in Asia started feeling the impact of globalization around the 15th-16th centuries when the first Europeans, fortified with advanced naval technology and gun power landed in their countries. For instance, the first Portuguese ship came to Sri Lanka at the beginning of the sixteenth century (1505 to be exact) and that marked the beginning of several centuries of colonial domination, partial under Portuguese and Dutch and total under British. Religiously speaking, up to the point of the arrival of the Portuguese in Sri Lanka, the ethnic Sinahala were Buddhist and the ethnic Tamil were Hindu. This equation started changing when Christianity was introduced for the first time. I start with the story of Sri Lanka for that is the most familiar to me, but this is the experience more or less with many other Asian countries, The arrival of western religion was simultaneous with the arrival of the western political powers. Thus it is interesting to see that the very first waves of globalization in the region of Asia are heavily connected with religion. In most of the Asian countries the newly arrived religion had to deal with already existing developed religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. A current picture of religious landscape in these countries will show how this encounter of the new with the old or vice versa has taken place over several centuries. During the past one hundred years or so, globalization has been happening at a faster speed, and science, technology, culture, literature and politics, and more than any one of these things, economics of the world, have come under global influence. Religion, one would say, has not been among the key factors discussed under globalization today compared to these other areas of human interest. This, however, does not mean that nothing has been happening in the sphere of religion. I see two important areas where the impact of globalization on religion has to be assessed, namely, how religions have adapted or not adapted themselves to globalization and how religions need to redefine their role as a viable factor in human individual and social behaviour in the 21st century. By the first, what I basically mean is how religions have fared or survived globalization which is marked by rapid growth of science and technology and resultant new modes of thinking and behaviour. This question becomes particularly significant in the context of wide-spread 1  In this discussion I am not going to review the extensive sociological literature on globalization and religion and related issues. For more information and relevant bibliographical information please refer to Dillon (2003) and Haynes (1999).

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

133

belief that religion, with its ‘irrational doctrines resulting from ignorance and superstition’ would be a thing of past in the face the modern scientific and technological advancements. This attitude to religion by the early modern sociologists, for example, has been articulated by a recent writer in the following words: The nineteenth century rationalism or positivism questioned and rejected religious notions as illusory. They were thought to be irrational and superfluous in a modern society in which science as a mode of understanding of reality would predominate. Religion was seen as a natural phenomenon to be studied objectively and scientifically and explained like any other natural phenomenon in terms of its underlying causes. In this reductionist, positivist approach religion was ‘reduced’ to the underlying factors that produced it, so that the reality of religious entities, experiences and so on were denied. The attempt to explain it in such a way resulted largely in explaining religion away. (D’Souza 2005, xi) The Marxian and Freudian analyses of religion are relevant examples among others. It looks that, in spite of the predictions to the contrary, religion has come in full force to the 21st century. Technology has been made to serve religion, a good example for which is how the information technology is being used by religious organizations to reach millions all over the world, a phenomenon which would have been unimaginable a few decades ago. As we saw earlier in the discussion, Christianity came to Asian countries with early globalization of political and commercial power of the west. Islam came to Asia even earlier with expanding Islamic political and commercial power. By the time of the 20th century, these two religions already have had several centuries of history in these countries. The 20th century however, witnessed a different trend in the spread of religion, namely, the spread of Asian religions in the west. This process started taking place due to various social and political factors. How Buddhism started spreading out from Sri Lanka starting from the late nineteenth century provides an interesting example. Up to the 19th century the Theravada Buddhism in South and South East Asia was basically confined to those countries with occasional sporadic contacts with the West. It is interesting to see, how the very globalization process that brought Christianity to Sri Lanka was later instrumental in taking back Buddhism to the west.

134

Asanga Tilakaratne

Starting of the Pali Text Society (PTS) by Rhys Davids (18431922) in 1881 in England can be regarded as the most important event that crystallized the beginning of the systematic studies of Buddhism in England in particular and in the west in general. Rhys Davids was a young British civil servant in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) who developed an interest in the ancient Buddhist literature and studied Pali language from an erudite Sri Lankan Buddhist monk. Gone back to England after his service, Rhys Davids started Pali Text Society in order to publish Pali texts in Roman letters and translate them into English.2 By the first quarter of the 20th century, all the basic texts of the Pali Canon had been published in Roman letters and larger majority had been translated into English. These texts provided the basis for the subsequent Buddhist studies in Europe and America, and also constituted the essential reading material to those early converts from the West to Theravada Buddhism. Another historically significant event that took place in the British period is what has come to be known as the ‘Great Panadura Debate’, a face-to-face encounter between a Buddhist monk and a Christian clergy on their respective teachings. The British Christian missionaries who accompanied their country rulers to Sri Lanka were very active in propagating their religion during the nineteenth century in the new colony. It is recorded that at first the Buddhist monks even allowed these clergy to use their monastic preaching halls to address the people. Encouraged by this lack of opposition, the Christian clergy challenged the Buddhist monks for public debates.3 It proved hard to beat in this game the Buddhist monks for whom public oratory and the scriptural 2  It is not totally irrelevant to record here that V. Fausboll, one of the pioneers who started editing and transliterating Pali texts in Roman letters, even before PTS was started, envisaged (cultural) globalization as far back as 1877 in the following words: I have continued to transliterate the Oriental into Latin characters and shall continue to do so in all I publish of Pali, for it is my conviction that the fine Latin Characters must not only henceforward be applied to languages which have no literature and to literatures which have hitherto not been published, but also that they one day will supersede all other characters when Europeo-American civilization has, like a lava, laid itself over all other civilizations and made them into Herculaneums and Pompeiis. (emphasis added.) (Jātaka Vol. I. 1877) Looking back after one hundred thirty years, it does not seem that the wish of Fausboll, articulated in not-altogether-kind words, has come totally true although he definitely has captured the trend of globalization. It is not known whether or not Rhys Davids had a similar wish. 3  Debates prior to that of Panadura were held at the locations of Baddegama (1865), Udanwita (1866), and Gampola (1871).

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

135

knowledge were an essential part of their monastic training. The last of such debates was held in 1873 at the township called Panadura, and hence the name of this debate, which aroused substantial interest not only among the native Buddhists but also in the English people themselves. It was widely acknowledged that the monk represented Buddhism won the day. A report of this debate with an account of its content was published in the English news papers. John Capper, the editor of Ceylon Times, published a report of the event under the title “A Full account of the Buddhist controversy held at Panadura in August 1873”. One Dr. James Martin Peebles from the USA, who happened to be there witnessing the debate, republished this report in New York under the title “Buddhists and Christianity Face to Face”. It is after reading this account that Henry Steel Olcott, along with Madame Blawatsky, a well-known theosophist, came to Sri Lanka in 1880 from the USA and became Buddhist and started working with the local Buddhist leaders. The arrival of these two people from the West marked a new beginning for Buddhism, in particular, it marked the beginning of the western model of education for the Buddhist children and enhancement of the organizational activities of the Buddhists in Sri Lanka. A young Sinhala Buddhist, who later came to be known as Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933), was awakened by the Panadura debate and subsequently served Olcott as his interpreter in his public talks given in various places in the island. Dharmapala himself became a leader of the Buddhist revival movement of the country following his mentor Olcott. In 1893, Dharmapala was invited to represent Buddhism (“Southern Buddhism”) at the World Parliament of Religion held in Chicago and became a prominent participant from Asia along with Swami Wivekananda from India who represented Hinduism. Dharmapala started Maha Bodhi Society (1891) which became the leading Buddhist organization in India which is responsible for the modern revival of Buddhism in the country where the Buddha was born. The first Theravada Buddhist Vihara (monastery) in the West was established by Dharmapala in London in 1926 which still functions and is known under the name: London Buddhist Vihara. Whereas Rhys Davids and the Pali Text Society marked the beginning of the Buddhism’s becoming a global religion, the arrival of Henry Steel Olcott and Madame Blavatsky marked the new beginning for the local Buddhism in Sri Lanka, which, through Anagarika Dharmapala, was instrumental in wide variety of Buddhist activism in India and the West. Both these events are clearly indirect and unintended results of the globalization of the West in the nineteenth century.

136

Asanga Tilakaratne

These dynamics of religion show that from the times of conquerors to colonizers, the religion has become an important part of globalization. Either conquerors or colonizers used religion as an instrument of their power game, or religions, in the sense of organized religion, themselves found a good alley in these enterprises for their own power games. In either manner, western religions came to Asia as a part of globalization process. Interestingly the process is far from being over- as globalization is happening in an unprecedented manner, what I would call ‘religious globalization’ too happening in renewed vigour in many places throughout Asia, the only difference being that the modes of operation have become more subtle and more sophisticated. Today in Asia we see the second wave of religious globalization. Initially, Islam and Christianity that came with conquerors and colonizers have by now become very much local and traditional that they form a part of Asian religiosity in those respective places. The second wave of globalization associated with religion is a more recent phenomenon. In many parts of Asia, in particular in South and South East Asia, new evangelical groups have been active for the last few decades to the extent that in many of these places social and religious harmony has been threatened in a serious manner. For instance, the practice known as ‘unethical conversion’ has aroused so much anxiety and frustration among people in some states of India, the state legislatures have passed ‘anti-conversion’ bills in their parliaments. There are two such bills awaiting consideration before the parliament of Sri Lanka. Usually these religious groups are from the West and are funded by local religious organizations in those western countries. More recently, Korea has entered the scene of new evangelism by following its western counterparts and is busy in setting up establishments for spreading Christianity in these regions (definitive statistics not available.). Korea provides an interesting example of how religious globalization is intimately linked with economic power. As in many other Asian countries, the history of Christianity in Korea is less than four hundred years old. Nevertheless, the fact that Korea is in a position to propagate its newly adopted religion to the other countries in Asia shows the significant role played by the economic power in this whole process. More recently, there has been considerable amount of discussion on both ‘unethical conversion’ and the measures adopted by other religionists to counter such efforts. The argument of the groups who do not approve of the new evangelical tactics and procedures, characterized

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

137

in particular by targeting of economically deprived groups by offering material gains and thereby using these groups merely as a means of glorifying one’s own religion, is that to follow such questionable practices is to misuse the misery of these people and to ‘bribe’ them into accepting a religion which ideally has to happen out of conviction. The other side has been arguing, based on the notions of freedom of religion and freedom of expression, that one has to have liberty to spread one’s own belief and that anyone has a right to believe in any religion of one’s choice. The debate could be extended to any length, but the important point to consider is how can we reconcile between a religion’s need to educate others on what it thinks to be the right thing while accepting the right of other religions for existence and for their own engagement in similar educative activities. Today, the plurality of religion has become a fact mainly as a result of globalization. For instance, many countries formerly with their one or two traditional religions have become multi-religious. The problem is how to deal with it. For instance, Sri Lanka with its traditional Buddhism and Hinduism has Christianity and Islam for the last several centuries, thus making the phenomenon of religious plurality and the resultant need to be in harmony with those who do not make a part of one’s own group problematic and challenging. In the globalized context of the present-day world, as many other things, religions too have been drawn close to one another as it has never been before. This situation necessarily prompts us to think seriously of the issues of inter-religious harmony. Inter-religious harmony and co-existence, nevertheless, have never been an easy affair. Usually, religions are supposed to provide solution and way-out when society is suffering from problems. History, however, shows that this has not been always the case. For the most part, it is true that religions have been culturing and sobering forces, but time and again we have witnessed in the history that, instead of being the solution, religions themselves have been the problem. Instead of being pacifying forces, religions have been the cause of conflict. At the heart of the problem is the belief that holding on to a truth claim in one religion and being peaceful and tolerant of opposite belief system is impossible or self-contradictory. Let’s examine this belief briefly.

Religious truth claims It is common among religions to make exclusive claims on the truth about the world and human existence. A claim of this sort in any religion

138

Asanga Tilakaratne

is, on the one hand, an assertion of its own position and, on the other, a criticism and a rejection of the religions that preceded it or other than it. The history of religions makes it clear that always a newly arising religion is a rejection of its older counterparts. For instance, in India, Buddhism arose as a way to freedom from suffering because Prince Siddhartha was not satisfied with the existing religions of the day, Brahmanism and many forms of non-brahmanic religions such as Jainism and Ajivikism. In the like manner, Christianity came into being owing to the dissatisfaction of Jesus of Judaism. Islam came as a rejection of both Judaism and Christianity. If any of the religious leaders were satisfied with what they already had, a new religion would not have arisen. Every religion, in this manner, contains truth claims which exclude the rest. Truth claims advanced by religions usually come as very strong assertions. This is particularly so when these truths are understood to originate from sources believed to be absolutely infallible. For example, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, God, the source of truth or who is believed to have revealed the truth, is characterized as omniscient, omnipotent and absolutely good and benevolent. By the very definition this god is infallible and anything that is said by such a god cannot be wrong, untrue or bad. Human beings by definition, are limited and imperfect whereas God is unlimited and perfect. This makes human beings totally incapable of not merely challenging but even understanding God. The end result is unconditional surrender of one’s own self and acceptance as final what is religiously given. In such a situation, one’s acceptance of these truths has to be understood not as an epistemological but as an emotional act. Once one accepts the possibility of such transcendental source, it automatically follows that one accepts what is claimed to have said by him. The acceptance is an act of faith and faith alone. Faith is basically an emotion. Not any amount of rational arguments would dissuade one from believing in such truths. This, in other words, could amount to subscribing to a very strong form of absolutism in religion. Any form of absolutism is a breeding ground for conflict. It is particularly so when it comes to absolute truths in religion. Religion is such a serious affair that one puts one’s entire existence at its disposal. Very often, in the believer’s eyes, the choice of religion is a choice between eternal hell and everlasting paradise. This explains why some people are ready to sacrifice even their life for this phenomenon.

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

139

Absolutism-and-relativism-debate in religion The dislike of absolutism with its resultant fundamentalism has led some to accept a form of relativism4 which holds that every religion is equally true. The underlying belief, which I think is mistaken, is that religious harmony is impossible so long as one holds to one’s own truthclaims for doing so is to hurt the feelings and the sensitivities of the other. Asserting a religious truth-claim, however, does not necessarily need to amount to an absolutism. One may well assert such a truth without holding a dogmatic and fanatic mentality about it. For example, the attitude advocated by the Buddha to his teaching is one of non-grasping based on rational understanding. Religious relativism, in this manner, is very often proposed as a necessary condition of inter-religious harmony. There is no doubt about the desirability of harmony among religions. But it needs to be positioned on a sound basis. Relativism seems to provide hardly any such basis which is intellectually satisfying. Among different varieties of relativism there is a classical Indian view which holds that all religions are true for they say the same in different languages or in different manners. According to this view, which has been classically expressed as: “ekam hi sat – viprā bahudhā vadanti” (Rg. I, 164. 46): “the truth is one; sages describe it many ways”, the apparent differences in religions have to be explained with reference to regional, cultural or linguistic differences. There are more recent versions of a similar relativism. In his much acclaimed work, An Interpretation of Religion, a leading philosopher of religion, John Hick, says that the ultimate goals of all religions can be classified into two, namely, personal representations and impersonal representations of the Transcendental. Such religious ultimates as Ishvara, Yahweh, Allah and the like are examples for the first category. Atman/Brahman, nirvana, Tathatā and the like are impersonal representations. All these phenomena are ultimately representations of one and only transcendental entity which he calls ‘the Real’. Now this Real is what stands above all these religious goals. What this theory amounts to is that all the religions are ultimately one and the same for the reason that all of them refer to the same transcendental entity. According to this theory, all religions are true because all of them ultimately have the same final point of reference. Both these ancient and modern versions of religious relativism are not really relativist; they allow truthfulness to all religions not because all of them are true as 4  Read Ernest Gellner (1992) for an enlightening discussion on the issue of relativism in a broader context of science, epistemology and religion.

140

Asanga Tilakaratne

they are but because they ultimately refer to the same Transcendental, though in different languages. This is not really a form of relativism for it ultimately affirms one form of religion as the only valid religion. The relativism proper has to be different in allowing validity to all forms of religion equally, but the epistemological question that it leaves behind is: how could many rival assertions be true simultaneously? Relativism in religion is not acceptable to anyone who is serious about religion as a way of life leading to a fixed destination. Notwithstanding the fact that religions do share a lot in common, there seem to be certain differences among religions which are quite fundamental and basic. The difference between two theistic religious traditions may be purely on such minor issues as the appropriateness of the names used to call God, the correctness of the epithets used to describe God and the like, but if we contrast a theistic religion with a non-theistic religion such as Buddhism, for example, the differences are not nominal. They involve the very fundamental beliefs of the two religions: whereas one is based on the assumption of the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and all-good God, who created the universe, the other begins by rejecting such a possibility altogether. This fundamental difference accounts for the other equally fundamental differences between the path and the goal accepted by each tradition. If the situation is such, relativism cannot be the right position to adopt. There cannot be a doubt about the necessity and the validity of religious harmony; but it needs to be founed on a different and sustainable basis. On the other hand, the classical Indian version of relativism with its modern versions cannot be accepted for, in fact, it is a kind of absolutism leading finally to a type of ‘colonialism’ in religion. The underlying assumption of this project is the belief that, in order to be acceptable and lovable, ‘the other’ needs to be in conformity with ‘one’s own’ categories. So there is a necessity of reshaping and reinterpreting ‘the other’ so that it suits ‘our own’ requirements. The real solution, therefore, cannot be either relativism or absolutism however sophisticated or mild it may be. The real solution has to be pluralism based on mutual respect. In a pluralistic religious dimension, one accepts the multiplicity of religion as a fact, although not attributing validity to all, and acts accordingly.

Epistemological and ethical challenge In concluding this part of the discussion let me propose that the real epistemological challenge for this position is to show that a religion can

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

141

uphold its claim for truth and still practice harmony with other religions, which it believes to be not totally true. The issue is, can religions still hold on to what they consider to be true and still come up with a philosophy and ethics enabling them to live while letting others also live? The history of religions is full of incidents of destroying the others for the propagation of one’s own. This is no wonder in a situation where one accepts some belief to be true not for rational reasons but for one’s emotional attachment to it. We cannot say that things have changed drastically. It is true that today we do not hear religious wars being fought in order to propagate one religion over the rest. Nevertheless, there are several ongoing conflicts in the world caused solely by historical religious reasons. Also it is true that today people are not being killed for the purpose of conversion, but it equally remains true that they are forced to accept one religion over another by improper means. Religious fundamentalism is very much a part of today’s globalized society. Religious fundamentalists are trying their level best to see that all the other religions are replaced by their own. Established forms of religion too are not without their secret agendas for conversion. Religions seem to have a kind of ‘cold-war’ going among them still. Mutual distrust and the desire to see that the other is eliminated are the key characteristics of this way of behaviour. It is ironical that most of the aggressive forms of religious conversions are taking place today under the guise of exercising one’s freedom of thought, freedom of choice and freedom of expression and other similar human rights and liberties. The kinds of freedom spoken here are not of those who are being converted but of those who are engaged in conversion. Majority of the people who become the victims are those who are deprived of economic well-being and are hence powerless to resist any pressure. Ultimately the question here is: whose freedom of choice and expression do really matter here? The freedom of the converter is being used to undermine the same of the converted. The religion which is expected to be the liberator has itself become the oppressor. Globalization has been a mixed baggage: it has brought economically and culturally both good and bad, in particular, to developing countries in Asia and elsewhere. Religiously, globalization has made possible for Buddhism to spread practically all over the world making use of sophisticated modes of transport and electronic modes of communication. With the vast advances of information technology and transport, the world today is much closer to one another than it

142

Asanga Tilakaratne

was a hundred years back. What this means for religions is that they cannot ignore the existence of the others any longer; nor can they expect their public behaviour to be unknown to others. In such a situation, all religions have to be sensitive to the other religions. This situation forces religions to have a well articulated position and attitude toward the rest of the religions. Respect for the other person’s views, whether they are acceptable or not, has to be inculcated as a religious virtue. While we have to admit that a religious person has a duty to tell others what he thinks to be true, right and good, we also need to underscore that this has to be done in the most unoffending manner possible. I think there are a lot of challenges lying before all those who identify themselves with religion in one way or another. Among them a very serious one will be to evolve a set of ethics by which religions themselves behave toward one another. In a world ridden with problems and miseries, there is no need for religions to contribute to the increase of it. Religious fundamentalism has caused a lot of suffering to humanity. We need to find solutions to these problems not by adhering to any fresh form of fundamentalism but by being vigilant and ethically strong.

Globalization, secularism and challenge for religion Apart from the problem discussed above, in which religions are faced with the challenge of developing right attitudes toward each other, religion in general is faced with equally or even more serious challenge, namely, to continue to make itself meaningful in a world order characterized by globalization and secularism. By this ‘challenge’, I mean two things: one is for religions to find a unique role to play in modern individual’s life. The other is to find ways and means to stay above secular conventions that articulate national and international and individual and social good behaviour. At the beginning of this discussion, I referred to some early sociologists and psychologists who anticipated that religion will be a thing of the past in the face of modernism. To the relief of the religionists this has been proved not true. But still there is a question regarding the manner in which religion exists among us presently. At one point of time, in many societies in the world, religion, in doctrinal as well as organizational sense, provided almost everything for the society. Most of these roles have been undertaken today by other branches of human knowledge and social organizations which fare even more effectively. Consequently, religion mostly has come to us only as a carrier of rites

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

143

and rituals. It is true that today religious organizations are engaged in many forms of social services, relief activities, measures of poverty alleviation and educational enterprises, but these are not necessarily the exclusive domains of religion, not to mention the fact that questions have been raised at times of the impartiality of how religions are engaged in these services. It is clear that there are secular organizations including governments who fulfill these social needs even more satisfactorily. In such a situation as this, it is imperative upon religions to discover their own unique role in individual life and society. This is not to underestimate the meaning of rites and rituals we live by. Since, however, rites and rituals are not exclusively religious, there can be tendency for people to find alternative rights and rituals which are more entertaining, more meaningful or more useful or any combination of them. This, in fact, seems to be the case with a culture like that of Korea where about 46% of people claim that they do not have a religion (According to 2003 census. Source: Wikipedia (Korea)).This statistics is important compared, for example, to any south Asian country where almost 100% would identify themselves with one religion or another. The large group of people, who does not claim any religious affiliation, is not necessarily detesting any rites or rituals, for in a broader sense, social life is a complex of rites and rituals. It is not my function here to determine what this unique characteristic of religion should be; it is up to each individual religion to determine it for itself. However, the point I would wish to make is that religion, if it needs to continue to be a meaningful and respected institute for individual and society, has to go beyond being a mere carrier of traditional rites and rituals or a mere social service institute. The other significant challenge for religion is coming from a very important development of globalization, namely, evolution of institutes like the United Nations, which encompass the entire world. The fact that almost all the nations in the world have joined the UN shows the willingness of people to submit themselves to a kind of global agreement and consensus. One of the most significant development in this trend was to adopt Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 by the General Assembly of United Nations. Subsequently many other documents specifying civil and political rights, rights of children, conventions against discrimination of women, and the convention against torture and other cruel and inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment have been adopted by this world-wide body.

144

Asanga Tilakaratne

It is interesting to see that all the individuals and social organizations, including religious organizations in particular, are seeking the assistance and guidance from these commissions, particularly they seek protection under Human Rights when faced with difficulties. In so far as religion is concerned, this shows that it is under these global conventions which are basically secular and non-religious. Secularism was initially developed in the context of the western society basically as a reaction to the western religion.5 The history of this development can be traced in the histories of the particular countries starting from late medieval through modern periods, in such documents as Magna Carta (1215: England), Bill of Rights (1689, England), Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789, France) and United States Bill of Rights (1789/1791) and in the movements such as Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. Although secularism implies rejection of religion in some sense and hence some religions in particular distance themselves from secularist movements, it is interesting to see that all the major world religions have accepted and supported UDHR. This, in a way, shows that the concept and the convention of human rights have been there ingrained in the religious teachings and from that perspective, that UDHR is not something new to religions. Granting this point, still we have to note the organizational structure of the UDHR and its legal power on the nations of the globe which religions seem to lack. Unlike a religious teaching or a belief, UDHR has a legal validity and a mechanism to deal with its violators. It is in this sense that secularist institutes under globalization have been able to bring out a global form of ethics that cut across religious affiliations. If what was done by religions in earlier times is now being done by organizations such as the UN, and if religions themselves accept this new order, it is an indication that secularism has triumphed over religion in some very significant sense. When religions themselves are at war with one another, it is secular institutes that sit on judgment and working as sobering influences on religions. If religion is reduced to a state in which it is told what to do and what not to do by a secular institute it clearly is not good for the age-old ethical self-image of the religions. This situation, on the 5  Although secularism of the kind that was developed in the West was not developed and even not favoured in other parts of the world (the possible explanations for which are being debated among scholars), there have been conventions clearly revealing universalist ethical tendencies, much earlier than conventions mentioned, in other parts of the world. One good example is the rock edicts established by the Indian Buddhist emperor Asoka in the 3rd century bce.

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

145

other hand, is inevitable in view of the history of religions fraught, very often, with persecution of other religionists, non-believers and others like witches who were considered to be undesirable for the particular religion. Nevertheless, the sublime teachings of all great religions, in spite of the misbehaviours, of varying degrees and frequencies, on the part of the followers, have to be recognized. The very secular institutes clearly have been influenced by, or at least have not gone against, the essence of such teachings. This shows that religions do not have a dearth of resources of their own. What needs to be done is to have developed truly a global ethics within each system. An indication to the recognition of this need is the document called “Declaration toward a Global Ethic”, authored by Hans Kung and issued at the Parliament of Word Religions, Chicago, 1993, which marked the first centenary of the initial Parliament in 1883. The Declaration was approved by the followers of the all religions gathered, and was signed subsequently by more than one hundred religious dignitaries belonging to different religious denominations.6 The declaration begins with the following analysis of the human predicament: The world is in agony. The agony is so persuasive and urgent that we are compelled to name its manifestations so that the depth of this pain may be made clear. Peace eludes us – the planet is being destroyed – neighbors live in fear – women and men are estranged from each other – children die! This is abhorrent. We condemn the abuses of Earths eco-systems. We condemn the poverty that stifles life’s potential; the hunger that weakens the human body, the economic disparities that threaten so many families with ruin. We condemn the social disarray of the nations; the disregard for justice which pushes citizens to the margin; the anarchy overtaking our communities; and the insane death of children from violence. In particular we condemn aggression and hatred in the name of religion. 6  The Document begins with an introduction which outlines the need for a global ethic and then goes to outline the principles of a global ethic under four headings, namely, [i] no new global order without a new global ethic, [ii] a fundamental demand: every human being must be treated humanely; [iii] irrevocable directives, under which four different aspects of ethical norms, namely, (i) commitment to a culture of non-violence and respect for life; (ii) commitment to a culture of solidarity and just economic order, (iii) commitment to a culture of tolerance and life of truthfulness; and (iv) commitment to a culture of equal rights and partnership between men and women, are discussed and [iv] transformation of consciousness. (Source of the Document: Foundation Global Ethic, Germany.)

146

Asanga Tilakaratne

The Declaration holds that these sad conditions need not exist on earth and that there is an ethic capable of solving these problems available within religions. It further says that Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948 “on the level of rights” are confirmed and deepened by the Declaration “from the perspective of an ethic” (emphasis original). In other words, the Declaration proposes to provide an alternative religious basis for human rights to be upheld and observed. Although the document itself may be studied for its relative merits in completeness and conceptual clarity and the like, the purpose of the present discussion being different we do not engage in such an exercise here. What is important to highlight in the present context is that religions have shown awareness of the larger challenge facing themselves. It is equally important to note that by admitting the religions’ own role in aggravating human predicament (as found in the passage quoted above) the Declaration displays unbiasedness and admirable sensitivity to the manifold sources of the problem.

Conclusion The early strides of globalization several centuries ago brought the western religion to Asia. More recently new strides of globalization have taken the Asian religions back to the West. On the one hand, globalization has found new homes for traditional Asian religions as it found new homes for the western religions centuries ago. On the other hand, the economic and cultural forces that are generated by globalization seem to pose serious threats to Asian religion in particular and religion in general all over the world without much discrimination. The fundamental principle of globalized market economy seems to be to let the market decide, and the market, in John Rawls words, “ignores the claims of need altogether” (Ryan 1993, 85). In this inhuman pursuit, it is believed that religion is the most plausible candidate to provide sanity while maintaining its own. The way the globalized religion tries to dominate over other religions alarmingly suggests that religion too has entered the race on equal terms. In other words, while the fate of the developing economies are decided by the market the fate of the Asian religions which lack sufficient material resources is left to be decided by the same principle of ‘market’. The race in the view of the runners has only one rational end –that is, extermination of all other religions except the most powerful, whatever it may be. So long as religion itself is a competitor in the game it does not have a moral right, nor does it have a capacity to provide guidance for the

Globalization and Religion in Asia...

147

kind of maladies described in the preamble to the Declaration of Global Ethic we discussed above. Therefore, it is paramount for religions to have adopted their own pluralist ethic toward each other before aiming at anything more grandeur. If religion fails to do this, what is most likely to happen is that ordinary people, who do not wish to be bothered by religious disputes, will bypass it.

8. Buddhism and Gender: A Textual and Contextual Study

Introduction The state of women in early Buddhism has been discussed so much one may wonder as to what is there to be said anew. The very fact that so much has been said by so many necessitates one to re-examine the ideas floating around. Traditional accounts are beset with difficulties, true enough. But those accounts that reject such accounts in toto too have to be taken with caution. In this paper, I will be looking critically at the traditional Theravada accounts of the establishment of the bhikkhunī order and try to draw a realistic picture in which the Buddha is neither a hero all out to save women or a misogynist who agreed to establish the bhikkhunī order simply because he could not escape from persistent Ananda, his chief attendant and ‘patron saint’ of bhikkhunīs. An initial difficulty in this study is to distinguish what is early from what is later, in particular, what may have actually happened and what have been added when the Vinaya account was made. In constructing what could have been the position or positions of the Buddha we will have to take the Dhamma and the Vinaya together so that the latter may be viewed from the perspective of the former for ultimately the Vinaya is based on the Dhamma. Before getting into the discussion proper, a remark on ‘gender’, one could object that there was not a concept of gender during the time of the Buddha. It is true, even a truism, to say that there was not a concept of gender for the Buddha as it is understood presently as socially constructed. The biological concept of sex was definitely there as found articulated in the canonical Abhidhamma literature in such terms as ‘itthi-indriya’-female faculty and ‘purisa-indriya’-male

Buddhism and Gender...

149

faculty. From the Abhidhamma definition of itthi-indriya as “itthilinga, itthi-nimitta, itthi-kutta, itthākappa, itthitta, itthibhāva” (Dhs 143) (woman’s mark, woman’s sexual organ, woman’s behaviour, woman’s appearance, woman-ness and woman’s being”) we can see that both physical aspects [linga and nimitta] as well as behavioural aspects have been taken together as constituting woman’s faculty. The malefaculty too has been defined in identical terms (purisa-linga etc.). This definition suggests that both biological and behavioral aspects (‘socially constructed’) have been taken together without making a distinction. When Soma Theri boldly asked ‘what is wrong with being a woman’ (itthi-bhāvo no kiṁ kairā…) (S I 129) she must have been referring to this comprehensive concept of feminine-ness or femininity. Although the gender aspects of femininity were not stated clearly, from the manner the Buddha treated women as capable of realizing the ultimate freedom (nirvana) like any one else, it seems that the Buddha rejected some of the crucial stereotypes of women current during his time. But this does not allow us to say that the Buddha made a sharp distinction between sex and gender. Therefore, to talk about ‘Buddhism and gender’ seems to presuppose a category non-existent for The Buddha. At least there are not two clear-cut concepts to refer to the two phenomena. However, on the other hand, it should not prevent us from discussing from a Buddhist perspective issues raised in the current gender debate. This discussion will be organized in the following manner. We will begin by discussing the Vinaya-piṭaka story of the beginning of the bhikkhunī order and highlight some inconsistencies in this story pointing at the same time to certain points that were not considered by the critics, but they should have considered. From there we will move into a discussion on the general characterization of women found in the discourses and see how to make sense of the different positions on women found in the early Buddhist literature. Lastly, we will discuss historical perceptions that have continued through the Buddhist tradition on women and the more recent debate on re-establishing the bhikkhunī order. We will conclude with some general observations on gender and feminism from a Buddhist perspective.

Establishment of the bhikkhunī order The Theravada account of the establishment of the order of bhikkhunīs is found in the bhikkhunī-khandhaka of the Vinaya-pitaka (Vin II, 253283). According to this account, Prajapati Gotami, the step-mother of

150

Asanga Tilakaratne

the Buddha, asks three times from the Buddha for the permission to enter the Sāsana1 or to receive (pabbajjā, ‘going forth, or ‘initial admission’2 meaning, becoming a member of the monastic order). In all three instances the Buddha refuses this request, but does not give any specific reason. Finally, Gotami with a group of women including Yasodhara, the wife of the Buddha in his life as Siddhartha, with shaven heads and wearing yellow robes, reaches by walking Nigrodharama of Kapilavatthu, where the Buddha was. It is Ananda, the chief attendant to the Buddha, that presents their case to the Buddha. When the latter refused the entry of women to the Sāsana, Ananda asks the crucial question: Is it possible for a woman to make an end to suffering in ‘this doctrine and discipline’ (imasmiṁ dhamma-vinaye)? To this, the Buddha answers affirmatively. Then, Ananda asks the inevitable question: then why should women not receive going forth in the Sāsana? The Buddha conceded and says that if Prajapati Gotami accepts the eight ‘weighty’ conditions (aṭṭha garudhammā) that very acceptance will be her going forth. Ananda conveys this to Gotami who accepts the weighty conditions without any hesitation, and upon her becoming a bhikkhunī by this act of acceptance the rest received bhikkhunī-hood from her and thus the order of the bhikkhunīs was begun. Having given permission for women to enter under the eight conditions the Buddha says to Ananda that had not women received entrance in the Sāsana, the Sāsana would be lasting longer, one thousand years; but now it will last only five hundred years;3 that like a household with more women and less men is susceptible for attack by robbers and is vulnerable, the religious order where women receive entrance will not last long; that as a fully grown rice field will not last long when it is affected by disease, in like manner, when women receive entrance the Sāsana will not last long; and that as a fully grown field of sugar-cane will not last long when it is affected by disease , in like manner, when women receive entrance the Sāsana will not last long. “Ananda”, the Buddha 1  Although literally ‘sāsana’ means message/teaching, it is used to refer to the organization. 2  In this discussion I use ‘initial admission’ for pabbajjā and ‘higher admission’ for upasampadā instead of the popular usage or ordination and higher ordination. 3  From the fact that the Sāsana still exists, we may have to judge that either the compilers of the Vinaya had miscalculated grossly or they had a very different sense of the length of five hundred (or even one thousand) years. If the Buddha (most likely) did not make this remark it suggests that the compilers of the Vinaya had a fairly gloomy view about the future of the Sāsana, caused, perhaps, by the undesirable state of affairs that might have existed when the Vinaya texts were compiled.

Buddhism and Gender...

151

further said, “like a man who will build a dam beforehand in order to preserve the water of a great reservoir, I prescribed for bhikkhunīs the eight weighty phenomena to be observed for life”. In this standard story there are some difficulties. Usually this story is interpreted as the Buddha’s unwillingness to enter women into the monastic order. According to the story the Buddha rejects the idea of bhikkhunī order for three times. The Buddha’s act of rejecting the request of Pajapati Gotami for three times is significant for in the Buddhist tradition, repetition (of any formula, request etc.) up to three times is accepted as the proper procedure. For instance, in the Vinaya, in monastic disciplinary acts, monks are required to repeat, say, a motion, for three times. If the participants are silent for all three times then it is accepted as final and approved. Usually the ritualistic formulas are repeated for three times. As revealed in the Buddha’s discussion with Saccaka (Bodhi 2009, 326) and similar occasions one cannot keep silent obstinately when the Buddha asks a question for the third time. Here in this story the Buddha rejects Pajapati Gotami’s request for the third time indicating thereby that his disapproval was final. But unusually he changes his mind in this occasion. Again, according to the story, the Buddha had to change his mind when he was, so to say, cleverly cornered by Ananda. But the question is, did the Buddha not know that women could attain the final goal till Ananda reminded him of it? I think clearly there is a problem here in the manner it has been reported. As it is, the story implies that the Buddha allowed entrance to bhikkhunīs simply because he could not by-pass Ananda’s argument. But this is unlikely. But this way of telling the story makes Ananda solely responsible for this move. This is further confirmed by the remarks the Buddha is said to have made having given permission. As we saw earlier, the Buddha compares the entrance of the bhikkhunī order to a germ introduced to the fertile field of the Sāsana. It is as if the Buddha were saying: ‘Ananda, I did this because what you said is true; but see, what is going to happen’! Clearly this Buddha is not happy about what he did. The story, however, attributing responsibility to Ananda, tallies well with the developments recorded in the account of the first council (Pañcasatika-khandhaka, Vinaya Cullavagga), namely, the charge brought against Ananda for persuading the Buddha to approve going forth for women. If the Buddha gave the permission only reluctantly, we have to assume that the Buddha was only concerned about the suffering of men and not

152

Asanga Tilakaratne

of women. But is this possible? Such a conclusion goes against the textual evidence in which the Buddha assumes or accepts the existence of the four groups (cattaro parisā) of disciples, bhikkhu, bhikkhunī, upāsaka and upāsikā. According to discourses, Māra appears before the newly enlightened Buddha and asks him to attain parninirvana, now that he had attained enlightenment whereupon the Buddha said to Māra that he will not attain parnirvana until all the four groups of his disciples, become well versed in the Dhamma and well trained in the discipline (D I 113). Whether or not we accept the time factor involved in this encounter with Māra, from the early Buddhist literature it is clear that the four groups were assumed always by the Buddha as well as by the tradition. Furthermore, the negative attitude attributed to the Buddha goes against his great compassion (mahā karuṇā) which is equally applicable to all beings irrespective of any kind of biological or social difference. The conclusion is that the Vinaya account of the establishing of the bhikkhunī order has to be treated with suspicion. The fact of the matter should be that the Buddha was cautious about establishing the new wing of the monastic order. The caution of the Buddha has to be understood not in terms of the potential to threaten the longevity of the order of the bhikkhus, as the Vinaya account wants us to believe, but at least due to two other considerations, as I believe. What I am going to outline are one social and the other soteriological, neither given much thought in the available discussions on the issue, but equally crucial. The soteriological consideration is how the juxtaposition of the two groups within the same monastic tradition is going to affect the soteriological opportunities of the two groups. The male monastic Sangha already in place comprises basically those who left their household life in order to attain termination of suffering which, according to the four noble truth teaching of the Buddha, is caused by, at its crudest form, desire for sensory gratification. The desire for the opposite sex may be imagined as the most formidable among these desires. So, it is quite rational for these males to have least to do with their opposite sex at least until they realize their goal. Now this same is true for the women who join the bhikkhunī order. Once the two wings of the same monastic order are established physical proximity cannot be totally avoided, which could be harmful for both groups. The problems associated with this physical proximity could be highlighted even more vividly in what I call the social consideration. One of the most challenging of the social aspects of female monastic life would have been the physical security of these women who join

Buddhism and Gender...

153

the all-female organization leaving behind, among other things, the protection they received within the household. In the Hindu life it is said that a woman is protected by her father at her childhood, by her husband at the adulthood and by the son at her old-age. Although this idea occurs in the Manusmṛti to establish that a woman does not deserve to be independent (na stri svātāntryam arhati: Manusmṛti 5:148.), the positive side of this is that she was protected in her whole life. Now it is a crucial matter how to provide physical protection to these bhikkhunīs. On the one hand, it is unimaginable to think that families of these women whom they left behind will come forward to protect them. On the other hand, the only possible alternative being the members of the male sangha, how could they undertake this responsibility which they have given up when they left their own households. Besides, such an exercise will surely be detrimental to their own soteriological endeavours. Also such an eventuality will be detrimental to both. In this manner, the soteriological and the social considerations become inseparable. Although, at least in some cases, the eight weighty conditions are viewed mostly unfavourably by modern critics for justifiable reasons, some of the conditions are meant to assure the physical protection of the bhikkhunīs, in particular, the second prohibiting bhikkhunīs to spend the rainy season in a locality where there are no bhikkhus. Subsequently we see many rules with similar prohibitions on bhikkhunīs living alone in forests, travelling alone in forests etc. In spite of all such rules we know there were instances when nuns who were living alone were physically violated by men. These instances show the gravity of the problem. The rules like the second among the eight weighty rules suggest that the Buddha had to make a compromise between the soteriological and the social considerations in putting the bhikkhunīs at least to some extent under the protection of bhikkhus. This led to the inevitable: Vinaya provides examples as to how certain bhikkhunīs developed inappropriate intimacies with certain bhikkhus, and how the public, in turn, criticized such bhikkhunīs as ‘mistresses’ of bhikkhus (Vin IV 62). Although the texts do not refer to these considerations directly it is quite reasonable to think that the Buddha had to consider all similar situations before he was to establish the bhikkhunī order. But did he really impose the eight weighty conditions on bhikkhunīs, or did he really impose all eight of these conditions, in particular the first, [A bhikkhunī with higher admission who has spent hundred rainy seasons must pay respect, attend on, salute and show courtesy to a bhikkhu who has just

154

Asanga Tilakaratne

received higher admission on that very day.] and the last [from today the way of communication with bhikkhus is closed for the bhikkhunīs but not vice versa.] and one before the last [A bhikkhunī must not in any manner abuse or speak ill of a bhikkhu. ]? We have to remember that these conditions were given as things ‘to be treated well, treated seriously, respected, paid homage and inviolable for the whole life’ (…sakkatvā garukatvā mānetvā pūjetvā yāvajīvaṁ anatikkamanīyo). Apart from this strong language which is very unusual and not used even for the Pātimokkha rules including the pārājikā (defeat) offences, most serious of all offences, the content of these conditions is the most questionable. According to the Vinaya account, when Pajapati Gotami heard these conditions from Ananda she accepts them unconditionally saying that she will accept them like a young person who will accept a garland of flowers. However, according to the very same Vinaya account, right at the beginning Pajapati Gotami asks for a favour, through Ananda, from Buddha, namely, to rescind the first condition. This gives the impression that Pajapati Gotami acted in a pragmatic manner, agreeing virtually to any condition in order to get it. But once got it she is seen behaving differently. The Buddha would not give in. Again, the reason given by the Buddha for his decision, that even the followers of other religious systems would not allow such a behavior, is strange. In the Vinayapiṭaka we quite often see how the Buddha was perceptive of what people including the followers of other religious systems thought about the monastic behavior and made changes accordingly. But this particular instance with specific reference to ‘the followers of other religions’ (añña-titthiyā) seems different. It gives the impression that the Buddha would not do anything if that is contrary to what the followers of other religious systems did. But we know that this is not the case. If it was the case then Buddhism would not be different from its contemporary systems in any significant manner. What is even more serious than this observation of the behavior of the followers of other religious systems is the assumption underlying this move, namely that whatever the inner virtuous qualities a woman may have developed all those are subordinate to her feminine factor which the society considered to be lower relative to masculinity. But this goes totally against the bold declaration (as we saw above) of Soma Theri: What is wrong with our woman-ness if our mind is concentrated and knowledge to discern phenomena rightly is present?4 4  Itthibhāvo no kiṁ kairā – cittamhi susamāhite

Buddhism and Gender...

155

Of the other two conditions, the reason for the seventh prohibiting abusing and speaking ill of bhikkhus is not clear because such acts are not permitted to anyone against any other. What may have meant is that even any constructive criticism of bhikkhus by bhikkhunīs is not allowed. The last bans in unequivocal terms any communication form bhikkhunīs to bhikkhus while allowing communication only from bhikkhus to bhikkhunīs. The two conditions combined give a picture of a bhikkhunī order totally subordinate and not challenging in any manner to the order of the bhikkhus. This goes totally against the democratic character of the Sangha. Moreover, it goes against the vinaya dictum of ‘aññam añña vacanena aññam añña vuṭṭhāpanena’5 (mutual advice, mutual ‘lifting-up [support]) which characterizes the mutually beneficial character of the Buddhist monastic community all in the path to deliverance from suffering. This discussion should show that the Vinaya account of the founding of the bhikkhunī order is beset with difficulties, particularly, doctrinal difficulties going against the compassionate nature of the Buddha and the soteriological purpose of the teaching of the Buddha. It seems that we have been led to an either-or situation: we have to conclude either that the Buddha was concerned only about the suffering of men or that the whole story of the establishment of bhikkhunī order with its eight weighty conditions is a later fabrication by the bhikkhus who were keen to assert their authority over the bhikkhunīs. Is not there a third possibility which is more reasonable? We might be able to get a clue to answer this question from the distinction between the Dhamma, the teaching, and the Vinaya, monastic practice. The outstanding character of the Dhamma is that it is for all (Gross 1993, chap. 1) a universal teaching applicable to beings described usually in the discourses by the stock phrase - sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamanabrāhmaniyā pajāya sadevamanussāya: (S V, 423) the world with its devas, brahmas, maras, ascetics and brahmins, and divine and human beings. The analysis of suffering and its cessation and the principle of dependent co-origination are applicable all those mentioned in this phrase and those who are not mentioned. In this statement and in many other similar instances, always, unless he wished to identify specifically men (purisa) or women (itthi), the Buddha used the term ‘maṅussa’ which includes both men and women ñāṇamhi vattamānamhi – sammā dhammaṁ vipassato (S I, 129) 5  Found in the concluding part of the bhikkhu and bhikkhunī Pātimokkha.

156

Asanga Tilakaratne

to refer to human beings. The path for the realization of cessation of suffering virtue, concentration and wisdom, and the noble eightfold path which is included in the threefold training, does not recognize a gender distinction. Sīla or virtue is for both men and women. In the five, eight or ten precepts, categories of sīla practiced at different levels, or sila described in such discourses as Brahmajāla-sutta (Dīgha-nikāya 1), namely, lesser, medium and large (cūla, majjhima and mahā sīla) does not recognize any gender distinction. All types of sīla illustrated in the Sīla-niddesa of the Visuddhimagga do not have a gender basis. The next two stages of the path too have the same gender-neutral character. This same, however, cannot be said about the Vinaya which presupposes two different social categories, male and female. It appears that the male order of the Sangha began at an earlier stage of the evolution of the Sāsana. Its rules for good behavior evolved gradually. In the presence of sīla which is common for all those who followed the path vinaya rules had to be set up for specific aspects of the public behavior of particular groups. First, it was for males and subsequently for females. The very fact that the identical vinaya rules cannot be applicable to both groups shows that Buddhism accepts the differences between the two groups to be real. So long as men and women were at their regular social set-ups and followed the Dhamma there was no need for the Buddha to worry about regulating their lives although, as revealed in such discourses as the Sigālovada-sutta (Dīgha-nikāya 31), the Buddha endeavoured to induce broad ethical principles into the household and social lives of men and women. The issue arises when the Buddha had to face the demand for the establishment of the order for bhikkhunīs, which physically separated these women from their household setting. Given the types of considerations which were outlined above, soteriological and social, it is understandable that the Buddha had to come up with certain rules and regulations and conventions beforehand. But whether or not the eight weighty conditions were included among such rules is something that cannot be determined definitively. Nevertheless, we may conclude that some conditions such as the first and the two last were added later to what already existed by the male Sangha who perhaps found that the order of bhikkhunīs was going out of their control. The conclusion is that the distinction between the Dhamma and the Vinaya justifies having two different sets of rules with two different degrees of emphasis on certain matters for the two groups. The fact that the bhikkhu Vinaya has 220 rules (227 including satta adhikaraṇa

Buddhism and Gender...

157

samatha (seven ways of conflict resolution which are not really Vinaya rules) and bhikkhunī vinaya 304 rules (311 including satta adhikaraṇa samatha) has to be understood in this context. Some rules that might appear stringent from our point of view today will have to be viewed from the traditional, orthodox, male-dominated social context of that time. We have to glean the truth from the Vinaya account of the event which I think to be a poor fabrication based on a series of historical events. All in all, the bhikkhunī order is the work of efforts of a religious teacher whose teaching had among its fundamental assumptions the universality of the need for deliverance from suffering. Given the situation, the Buddha would have done his best.

Characterization of woman in Buddhism It is believed that Pali canonical portrayal of women is negative. This is not true as a sweeping statement about the Pali canon. There are both negative and positive characterizations of women in the discourses6. In the Jātaka literature it is true to say that the portrayal of women is generally negative. The following statement occurs in Jātaka 62. All rivers flow crookedly; all forests are made of dry wood; (in like manner) all women do evil provided that they get an opportunity. Sabbā nadī vaṅkagatā – sabbe kaṭṭhamayā vanā sabbitthiyo kare pāpaṁ – labhamānā nivātake (Jātaka 62) Another Jātaka contains a curse on a country administered by a woman – ‘Let the country ruled by a woman be doomed!’ (Dhiratthu taṃ janapadaṃ– yatthitthi pariṇāyikaṃ: Jātaka 13). The Jātaka stories originating mostly in the ancient Indian folklore seem to contain sentiments of ordinary people which cannot be taken as the views necessarily held by the Buddha. At the same time, we cannot deny that the Jātaka literature with such stories was kept in the Buddhist tradition. In the discourses there are positive statements about women as mother, wife, sister and daughter in household life and as upāsikā in the context of religious life. As recorded in the Aṅguttara-nikāya (Etadaggapāḷi, I 25-26) the Buddha has recognized bhikkhunīs and upāsikās as excelling in various skills and good qualities. There is the unique case 6  Alan Sponberg (1992) identifies four different ways of presenting women in Buddhism: (i) misogyny or hateful statements about women; (ii) soteriological inclusivism; (iii) monastic exclusivism; and (iv) equality of status in Tantrayana practice.

158

Asanga Tilakaratne

of bhikkhunī Dhammadinnā who answered some serious questions on the dhamma posed by her former husband (Bodhi 2009, 396-404). When Visākha, her former husband, went to the Buddha to make sure that the bhikkhunī had given right answers to him, the Buddha not only confirmed what she had said but also praised her saying that he would give the same answers if the former were to ask the same questions from him. This instance of a woman disciple teaching the doctrine when the religious teacher is still present and getting such a high appreciation from the Master is perhaps unique not only in Buddhism but also in the history of religion as a whole. There are, however, negative statements too. “Ananda, woman is malicious, jealous, selfish, and wickedly intelligent (duppaññā).”7 Statements of this nature suggest that the Buddha believed that women in general had those characteristics that he mentioned. This characterization was made by the Buddha in explaining as to why women did not engage themselves in public enterprises. This does not need to be understood as asserting that each and every woman had these characteristics, but meant as applicable to women in general. But the question is, why did the Buddha specifically targeted women and not also men. I think this question is very important. The answer to this question, I think, is that what we have in the Sutta-Piṭaka is mostly the discourses addressed to the bhikkhus with the exception of the relatively small number of discourses found in the bhikkhunī-samyutta of the Saṃyuttanikāya,8 and equally small number of discourses addressed to Visākhā, the prominent benefactress of the Sāsana, and to some other women. It is reasonable to think that the Buddha taught the Dhamma equally to bhikkhus as well as to bhikkhunīs. We do not know whether or not the bhikkhunīs, as did the bhikkhus, had a system to keep what is taught by the Buddha in their memory. The fact of the matter is that nothing much has been recorded as what the Buddha taught women. As we will discuss later, in the first saṅgāyanā in which the Dhamma and the Vinaya were recited bhikkhunīs did not form a part of the group. Since the bhikkhunī Vinaya was recited at this occasion we may think that if there were any specific discourses addressed to the bhikkhunīs those 7  Kodhanā ananda mātugamo, issukī … maccharī … duppaññā ananda mātugamo. A II, 82. ‘duppañña’ (du+pañña) in this context cannot mean foolish or dumb as usually thought. 8 S I, 128-135. There are only 20 discourses in this section, and, interestingly, all are on episodes of bhikkhunīs’ encounter with Mara.

Buddhism and Gender...

159

too would have been recited. Since such discourses are not seen to have been recited either they were non-existent or they did not contain any specific things that were not in the discourses addressed to the bhikkhus. Of these two possibilities the first appears impossible; but the second may be justified on the basis of the universal or gender-neutral character of the Dhamma as we noticed earlier in the discussion. If the Dhamma is for both men and women one cannot expect any special Dhamma taught by the Buddha exclusively to women. Although it appears that this last argument is plausible, this apparent lack of what the Buddha taught to women has to be understood not as special Dhamma exclusive for women but as referring to points of specific relevance to women. Let me illustrate this with an example: In the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta (D II, 141) in which the last days of the Buddha are recorded, the following conversation occurs between the Buddha and Ananda: Venerable Sir, how should we behave toward women? Do not look at them. If we were to see them? Do not talk to them. If we were to talk to them? Establish mindfulness. In this conversation bhikkhunīs may have been included in women although vice versa is not logically possible. So we have to take this question to be applicable to all women including bhikkhunīs. Apart from the fact that this question coming from Ananda who is the ‘patron saint’ of bhikkhunīs is quite strange, it is also out of place for by the time the Buddha attained parinirvana the sāsana was a well-established organization in which all four groups (cattāro parisā) were well versed in the Dhamma (D II, 113). Perhaps Ananda asked this question for the sake of possible new comers who were lacking in discipline. But the real issue is not the strangeness of the question. But what would have been the Buddha’s response if the bhikkhunīs asked the parallel question as to how they should behave toward men. Looking from a soteriological point of view we have to expect the Buddha to respond similarly. But whether this was said by the Buddha or whether or not the question was raised by bhikkhunīs we do not know. In the Aṅguttara-nikāya, at the very beginning, there is an interesting discourse, first highlighting how a woman’s physical body,

160

Asanga Tilakaratne

sound, smell, taste and contact lure a man’s mind. The next discourse, although this has not got equal attention, says how a man’s body, sound, smell, taste and contact lure a woman’s mind. Apart from this instance in which the Buddha highlights mutuality of the influence, there are discourses specifically addressing bhikkhus highlighting how a woman attracts man’s mind by all forms of behavior such as walking, talking, smiling, crying etc. (A III 63; IV 196-7). Similarly the Buddha would have highlighted the similar desire-inducive aspects of men when he was admonishing women/bhikkhunīs. The point is that we do not have discourses highlighting this aspect. If we had, then there would be a balanced picture. It is in this context that it would make sense to query about what the Buddha said to women/bhikkhunīs and as to where are these texts.9 Thinking further in similar lines, one would expect the Buddha to have admonished bhikkhus on the filthiness of woman’s body. But in the discourses we do not find anything in particular against woman’s body. In particular this is important in the context of ‘meditation on filthiness’ (asubha-bhāvanā). Most familiar formula of filthiness meditation is to separate the physical body into thirty two parts and reflect on the filthiness of those parts taking them away from the context of body. In this analysis what is analysed is not male or female body, but human body. The ‘philosophy’ is clear: once one does not have a desire for these aspects one cannot have desire for any human body, male or female. In the Visuddhimagga (chapter on sila) there is an interesting story highlighting this neutral attitude to human body. Maha Tissa Thera of Cetiyapabbata (Current Mihintale close to Anuradhapura). who was meditating on human body as bones (aṭṭhika-saññā) saw a woman on the road, and perceived her as a heap of bones. A while later her husband came along and inquired about any passing woman. The bhikkhu responded by saying that he did not know whether it was a man or woman but he saw a heap of bones going on the road.10 The story highlights that ultimately the filthiness of body has nothing to do with whether it is a body of man or of a woman. There are instances that the Buddha has discussed the forms of suffering specific to women (mātugāmassa āvenikāni dukkhāni) and 9  At the same time we cannot ignore the fact that Therigāthā containing the statements of joy and insights of the enlightened bhikkhinīs, again a unique collection in the world religious literature, was preserved by the bhikkhus. 10  Nabhijānāmi itthī vā - puriso vā ito gato api ca aṭṭhi saṅghāṭo – gacchatesa mahāpathe (Vism, Sīla-niddesa. 21).

Buddhism and Gender...

161

not shared by men. There are five such forms suffering: women have to get married at very young age and go to husband’s household leaving her relatives behind, women menstruate, they become pregnant, they give birth and they have to attend on their men (S IV 238). In this analysis certain aspects are related to female physical body and certain others are related to her social life as existed in the ancient Indian society. Instances of this type cannot be taken as denouncing the female body or femalehood. In fact, it is interesting to see, whereas many contemporary religious traditions including Brahmanism considered women as unclean at menstruation Buddhism did not seem to have had any inhibition about this natural physical phenomenon of women. In the popular Buddhist culture there are no days that women cannot visit religious places or attend religious functions as in some other Indian traditions. Equally important to note is that Buddhism did not contribute to the then popular belief that women by nature are less intelligent. The bold statement by Theri Soma referred to above comes in the context of Mara trying to humiliate her saying: How can a woman with knowledge of two inches achieve a sublime position fit to be achieved by seers?11 It is quite natural that such a view of alleged intellectual inferiority of women to have arisen and got established in a social milieu where they were kept away from academic and intellectual pursuits. In the Buddhist tradition both men and women were allowed to achieve the highest goal displaying the untenability of the traditional belief notwithstanding the fact that there might well have been some members of the male Sangha with more ‘brahmanic’ attitudes toward women. The conclusion for this part of the discussion is that ‘misogyny’ is not the proper term to describe the early Buddhist position on women. It is important to understand the statements of the buddha, not only the ones concerning woman but all concerning all things, in their proper context. Although the Buddha accepted the intellectual equality between men and women, it appears that he believed that emotionally two groups can be different. Although there is not any discussion in the discourses on how this is possible, two reasons may be imagined: one is a social factor as referred to above. In a social milieu where women were kept aside from intellectual pursuits and were not allowed to flourish intellectually it is understandable that they had to resort to their emotions in order to survive. The basis for what the Buddha said on women may have been what he observed in their behavior under these 11  Yaṁ taṁ isīhi pattabbaṁ – ṭhānaṁ durabhisambhavaṁ na tam dvaṅgulapaññāya – sakkā pappothumitthiyā: (S I, 129).

162

Asanga Tilakaratne

circumstances. The second is a biological factor (which is debatable). It appears that the Buddha believed that women by nature (biologically) were more emotional.12 Again, this is only a conjecture, with no direct discussion in the discourses. Perhaps the distinction of woman-ness (itthi-bhāva) and man-ness (purisa-bhāva), mentioned above, which is found in the Abhidhamma, may be taken as supporting such a view.

Historical vicissitudes of the organization In addition to what the Buddha said in the discourses, there is a historical tradition that plays a very important role in this debate. In the first part of this discussion we discussed the Vinaya Cullavagga account of the establishment of the bhikkhunī order which was compiled after the first saṅgāyanā. We know that the bhikkhunīs were not invited to this assembly. At the concluding part of the Cullavagga account there is reference to several charges brought against Ananda by the other participants. One is that he persuaded the Buddha to give higher admission to Pajapati Gotami (allowing bhikkhunī order to arise). Ananda does not accept this as a wrong-doing, but confesses out of respect for the Sangha. If it is reasonable to take the first saṅgāyanā as the proper beginning point of the tradition that subsequently came to be known as Theravada, it is clear then that this tradition from its beginning thought that bhikkhunī order was a mistake.13 With such an attitude it is natural that those who compiled the discourses were not very enthusiastic to record what the Buddha said to bhikkhunīs. On the basis that the Dhamma did not have any gender preferences, as we noted earlier, they might have thought that there was nothing new in those discourses. Theravada tradition further developed the view that, although women could achieve arahant-hood, they cannot become a fully enlightened Buddha or a universal monarch. Statements to this effect are attributed to the Buddha.14 According to the Jātaka commentary, ‘liṅgasampatti’ or being a male is a prerequisite to receive from a Buddha the 12  It is well known that there is a lively debate on this among feminists among whom some tend to underplay the biological significance while some others build their views on the idea of biological uniqueness of women. 13  This particular attitude which is seen to exist even today among the Theravada Sangha can be taken as an evidence to the continuity of a homogenous tradition whether or not it was called Theravada from the beginning. 14  Aṭṭhānametaṁ bhikkhave anavakāso yaṁ itthī arahaṁ assa sammā sambuddho netaṁ ṭhanaṁ vijjati. ṭhānaṁ ca kho etaṁ bhikkhave vijjati yaṁ puriso araham assa sammā sambuddho ṭhānametaṁ vijjati (A I 28). It is also mentioned here that a woman cannot be Sakka, Māra or Brahma.

Buddhism and Gender...

163

‘definitive proclamation’ (niyata-vivarana), indicating the beginning of the bodhisattva career of a future Buddha. Even though it is not clearly stated that a woman cannot become a bodhisattva we do not find in the Jātaka (in all 448 stories) Bodhisatva as a woman notwithstanding the fact that he can become an animal or a bird, but even in that, not a female animal or a bird. According to this belief women cannot attain the highest mundane or supramundane states indicating clearly their alleged intellectual and emotional limits. Coming to the history of the Theravada bhikkhunī tradition in India and Sri Lanka: in the Vinaya Cullavagga we do not hear anything about bhikkhunīs after the parinirvana of the Buddha. However, as recorded in later literature, in the 3rd century bce during Asoka’s period we have Sanghamittā bhikkhunī taking the right side branch of the Bodhi tree to Sri Lanka and subsequently establishing bhikkhunī order there. Although both the Dīpavaṃsa and the Mahāvaṃsa record these events, the former which is earlier has something specific and even more important: it records the lineage of the bhikkhunīs, in India, from the time of the Buddha to Sanghamittā and, in Sri Lanka, from her time to the writing Dīpavaṃsa.15 When the Mahāvaṃsa replaced the Dīpavaṃsa tradition we do not hear much about bhikkhunīs in Sri Lanka. Whatever information on the bhikkhunī order in Sri Lanka after this initial period is coming from the commentaries the development of which was finalized by Buddhaghosa and others around the 5th and 6th centuries ce. There is outside evidence to the existence of bhikkhunī Sāsana in the country. In the Chinese Buddhist history it is recorded that a bhikkhunī named Nandasārā with a group of bhikkhunīs went to China and established the bhikkhunī order there. This event is not found in Sri Lanka reports.16 It is believed that after the invasion of Magha in the 12th century the bhikkhunī order in Sri Lanka disappeared. Since the bhikkhunī order was never established in the Southeast Asian Theravada countries (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia), this is considered as the end of the Theravada bhikkhunī order in the world. The debate over the re-establishment of Theravada bhikkhunī order is relatively new, started around 1980’s with new hopes 15  Dīpavaṃsa ch.18: 7-44. (Oldenberg: 1992). This chapter uses such epithets as ‘visāradā’, ‘paṇḍitā’, (39), ‘mahāpaññā’ (40), ‘bahussutā’, ‘sutadharā’ (42) and many other similar terms highlighting the intellectual achievements, in addition to the moral virtues, of these bhikkhunīs. 16  Biographies of Nuns: Pao-Chang’s Pi-chiu-ni-chuan. Tohokan Inc. Osaka, 1981 NB. I have not seen this work. What I have seen is a Sinhala adaptation of this work.

164

Asanga Tilakaratne

generated by feminist ideologies and in particular with the beginning of the Buddhist women’s movement, Sakayadhita Organization (www. sakyadhita.org.,1987). Naturally the traditional Theravada hierarchy opposed this move on the ground that the lineage of the bhikkhunī order has been interrupted, and once it is interrupted it can never be revived unless and until the next Buddha appears in the world. This is basically the only argument the Theravada hierarchy brings out. And it is very weighty argument for the Theravada tradition who invests so much on the unbroken continuity of the monastic order. This is very clear from the historical behavior of the tradition. When the tradition became extinct in the Southeast Asia it was taken back from Sri Lanka where it existed unbroken and was reestablished there. When the same thing happened in Sri Lanka in the 18th century higher admission (upasampadā) was brought back from Thailand (then Siam) and the present Syamopalivamsa-nikāya was established. This act was initiated by the Sangha leader named Velivita Saranankara, who later became Sangha-rajā – or the leader of the Sangha in Sri Lanka, with enormous hardship, with the first attempt ending in disaster in the rough seas. Subsequently, in the 19th century the lineage was also brought, in addition, from Amarapura and Rāmañña regions of Myanmar and established in Sri Lanka (in 1800 and 1854 respectively), making in this manner the three Sangha lineages current in Sri Lanka. The argument behind all these acts which were done at enormous risk for life owing to uncertainty in see voyage, was the belief that the sangha is impossible without unbroken lineage. It is this same argument that the hierarchy is advancing against the efforts of re-establishing the bhikkhunī order. Furthermore, this traditional mentality has to be understood in the context of having endless debates over the procedural matters such as the construction of the space (called sīmā) for the conduct of the ceremony upon the correctness of which the validity or invalidity of the act of higher admission was thought to depend. There is more than one instance when in the 19th century bhikkhus traveled to Myanmar to receive higher admission afresh simply on such procedural grounds, (Pulz 2000). The point here is that, whether or not this argument is valid or inviolable, the tradition has been consistent in its conviction on the need for unbroken continuity. It is not my intention here to summarise arguments presented for and against in this long drawn debate on reestablishment of he bhikkhunī order. While the debate was still going on a group of Sri Lankan Buddhist nuns usually known as ‘dasa-sil-mātā’ (mothers of ten precepts) received

Buddhism and Gender...

165

higher admission in 1996 at Saranath, India, initially from a group of Korean Mahayana bhikshunīs and subsequently, in accordance with the vinaya rule that bhikkhunīs should receive higher admission from both male and female Sangha, received the same from a group of Sri Lanka Sangha, thus establishing the bhikkhunī Sangha in Sri Lanka (Pulz 1996). The organization started in this manner now after two decades has become an established tradition recruiting new members and steadily growing. The official position of the hierarchy of the three Nikāyas is that they do not recognize it as proper. Consequently, the government of Sri Lanka too does not recognize the organization. But it appears that the society in general including a good number of ordinary members of the Sangha accept the Bhhikkhuni Sangha and happy to work with them. The Southeast Asian Theravada Sangha hierarchy, however, still remains quite firm in their rejection of any possibility of reviving the bhikkhunī Sangha in the Theravada lineage.

Concluding remarks Having reviewed the organizational, doctrinal and historical aspects of the Buddhist view of women what could we say about the overall attitude of Buddhism toward women? As we noted in the introductory remarks, the concept of gender as socially constructed is not familiar to Buddhism. Womanhood was not perceived in such terms during the time of the Buddha. Not perceiving in such terms, however, does not mean that the phenomenon of social construction was not-existent at that time. We saw how the Buddha rejected certain stereotype views and attitudes toward women which are nothing other than social constructions. In that sense we can say that Buddhism does make, although not clearly articulated, a distinction between sex or a biological phenomenon and gender or the attitudes of society toward women. When the Buddha enumerated the forms of suffering particular to women (mātugāmassa āvenikāni dukkhāni), as we saw above, he may be understood as referring to both these aspects. On the other hand, the Buddha seems to have believed that women can have certain emotional characteristics different in degree-wise from those of men. In other words, Buddhism does not reduce woman-hood to a mere social construction which ultimately is meant to serve narrow motives of men. Judging by the overall broad Buddhist attitude toward women sometimes there is a tendency to portray the Buddha as a champion of women’s emancipation in the ancient Indian society in which woman

166

Asanga Tilakaratne

were deprived of social and religious freedom and were bound to the household life characterized by bearing children and attending to endless household chores. Although Buddhism, along with some other Sramana groups, provided Indian women with an alternative to the traditional role of being producers of male offspring and being housebound, one has to be cautious when viewing the Buddha’s role in this manner for such a characterization of the Buddha’s role highlights only the social aspect of the freedom the bhikkhunīs gained in Buddhism. It is true that the Buddha had to change certain age-old beliefs about women. Such changes were bound to produce desirable effects in the social life of women. But the Buddha’s real purpose behind such actions should not be reduced to these social changes for their own sake. Its real aim was something much higher, namely, freedom from all forms of psychological bondages that hinder the achievement of cessation of suffering. For this purpose, since it was necessary that women should be able to make their own decisions, the Buddha had to reject the popular beliefs such as that women’s intelligence was only two inches long (although in a different context, as we saw above, the Buddha seems to have thought that women are wickedly intelligent). The Buddha showed that women are capable of attaining higher inner states that men could attain. The bhikkhunī order provided the structure for a form of life conducive for such attainments. It also provided an alternative for the popular Indian belief that woman’s life is house-bound and that she has to get married and produce children. In other words, Buddhism showed that women have a life, even more meaningful, beyond family. Hundreds of Theris, as found in the Therigāthā (Songs of the Theris), expressed the freedom and joy they enjoyed by living a bhikkhunī life. Although no less significant, the outside changes in the social life of women were, in a way, a by-product of the main emancipatory purpose of the Buddha. The soteriological goal attained by both bhkkhus and bhikkhunīs has a very important implication on the gender distinction. The ultimate goal of the Buddhist religious life, nirvana or freedom from suffering, results from freeing the mind from defilements foremost among which is the attachment for all forms of objects of desire. According to the Buddhist analysis the ultimate reference of all forms of attachment is one’s own self–atta- which persists till one attains nirvana. It is this self-view that comes out as ‘I am a man’ in men and ‘I am a woman’ in women. Once a man or a woman attains nirvana this identification with man or woman disappears along with all defilements. The person who

Buddhism and Gender...

167

attains nirvana is neither a man nor a woman in so far as that person’s self-understanding is concerned. He or she has gone beyond the social distinction of gender (although they are still man or woman in biological sense). That this is so is aptly expressed by bhikkhunī Soma referred to above, in responding to Māra: To whomever it occurs in the following manner ‘I am a woman” or ‘I am a man’ or ‘I am someone else’ such a person deserves to be told by Māra. Yassa nūna siyā evaṃ – itthāhaṃ purisoti vā kiñci vā pana asmīti – taṃ māro vattuṃ ārahati. (S I, 129) The Buddhist position, in this manner, is not one supporting or siding with either men or women (feminism or masculinism) but transcending gender identities imposed on oneself not only by society but also by oneself. Such a person is materialized in the a-sexual character of the Buddhist monastic dress which is common to both bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs and in their practice of removing all gender-indicative physical characteristics such hair, beard and mustache for men and hair and eye-brows for women. Having removed all physical traits indicating masculinity or femininity and wearing a dress of identical colour and shape Buddhist bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs are hardly distinguishable from one another. This can be regarded as the ultimate expression of transcendence of sexuality. This conclusion has interesting implications for feminism which has grown to be a vast ideology and an academic field with branches and sub-branches with many positive aspects. Setting, however, aside all these details for the present purpose, historically feminism is the contemporary response to the injustices historically perpetrated against women. In this basic form, it is pitted against masculinism (or male chauvinism), and looking from this perspective, feminism is responding to the wrong with the wrong. It may have a temporary utility, but not healthy as the final solution. The Buddhist stance of going beyond both may be considered as providing the ultimately healthy response to any form of chauvinism, whether masculine or feminine. Acknowledgement: I gratefully acknowledge research assistance received from Ven. A Somananda Thera, Bertram G Liyanage and Ruwan Bandara Adhikari of Encyclopaedia of Buddhism editorial board, Colombo, and Sewwandi Marasinghe, a research candidate at Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies.

9. Religious Ethics and the New World Order: A Buddhist Critique and Reconstruction*

Introduction This is basically an essay on Buddhist ethics. It will highlight the universality of the system of ethics taught by the Buddha. The context of the discussion is the challenges posed by what is known as the ‘new world order’ (NWO), which has recently gained currency as a political concept. I will begin with a short introduction to the idea of the NWO. Next, by way of a critique and reconstruction of the concept of the NWO, the Buddhist concept of the ‘wheel-turner monarch’ and the concept of the Buddha as representing two respective domains, the domain of the worldly wellbeing and that of inner purification will be elaborated. The paper will be concluded by showing how the Buddhist philosophy supports a universalist approach to ethics without subscribing to universal tyranny. In this paper, I take the Pali discourses of the Theravada canon as the main source material. This specification is not to exclude any other Buddhist canon or a tradition, but to serve two purposes, namely, to preserve internal consistency and to transcend all ‘yāna’ divisions in order to be based on the most ancient version of the word of the Buddha available to us.

New World Order (NWO) and its ethical implications The origin of the concept of the NWO is traced to the concept of world government which has a long history. Hugo Grotius’ On the Law of War * An initial version of this article was published in the proceedings of The International Conference to Commemorate the 100th Birth Anniversary of the Great Patriarch Sangwol Wongak, Korea, 2011.

Religious Ethics and the New World…

169

and Peace (written in Latin and published in Paris in 1625) is considered to be an early work promoting this idea which has attracted a worldwide body of adherents by now. The concept was given a definitive political nuance when George Bush, the President of USA used it in his ‘victory’ speech on March 6, 1999 at the conclusion of the war with Iraq (New World Order (Politics) in Wikipedia). It is this newly acquired meaning of the concept that Noam Chomsky, the American philosopher and activist, defined as: “an international regime of unrelenting pressure and intimidation by the most powerful states against the weakest” (WSWS. org (accessed on 02/07/2011)). As seen clearly in the definition of Chomsky, the notion of the NWO is not very welcome in all quarters of people who are keen on justice and equality in society. For the limited purpose of this essay there is no need to go into details of the concept of the NWO. It suffices to point out that the idea of the NWO as articulated by its contemporary adherents is something intimately linked to power and domination. It is natural that such a concept is not welcome by any nations or societies other than those few in whose hands power lies. Politically, it could mean power centred around the powerful, and owing to the same reason, economically and culturally it could mean domination and subjugation. In this latter sense, the NWO is very similar to globalization under which the culture of the most powerful is imposed on the less powerful. Religion is a clear case of cultural subjugation of the weak by the powerful. The spread of Christianity during the last five centuries in Latin America, Africa and Asia is a case in point which is well-known and hence not discussed in this paper. It should also be parenthetically mentioned here that this proselytization process by the economically more powerful religions to eliminate the religions of the economically less powerful has not stopped, but is carried out with renewed vigour in less developed regions of the world. Interestingly, these very same globalizing tendencies have forced us to rethink this religious ideology and attitude characterized by elimination of all other religions except one’s own and come up with a universal ethical system shared across religions. Both ideas, the NWO and globalization, have come under criticism mainly for the potential they carry to create authoritarian regimes or forces that keep people under physical and/or psychological domination. Interestingly, however, while Buddhism shares this critique and would undermine any efforts at keeping people under subjugation of any sort, holds at the same time that there can be a universal moral ‘authority’

170

Asanga Tilakaratne

based on the concept of ‘Dhamma’ or righteousness. This becomes clear in the Buddhist articulation of the concept of ‘rājācakka-vatti’ or ‘wheel-turner monarch’ found often in the early Buddhist literature. Scholars have discussed in detail as to what is meant by the wheel in this concept of ‘wheel-turner monarch’. In what follows, I will argue that wheel in this context is representative of the wheel of the armed vehicle of king and hence represents his power. The idea of wheel-turner monarch in the Buddhist tradition is one that combines both power and goodness. I will also adduce evidence to show that in the Pali discourses the Buddha is often portrayed as the counterpart of the universal monarch, not in any political sense but in the sense of ‘the teacher of gods and human beings’ (satthā devamanussānaṃ). It will be further shown that the concept of the Buddha also could serve as the basis for a system of morality that transcends the limitations of time and space. The conclusion of this discussion is that an idea of universal moral leadership is quite close to the Buddhist way of thinking.

The Buddhist concept of universal rule and the concept of cakkavattirājā: ‘wheel-turner monarch’ The concept of wheel-turner monarch is often found in the discourses. It is always referred to with approval, and this approval looks so strong that the Buddhist scholars are of the view, I think rightly, that the concept of wheel-turner monarch represents the Buddha’s concept of ideal ruler. In the well-known Cakkavatti Sīhanāda-sutta (Dīgha-nikāya 26) the wheel-turner monarch, Dalhanemi has been described in the following manner: Once, monks, there was a wheel-turner monarch named Dalhanemi, a righteous king who was a ruler of righteousness, conqueror of the four quarters, who had established the stability of the provinces, and was possessed of the seven treasures, namely, the wheel treasure, the elephant treasure, the horse treasure, the precious stone treasure, the woman treasure, the householder treasure, and a seventh, an advisor treasure. He had more than a thousand sons who were heroes, of heroic stature, conquerors of the hostile armies. He dwelled having conquered this sea- girt land without stick or sword, by righteousness (Dhamma). In this account the following features of a wheel-turner monarch have been mentioned: the wheel-turner monarch is righteous; he has conquered the four quarters of the earth; he has a stable kingdom; he has

Religious Ethics and the New World…

171

seven treasures; he has a thousand sons who are heroic and conquerors; he does not use violence, but uses only the good law (Dhamma) to conquer the earth. These features with minor variations occur as regular features of a wheel-turner monarch. Among the highlights of this account are the vastness of the kingdom of the monarch, and the fact that he has conquered it exclusively by righteous means. When referring to the vastness of the kingdom, the discourses describe it as ‘earth with ocean as its border’ (paṭhaviṃ sāgara-pariyantaṃ) indicating thereby the domain of the wheel-turner monarch is not any defined stretch of earth but the earth in its entirety. It is important to note that in this account the idea of power and conquering the regions by means of that power are not missing, in fact they have been highlighted, but the significant difference is that the wheel-turner monarch achieves his authority not by physical power but by the power of righteousness. It is important to establish that what the wheel signifies is precisely the metaphor of power. The concept of wheel-turner monarch is quite ancient in the Indian tradition. Scholars have found that it goes to the early Vedic period. The early modern Buddhist scholars who studied this concept have believed that the idea of a wheel-turner monarch has its origin in the early Vedic characterization of such gods as Varuna, and Indra. Varuna, in particular, with his responsibility of safeguarding the proper functioning of ṛta, has been identified as precursor to the concept of wheel-turner monarch. The wheel (cakra) mentioned in the concept is understood as referring to the sun whose proper movement is Varuna’s responsibility. Although this identification of Varuna and his ṛta with the wheelturner monarch and his wheel may contain an element of truth, it does not necessarily explain why the wheel turning monarch is so called. In particular, it does not justify the belief that wheel in this context refers to the sun. The numerous contexts of the occurrences of the concept of wheel-turner monarch seem to support a different interpretation of what the wheel could mean. The crucial role that has been played by the wheel in the development of human civilization is well known. The wheel associated with potters, viewers, carters and grinders say much about its crucial role in ordinary human life. The wheel in the context of wheel-turner monarch could very likely be the wheel of his war-chariot. In the Cakkavatti Sīhanāda-sutta (Dīgha-nikāya 26) where the Buddha articulates his own concept of wheel-turner monarch, interestingly, the wheel-turner monarch with whom the story begins

172

Asanga Tilakaratne

has an appropriate name, Daḷha-nemi, ‘Solid rim’, which has a direct relevance to the wheel of a chariot. The wheel gem (cakka-ratana) of King Maha Sudassana has been described as ‘having a thousand spokes, a hub and a rim and complete in all aspects’ (sahassāraṃ sanemikaṃ sanābhikaṃ sabbākāraparipūraṃ: D II, l72). This description makes it very clear that the wheel in question here is the wheel of a chariot. That wheel represents a vehicle is further supported by Aṅguttaranikāya I, 178 reference, where the phrase ‘cakka-samārūḷha’ ‘having alighted vehicles’ is used in order to describe a situation when people escape in vehicles from their villages when robbers attack them. In the ancient Indian state-craft, vehicles (ratha), along with elephants, horses and the infantry, constituted the fourfold force (caturangaṅīsenā) of a king. Of the modern scholars who have discussed the significance of the concept of wheel, Rhys Davids has held that the wheel of the wheelturner monarch is nothing other than his war chariot. Her view has been summarized in the following words: The widely accepted view is that the cakra-vartin concept is based on a sun­god. CAF Rhys Davids does not seem to fully endorse this view. Writing on the origin of this concept she says; “we must by no means give all the credit to the Sun as suggesting a wheel”. Futher she adds that the cakra here implies “the progressive discus, rolling on, as well as round, symbols of the procession of cosmic force or the advance of an aggressive conqueror. (Davids 1941, 549) In discussing the concept of ‘setting in rolling’ (pavattana) of the wheel of doctrine (dhammacakka), Jotiya Dhirasekera, a leading Sri Lankan Buddhist scholar, says that it indicates ‘the forward or progressive revolving movement of the wheel’, and he further says: It is in this same sense that a Cakkavatti or a Universal monarch calls upon his wheel treasure to start rolling. This conquering wheel of the Universal Monarch which conquers territories for him in all directions is not to be confused the peace­conferring dharma wheel of the Fully Enlightened One which is set rolling to proclaim to the world the Truth he had discovered. (Encyclopedia of Buddhism vol. iv: see ‘dhammacakka’) Dhirasekera’s warning should, no doubt, be taken seriously. Nevertheless, it remains a fact that the Buddha’s act of teaching or his ministry has been identified in the discourses with the turning of the

Religious Ethics and the New World…

173

wheel. Both the Vinaya and the Udāna record that the Buddha, on being questioned by an ajivika (a śramaṇa group) named Upaka met on his way to meet his five erstwhile companions, told him that he was going to the city of Kasi ‘in order to set the wheel of the Dhamma in motion’ (dhammacakkaṃ pavattetuṃ).1 The first sermon of the Buddha is known as the ‘discourse on setting in motion the wheel of the Dhamma’ (dhamma-cakka-pavattana-sutta). In the conclusion of this discourse, it is said that this wheel of the Dhamma cannot be turned back (appativattiyaṃ) by anyone in the universe with its sramanas, Brahmins, divine beings, Māra, or any brahma (dhamma-cakkaṃ pavattitaṃ appativattiyaṃ samaṇena va brāhmaṇena vā, devena vā marena vā brahmunā vā kenaci vā lokasmiṃ). That the wheel cannot be turned back is a characteristic equally shared by the wheel of the wheel-turner monarch. It is said that when the wheel of the wheel-turner monarch started rolling it was not to be stopped by any other ruler. Obstructing the movement of the wheel was to challenge it. The discourses say that nobody was able to challenge it, but everybody accepted its authority without question. One cannot miss the early Buddhist preference to describe the life of the Buddha in comparison with that of wheel-turner monarch. In the Sela-sutta of the Suttanipāta (III, 7) the following conversation, attributed to the brahmin named Sela and to the Buddha, occurs: You deserve to be a wheel-turner monarch, a conqueror in chariot (of war) vanquisher of the four quarters, the supreme lord of the Jambu Grove. The khattiyas, your feudatory kings will be in your service, you emperor among kings, overlord of men, do reign , O, Gotama.. ‘I am a king, O, Sela’ said the Exalted One, ‘the unsurpassed king of righteousness, I turn the wheel with righteous teaching, the wheel that cannot be turned backwards. (Sn v. 552-54) In this exchange of views, the Buddha does not deny what is said by the 1  In this discussion, the Buddha says to Upaka that he was beating the drum of deathlessness’ (ahanchaṃ amata-dundubhim). The drum in the ancient lndian society was usually associated with the kings who used it to disseminate their royal orders and decrees and to alert people on the arrival of armies.

174

Asanga Tilakaratne

Brahmin; instead he gives it a somewhat different interpretation that the Buddha turns the wheel in accordance with the Dhamma. Discourses elaborate on similarities between the Buddha and the wheel-turner monarch. One such similarity mentioned quite often is that both the Buddha and the wheel-turner monarch have thirty two auspicious marks one among which is the mark of wheel, on the soles of their feet. It is said that one who has these marks will become a wheelturner monarch if he were to live a household life, or he will become a Buddha if he were to leave the household life (D I, 88-89; II, 16; III, 142; M II, 134)’.2 The similarities do not end here. Both the Buddha and the wheel­turner monarch are born in the world for the welfare and happiness of the world; both are extra­ordinary human being (accahariya-manussa); the demise of both cause unhappiness for people; both deserve being respected by erecting monuments (thūpāraha) A I,76-77). The Dhamma is the hallmark of both the Buddha and the wheel-turner monarch. The former ‘is righteous,, king of righteousness, he relies on the Dhamma, pays respect to the Dhamma, has the Dhamma as his banner and pinnacle, has the Dhamma as his master, and provides righteous protection to such different groups as those who are within his household, etc. In like manner, the Buddha “is righteous, king of righteousness, etc., and provides, righteous protection for physical acts, ...verbal acts, ...mental acts...” (A I, l09-110). It is interesting to note here that the Dhamma-centred-ness of both the Buddha and the wheel-turner monarch is described in identical terms.3 The difference being whereas the former provides physical protection for everyone in his kingdom, the latter provides ‘protection’ for moral behaviour. The essential difference between the two is that one’s domain is worldly and the other’s is moral. In comparison with the wheel-turner monarch who is blessed with seven gems, referred to above, the Buddha is also said to have seven gems, namely, the gems of the seven factors of enlightemnent’.4 Since both have righteousness (Dhamma) as their basis, the difference is ultimately a matter of degree and not in kind. 2  This belief is mentioned in the discourses as ocurring in the ancient brahmanic tradition (āgatāni amhakaṃ mantesu dvattiṃsa mahāpurisa lakkhaṇāni...). See the Lakkhaṇa-sutta (D III, 142-179) for a detailed account of the 32 marks. 3 dhammaṃyeva nissāya, dhammaṃ sakkaronto, dhammaṃ garuṃ garukaronto, dhammaṃ mānento dhammaṃ pūjento dhammaṃ apacāyamāno, dhammaddhajo, dhammaketu, dhammādhipateyyo... (D III, 115). 4 Tathāgatassa bhikkhave pātubhāvā arahato sammāsambuddhassa sattānnaṃ bojjhaṅgaratanānaṃ pātubhāvo hoti. (S V, 99).

Religious Ethics and the New World…

175

Furthermore, the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta (of the Dīgha-nikāya) records that the Buddha instructed Ananada Thera, who wished to know as to how one should treat the dead body of the Buddha, to treat his body as if one would treat the dead body of a wheel-turner monarch. The wheel-turner monarch has his eldest son continuing his father’s rule following his example. The Sariputta Thera, who was one of the two chief disciples of the Buddha (agga-sāvaka), is described as one who continues with the turning of the wheel of the Dhamma set in motion by the Buddha (S I, 191). Following the tradition that the eldest son of the wheel-turner monarch is also his chief of armies, Sariputta Thera has also been described as the Buddha’s ‘chief of army of the Dhamma’ (dhamma­senāpati). It is further said that two Buddhas or two wheelturner monarchs do not appear within one world system simultaneously (M II, 65). It is impossible for a woman to be either a Buddha or a wheelturner monarch. It becomes clear from this discussion that the Buddhist tradition identifies, in many respects, the Buddha with the wheel-turner monarch. Nevertheless, during the time of the Buddha, we do not encounter any other wheel-turner monarchs. Therefore, it is clear that when, in the Buddhist texts, the Buddha is compared with the wheel-tumer monarch, the compilers of these texts were not refining to any particular ruler during or before the time of the Buddha, but they were referring to the concept of wheel-turner monarch. The Buddha, of course, was the historical Buddha, but, again, like the wheel turner monarch, the Buddha too has been made into a general category beyond the historical Buddha. So the comparisons are not applicable exclusively to the historical Buddha Gotama but to all Buddhas of all times. The significance of these two concepts in the Buddhist tradition is that they represent the total fulfillment of human beings’ both external or material and internal or spiritual needs. While the wheelturner universal monarch represents the fulfillment of material needs, the Buddha represents the other. The range of applicability of both the concepts is global. The hallmark of the wheel-turner monarch is that he has Dhamma or righteousness as his sole means of winning the world. According to the Discourse on the Lion’s Roar on the Turning of the Wheel, mentioned above, when the wheel-turner monarch visits a country with his wheel treasure the incumbent king of that particular kingdom welcomes the arriving monarch with pleasure, and submits himself for his guidance; the latter does not really take over the rulership of that kingdom from its incumbent; he merely establishes the host king

176

Asanga Tilakaratne

and his people on the Dhamma. What is described as the Dhamma here is nothing other than the five basic virtues (pañca-sīla) which have been prescribed by the Buddha for the regular observance of his followers. The wheel-turner-monarch admonished in the following manner: Do not kill; do not take what is not given; do not commit sexual misconduct; do not tell lies, and do not drink alcoholic drinks; ‘eat as you have eaten before ‘(do the governing as you have so far done5) Having admonished in this manner and having established the ruler and his administration on the Dhamma, the wheel turner monarch will leave for the next destination. In this manner, he will continue his journey untill he established the entire world on this Dhamma. Now this is considered conquering the entire world, but this way of conquering is not by punishment or by weapons (adaṇḍena asatthena), but by the Dhamma (dhammena).6 The last piece of admonition, ‘eat as you have eaten before’ highlights the fact that the wheel-turner monarch is not really interested in occupation of a territory in a physical sense; but that he is interested only in the establishment of good governance in the world. We must not lose sight of this aspect of the Buddhist notion. The Buddhist concept of wheel turner monarch is ultimately to establish a global society which is governed in accordance with the Dhamma. What is envisaged is not a universal ruler in whose hands the destiny of the humankind rests, but a universal ruler and regional rulers all coming under the governance of the Dhamma, namely, observance of the five principles mentioned above. Whereas the wheel turner monarch is busy with creating a world order guided by the concept of the Dhamma, the Buddha, the former’s counterpart in the ‘religious’ domain, is busy with inner development of all beings. The Buddha’s teaching is summarized in the following statement: Sabbapāpassa akaraṇaṃ – kusalassa upasampadā Sacittapariyodapanaṃ- etaṃ buddhānasāsanaṃ (Dhp v. 183) Not to do any evil, to cultivate good, to purify one’s mindthis is the teaching of the Buddhas. 5  The expression ‘eat as you have eaten before’ is the literal rendering of the expression (in Pali) ‘yathābhūttañca bhuñjatha’ which is wrongly translated as ‘be moderate in eating’ by Maurice Walshe (1987, 398). To admonish in moderation in eating to incumbent rulers does not make much sense in this context. As Professor Dhammavihari Thera (formerly Jotiya Dhirasekera) (2007, l41) too has mentioned, what is meant in this context is undisrupted continuation of the rule under the guidance of the Dhamma. 6  It is possible that it is this same Buddhist concept that was articulated and put into practice by the Indian Buddhist emperor Asoka (3rd century bce).

Religious Ethics and the New World…

177

The three matters mentioned in this well-known statement has nothing peculiar to Buddhism, it contains a message meant to all human beings. As in the case of the wheel turner monarch who is not interested in the actual physical control of the world, the Buddha too is not interested in converting the entire world to his ‘religion’. What is important in the Buddhist point of view is that all human beings follow a set of moral rules that is “not for the harm of oneself, not for harm of others and not for the harm of both oneself and others” (neva attabyābādhāya, na parabyābādhāya na ubhayābyābādhāya: Ambalaṭṭhika Rāhulovādasutta, M II, 414-420). The ultimate meaning of the message of the Buddha is inner purification of all beings. Although the Buddhist tradition upholds the ideal of the wheel turner monarch, in this ultimate sense, even such a high state is inferior even to the lowest state of the inner development, namely the fruit of stream-entry (sotāpatti-phala). The Dhammapada says: Better than absolute sovereignty over the earth, better than going to heaven, better than even lordship over all the worlds is the fruit of stream-winner.7 The inner purification discussed here is common to all those who see the need for it. It does not and cannot have any limitations associated with time and space. In this manner, what is envisaged in the teaching of the Buddha is a philosophy/ way of life which is universally applicable.

A higher morality transcending religion As I suggested in the above discussion the concept of the Dhamma advocated in the teaching of the Buddha, in its broadest sense, is not confined to Buddhism as a religious system or to any other particular religious system. It refers to a universal system of morality transcending particular religions. Interestingly enough, such a development has been in the making for some time now. In fact, this can be considered a challenge to religion in general, and such a challenge to religion is coming from a very important development associated with globalization, namely, the organizations like the United Nations, which have the entire world as their scope. The fact that almost all the nations in the world have joined the UN shows the willingness of people to submit themselves to a kind of global agreement and consensus. One of the most significant 7  Pathavyā ekarajjena-saggassa gamanena vā Sabbalokādhipaccena-sotāpattiphalaṃ varaṃ (Dhp v. 178) The process of inner purification, according to the Theravada tradition consists of four stages culminating in the arahant-hood signiJYing tl1e tntal purification of one’s mind of all defiling factors. At the first stage only some basic impurities are gone, but the practitioner who has achieved this state is destined to reach the final state.

178

Asanga Tilakaratne

developments in this trend was to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948. Subsequently, many other documents specifying civil ‘and political rights, rights of children, conventions against discrimination of women, and the convention against torture and other cruel and inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment of human beings have been adopted by this worldwide body. It is interesting to see that all the individuals and social organizations, including religious organizations in particular, are seeking the assistance and guidance from the particularly they seek protection under Human Rights when faced with difficulties. What this highlights, as far as religion is concerned, is that it is under these global conventions which are basically secular and non-religious. The idea of secularism has to be understood in its proper context. Secularism was initially developed in the context of western society basically as a reaction to the western religion.8 The history of this development can be traced in the histories of the particular countries starting from late medieval through modern periods, in such documents as Magna Carta (1215: England), Bill of Rights (1689, England), Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789, France) and United States Bill of Rights (1789/1791) and in the movements such as Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. Although secularism implies rejection of religion in some sense, and hence some religions in particular distance themselves from secularist movements, it is interesting to see that all the major world religions have accepted and supported UDHR. This is, in a way, shows that the concept and the convention of human rights have been there ingrained in the religious teachings, and from that perspective, that UDHR is not something new to religions. Granting this point, still we have to note the organizational structure of the UDHR and its legal power on the nations of the globe which religions seem to lack. Unlike a religious teaching or a belief, UDHR has a legal validity and a mechanism to deal with its violators. It is in this sense that secularist institutes under globalization have been able to bring out a global form of ethics that cut across religious affiliations. If what was done by religions in earlier times is now being done by organizations such as the UN, and if religions themselves accept this new order, it is 8  Although secularism of the kind that was developed in the West was not developed and even not favoured in other parts of the world (the possible explanations for which are being debated among scholars), there have been conventions in other parts of the world clearly revealing universalist ethical tendencies, much earlier than conventions mentioned. One good example is the rock edicts established by the Indian Buddhist emperor Asoka in the 3rd century bce.

Religious Ethics and the New World…

179

an indication that secularism has triumphed over religion in some very significant sense. When religions themselves are at war with one another it is secular institutes that sit on judgment and working as sobering influences on religions. If religion is reduced to a state in which it is told what to do and what not to do by a secular institute, it clearly is not good for the age-old ethical self-image of the religions. This situation, on the other hand, is inevitable in view of the history of religions fraught, very often, with persecution of other religionists, non-believers and others like witches who were considered undesirable for the particular religion. Nevertheless, the sublime teachings of all great religions, in spite of the misbehaviors of varying degrees and frequencies on the part of the followers, have to be recognized. The very secular institutes clearly have been influenced by, or at least have not gone against, the essence of such teachings. This shows that religions themselves have these resources within their own systems. What needs to be done is to develop truly a global ethics within each religious system. An indication to the recognition of this need by religions is the document called “Declaration toward a Global Ethic”, authored by Hans Kung and issued at the Parliament of Word Religions, Chicago, 1993, which marked the first centenary of the initial Parliament in 1883. The Declaration was approved by the followers of the all religions gathered, and was signed subsequently by more than one hundred religious dignitaries belonging to different religious denominations (www.parliamentofreligions.org.). The declaration begins with the following analysis of the human predicament: The world is in agony. The agony is so persuasive and urgent that we are compelled to name its manifestations so that the depth of this pain may be made clear. Peace eludes us- the planet is being destroyed- neighbors live in fear- women and men are estranged from each other- children die! This is abhorrent. We condemn the abuses of Earth’s eco-systems. We condemn the poverty that stifles life’s potential; the hunger that weakens the human body, the economic disparities that threaten so many families with ruin. We condemn the social disarray of the nations; the disregard for justice which pushes citizens to the margin; the anarchy overtaking our communities; and the insane death of children from violence. In particular we condemn aggression and hatred in the name of religion. The Declaration holds that these sad conditions need not exist on earth and that there is an ethic capable of solving these problems available

180

Asanga Tilakaratne

within religions. It further says that Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948 “on the level of rights” are confirmed and deepened by the “declaration” from the perspective of an ethic” (emphasis original). In other words, the Declaration proposes to provide an alternative religious basis for human rights to be upheld and observed. The Document begins with an introduction which outlines the need for a global ethic and then goes to outline the principles of a global ethic under four headings, namely, i. no new global order without a new global ethic; ii. a fundamental demand: every human being must be treated humanely; iii. irrevocable directives, under which four different aspects of ethical norms, namely, (i) commitment to a culture of nonviolence and respect for life; (ii) commitment to a culture of solidarity and just economic order, (iii) commitment to a culture of tolerance and life of truthfulness and (iv) commitment to a culture of equal rights and partnership between men and women, are discussed; and iv. transformation of consciousness. (Source: Foundation Global Ethic, Germany.) Although the document itself may be studied for its relative merits in completeness and conceptual clarity and the like, I do not propose to do so here. What is important to highlight in the present context is that religions have shown awareness of the larger challenge facing themselves and the need for constructing a system of globally applicable ethics.

Conclusion Whether or not NWO or globalization can usher a world government remains to be seen, but what is undeniable is the fact that, with the new developments in communication and transport, the societies of the world have come much closer than they were a hundred years ago. This physical proximity has proved one phenomenon beyond doubt: no one can ignore the presence of the other, and that everyone is living in an inter-dependent and inter-connected universe. This state of affairs highlights the fact that reality is dependently arisen and dependently ceased. All human beings are connected with all others through their words, deeds and thoughts; their environment is shared, and their sorrows and pleasures also are shared. This is why one cannot think local

Religious Ethics and the New World…

181

in order to act local. This new awakening to reality is what is highlighted by the Buddha’s teaching of ‘dependent arising ‘(conditionality/ paṭiccasamuppāda). The globalized society with its all possible negative characteristics still seems to provide us with some hope. It is the hope that with a system of ethics shared across religions, the prospects of the survival of humanity on this planet will be brighter. The purpose of this paper was to show that the teaching of the Buddha has supported a global forum of ethics and also that it has much to contribute in developing a system of global ethics. The discussion on the concept of wheel-turner monarch and the Buddha was to show how Buddhism would provide for a global context, a context beyond any particular time or space. The brief discussion on the Dhamma of the wheel-turner monarch and that of the Buddha, which needs to be elaborated on further, was to outline some guidelines for a universal system of ethics. What is essentially undesirable about one global authority (i.e. world government) is its potential to perpetuate tyranny both physical and psychological. However, as I demonstrated in the preceding discussion, the Buddhist concept of wheel-turner monarch is not without a concept of political power. What is affirmed by characterizing the wheel-turner monarch as being endowed with power is that power combined with righteousness is good. The Buddhist concept of the wheel-turner monarch is one who is based on the five moral virtues, not killing, not stealing, not misbehaving sexually, not telling lies and not taking alcoholic ‘drinks’. Positively put, these are nothing other than kindness to all living beings, safeguarding others’ properties and rights, honouring family/ marital relations, being honest in words and deeds and keeping one’s sanity and sobriety in social relations. When the Buddha asked his lay followers to observe these five principles regularly, he was merely asking them to adhere to the basic principles of good behavior without which a society cannot function. As broad ethical principle anyone anywhere in the world may adhere to the same principles without contradicting one’s own particular religious beliefs. It is the need of the religions in the world today to be clear about their ethical standing vis-a-vis other religions. The religions will have to develop their own ethics of accommodating the other religions without resorting to exclusivist and absolutist claims that negate the existence of the others. Today the religion itself has become globalized. It is a matter of concern whether or not religion has inner capacity to withstand

182

Asanga Tilakaratne

the negative forces of globalization. Let me wind up this discussion by quoting from my conclusion from a paper I wrote on ‘Globalization and Religion in Asia’ which is equally relevant to the present context: So long as religion itself is a competitor in the game it does not have a moral right, nor does it have a capacity to provide guidance for the kind of maladies described in the preamble to the Declaration of Global Ethic we discussed above. Therefore it is paramount for religions to have adopted their own pluralist ethic toward each other before aiming at anything more grandeur. If religion fails to do this, what is most likely to happen is that ordinary people, who do not wish to be bothered by religious disputes, will bypass it. (refer to pp. 146-147 of this volume.)

10. The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka*

Scholars have widely discussed the involvement and the role of the Buddhist monks in the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka. Most of them believe that the Sinhala-Buddhist ideology held by a larger majority of Buddhist monks has been a key factor in the etiology of the Tamil separatist movement operating mainly in the North and East of the island. The most formidable political challenge that Sri Lanka faced in the recent past is the separatist problem and the ensuing violence. The issue of Tamil separatism is also the main test Sri Lankan Buddhism has been facing in the post-independent history of Sri Lanka. Therefore, it is very important, both politically and religiously, to understand rightly the current ethnic problem. The criticism levelled at the Sangha in connection with Tamil separatism contains two claims: one is that the Sangha has, over time, developed an ideology of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism in which that particular identity is given prominence over the identities of the minority ethnic groups of the country. The second is the resultant exclusivist attitude and behavior of the Sangha toward the Tamil minority in particular and the other minorities in general. It is further stated, as following from the earlier two claims, that it is due to this attitude that some Tamil factions have decided to create a country of their own within Sri Lanka and that they have taken up arms as a way of realizing their objective. In this chapter, I shall examine two recent publications on the role of monks in Sri Lanka. Then, I will highlight some significant aspects of the Sangha’s role in relation to the conflict and develop some constructive suggestions in achieving a stable solution to the problem. * An initial version of this paper was published as “The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka” in Buddhism, Conflict and Violence in Modern Sri Lanka. ed. Mahinda, Deegalle, Routeledge: London & New York, 2006.

184

Asanga Tilakaratne

The Work of Kings HL Seneviratne’s The Work of Kings (1999) is a major contribution to the study of the contemporary Sri Lankan Sangha. Seneviratne’s work is very much a continuation of the scholarly work represented by such works as SJ Tambiah’s Buddhism Betrayed? (1992). Seneviratne’s work, however, differs very much from that of Tambiah by being much wider in its perspective and much more far-reaching in its criticism. The main task of Seneviratne’s work is to ‘explore’ how Buddhist modernism in Sri Lanka could not usher a civil society characterized by such universal values of tolerance, non-violence and pluralism. Seneviratne begins his exploration with Anagarika Dharmapala (1864- 1933), the founder of Buddhist modernism, who defined the Buddhist monk’s role as ‘a caretaker of the flock and a social worker’ (Seneviratne 1999, 27). The new role attributed by Dharmapala to the monk had two distinct aspects: (i) economic and pragmatic and (ii) ideological and political. The former was the need to uplift the living standards and the quality of life of the ordinary people in the country. The latter was to revive what Dharmapala thought to be the ideal Sinhalese-Buddhist culture of ancient Sri Lanka. Of these two tasks, the first was taken up by a group of monks associated with Vidyodaya Pirivena, one of the two prominent centers of Buddhist learning established in 1873, and the other being Vidyalankara Pirivena established after two years, the members of which undertook to materialize the second aspect of Dharmapala’s interpretation of the monk’s role. Under the category of those who took to village upliftment and rural development, Seneviratne examines in detail the work of three leading monks, namely. Kalukondayave Pannasekhara, Hinatiyana Dhammaloka, and Hendiyagala Silaratana Thera. In Seneviratne’s assessment, these monks ‘separated ideological from the pragmatic’ and did their best for the course chosen by them although ultimately ‘they simply had neither the vision nor the qualifications to launch a meaningful activist project’ (Seneviratne 1999, 127-28). Seneviratne sums up his conclusions regarding the activism of these monks in the following words: But these monks had their heart in the right place. Because they were convinced of the truth and feasibility of Dharmapala’s message, they tried to do what he told them to do to the best of their capacity. They represent a pragmatic nationalism as opposed to a nationalist ideology with built-in propensities for degeneration into narrow ethnic and religious chauvinism.

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

185

Their education and socialization was traditional as was their ‘monkness’ about which the Vidyalankara monks made a loud, self-conscious and futile defence, and which for these monks was unnecessary because they had nothing to hide. They did not explicitly talk about their monkness or have to define or defend it because their lifestyle conformed to accepted rules of monkness, and they had no personal or ideological reason to change that lifestyle. They were patriots without being narrow nationalists and they were able to conceptualize in principle a social order in which the economic was primary, with the potential for economic self-interest to triumph over ideology, sided by the inner-worldly asceticism they, after Dharmapala, were able to fashion. (Seneviratne 1999, 128) These remarks of Seneviratne anticipate the critique he would develop in discussing the role of Vidyalankara faction of monks who, in 1940s, undertook to articulate the ideological vision of Dharmapala which ‘by the mid 1950s (it) turned into a hegemonic Sinhala Buddhist chauvinism’ (Seneviratne 1999, 131). The turning point in the Vidyalankara ideology was Walpola RahulaThera’s The Heritage of the Bhikkhu which, according to Seneviratne, is “a work that has influenced the monkhood more than any other in the recent history of Sri Lankan Theravada Buddhism” (Seneviratne 1999, 135). The key characteristics of the project proposed by The Heritage are: advocating secular education for the monks; discouraging monks from participating in their traditional religious (ritualistic) functions; advocating social service, meaning thereby basically the involvement in politics, as the proper vocation for monks. This way of life was embraced by the monks who accepted the ideology of The Heritage and the result was the emergence of a monastic middle class with money and power who paid only a ‘lip service’ (Seneviratne 1999, 334) to proper Buddhist monastic ideals. ‘These new monks,’ Seneviratne says: [N]ever intended any such (social service) in the first place. What they meant by social service was a license for them to have greater involvement with secular society beginning with politics. (Seneviratne 1999, 338) The general appearance of this genre of monks is something like the following: [G]oing overseas and establishing themselves in foreign lands, facilitated by both philanthropists of those lands and by

186

Asanga Tilakaratne

expatriate communities of Buddhists. A few of these monks control vast revenues and live the life of busy executives, replete with symbols like Mercedes Benzes, BMWs, and cellular phones. These monks have a foothold both in the country of their adoption and in Sri Lanka, and some hold immigrant status in several countries. At the lower end of this financially comfortable class are the salary-earning monks, mostly graduates, who, especially if they also have support from the laity as well as productive land, are able to invest money in businesses like repair shops, taxi services, rental properties and tuition classes. A small minority also commercially practice astrology, medicine, and various occultisms, the ‘beastly arts’ that are taboo for monks. Throughout history there were monks who practiced these, but now they do so with a new sense of legitimacy and commercialism. These come from the new definition of monk’s role as social service. (Seneviratne 1999, 336) ‘Stated differently,’ the author says, The Vidyalankara idea that the monk’s vocation is social service has been revolutionary in that it has provided the monks with an excuse to seek profit and other secular goals and satisfaction in an unprecedented manner. It has opened the flood gates and given rise to a new monkhood that many thoughtful members of the culture view with alarm. (Seneviratne 1999, 195) The most serious defect in Rahula Thera’s new definition of the monk’s role is that it replaces the ascetic ideal, which is the source of the sense of morality in the monkhood with social service that does not have any such inner obligation. Seneviratne says: The true and clear commitment of the monk is the otherworldly goal, and when that is taken away, the monkhood is freed of its basis and monks can engage in any activity ... But when the floodgates are open, as when knowledge is elevated over practice, there is no inner way to control the activities of monks, whereas such control is the essence of the renouncer’s commitment. (1999, 172) In The Heritage and in The History (of Buddhism in Ceylon) it suits Rahula to be an advocate of a Buddhism that glorifies social intercourse with lay society ... the receipt of salaries and other forms of material remuneration; ethnic exclusivism and Sinhala Buddhist hegemony; militancy in politics; and violence,

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

187

war and the spilling of blood in the name of ‘preserving the religion.’ (1999, 186) In this connection, Seneviratne discusses several specimens of ‘social service’ as performed by some of the leading monks representing this field (see his chapter on: Social Service: The Anatomy of a Vacation). The main thrust of Seneviratne’s argument is that there has not developed, nor is there any room for development of a civil society characterizing such virtues as tolerance, pluralism, universalism in the contemporary Buddhist monastic tradition, and hence the exclusivist, hegemonic Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism which does not allow anyone other than Sinhala and Buddhist to be the legitimate inhabitants of the island. The reason for this unsatisfactory state of affairs is the mistaken or skewed adoption by Vidyalankara monks headed by Rahula Thera (and Yakkaduwe Pannarama Thera) of Dharmapala Thera’s definition of the role of the Buddhist monk as socially active caretaker of the flock. This brief sketch is never meant to be a comprehensive summary of Seneviratne’s work pregnant with an invaluable mine of first-hand information upon which he develops his deep and incisive appraisal of the contemporary Sangha in Sri Lanka. My main concern is to see how far Seneveratne’s analysis is helpful in understanding the role of the Sangha in the conflict in Sri Lanka. There is no doubt that explaining the arising and the perpetuation of what Seneviratne considers to be the Sinhala-Buddhist hegemonic tendencies or chauvinism of the sangha and the resultant discrimination against the Tamil community of Sri Lanka is, if not the key objective, one of the key objectives of his essay. The argument is: Rahula Thera’s The Heritage gave a new secular twist to Dharmapalite definition of the Buddhist monk. As a result of the adoption of this definition the Sri Lankan Sangha discarded the inner, otherworldly element, which is the most important element in its monastic life. This opened the floodgates of the traditional monastic life and there came to be a new monastic middle class hungry for money, power, and prestige. The conclusion of the argument is that this development ultimately produced the Sinhala-Buddhist hegemonic exclusivist worldview which “ensured the preparation of the ground for the subversion of democratic institutions, adventure capitalism, terror, anomic and violent call for a separate state” (Seneviratne 1999, 204). I do not have much problem with the premises of this argument, but I do not see how the specific conclusion follows from these premises. This is not to deny that the people Seneviratne discusses

188

Asanga Tilakaratne

do not have these tendencies; they may or they may not have them, but the rejection of traditional morality, damaging one’s monkhood, being capitalist, cherishing Mercedes or BMWs, none of these things has any logical connection with some of the leading members of the Sri Lankan Sangha being Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinist and inhuman, ‘so attracted to murder and muderers’ (1999, 305), as Seneviratne wants us to believe. In other words, ethnic or religious exclusivism is not a necessary entailment of ‘worldly individualism’ that, as Seneviratne reveals in a masterly manner, emerged within the Sri Lanka sangha. There are several difficulties in the manner Seneviratne goes about in articulating his argument. In the first place, the depiction of Vidyalankara and Vidyodaya as absolute black and white entities, to say the least, is unrealistic and naive. In particular, I do not really know how far an anthropologist can legitimately go in making moral pronouncements on people, let alone making such pronouncements that are not easily substantiated. Seneviratne (1999, 196) does refer to a Vidyalankara monk who allegedly smuggled precious stones concealed inside statues. I can understand why, contrary to his usual method, he does not mention the name, but such information would not support his argument any more than ‘bath-well’ gossip would. On the contrary, the given the situation I am going to describe next, this kind of behavior on the part of the Sangha can well happen irrespective of place or time. Emergence of capitalism and worldly individualism may well be explained as a natural evolution of events. It is well known that landlordism was very much there with the Sangha. It is quite natural that from this feudalist state capitalism follows. Whether The Heritage was there or not, this was taking place in the Sangha. The present monastic order was started with the revival of Saranankara Sangharaja (1698-1778) in the mid seventeenth century. Some of those who received upasampadā (higher-ordination) at this occasion were none other than these landlords. It is also recorded that some of these monks who received upasampadā gave it up and became sāmaṇeras (novices) in order to resume their more worldly activities (At least this suggests that they were serious about their monkhood!). I see that this process continued without a break amidst the more enlightened members of the sangha who were busy with ideological issues. It is true that those who wanted an excuse were provided with one by Rahula Thera, but whether it was there or not capitalism was bound to come up. Capitalism does not need excuses or explanations. Money itself is both. I contend that

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

189

among the people that Seneviratne discusses in the fifth chapter of his book, there are only a few who are interested in national or religious activities; most of the others are simply moneymakers who wouldn’t give a damn about nation or religion, although some of them may have social organizations as camouflage. I think that Seneviratne should have made a distinction between these two groups. The group that is involved in the national problem in particular deserves to be put in a different category no matter whether or not one may agree with their ideological position. How they came to hold the kind of position attributed to them has to be explained on different grounds. In making a distinction between vidyodaya (f. 1872) and Vidyalankara (f. 1876), it is true that Seneviratne is making a broad generalization in which there can be exceptions. Such exceptions usually would not affect the main thesis as such. There is, however, an exception that cannot be overlooked without damaging his main claim considerably. Seneviratne does not overlook Madihe Pannasiha Nayaka Thera (19132003) altogether. He refers to him mainly in two contexts, namely, his acceptance of the Aggamahapandita (Most Supreme Pundit) title from Myanmar and the critique of him by an unnamed member of the sangha. Apart from these two negative contexts Seneviratne does not see in him any relevance to his study. The curious fact is that Madihe Thera does not fit into either of the two categories of the sangha Seneviratne constructs. He cuts across Seneviratne’s categories. Although his teacher, Palane Vajirañāṇa Thera (1878-1955), was a student of vidyodaya, he was not. He was very much a domestic product of the Vajiraramaya (f. 1901) as many others of Vajiraramaya were. Contrary to the view of his teacher, Madihe Thera accepted social service as his mission. His social service has both village reconstruction and economic and pragmatic aspect of Vidyodaya and the ideological and political aspect of Vidyalankara (in so far as these two centers represent these two trends). Now, from the point of view of monkness and seriousness of the monastic purpose none including his detractors would have any misgiving. From all what we know and hear about him he is the very embodiment of the ideal of Buddhist monasticism. Seneviratne says that Vidyodaya activism suddenly came to an end in the 1940s, but Madihe Thera proves that it did not. In some respects, there is evidence to show that Madihe Thera went even farther than Vidyodaya social workers. As a young monk, he studied the Tamil language and preached in Nuwaraeliya to estate Tamils. At a later stage

190

Asanga Tilakaratne

he made contact with Tamils in the North, in particular, those Tamils who were considered low-caste and helped them in their education. Seneviratne finds fault, I think rightly, with the sangha who has not seen the significance of propagating Buddhism among the Tamils, in particular, the low-caste Tamils: It (parochial identification of Buddhism with the Sinhala) also explains the failure, surprising for a missionary religion, to explore the proselytizing possibilities of neighbouring non-Buddhist populations, in particular the low-caste Tamils subjected to religious discrimination by the upper-caste Jaffna Hindu Tamil establishment. (Seneviratne 1999, 324) At least in the case of Madihe Nayaka Thera, one finds a quite weighty counter-example. As my own study on Madihe Nayaka Thera (Tilakaratne 1998, 396) shows that he is a textbook example of a harmonious amalgamation of traditional morality or pristine monkhood with political and social activism.1 If Madihe Thera is a Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinist, and undoubtedly he is according to Seneviratne, the phenomenon has to be explained differently. Madihe Thera cannot be considered an unimportant lonely exception for he has been probably the foremost political activist among the sangha during, in particular, the 1960s through 1980s. Furthermore, it is not easy to establish a direct influence of Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933) on Madihe Thera, but this is not very important for the influence can well be indirect. The point l wish to make, however, is that it is possible that Madihe Thera chose social activism simply on the ground that it was a proper thing to do by a renouncer. It is a major claim of Seneviratne that social service by the Sangha is not an integral aspect of the teaching of the Buddha and that it became the accepted goal of the Buddhist monk only as a result of Dharmapala’s efforts. Seneviratne states: The role in that task Dharmapala attributed to the monk in traditional Sri Lankan society, and which he wanted the monks to regain, was more a need of his paradigm and project than a fact of history. (1999, 35) It is the essence of the Buddha’s doctrine to lead men on the vibhavagami path. The doctrine has no essential link with or 1  On his ninetieth birthday (June 21, 2002), I interviewed him for ITN Television in Sri Lanka. My last question for him was what was his message to the younger generation of monks. He promptly responded: “Do social service without damaging your monkhood!”

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

191

interest in the progress of society ... This does not mean that Buddhism has no relevance for mundane society. As a middle path that avoids extremes, it obviously contains numerous teachings that are relevant for the welfare of society. However, if behaviour resulting from such teachings contributes to social welfare, that is a by-product that constitutes a benefit to society but not the achievement of the distinctively Buddhist goal. (1999, 163) There are two claims here: one historical and the other doctrinal, both are open to debate. In my opinion, the very acceptance by the Buddha of men and women householders as making up the four components of the Sangha (A II, 8) is strong proof that the Buddha cannot have considered their worldly upliftment as secondary or incidental. With regard to the historical claim, it is clear that Dharmapala made this attribution with passion; that, however, does not mean that he invented it based on his experience with Christianity. Throughout the history of Buddhism there seems to have been two categories of monks, or rather, monks with two different slants. The best example for this kind of division is the two great elders of the time of the Buddha, namely, Mahakassapa and Ananda Thera. The former was the epitome of relentless ascetic practice and austerity characterized by living in the forest, dislike for women etc..., clearly, even more austere than the Buddha himself. Ananda Thera was the total opposite, city-dwelling, active, busy, a perfect private secretary, coordinator and champion of the liberation of women, visiting and meeting people. The texts say that Ananda Thera could not attain the state of arahant, the perfection of the path, till the Buddha attained parinibbāna (complete cessation), but the ironical situation is that the person who lived closest to the Buddha and who kept the entire teaching in his memory was unable to realize the main goal of his monastic life. Had Ananda Thera not spent his time for things like preservation of the teaching, he would have attained arahanthood much earlier but posterity would have been deprived of the opportunity of following the teaching of the Buddha after he was gone. As Seneviratne holds, the Dhamma is to be practised and not to be protected, but it does not seem that we can easily escape the hard reality exemplified in the story of Ananda Thera. It is true that not all were like Ananda Thera or even followed him, but the modes of behavior exemplified in the lives of the two elders have persisted throughout the history of Buddhism. Such categories as granthadhura (Sin.) and vidarśanādhura (Sin.), dhammakathika (P.) and pansukulika (Sin.),

192

Asanga Tilakaratne

and gāmavāsī (P.) and araññavāsī (P.) that became the vogue in the subsequent history of Buddhism may be traced back to the two elders.

The role of the Sangha in the reconciliation process In 2001, T. Bartholomeusz and C.R. de Silva published The Role of the Sangha in the Reconciliation Process (2001). The contribution it seeks to make to this already extensive scholarship is to underscore the possibility that the “Sangha is situated to play a major role in the ongoing, though elusive, reconciliation process in Sri Lanka” (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 1). In the opinion of the authors, this point has not received due attention. A key point in their argument is that the education that Buddhist monks receive is largely responsible for the ‘negative perceptions of Sinhala-Tamil power sharing’ (2001, 1). They hold that the appropriate changes in the monastic education system will make the Sangha of Sri Lanka adopt a more inclusive attitude toward the other communities including, in particular, the Tamils. The paper ends with the suggestion that the education of the sangha and education about the sangha should receive the highest priority. The authors begin their discussion by highlighting the distinction between ‘buddhaputra’ and ‘bhūmiputra’ and the tensions arising in ideology and practise of the Sangha from simultaneous adoption of these two identities not compatible with each other. According to the authors, ideology-wise bhūmiputra attitude is in conflict with the ideal Buddhist virtues such as loving-kindness and nonviolence. Practise-wise it has made the Sangha believe that they, namely, the Sinhala, alone were ‘the legitimate inhabitants of the island’ (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 6) and their language is ‘the language of the sons of the soil’ (2001, 5). This ideology was also instrumental in treating the non-Sinhala as ‘foreign’ communities (2001, 7). Owing to this bhūmiputra ideology, they say, the Sangha can be described as fundamentalists. The ultimate result of this way of thinking and behaving is the arising of a ‘competing bhūmiputra ideology’ among the Tamils. Subsequently, the authors discuss the divisions within the Sangha and its concern about the unity among its own members and the implications of this phenomenon for national reconciliation. The argument of this section is that the Sri Lankan Sangha is divided and is very worried about its divided state and yearns for unity. It carries this mentality to the issue of national reconciliation, and consequently, is unable to see any possibility of reconciliation while existing as separate

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

193

groups. The authors also refer to Seneviratne’s suggestion that the Sangha should draw inspiration from ‘the model of decentralized authority among the Sangha’ (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 20). It may not be too inappropriate to mention at this juncture that how Seneviratne perceives the phenomenon of the split in the Sangha is very different from the attitude of the two authors. For Seneviratne, the Sangha is living under a highly decentralized system. Living in that manner, it is strange that they do not allow the rest of the society to enjoy the benefits of such a devolved system. Seneviratne says: “It is therefore incomprehensible to say the least for the monks not to allow the same principle, which has worked so well for Buddhism ensuring its luxurious variety and longevity, to be applied to the secular social order” (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 21). Seneviratne’s assessment on this matter seems right historically. The two authors, however, seem right in articulating the real sentiments of the Sri Lankan Sangha on the phenomenon of plurality of the chapters of the Sangha which is usually described with the highly charged expression of sanghabheda (schism of the Sangha) which is considered one of the most serious akusala kammas (unskillful actions) that a monk is capable of committing. In other words, what this means is that the Sri Lankan Sangha, in particular, cannot view the multiplicity of the chapters as a salutary phenomenon. In such a mental frame, it is unrealistic to expect from them any support for devolution on that count. This is not an argument to the effect that therefore they must not support devolution of power. The real dislike for devolution of power on the part of the Sangha lies elsewhere. The authors come to the issue of monastic education as the last part of their argument. They discuss the history and the extent of the Pirivena (monastic) education for the young members of the Sangha. According to the authors the problem with this education is that “they (members of the Sangha) have limited knowledge of the culture and religious beliefs of the minorities in Sri Lanka and this has implications for shaping attitudes toward minority rights” (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 22). The authors conclude that “it is imperative that all those who wish for an enlightened Sangha should pay much greater attention to the training of young Buddhist monks” (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 22). In concluding their essay, the authors lay emphasis on the need to be conscious of the roots of the dominant ideology of the Sangha and to attempt to forge links among all opinion groups in the Sangha as means necessary for building peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka.

194

Asanga Tilakaratne

The general atmosphere of the Silva/Bartholomeusz essay is positive and optimistic. A glance at the vast amount of literature devoted for discussing the role of the Sangha in the conflict in Sri Lanka, however, would show that the main claim of the paper is nothing new. What is new, perhaps, is the positive articulation of it, namely, that, given a proper education, the Sangha can play a decisive role in bringing about harmony between the two communities and that the involvement of the Sangha is a must. This conclusion is more instructive than informative, particularly, in the context of the near loss of hope articulated by Seneviratne: It is one of the stark facts of the contemporary elite monastic scene in Sri Lanka that we do not have a single monk who would fit the basic requirements to qualify as an urbane, cosmopolitan, modem intellectual who alone would be qualified to play the role of “guardian deity.” (Seneviratne 1999, 339) In spite of my agreement with the broad flavor of the paper certain basic claims made there are questionable. For instance, the authors agree with earlier writers like Sarath Amunugama in holding that the Sangha in Sri Lanka has adopted a bhumiputra ideology. Accordingly, as shown earlier, it is claimed that the sangha considers Sinhala people alone as the ‘legitimate’ sons of the soil and the others as ‘illegitimate.’ Amunugama (1991) introduced these two terms in the context of Mavubima Surakīme Vyāpāraya (Movement for Protecting the Motherland), an organization of Janatha Vimukti Peramuna (JVP) oriented young monks which was active in the late 1980s. Obviously these terms have limited relevance in Amunugama since there is no concrete evidence for the usage. In Sri Lanka, only a recent nationalist political party carries ‘bhūmiputra’ as a part of its name to describe its self-identity (the support of the sangha for this political party being minimal). The closest to this view held by the Sangha is that resources of the country should be shared among its people in proportion to the ratio of its population. A relevant example is Madihe Pannasiha Nayaka Thera who has held such a position as the right way of assuring social justice (Tilakaratne 1998, 180). May be this ‘majority’ view is faulty, but it does not seem fair that the two authors attribute the bhumiputra ideology to the Sri Lankan sangha. It is a known fact that the Tamil militants adopted a real bhūmiputra type ideology in the recent history of Sri Lanka. According to the authors, this Tamil ideology came as a reaction to ‘asserting a competing bhūmiputra ideology’ (Tilakaratne 1998, 6) to the similar ideology by the Sinhala. I do not see any explanatory potential of this assertion except, of course

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

195

that it lends legitimacy to the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Tamil militants in the North and North eastern regions of the island. The fact of the matter, however, is that the so-called Sinhala bhūmiputras’ response to Tamil bhūmiputra ideology was to assert that the entire island is the bhūmi of all communities living there. The authors’ reference to ‘Sinhala homeland or dhammadīpa’ is equally problematic. In the first place, it is difficult to see how ‘dhammadīpa’ could mean Sinhala homeland. Perhaps the authors may have taken Dhamma in ‘dhammadīpa’ (the island of the Dhamma), as the Dhamma followed by the Sinhala, and hence the island of the Dhamma to mean ‘Sinhala homeland.’ It is really doubtful for want of evidence whether or not the term was used in this sense. What seems to have meant by the term by those who use it is the righteous land or the land that adheres to the Dhamma without reference to Sinhala. If Sinhala ‘fundamentalists’ are using this term to refer to their homeland what the authors should have done is to quote them without taking pains to produce far-fetched interpretations. In their essay, the authors refer to what they call ‘Sinhala-Buddhist fundamentalism’ and define it as ‘the penchant’ for drawing on mythical and legendary history “as a charter for the special position of Sinhala Buddhists in Sri Lanka and the justification of the belief in Sinhala linguistic, political, religious and economic hegemony” (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 20). The authors refer to their previous work, Buddhist Fundamentalism and Minority Identities in Sri Lanka (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 1998) in which they discuss this category in detail and try to show in what sense these Buddhists are fundamentalist. According to them there are certain family resemblances between Buddhist fundamentalists and the others as well as important differences. The trouble with this definition is that it is too broad and too vague; hardly anyone who takes religion as a valid form of behavior will be spared by this definition. According to this definition, all the Buddhist activists past and present are fundamentalists except those whom they call ‘traditional Buddhists,’ a category not very clear. Equally fundamentalist are those Buddhists in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centuries who saw Western culture and Christian mission as ‘the main alien force’ (Bartholomeusz and De Silva 2001, 3). I fail to see how else they could see these phenomena. The question ultimately is: what is it that the authors are trying to achieve by invoking this name? Surely they have contributed to introducing a new category and new concept that could serve as an attractive label in academic discussions of Sri Lankan conflict, but it cannot bite too much.

196

Asanga Tilakaratne

When one reads the two works discussed in this section one cannot help getting the impression that the entire problem lies in the ‘hegemonic’ attitudes of the Sangha, and once the Sangha is reformed everything will be perfectly alright and everybody will be able to live happily ever after. This is, undoubtedly, a very high estimation of the role of the Sangha, on the one hand. On the other hand, however, the two analyses suffer from being totally and absolutely one-sided. Such efforts, undertaken even with the loftiest of sentiments stop at being nothing more than political sloganeering serving one against another.

Reflective remarks My account in the previous section does not mean that everything is perfectly alright with the Sangha and that they should just keep on doing what they are doing right now exactly in the same manner. Before trying to articulate some of the measures that I feel that the Sangha should take, let me briefly look at how and why the Sangha has come to identify itself with the Sinhala people and the role of protecting these institutions. It is a truism to say that one’s self-identity and self-definition do not arise in a vacuum. The very need to define oneself arises as against the presence of ‘the other.’ In the context of ancient Sri Lanka, the invaders from South India became the other. The Mahāvaṃsa reports that a number of invasions and attacks of this sort took place from a very early period. The first recorded attack came from two merchants called Sena and Guttika in 177 bce (Mhv 21, 10). Ever since this incident, till the arrival of Europeans in the fifteenth century, these attacks continued periodically. The worst attack from which the country never fully recovered happened toward the end of the Polonnaruwa period (Cūlavaṃsa 80, 54). Magha (1215-1236) invaded and destroyed practically the entire power base, religion, and the culture of the country. The Cūlavaṃsa (80, 65-70) records the disaster as follows: They wrecked the image houses, destroyed many cetiyas, ravaged the viharas and maltreated the lay brethren. They flogged the children, tormented the five (groups of the) comrades of the Order, made the people carry burdens and forced them to do heavy labour. Many books known and famous they tore from their code and strewed them hither and thither. The beautiful, vast, proud cetiyas like the Ratnavali (-cetiya) and others which embodied as it were, the glory of the former pious kings, they destroyed by overthrowing them and allowing alas! Many of the bodily relics, their souls as it were, to disappear. Thus the

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

197

Damila warriors in imitation of the warriors of Mara, destroyed in the evil of their nature, the laity and the Order. (Geiger and Rickmers 1980, 133) What is significant is not whether these things happened exactly in the manner described but the fact that the particular incident was perceived in that manner. The threat to the religion was always there. The extent of the invasion and the destruction of religion by the time of Dutugamunu are elaborately described in the Mahāvaṃsa. There is no reason to believe that the Buddhist monks had to invent these incidents against Tamils. Given the possibility that the country was invaded and the religion was attacked it is quite natural that the sangha developed a mindset in which the protection of religion and the country was paramount. On the other hand, the sangha depended on Sinhala people, who were the only Buddhists they had around, and the Sinhala kings for the protection of their religion. A mutual bond was gradually created in this manner. The history of the island untill today shows that the threats from abroad were a part of its life. Up to the fifteenth century the invaders came from South India. After that the invasion was from Europe. Again the religion was a main target. With the arrival of the Europeans there was an added threat, namely, the forced introduction of a new religion. I do not need to tread the familiar grounds of discriminations against the people and the religions (both Buddhism and Hinduism) of the island.2 The threats were real and they continue to be present even today. At the moment there are several hundred new Christian missionary organizations operative in the country surreptitiously under the camouflage of business ventures. Earlier the conversions were done under muscle power; today they are taking place under the cover of freedom of expression and freedom of religion. In the political arena, it is true that the Sangha has opposed any attempt at devolution of power beyond certain limits. The reason has been that separatism has been always there overtly or covertly. If this is an unrealistic fear on the part of the Sangha, Tamil politicians have done nothing to attenuate it. Hegemonic views and attitudes are not created in an ideological vacuum. Things are dependently co-arisen and this is true for both sides of the controversy. 2  On the alleged discrimination against Buddhist education by the colonial powers, Tambiah states: With regard to the charge that the colonial government’s policy favored the Christian missions’ grant-aided schools, and placed obstacles to the founding of Buddhist (and Hindu) schools, it clearly seems that by and large the authors of The Betrayal of Buddhism were correct in their allegations. (1992, 183)

198

Asanga Tilakaratne

The deeper ‘philosophical’ question arising from this situation is: What should a monk do when one’s religion, the people, and the country associated with it are in danger? Following a religion and protecting a religion are obviously two different things in the sense they involve different sorts of actions. In particular, when one’s religious tradition is physically in danger, there is no doubt that one has to do something, but what is the limit of such action? Can he be aggressive or use violence in the process? What is the degree of such aggressiveness or violence? The Sangha in Sri Lanka, in addition to facing the threats of disappearance due to natural disasters such as the Brahrnanatissa famine during the reign of Vaṭṭagāmaṇi Abhaya (103 bce), faced severe physical aggression during Magha’s invasion at the end of the Polonnaruwa period (referred to above). Buddhism in India was physically destroyed by the invading Islamic forces and some incumbent Hindu rulers. There are no records of Buddhist resistence to these attacks. As a result, until Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933) revived Buddhism in India by establishing the Mahabodhi Society in 1891, it remained a thing of the past. The Mahā Sīlava Jātaka (Jātaka 51) says that the Bodhisatva king waited, surrounded by his ministers, till the enemy came and got hold of his kingdom. If such behavior leading to self-destruction is not answer, then in an aggressive context, what should a Buddhist (monk) do? Seneviratne seems to think that vibhavagāmi paṭipadā (‘path leading to non-existence’) is the only proper thing for a monk to do. In addition to the various statements he makes to this effect, his view becomes clear in what he quotes at the beginning of his book. His quotes from The Questions of Milinda and the Majjhima-nikāya highlight this attitude to the Sangha life. The kind of Buddhism Seneviratne has in his mind is what may be called early or ideal Buddhism in which the sole occupation of the monk is to strive to attain arahanthood. We know that this ideal of perfection got somewhat softened in Sri Lanka. It does not mean that the ideal was totally rejected. While there were always those who opted to follow the ideal, for a larger majority of the Sangha, the proper way of life was one of service to people while occupying a religious position a little higher than that of ordinary lay persons. Here we come across the age-old dilemma exemplified in Mahakassapa and Ananda Thera referred to earlier. If Ananda Thera was very serious about his inner life there is a good possibility that Buddhism would not have lasted long and we might not have the so-called Sinhala-chauvinist Buddhist monks to kick around! Contrary to what Seneviratne maintains, I propose that a larger

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

199

majority of monks who hold a so-called Sinhala-Buddhist hegemonic ideology are not necessarily liberal individualists who have money and pleasure as their ultimate aim, but are serious people who are faced with a moral dilemma: dilemma of choosing between Mahakassapa Thera and Ananda Thera; or choosing between dispassionate inaction and compassionate action. One thing they seem to know for sure is that, on the face of being destroyed by another, suicide, either active or passive, is not the answer. Seneviratne discusses the debate that occurred between ‘the preachers of the dhamma’ and ‘those who followed ascetic practices’ (dhammakathika and pānsukūlika) during King Vaṭṭagāmani Abhaya (89- 77 bce) on the status of learnedness and practice (pariyatti and paṭipatti). The fact that the group that represented learnedness won in the debate indicates that a significant segment of the Sri Lankan Sangha took a turn toward practicality at an early date of its history. Although ‘doers’ are more important than ‘talkers,’ a distinction Seneviratne employs, the ironical situation is that the former cannot survive in the absence of the latter. Putting it more specifically in the context, one cannot follow the Dhamma if there is no one to teach him what the Dhamma is. History has accommodated both groups, and lay society has found a particular group more useful than the other depending on the occasion or need. Going back to what I would like to describe as the deeper philosophical problem, it is necessary to acknowledge the fact that the present-day Sangha operates with the assumption of the validity of such categories as religion, ethnicity, and culture. In its ideal constitution, the Sangha is universal; in its practical constitution, however, the Sri Lankan Sangha is local. In balancing these two trends, the Sangha has to constantly evaluate the situations that arise anew. The task is not easy and requires, as Seneviratne rightly points out, a lot of skills. I agree with all three authors I discussed here on the deficiencies of monastic education. By education I do not mean, as very often it seems to mean, that monks must be trained to think in a manner that categories such as religion and culture are not valid and should be done away with. As in everything else, the Sangha must be trained to follow a middle path in such issues too as a part of their formal education. I do not think that the dilemmas and contradictions visible in the contemporary monastic life can be resolved by going back to the ideal Buddhism of ancient India. It is imperative, nevertheless, that the Sangha should review its path from time to time and make necessary adjustments in a collective manner. Seneviratne points out to the lost possibility of propagating the Dhamma among the Tamils. While it is true that the Sri Lankan

200

Asanga Tilakaratne

Sangha did not make use of this opportunity, I see this inaction as a result of historical suspicion carried down throughout without much contemplation. As I made clear earlier, it is perfectly understandable why the Buddhist Sangha had to develop a special linkage with the Sinhala people. This should not mean, nevertheless, that Sinhala people alone could be the protectors of the religion. It is only a historical event that Sinhala people built up a close association with Buddhism in Sri Lanka. There cannot be anything intrinsically against Buddhism in Tamil. As Seneviratne rightly points out, many contemporary Sangha does not know that the great Pali commentators such as Buddhadatta and Dhammapala, on whom traditional Theravada orthodoxy so much depends on for the right interpretation of the word of the Master, are from Southern India and could well be Tamil. Now the question is: should past perceptions be carried to the future without subjecting them to scrutiny? It is a shame that Buddhism, which existed in the country for more than twenty-three centuries, does not have a TamilBuddhist community. Although there were individual actors who thought differently and learnt Tamil and extended their service to that community, the outcome does not seem to have changed the main picture. Here I think that post-independent enlightened Sangha has failed in its duty, and as a result, they have also lost the opportunity of being effective mediators in the ongoing conflict. Finally, I would like to go back to Seneviratne’s work, The Work of Kings. While the academic critiques of the role of the Sangha are not uncommon in the recent history, Seneviratne stands out as the most open, straight, and ruthless. Seneviratne’s conclusions are mostly negative and do not leave much hope for this time-tested organization. His sentimental involvement can, however, be understood as resulting from the methodology of being an observer-participant instead of being the other way round. In this sense, Seneviratne’s effort needs to be understood as resulting from a deep interest in human welfare that necessarily includes the welfare of the Sangha in it. The Sri Lankan sangha needs to take Seneviratne in the same spirit as an eye-opener; the glare of which cannot be toned down, and as a wake-up call the bang of which will be heard by all but the deaf and by those who do not want to hear. I do not think anyone who is deeply concerned about the welfare of the Sangha can overlook Seneviratne. If his warning of rising commercialism, capitalism, and individualism is not taken seriously and done something about it, perhaps re-establishing the ‘sānghika’ (communal) system, the Sangha will not be able to arrest the already

The Role of Buddhist Monks...

201

decadent nature of some of its members and will ultimately be reduced to being a priestly class with wealth and power but devoid of moral authority. Although I still do not see how being a capitalist, liberal individualist entails being a Sinhala Buddhist chauvinist, if taken in a positive and constructive manner, The Work of Kings may prove to be the best recent critique of the contemporary Sri Lankan Sangha.

11. Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions in Sri Lanka: Doctrinal Position and Role of Buddhism*

Introduction Buddhism has become part and parcel of any discussion on ethnicityrelated tensions in Sri Lanka. This is understandable for Buddhism, followed by a large majority of the people in the country, has been its major religious tradition for more than 23 centuries, ever since it reached Sri Lanka in the third century bce. Owing to this very reason, one tends to look at Buddhism in order to understand continued ethnic tensions mainly between Sinhalese and Tamil ethnic groups in the country. The often-raised question is: how could Buddhists, being followers of Buddhism, which is considered to be a pacifist religion, adhere to violence? A typical answer to this question attributes the responsibility to Buddhism, and, by doing so, justifies, directly or indirectly, the ethnicity-based stance and associated violence of the non-Buddhist groups. The involvement of Buddhism in ethnic conflicts and tensions, in particular, the role of bhikkhus in it, has been discussed in detail. To list all such instances will be a huge literature survey project which I do not plan to do myself here. Earlier I have commented on two recent works, CR de Silva and Bartholomeusz (2001) and HL Seneviratne (1999). In what follows I will not repeat everything I have said before, but I will incorporate some views I have already outlined with some new observations. * An initial version of this paper was published as “Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions in Sri Lanka: Doctrinal Position and Role of Buddhism” in Ethnic Conflict in Buddhist Societies in South and Southeast Asia: The Politics behind Religious Rivalries, ed. KM de Silva, International Centre for Ethnic Studies, Colombo, 2015.

Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions...

203

In discussing ethnicity-related problems during the last 25, one has to take into consideration the fact that Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has been militarily defeated about ten years back in 2009. It is true that there are many debates in the international community, in particular, on how this was done. These debates, however, will not take away the importance of the achievement, although this broad appreciation does not mean that everything is fine in post-LTTE Sri Lanka. Therefore, it is important that the current situation and the way forward are reappraised. In the first part of this chapter, I examine the Buddhist doctrinal position on ethnicity and use of force (violence/pain) as general themes. The purpose of this is to show that the Buddhist doctrinal position is not uniform or absolute. In the second part, I examine the historical role of Buddhism in this age-old and persistent problem, and explore room for progress through constructive dialogue.

Buddhist doctrinal position It is relatively easy to state the doctrinal position of Buddhism on the two issues, namely, discriminating against human groups based on their ethnicity and use of force. On the first, one could easily point out to the Buddha’s admonition to Vāseṭṭha (M II, 196: Sn 115-123), where he rejects distinctions made on caste division and asserts the equality of all human beings. In this analysis, the Buddha uses arguments from biology, psychology, history, sociology and morality to establish that the humanity constitutes only one species unlike birds and beasts, and trees and plants with their unique species-indicating features. Although the caste is not exactly the same as ethnicity, as Malalasekera and Jayatilleke (1958, 21-28) have shown, what the Buddha said on caste in the context of the ancient Indian society can be applied to understand and formulate the Buddhist position on ethnicity. Accordingly, we can conclude that Buddhism rejects division of human society into various ethnic groups. On that basis, we may further conclude that Buddhists’ getting involved in any ethnic-related tensions is unwarranted. A similarly plain answer may be given to the problem of violence as well. According to the first precept to be observed by Buddhists, namely, that of abstaining from killing, Buddhists are not allowed to engage in killing not only human beings but also any living being. The Buddhist monastic community too is prohibited from killing: killing of a human being involves ‘defeat’ (or total loss of the membership among

204

Asanga Tilakaratne

the Sangha) for bhikkhus (and bhikkhunīs) with higher admission; killing of any other living being involves a lesser offence, but killing is prohibited for members of both monastic and lay communities without exception. Now if killing is understood as the highest form of inflicting pain, any kind of violent activity not amount to killing too is prohibited for all Buddhists, and this makes any violence, including those related to ethnicities, prohibited. There is, however, a problem in articulating the Buddhist position in this definitive and abstract manner. Although what is outlined above is true as representing the general Buddhist picture regarding these matters, the Buddhist doctrinal position needs to be understood in a broader context. Although the Dhamma is one, its application depends largely on context. In particular, a distinction between Buddhist monastic discipline and household discipline is to be made. This does not mean that there are two kinds of discipline totally different from each other for these two groups. The difference is not in kind but in degree. Nevertheless, this distinction needs to be heeded in order to preserve the integrity of Buddhist ethics. Although the position of ethnicity advocated in the Vāseṭṭha-sutta is clear, in the Ambaṭṭha-sutta of the Dīgha-nikāya (D I, 87-110) we encounter the Buddha arguing with Brahmin youth Ambaṭṭha to prove superiority of Kshatriyas over Brahmins. When Ambaṭṭha complained to the Buddha that, when he visited their assembly hall, the Sakyan youth did not pay respect to him but were noisy and disrespectful, the former responded by saying that even a small quail is vociferous in its own nest (laṭukikāpi kho ambaṭṭha sakuṇikā sake kulāvake kāmalāpinī hoti) (D I, 91). The context is the latter’s disparaging remarks on the Buddha and his clansmen due to his arrogance and vanity. This shows that the Buddha did not deny social conventions altogether although some of such conventions do not have any factual basis behind them. The Buddha’s reference in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta of the Dīghanikāya to ‘ancient customs of Vajjis’ (porāne vajji-dhamme) (D I, 74) with approval suggests his recognition of social conventions among human groups. A story in the commentarial literature (DhpA I, 34649) tells us that the Buddha, seeing that the king Viḍūḍabha was getting ready to attack Sakyans, went to the war zone to intervene personally. The story says that, in that warm mid-day, the Buddha was seated in the Sakyan side under a tree with sparse leaves and hence with no shade. Seeing the Buddha seated in that manner, Viḍūḍabha asked him to

Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions...

205

come and sit under a huge shady tree in his side. The story says that the Buddha refused his offer saying that the shade of the relations is cool (ñatakānam chāyā nāma sītāla). Although this story occurs in the commentarial literature which is not the Buddha’s own words, one cannot reject the tradition which was recorded by a group of disciples who felt very close to the master. One may tend to think that there is a contradiction in this way of denying phenomena like caste/ethnicity on the one hand, and accommodating similar concepts on the other. A closer look will reveal that Buddhism perceives reality in two different ways, namely, from the point of view of conventional truth and from that of ultimate reality. The first is described as ‘sammuti-sacca’ or truth by convention, which admits reality as it is identified by general society as having validity in one’s day-to-day existence. The second is ‘paramattha-sacca’ which is the truth in the ultimate sense. Both are considered true, the first because it has been agreed upon in the world, and the second, because it represents the reality of phenomena (Jayatilleke 1963, 361). The two-truth idea in Buddhism is another way of accepting contextuality in our modes of perception and understanding. To put it another way: we need to adhere to conventional truth in order to live in the world which is full of people who think that there are hard facts behind words. The ultimate truth, however, is for those who wish to transcend this mundane reality of objects and individuals. What one sees in the Buddha’s behaviour in the context of his own relatives is that he accepted the need to take worldly conventions with due seriousness. Although in an ultimate sense the Buddha would deny all worldly or substantialist perceptions, he was aware of the lived reality of the samsaric existence. Similar considerations apply to the issue of using force/physical power. Although the overall position of Buddhism is, as mentioned above, is to eschew using force, it appears incorrect to portray the Buddhist position exclusively in that manner. A discussion between the Buddha and Prince Abhaya has implications on this issue although the discussion is not directly on using force but on uttering unwelcome and disagreeable words (Abhayarājakumāra-sutta, M I, 392-396). The Buddha admits to Abhaya that he would speak unwelcome and disagreeable words provided that such words are true, correct and beneficial. Having said so, the Buddha, pointing to the infant son he was holding, questions Abhaya what would he do if the child were to put a stick or a pebble in its mouth. He says; “Venerable sir, I would take

206

Asanga Tilakaratne

it out. If I could not take it out at once, I would take his head in my left hand, and crooking a finger of my right hand, I would take it out even if it meant drawing blood.” And he further says that he will do so because he has compassion for the child. The implication is that one can use force provided that such use is made out of compassion. This discussion suggests that the Buddha does not reject force altogether. Clearly the use of force has limits. Based on this evidence we may conclude that, for a larger cause, using force with right intention is allowed in the teaching of the Buddha. Another relevant example comes from the career of the universal monarch (rājā cakkavatti) who is described in the Buddhist texts as righteous (dhammiko). It is said that the universal monarch, upon attaining this very high position would start his journey to win over the other rulers by the Dhamma (dhamma-vijaya). It is clearly stated that monarch sets on his journey accompanied by his four armies which are formidable. It is said that the kings of these kingdoms would welcome the monarch and submit themselves to him. Then the monarch will admonish them to follow the rules of righteousness, and leaves them allowing them to continue their rule righteously. It is clear that no aggression takes place in this process for the kings submit themselves to the approaching universal monarch voluntarily. But the implications of being accompanied by the formidable four armies are clear: the real reason behind the motivation to submit themselves may not be merely the respect for the Dhamma. Although the righteous monarch will rule following the Dhamma, it is not said that he will dissolve his armies. It is widely believed that Emperor Asoka of India (third century bce) emulated this Buddhist model. In his case too, it is not recorded that he abolished his armies, although it may be imagined that he, following Buddhist principles, reduced his armies to a considerable extent. What these examples suggest is that in actual practice the Buddhist rulers were not expected to do away with their physical power represented by armies. The presence of physical power is an indication to the possibility of using power if and when need arises. There is an interesting instance in the Vinaya (Vin II, 290) (the literature pertaining to Buddhist monastic discipline) in the context of Channa Thera, a close associate of the Buddha in his early life as Prince Siddhartha, who subsequently became a bhikkhu under the Buddha. Channa Thera remained obstinate and inadvisable untill the end of the life of the Buddha. Finally, the Buddha said to Ananda Thera that the

Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions...

207

Sangha should impose the ‘highest punishment’ (brahma daṇḍa) on Channa Thera after his parinirvāṇa. When the Sangha at the conclusion of the first saṅgāyanā asked Ananda Thera to impose this punishment on Channa Thera, the latter expressed concern that Channa Thera was rough and violent. At this point, the Sangha asked him to go with a large crowd of monks. Although it is not clearly said as to why Ananda Thera had to go with a large crowd, the implication is clear: the presence of a large group was to serve as a deterrent. Clearly, it is a case of recognising the need for physical power. Ultimately, what emerges from these considerations is non-absolute and context-dependent character of Buddhist ethics. This is not an occasion to have a discussion to determine the nature of Buddhist ethics. Nevertheless, it is important to know that Buddhist ethics does not have Kantian type ‘categorical imperatives’ to be followed at any cost. As Buddhist philosophers such as Jayatilleke (1963, 357-58) and Kalupahana (1992, 50-52) have noted, there is a strong element of pragmatism in the Buddhist ethical thinking although it is not correct to say that the Buddhist theory of truth is pragmatic. A good example for this character of Buddhist ethics is the idea of ‘skill in means’ or upāya kauśalya which is emphasised in the Mahayana tradition in particular. The Buddhist literature records that the Buddha persuaded the Prince Nanda, his nephew, to join the monastic order in the pretext that he will get divine damsels in return, but it is more than clear that the Buddha had a different plan in his mind for Nanda. Although this approach will have difficulties when it is driven to the extreme, a form of moderate ‘skill in means’ is accepted in the Buddhist tradition. In brief, what all this means is that there is nothing called ‘the Buddhist position’ inscribed in stone.

Historical role of Buddhism in ethnicity-related problems As we already know, Buddhism has been closely connected with ethnicrelated tensions in the country. The history goes to the very early days of the country which was then called ‘the island of Lanka’ (Lankādīpa). The reported first invaders, Sena and Guttika, merchants, came in 177 bce during the reign of Suratissa (Mhv, (Guruge) 607, chap 21:10). The trend continued intermittently untill the last and most destructive attack by Magha in the thirteenth century (1215-36 ce). The arrival of Europeans in the sixteenth century marks the end of this trend and beginning of new one. Untill that point the invaders always came from

208

Asanga Tilakaratne

the southern part of India, and their prime target was Buddhism. The following Mahāvaṃsa account captures vividly the havoc made by Magha and his armies: They wrecked the images, destroyed many cetiyas, ravaged the vihāras and maltreated the lay brethren. They flogged the children, tormented the five (groups of the) comrades of the Order, made the people carry burdens and forced them to heavy labour. Many books known and famous they tore from their code and strewed them hither and thither. The beautiful, vast, proud cetiyas like Ratnāvalī (cetiya) and others which embodied as it were, the glory of the former pious kings, they destroyed by overthrowing them and allowing alas! Many of the bodily relics, their souls as it were, to disappear. Thus the Damila warriors, in imitation of the warriors of Mara, destroyed in the evil of their nature, the laity and the order. (Geiger and Rickmers 1980, 133) One has to take this historical context into consideration when one tries to understand the Buddhist position with regard to the ethnicity-related tensions in the country. Although this reference to history is not meant to be a justification, it surely explains this phenomenon. The scholars who have studied the role of Buddhism seem to undervalue this historical background which shaped the attitude of the Buddhist Sangha in the country. Although the critics attribute the creation of what they call ‘Sinhalese-Buddhist consciousness’ to Buddhist monks, it is interesting to note that up untill the first decade of the last century the predominant allegiance of the Buddhist monks in this country was not to Sinhala language but to Pali language and the Theravada canon found in that language. It is in response to this emphasis on Pali that Munidasa Kumaratunga1 introduced an alternative concept of ‘triple gem,’ namely, country, language and nation (desa, basa and resa) and found fault with Buddhist monks for disregarding their own language and culture in favour of Pali. Accordingly, it is true to say that the main concern of the Buddhist monks was the Dhamma and the sāsana. It is with reference to these two that we have to understand the Buddhist monks’ preoccupation with the Sinhalese community and the integrity of the country of the Sinhalese people. It is more accurate to think that the monks relied on Sinhalese people who were Buddhists for the protection of the Dhamma and the preservation of the sāsana. 1  For a penetrative study of Kumaratunga’s Coperahewa, 2012, 85-91.

language movement, refer to

Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions...

209

For the very same reason, the monks were keen on the integrity of the country. As the Mahāvaṃsa (7: 4) records, the Buddhist monks had the belief that it is this country that destined to be the safe place for the sāsana. Each and every invasion from South India must have fortified these concerns and convictions of the monks. Although the invasions from the southern part of India stopped with the arrival of the Europeans, gradually the monks realised that the new situation was even worse. The initial response of the monks for the Western religion was one of openness and naiveness. Soon the monks realised that they had to defend their religion from the aggressive Christians who had political power. Again, the monks found themselves in a situation in which they had to rely on the Sinhalese people and integrity of the country for their survival. Bartholomeusz and de Silva have found fault with monks for identifying ‘Western culture and the Christian missions’ as the main ‘alien force’ (2001, 3). This is a strange accusation for it is hard to imagine how else the monks could have viewed the Western culture and the Christian missions. It is, in fact, because the monks perceived these two as alien forces that the Buddhist religion and the culture remain, to a large extent, intact even after the domination of three Western powers for almost four and half centuries.2 It is this troubled history that provides the background for the Buddhist monks’ involvement in the recent political activism emerged as a response to Tamil extremism (and such other things as ‘unethical’ conversions). The last decade of the last century and the first decade of this century constitute the most serious phase of the war between the Sri Lankan government forces and the LTTE. The general Buddhist attitude was that terrorism should be eliminated by the government. Consequently, the Buddhist monks supported the government in its war efforts. In 2009, the government forces comprehensively defeated LTTE and thus the war came to an end. Naturally, like the larger majority of the people, the bhikkhus too rejoiced over this. It is now ten years since this historic victory over the LTTE (2009). Now there are two phases to the conflict, the pre-victory and post­ victory phases. In the preceding discussion, we found reasons for the attitude the bhikkhus have adopted toward the conflict. It was also 2  This situation may be contrasted with a country such as Philippines which came under the domination of Portuguese during the same time as Sri Lanka did, but lost its native religious culture almost totally, and consequently people think that their history began only in the sixteenth century.

210

Asanga Tilakaratne

indicated that the explanation is not necessarily a justification. In my earlier discussions (Tilakaratne 2006), I have clearly stated that my position is different from that of Seneviratne who holds that the sole legitimate function of the bhikkhu is to follow the path leading to nirvana. Like any social institution, that of Sri Lankan bhikkhus too have changed, and not to recognise this change means to function on an idealist image which is far from reality. This, however, does not mean that Sri Lankan bhikkhus could bypass the teaching of the Buddha and function solely on the basis of historical tradition. An effort of this character is found in Walpola Rahula Thera (1946/48) in which he adduces historical evidence to establish that the monks should engage in political activism. In this case, although history may provide a strong reason for justification of a particular mode of behaviour, it does not constitute the sole or sufficient criterion for such behaviour. In particular, it is hard to imagine how the Dhamma can be superseded by history.

Conclusion By way of conclusion, I would like to make two comments. The first has to do with using history as a means of justification. In the above discussion, we found that the Buddhist monks’ mindset and behaviour can be explained with reference to the troubled history of the country. While I repeat that this explanation should not amount to a justification, what needs to be added is that monks should not carry this mentality any further. It is mainly due to historical mistrust of Tamils by SinhaleseBuddhist bhikkhus that there was no room for Tamils to become Buddhists. It should be a matter for concern for the monks themselves that there is not a Tamil-Buddhist community in the country, although the historical conceptions and perceptions may have played a key role in this unhappy state of affairs. The more recent conflict situation for the last several decades and the atrocities perpetrated on the Buddhist bhikkhus and the Buddhist holy places by the LTTE must surely have added to this situation. Anyhow, the point is whether or not the bhikkhus should persist on continuing a negative attitude toward the Tamil community. It is true that Sri Lanka Buddhist bhikkhus are grateful for Sinhalese people who protected their religion and culture from Tamils first and then from Europeans. It is also true that the Sinhalese people performed this historical role not for any intrinsic character of them to be the protectors of Buddhism but for some conditioned circumstances. If it is so, there cannot be any specific reason why Tamils similarly be the supporters and protectors of Buddhism. It is understandable as to why

Buddhism and Ethnicity-Related Tensions...

211

this mentality persisted in the ancient past, but there is no reason for the present-day Buddhist bhikkhus to continue with this mentality. It is now time that they take appropriate measures to correct this historical mistake and view Tamils too as possible followers, supporters and protectors of Buddhism. The second comment is on the misguided contemporary activism of some bhikkhus in Sri Lanka. This is basically a post-victory development among some members of the Sangha, who seem to think that they have liberty to use their physical power to vanquish what they perceive as ‘threats’ to Buddhism. This is not to deny that there are threats to Buddhism in this country, but the crucial issue is: whether it is possible to protect a religion by violating its own precepts? Buddhism is a religion with a rich philosophical thought which enables one to formulate a system of resolving conflict without resorting to sheer physical power. One does not need a sophisticated religious system of the nature of Buddhism to follow the path of physical force. It is not surprising that those bhikkhus who rely on muscle power to solve the problems affecting Buddhism have not come out with any solution based on the teachings of the Buddha, but what is surprising is that not even any other bhikkhus in this country, who are peace ­loving and compassionate have seriously proposed to use Buddhist teachings to solve problems facing Buddhism. It does not seem that the salutary example of such Buddhist leaders and His Holiness Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh have made much impact on our Buddhist bhikkhus in this country. The teaching of the Buddha contains a rich philosophical system which should not be subordinated to parochial political views. The Dhamma, which is universal and timeless, is there to be made use of. The following words by a critic summarise the situation of the Buddhist monastic activism in the recent past: If one calls oneself Sinhala-Buddhist then the Dhamma and all that it teaches must inform the Sinhala consciousness. What then is the role of the Buddhist monk in shaping and developing Sinhala consciousness? Regrettably the monks have played a leading role in promoting the Sinhala consciousness in its aggressive, exclusivist form. Their primary duty was to ensure that the Buddhist virtues informed the post-independence Sinhala consciousness and created the right environment for a political and social order that would be just to all - Sinhala,

212

Asanga Tilakaratne

non­Sinhala. Instead they were more concerned with assisting politicians to come to power and ensuring for themselves a share of that power. (Jayaweera 2001, 11) It appears that the post-LITE consciousness of our society is not much different from what is described here. There is a widespread allegation that we as a society have failed in creating a social and political environment that is inclusive of all its citizens irrespective of their ethnicity, religion or politics. It is the task of the Buddhist bhikkhus to be the torch bearers to this darkened society, but in order to do so they have to transcend narrow divisional ideologies. In the Buddha’s own words: it is impossible for one who is himself sinking in the mud to pull out another who is sinking in the mud (Sallekha-sutta, M I, 45).

12. Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization on Buddhism: A Study of Contemporary Sinhala Buddhism in Sri Lanka*

Introduction In this paper, I argue that contemporary Buddhism, meaning Buddhism as practised by Sinhala Buddhists for the last two decades, by and large, is a response to two phenomena, namely, uncertainty, sense of insecurity and fear caused by threats to physical safety, killings and disappearances mainly of LTTE1 and various allegedly state-run and underworld organizations, and frustration, alienation and sense of helplessness caused by erosion of cultural, religious and family values due to commercialization, globalization, consumerism and related developments. In support of this view, I will discuss briefly some of the most popular contemporary Buddhist religious preachers who represent the current popular Buddhist religiosity and an organization active in counteracting what is perceived to be unethical conversions, a phenomenon raising concerns among Buddhists not only in Sri Lanka but also in other parts of the Buddhist world.2 The developments described in this paper largely belong to the last decade of the last century extending up untill today. That does not, 1  Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam: the terrorist organization fighting for a separate country in North-eastern region of Sri Lanka 2  These concerns were expressed at a meeting (International Conference on Buddha sāsana in Theravada Buddhist Countries: 16-19 January 2003) participated by representatives of all the traditional Buddhist countries, both Theravada and Mahayana, held in Colombo recently. See the proceeding of the meeting for details. * An initial version of this article was published as “Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization on Buddhism: A Study of Contemporary Sinhala Buddhism in Sri Lanka” in South and Southeast Asia Culture and Religion, -- Vol. III. ed. Arvind Sharma et al., New Delhi; 2009.

214

Asanga Tilakaratne

however, mean that they have to be understood solely with reference to that period; they do have their roots in earlier years. The last twenty years, nevertheless, have been so crucial that there have been changes in the attitudes, behaviour and the outlook of people of an unprecedented magnitude. They force us to re-examine the traditional categories of Sri Lanka society. New developments and trends in Sri Lankan Buddhism during the last century, except for its last twenty years, have been studied by eminent scholars like Gombrich (1988),. Obeyesekera (1997, 355-384), Bond (1992) and Carrithers among others. The present paper, although much less in scope, details and depth, falls essentially on similar lines in documenting some of the more recent developments. There may, nevertheless, be a difference, in my approach, namely, being that of an insider whose interest in Buddhism is not merely academic. This last remark is not meant to be a criticism of the scholars who have dealt with this aspect of Sri Lankan Buddhism before; it is only a warning that my approach may not be one of a dispassionate observer. In other words, my outlook will be rather one of observer participant than that of participant observer. In developing this theme, first I will highlight some of the key elements of the discussions by Obeyesekere, Gombrich and Bond. It is to locate the subject in its proper context and also to give an idea to the reader of the issues involved. Secondly, I will discuss some individuals and the organizations in order to illustrate the nature and shape of the contemporary Buddhist practice in the country. Finally, I will try to understand the implications of these new developments and trends in the context of the Buddhist-ness and the Sinhala-ness in question at a crucial stage in our history. Having said what I do in this paper, I must also say what I do not do. In particular, I do not discuss the political involvements of Jatika Hela Urumaya JHU, (National Sinhala Heritage), the Sinhala Buddhist political party, of which some of the monks I discuss in this paper are direct stakeholders. The immediate impetus for the movement was the questionable death of Gangodawila Soma Thera, charismatic Buddhist leader whose political involvements and interest were known well. For the first time in Sri Lanka history a group of Buddhist monks contested parliamentary elections in 2004 and were elected to the Parliament. Uduwe Dhammaloka Thera and Kolonnave Sumangala Thera are among so elected. While the former continued to be a member of Parliament

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

215

the latter resigned after several months. This whole phenomenon needs to be studied carefully, but the argument of the present paper does not require such a heavy-duty work. Writing on Sinhala Buddhist identity prior to the arrival of Christianity through Europeans, Gananatha Obeyesekere (1997) says that, during this pre-Christian era, being a Sinhalese implied being a Buddhist. Referring to changes that happened subsequently, Obeyesekera shows how Sinhala-ness ceased to be a marker of the religion and how in the presence of Sinhala Catholics and Sinhala Protestants being Sinhala did not imply being Buddhist any more but vice versa became true. According to Obeyesekere, it is Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933) who helped create a new Sinhala Buddhist identity by overcoming his own identity crisis caused by being a Christian at the school and being a Buddhist at home. In order to create a new Sinhala Buddhist identity, Dharmapala, on the one hand, criticized Christianity and the customs associated with that religion and the locals who imitated the Europeans blindly and, on the other hand, upheld the ‘glorious’ past of the Sinahla race. The result is what Obeyesekere calls, now well known term, ‘Protestant Buddhism’. The new development is so called by the author for two reasons: it is ‘protestant’ for it came into being as a protest to what the British rulers did to Buddhism. It is ‘protestant’ also for it embodied some of the salient features that characterized Protestantism in Europe. If the late 19th and early 20th century Buddhism is to be characterized as ‘protestant’, the period beginning with 1950’s marks more assertive form of Buddhism. A watershed event happened during this period is the establishment, initiated by Professor GP Malalasekere, of Commission of Inquiry into the affairs of Buddhism in the country by All Ceylon Buddhist Congress in 1953. The commissioners traveled in the entire country meeting people and listening to what they had to say on the past, present and the future of Buddhism. The report of the commission was released to the public at a function held at Ananda College3 in February 1956 and it was SWRD Bandaranaike who received the report on behalf of the public. Bandaranaike promised to implement the proposals of the report if he came to power and understandably this move had salutary political implications for him.4 3  The leading Buddhist boys school in Colombo originally established 1886 by Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907) by the end of the 19th century. 4  See Bond 1988, 79-104 for Buddha Jayanti and post-Jayanti activities and Tilakaratne, Asanga (1998). Madihe Nahimi: Caritaya ha Cintanaya, (The Life and Thought of Madihe Nayaka Thera), Sāsana Sevaka Samitiya, Maharagama, 34-8 for a

216

Asanga Tilakaratne

The state of Buddhist activities around the period of Buddha Jayanti has been studied by Bond (1988). In his discussion he focuses mainly on vipassana meditation movement that was getting increased popularity and Sarvodaya Sramadana Movement which he interprets as ‘reinterpretation of Dhamma for social action’. It is clear that the celebration of Buddha Jayanti gave Sri Lankan Buddhists impetus for developing organized religious action island-wide. After coming to power, Bandaranaike government appointed a commission of its own in 1957 to propose measures to be taken to implement the proposals of the earlier commission. The members of the commission met Buddhist groups all over the island and carefully listened to both members of the Sangha and the laity and the Commission presented its historic report in 1959.5 Bandaranaike’s tragic death in the same year took away much of hope the Buddhists had on its implementation. The Commission and the report, nevertheless, created a huge enthusiasm and hope for future in the minds of Buddhists, although, as the subsequent developments show, such hopes and aspirations were not destined to be realized fully. Gombrich and Obeyesekere (1988) jointly discuss subsequent developments in the Buddhist religious practice in Sri Lanka. In the first half of their work, they discuss in detail the popularization of god and demon cults particularly among the urban Buddhists in Sri Lanka. Under the theme ‘Buddhist developments’ they focus on the following themes: Sarvodaya as a Buddhist model of development, resurgence of nuns, Balangoda Ananda Maithreya Thera, Bodhi-pūja (worship of the Bodhi tree) and the related developments and Ariyadhamma Thera who introduced a new meaning and dimension to Bodhi-pūja and some Buddhist practitioners outside mainstream Buddhism. The two authors devote a rather long chapter to discuss ‘three Buddhist leaders’, namely, Mr. and Mrs. Perera who combined meditation and spirit religion, Uttama Sadhu, a self-ordained ‘monk’ who rejected the authority of the institute of the Sangha and had his own group of monastic followers comprising both ‘monks’ and ‘nuns’ and one DA Jayasuriya alternatively known as ‘the Sun Buddha’ who claimed that he had attained Enlightenment. Although it is true that these people had their own reading of Buddhism and their own groups of followers the extent of the influence they had on society at large was simply minimal. According to the authors’ discussion of Inquiry Commission. 5  See above chapters 1 and 2 for details of Buddha Sāsana Commission.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

217

own account, these ‘leaders’ had very small number of followers. None was known to the public at large. Uttama Sadhu, (died in the latter part of 2002) who ran programs on Poya (Days of religious observance in the Buddhist calendar.) days for several hundred of regular lay followers, alone seems to have had some but still very limited influence on public at large. Others practically are not known outside their own small groups. Looking from this point of view it is hard to see how they become qualified to be called ‘Buddhist leaders’. The six Buddhist monks I study in this paper, if we judge them by their vast popular appeal and the influence they exercise on people, may well be described as leaders of the present-day Buddhism (although by 2009 one of them passed away and one gone to oblivion), but I would rather refrain from using this term for them at this juncture for they are more the setters of new trends in the making in Buddhism than leaders although they are well on their way to achieve that status. As we saw in the previous section changes and new trends in Sri Lankan Buddhism have been discussed by a team of eminent scholars. In their latest work on this subject, Gombrich and Obeyesekere (1988) have covered the period up to 80s. From the late 80s up untill now there have been several noteworthy developments in the Buddhist practice of the country. Emergence of a host of popular teachers and preachers and some action-oriented lay organizations cannot be understood in isolation from what has been happening in the arenas of politics, economics and society. As I indicated at the beginning of this paper the Buddhist practice during this period is basically a response to two challenges: i. Terror inflicted on people by LTTE terrorists and the killings and disappearances for which the government of Sri Lanka and certain underworld groups are allegedly responsible; ii. Globalization and commercialization: (Import-export oriented open economy; gambling, drugs and pornography, new radio and TV stations and tabloid news papers and the attitudes promoted by these media.). The two phenomena have been quite a part of Sri Lankan life during this period (Although I discuss here how the Sinhala Buddhists have been coping with the situation, it would be equally interesting to study how other religionists and other communities are coping with the situation religiously.). Destruction caused to civilian life and property by bombings and attacks by LTTE is common knowledge. There is no exact statistics on disappearances during the peak period of the government suppression of JVP during 1988-1992. According to the information provided by the organization of the parents of disappeared persons, the number altogether is 31183.6 6  District-wise analysis is as follows: Kurunagala: 4406; Anuradgapura:2146;

218

Asanga Tilakaratne

The response for the fear, uncertainty and sense of insecurity comes as a form of intense participation in popular religious ritual called ‘bodhipūja’, an elaborate form of worship centred around Bodhi tree. Recent popularization of bodhi-puja has been discussed by scholars (Gombrich and Obeyesekere 1988, 384). Gombrich and Obeyesekere discuss the Ariyadhamma Thera, the pioneer of this religious trend. As they see: … the Bodhi pūja has become something of a national ritual for Sinhala Buddhists. By this we do not mean that it forms part of civic religion or is associated with the state. We mean that while its emotional appeal makes it attractive to almost all Sinhala Buddhists, it has no association with any particular status group or faction within the society, but seems to belong to all Sinhala Buddhists equally. (1988, 389-390) They further say that ‘from this point of view it is not surprising, although deeply ironic, that services have been held with the express purpose of bringing success to the Sinhala army waging war against the Tamils in the north and east’7 (1988, 390). My reading of the situation is different: I do not think that the sole reason for conducting bodhi-pujās is to send blessings to the armed forces although that has been a main objective. The main reason may well be the fear and uncertainty caused by terrorist attacks and other harmful events and the belief that bodhipūja is capable of bringing in protection. Although Ariyadhamma Thera suffered an untimely death, bodhipūja had been already established among the Buddhists as a means of securing this worldly protection. In particular, in late 80 and early 90s bodhi-pūjā was conducted, as we just noticed, as a mark of the support of armed forces who were fighting war with LTTE terrorists. During this period when R Premadasa was president, there were organizations the main task of which was to organize bodhi-pujas in different areas of the island for invoking blessings on the country and the armed forces. These pūjas were very much in line with what Ariyadhamma Thera did although those Buddhist monks who conducted them now were far apart from Ariyadhamma Thera in their charisma, ability and effectiveness. A new turn in bodhi-pūjā was witnessed with some new arrivals in Polonnaruwa: 1569; Puttalama: 574; Nuwaraeliya: 617; Badulla: 1512; Monaragala: 2770; Matale: 422; Mahanuwara: 6027; Colombo:1117; Kalutara: 1132; Gampaha: 1408; Galle: 771; Matara: 2289; Hambantota: 1557; Ratnapura: 1371; Kegalla: 822; and Ampara: 49. (Lankadipa: June 23, 2003) 7  The remark that Sinhala army is waging a war against the Tamils in the North and the East does not represent the situation in Sri Lanka accurately.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

219

the scene. The first among them was the monk named Anuradhapure Nandawimala, better known as ‘Dolukande Hamuduruvo’, named after the place in Kurunagala area (North-West of the Island) where he had his head quarters. Although essentially in line with the bodhi-pūjā of Ariyadhamma Thera, under the new innovation, puja was called ‘āśīrvāāda-pūjā’ or ‘pūja for (invoking) blessings’. It is significant that at this juncture this religious rite was viewed mainly as an act of invoking blessings, not necessarily on the armed forces of the government but on the general public. The fact that ‘bodhi’ was dropped from the name also indicates this shift from a religious act for meirt-acquiring to an act meant for invoking blessings. At the highest point of his career Dolukande Hamuduruvo was drawing practically hundred thousands for his highly publicized pūjās. According to Police reports, I was told, the pūjā he conducted in Embilipitiya (a developing agricultural township in South-East of Sri Lanka) had drawn estimated eight hundred thousand people, the recorded largest that ever gathered for a religious function in the country. Dolukande Thera’s pūja had reached its highest by the year 2000. It is reported that the crowd gathered in some places where he conducted his pūja was so big that the water for distribution among the people as the ‘pirit’ (Pali: paritta, protective chanting) water had to be brought in bowsers. Such extravagant acts, although supported by the frenzy participants, however, reduced the whole pūja to a laughing matter in the eyes of the more sober followers of the religion at the end. In addition, the monk has had several law suits against him for violating environmental laws (by digging out a huge pond where it was prohibited by the government to do so) and gradually his popularity waned. At the moment he has gone to total oblivion. The characteristic marks of Dolukande Thera were appeal to popular religious emotions of faith and bringing into a new dimension the efficacy of pirit as generally believed by Buddhists. Although it is quite normal for the Buddhists to listen to pirit at special occasions and receive ‘pirit water’ and ‘pirit strings’ as marks of blessing generated by chanting, what was witnessed with Dolukande Thera was the expression of the belief that blessing of pirit as providing essentially needed protection as a part of one’s daily life, and not as something connected to a special occasion alone. Ever since radio became a part of Sri Lankan life, people have been listening to pirit every morning and night, but the Dolukande Thera phenomenon cannot be compared with that. This is a public expression in gigantic proportions of the need for having protection and a sense of security as a part of one’s daily life. Blessings

220

Asanga Tilakaratne

of the Triple Gem are invoked in the daily life of Buddhists for possible disasters; in the present case they are invoked for actual disasters. In the virtual absence of Dolukande Thera his place has been taken up by another popular monk named Kolonnave Sumangala Thera (born: 1969). Much junior to the former but following a very similar line of practice, Sumangala Thera seems to be a firm believer in the efficacy of religious feelings and emotions. His main religious activity too is described by the term ‘āśīrvāda-pūja’ as was the case with Dolukande Thera. According to a recent publication on Sumangala Thera, “the pūjā is conducted to invoke blessings and wish peace, unity and prosperity for those who are not well and to all households in the island and ultimately to the entire world through reflection of the infinite virtues of the Blessed One” (Maddumage 2000, 146). A usual pūjā by Sumangala Thera has four main aspects: worship, preaching, chanting of pirith and distribution of what is described as ‘medicinal water’ (osu-pän) by him with his own hands. It is believed that this water has a healing effect resulting from the psychic powers Sumangala Thera is said to have acquired through meditation. The unique characteristic of Sumangala Thera, however, is his language and the tone laden with emotions. One cannot fail to note that his sermons are full of emotional expressions, statements and appeals. His popular themes are virtues of the Buddha, value of respecting parents, stressing in particular on the virtues of ones mother, and faith in the Triple Gem. The influence of his sermons is not so much due to content of them as the emotionally charged manner of presentation. Sumangala Thera has an organization called ‘Budumaga Sanvidhānaya’ (Path of the Buddha Organization), started in 1993, responsible for organizing religious and social activities initiated by him. Hospital services, village upliftment work and meditation classes are some of the activities done by the organization. The organization started a monthly news paper in 1998 by the same name in order to spread the message of its founder. As the above account reveals, Sumangala Thera’s work has many aspects. It is not ‘āśīrvāda pūjā’ alone. In addition to its obvious religious aspect, it has a social component. This latter, however, depends on Sumangala Thera’s appeal as a religious performer and therefore it is auxiliary to pūjā meant to shower blessings on the entire world ultimately. The sense of uncertainty pervading the social life of the world today, no doubt, provides ample justification for a grand aspiration of this type.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

221

Uduwe Dhammaloka Thera is an emerging young monk cutting across the two categories of Buddhist monks discussed in this paper. Like Ariyadhamma Thera and Kolonnawe Sumangala Thera he uses poems in Sinhala in his pujas although these pujas are not specifically called ‘āśīrvāda pūjās’. He has nice voice and a charming personality and People in large numbers attend to his pūjā sessions. In addition to the pūjā aspect, Dhammaloka Thera’s work involves preaching and counseling which are strong aspects of his work. Although he does seem to have an organizational structure similar to the two monks I will be discussing in the next section, he shares some similarities with them, particularly, in his emphasis of fundamental religious values as the core of successful life. Dhammaloka Thera is a popular preacher and his usual themes are family values, parent-children relationship, problems among the youth, married life and the like. He presents a Dhamma for the daily life. Also he spends considerable time on counseling both young and old people on matters of family life and relations. If one visits his residence in Javatta Road, a sophisticated residential area in Colombo, on a day assigned for visitors one will see around 50 to 60 people waiting in a queue to see him. Some of them have come to invite him for some religious function while many others are there to discuss their problems and seek his guidance. It is clear that he takes showing the laity how to live virtuous and good human life within this life itself as the main duty of a monk living in this age. Dhammaloka Thera seems to be a good combination of both Ariyadhamma-style bodhi-pūjā and serious presentation of the Dhamma for the daily life. While ‘āśīrvāda pūjā’ caters for the sense of insecurity and helplessness arisen in people due to the prevalence of violence in society there is an equal sense of frustration, anger and anxiety due to commercialization, globalization and resultant vices making inroads into society. The Buddhist reaction to these phenomena can be seen in two developments: one is the emergence of a number of Buddhist monks with a strong appeal to go back to fundamentals, the basic values and the tradition. The other is the development of organizations among the lay Buddhists to counter what they perceive to be threats to Buddhism and to Buddhists in the Island. Among the Buddhist monks that can be included in this category, Gangodawila Soma Thera (1948-2003) may be considered the most prominent. His manner of communication was public speeches given in the traditional mode of Dhamma sermons. He was a popular preacher

222

Asanga Tilakaratne

who drew large crowds and writer who had a wide readership.8 He was so popular in TV media that he may be described as the foremost among the Buddhist monks who used this medium most effectively. His message has two basic aspects: He rejects all kinds of belief in gods and supernatural deities held by people for material gains. In laying emphasis on this, Soma Thera criticized those Buddhists who go to Devalayas (shrines dedicated for various deities) seeking protection and material help. In this regard, his main target was Buddhists themselves whom he thought to have deviated from the right path. He was in the opinion that the Buddhists do not need any protection and other than that they can expect from the belief in the Triple Gem (The Buddha, his teaching (Dhamma) and disciples (Sangha), in whom Buddhists ‘take refuge’, are described by this term) and living in accordance with the Dhamma, the teaching of the Buddha. The second aspect of his message is social, political and national. He is an ardent critic of LTTE terrorist politics and the expansionist tactics followed by Muslim political parties. In this issue too, Soma Thera finds fault, first and foremost, with Sinhala politicians who have been following opportunistic and power-motivated policies to be in power at any cost. He criticized the economic policies that depend on sale of alcohol, cigarettes and other socially harmful products and policies adopting birth control as an essential aspect of economic planning. Due to this latter, Soma Thera claimed that the growth rate of Sinhala community has gone down and it will continue to decrease in future ultimately resulting in sharp decrease of Sinhala people. The end result, according to Soma Thera, is weakening of the Sinhala people who are predominantly Buddhist. This will, ultimately, lead to the weakening of Buddhism as a moral and cultural force. Soma Thera’s native place is Gangodawila, just outside Colombo and he was the eldest in a family of five. He was born in 1948. When he entered the monk-hood in 1974 he was a young man of twentysix years of age. Unlike many others who entered monk-hood at very young age, Soma Thera was already a mature person with experience in household life. His preceptors were Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera and Ampitiye Rahula Maha Thera who headed Siri Vajiranana 8  Books by him on various aspects of Buddhism run into several editions. A book based on his views (Mage Deshaya Avadi Karana Handa: ‘Voice that awakens my nation’) written by Chamika Munasinghe and published by Dayawansa Jayakodi Publishers, Colombo went into three reprints in the year 2000 it was first published. Its fourth print came in 2002. His biography too (Soma Hamuduruvo) written by

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

223

Dharmayatanaya, a training centre for young monks at Maharagama, close to Soma Thera’s native place. The two monks are known for their discipline and strict adherence to the Vinaya of the Buddhist monastic tradition. While Ampitiye Rahula Thera looked after the training of young monks and the Centre, Madihe Nayaka Thera was deeply involved in religious and social activities of the larger Sri Lankan society. As I have discussed elsewhere (Tilakaratne 1988, 160-232) Madihe Nayaka Thera is one of the foremost monks who influenced society and politics in the country for the last five decades. In so far as the basic message is concerned Soma Thera’s was essentially the views held and advocated by his teacher Madihe Nayaka Thera. The latter is one of the first Buddhist leaders to talk about the rights of Sinhala Buddhists, how the partisan politics and adoption of unhealthy economic policies such as promotion of alcohol and cigarette could destroy the traditional Buddhist value base of the country and how family planning policies could affect the Sinhala community adversely. Soma Thera seems to have picked up these points. Madihe Nayaka Thera’s Buddhism for lay people was essentially one comprising a social message stressing the need for observing the five precepts and becoming economically strong through righteous means as advocated in the discourses of the Buddha. He was also not enthusiastic about seeking protection and gains from gods though he was not vocal about it as his pupil was. Being quite traditional in his outlook, Madihe Nayaka Thera was satisfied by expressing his views by means of public lectures, news paper articles and statements and meeting with politicians usually at his own residence. The departing point of Soma Thera seems to be that he was ready to go to the extent of creating his own organization which aims at functioning as a political party among many other such parties. The organization established by Soma Thera is called Jana-vijaya Foundation and it originally was started in 1999 as the organization of his social and religious activities. In 2002 the already existing organization was given a political character at its annual meeting by publicly announcing a political program. The guiding principle of the organization as articulated in its constitution is the idea of the Dhamma or the teaching of the Buddha. The organization says that the great cultural tradition inspired by Buddhism is marching towards destruction owing to its loss of self confidence and immoral behaviour of people. Therefore the organization aims at reestablishing the lost essence of the culture. Indu Perera and published in 2001 by the same publisher has a good sale according to the publisher.

224

Asanga Tilakaratne

The foremost of objectives of the organization is to protect, foster and nourish the Buddha-sasana. The subsequent list of objectives cover social, economic, cultural and educational aspects of national development. In particular, 2.2.5 of the constitution says: “To be active in a timely manner in case a need arise to make any structural changes in the system of government.” This makes it clear that the organization is not hesitant to adopt the role of political party if need arises. The impression given in the national news papers was that Soma Thera is going to run for presidency. However, in a personal interview, a leading member of the organization explained to me that what it amounts is that, if a suitable person is not found, Soma Thera himself would not mind doing it. There is no doubt that this is quite a contrast to the manner his own preceptor chose to follow. It seems, nevertheless, that many seem to feel that Soma Thera is representing a real need felt by a larger majority of Sinhala Buddhist society. The next Buddhist monk we are going to discuss is Kiribatgoda Gnanananda Thera (born 1961) who, before becoming a leading interpreter and a presenter of the teaching of the Buddha to the modern public, attracted even international attention by donating one of his kidney’s to a patient, a lady who happened to be Christian by faith.9 Gnanananda Thera himself comes from a Christian background although later the whole family became Buddhist. According to an account given by Gnanananda Thera himself, (Gnanananda, 2016) he went into forest (‘āraṇya senāsana: forest hermitage’) in search of the true Dharma of the Buddha giving up his undergraduate education at Sri Jayawardenepura University. Soon he was fed up with the forest hermitage for he was required to submit his horoscope to enter the hermitage! Subsequently, he went to India and stayed in the region of Himalayas and meeting various kinds of religious people with the hope of finding a clue to the right Dhamma. Finally, he had a revelation the content of which was that in order to find the real essence of the Dhamma he should go back to the Tri-piṭaka (three baskets containing the word of the Buddha). Upon this he came back to Sri Lanka; studied Dhamma on his own following the methods taught in the discourses themselves. His subsequent decision to teach came in the following manner: It is only after this (coming to know the Dhamma) that I started feeling that I should teach it to those who have taken refuge in the Triple Gem. In fact the intention of my learning Dhamma 9  Readers’ Digest (August 1999: p:29) reports that he was awarded, in March 1997, by Sri Lanka’s Foundation for Civilian Bravery its top bravery award.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

225

was neither to teach nor to conduct meditation classes. In the course of the practice of the Dhamma, however, I gained a quite specific and unique understanding and I thought how great would it be if I have an opportunity to teach this teaching to others. It is with this pure intention that I started teaching the Dhamma. (Gnanananda 2016, 11) Currently Gnanananda Thera is one of the leading Dharma teachers in the country. A large number of followers participate in his Dhamma discussions, meditation classes and retreats. He has published several full length books. Among these works, annotated translations of the Satipaṭṭhāna-sutta (Gnanananda 2000) (discourse on the establishment of mindfulness) and the Sutta-nipāta (Gnanananda 2001) (a rather difficult text included in the Khuddaka-nikāya) and an exposition of the doctrine of dependent co-origination (Gnanananda 2002) (paṭiccasamuppāda) stand out. In addition, there are several other publications emphasizing mainly various aspects of the Dhamma. Gnanananda Thera has an analysis of what he calls ‘the present crisis of the sāsana of the Buddha’. He lists the following as his diagnosis of the situation: i. Not believing in the sublime word of the Buddha; ii. Postponing the realization of Dhamma till a future Buddha appears; iii. Misguided aspiration for Buddha-hood; iv. Unscrupulous acceptance of Mahayana; v. Blind faith in Sai Baba (an Indian holy man supposedly with miraculous powers) and Hindu gods, goddesses and demons; vi. Seek help through external means by rejecting (the efficacy of one’s own) karma; vii. Monks getting into politics motivated by material gains; and viii. Invasions by holders of wrong beliefs. Under this last Gnanananda Thera details what he perceives to be the tactics followed by nonBuddhist NGOs to destabilize Buddhism. Gnanananda Thera’s most severe criticism is on those monks whom he thinks to have deviated from the path shown by the Buddha. In order to illustrate this I will translate into English some sections from the editorial he wrote to the edition of his monthly newsletter, Bodhijñāṇa: He says; A majority of laymen and monks are unaware of the fact that there is a sāsana belonging to the Buddha Gotama. But they do seem to be sure about the existence of something quite strange, namely, the future sāsana of the Maithreya Buddha, believed to occur in millions of years! In brief, they have simply forgotten the sāsana of the Gotama Buddha. They are awaiting the appearance of Maithreya Buddha!

226

Asanga Tilakaratne

What is practiced in this country, in most cases, is mere recital of the five precepts. Nobody seems to care about the three refuges given before taking precepts. Nobody talks about it. They are not serious about taking three refuges. Whole thing is a stark lie! In short, even when one is admitted to the sāsana what is consulted before every thing is the horoscope. (At the ordination ceremony novice’s) head is shaven at an auspicious moment! Even name-giving is done at an auspicious moment. So what seems to be crucial is not the sāsana but the horoscope. It is shameful that they follow this false view which belongs to Brahmins. They have every thing except the three refuges! The monks’ life in this country is only a cross section of lay life. Some are astrologers but not monks; some are farmers but not monks; some are gentlemen teaching in schools but not monks; some are witch-doctors; some run sales centers for vehicles; some are politicians; of the monks in this country, locating one established on the three refuges is harder than locating a needle in a pile of straw! Gnanananda Thera’s criticism in this manner is basically focused on his own Buddhist lay and monastic brethren who, in his view, are totally misguided. The remedy Gnanananda Thera proposes is basically going back to the fundamentals of the Buddhist practice. One’s life as a Buddhist begins by taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sangha. Gnanananda Thera’s main point is that the Buddhists today should rediscover their spiritual heritage by firmly establishing themselves on this basis. His message is for both monks and the laymen. He often emphasizes the point that realization of the Dhamma is possible during this life itself and that it need not be postponed to an indefinite future. Dharma can be understood in this very life. In the introduction to his exposition of the Satipaṭṭhāna-sutta, he asks rhetorically what use could be in the Dhamma taught by the Buddha if it cannot be realized in this very life. Gnanananda Thera is an ardent believer in reading, studying and listening to the discourses of the Buddha as a means of realizing the Dhamma. In 2003 April he completed translating a section (comprising 1/3) of the Majjhima-nikāya (the collection of the middle-length discourses of the Buddha) into Simple Sinhala to be used by the general public. It is understood that his plan is to translate the entire tri-pitaka (the Buddhist scripture) in this manner. In one of his recent publications

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

227

Gnanananda Thera repudiates a woman-preacher called ‘Svarna Maniyo’, (a follower of one Siriwardhana who himself is an influential lay preacher) who holds the view that mere listening to a teacher is absolutely enough and nothing else is needed for the realization of the Dhamma. There is no doubt that this view with unconditional faith in a teacher is far from the free spirit of Buddhism and that Gnanananda Thera rightly criticizes points raised by her.10 In his mode of activism, Gnanananda Thera represents a new generation of Buddhist monks, situated firmly on the textual tradition on the one hand and well acquainted and comfortable with modern ways of communication, on the other. His organization runs a TV station (named ‘Sraddha’). He can be reached by e-mail and his organization has a web-site. The society he has started is called Bodhi Gnana Sabha (Society for Knowledge of Understanding [the Four Noble Truths]). The goals of the society are: i. Know the sāsana of the Gotama Buddha well; ii. Achieve right view within this very life; iii. Spread the pure Dhamma in its pure from; iv. Gather all (beings) to the circle of the Dhamma of the Gotama Buddha; and v. Establish faith in the threefold refuge.11 These objectives reveal that intellectual understanding of the teaching of the Buddha and its practice are the key elements of Gnanananda Thera’s program. At the end of the handbook for his followers, rather than calling himself the leader of the society he says that it is the Dhamma that is the real leader.12 He adds a section detailing how to celebrate occasions such as weddings and how to act in one’s daily life in accordance with the new understanding. The aim is clear: in order to overcome the crisis Buddhism is facing today there must emerge a totally new culture in which faith in the Triple Gem and the practice of the Dhamma are central. While we understand the monks discussed so far as responses to what they perceived as the religious, cultural and social decadence of the Sinhala Buddhist society in general we may also see how the lay society is responding to this situation. One clear indication that ordinary Buddhists are becoming concerned is the recent sharp increase of the number of children attending Dhamma Schools. Around cities 10  See his Buddhimatunta Satyaya (‘Truth for the Intelligent’), undated publication of 39 pages. For an English version visit his web-site: www.mahamevna.org 11  Mahamevnave Bodhi Gnana Sabhava (Society for Knowledge of Understanding at Mahamevna), Kelaniya, 2002. This is a kind of handbook for the members of the Society authored by Gnanananda Thera. 12  Ibid, 83.

228

Asanga Tilakaratne

it is quite usual to see Dhamma schools with several thousand students. For example the Dhamma School at Siri Vajiranana Dharmayatanaya, Maharagama has about six thousand students and about two hundred fifty volunteer teachers. Unlike several years ago, presently the ‘national dress’ for the boys and ‘Lama Sariya’ for girls, both in white, have become the accepted manner of dressing when they attend the Dhamma school. Most schools have their own medals to be worn by students. According to the Commissioner of Buddha sāsana Affairs, there are about two million students attending about ten thousand Dhamma Schools all over the country. This, according to him, is clear increase of the numbers during the recent years. The new leaf of life Dhamma Schools have got and the obvious enthusiasm with which parents seem to send their children to these schools and orderliness and better organization seen in running the schools are indications that the Buddhist society is quite self-conscious in this exercise. The enthusiasm on Dhamma schools cannot be a matter of academic interest on the part of its participants as parents and children. It seems that parents are more concerned about the Buddhist upbringing of their children. The resurgence of Dhamma schools has to be understood also as a result of Buddhists’ feeling the need to revive the Buddhist ways of behaviour such as respecting monks, parents and elders. It is customary for Buddhists to pay homage to monks by kneeling down before them. The identical behaviour for one’s parents etc., however, is optional or seen, at best, as needing to be practiced on special occasions. The new development is to kneel down and pay homage to one’s elders as a habit in daily life. A significant incident illustrating this took place a few years back (1st of March 2003) in Anuradhapura in connection with respecting one’s parents. It was organized by a group of leading monks including Uduwe Dhammaloka Thera, discussed above, playing a key role. The event was to bring the parents of Buddhist monks along with their monastic sons to the sacred city of Anuradhapura and recognize the service rendered by these parents to the sāsana by letting their children leave home. Each monk was asked to pay respect to their parents, not by kneeling before them, (This is because, once become a member of the Sangha, one is higher than all the socially accepted hierarchies.) but by presenting them with a Buddha statue and other items of religious value. This drew large crowds and attracted a lot of public attention. The Buddhists responded to the event with approval and appreciation. The enthusiasm people showed in the event may be interpreted as a mark of their renewed interest in the age-old practice of paying homage to parents and elders.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

229

There are quite a number of lay organizations which perceive danger and threat in commercialization, globalization and attendant phenomena. Not only the Buddhist monks discussed above but also many such organizations seem to be of the view that Buddhists need to be sufficiently aware of their own religious and cultural traditions if they are to counter the adverse effects resulting from these trends. The organization I plan to discuss in this category is quite active in the field of education, by way of raising awareness of Buddhists on actual and possible problematic situations, and in upliftment of standards of living of needy Buddhists. This organization feels that conversions of Buddhists to Christianity in particular by following unacceptable methods is a real threat to Buddhism. One of the pioneering Sinhala Buddhist organizations that started working to counter these practices is ‘Jayagrahanaya’ or SUCCESS (standing for: Society for Upliftment and Conservation of Cultural Economic and Social Standards). The organization was started in early 90’s in Kandy and soon spread into other parts of the island. The membership is usually composed of professionals such as medical doctors, engineers and the like. The Organization holds that conversion of people by making use of their poverty is unethical and involves violation of their human rights and tries to remedy the root of the problem, namely, the material and spiritual poverty of the victims, by providing them with material help and education. According to the 9th annual report of SUCCESS-Colombo, it has done the following during the year ended by 31st March, 2003: i. holding meetings to educate Buddhists on Buddhism; ii. Organizing medical clinics at temples; iii. Collecting data on unethical conversions of Buddhists and inform the authorities; iv. Cooperation with Bauddha Sanrakshana Sabhava (Society for the Protection of Buddhists) to prevent unethical conversions; v. Confronting challenges to Buddhism, Buddhists, Buddhist shrines. vi. Provide assistance to the temples in North and East suffering terrorism. vii. Providing assistance to people living in North and East under terrorism. viii. Starting new pre-schools and support those that exist already; and ix. Visiting and encouraging the members of armed forces who protect the country (Courtesy: Gamini Perera, President, SUCCESS-Colombo). The list of services testify to the fact that SUCCESS is on the opinion that the country and the religion both are threatened by forces coming from outside. The above discussion shows that a new Buddhist activism and leadership have been emerging for the last two decades. We perceive

230

Asanga Tilakaratne

two trends in the Buddhist practice: one is characterized by mass participation of bodhi-pūjā, āśīrvāda pūjā and the like, meant to invoke blessing of the Triple Gem on the people. The other is characterized by going back to basics and fundamentals and laying emphasis on practice of Buddhism. We noticed that behind this second movement there is a social critique. It perceives that there are serious problems faced by the Sinhala Buddhist community. It also perceives that there is a crisis in the Sangha. The answer it provides is to go back into the tradition with a renewed vigour. The cases of Gangodawila Soma Thera and Kiribatgoda Gnanananda Thera show that the kind of Buddhism they advocate is very much similar to what has been characterized as ‘protestant’. Historically the background for the so called protestant Buddhism was provided by monks like Migettuwatte Gunananda who articulated most strongly the Buddhist response to Christian attacks on their religion. The arrival of Henry Steel Olcott, and the subsequent start of Buddhist schools and the activism of Dharmapala were all consequent to what the monks initiated. Later, however, as documented by Obeyesekere and others the trends was taken over gradually by the laity who went far ahead in modern education than the monks. While Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara were producing basically monks with traditional education with more emphasis on Brahmanic Hindu aspects of erudition, schools initiated by Olcott and subsequently run by Buddhist Theosophical Society (BTS) were going ahead with modern education which was an adaptation of Christian education. The only difference was that it was run by Buddhists who, in their social status, shared the same mental universe with their Christian counterparts. The Buddhist monks did not play a crucial role in this process. Although these Buddhists went to temples for their religious activities, the monks and they belonged to two different worlds. They did not really communicate with each other. These learned and elite Buddhists simply tolerated the unkempt atmosphere of the temples and unkempt appearance and the unrefined ways of behaviour by monks. They removed their shoes to enter these places but were fully aware that it was one of those embarrassments of religion which they had to tolerate. The gap between these urban, elite Buddhists and those represented by ‘pañca mahā balavegaya’- fivefold great force, Buddhist monks, Sinhala school teachers, paddy cultivating farmers, native physicians and labourers, has remained. It is this latter group of Buddhists who brought

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

231

SWRD Bandaranayaka into power in 1956. They are the Buddhists who were worried about Sinhala Buddhist culture, language and religion. As our discussion in the previous section shows the sharp distinction between the two groups, monks and the lay people, no longer exists. Most of the aspects of protestant Buddhism can be seen in what monks like Soma Thera and Gnanananda Thera advocate: they are into meditation, they are into books, and they reject all kinds of local beliefs and practices as superstitious. A large number of their followers are from urban areas although theirs is not necessarily an urban phenomenon. These moves are not so much results of protesting any specific organized efforts against Buddhism as they are results of self-understanding of Buddhists themselves. For example, Gnanananda Thera’s emphasis on reading and understanding the Pali Canon can well be understood within the Buddhist tradition itself. In the absence of a successor to the Buddha from the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha, Buddhists had to rely on the ‘books’. So study of the tri-piṭaka (pariyatti-sāsana) was something that existed from the very beginning of the sāsana. It may be true that the trend had some influence from Protestant tradition at the end of the 19th century, but these trends cannot be understood solely as protests to Christianity or to the west. The new trend for going to texts, however, cannot be understood with reference to those developments alone. They have to be understood in the context of what is perceived to be the crisis in the Sangha and general problem of moral decadence among the Buddhist, as articulated well in Gnanananda Thera’s writings referred to above. In the course of the discussion on Gnanananda we briefly referred to some lay Buddhist teachers like Siriwardhana and Swarna Meniyo. The emergence of these lay preachers may be understood not as a rejection by them the leadership of the monks. It may be precisely because they accept the authority of the Sangha but are disappointed for the failures on their part. In fact, in the present paper I have not undertaken to study these teachers. If we examine what they say by way of criticizing monks we can see that their very criticism anticipates the supremacy of the Sangha in the Buddhist religious life. While there are critics of the Sangha in such people as Siriwardhana one cannot fail to notice with the arrival of the kinds of popular monks, as discussed in this paper, to the religious scene there is an element of personality cult associated with them. With organizations, centers, news papers and web-sites of one’s own, and even TV stations, there is enough space for the followers to gather around a particular teacher and built dependent attitudes and mentalities on them. Any further developments in this line are yet to be seen.

232

Asanga Tilakaratne

A phenomenon to be noted is that there has not emerged a lay Buddhist leadership from the organizations we have discussed here and others we have not discussed. The new lay Buddhist organizations seem to accept the traditional religious categories and seem to be willing to function within that framework. The interesting feature in this new practice of Buddhism is that it is the monks like Gnanananda Thera and Soma Thera that advocate what was earlier dubbed as ‘protestant Buddhism’. Buddhist monks like Gnanananda Thera and Soma Thera advocate going back to fundamentals and basics, but this cannot be interpreted as going to a kind of fundamentalism in its negative sense. The possibility of fundamentalism in Buddhism has been discussed by CR de Silva and Tessa Bartholomeusz.13 I have discussed this matter elsewhere and shown that the authors have not shown clearly what this Buddhist fundamentalism is. My experience is that what we witness today in Buddhism (or what we have witnessed in Buddhism in the past) is not fundamentalism in any accepted sense of the term. Furthermore, I would like to maintain that Buddhism lacks a theoretical basis for a religious fundamentalism to arise. For example, it is very easy for a fundamentalism to arise in a religious tradition that claims to be absolutely true. Belief in a god in such absolute sense to the exclusion of all other religions is a good breeding ground for religious fundamentalism. It is clear that Buddhism lacks such a basis. This does not necessarily mean that one cannot hold Buddhism in such manner or adopt a fundamentalist attitude; but it has not happened so far. We know that Buddhist response and reaction to the colonial situation and the resultant resurgence of Buddhism in early twentieth century has been described as ‘protestant Buddhism’. What has been happening at the end of that century, as we have discussed here, is a reaction and response to what the leaders of those movements perceived as ‘crisis in Buddhism. These movements and organizations are basically positive in nature, activism and outlook. The aim has been to revive the traditional Buddhist practice. This, no doubt, is proposed as a response to what is happening under the influence of commercialization, globalization and threats perceived to the very existence of cultural and religious tradition. In other words, the new Buddhist religious leaders such as Soma Thera and Gnanananda Thera believe that the solution 13  ‘The Role of the Sangha in the Reconciliation Process’ in History of Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka, Marga Institute, 2001.

Impact of War, Globalization and Commercialization…

233

for the problems Sinhala Buddhists are facing lies in reestablishing themselves firmly in their own religious and cultural tradition. I would therefore suggest that this new trend in contemporary Buddhism may well be described not as ‘protestant’ but as ‘responsive’.

13. Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu: the Challenge of the Future*

The organisation of the Buddhist Sangha is one of the oldest religious bodies in the world. It originated with the admittance of the ‘group of five bhikkhus’ (pañca vaggiya bhikkhu) into monkhood by the Buddha soon after his attainment of the Buddhahood. The continuity and change of the tradition during its long history in different locations is a fascinating subject for serious study. However, the present paper has a more modest aim, namely to try to identify the specific role of a bhikkhu in contemporary society often marked by ideological dogmatism, science and technological advancements. The history of the Sangha shows very clearly that the organisation has undergone considerable change since its inception. It is as a result of such changes that we have three major Buddhist traditions, namely, Theravada (a form of so-called Hinayana), Mahayana and Vajrayana. The attitude to change within these traditions betrays their ideological biases. The only extant branch of Hinayana is the Theravada which began from the premise that they will not change the Vinaya rules already enforced by the Buddha and that they will not enforce anymore new Vinaya rules over and above what is already prescribed by the Buddha (apaññattam na paññapema: paññattaṃ na samucchindissāma). This is one of the momentous decisions the Theravadins made at the very inception of their tradition and it is recognised to be the cornerstone of the Theravada tradition. It is noteworthy that the Theravadins throughout their long history have not revised or amended this agreement. The situation with the Mahayana is different. According to the

* An initial version of this article was published as “Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu: the Challenge of the Future”, Thames Buddhist Vihara Vesak Publication, London. 1998.

Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu…

235

Theravada accounts, the original schism which paved the way for the arising of the Mahayana took place over some ten issues related to the Vinaya rules. When the elderly group of traditional monks did not approve of a proposal for change (which went against the first saṃgāyanā convention), what should have happened was to apologise and withdraw the demands. However, this did not take place and instead the proponents of change walked away and formed a new group. The schism which began in this manner was subsequently instrumental in producing many branches and sub-branches which ultimately resulted in the Mahayana tradition. The Vajrayana tradition which was established in Tibet is basically a result of the syncretism of the Mahayana schools along with some other non-Buddhist beliefs and practices. Therefore, it can be considered a sub-division of the Mahayana itself. In this manner the very beginning of the Mahayana is a result of accepting the premise of viability of change. Throughout the Mahayana tradition we can see that their attitude to change has been characterised by openness. This however, does not mean that the Theravada tradition has not changed. It only means that it has never admitted this fact in public. This phenomenon may be viewed by different people in many different ways. Nevertheless, we have to admit that Theravadins is not an easy attitude to adopt. It is much easier to ‘legalise’ the change and accept it in public. The path chosen by the Theravadins is more difficult. The ‘philosophical’ reason behind this long standing move is that the path prescribed by the Buddha, in essence, is not constrained by space or time; therefore the option needs to be left open for those who still wish to follow the ‘ancient path’. Furthermore, once admitted, the change will never be stopped. This does not, quite obviously, mean that the Theravada tradition has not undergone change. Nevertheless, what remains unchanged is the possibility of pursuing the original goal and following the original path prescribed for that purpose. The fact that still many thousands of bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs, upāsakas and upāsikas adhere to dedication to this goal and the path testifies to the significance of leaving this option open. The focus of this brief survey, however, is on the large number of Buddhist Sangha who may not be included among the relatively few referred to above but on the larger group which has undergone change through centuries. Although the Theravada Sangha has never rectified change within their tradition, it nevertheless has undergone change. Particularly significant is the change of the altitude of the goal of life

236

Asanga Tilakaratne

as a bhikkhu. The order of the Sangha began with different individuals seeking ordination from the Buddha and the latter giving them the ordination in order to follow the path leading to complete exhaustion of suffering (sammā dukkhassa antakiriyāya). Although the development of the Vinaya bears ample evidence to the fact that there were individuals who entered the sāsana with motives contrary to the original, the goal remained intact as the sole purpose of living the life of a bhikkhu. Any other purpose of religious life seems to have been relegated to a secondary position. The words of the Buddha by way of a request from the group of disciples to propagated the message of the Dhamma are revealing. When the number including himself, of individuals who realised nirvana had reached sixty-one (ekasaṭṭhi arahanto), the Buddha addressed his disciples and said, bhikkhus, I am liberated from all the snares both human and divine. You too are liberated from all the snares both human and divine. bhikkhus go on teaching for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many ... bhikkhus teach the doctrine which is good at the beginning, good at the middle and good at the end.... There are beings with less dust in their eyes who will deteriorate due to lack of listening to the Dhamma.’ (Vin ⅰⅰ, 46) The Buddha’s request to his disciples to go out and spread the teaching seems to have come as a logical implication of the fact that all of them had attained arahanthood. Very often, this statement is interpreted as indicating the Buddha’s overall attitude to service to society. However, the context is more specific; what was entrusted to the bhikkhus was to help and guide others to liberate themselves from samsara. The idea seems to be that one who is not liberated cannot do that. The ‘philosophy’ behind this requirement has been pronounced by the Buddha elsewhere, in the following words; Being oneself submerged in mud it is impossible for one to lift another equally submerged in mud: Attanā palipapalipanno paraṃ palipapalipannaṃ uddharissatīti n’etaṃ ṭhānaṃ vijjati. (M I, 45) Unlike any other kind of social service, this particular action seems to require a different kind of qualification due to its very nature. The texts suggest that those who entered the sāsana in its early stages first devoted their life for their own realisation of nirvana and once they had achieved their goal, they then devoted their life to teaching and guiding others. The subsequent change within the Theravada tradition is not about nirvana

Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu…

237

as the ultimate goal of religious life but about the possibility of reaching the goal within the foreseeable future. Gradually, a feeling seems to have gained currency that nirvana is something that requires an indefinite number of lives of religious practice to realise. The development of such a perception needs to be explained through doctrinal and historical and social factors as well. A historical point of particular significance in this context is that the Sangha after the Parnibbāna of the Buddha had the additional, nonetheless most important task of preserving the teaching of the master. This seems to have paved the way for the emergence of a tradition of bhikkhus who dedicated their life for the preservation of the Dhamma contained in the three Piṭakas. Gradually, this particular task came to be known as ‘gantha dhura’ or ‘yoke of text’ and the life of those who devoted their life for the attainment of nirvana came to be called ‘vipassanā dhura’ or ‘yoke of insight’. What is significant in the division among the Sangha into two ‘vocational’ camps is the importance attributed to the gantha-dhura over the other. The Pali commentarial literature bears ample evidence to the existence of such a discriminative attitude among the saṃgha. In commenting on the story of the bhikkhu called Cakkhupala in the commentary to the Dhammapada, Buddhaghosa attributed the following words to the former; ‘Sir, since 1 have become a bhikkhu in my old age I am unable to fulfil gantha-dhura; therefore, I will fulfil vipassanā dhura’. This remark definitely betrays a kind of apologetic mentality and an inferiority feeling among those who practised ‘vipassanā dhura’. A more significant incident occurs in the commentaries and EW Adikaram has drawn our attention to it. The time of the Vaṭṭagāmanī Abhaya (29-17 AC) bears significance in the history of Theravada Buddhism for several reasons. The act of committing the word of the Buddha into writing was a historical moment in the entire Buddhist tradition. The causes which prompted this act at this particular instance seems to have more to do with local and accidental factors than with anything else. The famine which endangered the life of many including the members of the Sangha among which were those who carried the teaching in their memory was felt very deeply by the Sangha. According to Adikaram, one of the texts was remembered by only one bhikkhu who himself had a questionable character. Nevertheless, the virtuous members of the Sangha had no choice but to go to him and pay respect to him and learn it. Such incidents naturally highlighted the relative significance of the ganthadhura. Among the members of the Sangha there arose a query as to which dhura is more important. Those who upheld practice maintained that

238

Asanga Tilakaratne

practice and realisation (pariyatti and paṭivedha) are more important. The gantha-dhura argued that the practice and realisation are impossible without the knowledge of the text (pariyatti). For obvious reasons, the ‘learned’ group won the argument. According to Adikaram: How different this was from the oldest attitude “vinayo nāma Buddhasāsanassa āyu” (Vinaya is the very life of the religion of the Buddha) cried out in bold terms, the theras of old. This change in attitude, though no attention has been paid to it in the commentaries, is of the utmost importance in the history of Theravada Buddhism. This school of Buddhism claims its descent from Upali, the greatest Vinayadhara among the disciples of the Buddha. Mahinda, too the founder of this school in Ceylon, insisted on the reciting of the Vinaya by a Ceylonese bhikkhu as it was only then, he maintained, that the sāsana would take root in Ceylon. Mahinda’s Buddhism was a religion predominantly of practice, and the victory, mentioned above, of Suttanta over Vinaya would not have been one after the heart of that great missionary. (Adikaram 1946, 73) Apart from this shift of attitude which may have influenced the Theravada as a whole there were certain factors which were of particular local significance. The spread of Buddhism outside India starting from the time of Emperor Asoka was the beginning of local Buddhist cultures. For instance, the historical chronicles of the island show that Buddhism which was brought to Sri Lanka, influenced by local factors, gradually developed its own tradition. One characteristic of this new development is that the picture of the bhikkhu as aloof from society was changed. The prominent place among the Samgha was occupied by the ‘grāma-vasin/ gāmavāsī’ - ‘city dwellers’ who engaged in gantha-dhura. The vipassanādhura was mostly ‘aranya-vāsīns/āraññavāsī’ - ‘forest dwellers’ and they were not in the limelight under normal circumstances. The bhikkhu developed a new identity as ‘kula-devatā’ or ‘family god’ which signifies the new role of the Sangha having closer ties with the social unit of family. At no point in the history of Buddhism in the island up untill today have the two forms of life of the Sangha as grāma-vāsi and āranya-vāsī disappeared. People have always looked upon as the ideal bhikkhu, the one who lives in the forest (in seclusion) and engages in solitary religious practice. Even today, Buddhists in Sri Lanka express their allegiance to this ideal form of life by maintaining these religious hermitages and by offering ‘dāna’ with utmost respect to the inhabitants by travelling

Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu…

239

practically hundreds-of miles. Nevertheless, they have their associations with the neighbourhood vihāra (monastery) which is the centre of their day-to-day religious life and many other religious-related and unrelated social activities. The accomplished bhikkhu today in Sri Lanka is relatively young, has one or two degrees from a recognised universally, speaks English and perhaps some other foreign language, heads an urban monastery which has several social service organisations and travels abroad. He is socially and politically influential. This form of life of a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk is something that has evolved through centuries of Buddhist life in the island. The people whole-heartedly accept this ‘new’ form of bhikkhu and it is clearly demonstrated by colourful processions with which they conduct a newly graduated young bhikkhu to the vihāra from the university. On the other hand, they always show their allegiance to the moral ideal of the Sangha by conducting with the highest respect again through a colourful procession, the young bhikkhu newly admit led to higher ordination (upasampadā). The role of the bhikkhu in contemporary society seems to be getting very close to that of an enlightened social worker. This does not mean that the present day Theravada monasticism has given up the moral ideal of nirvana altogether. In fact, following an age old tradition, still today the prospective candidate requests to bestow monkhood upon him in order to ‘eliminate all forms of suffering and realise nirvana’ (sabba dukkha nissaraṇa nibbāna sacchikaraṇattāya …). At the higher admission, again, one reassures one’s commitment to this goal by undertaking to follow a set of stringent rules of behaviour and an austere way of life characterised by dwelling under trees, wearing clothes picked up from cemeteries, eating alms and using urine as medicine. However, having received monkhood under such promises, the young adherents is trained to be an accomplished scholar, social worker and organiser. No one expects the present-day bhikkhus to wait untill they realise nirvana in order to embark on social service. The entire ‘grāmavāsi Buddhist culture’ seems to have postponed the nirvāṇic goal to an indefinite future. This change of attitude is well characterised by the popular statement made by the bhikkhus in Sri Lanka at the end of any religious activity, namely, that we must aspire to attain the ‘happiness of nirvana having exhausted the pleasures of two realms, divine and human’ (dev minis degatiyehi sapa kelavara amāmaha nivan suva). In fact, what seems to have happened is a shift of emphasis in accordance with the changing aspirations of society at large.

240

Asanga Tilakaratne

There cannot be anything wrong in catering by a religion to the reasonable aspiration of its adherents. The role of a bhikkhu as an enlightened social worker is therefore fully understandable. However, there is a question to be raised - namely, Is this the unique role of a “bhikkhu?”. This question becomes meaningful in the context of the presence of many kinds of non-Buddhist and non-religious social workers. A challenge common to all religions is that whether one needs to be a member of a religious group in order to do successful social service. In spite of the obvious answer in the negative, one could still argue that a person without family bonds and responsibilities and with training in religious life is better equipped for such an undertaking. However, this argument is equally applicable to many religions other than Buddhism in which celibate renunciates are found. Nevertheless, one could further argue that what makes a difference in each religious group is not exactly what they do but why and how they do it. Granting that this is a very valid observation, and further granting that there is so much to do in contemporary society in alleviating poverty, malnutrition, disease and suffering and eradicating ignorance and establishing peace within individuals and among nations, still I would like to maintain that social service in those fields cannot be a unique contribution to society by members of the Sangha. There is no reason to believe that religious organisations are uniquely qualified to deal with social evils referred to above. In fact, non-religious, secular organisations may do it even better. Therefore, in order to find meaning and purpose in life, a bhikkhu needs to look at a different direction. As we found earlier in the discussion of the original goal of the life of a bhikkhu was to guide people in the path of eradication of suffering. However, this activity was understood not in terms of distribution of materials as it is understood today but in terms of change in altitudes and transformation of character. Even after the relaxation of the nirvanic ideal, this must be still possible. What is really needed is to explore the applicability of the teaching of the Buddha in the context of the temporary human problems. Buddhism as a religion shares a lot with many other religions in the world. It does have many beliefs that may well be described as ‘metaphysical’ and hence lying beyond our ordinary perception. Nevertheless, it has certain features that make it fundamentally different from all other religions of the world. A major point of departure is that it is the only non-theistic religion among all the world religions. Being nontheistic has some very significant further implications such as being non-

Redefining the Role of the Bhikkhu…

241

creationist, non-dogmatic and non-absolutist. The Buddha was a human being and He did not claim Himself to be anyone else. His teaching was presented to intelligent people (viññū) for their own personal verification. He did not require of his disciples (sāvaka -listener) to believe in what He said without due investigation. He encouraged His sāvakas to ‘make investigations to discover whether or not the Buddha is enlightened’ (tatāgate samannesana kātabbā), the teaching leads to nirvana and the Sangha has accomplished the goal. The ‘saddhā’ or confidence required of a sāvaka was always not ‘groundless confidence’ (amūlikā saddhā) but ‘rational confidence’ (ākāravatī saddhā). There is a good possibility that such a system as this could attract the attention of people who are religiously rational and who require religious tradition to follow. What is significant here is that a religion like Buddhism still can have a role in society as a religiously rational tradition. Some time ago encouraged by the fast advancement of science and technology, some sociologists believed that religion will be dead soon. However, this obviously has not happened. On the contrary, religion still not only survives but also flourishes in some instances. Nevertheless, a closer examination will reveal that what has so survived and whatever flourishes in some instances is what is mystical, opaque and mysterious. The rites and rituals do not seem to have lost their attraction. However, what needs to be noted is that religion as a rational aspect of human behaviour is almost dead. Unsustainable beliefs, superstitions and dogmatism associated with doctrinal or organised aspects of religion have made religion simply inapplicable to the rational mind. Once this essential applicability of religion is lost it naturally has to look for alternative reasons which are only peripheral as its rationale for existence. A religion which thrives on social service does not have a future as a religion. Social service in its ‘material’ sense will remain a necessity for many years to come. Nevertheless, for a religion it can only be a subordinate role. The unique role of religion is to provide a rationale for the ethical and moral life of people. In other words, a religion needs to contain a rational analysis of human predicament and a satisfactory solution to it. I do not mean the existence of this aspect theoretically; but I mean that the adherents of a religion are truly convinced of it. Without this aspect a religion is similar to a giant without a head. No matter how much we decorate it with ornaments, it cannot be given life. Now coming back to the unique role of a bhikkhu in the Theravada Buddhist tradition, the challenge before him is to interpret the

242

Asanga Tilakaratne

teaching of the Buddha, basically the four noble truths which is the Buddhist analysis of human predicament and its solutions so that it will be intelligible to contemporary society. This task requires him as a necessary prerequisite to be convinced of it; but it does not require him to be an arahant as the Buddha expected of the first disciples before they embarked upon cārikā (mission). In this context, my emphasis on the Theravada tradition is mainly because it provides the most direct path with as less descriptive and decorative aspects as possible. The recent popularity of Buddhism as a social movement, in a way, suggests that Buddhism too suffers from loss of vitality in its essential aspect. The point I am trying to make is not to denounce or discourage the very valuable social service aspect of Buddhism or in any other religion: but to lay emphasis on the necessity of retaining above everything else, the religious vitality of a religion. Although the Theravada as practised in countries such as Myanmar (Burma), Sri Lanka and Thailand and many other traditional and non-traditional locations in the world has its popular cultural and religious aspects. Still it is not hard to identify the basic universal message contained in it. The real necessity is to highlight the essence of the teaching in its most lucid and straightforward manner. The desirability of the ‘self-centred’ liberation of early Buddhism has always been questioned and it is not my intention to try an elaborate defence of it. Nevertheless, we must at least realise that eradication of ‘taṇhā’ (thirst/craving/attachment) in its manifoldness can be anything but selfish for the goal and the motivation are contradictory to each other and cannot co-exist. The larger human problem Buddhism focusses on, namely, human suffering in its deep existential sense, surpasses limits of space and time. It is common to all stages of individual human life and to all ages of humanity hitherto we have passed. In individual human life from stage to stage the objects of taṇhā differ and consequent dukkha persists. In the like manner at different ages of human existence, the objects of taṇhā have differed but the consequent dukkha has persisted. This strongly suggests that the path of the Buddha with its characteristic rational appeal is worth exploring. The unique task before the bhikkhu today is to understand, interpret and communicate it to the global society.

14. Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera: A Quest for the Ideal Theravada Bhikkhu*

Introduction Each Theravada bhikkhu is a representative of the Theravada Sangha. Although, in this sense, all bhikkhus are bhikkhus with no difference among them, some naturally stand out. Walpola Sri Rahula Thera (WR) who passed away in 1997 is one such. He stood out in many respects, and made a long lasting impression on the Sangha organization. WR’s life and work need to be studied deeply in order to understand the path of the Sri Lankan Sangha in the last century and, thereby, its historical continuities and discontinuities. One may agree with him or may not but one cannot bypass him easily. The present paper is not meant to be a general study of this multi-faceted personality. Rather it will focus on his life as a Buddhist monk and its implications on the Sangha as a body and as individual members. As a prelude to this discussion, I will study the life of WR with special focus on his formative years and his early political activism. Subsequently, I will discuss my main theme, a quest for the ideal Theravada bhikkhu, keeping WR as its basis. In concluding remarks, I will try to connect this discussion to the present context of Sri Lankan Buddhism.

Walpola Sri Rahula Thera: Formative years WR was born in 1907 at Walpola Thera, a village in the southern province of Sri Lanka, as the youngest in a family of ten. At the age of thirteen * An initial version of this paper was published as “Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera: A Quest for the Ideal Theravada Bhikkhu”, Walpola Rahula Institute for Buddhist Studies, Kotte, Sri Lanka, 2014.

244

Asanga Tilakaratne

he was admitted to the Sangha at the village monastery and was given the name: Walpola Dhammadassi Thera, which he changed to Walpola Rahula Thera after about eight years. The first decisive influence WR Thera’s life came when he was entrusted for further studies to Paragoda Sumanasara Thera, a monk not only with vast learning but also with a deep commitment to follow the monastic life to its fullest. In his seriousness to follow the Vinaya, Paragoda Sumanasara Thera was very different from the larger majority of his contemporaries that he strived to reach the ideal: to follow all Vinaya rules without violating any and to practice, in addition, austere practices, which are known in the tradition as dhutaṅga. Realizing the difficulty in following the Vinaya to its fullest, Sumanasara Thera made a very bold decision to relinquish his higher admission (upasampadā) and revert to novice-hood (sāmaṇera), which is coming down in his stature among the Sangha. Not stopping at that, he and his student including WR left the life in the monastery with relative comforts to forest and assumed an ascetic life. Rejection of modern comfort and assuming a simple life with minimum needs was the hallmark of this way of life. Accordingly, the group existed on alms food, wore ragged robes, used coconut shells for cups, and did not handle money. Consequently, the group became known sarcastically as ‘coconutshell nikāya’ (polkaṭu-nikāya). Meanwhile, led by his perfectionism which earlier made him give up higher admission, Sumanasara Thera decided to become a ‘layman.’ Having become a layman he still lived a celibate life guiding his monastic pupils. Sumanasara Thera’s moral perfectionism and idealism seem have had a great influence on WR Thera in his formative years. The articles he wrote to Sinhala Jātiya, then well-known Sinhala newspaper, were mainly on monastic vinaya issues, a clear influence of his mentor. After several years of this ‘ascetic’ life, WR moved Colombo already with a name as a controversial writer. He wanted to pursue studies, and with financial support from his brother Victor Hettigoda, he went to India with the hope of entering a center of higher learning. This effort proved to be unsuccessful due to various reasons including his ill health, and WR returned to Sri Lanka and embarked on education almost on his own with guidance from some friends, noteworthy among whom were S Thangaraja, a teacher at St. Thomas College, Mount Lavinia for mathematics and science, and DS Gunasekera, a warden of Nalanda College, for English. Apart from a few months of schooling at his village school, WR had never had any formal education until he was admitted

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

245

to Ceylon University College where professor GP Malalasekara was his teacher and mentor. It is during this time that WR came to associate with NM Perera, Philip Gunawardhana and SA Wickramasinghe, future political leaders of the country, and also got opportunities to meet such eminent international figures as Mahatma Gandhi, who was visiting Sri Lanka, Rabindranath Tagore who came to lay the foundation stone for Sri Palee College, Horana, and J Krishnamurti who arrived in Colombo to deliver a series of lectures.

A controversial period: critique of religion and political activism An important milestone of this formative period of WR was the series of tracts he wrote under the common title of ‘satyodaya’ (the dawn of truth) on various issues related to Buddhist practice by ordinary people as well as by the Buddhist monks, and distributed free. These tracts were written during December 1933 and September 1934.1 The ideas expressed in these tracts were the text book examples of critical thinking particularly on matters of religion, in this case, Buddhism, which was the religion of the larger majority of the people of the country and consequently was very sensitive matter to touch. In these tracts WR demonstrated with sharp critical acumen how some of the very popular Buddhist practices were in contradiction with the basic philosophy of the Buddha. Among the practices that came under WR Thera’s attack were offering food as Buddha-pūjā, the caste discrimination in the Sangha and offering what is erroneously called ‘dharma-pūjā’ to the preachers of the Dhamma which is tantamount to making a payment for the service they rendered. WR Thera argued vehemently against these practices and showed how such practices violated the philosophy of the Buddha. In addition, he questioned the practice of inviting gods to listen to the Dhamma (dēvatā ārādhanāva), the concept of ‘poya’ day as a special day, popular perception and practice of offering ‘sāṅghika dāna’, collecting money in the name of the Triple Gem, and doing meritorious deeds expecting future results. Everything that WR found unacceptable in the Buddhist practice still persists after eight decades. Some practices such as ‘reducing a preacher to a service provider’ not only persists, but has gone beyond the imagination of even WR! On some other practices, WR Thera’s critique came from a very idealist position of taking straight path to nirvana as the only valid form of Buddhism, a position which he himself 1  Later the tracts were published in book form under the title Satyodaya by S Godage Brothers, Maradana in 1992.

246

Asanga Tilakaratne

is to repudiate in his years. There is no doubt that what he says on these is logical and true from that perspective, but, as in the proverbial story of blind men and the elephant, it is to take a part to be the whole. The next twelve years witnessed WR getting gradually and increasingly involved in national and social activities. The culmination of these activities is marked by the Vidyalankara declaration on the Buddhist monk’s involvement in national politics, in which WR played a key role, and the publication of Bhikṣuvage Urumaya (BU), based on the historic speech made by WR at Kandy Town Hall. BU was first published in 1946, and a revised edition came in 1948. It is said that the first edition was sold out within three weeks of its publication. The main point of BU is that it is proper for the Sri Lankan Buddhist monks to get involved in political activities. WR argues his case with reference to the history of Sri Lanka, in particular, the history of the country since the arrival of Buddhism to the early 20th century, with emphasis on Buddhist monk’s involvement in political activities. WR’s is a justification of monastic political activism on the basis of historical practice. Not only WR campaigned for monastic political activism but also he got actively engaged in political activities of then emerging socialist leaders such as NM Perera, Philip Gunawardhana, and SA Wickramasinghe, mentioned above. He was even jailed for a few days for some of these activities.

Milestones in ganthadhura Amidst his political activism, WR Thera was academically very active. While teaching at Vidyalankara pirivena and rewriting his BU, WR Thera had started working, under the guidance of Professor G.P. Malalasekera, for his doctorate on the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. In 1950, WR Thera got his PhD for his work which was published in 1956 History of Buddhism in Ceylon, covering the history of Buddhism during the Anuradhapura period. In 1950 WR Thera received a French Government post-doctoral research fellowship at the initiative of Professor Paul Demieville of the College of France. This was a beginning of unfolding of another phase in WR Thera’s life which lasted till 1974, the year he moved to England. During the period he spent in France, (among other events in his life) I identify four events as very important, not merely for his life but for the field of Buddhist studies locally as well as globally. One is his translation into French Abhidharmasamuccaya of Asanga, a major work he undertook under the guidance of Professor Paul

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

247

Damieville (which was published in 19712). In 1966, he was invited by Professor Edmund F. Perry, Chairman of the Department of Religions at Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA. There he was to occupy the newly established Bishop Brashares Professor of History and Literature of Religions Chair. Not only WR was the first to hold this Chair, but also he was the first bhikkhu to ever hold such a Chair in the Western academia (Balasooriya et al. 1980, ix). An added significance was that this Chair had been created in memory of a Christian academic leader. The relationship between WR Thera and Perry was a life-long affair which provided living example of what is known today as ‘interreligious dialogue’. On the nature of this relationship and its influence, Perry wrote: WR Thera has translated the Message of the Buddha so accurately into his own character that when a Christian receives Rahula as a friend the Christian has received a living personal statement of the Buddha’s teaching. Although Rahula Thera’s presence among Christians has evoked their devotion to him as a person, has commanded their respect for the holiness of his life, and has confirmed to them his reputation of peerless scholar, what really matters to him, and what signifies far more than all this respectful recognition of him is that his presence has commended to the consideration of the Christians the Buddha’s wisdom and love. (Balasooriya et al. 1980, 201-202) An event with local significance is his assumption of duties in 1966 as the Vice Chancellor of then Vidyodaya University from which he resigned after about three years in 1969 over a disagreement with the minister of education, IMRA Eriyagolla. Perhaps the most important of the four events is his publication of What the Buddha Taught (WBT) in 1959. Obviously the value of the book is not that it is a result of a deep research into the teaching of the Buddha. Its value lies mainly in what was presented as what the Buddha taught and how it was presented. In Paul Damievill’s words it is an exposition of Buddhism conceived in a resolutely modern spirit by one of the most qualified and enlightened representative of that religion (Forward to What the Buddha Taught). WBT provided a definitive statement on what the Buddha taught, namely, the fundamental teachings of the Buddha as they occur in the Pali Canon, also found 2  Le Compendium de la Super-Doctrine (Philosophies) (Abhidharmasamuccaya) d’ Asanga, Ecole Francaise d’ Extreme-Orient, Paris, 1971.

248

Asanga Tilakaratne

in the Agama literature preserved in Chinese, which are the earliest extant versions closest to what the Buddha would have originally taught. Today there is, among Buddhist scholars, skepticism as to what exactly the Buddha taught. The skepticism is due to the discovery of many inter-nikāya versions of the Buddhist canon in various languages other than Pali and classical Chinese. Nevertheless, it remains a fact that the Pali Canon remains the only complete one with a history of about two and half millennia of unbroken practice behind it. It is the fundamentals of this tradition that WR Thera gave to the world as what Buddha taught. In Edmund Perry’s words it is “the most widely read introduction to Buddhism in any language (Liyanage 1995, ix).” It will not be an overestimate to say that WBT is the most lucid, methodical and straightforward introductory book on Buddhism the world has so far seen. By today, although there are many primary text books for introducing Buddhism, the scholarly attraction of WBT remains undiminished. Even after five decades, it is almost impossible to imagine a Buddhist studies program without WR Thera’s book as an essential reading.3

Gantha-dhura, Vipassanā-dhura and the ideal Theravada bhikkhu Reflecting on WR’s many-sided life, one cannot forget the two most prominent books he authored, Bhikṣuvage Urumaya (BU) in 1948, later translated into English as The Heritage of the Bhikkhu (Grove Press inc. New York, 1974), and What the Buddha Taught (WBT) in 1959. The first, which is considered the manifesto of the monastic political activism of the Sri Lankan bhikkhus, is one that exercised a very strong influence on the formation of the modern bhikkhu in Sri Lanka. H.L. Seneviratne, a contemporary critic of WR Thera, describes the book as “a work that has influenced the monkhood more than any other in the recent history of Sri Lanka Theravada Buddhism” (Seneviratne 1999, 135). The importance of WBT in defining what the Buddha taught, which has a global significance, was referred to above. These two books in particular capture WR Thera’s role as a practitioner of what has come down in the tradition as ‘gantha-dhura’, yoke of books. It was customary in the Sri Lankan Buddhist tradition to perceive the life of a bhikkhu as holding or carrying either of two yokes 3  The book has undergone several editions and has been translated into Burmese, Chinese, French, German, Sinhalese, and Spanish. See Mallawarachchi (1980) for publication history.

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

249

(dhura), namely, those of books (gantha-dhura) or the yoke of insight (meditation) (vipassanā-dhura). Although commentators want us to believe that the division goes as far back as the time of the Buddha, it is imaginable that it evolved in the post-parinirvāṇa Buddhism. The act of learning, represented by books, started assuming a more important role right after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha. This was mainly as a result of the situation in which the Buddha did not name a successor to him after his parinirvāṇa, and, instead, said that it would be the Dhamma he taught and the Vinaya he prescribed that should be treated as the teacher in his absence. Once the Dhamma and the Vinaya assume the position of the teacher, it makes it very crucial that those two are there in organized form to be referred to and consulted whenever an issue arose requiring to determine what would have been the Buddha’s view. The Vinaya account of the first saṅgāyanā tells us how the Sutta and Vinaya were distributed among the key disciples in order to master and protect. Although it may be imagined that there were experts of the Dhamma and the Vinaya even during the time of the Buddha, the first saṅgāyanā may be taken as the official beginning point of this trend in the Theravada tradition. We know that from this tradition gradually evolved the bhanaka lineages with experts in different sections of the discourses, the Vinaya and the Abhidhamma. It appears that the word ‘dhura’ (yoke) was used to refer to the two practices first in the commentaries. In the commentary to the Dhammapada, Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā, Buddhaghosa uses this in this latter sense to denote the practice of studying the word of the Buddha and the practice of engaging in insight meditation. In the story of Cakkhupāla, who entered the Sangha rather late in his life, we find him saying to the Buddha that he, who is old, is not competent to undertake the yoke of books which is for those who are clever and competent, and hence he will rather practice yoke of vipassanā, which is for the weak, implied although not said directly. The very word dhura (yoke) in this connection is somewhat problematic because the yoke, as in the case of a bullock tied to the cart, implies a state to which one is inescapably bound, and hence burdensome and not very pleasant. The subsequent history of Theravada tradition in Sri Lanka suggests that this division had gone deep into the body of the tradition from a very early stage of its history. A very important example is available from the reign of Vaṭṭagāmiṇi Abhaya in the first century bce. The hard conditions of a long lasting famine and foreign invasions due to which a good number of people

250

Asanga Tilakaratne

including bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs died and another set of bhikkhus went to the neighboring country, India, are well known. It is said that at the end of the difficult period when those who left for India returned, there arose a question as to which is more important, learning (pariyatti) or practice (paṭipatti). It is clearly stated that this debate arose between the preachers of the Dhamma (dhamma-kathika) and those who wore rag robes (pamsukūlika). As could be expected, those who were well versed in the Dhamma won the debate leaving pamsukulikas away from the limelight.4 Another similar division found among the Sri Lanka Theravada bhikkhus was between village-dwellers (gāma-vāsī) and forest-dwellers (arañña-vāsī). Even though these categories seem to go as far back as the time of the Buddha, the division among the bhikkhus into sharp categories in these lines could be considered a new development that took place in Sri Lanka. The debate between the two groups, no doubt, may have had justifying historical conditions. With monks who kept what the Buddha taught in their memory gradually succumbing themselves to harsh living conditions, the physical integrity of the Dhamma was at a serious threat, and one can understand how and why the practice of pariyatti become so crucial. Nevertheless, looking from a point of view of the teaching of the Buddha, we can see that the very question, which is more important, was a misguided one. In a system where all three, pariyatti, paṭipatti and paṭivedha (learning, practice and realization), are inter-connected with and inseparable from one another, it is hard to see how any one aspect can occupy a loftier position than the rest. But the debate itself and the conclusion drawn highlight a historical self-understanding of a tradition, which is open to debate by the posterity. Such a debate or a difference of opinion over this historical debate is found between WR and Adikaram who wrote prior to the former on the early history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. Commenting on this debate and its aftermath, Adikaram says: Practice was relegated to the background and preaching gained supremacy. The Sutta defeated the Vinaya. How different this was from the older attitude! “vinayo nāma Buddha-sāsanassa āyu” (Vinaya is the very life of the religion of the Buddha) cried out in bold terms by the theras of old. This change in attitude, though no attention has been paid to it in the Commentaries, 4  This, however, was not the case always. In Sri Lankan history, there were times when pāmsukulikas became more powerful over the dhamma-katika.

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

251

is of the utmost importance in the history of the Theravāda Buddhism. This school of Buddhism claims its descent from Upali, the greatest Vinayadhara among the disciples of the Buddha. Mahinda, too, the founder of this school in Ceylon, insisted on the reciting of the Vinaya by a Ceylonese bhikkhu as it was only then, he maintained, that the sāsana would take root in Ceylon. Mahinda’s Buddhism was a religion predominantly of practice, and the victory mentioned above, of Suttanta over Vinaya, would not have been one after the heart of that great missionary. (Adikaram 1946, 78) Writing subsequently on the same subject in his doctoral dissertation, WR described Adikaram’s work as devotee’s lament “over the “degeneration” and “corruption” of the faith” (Rahula 1956/1993, xi). WR’s encounter with Adikaram crystallizes the on-going debate over the definition of the ideal Theravada bhikkhu. It is interesting to note, in his own metamorphosis, WR Thera holding a position similar to that of Adikaram with regard to the nature of a bhikkhu. WR Thera from his Walpola atthadassi days of ‘tāpasa nikāya’ using coconut shells to Satyodaya tracts and BU is a person undergone a dramatic change in his outlook of the nature and the role of a bhikkhu. As a follower of Paragoda Sumanasara Thera, WR was a bhikkhu who dedicated his life for the realization of the ultimate goal by following the most straightforward path meant for it. It was vipassanā-dhura at its extreme for some of the practices WR Thera followed under the guidance of Sumanasara Thera, namely, dhutaṅga, were of very special type to be practiced under severe conditions. Considering the extreme character of the practice he followed, WR Thera’s transfer into gantha-dhura at a later stage of this life is truly phenomenal. In a sense, WR Thera can be described as one who has reversed the traditional sequence of doing ganth-dhura while young, and reverting to vipassanā-dhura in the oldage. In his prime youth, WR Thera practiced vipassanā to discover gantha-dhura only later. As we saw in our earlier discussion, as a learned bhikkhu WR Thera reached great heights in the academic world, heights that a bhikkhu of any tradition had not reached before. From his own nikāya he was honored as tripiṭakavāgīśvarācārya/supreme master of the Tripiṭaka. Although the reign in the academic world does not necessarily mean that he discontinued his practice of meditation, it is clear that WR Thera assumed a different form of life in which academic engagement

252

Asanga Tilakaratne

featured more prominent than any other engagement. The question is: how should we understand from a historical point of view these two poles in one Theravada bhikkhu. Is there, between these two, one way of life more legitimate than the other, or who should be the ideal bhikkhu in the Theravada understanding - it is to inquire into these questions that we turn next. We propose to do this inquiry by way of analyzing two of the greatest elders of the Theravada tradition, Mahakassapa and Ananda, whose ways of life have exercised vital influence on the formation and evolution of the Theravada bhikkhu.

Mahakassapa and Ananda: two leaders of the earliest Sangha Usually in the Theravada tradition all arahants are understood as homogenous in their character and behavior. Although arahants could differ in their specific abilities such as exercise of psychic powers and mastery of the Dhamma, all of them are described as similar in their final attainment. In this analysis, Ananda, the attendant to the Buddha and treasurer of his Dhamma, was only a stream-winner and remained so untill the Buddha attained parinirvāṇa, whereas Mahakassapa was an arahant. Nevertheless, both occupied a very high position in the Sangha, the latter for his seniority and the near equal status he enjoyed at the Buddha, and the former for fulfilling the arduous task of mastering the Dhamma taught by the Buddha. The two elders, owing to the differences they had in their outlook and behavior, become crucial in understanding the nature of the early Sangha. There is substantial evidence in the canon to establish that Mahakassapa Thera was treated by the Buddha almost as an equal. The fact that the Buddha exchanged his robe with Mahakassapa Thera is a clear indication to this. Commenting on this unusual and unprecedented event, the commentary says: The Buddha exchanged the robe with the elder saying: This robe worn out by wearing by the Tathāgata cannot be worn by one who has only a little virtue. This must be worn by one who is strong, capable of completing practice of virtues and a bornwearer of rag-robes. (ThagA III, 135) This commentarial account testifies to the great sense of respect with which the tradition held Mahakassapa Thera. A key characteristic of Mahakassapa Thera’s behavior was his observance of austere practice known in the tradition as dhutaṇga

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

253

referred to above. These practices included, among others, wearing ragrobes, accepting only alms food, living in the forest, which Mahakassapa Thera observed. At one instance, the Buddha suggested Mahakassapa Thera, on the ground of his advanced age, to give up these practices and stay with him accepting robes offered by house holders and meals given on invitation. At this Mahakassapa Thera reminds the Buddha that he has been observing these practices for a long time in his life and that he has been doing so not only for his own happiness but also out of kindness to the later generations. The Buddha withdraws his request and allows Mahakassapa Thera to continue (S II, 202). The last of the characteristics of Mahakassapa Thera that I wish to highlight in this discussion is his apparent indifference to bhikkhunīs in general. According to one episode occurring in the discourses, Mahakassapa Thera was not very keen at all to teach bhikkhunīs (S II, 214-217). Ananda Thera had to plead with him three times before the former was persuaded to do so. Finally, Mahakassapa Thera went to the bhikkhunī monastery, accompanied by Ananda Thera and admonished bhikkhunīs. However, when Mahakassapa Thera got up and started leaving after his admonition, a bhikkhunī called Thullanandā made the following remark: How can Master Mahakassapa Thera think of speaking on the Dhamma in the presence of Master Ananda Thera, the Videhan sage? For Master Mahakassapa Thera to think of speaking on the Dhamma in the presence of Master Ananda Thera, the Videhan sage - this just as if a needle-peddler would think he could sell a needle to a needle-maker! (Bodhi 2000, 675) In another incident, a bhikkhunī named Thullananda accused Mahakassapa Thera referring to him as a “former member of another sect”. The context is, again, connected to Ananda Thera. Mahakassapa Thera calls Ananda Thera, a ‘youngster’ for the latter wondered in a tour with a group of some undisciplined newly admitted bhikkhus whose public behavior caused damage to the good reputation of the Sangha. These incidents show the dislike some bhikkhunīs had towerd Mahakassapa Thera and their high regard to Ananda Thera. In this context, it is relevant to note that, at the first saṅgāyanā which was held under the leadership of Mahakassapa Thera, Ananda Thera was charged with a series of offences among which was that he persuaded the Buddha to give higher admission to women. Although there are no records of Mahakassapa Thera’s disapproval of the establishment of the Bhikkhunī

254

Asanga Tilakaratne

sāsana, what happned at the first saṅgāyanā strongly hints at Mahakassapa Thera’s possible negative attitude to bhikkhunīs in particular. Ananda Thera, on the contray, was the total opposite of Mahakassapa Thera in many respects. If Mahakassapa Thera was the embodiment of austerity, solitude and aloofness from social life, Ananda Thera, with his busy city life, immersed in public relations and social engagements, represented the total contrast. As the attendant of the Buddha, Ananda Thera was busy with looking after the needs of the Buddha, accompanying him on tours, accepting invitations on behalf of the Buddha, making appointments and functioning as the intermediary between the Buddha and those who came to see him. In addition, Ananda Thera was the treasurer of the Buddha. Ananda Thera was praised by the Buddha as the highest among those who were learned (bahussuta), mindful (satimanta), with good behavior (gatimanta), resolute (dhitimanta) and attending on the Buddha (upaṭṭhaka) (A I, 24-25). Ananda Thera was praised by the Buddha for his wisdom on several occasions. Satisfied with the answer Ananda Thera gave to a question he asked, the Buddha praised him saying: Bikkhus, Ananda Thera is a trainee, but it is not easy to find one equal to him in wisdom (Bodhi 2012, 311). Addressing a group of bhikkhus who were not satisfied with the answer they got for their question from Ananda Thera, the Buddha praised Ananda Thera’s wisdom and said that they would get the same answer even if they were to ask that question from him (Bodhi 2012, 1494-1497). At another instance, the Buddha elaborated on four ‘astounding and amazing things’ about Ananda Thera, namely, that any assembly of bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs, male lay followers or female lay followers would be elated to see him. Even more elated to listen to him and that they would be still unsatiated when Ananda Thera falls silent (Bodhi 2012, 513). All these accounts suggest stronly that Ananda Thera was one of the most gifted of all disciples of the Buddha. Ananda Thera contrasts sharply with Mahakassapa Thera in his support of the bhikkhunī order. The Vinaya account of how Ananda Thera was instrumental in persuading the Buddha to give admission to women is well known (Vin II, 253-256; A IV, 274-279). It appears that the Buddha, who turned down thrice Maha Pajapati Gotami’s request to establish the bhikkhunī order, could not reject Ananda Thera’s argument in favour of giving admission to women, based on the ability of women to realize the ultimate goal in religious life, namely:

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

255

If a women were to go forth from the household life into homelessness in the Dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Tathāgata, would it be possible for her to realize the fruit of stream-entry, the fruit of once-returning, the fruit of nonreturning, and the fruit of arahanship. (Bodhi 2012, 1189) With the Buddha’s affirmative answer to this question, it was understood that the bhikkhunī sasana was in order. Under these circumstances, and as also revealed in the episodes referred to above, it is understandable that bhikkhunīs developed a great sense of respect and appreciation of Ananda Thera. It should be more than clear from this analysis of the two great elders of the Theravada tradition that both were highly regarded by the Buddha himself and also by the members of the Sangha. Both were praised by the Buddha and by the fellow Sangha for their unique qualities, although Mahakassapa Thera was not praised at least by some bhikkhunīs. On the other hand, it is equally clear that the two elders were poles apart in their modes of life and in certain attitudes. The long history of the Theravada tradition reveals that the two elders were its defining figures. The traditional classifications such as gantha-dhura and vipassanā-dhura, dhammakathika and pamsukūlika and gāma-vāsī and arañña-vāsī, have respectively Ananda Thera and Mahakassapa Thera as their founder fathers. Although there are preferences for one or the other, neither has been totally rejected in favour of the other. As some scholar have shown, the boundaries of these traditional classifications have been elastic (Gombrich 1988, Chapter six).

Discussion and concluding remarks Thera’s justification of political involvement of the bhikkhus derives basically from his reference to the history of the Sangha in the country. In BU, WR Thera produces a summary of the main political and social involvements of the Sangha, in Sri Lanka and, in the body of the work, he goes on to elaborate on these involvements. Historical tradition that WR Thera refers to is one way to view the problem, and it surely provides justification of some sort for the phenomenon, but there are other ways to view the same. One such way is to view the phenomenon from a point of view of the Dhamma and the Vinaya. An effort of this nature was made by Pelene Vajiranana Thera, then Mahanayaka Thera of Amarapura Dharmarakṣitavaṃśa-nikāya and founder of Vajiraramaya, Bambapalapitiya. In a long article titled “Deśapālanaya

256

Asanga Tilakaratne

saha bhikkṣūnvahanse” (Politics and the bhikkhu), dated 17th March, 1946 written to ‘Lak Budu Sasuna’, a newspaper which claimed that its purpose was to arrest the progressive decline of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, Pelene Mahanayake Thera argued on the basis of the Dhamma and the Vinaya why getting involved in political activities is not in accordance with the goal of renounced life. At the very outset of this article, he says that the question whether or not bhikkhus should get involved in politics has to be examined not on the basis of history but on the basis of the Dhamma. Resembling mathematical propositions, Pelene Nayaka Thera further argued, the Dhamma does not change according to time or space. In another essay, the Nayaka Thera takes up the issue again. Although he did not mention WR Thera by name, it is clear that he was responding to the program outlined in BU when he said: One must not exert to prove on the basis of history how the bhikkhus of the past were involved in public activities related to the development of the county. History is not religion. Whether it is in the past or in the present, it is a misunderstanding to substitute the religion with the behavior of an ordinary worldling (pṛthagjana), however high a position he were to occupy. One must keep constantly in one’s mind that the life of a bhikkhu, which relies on alms-food, is simple and free without any particular attachment to one’s county, village or race, and that it is dissociated from the world, and allows only instructing people on the Dhamma with a kind attitude to all without any discrimination. (Pannasiha 1981, 67) In this analysis, Pelene Nayaka Thera does not reject altogether the view that bhikkhus should engage in activities concerning the world, but such activity should be confined only to instructing people in the Dhamma with a kind heart. Even that has to be done without any discrimination on nationality, caste, religion and the like. In the second edition of BU (1948), responding to these criticisms, WR Thera refers to two instances when Narada Thera and Kassapa Thera, pupils of Pelene Nayaka Thera, were sent to Singapore by the DS Senanayake government in order to pacify some unrest among the Ceylonese troops. On this development WR Thera observes: It will be clear to anyone that these activities are not nonpolitical. It also appears that those chief monks (nayaka theras) who were once opposed to bhikkhus taking part in politics now gave their blessings. We are happy to see that these worthy people are now awakening to the truth, though late. (Rahula 1948, xx)

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

257

This exchange of ideas between Pelene Nayaka Thera and WR Thera, though seem poles apart from each other, will make more sense from a point of view of Mahakassapa Thera and Ananda Thera. Although WR Thera is right here in identifying the missions of the two Vajirārāma monks as ‘political’, they are political in a broader sense, not in the narrow sense of getting involved in party politics and related activities perceived as not in conformity with the traditional image of a bhikkhu as a person withdrawn from society. Pelene Nayaka Thera may have approved the missions for the involvement required in this connection was qualitatively different from the political engagements of the bhikkhus during this period. WR Thera’s political program has come under severe criticism in HL Seneviratne (HLS) (1999). In this context I am not going to make an extensive analysis of Seneviratne’s critique. I refer the reader to one of my earlier works for those who wish to know details (Tilakaratne 2006). For the present purpose, I will give the gist of his argument. HLS starts with Anagarika Dharmapala whose criticism of Buddhist monks of the early last century was a important part of his Buddhist modernism. He criticized monks for being lazy, being prone to luxury living and being idle. He advocated that monks should come out of this unfortunate state and be actively involved in social upliftment. Dharmapala identified economy and culture as two areas in which the Buddhist monks should get involved. Of the two main centres of Buddhist monastic education, Vidyodaya monks undertook work related to ‘village upliftment’ (grāma sanvardhanaya) and moral regeneration whereas Vidyalankara monks undertook the aspects of cultural development. WR Thera’s BU becomes relevant in this context. It is, in HLS’s words, …lucidly written, …at once naïve and sophisticated, rhetorical and scholarly, and simplistic and brilliant. It is a manifesto ostensibly based on historical and sociological analysis. It is a justification of and a charter for monks to involve themselves in social activism (politics robed in social service). It is an attempt to restore to the monk his alleged pre-colonial status by telling him to rearm himself for a society that has progressed while he has languished. It bears the imprint of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism of Anagarika Dharmapala. (Seneviratne 1999, 136-137) According to HLS, Vidyodaya monks who undertook village regeneration did their work while paying due heed to their monkhood whereas the Vidyalankara monks were lacking in this respect. The former,

258

Asanga Tilakaratne

although they ultimately were not successful in their efforts, ‘had their heart in the right place’ (128). The latter gradually degenerated into ‘Sinhala Buddhist chauvinism’ paving way ultimately to the disastrous ethnic conflict. This latter group failed, in HLS’s analysis, because they could not live up to the standards that Dharmapala expected from such monks. “What they meant by social service was a license for them to have greater involvement with secular society beginning with politics. The license was given to them by The Heritage” (338). This analysis suggests and blames Rahula Thera that his BU provided the theoretical justification for everything that HLS sees as degeneration of the Sangha. Whether or not in fact this degeneration happened, if it did, then was it due to BU is a larger question, an inquiry into which goes beyond the limits of the present engagement. What, however, Rahula Thera meant by the new vocation he supported in BU comes clear in the following words of him: ‘Bhikkhu politics’ as much as the gantha-dhura (‘scholarship’, literally, ‘occupation of texts’) may become a Buddhist tradition. Moreover, the ‘sons of the Buddha’ (i.e. bhikkhus) who keep away from crooked and dishonest practices, who have a pure character, who have received a higher education in keeping with the needs of the times, who will not bow down before wealth or power, and will work for the benefit of the common man; altruistic, bold, upright, and honest monks will be regarded as political bhikkhus. (emphasis added). (Rahula 1974/2003, xix) If we take HLS’s examination of social engagement of some of the recent monks as valid, then we have to admit that Rahula Thera’s expectations not only failed to materialize but were also wrongly interpreted and misused. As the above-quoted words of Rahula Thera make very clear what he meant by a ‘poltical bhikkhu’ is not one who merely helped his friends to come to political power for one’s own personal gain, as it turned out to be in more recent times, but a bhikkhu who is morally upright and serious in his purpose. Our quest for the ideal Theravada bhikkhu has brought us back to Rahula Thera, who, obviously following his own life experience, both as an ascetic with severe and difficult practices and full-fledged academic scholar, tried to strike a compromise between Mahakassapa Thera and Ananda Thera. In the classical Theravada tradition, although the two elders had adopted two different ways of life, there was no question

Reflecting on Walpola Sri Rahula Mahathera...

259

about their moral integrity. If some more recent practitioners were failing in this respect, it is not clear how Rahula Thera should be held responsible for it. In more recent years, the political involvement of the monks has taken a new turn with Jatika Hela Urumaya monks being elected as members of Parliament. This may or may not be a situation which Rahula Thera anticipated, but if a bhikkhu with the qualities mentioned by Rahula Thera were to become a member of the highest legislative body of a country that country, would certainly be a very fortunate one. What, however, Rahula Thera would not have even dreamt of would be monks who gate-crash into public buildings, take people hostages, run after their own members in public with clubs, and get caught in drunken driving. It will be futile at this juncture to debate whether or not these are the legitimate offspring of The Heritage/BU, but what will be fruitful surely is to re-embark on a reforming movement of the type which Walpola Rahula Mahathera pioneered during the first half of the last century.

15. Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of a Global Buddhism*

Introduction Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933) was a many-faceted personality. First and foremost, he was the leading national hero of the Sinhala people and the leading revivalist of Buddhism in the colonial Sri Lanka, then known as Ceylon. While these local concerns were very important in his life, Dharmapala’s interests spread beyond the confines of this small island. His long and arduous strivings to reintroduce Buddhism to India, the birthplace of Buddhism, and to preserve its Buddhist heritage, and in particular, to regain the ownership of Buddhagaya from its Hindu custodians were major preoccupations of Dharmapala’s life till its very end. In addition to these local and near local Indian interests, Dharmapala imagined Buddhism as a global religion spreading far and wide surpassing all other religions. This aspect of his work, began with the historic Parliament of World Religions in 1893 in Chicago, lasted untill the end of his life and culminated in establishing the London Buddhist Vihara. Dharmapala’s life, thought and work, in the three areas just outlined has been discussed very widely. It is not my intention to do a comprehensive literature survey and review of what has been written on him by various academics and activists, in both appreciative and critical manners, nor is it my intention to present a chronological biography of Dharmapala, one of the most colourful and multi­faceted personalities of the recent history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, India and the United * An initial version of this paper was published as “Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of a Global Buddhism” in Anagarika Dharmapala and India-Sri Lanka Relations: 150th Birth Anniversary Commemorative Volume, ed. Sandagomi Coperahewa, Centre for Contemporary Indian Studies (CCIS), University of Colombo, 2015.

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

261

Kingdom.1 My effort in this paper is to highlight the wide perspective of Buddhism that Dharmapala had developed as the fundamental assumption of his thought and activism. In order to highlight this aspect, major events in Dharmapala’s life will be discussed. The discussion will be concluded with some observations on the future of Buddhism, including Theravada, in the West, which was very close to Dharmapala’s heart. In this discussion, I use the term ‘global Buddhism’ not to refer to any kind of new school of Buddhism, but to convey Dharmapala’s vision of Buddhism as a globally applicable philosophy and a way of life which in Dharmapala’s perception was non-sectarian, non-regional and universal. In addition to this global perspective of Buddhism, Dharmapala’s vision of life itself transcended limited boundaries of nationality and religion to absorb a universalist outlook. One might think that this claim flies in the face of Dharmapala’s Sinhala nationalist sentiments and his resultant disparaging of what is alien to what he perceived as ‘pure Aryan’ characteristics of the ancient Sinhala Buddhist society, expressed, at times, in harsh and incisive terminology. In fact, Dharmapala may more accurately be described not as one who was motivated by narrow nationalist sentiments and spread hatred among different social groups, but as one who took pains to uplift the culture of Sinhala people to create a modern state based on their great ancient traditions. Although I am not going to argue my case at this point, I would, nevertheless, maintain that Dharmapala’s national activities themselves were motivated by his global perspective fortified by a great sense of modernity.2

Beginnings of Dharmapala’s global vision Urbanity and modernity inter­mingled with traditionality were a part of Dharmapala’s life from his very infancy. His parents, Don Carolis 1  See Steven Kemper (2015) Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World for a comprehensive bibliography of works on Anagarika Dharmapala and a detailed and systematic account of his life in chronological order. 2  In his well-researched new book on Dharmapala (2015), Steven Kemper argues that Dharmapala’s vision was a form universalism which was motivated by competing universalism of his day. Explaining Dharmapala’s Sinhala Buddhist nationalism, Kemper says: “For reasons that are more historical than philosophical, nationalism complicated Dharmapala’s universalizing project. As Lanka’s leading nationalist campaigned to create a united Buddhist world, he needed to gain the cooperation of people themselves energized and reshaped by nationalist feelings. His challenges included not only nationalism but also the proliferation of other universalism. To make a united Buddhist world Dharmapala had to engage with the British imperium, theosophy, Christianity, and Western civilization” (9).

262

Asanga Tilakaratne

Hewavitharne and Mallika Dharma Gunawardhana belonged to rich, urban business families in Colombo. Don Karolis’ father Dingiri Appuhami was a furniture businessman whose business his son inherited. Mallika’s father was the one who donated the land where Vidyodaya Pirivena, one of the two leading monastic education centres in the 19th century Sri Lanka, was established by a leading lay Buddhist group under the guidance of Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera, who was the foremost Sangha authority during this period. Dharmapala was given a Portuguese - English name, Don David, following the custom in his day. In his formative years, he had the good fortune to associate with such great monastic figures as Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala and Mohottivatte Gunananda, who acquired international fame after the Panadura Debate (1873). The atmosphere at home with his mother who was quite religious, and with visits of erudite monks, was very Buddhist. The education Don David received, nonetheless, was very Christian. He started with St. Mary’s school, Pettah, and subsequently went to a private Sinhala school at Kotahena which had to be closed due to the Christian education policy of the colonial government. Next, Don David was sent to St. Benedict school from where he was sent to the boarding school in Kotte and finally to St. Thomas’ College. The life in all these schools was dominated by Bible studies and Western ways of life. Consequently by the time Don David concluded his studies he remembered a good part of Bible, developed a liking to the New Testament (as he claimed later), was familiar with Christian religious rites and rituals and also with Western table manners. Apart from the poor quality of food, an experience he had at Kotte Christian School was particularly devastating. When one of his teachers who himself was a clergy shot down a bird with his gun, young Don David, who had a Buddhist religious background could not believe his eyes. This proved a sharp contrast between Christianity and his own religion. Although this early childhood and adolescent exposure to Christianity was against his mild sensitivities and was not always pleasant, it nevertheless, gave him the confidence to speak to and work with, later in his life, predominantly Christian groups in the West. The arrival of Colonel Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907) and Madame Helena Petrovina Blavatsky (1831- 1891) in Ceylon in 1880 provided young Dharmapala (then only 16 years old) with a rare opportunity of an encounter with the West and the world at large. It is as a result of reading a report of the great Panadura Debate compiled3 by M Peebles 3  This was compiled on the basis of the text, A Full Account of the Buddhist

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

263

and distributed in New York that Olcott and Blavatsky came to Ceylon with the intention of working with the Buddhists in the country. From the very first meeting with the two visitors Dharmapala developed an admiration toward them, and gradually became, with his father and grandfather, a supporter of the educational, social and religious activities initiated by Olcott. In the course of time, Dharmapala became a close associate of the two eminent people, helped in the activities of Colombo Theosophical Society started by them, and also became the translator of Olcott’s speeches in and outside Colombo. When Dharmapala travelled with Olcott as his interpreter to various parts of the island, he not only acquired knowledge of how a Westerner thought and worked, but also he gained invaluable knowledge of the condition of the poor people in his own country, knowledge which was very helpful for him in his own reform activities later. By 1883, he had changed his name to Dharmapala, which even later was added with ‘anagārika’ (home-less). There are two important events that seem to have been instrumental in broadening Dharmapala’s vision regarding his own life and its purpose and his perception of the teaching of the Buddha. In 1884, Dharmapala accompanied Olcott and Blavatsky to Adhyar, the headquarters of Theosophical Society in Chennai, South India. The idea was to study theosophy more deeply. Although this journey was done with mixed feelings on the part of his parents and the Buddhist monks he associated with, something unexpected happened in Adhyar: Madame Blavatsky called him one day to her and dissuaded him from pursuing theosophy and asked him to study, in its stead, Pali ‘wherein all the knowledge necessary for him was available’ and work for the welfare of the humanity. Dharmapala came back to his country determined to spend the rest of his life for the welfare of others. He left home, assumed the role of ‘anagārika’, took residence at Colombo Theosophical office and thus was born his life as Anagarika Dharmapala. Although Dharmapala later developed differences with Olcott he continued to associate with him. Olcott was of the belief that numerous schools of Buddhism had a common core and was working on it. Finally, in 1891 Olcott developed a document with 14 points which he believed to be common to all Buddhist schools, and obtained the approval of representative scholars and leaders of all schools. From Ceylon, it was approved by Hikkaduwe Controversy Held at Panadura, written by John Capper and published by Ceylon Times office, Colombo, 1873 (Sugataratana et al. 2003).

264

Asanga Tilakaratne

Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera. Dharmapala actively supported Olcott to secure this approval from Sri Sumangala Thera. In 1891, taking along with him the latter’s approval, Dharmapala went to Adyar (India) to take part in the international Buddhist conference organized by Olcott. Olcott’s this effort of uniting all Buddhist schools, with which Dharmapala himself agreed, must have given him an occasion to view Buddhism from a broader universal perspective, going beyond many familiar national boundaries. It is after the conference in Adyar that Dharmapala went on a pilgrimage to the Buddhist shrines in India, a pilgrimage which gave a cause for Dharmapala to dedicate the rest of his life and reason to live in India although he frequently traveled in his home country and in the world and intermittently resided in Sri Lanka. Dharmapala was shocked to see the utter neglect that the Buddhist holy places were subjected to. His shock was boundless when he saw that Buddhagaya, the most sacred of all Buddhist holy places, which had virtually been converted to a Shiva temple with a Shiva linga in the middle of the compound. On his arrival back in the country, Dharmapala convened a meeting of all Buddhist leaders, lay and monastic, and explained the unfortunate situation of Indian Buddhism and the need for an organized effort to address this issue. The Mahabodhi Society, which was originally called Buddhagaya Mahabodi Society was born accordingly. Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera was appointed the president of the new society, Olcott as the director and chief organizer and Dharmapala as the General Secretary. The motives behind the establishment of the society are expressed in the following words: At this hallowed spot, full of imperishable association it is proposed to re-establish a monastery for the residence of bhikkhus representing the Buddhist countries of Tibet, Ceylon, China, Japan, Cambodia, Burma, Chittagong, Nepal, Korea and Arkan. We hope to found, also a college at Buddha-Gaya for training young men of unblemished character; of whatever race and country for the Buddhist Order (Sangha), on the lines of the ancient Buddhist University at Nalanda, where were taught the Mahayana and also works belonging to the eighteen sects. The study of Sanskrit, Pali, and English will be made compulsory to all students. One or more Buddhist scholars from each of the Buddhist countries will in time be attached to the staff of teachers. (Guruge 2006, 54)

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

265

In conformity with this vision, Mahabodhi Society was to include in its board representatives from all three schools of Buddhism. The constitution of the society makes this point very clear: “The society represents Buddhism in general shall preserve absolute neutrality with respect to doctrines and dogmas taught by sections and sects among Buddhists” (as quoted by Kemper (2015) from Journal of Mahabodhi Society 1. No.1 1892: 1-2.). It is important to note that Dharmapala had the vision to appoint a board comprising a majority from other Theravada Buddhist countries and other Buddhist traditions. Those selected as representatives comprised, among others, His Royal Highness Chandradar Chaudatdhar, Prince of Siam, Rt. Shaku Unisiyo Thera, Shincho-ko-kuji Mejiro, Tokyo, Jokyoji Tera Machi, Sojo Sagaru, Kyoto, S Horiuchi, Tokyo, Maung Hpo Mhyin, KSM, Burma, Krishna Chandra Chaudhury, Chittagong, and Maung Hla Pru, Arakan (Sumedha 2006, 17-18). Dharmapala’s awareness of the fact that Buddhagaya was the common heritage of all Buddhists must have made him constitute the organization meant to restore the Indian Buddhism in this manner. It does not seem that Dharmapala received as much support as he expected from other Theravada countries or Mahayana countries such as China and Japan, but for his own part Dharmapala was broad- minded enough to project his activities in a global setting.

World’s Parliament of Religions and Anagarika Dharmapala’s global Buddhist mission Dharmapala represented Theravada Buddhism in the historic assembly in Chicago in 1893. Although Dharmapala was from Ceylon and belonged to Theravada tradition, he perceived himself as representing Buddhism as a world­wide phenomenon, notwithstanding the presence of a Japanese Buddhist delegation. In his opening address Dharmapala said the following: I bring to you the good wishes of four hundred and seventy-fivemillion of Buddhists, the blessings and the peace of the religious founder of that system which has prevailed so many centuries in Asia, which had made Asia mild, and which is today, in its twenty-fourth century of existence, the prevailing religion of those countries. I have sacrificed the greatest of all work to attend this Parliament; I have left the work of consolidating the different Buddhist countries, which is the most important work in the history of modern Buddhism. (Guruge 1965, 655)

266

Asanga Tilakaratne

Two very important observations Dharmapala makes in his statement are that he represents the entire community of the followers of all schools of Buddhism in the world, indicating that he does not represent merely the tiny Ceylon or its Theravada tradition, and that he was in the process of consolidating the Buddhists all over the world, which for him was the most important of all his work. This statement reveals that Dharmapala had the vision of a globalized Buddhism already in him and that he was consciously working to achieve that goal. In this trip, Dharmapala made a lasting impression of himself and of Buddhism in the minds of the people who were keen on learning and practicing the teachings of the Buddha. He made several public speeches on Buddhism at various places. His speech delivered at a well-attended session of the Parliament of Religions on 18th September 1893 on “The World’s Debt to Buddha” was enthusiastically received by his audience, as contemporary reports testify (Guruge 1965, 3). After the Chicago conference, Dharmapala returned to Ceylon via Pacific ocean,4 and on his way, the ship stopped at Honolulu, Hawai’i, where, among those who had come aboard to welcome him was Mary Elizabeth Foster, a noble woman of Hawaiian royal ancestry, who virtually became ‘the foster mother’ for Dharmapala. Beginning from this encounter, till her death in 1930 this generous lady donated so much money to Dharmapala for his religious and educational projects in India, Sri Lanka and in England. The lady was so magnanimous that she thanked Dharmapala for giving her opportunity to support his good work, and often asked him to use the money she donated to him also for his own comfort which Dharmapala does not seem to have listened to.5 On his part, Dharmapala was ever grateful to this modern day Visākhā for her exceptional generosity. It is partly due to her generosity that Dharmapala was able to purchase a piece of land and a building for London Buddhist Vihara, and for several years she supported the maintenance of the Vihara with her monthly contributions. 4 Dharmapala made several trips to the USA within next several years, not only to lecture on the Dhamma, but also to study American education system and its industries from which he received inspiration for his own work for social development, which he initiated both in India and Sri Lanka. 5  Although there is no evidence to show that Dharmapala used the funds he received for his own comfort his critics were quick to point out his failure to make available to the public the accounts of Mahabodhi Society and the Buddhagaya court case (A letter to the editor of Daily News by ‘a sincere Buddhist’ 9th December 1926).

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

267

Dhamma to the UK Dharmapala visited London for the first time on his way to Chicago via Atlantic. In London, he was received by Sir Edwin Arnold (1832-1904), who wrote the celebrated Light of Asia, and Annie Besant (1847- 1933) of Theosophical Society, London, and spent several days meeting people, visiting interesting places and getting acquainted with the intellectual environment of the great city. In 1904, Dharmapala visited England again, this time to study industrial schools in London and Liverpool. During the next two decades, Dharmapala was occupied with work in Ceylon and India, and after 1915 riots, for next seven years, his movements were restricted and he was confined to India. He nevertheless kept in touch with Buddhist activities in England. He was aware of Ananda Metteyya Thera’s (Allen McGregor Bennett 1872-1923) work, and in 1909 April­ May issue of Mahabodhi Journal, Dharmapala published an appeal in support of London Buddhist Society’s work to establish a monastery in London. He concluded this appeal with the following words: I consider it a privilege that the Sinhalese Buddhists have been given the opportunity to help this great movement. Let each one of us make whatever sacrifice he can and contribute his mite for the London Buddhist Monastery Building Fund (Guruge 2006, 56). This project, however, did not succeed, and by 1925 the society had ceased to be functional. Dharmapala believed that giving the Dhamma to the West was one of the most important things that Buddhist countries could do. In an article titled, “Our Duty to the Peoples of the West” published in 1927 September issue of the Mahabodhi journal, Dharmapala articulates his views on propagating the Dhamma to the West: The time is come to give the sublime Dhamma to the people of the West. Christianity is confronted with modern Science and Science is against all dogmatic theology. Science is modern, while dogmas of Christianity belong to an antiquated age. China is waking up and also India. The missionaries are now meeting with opposition in China. Some oriental scholars are now in league with the missionaries. Both are paid for their services, and they know that if Buddhism enters the field the missionaries will have to recede. In England there is an increasing number of Freethinkers and Rationalists and their activities have to be taken into account. (Guruge 1965, 658) Then Dharmapala goes on to describe Buddhism as ‘pure science’ and contrasting it with Christian beliefs on creator God, and dismisses

268

Asanga Tilakaratne

eternal hell and heaven as superstitions. Although we may not describe the teachings of the Buddha as ‘pure science’ today, that went along well with how Buddhism was then introduced to the West by its Western admirers themselves. Dharmapala’s characterization of Buddhism as advocating oneness of all human beings and his emphasis on the need for an ethics “embracing all humanity, and the world of animals as well as gods” remains and continues to be valid. It is Dharmapala’s understanding of the teaching of the Buddha as universally applicable that provided impetus for him to strive to give that teaching to the West. The universalist perspective in the teaching of the Buddha, which Dharmapala noticed, is not his own creation in response to the historical circumstances of his time but part and parcel of the Buddha’s understanding of reality. This characteristic is clear from the very beginning of Prince Siddhartha’s quest for deathlessness. A discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya articulates in the following words the understanding that prompted the future Buddha to embark on his great renunciation: This world has fallen into trouble, in that it is born, ages, and dies, it passes away and is reborn, yet it does not understand the escape from this suffering (headed) aging-and-death. When now will an escape be discerned from this suffering (headed) aging-and-death? (Bodhi 2000, 537) The use of the term ‘loka’ in this context is noteworthy for it refers to the world, meaning all those who have not escaped suffering. The problem of suffering (dukkha), the main focus of the teaching of the Buddha is universal and all those including gods, maras, brahmas, ascetics, Brahmins and human beings (sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇbrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadeva manussāya...) are subject to this predicament. Furthermore, it is not limited by any constrains of time or space, it is found anywhere and anytime in the world. In the practice, Buddhism has demonstrated this universality by adopting a position that all (human) beings have the potentiality to realize freedom from suffering irrespective of their caste or ‘colour’ into which they are born. The Brahmins, who maintained categorically that only certain groups of people can attain purity, found fault with the Buddha for his position that all four ‘colours’ (social groups)6 can attain purity. The organization 6  The standard accusation leveled to the Buddha was the following: the ascetic Gotama proclaims purity for all the four colours (samano gotamo catuvaṇṇiṃ suddhiṃ paññāpeti: (M II, 147-157).

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

269

of the Sangha which the Buddha initiated was open to men and women of all social categories. Dharmapala’s ambition was to give the sublime teaching of the Buddha to the entire West, including the USA, England and Europe. He started with England, and outlined the following series of actions to be implemented for this purpose: i. To hold a conference composed of the Chief Maha Theras of the three nikayās to adopt methods to propagate the Buddha Dhamma in European countries and to establish the Buddha sāsana in England and in America. ii. To send a sandēśa (Dispatch) signed by the Chief Nayakas of the island to the Kings of Siam and Cambodia and to the High Priests of Japan, Korea and China, to the President of the Republic of China and to the Tashi Lama now in Peking to cooperate with the Ceylon Buddhists to establish a Buddhist Monastery and a Vihara in or near about London. iii. To invite the principal leading lay Buddhists to attend the above conference and to adopt measures to collect subscriptions from Buddhists throughout the island to build the Vihara in London and for the establishment of a Training School in London to train a number of young English men and women as preachers to go all over England proclaiming the Doctrine of the Lord Buddha. (Guruge 1965, 671) Although Dharmapala could not do everything that he anticipated, he did manage to buy a property in London for the Buddhist Vihara with the savings from money he received from his family and Foster for his own expenses. The London Buddhist Vihara was thus born making his dream to establish the sāsana in the West, a reality. In the new monastery, three monks observed, for the first time, the rainy retreat in 1928 indicating that the traditional Sangha was functioning in the UK. The story of this historic vihara has been told and retold by better qualified authors by now, and hence, I am not going to tread the already well - trodden paths. Let me just quote Guruge by way of summary of the history of the vihara: As the first ever Buddhist monastery to be established outside the continent of Asia, it has become a leading centre of Theravada Buddhism. From Knightsbridge, it was moved to Heathfield Gardens in Chiswick in 1964 and is now located in The Avenue,

270

Asanga Tilakaratne

Chiswick, London W 4. The chief bhikkhus from Sri Lanka, who had served the growing community of Buddhists other than during the WWII years in the 1940s,7 are the famous scholar-monks: Dr. Paravahera Vajirajnana Nayaka Thera (19281932), Narada Mahathera of Vajiraramaya, Mirisse Gunasiri Thera (1954-1957), Dr. Hammalawa Saddhatissa Nayaka Thera (1957-1985) and Dr. Medagama Vajiragnana Nayaka Thera (1986- 2005). Bogoda Seelawimala Thera is currently the chief monk. Among the lay patrons who had supported the Vihara in various capacities, mention has to be made of Mary Elizabeth Foster, Sir Edwin Arnold, Dr. CA Hewavitarne, Daya Hewavitarne, WE Bastian, Christmas Humphreys (1901-1983), Dr. Gunapala Malalasekera (1899-1973), Sir Cyril de Soyza, Gamini Jayasuriya and Russell Webb. (Guruge 2006, 75)

Anagarika Dharmapala’s vision for the future of Buddhism It is a mere truism to assert that the world Dharmapala was born into one hundred fifty years ago has changed dramatically in all imaginable respects. In 1926, Dharmapala took great pains to establish a Buddhist monastery in the UK and was successful in his effort. Today there is not only that particular vihara, but there is a dozen of Sri Lankan Theravada monasteries in the UK alone, not to mention many other Theravada Buddhist monasteries and still many other monasteries and centres belonging to other schools of Buddhism, all over the Western world. According to an author who has done extensive studies on the current Buddhist atmosphere in the UK: A detailed analysis of groups, centres and organizations listed in The Buddhist Directory (1997, 2000) and/ or Religions in the UK (1997, 2001) shows that by the end of the twentieth century there were over thirty different traditions or sub-traditions of Buddhism in Britain, with almost 1,000 Buddhist groups and centres in all. These were made up of 454 East Asian (a convenient term for traditions originating in China or Japan, including 300 Soka Gakkai and Zen groups), 284 Tibetan (including 183 New Kadampa groups), 124 Theravada and 58 unaffiliated groups. (Bluck 2012, 400) 7  From 1940 to 1954 the vihara was closed, and was reopened with Narada Maha Thera as the head and Bope Vinita Thera as his assistant.

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

271

As was revealed in an anthology published in Sri Lanka on the occasion of the 2600 Sambuddhatva Jayanti (Abenayaka and Tilakaratne 2012), the Buddhist religious picture in the rest of the Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand does not appear to be different: Swans have come to the lake, and they have come abundantly, and Dharmapala can surely be happy that the kind of globalized Buddhism he imagined has come true. But is this the end of the story? Can we say that all lived happily ever after? The answer does not seem to be all that simple. The increased number of Buddhist monasteries and physical proximity have given way to new challenges and problems. In one of my earlier writings (Tilakaratne 2012, 571-572), discussing the effects of globalization on Buddhism I proposed the term ‘trans-yanic Buddhism’ or ‘miśra-yāna’ to describe a form of an emerging Buddhism which runs across all three major traditions. The reduction of time and space and innovations in information technologies have caused Buddhist schools, which were physically segregated untill only several decades, to come physically close to one another and share not only their physical spaces but also conceptual spaces. Today, Buddhist monks from many different schools and sub-schools get together in world forums and discuss matters common to all Buddhist schools or matters common to all across religions. Buddhist teachers including HH Dalai Lama, going beyond their own doctrinal confines, quote freely from various Buddhist textual traditions. In the Buddhist practice too, it has become increasingly common to absorb even from non­Buddhist traditions such as Yoga. Mindfulness meditation, which finds full expression in the Pali Canon of the Theravada school, has become almost the standard practice among all Buddhists, as well as many non-Buddhists. This, I think, is an improvement and it is to be lauded. Dharmapala’s own thinking of unity of all Buddhists resulted in the birth of World Fellowship of Buddhists (WFB) under the leadership of Gunapala Malalasekera, a Sri Lankan Buddhist scholar, activist and diplomat, who came under direct influence of Dharmapala. The developments of this nature, however, do not seem to be exercising a major influence on what is actually being practiced in the traditional South, Southeast and East Asian Buddhist monasteries and communities found in the West. The kind of Buddhism practiced by immigrant Buddhist communities has been variously termed as ‘baggage Buddhism’ ‘diaspora Buddhism’ or ‘cultural Buddhism’. The phenomenon has been widely discussed by the authors who have discussed Buddhism in the West. The monasteries originating from the

272

Asanga Tilakaratne

traditional Buddhist habitats usually look after their own local groups by practicing a form of Buddhism as close as to what they would have found in their home countries. There is no doubt that this exercise is valuable, and by taking care of the religious and cultural needs of those who are far away from their original religious and cultural settings, the monasteries representing traditional Buddhist schools fulfill a much needed cultural and psychological role. This, however, is not without its own problems. As has been pointed out by many who have studied Buddhism in the West (Mahinda 2008), this practice gets constrained with the widened generation gap among these Buddhists. While the replication of the traditional local Buddhism becomes attractive to the first or even to the second generation, the third generation onwards, who have most probably absorbed into the host culture, may not find this form of Buddhism as attractive, meaningful or relevant as their parents and grand-parents would have found. There is no easy solution to this problem, for to be attractive to two cultures simultaneously does not seem an easy task. One cannot hope for a solution with the passing of time, for the process of emigration to the West from the rest of the world will not likely to end in the near future. Although Dharmapala brought monks from Sri Lanka to reside in the West, from his writings one can gather that his ultimate aim was to have a local British Sangha to evolve. To take an example from history, when arahant Mahinda brought the sāsana to Lanka, he handed over the tradition to the local hands within his life time itself. This, however, cannot be done by the traditional Buddhist monks in the West, for they have their local flocks to look after. History up to this point has shown that evolving a Western Buddhism from Asian Buddhist traditions is not something that can be realized within only a several generations, although it is still too premature to predict anything definitively.

Concluding remarks We noted that Anagarika Dharmapala was a many-sided person with an indefatigable urge to work. As I mentioned at the outset of this discussion, he had three arenas for his activism, Ceylon, India and the traditional Buddhist world, and the UK and the West. While striving to establish Buddhism in the West, Dharmapala was having an eye on his work of building the vihara at Mulagandhakuti at Saranath, which was completed before he passed away in 1933. His local work was thought

Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision...

273

out in global terms. That is the reason why his activities in the colonial Ceylon, India and the West were inter-linked. Buddhism in the UK was only the beginning point for him, and he conceptualized a Buddhist future for the entire Europe. Dharmapala’s concept of Buddhist Europe was not a result of converting people by following methods similar to those practiced by Christian missionaries in colonial Ceylon. Instead, he believed in reason and scientific knowledge as means for Westerners to accept Buddhism. Reflecting today after more than a century of his first visit to Buddhagaya, Anagarika Dharmapala’s dream of taking Buddhagaya into Buddhists’ hands and Buddhism’s becoming a global religion does not appear to have been in vain. Although he could not win his Buddhagaya struggle during his life time, today the birth place of the enlightenment of the Buddha has become the centre of the piety of Buddhists belonging to all schools and visited by hundred thousands of them annually. This is notwithstanding the fact that still the administration of Buddhagaya is executed by a board comprising Buddhists and Hindus in equal numbers. Although the world is not converted to Buddhism (and it was not Dharmapala’s dream anyway), it has come to share the Buddhist vision of life increasingly in recent times and has adopted meditation as a means to improve the daily life,8 the facts that testify to the validity of Dharmapala’s dream of global Buddhism.

8 Eric Braun (2013, 230 note# 92) refers to work that discuss how mindfulness meditation can be used in improving eating habits, and sexual relation and raising children.

16. Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World* Book Review Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhit World by Steven Kemper; University of Chicago Press, 2014.

Discussing the influence of Nagarjuna on the subsequent Indian Buddhism, TRV Murti remarked that “philosophy never returns to its former placid state after the shock of a great philosopher”(murti 1955, 104) Kemper’s latest book on Anagarika Dharmapala (AD) reminds me of this statement by Murti because it challenges, quite forcefully, all the major stakeholders of Dharmapala scholarship up to now. Kemper is so comprehensive and critical in the treatment of his subject matter that anyone writing on Dharmapala in future will not be able to by-pass him. How substantial and valid is Kemper’s challenge has to be judged by the more knowledgeable in the field, and I leave Kemper’s criticisms of the views of the eminent scholars to those scholars themselves who are well capable of defending themselves. Mine is only by way of introducing this important, by no means uncontroversial, work in Dharmapala scholarship. The very title highlights the main thrust of the book: Dharmapala, who has been made a hero of the Sinhala nation has to be rescued from the nation, and needs to be placed above the bounds of this particular nation - in fact, Dharmapala has to be placed above all nations for he is a universalist: this is what Kemper tries to establish from his work. In his well-researched and substantial work (running into nearly 500 pages), Kemper locates Dharmapala, or Dharmapala’s Buddhist universalism, in the context of emerging universalisms of India, Japan, Britain and the United States.

* An initial version of this paper was published as “Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World”, review of Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World (by Steven Kemper) in Anagarika Dharmapala and India-Sri Lanka Relations: 150th Birth Anniversary Commemorative Volume, ed. Sandagomi Coperahewa, Centre for Contemporary Indian Studies (CCIS), University of Colombo, 2015.

Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala…

275

Kemper starts his work with a discussion of universalism for which Dharmapala is portrayed as providing an example. In this long introductory chapter titled “World Renunciation in a Nineteenth Century World” Kemper sketches out his argument running through the book. Subsequently, he treats his subject matter in six respective chapters titled ‘Dharmapala as a Theosophist”, “Buddhists in Japan”, “Universalists Abroad”, “Dharmapala, the British and the Bengalis”, “Dharmapala and the British Empire” and “World Wanderer Returns Home”. The Afterword brings the discussion into a conclusion returning to Dharmapala’s universalism. The book has two appendices. The second, a chronology of the life of Dharmapala, is a useful guide to those who are interested in Dharmapala’s life from his birth to death. Since the book does not discuss Dharmapala in a chronological order, this appendix provides basic information on Dharmapala in a systematic manner. The first appendix, “The Diaries and Notebooks Explained” can be considered the highlight of the whole work for the light it throws on those very important and indispensable source materials for Dharmapala study. In fact, the main reason behind the forcefulness of Kemper’s work has to be attributed to his extensive and careful use of these diaries and notebooks. As I will show later, however, the use of these documents is not without problems. One of Kemper’s criticisms of his predecessors is that they have not gone beyond Ananda Guruge’s collection of Dharmapala’s speeches, essays and letters (Guruge 1965). Although a substantial collection running into 850 pages, Guruge’s is still a collection of carefully selected items to portray Dharmapala as a national hero. Kemper has noted that its publisher has been the government of Sri Lanka itself. Guruge has selected what he needed for his specific purpose, but the real problem, according to Kemper, lies with those who relied on Guruge for their theories and interpretations. Where Guruge’s book had its effect was not so much on the Buddhist public as on scholars who have relied on the book’s treatment of Dharmapala. It is not surprising that he comes across a patriot in a government publication. What is surprising is that scholars have approached Dharmapala only in terms of Guruge. We can do better by looking at the evidence (37). Discussing this further, Kemper says, “not looking for evidence beyond Guruge has led to inferences that have no warrant”, and refers

276

Asanga Tilakaratne

to Gombrich who said Gom brich 1988, 188) that Dharmapala left Colombo in 1892 because his political activities had attracted official attention (footnote # 80, 37), but according to Kemper, Dharmapala’s troubles with the British government started two decades after. Kemper’s critical gaze does not spare any major Dharmapala scholar including Gananatha Obeyesekera, Richard Gombrich already mentioned, KM de Silva, Kitsiri Malalgoda, HL Seneviratne and Tessa Bartholomeusz. The idea of ‘Protestant Buddhism’ initially coined by Obeyesekera and subsequently used by such scholars as Gombrich and Malalgoda receives substantial critical comments from Kemper. Although Kemper does not dismiss the concept altogether, he finds fault with Obeyesekera for “seeing him [Dharmapala] as the source of a Protestant Buddhism, which then becomes a precondition for an evolving national subjectivity” (40). Kemper questions the role attributed to Dharmapala as the one who gave lead to Protestant Buddhism and the resultant changes including laicization of Buddhist life (44) and shows how Dharmapala emphasized the need for renunciation for a proper social activism, and concludes that he was “an ascetic who pursued social reform, not a social reformer who practiced asceticism” (44). It is not my effort here to summarize Kemper’s discussion of all the scholars mentioned and not mentioned here. Kemper produces substantial evidence against the received views about Dharmapala and tries to see all major happenings in his life in the light of universalism attributed to him. Dharmapala’s first visit to Buddhagaya and his determination to not to leave the place until he rescued it from Hindu Mahants, according to Kemper, is not merely a result of his love for the Buddhagaya but a result of his effort to emulate the life of the Buddha who made a similar vow that he will not leave his seat of enlightenment without being successful. Dharmapala, in Kemper’s reading and reconstruction, is a renouncer who opted to become homeless (anagārika) and adopted a form of universalism based on the teachings of the Buddha. However, “for reasons that are more historical than philosophical, nationalism complicated Dharmapala’s universalizing project” (9). Adding to the complexity of Dharmapala’s life, Kemper reveals, based on evidence from the diaries, that he remained loyal to theosophy to the moment of his death, which is not conducive to the constructed image of Dharmapala as a Buddhist hero pure and simple. Dharmapala had several simultaneous facets in his life. In addition to his local role as a reformer, Dharmapala had much of his life spent in India,

Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala…

277

while going around the world several times and developing extensive involvements with the UK and the USA and many other countries. His roles and activities and relations with people took different shapes in different places. Kemper disagrees with Obeyesekera’s Freudian interpretation of Dharmapala’s life, in particular, his alleged love for his mother and the distancing himself from his father. Kemper adduces evidence to prove that this is not the case (Kemper, 49). Nevertheless, it does not seem that Kemper has been able to explain all the possible reasons behind some important events of Dharmapala’s life such as Dharmapala’s choice of anagārika life, his father’s wish/request that he should try to become a Buddha (Kemper, 49) and his sudden change of mind to leave behind Madame Blavatsky and the Theosophical organization to start his Buddhist work, to mention a few. A student of Dharmapala is lucky to have so much information about him including his diaries and notebooks. However, it is a question as to what extent one can rely on Dharmapala’s (or anyone else’s for that matter) personal diaries as providing reliable information. In Dharmapala’s case, we have what he did, what he said he did and what others said he did. It is possible that one’s own autobiographical accounts are not exactly true records of one’s own life. Kemper seems to rely on what Dharmapala said he did for he takes Dharmapala’s diaries and notebooks as providing ‘evidence’ on his life and events. The mentality behind diary writing is such that even the most secretively kept diaries are ultimately meant by the author herself to be read by others. In his case, Dharmapala clearly meant his diaries to be read by others. It is quite imaginable that he was providing explanations and justifications of his behaviour for those unknown readers. If this is the case, the key source of Kemper’s information is not without problems, but this is not to cast doubts on Dharmapala’s honesty and integrity indiscriminately. As Kemper has shown, Dharmapala has recorded his own inner sexual feelings and conflicts and his close associations with a number of women and even troubles with some of them, information potentially damaging his adopted mode of life as an anagārika. This, I must admit, supports Kemper’s trusting attitude to Dharmapala’s diaries and notebooks. Dharmapala had several simultaneous facets in his life. In addition to his local role as a reformer, Dharmapala had much of his life spent in India while going around the world several times and developing extensive involvements with the UK and the USA and many other countries. His

278

Asanga Tilakaratne

roles and activities and relations with people took different shapes in different places. His ‘Buddhism’ took different shapes in these places. In Sri Lanka, people have made him a Buddhist and national hero for which there is ample evidence from his life. They seem to have ignored or even not been aware of universalizing tendencies and such matters operative in Dharmapala which were perceived as simply irrelevant to their image of Dharmapala. This image has served and continues to serve a useful purpose for his admirers. But according to scholars such as HL Seneviratne (The Work of Kings), this image of Dharmapala has influenced a segment of Sri Lankan Sangha in an adverse manner. It does not seem an easy task to make one homogenous Dharmapala. Dharmapala has been studied by many scholars. His life has been interpreted and re-interpreted, appreciated and condemned. Kemper’s is the latest in this genre but surely will not be the last. Historical circumstances and life situations of Dharmapala are so complicated that it is unlikely that anyone will ever be able to say the last word on him or to explain all events in his life. Dharmapala is a good example that Aristotle’s principle of non-contradiction is not easily applicable to human behaviour. Kemper’s is a gigantic effort meant to bring order, coherence and consistency to the life of one of the most picturesque and complex personalities of the recent history of Sri Lankan Buddhism. He has introduced a new category (universalism) as a theoretical tool to bring order to the complexity. To judge whether or not Kemper has succeeded in his effort is beyond my immediate purpose.

17. Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years: Continuing the Journey*

Introduction In this essay, I will briefly highlight some salient features of the journey of Buddhism around the globe for the last twenty-six centuries, and will then discuss some emerging new trends in world Buddhism to conclude with a discussion on challenges to Buddhism and its role for the future.

Journey of Buddhism for twenty-six centuries Beginning in the ‘middle land’ of ancient India around the sixth century bce, and spreading to various continents and sub-continents, Buddhism has now evolved to be one of the five leading world religions. In fact, Buddhism started extending beyond the borders of India during the time of Emperor Asoka. According to traditional Theravada history, after the third Buddhist council, Asoka sent missionaries to nine different countries and regions, among which were Sri Lanka and South Asia, known as the ‘golden land’ (savaṇṇa-bhūmi) by that time. While Theravada started spreading in South and Southeast Asia, other early schools, and subsequently the so-called Hinayana and Mahayana schools, started spreading towards central Asia and China. In China, new forms of Mahayana gradually evolved with the philosophical/conceptual and cultural influences of Taoism and Confucianism. The rest of the East Asian region, including Korea and Japan, received Buddhism through China. When Buddhism in central Asia was destroyed by Islamic invaders, the so-called Hinayana schools, which were prevalent * An initial version of this article was published as “Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years: Continuing the Journey” in 2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening, Colombo: The Government of Sri Lanka, 2012.

280

Asanga Tilakaratne

in these regions, were destroyed, never to be revived. The fate of these schools in mainland India was no different; only the remnants of some of these schools have survived in China and Japan to date. The Vajrayana tradition, which was started in India after the fifth century ce, moved to Tibet where it developed with influence from the beliefs and practices of its host country.

The challenge of the plurality of religion To exist for twenty-six centuries is a remarkable achievement for any organization, including religion, even though religions are among the longest-lasting of all mass organizations. Nevertheless, it is common knowledge that survival for many religions has not always been a smooth affair. One religion usually has other religions as adversaries. The hostility towards or intolerance of other religions arises mainly owing to the strong sense of the monopoly of being truthful, right and good that is maintained by religions. This peculiar religious logic seems to develop in the following manner: if truth is one (and cannot be more than one, according to the Aristotelian system of bivalent logic), two religions cannot be true, and hence cannot be right or good. What is untrue, not right and not good is harmful, and hence it should not exist. This argument becomes even stronger when claims for truthfulness and goodness are held on the basis of the assumption of an all-knowing and all good creator god who by definition cannot be ignorant of what is true and incapable of holding what is not good. Of the major world religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are monotheistic, although the Christian concept of monotheism has been questioned by the other two traditions. Hinduism in its many forms is monotheist, polytheist and non-theist, whereas Buddhism is non-theist (although some later Japanese Mahayana schools such as Pureland have come close to the model of monotheistic religion). Those religions which hold a monotheist view have been belligerent with others with a similar worldview in order to claim the monopoly of the true concept of god, and they have been belligerent with those who rejected the monotheistic world view for being different from them. Even though Buddhism is one among many religions, and, on that count, shares certain characteristics and forms of behaviour with other religious traditions, its position on this issue has to be determined accurately. Since the Buddha did not claim himself to be an all-knowing and all-good god or a messenger of such a god, moral absolutism

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

281

entailing from theism does not arise in his teaching. The Buddha identified himself with the recluses and Brahmins who made religious claims based on “their own realization through higher knowledge” (the Sangārava-sutta (100) of the Middle Length Discourses (Majjhimanikāya) and Jayatilleke (1963/1980) for a detailed discussion.). Being in conformity with this claim, the Buddha also asked his listeners to accept what he said when they saw it for themselves. This is not to say that his listeners always followed this advice, but the texts are not lacking in cases illustrating how some followed this method of free inquiry to the letter (M II, 133-146). This attitude suggests that the Buddha was not absolutist about his claims, but does this mean that he was relativist about his religious claims? This requires careful examination for while the Buddha was not absolutist in its standard theistic sense, he did not hold a relativist position regarding what he claimed to have realized through his higher knowledge. It is useful at this point to make a distinction between what religions consider to be morally and ethically good and what these religions uphold as the ultimate goal. The Buddha did not have a problem with the first aspect of the other religious systems of his day, although he had some dissatisfaction about the moral theories of his contemporaries. What he considered to be outright unacceptable were the three positions, namely, the denial of causation, the negation of moral action and its result, and determinism, which ultimately amounts to rendering meaningless the concept of human responsibility. Save these three positions, the Buddha was in broad agreement with the ethical and moral teachings of the other religious traditions. The same cannot be said about the final goal taught in Buddhism. The final goal, nibbana, and the path leading to it, are considered to be valid irrespective of the limitations of time and space. The Buddha compared his discovery of nibbana to the discovery of an abandoned city, with its ancient path lost due to non-travelling (Nagara-sutta, Nidāna-samyutta). The Buddha compared himself to be a pioneer who discovered this lost city by following the abandoned path. This metaphor highlights the Buddhist belief that both the goal and the path have been there all the time: they need to be discovered by a Buddha and shown to the world. Those who follow this path pass through four stages according to which the followers are classified as stream-entrant, once-returner, non-returner and the accomplished. The Buddha categorically states that these four practitioners are found only within his system, and that the other systems are devoid of these true religious personalities (Cula-sīhanāda-sutta, M I, 63-68). It is clear

282

Asanga Tilakaratne

that the Buddha was uncompromising about these positions, and his statements to this effect are categorical. It does not seem that one can easily bypass this standpoint. In a similar manner, the Buddha described the phenomenon of dependent origination as real (tathatā), not false (avitathatā) and not otherwise (anaññathā), adjectives signifying the stable character of these doctrines. The same adjectives have been used in the discourses to characterize the four noble truths. Now, as is clear from these characterizations of the Dhamma, if the Buddha was not a relativist regarding his fundamental insights about human reality, how does Buddhism differ from the other religious traditions which hold similar categorical positions? The difference lies in my opinion not in the Buddhist concept of truth per se but on the attitude the Buddha held toward the plurality of religion and the freedom of the individual to choose. In other words, it is one thing to hold that a certain state of affairs is the case, and quite another to hold that human beings have freedom of choice even in matters of truth and falsehood, meaningfulness and meaninglessness, and usefulness and uselessness. The Buddha perceived his own role in the practice of his followers as one of a guide. In a well-known Dhammapada statement the Buddha says: You yourself must do the work; the Buddhas only give directions (tumhehi kiccaṃ ātappaṃ-akkhātāro tathāgatā: Dhp, v. 276). In addressing the Kālamas (a group of free thinkers), the Buddha said to them not to accept a statement purely on the personal authority of one who says, on the authority of the tradition or on logical grounds unless one sees by oneself the truthfulness of what is said (A III, 65). In the ‘Discourse on Inquiry’ (M I, 317-320), the Buddha encourages his followers to embark on scrutiny to make sure ‘whether or not the Buddha is fully enlightened’. When Upali, a wealthy banker and Jain follower, was ready to accept what he said, the Buddha warned him against rushing into a decision: “Investigate thoroughly, householder. It is good for such well-known people like you to investigate thoroughly” (Upāli-sutta, M I, 371-387). We also have the example of the youth Uttara who followed the Buddha for six months ‘like the inseparable shadow’, before he finally became convinced (Brahmāyu-sutta, M II, 133-146). In Upali’s case mentioned above, there is a statement made by the Buddha which one would not usually hear in religious circles: when Upali opted to follow the Buddha renouncing his present religious belief, namely, Jainism, the Buddha, having first warned him against making quick decisions, subsequently, asked him to continue with his support for the

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

283

Jain community. As is evident in this remarkable example, the Buddha did not think that Jainism was the right system to follow; nevertheless, he accepted the ‘right’ it has to exist. Furthermore, he accepted that he should not deprive this (or any other religious system) of its means of existence. This clearly shows that the Buddha did not confuse the issue of truth of a religious system with the ‘right’ it has to exist. If religious traditions could make this distinction very clear, world history would not have witnessed as many religiously-instigated conflicts and wars as it has up to this point. With this understanding since a very early stage of its history, it is a fact that Buddhism has contributed least to the phenomenon of religious wars. Commenting on the track record of religions Joseph Needham says that “Three Judaic religions have a record of intolerance, hatred, malice, uncharitableness and persecution that is black by comparison with Buddhism’s record” (Seth, 1988, 240). This does not mean that the entire history of Buddhism has been nothing but peaceful. In an interesting study, Noel Seth has collected a good number of instances when Buddhists belonging to many schools have behaved violently. An interesting feature of this phenomenon, however, is that all the reported instances, except the politically motivated battles of the kind reported in the history of East Asian Buddhism, (See victoria 1997 for an interesting discussion on this issue.) are in-fighting within the Buddhist groups themselves. There is no one single incident involving other religions. This means that Buddhists have not been particularly kind to their own internal heretics, (This does not mean that the Buddhists either killed or tortured their internal heretics.) but they do not seem to have minded the presence of other religions, which were clearly identified as representing wrong views. One could say that inside or outside, violence is violence. Nevertheless, we have to admit that there is a clear difference between violence within one’s own group and one that was perpetuated to others.1 1  Recently, the Sri Lankan Buddhist Sangha has been accused for their support for a military solution to the terrorism perpetrated in Sri Lanka by Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Although a larger majority of the Tamils of the LTTE were Hindu and the Sinhalese targeted by them were predominantly Buddhist, the conflict itself did not have religion as its cause. While the conflict was not religiously instigated, one may still say that violence is violence under any circumstance. Although not all Buddhist monks supported a military solution the majority did. The complex problem with protracted violence spanning for three decades and the factors which forced them to adopt such a stance requires a detailed discussion which will not be done here. It is a fact, however, that, due to historical circumstances, the Sinhala Sangha has always relied on the State for the protection of the sāsana. The Sangha seems to have resorted

284

Asanga Tilakaratne

In this manner, the journey of Buddhism has been characterized by its tolerance toward other religions. While the Buddha was not a relativist with regard to the concept of truth in religion, he was not an absolutist in the sense of holding that his own is only true and all else is false. At the same time the Buddha was not hesitant to claim that his teaching alone was capable to lead its followers to nibbana, but this claim did not mean all should follow Buddhism. The Buddha allowed people to choose their own religion. In other words, the Buddha asserted his position without at the same time asserting that everyone should accept it without any question. This can be considered the distinguishing feature in the journey of Buddhism throughout the last twenty-six centuries.

Emerging new trends in Buddhism Throughout its long history, the Buddhist tradition as a religious organization has undergone considerable change. These changes have taken place within individual Buddhist traditions, and usually the effects of such changes have been limited to those traditions themselves. With the increased phase of globalization, however, some of these changes are no longer limited to any particular school existing in a particular region; they have global implications. This undoubtedly is a vast subject, and has already been studied by many scholars. In the present discussion, I propose to study a few examples of such developments which I would call ‘new trends’ for they seem to represent new movements in Buddhism, going beyond the denominational and geographical boundaries to become global trends. This includes brief discussions on what I would like to call ‘sāmagriyāna’ or united vehicle which is a type of trans-yanic Buddhism, and what is widely known as socially engaged Buddhism. Under the latter, I will briefly examine what is called ‘eco-Buddhism’ or Buddhist environmentalism. I will show how these new developments point to an approach transcending the boundaries of the traditional yānas (‘vehicles’).

Sāmagriyāna or misrayana (united vehicle or hybrid vehicle) Buddhism Today, globalization (disappearance of distance and time due to rapid improvements in transport and communication) has enhanced physical proximity and communication among different schools of Buddhist monks in an unprecedented manner. Sharing of physical space and to the same strategy at this context too. The Dhamma would have required the Sangha to follow a different strategy, but the ground realities may have prompted the Sangha to be more pragmatic and realistic than idealistic.

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

285

experiencing different modes of life and practice have enhanced mutual understanding among the members of the Sangha. Modern education has done its part by providing opportunities for the monks belonging to many traditions to learn about one another’s traditions. In particular, there is an ever-growing tendency among the non-Theravada monks to come to Theravada countries and study what is believed to be the original teaching of the Master. In a similar manner, monks from Theravada tradition go to countries such as China, Korea and Japan and learn different schools of Mahayana Buddhism. The study of Buddhism by Buddhists has never been a dispassionate and pure academic exercise devoid of any religious significance. The end result can be mutual enrichment. It is customary today to hear a Mahayana or a Vajrayana teacher referring to Pali Canon and a Theravada teacher narrating a Zen Buddhist story or quoting from Mahayana or Vajrayana texts. Theravada vipassanā meditation is being practiced by a large number of Buddhists cutting across traditional methodologies of meditation. The very concept of ‘yāna’ or vehicle is a later development in the history of Buddhism. The Mahayanists who seem to have coined the term ‘mahāyāna’ to describe themselves have used the term ‘hīnayāna’ to refer to whom they considered to be of lower capacities and inclinations. Clearly ‘hīnayāna’ could not be a term the non-Mahayanists would have used to describe themselves. Neutral terms such as bodhisattvayāna and śrāvakayāna were representative of the actual soteriological positions behind the so-called Mahayana and Hinayana respectively. Vajrayana (tantrayāna or mantrayāna) was the latest development in the process. Theravada, which originated from the original Sangha after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha, seems to have had its existence away from this yāna struggle although technically it too could have been called Hinayana. Despite the doctrinal differences, there has been a considerable amount of interaction among these groups. The worldwide history of Buddhism bears evidence to how members of different Buddhist schools developed friendly and fruitful interactions over the centuries. This is nowhere more evident than in the illustrious Buddhist monktravellers from ancient China to South Asia, namely, Fa Hsien (334413), Hsuan Tsang (603-668) and many others who followed their lead. The Buddhist world is indebted to these Chinese monks who risked their lives for the preservation of the vast Buddhist literary heritage. In the subsequent centuries, however, this trend seems to have gradually waned. With the demise of the so-called Hinayana traditions in India, relocation of Vajrayana in the Tibetan area, and overall destruction of

286

Asanga Tilakaratne

Buddhism from its place of birth, interactions among yānas seem to have ceased after the first millennium and a half. Nevertheless, within the yānas there were frequent interactions across boundaries. For instance, the East Asian Mahayana Buddhism in China, Korea and Japan had interactions among themselves unhindered until modernity. The same is true for South Asian and the South East Asian Theravada, and Vajrayana, which have their Eastern and South Asian branches. Particularly within the Theravada, there were frequent interactions, and give and take from the time Theravada was reintroduced to South East Asia from Sri Lanka untill modernity, but the three main traditions themselves do not seem to have had interactions after the celebrated Chinese pilgrims mentioned above. This state of isolation continued until the nineteenth century when Buddhists, like many others in the world, started moving beyond their traditional habitats. Physical proximity of various groups of people, who were otherwise isolated, has become a reality today as a result of globalization. One of the key characteristics of the global existence of Buddhism today is close interaction not only among different schools of Buddhism but also among different religious traditions. This physical proximity has caused religions to review their traditional isolationist policies and come up with new ways of inter-action. Inter-religious dialogue is a concept that has been developed quite recently in the Western religion in its effort to communicate with other religious traditions. Although Buddhism has not developed any such specific concept, friendliness and cooperation toward other religions has been there from its very inception. Usually the reaction of one particular religion to other religions has been one of intolerance and hostility. The only purpose of studying another religion was to find fault with it. Different religions have varying degrees of intolerance toward other religions. As we have already observed, Buddhism, throughout its history, has been a quite tolerant religion and it has never engaged in hostilities against other religions although occasionally the Buddhists have been unfriendly to their own dissent groups (Seth 1988, 44-66). It is interesting to note that religions have always treated their internal ‘heretics’ more harshly than they would treat total outsiders. In pre-modern Sri Lankan Theravada tradition, for instance, there was much openness to Hindu philosophical traditions and literature and other Brahmanic systems such as medicine (āyurveda) and astrology (nakṣatra) whereas it was almost totally closed for Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions (This is not to deny the fact that Sri Lankan Buddhism has incorporated certain Mahayana and Vajrayana

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

287

practices and beliefs at its popular level.). It is only from the middle of the last century that Mahayana texts were allowed in the traditional monastic educational curriculum. The same in varying degrees holds true for the other religions in the world. Inter-religious dialogue, therefore, is relatively a new phenomenon. What is even more new is intra-religious dialogue which has been growing for the last several decades. This is true not only for Buddhism but also for many other leading religions. Long gone are the days when the monks belonging to the three main sects in Sri Lanka would not even sit together to take part in a dāna. Not only among the different sects within the same tradition but also among different Buddhist traditions inter-action and cooperation is quite a common phenomenon today. This trend is developing to such an extent that it is true to say that a form of world Buddhism or a kind of transyanic Buddhism is being evolved characterizing a united approach (‘united vehicle’) to global issues.

Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907): father of sāmagrīyāna (united vehicle) Buddhism? The emergence of this new form of Buddhism did not, however happen all at once. Untill the latter part of the nineteenth century, the three main traditions of Buddhism existed as disparate schools confined to their traditional habitats although each tradition had close connections with its own brethren across countries. This isolated situation started changing with certain developments that were taking place in the Buddhist countries like Sri Lanka and others around the world. One event with far-reaching affects was the arrival of Henry Steel Olcott (18321907) in Sri Lanka in 1880 with Madam Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891), who together had founded the Theosophical Society in the United States in 1875. They came to Sri Lanka inspired by reading a report of the famous Panadura debate which took place in 1876 between Buddhists and Christians. Although this was the immediate cause, the two pioneers of theosophy were already looking up to Hinduism and Buddhism as the source of ‘ancient Asian wisdom tradition’. Upon arrival in Sri Lanka, Olcott and Blavatsky embraced Buddhism and started working with the local Buddhist leaders, both monastic2 and lay, 2  The exact nature and degree of the role of the Buddhist monks not only in this particular aspect but also in what is called ‘Buddhist modernism’ remains to be determined. The commonly accepted belief is that the monks played only a supporting role in the works initiated by Olcott and Dharmapala. Nevertheless, records left by Olcott himself reveals how crucial was the role played by Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala

288

Asanga Tilakaratne

in areas such as the education of children and organization of adults. In addition to starting new schools for local Buddhist children, a major project of Olcott was to prepare a Buddhist catechism, obviously following the Christian model, to be used in schools and also to serve as a source for the correct knowledge of Buddhism for the adults whom Olcott felt to be wanting in their knowledge of their own religion. In this project he worked closely with Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera who was the foremost of all erudite monks of the nineteenth century Sri Lanka (then Ceylon), and to whom he dedicated this work, which was an immediate commercial success. The compilation went into several dozens of reprints and editions and was translated into many languages. What interests us in this context is not the catechism, which was basically based on the Theravada Buddhism, but what Olcott added at the conclusion under the title ‘fundamental Buddhist beliefs’. Olcott concluded this list with the remark that it was “drafted as a common platform upon which all Buddhists can agree”. Guided by the theosophist outlook, Olcott’s main purpose was to present Buddhism as a scientific and rational system which did not have a place for superstition. The catechism was the result of this motivation, but, one could question why Olcott wanted to develop what he believed to be the core of Buddhism acceptable to all three traditions of Buddhism. According to Elizabeth J Harris, the answer is the following: The theosophists who came to Sri Lanka saw Buddhism as that part of the East’s wisdom best suited to aid their search for the spiritual truth at the heart of all religion. Whether they read this in esoteric terms or not, they usually opted to downplay the esoteric when in Sri Lanka in their zeal to encourage a ‘pure’, rational, exoteric Buddhism, rooted in right action, loving compassion, cosmic law. Olcott came closer than other theosophists, with the exception of Frank Lee Woodward of the twentieth century, to making Buddhism his primary love, even Thera among other monks. Although catechism appears to be the idea of Olcott, it was so crucial for him to get the approval of Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera for his project. Olcott admiringly records how the erudite monk went word by word of the whole document with utmost care (Guruge 1986, cxxxix ff). The fourteen points of the core of the teaching of the Buddha too were given approval by Sumangala Thera. Given the vast Dhamma knowledge he had, it is probable that these points were a joint work by both Olcott and Sumangala Thera. But unfortunately, as our current knowledge stands, we are not in a position to draw a definitive conclusion on this matter. (See Blackburn (2001) and Harris (2006) on the monks’ role in ushering modernism prior to the arrival of Olcott.)

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

289

seeking to create a movement that would unify Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism (emphasis added). (Harris 2006, 146) Olcott’s effort at identifying a ‘core Buddhism’ may have come as a part of his larger theosophical enterprise, as Harris suggests. At the same time, it seems that Olcott with his exposure to the world was in the process of creating a ‘world Buddhism’ transcending traditional local boundaries. In the fourteen articles Olcott presents as the fundamental Buddhist beliefs, are included the basic Buddhist teachings such as the four noble truths, karma, causation, morality and nirvana. The Buddhist nontheism, and its rational and tolerant character are emphasized at the very beginning. Olcott formulated these articles, obtained the initial approval of the leading members of the Sri Lankan Sangha, and the approval of the representatives of the Mahayana Sangha, having presented these articles to them at the international Buddhist conference held at Addyar, Madras in 1891. At the end of the 1891 edition of the catechism, Olcott describes how he obtained the approval of the Vajrayana tradition for the document: The following text of the fourteen items of belief which have been accepted as fundamental principles in both the Southern and Northern sections of Buddhism, by authoritative committees to whom they were submitted by me personally, have so much historical importance that they are added to the present edition of THE BUDDHIST CATECHISM as an Appendix. It has very recently been reported to me by H.E. Prince Ouchtomsky, the learned Russian Orientalist, that having had the document translated to them, the Chief Lamas of the great Mongolian Buddhist monasteries declared to him that they accept every one of the propositions as drafted, with the one exception that the date of the Buddha is by them believed to have been some thousands of years earlier than the one given by me. This surprising fact had not hitherto come to my knowledge. Can it be that the Mongolian Saṅgha confuse the real epoch of Sākya Muni with that of his alleged next predecessor? Be this as it may, it is a most encouraging fact that the whole Buddhistic world may now be said to have united to the extent at least of these Fourteen Propositions. (Olcott 1915, 91-92) This effort by Olcott remains the first ever in the direction of forging a unified Buddhism, and, as his above words reveal, in addition to formulating the document Olcott actively campaigned for it to be accepted by the Buddhists worldwide. Olcott’s document can be

290

Asanga Tilakaratne

considered the first ever attempt at laying the philosophical foundation for a ‘unified Buddhism.’

Anagarika Dharmapala Anagarika Dharmapala, Olcott’s protege in Sri Lanka, seems to have inherited this holistic view from his mentor. In 1889, Olcott and Dharmapala went to Japan and this trip, as one writer describes, “was taken up in the spirit of a dawning unity among Theravadins, Mahayanists, and Vajrayanists” (Christoper 1996, 23). In these travels the two leaders encouraged participation of all the Buddhists in the activities they organized. For instance, when Dharmapala established the Mahabodhi Society (1891) with the aim of restoring the Buddhist sacred places in India, he had on his board representatives from Sri Lanka, Tibet, Thailand, China, Chittagong, Myanmar and the USA. For the place of the Buddha’s awakening, Buddhagaya, Dharmapala had a grand vision, including an international university of the calibre of ancient Nalanda. Dharmapala’s own words reveal his vision that included all the Buddhist traditions: At this hallowed spot, full of imperishable associations, it is proposed to re-establish a monastery for the residence of bhikkhus representing the Buddhist countries of Tibet, Ceylon, China, Japan, Cambodia, Burma, Chittagong, Nepal, Korea and Arkan. We hope to found also a college at Buddha-gaya for training young men of unblemished character, of whatsoever race or country for the Buddhist order (Sangha), on the lines of the ancient Buddhist university at Nalanda, where were taught the Mahayana and also works belonging to the eighteen sects. (quoted by Ananda WP Guruge in Mahinda 2008, 54) Although Dharmapala later fell out with Olcott and other theosophists such as Leadbeater and Annie Besant, this holistic vision persisted in him. For both Olcott and Dharmapala there was another avenue through which this broad outlook naturally came. For Olcott it is the globalizing background from which he came. Travelling from the United States to India and Sri Lanka passing through various countries and meeting with various people, Olcott had the experience needed for a holistic approach to Buddhism. Dharmapala himself came from a family with urban culture, and with his early Christian education and entrepreneurship inherited from his family, he was quick to grasp Olcott’s outlook. Olcott’s arrival in Sri Lanka, having read a report of the

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

291

Panadura Debate in an American newspaper, can be described as a result of globalization (contraction of space and time due to rapid advances of transport and means of communication). The holistic view toward Buddhism ushered by Olcott and accepted by Dharmapala may well be described as resulting from emerging forces of globalization. Although what was initiated by Olcott and followed by Dharmapala does not seem to have reached its desired conclusion in their lifetimes, the former’s formulation of what was widely accepted as the fundamental Buddhist beliefs can be taken as the first-ever effort at fonnulating a ‘manifesto’ for intra-Buddhist dialogue and cooperation.

Developments in the twentieth century Dharmapala’s influence on organizational Buddhism was far-reaching. The World Fellowship of Buddhists (WFB) initiated by the late Professor Gunapala Malalasekera in 1950 was a direct outcome of this broad outlook. Malalasekera came under Dharmapala’s influence when he was a young man. Being the first Professor of Buddhist Civilization at University of Ceylon, Malalasekera understandably had a good knowledge of the historical evolution of Buddhism. It was his expressed opinion that there were more reasons for Buddhists to get together than to remain separated. The initial resolution for the establishment of WFB was presented to the 1947 meeting of the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC), which said that an organization representing all the Buddhists of the world needs to be established “for the purpose of bringing together Buddhists of the world, of exchanging news and views about the condition of Buddhism, of different countries and of discussing ways and means whereby the Buddhists could make their contribution to peace and happiness”. It is with this understanding and conviction that he convened the Buddhists from all the traditions of Buddhism and established what is known today as the World Fellowship of Buddhists. After the establishment of WFB Malalasekera embarked on a world tour covering countries in South, South East and East Asia meeting Buddhists belonging to all traditions. Malalasekera’s own account of this tour amply reveals the magnitude of goodwill and respect he commanded everywhere he went. One of the things he achieved on this tour was to get all the Buddhists to accept the six-coloured flag, initiated by Olcott as a part of his holistic vision, as the common Buddhist symbol. In concluding the records of his travel in the Buddhist world Malalasekera says: I had asked for unity, for the recognition of the basic agreements which exist, as I passionately believe, amongst all who call

292

Asanga Tilakaratne

themselves the followers of the Sakyamuni Gautama. I sensed that there was this recognition by all, orthodox Theravada or not, and felt happy that my mission was not in vain. In symbolic fellowship I asked, on a mandate of the World Fellowship of Buddhists, that the six-coloured Buddhist Flag as used in Lanka be accepted by Buddhists everywhere. Wherever I went I saw that the response to the call was marvellous. On the day of Vesak, as is known in Theravada lands, or Buddha day (as asked for by the World Fellowship of Buddhists) in others, I saw the Flag continuously from Lanka to Viet Nam, the utmost confines of this my mission. (The Buddhist Flag in South Asia11, 71) Today WFB is an organization serving as the gathering point for Buddhists of all traditions all over the world. Another result of Malalasekera’s broad vision of unified Buddhism was the Encyclopaedia of Buddhism project which was conceived and planned by him. The proposed encyclopaedia was not confined to Theravada but was to cover Buddhism in its totality. Malalasekera served as its first editor-in-chief. Many world renowned scholars representing the three traditions are among the contributors to this encyclopaedia.

World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC) WFB has remained predominantly a lay Buddhist organization. It took nearly two decades for a similar organization for the Sangha to develop. The World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC), started in 1966 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, with the participation of monks from all Buddhist traditions, is an organization for the Buddhist monks exclusively. The Council membership represents all the Buddhist traditions, sharing responsibilities among members across traditions. The Council has four objectives, namely, (1) Developing the organizations and exchanges of Sangha worldwide; (2) helping the Sangha carry out dharmadūta activities throughout the world; (3) enhancing harmony and relationship among different Buddhist traditions and (4) propagating Buddha’s teaching of compassion to promote world peace. These objectives amply testify to a unified vision of the Dhamma, which was to serve as the foundation for the unity of the world-wide Sangha, not identifying with any sectarian particularities. It is also interesting to note that the council accepts the six-coloured flag (referred to above) as its official flag. After four decades from its inauguration, the WBSC is today

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

293

a world-wide organization in its true sense where Buddhist monks from all traditions get together on one platform and work under one identity, namely, the sons of the Sakyamuni Buddha (samaṇā sakyaputtiyā). This is definitely a long way from the situation that existed at the turn of the twentieth century when, at times, members of different sects belonging to the same tradition refused even to acknowledge the existence of the other sects.

Daughters of the Buddha: Sākyadhītā A similar and even more interesting development has been taking place among Buddhist women all over the world. Like their male counterparts, the Buddhist nuns along with Buddhist female followers have initiated a worldwide Buddhist women’s organization called Sākyadhītā (Daughters of the Sakyamuni Buddha): International Network of Buddhist Women. The organization was founded at Buddhagaya in 1987 by a group of female Buddhist practitioners, including Karma Lekshe Tsomo, an American national with an Asian Studies academic background and nun in the Tibetan tradition; Bhiksuni Jampa Tsedroen, a nun in the Tibetan tradition; Ayya Khema (1923-1997), a nun in Theravada tradition; and Dr. Chatsuman Kabilsingh, a university professor in Thailand and later Bhikkhunī Dhammanandi, a Theravada Buddhist nun. The organization comprises nuns and female followers from all traditions including the recently ordained nuns from Sri Lanka (See for more information Findly, 2000, 97-101).3 The very reintroduction of bhikkhunī upasampadā (full admission to Buddhist nuns) to Sri Lanka is an example for the emerging transyanic Sāmagrīyāna Buddhism. The bhikkhunī-sāsana in the Theravada tradition had been extinct for the last ten centuries.4 The traditional position is that reintroduction within Theravada is out of the question since there is no bhikkhunī-Sangha within the Theravada lineage to grant higher admission (upasampadā) to them. Consequently, it is claimed that until and unless a Buddha appears again none can initiate the bhikkhunī order. This meant that there is no room for bhikkhunīsāsana to be revived within Theravada. The stalwarts in the tradition do not wish to identify the legitimacy of the Mahayana bhikkhunīs, and 3 Women’s Buddhism and Buddhism’s Women: Tradition, Revision, Renewal. ed. Ellison Banks Findly, Wisdom Publications, Boston, 2000,. 4  In fact, after India, it seems to have existed only in Sri Lanka where it disappeared after the collapse of Anuradhapura around 10th and 11th centuries. It does not seem that the Bhikkhunī order was ever introduced to the Southeast Asian region from Sri Lanka.

294

Asanga Tilakaratne

the Vajrayana tradition does not have a full-fledged bhikkhunī order. Consequently, they do not see any possibility of cross-breeding. The recent reintroduction of a bhikkhunī order in Sri Lanka was made possible when the prospective candidates first received higher admission from the Korean Mahayana bhikkhunī tradition and subsequently received the same from (a group of) the Sri Lankan Sangha, as the traditional Vinaya requires a bhikkhunī to have upasampadā from both the monks and nuns. Strictly speaking, the present bhikkhunī organization in Sri Lanka, which was a joint effort by both Mahayana bhikkhunīs and Theravada bhikkhus, is both Mahayanic and Theravadin in its origin.5 Although the traditional monks6 and lay people of Theravada do not accept the validity of this new upasampadā, there cannot be any doubt that the age-old boundaries across traditions are being blurred and that what is emerging clearly transcends the age-old categories.

‘American Buddhism’ The practitioners of what is sometimes referred to as “American Buddhism” derive inspiration from various Buddhist traditions simultaneously, and seem to have evolved a type of unified Buddhism going beyond traditional categories (Seager 1999). So-called American Buddhism is a result of both globalization and some geopolitical and social problems the world has been experiencing for the last four to five decades. The arrival in the USA of East Asian Vietnamese Buddhists in large numbers took place as a result of the Vietnam War that ended by 1975. The kind of Buddhism they brought was mainly Mahayana although a sizable number of these Buddhists were Theravada followers who were ‘converted’ by Narada Maha Thera of Wajiraramaya, Colombo. Vajrayana Buddhists from Tibet arrived in the West in large numbers as a result of political problems between China and Tibet. Cambodian Buddhists started arriving in the West in the 1980s after disastrous political experimentations by the Pol Pot regime. What they represented was Theravada Buddhism. In addition to these groups there were Buddhists from the Mahayana countries settled for more than one 5  Hawanpola Ratanasara Thera (1920-2000), a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk who lived in Los Angeles, gave initial and full admission to a group of women following exactly a similar methodology. Women’s Buddhism and Buddhism’s Women: Tradition, Revision, Renewal. (Findly, 2000, 154). 6  In fact the hierarchy of the three chapters of the Sri Lanka Sangha does not recognize this joint upasampadā as valid. Consequently, the state of Sri Lanka too does not accept the existence of bhikkhuṇīs with full admission. The ordinary people, however, do not seem to worry about this theoretical issue.

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

295

hundred years in the USA and the Theravada Buddhists from Sri Lanka, Thailand and Myanmar for the last several decades. The evolution of this manifold Buddhism is a long story to be told in great detail and I shall not attempt it here. What is to be noted, however, is the on-going process of the evolution of a new form of Buddhism drawing inspiration from all the traditions. As we noted earlier already some scholars have dubbed this as ‘American Buddhism’. Richard Hughes Seager tries to portray this phenomenon accordingly: The American Buddhist community as a whole encompasses an extremely wide spectrum of opinions about the nature of Buddhism. Within it, traditionalist and innovative impulses co-exist, sometimes comfortably, sometimes not. Tolerance is generally valued highly and the idea that all expressions of the dharma are in essence one is widely accepted. (Seager 1999, 232) A good example of this newly evolving Buddhism comes from the Sangha (monks and nuns) in this part of the world. The Buddhist Sangha Council of Southern California founded in 1980, initially to mediate disputes between monks and laity, grew up to be an organization bringing monks and laity from all Buddhist traditions that exist in that region. Inter-Buddhist celebration of Vesak organized by the Council is very significant for it marks the unanimity reached by all Buddhist traditions to adopt the full-moon day of the month of May, as accepted by the Theravada tradition, as the birth day of the Buddha. This shows how different Buddhist traditions developed consensus in matters of importance and created new traditions in their new habitats. In addition to this example of organizational significance, there is another important aspect with doctrinal significance that has developed within the context of North America in particular and the West in general. It is the practice of meditation we referred to at the beginning of this discussion. The insight (vipassanā) meditation was introduced to the USA in the 1960s by the monks of the Theravada school. This early meditation remained basically traditional and the teachers were usually monks from South and Southeast Asian countries. This traditional form started undergoing change with lay meditation teachers such as Sharon Salsberg (born 1952), Joseph Goldstein (born 1944) and Jack Cornfield (born 1945). Salsberg and Goldstein studied meditation under the wellknown Myanmar-Indian meditation teacher Goenka (born 1924) whereas Cornfield was ordained twice under Ajaan Chah (1917-1992) in Thailand. They together started the Insight Meditation Society in 1974 in Barr, Massachusetts, and have been teaching meditation at their centre

296

Asanga Tilakaratne

and elsewhere. What is unique in their practice of meditation is that it has not been confined to the traditional Theravada. They have evolved a practice deriving inspiration from all the three Buddhist traditions and even from some non-Buddhist systems. This is very different from how the traditional meditation teachers from Theravada would feature their practice. Although they may have their own unique approaches to meditation and follow some of their own methods, they basically remain within the tradition. The newly evolved practice is not strictly Theravada in that sense. It is eclectic and trans-yanic in its character. Apart from this American reconstruction of meditation, some of the world-renowned teachers such as Thich Nhat Hanh are well-known for their innovative methods that cut across traditions. As we know, the traditional division of Mahayana and Hinayana is based on a value judgment in which the former takes the latter to be of low dispositions whereas the latter is convinced that the former is misguided. After two millennia of the controversy, today, however, the traditional division does not mean exactly the same. All traditions seem to come to a consensus as to what the core of Buddhism is. Traditions have displayed openness to learn from others. Buddhists are free to follow whatever the goal they aspire to, namely, the goal of full enlightenment, that of individual enlightenment or the goal of enlightenment as an arahant. As we have seen in the discussion so far, the dialogue within Buddhists themselves has been less theoretically oriented and more practical. This, however, does not preclude the need to have a theoretically refined position regarding the dialogue within. What seems significant is that the substantial practical experience gained so far can shape the nature of the theory and avoid the danger of theory being empty.

Socially Engaged Buddhism Buddhism arrived in the Western world roughly one and half centuries ago and was perceived as matching well with rational understanding of the universe advocated by the Enlightenment movement in Europe. More recently its philosophy was interpreted by philosophers like KN Jayatilleke as embodying an advanced form of empiricism. Continuing this line of thinking, today Buddhism is identified as a religious and intellectual force that provides an alternative mode of thinking and behaviour for those millions of people who feel that they need a change. What is known as socially engaged Buddhism refers to a way of thinking and behaviour characterized by active engagement by Buddhists

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

297

in social and political problems that affect society at large. Writing in 1985 on socially engaged Buddhism, Fred Eppsteiner, having described a risky effort by a group of concerned Buddhists to evacuate about 200 civilians trapped in a combat zone in Vietnam (in the mid-1960s), says: The term ‘engaged Buddhism’ refers to this kind of active involvement by Buddhists in society and its problems. Participants in this nascent movement seek to actualize Buddhism’s traditional ideals of wisdom and compassion in today’s world. In times of war or intense hostility they will place themselves between factions, literally or figuratively. (Eppsteiner 1985, xi) Social engagement is not something new in Buddhism. In traditional Buddhist societies, Buddhists have always been living a community life looking after the needs of one another. The newness in socially engaged Buddhism is that it is the response of the West, where Buddhism was introduced recently, to the initial misrepresentation of Buddhism as an anti-social teaching. The difference is that whereas in traditional societies Buddhists looked after their own societal needs, modern Buddhists are involved in large social political issues, the effects of which go far beyond the places where they originated. This is basically a result of globalization forces. Furthermore, social activism of Buddhists can be regarded as both responding to the pressing needs of the world today and searching for new meanings of religious life itself.

Eco-Buddhism (green Buddhism) Although any specific movement or an organization is not meant by these terms, eco-Buddhism or green Buddhism is the Buddhist theory and practice toward nature. There are many organizations and groups world over which may be described under these terms. As theory, Eco-Buddhism presupposes and is based on the Buddhist perception of reality as a dependently arisen phenomenon. As practice, eco-Buddhism represents a set of attitudes and a way of behaviour. It is activism or praxis what makes eco-Buddhism a kind of engaged Buddhism (Batliner 1990). As one advocate of this way of thinking puts it, “contrary to the popular view of Buddhism as a ‘refuge’ from the world, to become a Buddhist today is definitely political act. More specifically it is a geopolitical act”(Batchelor and Brown 1994). Buddhist ecologists identify two approaches to ecology: one is what is described as ‘appropriate management’ or stewardship of nature and its resources by man. This is understood to be a human-centred environmentalism

298

Asanga Tilakaratne

based on individualism and supporting exploitation of natural resources by human beings. In this perspective, the opponents claim, individual greed is justified and the result is “a planet often billion points of infinite greed”. The other approach is characterized by the protection of nature and environment from encroachment by human beings. This has been described as ‘eco-centric environmentalism’, and many find it preferable to the former. Writers such as Ken Jones (1993) criticize even this second type of approach which is relatively good. He describes views held under this category as “many varieties of deeper greenery” which are still based on subtle forms of individualism. He compares such approaches to the parable of the elephant and blind men and proposes to jettison modem hyper-individualism in favour of a return to community. What this sketch reveals is that there is an intensive discussion and debate on the issues of engaged Buddhism including many aspects of Buddhist environmentalism. The problem of individualism which Ken Jones touches is at the heart of the whole issue. The place of the human being in the whole process of interacting with nature has to be assessed correctly with the right balance. The concerns regarding space prevent me from doing so in this context.

Doctrinal and organizational implications As we saw in the above discussion, unified Buddhism cuts across the traditional three yānas. The practice throughout history has been that the contacts among the traditions have been kept to the minimum although we cannot say that there were no contacts at all or that they were actively hostile to one another. As Noel Seth’s paper referred to above reveals, there have been hostilities within schools of, for instance, Japan and Korea and other countries. Sri Lankan history too records several instances of conflict between the members of Mahavihara and those centred around Abhayagiriya who held different views (vaitulyavāda), but one finds hardly any evidence of the three Buddhist traditions fighting with one another. What we witness with the dawn of modernity is something different. It is a conscious effort to assimilate and incorporate ideas and practices of one another which were naturally isolated in the past owing to practical difficulties barring interaction. A question one may raise is whether there is any doctrinal or theoretical difficulty for this kind of interaction among divergent groups to happen. Both in the early Dhamma and the Vinaya one finds frequent references to the unity of the Sangha (Sangha-sāmaggi). The discourses

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

299

such as Cūla-gosiṅga and Mahā-gosiṅga of the Majjhima-nikāya (31 & 32) heap praise on the disciples of the Buddha who interacted with each other like ‘milk and water’ (khīrodakībhūta). Devadatta, on the contrary, is disparaged for splitting the Sangha (saṅgha-bheda), which is described as one of the most serious unwholesome deeds resulting in the birth in the hell immediately after death (ānantariya-kamma), but it is not included in the category of “defeat” (pārājikā), the most serious of all monastic offences. It is included in the next category, sanghādisesa, which can be remedied by proper behaviour unlike the first category of violations which cannot be remedied. There are two saṅghādisesa rules (rules 10 & 11) applicable to one who commits the split of the Sangha and to those who support such an act. In both cases those who were found guilty may remedy their offences by proper behaviour. In the subsequent history of the sāsana we find that there were many instances when the groups of Sangha split from the mother group and started acting as separate groups. Symbolic to the independent activism is performance of the Pātimokkha recital (bi-weekly recital of the code of Vinaya rules) as a separate group. It is not quite clear whether or not such breakaway groups were considered to have committed the offence of saṅgha-bheda. As early Buddhist history shows, there were breakaway groups from the breakaway groups themselves, making the situation more complicated. Even in the more recent history of Buddhism in Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka this tendency of breaking away from mother groups was quite commonplace. In Sri Lanka, in the Amarapura fraternity, which started in the early eighteenth century, there are still more than twenty subgroups operating as independent groups, but these groups are not considered guilty of splitting the Sangha although every act of forming a new group of the Sangha runs the risk of saṅgha-bheda. While the Vinaya does not approve of saṅgha-bheda, it does provide for the Sangha, which is split, to come together. The recital of the Patimokkha as one group is considered symbolic of the unity of the Sangha. There is a special provision for the recital when the Sangha, which was split before, reunites as one group. This recital is called ‘unity recital’ (sāmaggī-uposatha). A recent example of such performance is when all the branches of the Amarapura fraternity of Sri Lanka got together in 1969 and performed uposatha together to mark the newly forged unity.7 This shows that the ideal situation is to have 7  The branches of the Amarapura fraternity were united formally in 1956 under the name, All Lanka Amarapura Sangha Council. In 1974 the organization was brought under a new constitution and was renamed, ‘Sri Lanka Amarapura Sangha Council (Sri Lanka Amarapura Saṅgha Sabhā).

300

Asanga Tilakaratne

a single unitary body of the Sangha. If a group breaks away that does not necessarily mean that the breakaway group is invariably guilty for there is a possibility that the very breakaway group is the one that upholds the right position. Both the Dhamma and the Vinaya support unity, and encourage divergent groups to unite. Strictly speaking, when divergent groups come together, there is no divergence anymore and the uposatha is performed within the united Sangha. The situation with the three Buddhist traditions today is different. When the three traditions come together, they come as unique groups maintaining their identity, but tend to work together upholding commonalities at a higher level. For example, in the case of Sākya-dhītā or ‘the daughters of the Buddha’, what unites all different Buddhist groups is their identity as the female followers of the Buddha. When the first group of nuns from Sri Lanka received higher admission (upasampadā) from a group of Korean nuns and when the same group was given higher admission by the Sri Lanka Theravada Sangha, as the Theravada Vinaya requires. This becomes tantamount to accepting the validity of the Mahayana practice by the Theravada and vice versa. The situation here is different from two divergent groups coming together to form one group. This act of upasampadā is a clear case of two different Buddhist traditions accepting the validity of each other while maintaining their own identities. The resultant bhikkhunī tradition functioning currently in Sri Lanka (Thailand has only a very few bhikkhunīs with higher admission.) is neither fully Theravada nor fully Mahayana; it is both Theravada and Mahayana (Currently the Sri Lankan Theravada hierarchy and the state of Sri Lanka do not accept the validity of this newly-formed bhikkhunī Sangha. However, if they proceed as a new, non-Theravada group with a new identity, this question does not arise.). On the one hand, the Vinaya observed by the Mayahana nuns is not the same as that followed by the Theravada nuns. On the other hand, however, the differences are only with regard to minor rules, and not the major ones. From the point of view of the Dhamma we can argue that the Mahayana, while upholding the Buddhahood as the ultimate goal and the path of the Bodhisatva as the method, does not reject the arahant ideal or the śrāvaka-yāna. This shows that there is really not any serious difficulty either from the Vinaya or from the Dhamma in the joint operations among the three traditions. The presence of some East Asian sects with married clergy, however, seems to pose a problem, for sex involves violating one of the central requirements of the monastic life not only in the traditional Theravada, but also in Mahayana and Vajrayana. This more recent development,

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

301

which arose first in Japan and then introduced to Korea almost by force at the turn of the last century, may be ignored for the present discussion. In any case, in the Buddhist tradition in which where there is no centre with accumulated power, a question of excommunication does not arise. Therefore it seems that there is no real doctrinal or legal difficulty for a unified, trans-yanic Buddhism to evolve. Engaged Buddhism, as we noted already, represents the contemporary Buddhist approaches to social issues and problems, and provides an example of Buddhists worldwide working together. While social consciousness is not absent in Buddhism, what we witness today is Buddhists sharing the global awareness of the need for addressing social ills. The phenomenon of global warming which is described as ‘the climate emergency’ has been an area in which some of the leading scientists and religious figures have been active for the last several decades. Today there is a growing consensus among the Buddhist leaders and scholars belonging to all three schools that they should adopt a unified approach to address this serious issue. There are signs that this approach is being developed across the three Buddhist traditions. In a recently published anthology of essays of a group of leading Buddhist religious and academic figures such as the Dalai Lama, Thich Nhat Hanh and Bhikkhu Bodhi, this sentiment is voiced in the following words: “What an inspiring example Buddhism could provide, if the various Buddhist traditions were able to work out a joint response to this climate emergency” (John Stanley et al. 2009, 12). The problems of global dimension require globally applicable solutions. The Buddhist approach to such problems has to be one and not many, one shared by all Buddhists universally.

Challenges and prospects There are challenges to Buddhism, both internal and external: how Buddhism faces these challenges will largely determine its future as a viable philosophy of life for generations to come. In this part of the discussion, I will deal with the following four issues which clearly do not exhaust the challenges Buddhism is facing. (i) Multiplicity of religion: the attitude of Buddhism towards the other religions and conversion, and the Buddhist concept and practice of inter-religious harmony. (ii) Responding to social suffering, and fine-tuning the Buddhist social ethics and philosophy.

302

Asanga Tilakaratne

(iii) Developing the Buddhist standpoints on contemporary ethical/ bio-ethical issues. (iv) Buddhist contribution to bring about peace to the divided and war-torn world.

Multiplicity of religion, conversion and interreligious harmony We have already referred to some problems associated with the phenomenon of multiplicity of religion. In particular we discussed the Buddhist concept of religious truth and concluded that holding a concept of truth is not problematic and that what is problematic is the lack of tolerance towards the multiplicity of what different traditions hold as truth. The view currently popular among those who discuss the multiplicity of religious truth is a kind of relativism which is to hold that different religious worldviews are equally true and that they are ultimately no different from each other for they all refer to one and the same transcendent which has been described in many religions in many terms. A classic example of this standpoint is found in John Hick (1989) where he studies the ultimate goals of all the major religions, analyses them into two categories as ‘personae’ and ‘impersonae’ - personal (Yahweh, Allah, Krishna, etc.) and impersonal (Tathatā, Nirvana, Satori, Advaya, etc.) characterizations of the Transcendent - and claims that in either manner they represent one and the same transcendental. The trouble with this analysis is that it fails to recognize the very multiplicity of religious belief which it aims to explain! The assumption behind this claim, namely that all religions ultimately refer to an ineffable transcendental, is problematic at best, and I have demonstrated elsewhere that the Buddhist religious experience cannot be characterized as transcendental and ineffable (Tilakaratne, 1993). In the context of the discussion on the multiplicity of religious beliefs, this move towards transcendentalism seems to be based on a misunderstanding that harmony among religions is impossible in the absence of some transcendental point where all these religions meet and converge. The so-called inter-religious or interfaith dialogue conducted by some of its advocates is founded on this misconception. The Buddhist understanding, as I have already shown, is different: it is natural for different religions to hold different religious truths; what is needed is to accept and honour the freedom of people to hold different views and faiths. The conclusion is that we must search for a solution that surpasses the narrow boundaries of both relativism and absolutism in religion.

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

303

This Buddhist position should not be misunderstood as refusal to accept the need for inter-religious understanding, good-will and cooperation. The truth is far from it. The Buddhist concern is not on the lofty goal but on the methodology adopted by its adherents. The only method the Buddha followed in order to convince others of his Teaching is the act of teaching alone. He believed that anyone had this ‘right’ to teach, but it is up to the listeners to weigh the evidence carefully and to accept or to reject. This is what the Buddha demonstrated to free-thinking Kalamas in his well-documented encounter with them. To doubt is not a sin in Buddhism. When two people say two mutually contradictory views one must necessarily doubt, as the Buddha said to Kalamas, it is up to the teachers to teach, and it is up to the listeners to accept or reject what is taught. What is crucial is to honour the individual’s freedom to choose. It is possible that some adherents of religions would claim that they know what is good for others who follow the wrong religions. Even if this could be the case, such knowledge does not guarantee them a right to impose their religious beliefs on so-called unbelievers or wrong believers. Today we live in a world in which religions are in fierce competition to convert, increase numbers and become the number one among their counterparts. Buddhism cannot become a partner of this competition. On the one hand, the attitude behind the act of conversion, namely that people are passive objects to be converted, is alien to the Buddhist attitude to human beings as capable of bearing responsibility for their own actions. On the other hand, the religious rivalry which has caused enormous suffering to the human kind for millennia cannot be one in conformity with the noble eightfold path which is to reduce and ultimately to do away with suffering but not to increase it. The competition of religions to increase their numbers has created many unpleasant situations in interreligious interactions. It is well-known that religious organizations with substantial financial and material resources, mainly from developed countries come to the so-called underdeveloped countries and are very active in converting people. The term ‘unethical conversion’ has been coined to describe this questionable mode of practice. Some countries have even taken legal measures against such practices. An essential function of any religious teacher or a religion is to teach. Therefore, it is not right to deny that basic function, but what is very important is to engage in this exercise recognizing and respecting the sentiments, traditions and cultures of the people who are targeted,

304

Asanga Tilakaratne

and by not trying to lure them by material gains or promises. In an essay to be discussed in the next section, bhikkhu Bodhi refers to two Christian social service organizations, Christian Aid and Christian World Vision and says that they “are not missionary movements aimed at proselytizing but relief organizations that provide relief and development aid”. His statement, sadly, is not supported by the experience of the developing world with these two and many other similar organizations who have been found to be active in proselytizing along with their social service work. For many organizations of this nature, social service is only an excuse for conversion. What is needed for religions today is to get away from the ambitious mentality of converting the whole world and to agree on certain basic principles of conversion. Some religious groups seem to think that they should convert by any means at any cost. The promised end is taken as providing justification for the questionable means. Conversion in the Buddhist view should happen on and only on rational conviction. The history of Buddhism does not show any instance in which Buddhists have resorted to means which are not in accordance with the fundamental principles taught by the Buddha. Buddhism deserves to receive this same courtesy back from the other religions.

Responding to social suffering Buddhism in general, the Theravada Buddhism in particular, has been blamed for being more concerned about one’s personal liberation from samsaric suffering and for being less concerned about the social suffering rampant in today’s world. The discussion on the nature and the limits of altruism is not something coming totally from outside the Buddhist tradition; it has been there within the tradition for a long time. The classical debate between Mahayana and the so-called Hinayana was centred on this issue. The Mahayanist Bodhisatva ideal was brought in as a substitute for the ideal of the arahant, whose life was characterized by personal purity and aloofness from society. The Bodhisatva ideal, on the contrary, was defined as one who will be in the samsara till the last being attains enlightenment. Since the concept of “the last being in the samsara” does not make sense in the endless samsara, what this amounts to is that the Mahayana Bodhisatva is one who will never be away from the samsara. With this Bodhisatva ideal, it is clear that the Mahayanists were trying to highlight the importance of taking other’s suffering over and above one’s own suffering. On the other hand, in defence of the Theravada arahant ideal, it can be pointed out that it does not reject the idea of altruism, but it only reiterates the need for being blameless before one helps others.

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

305

This theoretical debate may be conducted endlessly with reasons produced for and against, but it remains a fact, relative to some other religious traditions, that in Buddhism, social philosophy is less articulated in global terms and social activism is less developed to meet the global needs. In a short but very powerful essay, titled “A Challenge to Buddhists” Bhikkhu Bodhi, a leading Theravada Buddhist monk of Western origin has presented this matter in no uncertain term. He says: I’ve been struck by how seldom the theme of global suffering - the palpable suffering of real human beings - is thematically explored in the Buddhist journals and teachings with which I am acquainted. It seems to me that we Western Buddhists tend to dwell in a cognitive space that defines the first noble truth largely against the background of our iddle-class lifestyles: as the gnawing of discontent; the ennui of over-satiation; the pain of unfulfilling relationships; or with a bow to Buddhist theory, as bondage to the round of rebirths. Too often, I feel, our focus on these aspects of dukkha has made us oblivion to the vast, catastrophic suffering that daily overwhelms three fourths of the world’s population. In this essay, bhikkhu Bodhi warns Buddhists that if they do not develop a methodology to care for human suffering, Buddhism will be reduced to a mere means to pursue personal spiritual growth, a project which will be attractive largely to the affluent and the educated. Bhikkhu Bodhi discusses this problem mainly in the context of Western Buddhism in which the practice of Buddhism is understood basically in terms of sitting meditation. This particular concept of the ‘practice’ of Buddhism is a product of the West. In the East, particularly in the South and Southeast of Asia where Theravada Buddhism has its roots, one hardly finds ‘practicing’ Buddhists in this sense. The large majority of Buddhists in these regions are those who have received their religion by their birth, and do not have a specific time when they ʽpractice’ Buddhism and other times when they do not. For most traditional Buddhists, Buddhism is a socio-religious affair in which they are engaged in giving in numerous ways, virtue in the sense of observing the five precepts at varying capacities, and engaging in meditation and many other related activities. They respond to the callings of their fellowbeings in need, look after the monks and the village monastery to their best capacity, and contribute to social causes according to their strength. It is true that these people are not very aware of the problems of global

306

Asanga Tilakaratne

dimension. Even if they are aware of the problems, they are not in a position to do anything substantial owing to their less than desirable economic conditions. Under these circumstances one would expect the Buddhists of the affluent West to respond to the manifold human suffering more readily. Bhikkhu Bodhi acknowledges the activism of “Socially Engaged Buddhism”, a concept articulated in the context of Western Buddhism, although the leading proponents of the movement, the Dalai Lama, Thich Nhat Than, AT Ariyaratne, etc., are from the traditional Buddhist countries. But bhikkhu Bodhi still thinks that the practice of such Buddhist virtues as loving kindness and compassion should not be practiced merely as a means of personal transformation but should be translated into action. The point of the Bhikkhu Bodhi’s eye-opening essay is that Buddhists still have room for improvement in the direction of alleviating tangible human suffering. Whether it is Eastern or Western Buddhists, all have an obligation to be sensitive to human suffering and do their utmost to reduce and ultimately eradicate it, but his message should not be misunderstood as a plea to leave the meditation hall to reach out to the world. One gets the necessary strength and integrity to reach out to the world through the inner exercise of meditation. One has to be sufficiently stable within oneself even to help others materially. What I mean by “being stable” is not the final deliverance by becoming an arahant, but if Buddhism is to go beyond mere social service and Buddhists to be a little more than the mere “good guys” one should see the full significance of its rich tradition of inner development.

Developing a Buddhist standpoint on contemporary ethical/bio-ethical issues Although ethical dilemmas are not new to humanity, with the rapid developments in science and technology, and with the physical and virtual proximity created by globalization and communication, people have started feeling the heat of ethical arguments as never before. Although science and technology create ethical problems they themselves do not and cannot answer what they have created. Answers have been sought outside, and religions have served as sources for inspiration, responses, and explanations. Usually religious response has been confined to the religions of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and, consequently what usually comes as religious responses to contemporary ethical issues is originated from these religions which are basically theistic. While there

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

307

is basically nothing undesirable about it, Buddhism being the only nontheistic system among the major world religions and being non-Western in culture, it is likely that Buddhism provides responses/answers different in nature. Therefore there is a need to include Buddhism in the map. There are, however, some other problems which are internal to Buddhism to be dealt with in this regard. Why Buddhism is not on the map is mainly due to the fact that there is no Buddhist standpoint on modem ethical issues developed by Buddhists. As Damien Keown observes: (However) there is a curious absence of authoritative opinion on these matters. Contemporary Buddhist groups rarely publish position papers and the great thinkers of the past left no legacy in the form of treatises on ethics. There is not even a word for “ethics” in the early Buddhist texts - the closest approximation to it is sila, often translated as “morality” but closer in meaning to disciplined behaviour or self-restraint. In the course of Buddhist history there never arose a branch of learning concerned with the philosophical analysis of moral norms. (Keown 2005, 27) Damien Keown is right in saying that in the history of Buddhism there never arose a branch of learning called ethics dealing with the philosophical analysis of moral norms. He further thinks that this absence is due to the fact that Buddhism has always existed under rulers with absolute powers and that Buddhism basically started as a movement of renouncers that rejected social life. Although both these claims are true, this analysis does not explain fully why there is no philosophical analysis of moral norms in the manner of what is found in the western philosophical tradition. That there is in the Buddhist canonical literature a vast amount of material dealing with morality (virtue and ethics) is undeniable. Discussions relevant to morality are found in many discourses, in the Vinaya dealing with the monastic discipline and in the Abhidhamma, as well as the commentarial literature including the Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa, the greatest commentator of the Pali Canon. A study of these materials show that discussions relevant to what we today call normative and meta ethics are intermingled in these discussions. A discourse like Kālāma-sutta (of the Aṅguttara-nikāya) in which the Buddha details ten grounds for not accepting any moral claim, the empirical criteria to accept moral claims and classification of moral norms, is a good example for the rich moral content of the early Buddhist thought. The detailed and minute analyses of matters pertaining to the monastic behaviour found in the Vinaya Piṭaka and the

308

Asanga Tilakaratne

Buddha’s guidelines for social, political and economic spheres of life are too well known to describe here. This means that Buddhism possesses an ethics and morality adequate for the goal it endeavours to achieve. This, however, is not to say that Buddhism has developed an analytical and philosophical inquiry of ethics in its modem sense. In addition to reasons proposed by Keown for this absence, the strong pragmatic and practical orientation of the teaching of the Buddha should be the key reason why Buddhism has not developed a detailed ethical inquiry similar to one found in the Western philosophical tradition. Having provided this justification for the historical absence of “ethics” in Buddhism, one cannot still deny the need to develop a Buddhist position regarding the contemporary ethical issues. Currently, there is no such a position developed by Buddhist philosophers which is readily available for reference. The difficulty of developing a position acceptable to all the three Buddhist traditions has been highlighted. Given the broad agreement among the Buddhist traditions at the fundamental conceptual and philosophical level, and also at the organizational level, which has been a growing phenomenon for the last several decades, it does not seem that there is an insurmountable obstacle here. In fact this multiplicity of congruent positions may be viewed not as an obstacle but as an advantage. There may be several Buddhist positions with differences in degree but not in kind. The fact that there is no central authority to sanction “the correct” position too has been discussed. This again can be considered a healthy feature in Buddhism for it leaves open the possibility for dynamism while it discourages ideological authoritarianism and resultant rigidity. One of the challenges for Buddhism today is to study the contemporary ethical problems such as cloning from perspectives that are unique to Buddhism and come up with analyses/explanations/solutions. The new ethical problems will not only require Buddhists to provide answers, but also such problems will force Buddhists to re-evaluate their own traditional teachings to test their power to meet the new challenges.

Promoting peace in a divided and war-torn world One of the biggest challenges that lie before Buddhism is the role it should play to bring peace, harmony, understanding and respect to a world torm between ideologies and conflicts. Religions in general have this task before them, but one cannot say that religions have always been successful in this task. In fact, religions have been accused as perpetrators

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

309

of conflict and violence. We do not need to go into world history which has been plagued with religious wars among many other types of wars. As we saw earlier in this discussion, Buddhism has been peaceful in its journey through 2,600 years. It has not engaged in war to propagate itself or to subjugate other religions in its journey through various cultures and civilizations. Rulers who embraced Buddhism have not subjugated other countries for the greater glory of the Buddha or Buddhism. The classic example of the Emperor Asoka in India (third century bce) shows how he stopped his expansionist wars ever since he accepted Buddhism. Although it is incumbent upon Buddhism to continue with this good record, the task of Buddhism today is to go beyond maintaining the status quo and contribute actively for the promotion of peace and harmony among religious and social groups and, above all, among all sentient beings. Buddhism has the resources to achieve this goal. In addition to the life of the Buddha embodying the inner peace and characterized by the dedication to peace, harmony and understanding among social groups, Buddhists have the teachings of the Buddha to provide the philosophical basis for such an endeavour. The doctrine of dependent origination (paṭicca-samuppāda) provides the overall approach of Buddhism to any problem including social conflicts. The dependent origination highlights the multiplicity of causes and conditions and their inter-connectedness in creating a situation. The “right view” marking the beginning of the noble eightfold path stresses the correct perspective in approaching a particular situation. Another important feature in the Buddhist approach is the deep psychological analysis in order to understand the root causes of a problem while not undervaluing the social and organizations aspects of problems. The problems including social conflicts are born in the human mind. A deep analysis of the human mind is sine qua non for understanding as well as remedying such situations. It is not my intention here to dwell in detail in a Buddhist theory of conflict resolution. It is necessary that Buddhists do more research into this aspect of the teaching of the Buddha and put it into practice “for the happiness of the many”.

Conclusion In Buddhism two virtues, compassion and wisdom, are endorsed as supreme. It is held that the Buddha’s behaviour is motivated by these two virtues. Sambuddhatva of the Buddha has its origin in these twin virtues. Describing his quest for the awakening - Sambuddhatva - the

310

Asanga Tilakaratne

Buddha articulates in the following words the compassion he felt toward the suffering humanity: Alas! This world has fallen into trouble, in that it is born, ages, and dies, it passes away and is reborn, yet does not understand the escape from this suffering [headed by ageing-and-death]. When now will an escape be discerned from this suffering (headed by ageing-and-death)? (S I, 104; Bodhi 2000, 537) The quest for the Awakening was not motivated purely by his own suffering. It was for the sake of the entire suffering of humanity. Ever since this remarkable event called sambuddhatva, which the Buddha subsequently described as the dawn of vision, knowledge, wisdom, “science”, and light (cakkhuṃ udapādi, ñaṇaṃ udapādi, paññā udapādi, vijjā udapādi, āloko udapādi), he spent the rest of his life (forty-five years according to the tradition) to teach the message of “deathlessness” to all beings. During the lifetime of the Buddha, his message was spread in many directions inside India. During the time of Asoka, (third century BCE), the message of the Buddha was propagated to neighbouring regions and countries, and over the next several centuries Buddhism became the religion of Asia. Buddhism did not enter these regions and cultures as a domineering force vanquishing existing traditions. Wherever Buddhism went, it went as a civilizing and peace-promoting movement; it incorporated whatever it could in indigenous cultures, and while it transformed local cultures according to its sublime teachings and attitudes, it was transformed in the process to suit the local conditions and traditions. The journey of Buddhism for the last twenty-six centuries has been in conformity with what the Buddha said to his first sixty disciples, namely that they should go out and spread the message of the Dhamma for the “welfare of the many, and for the happiness of the many” (bahujanahitāya, abhujanasukhāya). The followers of the Buddha of yore did not violate the peaceful and liberating spirit of the Dhamma in whatever they did - including the propagation of the Dhamma. Today, even with continuous new challenges coming from consumerist worldviews, conflicts and religious rivalries, the followers of the Buddha cannot afford to do anything that is contrary to the Dhamma even for its very survival let alone for its propagation. The ultimate test of the Dhamma is its practice, and it is in the practice that the Dhamma becomes alive. The Dhamma has lived for the past twenty-six centuries demonstrating the relevance and the validity of the Sanbuddhatava

Buddhism Beyond 2600 Years...

311

experience to humankind whenever or wherever it happened to be. The same will hold true for the future, for the next twenty-six hundred years, provided that people keep treading the path shown by the Buddha.

18. Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka: 1972-1997*

What follows is an overview of the field of Buddhist studies in Sri Lanka for the last twenty-five years. Since this two and half decades of the history of Buddhist studies in this country cannot be studied in isolation from its long past and its future possibilities I will begin with an outline of the major events of the past and wind up with some observations regarding the future. In discussing the present status of the field, I have not tried to include the names of all authors or the titles of all publications. Partly, this is almost impossible, and partly it is of no significant use . Nevertheless, my aim has been to cover the major trends and the key figures of the relevant period, and this is what can reasonably be expected to achieve within the space allowed.

Buddhist Studies and research in Sri Lanka: Past Sri Lanka being one of the earliest places outside India where Buddhism was established its tradition of the Buddhist scholarship naturally has a long history. There is sufficient ground to believe in the records of the chronicles that the first systematic introduction of Buddhism to the island took place during the reign of Emperor Asoka, 3rd century bce. The Pali commentaries complied by Buddhaghosa Thera trace the continuation * An initial version of this paper was published as “Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka: 1972-1997” in State of Buddhist Studies in the World, eds. Donald K Swearer and Somparn Pornta, Bangkok: Centre for Buddhist Studies, Chulalonkorn University, Thailand. 2000. (N.B. This chapter covers the state of Buddhist studies in Sri Lanka roughly till the end of the 20th century. Only at some instances, subsequent developments have been indicated in footnotes. Excepting such instances, the chapter needs to be understood as referring to that time priod.)

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

313

of the Theravada tradition starting from Mahakassapa Thera, the leader of the first council in which the canon of the Theravada seems to have assumed its initial shape, up untill Mahinda Thera who introduced the religion to Sri Lanka. Although Buddhaghosa Thera worked in the 5th century ce, the commentaries he edited and translated, according to his own evidence, existed in Sri Lanka in local vernacular (dīpa bhāsāyaa, language of the island) from very early times. According to EW Adikaram, (1946) in the Pali commentaries, reference has been made to sixteen such commentaries. In the Samantapāsādikā, the commentary of the Vinaya, Buddhaghosa Thera actually refers to Sīhalaṭṭhakathā as one of his source materials. According to von Hinuber, Buddhaghosa Thera quotes from six such earlier commentaries, namely, Kurundi, Mahāaṭṭhakathā, Mahāpaccari, Andhaka, Saṅkhepa, and Paccari. (Hinuber 1996, 104) The tradition of studying the religious literature in the language of the island goes back to Mahinda Thera himself. According to Buddhaghosa Thera’s account of the establishment of the sāsana in Sri Lanka, having assisted Mahinda Thera to introduce the religion to the country, king Devanampiya Tissa inquired whether the sāsana was established. Mahinda Thera answered by saying that it will be established only when a sīma is determined within the country. The king assisted the Thera to do so and asked again whether the sāsana was now established. The Thera answered affirmatively, but added that it will take roots only when a person born in the island from the parents of the island having become a monk in the island itself and having studied the Vinaya of the Buddha inside the country explain it (VinA I, 102). This emphasis by Mahinda Thera on studying and teaching the doctrine in the country by local people testifies to his far-sightedness as a missionary. Besides, it also marks the beginning of a Sri Lankan tradition of Buddhist studies at a very early stage of the development of Buddhism in the country. In addition to the commentaries to the three baskets of the canon, there developed a literature called vaṃsa-kathā which is meant to record the history of the religion and the nation and the sacred objects that reached the country from India, such as the tooth relic of the Buddha, the Bodhi tree, etc., and the sacred places constructed in the country by the pious kings, i.e. the great pagoda, mahācetiya, built by king Duṭṭhagāmaṇi. The tradition of recording the history of the sāsana which was considered to be the most sacred of all, along with history of the island has continued in the country in an unbroken succession for the last twenty-three centuries, a phenomenon only a few countries in the world can claim.

314

Asanga Tilakaratne

All of the original pre-Buddhaghosa Thera works written in Sinhala language are lost today. What is preserved is the Pali translations of those works done after several centuries from their original compilation. The great commentator Buddhaghosa Thera came to Sri Lanka in the fifth century ce and edited and translated the commentaries of the three baskets into Pali. All the commentaries to the Vinaya basket, all the commentaries to the Abhidhamma basket, the commentaries to the four major nikāyas, and for the Khuddakapāṭha and the Sutta-nipāta, two books belonging to the Khuddakanikāya, have been complied by Buddhaghosa Thera. The commentaries to the Dhammapada and the Jātaka (with no specific name as in the case of other commentaries) too have been attributed to him. Dhammapala wrote a commentary called Paramatthadipani to the Udana, Itiuttaka, Vimāna-Vatthu, PetaVatthu, Theragāthā, Therīgāthā, and Cariyāpiṭaka. Upasena Thera is the author of the Saddhammapajjotika, the commentary to the Niddesa. Buddhadatta Thera, a senior contemporary of Buddhaghosa Thera, wrote Madhuratthavilāsinī to the Buddhavaṃsa, and Mahanama Thera wrote Saddhammappakasinī to the Paṭisambhidāmagga. The author of the Visuddhajanavilāsinī, the commentary to the Apadāna, is not known. The Anuradhapura period of Sri Lanka’s history lasted about thirteen centuries from the 3rd century bce untill the 10th century ce Except at the very beginning of this era, Buddhism has been there throughout and it has been the dominant cultural force of the island. The religion newly arrived in the country steadily developed through these centuries and by the end of this era Buddhism had got established as the sole mark of identity of the island-nation. Writing of the subcommentaries (tīkā) was started by Dhammapala Thera who is believed to have lived in the sixth or seventh century. In addition to being the main writer of commentaries to the books of me Khuddaka-nikāya, Dhammapala Thera wrote sub-commentaries to Buddhaghosa Thera’s commentaries of the four nikāyas and to some other texts. The transition from Anuradhapura to Polonnaruwa was mainly a result of foreign invasions; and consequently, the beginning of this era was tumultuous. However, under the able protection of such kings as Mahavijayabahu and Parakramabahu the Great, t h e sāsana became stable and the literary and academic activities resumed with accelerated vigour. The country regained its name as the house of the Theravada tradition. The ensuing two centuries were the period of gaṇṭhipada (explanation of knotty words), sub-commentaries, and the manuals

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

315

on Vinaya and Abhidhamma. During this period sub­ commentaries, handbooks to Vinaya and Abhidhamma, and many other books were written mainly in Pali. The Buddhist literature in Sinhala medium too developed along with that of Pali, and the subject matter was mainly the virtues of the Buddha and the stories that generated and sustained faith in the religion.

Decline and the dawn of the modern period The period of Parakramabahu VI, who ruled from Kotte in the 15th century, was the last period of the academic and literary activities of the country before the decline which lasted untill the middle of the eighteenth century. First, it was internal power struggles among the regional power bases that caused the decline. Starting from the beginning of the sixteenth century, the country came under the influence of the European nations, Portuguese, Dutch, and British consecutively, and it was a totally new experience for the country. The academic activities suffered further due to the resultant political instability. The modern academic resurgence owes its beginning to one charismatic Buddhist leader who not only resuscitated the monastic order that had virtually disappeared from the country but also laid the foundation for the modern literary and academic activities in the field of Buddhist studies in Sri Lanka. It was Asarana Sarana Saranankara Thera (1698 - 1778) who later became the Saṅgharāja (king of the Sangha) of the country. By his time, there were no monks who had got higher admission (upasampadā) and therefore there was no way that he could receive the higher admission for himself. The monastic discipline and scholarship had disappeared and he had to educate himself with great effort. As a result of his indefatigable effort he was able to persuade the king to send messengers to the king of Siam (Thailand) to send a group of senior monks in order to reintroduce higher ordination to the country. After several efforts, finally it was a success and the king of Siam sent twelve upasampadā monks headed by Upali Maha Thera. They established higher admission again in the country. Saranankara Thera himself became a full-fledged monk. The monks from Siam spent many more years training the Sri Lankan monks in the teaching and the discipline of the Theravada tradition which they had received from Sri Lanka itself at an earlier stage when the purity of the upasampadā of Thailand was subjected to doubt. The Saṅgharāja Thera established a centre to instruct the monks (pirivena) and started teaching them

316

Asanga Tilakaratne

the canon and the Pali language. Monks from various regions of the country came to him and started receiving education and gradually the light of knowledge started spreading far and wide in the country. The Buddhist monastic education and academic activities were thus born again in the country.

Early modern period The next landmark in the modern renaissance of the Buddhist studies is the birth of Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara Parivenas by two illustrious monks who themselves belonged to the tradition initiated by the Saranankara Saṅgharāja. Vidyodaya Pirivena was started by Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayaka Thera (1827-1911) in 1873 and Vidyalankara Pirivena was started in 1875 by Ratmalane Sri Dharma loka Nayaka Thera (1818-1887). After t h e d e m i s e of the founder of Vidyalankara, h i s pupil Ratmalane Sri Dharmarama Nayaka Thera (1853-1918) became its principal. These two principals of the Parivenas were the intellectual giants of their day. Besides the substantial academic contribution of the two monks by way of editing ancient texts, writing books, and instructing students, the long-lasting contribution of the two pioneers lies in their laying a firm foundation for the future of the academic life in the country. The service rendered by these two centres of monastic education in propagating the Buddhist Studies and research in the country is immeasurable. The contribution of the two centres to the awakening of t h e Buddhist modernist movement toward the end of the 19th century is also noteworthy. In particular, two key figures of this movement, Henry Steel Olcott and Anagarika Dharmapala, were closely associated with Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thera, t h e head of the Vidyodaya Parivena. In inter-religious debates of the 19th century, Sri S u m a ngala Thera was the leading member of the Sangha who supplied t h e intellectual support to the Buddhist side, the anchor of which was Migettuwatte Gunananda Thera. Toward the beginning of the 20th century the fame of the two centres had spread to the neighbouring countries such as India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. Some of the illustrious contemporary lndologists such as Satischandra Vidyabhusana, Jagadisha Kashyapa, Rahula Sankrtyayana, Ananda Kaushalyayana, Shanti Bhikshu Shastri, Anantarama Bhatta, Visuddhananda Sthavira, Shitala Prasada Jaina, and Padmanabh S. Jaini had their education in either of these two centres.

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

317

An immediate task of the scholars originated from these centres was to make available to the public the Buddhist canon and its affiliated literature including commentaries and sub-commentaries. Most of the canonical texts were edited and translated into Sinhala. The academic contribution of these scholars did not confine to Buddhist studies. The scholars produced by these two centres and many other affiliated centres all over the island were indologist in the full sense of the term. Their service to the study of Sanskrit language and literature and Hindu and Buddhist logic was equally enormous. The tradition has been continued by such illustrious scholars as Welivitiye Sorata Nayaka Thera of Vidyodaya and Yakkaduwe Pannarama of Vidyalankara. The establishment of Pali Text Society in 1882 in England marks the beginning of the modern studies in Pali in the Western world. Thomas William Rhys Davids (1843-1922) who started PTS, then a junior civil servant in the British administrative service, had his first lessons in Pali from the learnt monk called Yatramulle Dhammarama. He had further guidance of such eminent Sri Lankan scholar monks as Waskaduwe Sri Subhuti. It is significant to note that while some traditional minded monks in Sri Lanka did not like the idea of printing the Tripiṭaka in papers a large group of other monks supported Rhys Davids actively in his endeavour by subscribing in advance the cost of printing of earlier texts when actually PTS was struggling to survive (Wickrameratne 1984, 152-3).

The Oriental Studies Society Started at the turn of the century by the British Government, the society has been a main institute which catered the study of subject such as Sinhala, Pali, Sanskrit, and Prakrit. Vidurupola Piyatissa Nayaka Thera who became one of the leading Pali scholars who composed literature in Pali was the first to pass all three examinations conducted by the society and claimed the Panḍit degree. Ever since, the successful completion of the final examination of this society has become the hallmark of traditional Buddhist scholarship in this country. Particularly during the early decades of this century when the universities in the modern sense were yet to be established, most of the academic activities of t h e country owe to the erudite monks who successfully completed these examinations. Welivitiye Sri Sorata, Balangoda Ananda Maithreva, Yakkaduwe Sri Pannarama,

318

Asanga Tilakaratne

Palannoruwe Vimaladhamma, Induruwe Uttarananda, Henpitagedara Nanasiha, and Balapitiye Sri Visuddhaloka are few of such names. Although most of the Buddhist monks are well-versed in Pali and Sanskrit, they were not so with English. Among the leading of the Buddhist and Pali scholars who were competent in English are Suriyagoda Sumangala Thera who edited the Dhammapada and particularly Aggamahāpaṇdita1 Polwatte Buddhadatta Thera who, in addition to editing a large number of Pali texts for PTS,2 complied English-Pali Dictionary (1949) and PaliEnglish Dictionary (PTS 1955) and wrote text books in both Sinhala and English for learning Pali. Among his other writings, History of Pali Literature, two volumes, written in Sinhala (1956-7) and the updated version of the Mahāvaṃsa are well-known. In addition to those works, he edited, for the first time, some lesser known Pali books connected with the recent history of Buddha-sasana in Sri Lanka. The Buddhist monastery called Vajiraramaya and its creator Palene Vajiranana Nakaya Maha Thera (1878-1955) cannot be forgotten when we discuss the contribution of the monks to the Buddhist scholarship in English medium. Vajiranana Thera was himself a traditional scholar who had completed the Vidyodaya Parivena education winning the śyāmarāja Price (a prize established by the king of Thailand for the student who excels in all subjects in the final examination). Some of his students such as Narada Maha Thera (1897-1983) and Piyadassi Maha Thera (1914-1998) were English educated when they were ordained and they made a valuable contribution by writing Dhamma books in English and also by translating Pali texts into English. Narada Maha Thera translated the Dhammapada and the Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha into English with annotations while Piyadassi Nayaka Thera wrote well-known The Buddha’s Ancient Path in addition to many other writings both in Sinhala and English. Ñānamoli Thera, an English national, who translated into English number of texts such as the Visuddhimagga, the Khuddakapāṭha, and the Netti ect., the last two published by PTS, is also a disciple of Vajiranana Nayaka Thera. There are several important projects started in the first few decades of the century which are the landmarks in the Buddhist academic 1  A very high honourific title given by the state of Myanmar. 2  He has edited the following books for PTS: Nāmarupapariccheda (1914), Abhidhammāvatāra ( 1915), Rupārupavibhāga (1915), Sammohavinodanī (1923), Vinayavinicchaya and Uttaravinicchaya (1927), and Niddesa Aṭṭhakathā (1931-40). Most of these Pali books he has published in Sri Lanka in Sinhala characters too.

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

319

activities. The main focus of such activities has been the edition and the translation of the Buddhist canon. Making it available for the large public was the purpose.

Hewawitarana commentary project Outstanding among such projects is the one for the edition and publication of the Pali commentaries funded by the bequest donated by Simon Hewawitarana (1875-1913). Under this project all the Pali commentaries for the Buddhist canon have been edited by the leading Buddhist scholar monks of the country3 and published i n 49 volumes. In addition to these texts, it has also published seven texts from the Tripitaka itself, namely, the Cariyāpiṭaka, Pārājikapāḷī, Dhammasaṇgaṅi, Jātakapāḷī (vols. i & ii), Khuddakapāṭha & Dhammapada and Catubhanavārapāḷi. The project was completed by 1947, these texts are accepted as standard. Recently in 1982 Soma Hewawitarana, the widow of Hewawitarana, donated her entire state to reprint the texts and to continue with the publication of the texts of Tnipiṭaka. The reprint has already been completed. In the first five decades of this century there have been many other individual projects started b y various Buddhist religious and educational centres. The Vidyodaya Parivena has started a series to publish the Pali tīka (the sub-commentaries). It was started under the guidance of Kahave Ratanasara Thera, the then principal of the Parivena and its first publication, Abhidhammattha Vibhāvinītīkā, came out in 1933. The Vidyalankara Parivena was active in similar ventures and one of the unique activities initiated by this centre of Buddhist education was to hold a saṅgāyanā of Tripiṭaka. The entire Tripiṭaka was recited identifying, in the process, variant readings from a number of Ola leaf texts. The ultimate idea was to publish a more accurate version of the Tripiṭaka. Although the saṅgāyanā aspect of the project was completed during 1950-3, the publishing part did not materialise. However, only one text was published under this project, namely, the Majjhima-nikāya Mūlapaṇṇāsaka (first 50 discourses) 3  Siri Dhammaramatissa, Mapalagama Chandajoty, Weliwitiye Sorata, Suriyagoda Sumangala, Weboda Sangharatana, Bihalpola Sri Dewarakkhita, Heyyantuduwe Siri Dewamitta, Kahawe Siri Ratanasara, Palannoruwe Wimaladhamma, Pamunuwe Buddhadatta, Widurupola Piyatissa, Boruggamuwe Siri Rewata, Welipitiye Dewananda, Yagirala Pannananda, Lunupokune Dhammananda, Madugalle Siri Siddhatta, Morontuduwe Dhammananda, Rerukane Ariyanana, Madana Jinaratana, Siri Anomadassi, Baddegama Siri Piyaratana, Kukulnape Siri Devarakkhita, Doranagod Nanasena, and Karandana Jinaratana.

320

Asanga Tilakaratne

in 1946 edited by Yakkaduwe Pannarama Thera, the principal of the Parivena. The introduction which was called Samannesanā by t h e author borrowing a term from me Vīmaṃsaka-sutta of the Majjhimanikāya remains even today one of the finest examples of the critical study of text and the content thereof. Among other similar projects, P de S Manatunga Tripiṭaka Publication Series, under which the Dīgha-nikāya was edited by Walagedara Somalokatissa Nayaka Thera and published in 1954, is worth mentioning. The complete Majjhima-nikāya was edited by Kirielle Nanawimala Nayaka Thera and published in 1937 as a part of Tr i piṭaka publication project sponsored by N edun Vihara, a well-known ancient monastery in the country. It does not seem that these projects lasted to complete their goals. Nevertheless, they mark an important trend in the academic activities of the first half of this century in the country. AP de Zoysa Translation Project, a single-handed translation project worth mentioning, is one started by AP de Zoysa. With the help of the erudite Buddhist monks of the country he has translated into Sinhala the entire Tripiṭaka and its commentaries, printed material running into about hundred volumes.

More recent period: (The second half of the last century) Buddha Jayanti: The year 1956 which marked the Buddha Jayanti or the 2500th anniversary of the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha, was the beginning of new life and new direction in the study and research in Buddhism in Sri Lanka. The following are the academic activities initiated to mark this anniversary.

Buddha Jayanthi Tripiṭaka text series One of the major projects started as a Buddha Jayanti activity is to edit and to translate the Pali texts into Sinhala. The series was called Buddha Jayanti Tripiṭaka Granthamālā and started its work in 1956 and was completed in 1989. Twenty-four leading Buddhist monks were selected to assign this work. Among them five most erudite monks, Welivitiye Sorata Thera, Paravahera Vajiranana, Balangoda Ananda Maitreya, Labugama Lankananda, and Kodagoda Nanaloka, were appointed as the Supreme Editorial Board.4 The first translation appeared in 1959. It was the 4  The rest of editorial board comprised the following erudite monks: Keselwatugoda Ratanajothi, Haldanduwana Dhammarakkhita, Ambalangoda Dhammakusala, Kadawadduwa Siriniwasa, Palannoruwe Wimaladhamma, Dehigaspe Pannasara, Weragoda Amaramoli, Parawahera Pannananda, Galagama Saranankara, Hegoda

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

321

Pārājikapāḷī edited and translated by Weragoda Amaramoli. Labugama Lankananda Nayaka Thera was the chief editor and president of the board from its inception in 1956 to its completion in 1989. In addition to supervising and editing the translations, he himself translated nine books into Sinhala. The text has been collated with several manuscripts and with the edition of Myanmar Chaṭṭha Saṅgāyanā edition. The style of the translation is archaic Sinhala and the content always represents the Buddhaghosian interpretation.

Encyclopaedia of Buddhism Another important Buddha Jayanti project was Encyclopaedia of Buddhism started in 1956. Professor GP Malalasekera, one of the leading figures in Buddha Jayanti activities and a renowned Buddhist scholar and a lay Buddhist leader, was appointed the first editor-in-chief. An office was set up and an editorial board was appointed. Malalasekera was editor-in-chief untill his death in 1976. Since then, Professor OH de A Wijesekera, Dr. Jotiya Dhirasekera, and Bandhula Jayawardhana have served in that capacity. The present editor-in-chief is Dr. WG Weeraratne (1998). So far six volumes have been completed and the last volumes cover up to ʻ K’. The project is expected to comprise ten volumes altogether.5 Of the research and study projects started to mark the Buddha Jayanti, the Tripiṭaka translation and publication project continued into 1980s and the Encyclopaedia of Buddhism project still continues. During the one half decades between the Buddha Jayanti and t h e beginning of the 1970s’ there has been a great resurgence in the Buddhist literature in Sinhala. Such venerable authors as Rerukane Chandawimala, Henpitagedara Nanasiha, Balapitiye Visuddhaloka, Ambalangoda Dhammakusala, and Balangoda Ananda Maithreya have produced many works in the Dhamma. Rerukane Chandawimala Thera is foremost among the authors who presented t h e teaching of the Buddha in simple Sinhala to the religiously minded readers . It is significant to note t h a t t h e study of me Abhidhamma has Dhamminda, Katukurunde Dewananda, Akuretiye Amarawansa, Mirisse Gunasiri, Karagampitigoda Sumanasara, Watugedara Amarasiha, Induruwe Uttarannada, Madihe Pannasiha, kosgoda Dhammawansa, and Talalle Dhammananda. 5  The project which was temporarily halted after the demise of WG Weeraratne in 2014 has been resumed from this year (2018). The current editorial board with Asanga Tilakaratne as editor-in-chief focuses on editing and updating the content, filling missed out entries, and, in particular, developing a web version of the content.

322

Asanga Tilakaratne

become popular from the early decades of this century and there have been several expositions of the Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha, the most popular text for the beginners in me Abhidhamma, in simple Sinhala. Among such works, Rerukane Chandawimala Thera’s books (Abhidharma Mārgaya) and Dr. Amaradasa Ratnapala’s fivevolumed exposition (Abhidharma Pradīpikā) deserve to be mentioned particularly. WF Jayasuriya’s The Psychology and Philosophy of Buddhism (Colombo, 1963) belongs in the same genre but written in English. The popular presentations of Buddhism in Sinhala language continue without break and presently of the annual Sri Lanka publications in Sinhala roughly about 8% is on Buddhism. A noteworthy addition to the studies of Buddhism in Sinhala is the translation of the Buddhist Sanskrit texts into Sinhala. Pioneers in t h i s kind of studies are Moratuve Sasanaratana Thera who was the professor of Sanskrit in t h e Vidyalankara University (presently University of Kelaniya) and Henpitagedara Ñānasīha Thera. The former published a Sinhala translation of Nagirajuna’s Mūlamādhyamikakāri.kā and Santideva’s Bodhicaryāvatāra with Sanskrit texts, and the latter published the text and the translation of the Vijnaptimātratāsiddhi and a part of the Jānaprasthāna. He is also among the first Buddhist monks to present t h e Mahayana teachings to the Sinhala readers and at times argues for their better logical character. More recently, M Gunatilake and Gunapala Dharmasiri, two professors from the University of Peradeniya have translated into Sinhala a large number of basic Mahayana and Vajrayana texts.

Translation of the tripiṭaka into simple sinhala This project started in 1993 comes under the Ministry of Buddha sāsana. The idea was to produce a simplified Sinhala version of the Tripiṭaka. Five advisors and nine editors, all scholarly Buddhist monks, have been appointed for the task. Under this project already the Majjhimanikāya has been completed and published; the Saṃyutta-nikāya awaits publication and the rest is still being done.6 6  By now (2018) Sutta piṭaka has been completed and being published. The board is working on the Vinaya and Abhidhamma Piṭakas. Currently Balangoda Sobhita Thera, Principal of Vidyodaya Pirivena, heads the team, and the other erudite monastic members are Matale Dhammakusala, Wegama Piyaratana, Madauyangoa Wijayakitti, Tirikunamale Ananda, Medagampitiye Wijithadhamma, Kivulegedara Narada and Akiriye Somananda. Among those who took part in the project at different periods and by now deceased are the following erudite monks: Labugama Lankananda, Balangoda Ananda Maithreya, Madihe Pannasiha, Akuretiye Amarawansa, Welamitiyawe Dhammarakkhita, Horana Wajiranana, Doratiyawe Nandasara, Pitipana Dhammaloka,

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

323

The National Universities and Buddhist Studies At present, the academic studies and research are done mainly through universities, higher academic institutes, and learned societies. Presently there are twelve universities in the country. The oldest of them is the University of Peradeniya which has the oldest department of Pali, and subsequently Buddhist civilization was added to it. Professor GP Malalasekera was the founder professor of this department and he served in that capacity from 1942 untill his retirement in 1969. Among Malalakesera’s monumental contributions, the edition of Mahāvaṃsaṭīkā (Colombo, 1938), History of Pali Literature (1936), and Dictionary of Pali Proper Names (PTS) are noteworthy. He was succeeded by Professor NA Jayawickrama (b.1920) who can be considered the leading Pali scholar in Sri Lanka today. He edited and translated into English Jātakanidānakathā (Colombo, 1951) and the Nidānakathā of the Vinaya (The Inception of Discipline and Vinayanidāna, SBB vol. XXI, London, 1962). His, The Epochs of the Conqueror (PTS, 1968) is the translation of the Jinakālamāli. His editions of Buddhavaṃsa and Cariyāpiṭaka (1974), Vimānavatthu and Petavatthu (1974), and Kathāvatthuppakaraṇa-Aṭṭhakathā (1979) were published by PTS. In addition to these editions and translations, Professor Jayawickrama has written a number of papers to academic journals on issues related to Pali. Although retired from active university teaching he is still active in the field of Pali and Buddhist studies. Professor Lily de Silva who edited the Dīgha-nikāya Aṭṭhakathā-tīkā which was published by PTS was the professor untill 1996. Currently Professor PD Premasiri (now retired), a comparative philosopher by training, heads the department. He can be described as one of the leading scholars in the country who specialises in Buddhism and Western comparative philosophy. He has published on Buddhist ethics and epistemology from a comparative point of view. The department has Professor Cetiya Vitanachchi (now retired), one of the most experienced Pali teachers in the university system of the country. The department also has a group of young scholars who have yet to establish their identity in the field. The Department of Philosophy at Peradeniya has been the birth place of modern philosophical analysis of Buddhism. The late Professor Yatagama Dhammapala, Henegama Kalyanadhamma, Alubomulle Ratanajoti, Dadalle Nanaloka, Diganatenne Sumangala, Kanaweralle Chandawimala, Hegoda Khemananda, Puhulpola Wanaratana, Weligama Nanaratana, Bellana Nanawimala, Alubomulle Saddhananda, Theripaha Somannada, Davuldena Nanissara, and Ambalangoda Sumangala.

324

Asanga Tilakaratne

KN Jayatilleke who has published on Buddhist epistemology, ethics, and social philosophy can be regarded as the architect of this modern interpretation. In his monumental work, Early Buddhist Theory o f Knowledge (1963), he convincingly argued that early Buddhism is empiricist in its theory of knowledge. The line of interpretation initiated by him has been followed and developed by subsequent scholars like David J Kalupahana (who was one t i m e in Peradeniya), Padmasiri de Silva (who has published on Buddhism and modern psychology), Gunapala Dharmasiri whose basic research is on the Buddhist critique of Christian concept of God and has recently published a sharp critique of Western thedicine, PD Premasiri basically an ethical philosopher, and Asanga Tilakaratne whose research is focused on philosophy of language and religion from a comparative point of view. Presently in Peradeniya department o f Philosophy, there are Professor RD Gunaratane who is trained in philosophy of science and has published on Buddhist and Western logic, Professor Gunapala Dharmasiri, and ADP Kalansuriya (All retired and the last two deceased by 2018.). who has published on Buddhism and Wittgenstein in addition to his number of useful books in Sinhala on different philosophers and philosophical movements in Western philosophy. Among the other Peradeniya departments which do Buddhist related studies, the Department of Classical Language has Professor Ratana Handurukanda who specialises on Buddhist Sanskrit and Tibetan literature and Dr. Waragoda Pemaratana Thera who specialises on Buddhist Sanskrit literature. Departments of Sinhala, History, and Archaeology by their very nature of the subject matters have scholars working on Buddhist related themes. In the Department of Sinhala which has a great history of scholars such as Professor DE Hettiarrachchi who was an expert in ancient Sinhala Buddhist literature, there is Professor Ananda Kulasuriya (now retired) an expert in ancient Sinhala literature and particularly on the ethics and philosophy of the Jātakas. Professor KNO Dharmadasa of the same department has published on the Sinhala Buddhist identity. Currently, he is the editor- in-chief of Sinhala Encyclopedia. In archaeology, Professor Sudarshan Seneviratana specialist on Indian Buddhist history and archaeology, particularly that of Maurya period; and Wetara Mahinda Thera has published on the Buddhist monastic medical practice in ancient Sri Lanka. In the Department of History, Professor KM de Silva has published extensively on the history of Sri Lanka both onancient and modern periods. Professor Sirima Kiribamuna has published on Sri Lanka Buddhist history, particularly

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

325

on the early period. Professor RALH Gunawardena specialises on the economics of the medieval Buddhist monasteries and has published on historiography of Sri Lanka and the issue of Sinhala Buddhist identity. Professor PVB Karunatilake has published on the history of Buddhism. There are other members of this department who have touched one aspect or other of Buddhism in their research. As a whole, Peradeniya has a substantially qualified large group of scholars in Buddhism. The University of Kelaniya, the University of Jayawardenepura, and the University Ruhuna have departments for Sri Pali and Buddhist Studies. The former two were first established in 1959 by turning Vidyalankara and Vidyodaya Parivenas into universities as a mark of the recognition of their academic service. In 1978, they were renamed in their present manner to give a uniform character to all university names. With certain educational reforms which did not give a high value to traditional subjects such as Pali and Buddhist studies, there was a decline in these areas of studies for some time. However, the situation seems to be changing for better now. Professor NA Jayawickrama and WS Karunaratne who were in Peradeniya earlier served in Kelaniya towards the end of their career. Professor Y Karunadasa, a member of this department, has been released to head the Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies. Professor MMJ Marasinghe (1930-2018) whose research is on the development of the idea of gods (Gods in Buddhism, Colombo, 1974) and Dr. K Anuruddha Thera who is an excellent teacher of Pali are retired now (and pased away by 2018). Presently, the department has Professor Tilak Kariyawasam (1942) who specialises on the development of the concept of Buddha, and Professor Sumanapala Galmangoda who specialises in the Abhidhamma and the textual studies working as the head of the department. Devalegama Medhananda Thera has published in Sinhala on the history of Buddhist schools. AA Jayasuriya, although has not published much, is one of the most experienced Pali teachers in the university. Additionally, there is a group of young Buddhist scholars attached to the department as lecturers. A special feature of the department is that it conducts, a Buddhist Studies Diploma course in English medium for foreign students and the successful completion of which enables the students to be enrolled as undergraduates in the department. The Departments of Sanskrit, Sinhala, History, Archaeology, and Linguistics (of University of Kelaniya) too have scholars who are engaged in various aspects of Buddhist studies. The Department

326

Asanga Tilakaratne

of Sanskrit had so the illustrious scholars attached to it. At its very inception, it was well-known as Shanti Bhikkhu Shastri who was the head of it. Subsequently, Professor MHF Jayasuriya, a Vedic scholar, and Professor S Weeratunga, a scholar in Sanskrit literature, served as the heads of this department. Presently, relieved of active university service they still are active in academic activities. Although Sanskrit is taught in all major universities in the country, only in Kelaniya and Jaffna there are separate departments for Sanskrit. In Kelaniya, W Wijesinghe and Kahapola Sugataratana Thera are involved in Buddhist Sanskrit Studies. The Department of Sinhala is one of the largest and it has resources for those who wish to study the ancient and modern Buddhist Sinhala literature. Professor Chandrasiri Palliyaguruge, Somararatne Balasuriya, and Ananda Abesiriwardane are among the senior scholars of the department. In the department of history, there are Professor Amaradasa Liyanagamage who specialises in the history of the medieval Sri Lanka and Professor Mangala Ilangasinghe who has published on the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and outside. In the Department of Linguistics there is a group of qualified scholars headed by Professor WS Karunatilake who are engaged in the studies of Sinhala, Pali, and Sanskrit texts. Many foreign scholars who conduct their research with Sinhala and Buddhist literature as their source material have found this department very helpful. The Department of Archaeology has Professor Senake Bandaranayake who is one of the most known archaeologist in the country. He has been the director of Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology from its inception. He has published extensively on Buddhist monastic architecture in Sri Lanka. The department works in close co-operation with the Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology. The Department of Pali and Buddhist Studies at the University of Sri Jayawardenepura had an eminent Pali scholar, Professor LPN Perera, who later served as the vice-chancellor in the same university. He wrote a highly acclaimed book on sexual life in ancient India as revealed in the Vinayapiṭaka (see below for details). Presently there is Professor Chandra Wickramagamage (1936) who is an expert in Pali, Buddhist arts, and archaeology in Sri Lanka. For several years he edited a useful journal for Pali studies, Dhārā. Lately, he has been publishing more on Buddhist arts and archaeology. Some of his noteworthy publications in this area are: Principles of Buddhist Iconography, First Report of Archaeological Excavations at Abhayagiri Vihara, Second Report of Archaeological Excavations at Abhayagiri Vihara, and Architectural Remains: Anuradhapura Sri Lanka . In addition to these publications,

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

327

he has published on individual ancient monuments in both Sinhala and English. Professor Chandima Wijebandara specialises in Buddhist culture, and Professor Bellanvila Wimalaratana Thera’s speciality is Buddhist arts and iconography. Although there is no separate department for Sanskrit in Jayawardenepura, the subject has been very much alive. Professor Mahinda Palihawadana (1926) who started as a Vedic scholar has expanded his research interests into Buddhist Sanskrit and Pali literature. Presently, there is Professor Walter Marasinghe, who has published substantially on classical Indian and Buddhist sculpture, functioning as the head of the section. In the departments of history and Sinhala too there are scholars engaged in Buddhist related studies. Professor SB Hettiarachchi in history and Professor Gatare Dhammapala Thera in Sinhala combine their studies with Buddhism. The department in the University of Ruhuna is a relatively new one, established in 1979 with the inception of the university. It has several emerging young Buddhist scholars. Dr. Ananda Ruhunuhewa is an expert in the history and philosophy of Japanese and Chinese Buddhism. Dr. Wilegoda Ariyadeva specialises on the social and political philosophy of Buddhism. Dr. Madagama Nandawamsa specialises in Pali. Beligalle Dhammajoti Thera has published on the economic philosophy of Buddhism and interested in social application of Buddhism. University of Colombo had a department for Pali and Buddhist Studies earlier, but it was closed down with the amalgamation of universities in 1972. However, the university has restarted Buddhist studies since 1995 and offered a course in Buddhist studies and pali as an undergraduate subject. At the moment this is conducted as a part of the Department of Sinhala. It is hoped that in future it will grow to be a department of its own.7 In Colombo, the Department of Sinhala has several scholars who are engaged in Buddhist related research. Dr. MB Ariyapala, the former professor of Sinhala, is an expert in medieval Sinhala culture and ancient Sinhala literature which is basically Buddhist. Professor H Wijewardana is an expert in ancient Sanskrit and Sinhala literature. Professor JB Disanayaka is an expert in contemporary use of Sinhala language.He has lately published extensively on Sinhala Buddhist culture and history. 7  Department of Buddhist Studies was established in Colombo in 2017 with Asanga Tilakaratne, who served there as the Chair Professor of Pali and Buddhist Studies during 2009-2018, as its founder head.

328

Asanga Tilakaratne

Postgraduate Institutes of Pali and Buddhist Studies In Sri Lanka, in addition to the graduate studies in the university departments, there are special institutes established for that purpose. These institutes usually form part of a university. An institute devoted for Pali and Buddhist studies8 and research is Postgraduate lnstitute of Pali and Buddhist Studies a part of the University of Kelaniya. Established in 1972, it caters to advanced students who wish to pursue their studies leading to MPhil and PhD degrees. The Institute has been organized under three departments: Buddhist Sources (Head: Dr. K Dhammajoti Thera), Buddhist Thought (Head: Dr. Asanga Tilakaratne), and Buddhist Culture (Head: Dr. Abhayawansa). There is an academic and administrative Director who runs the institute. For the last seven years Professor Y Karunadasa (1934) has been the Director. He is well-known among the Buddhist scholars for his Buddhist Analysis of Matter (Colombo, 1967) and many other writings on Theravada Buddhist philosophy. In order to prepare graduates for advanced studies, the Institute conducts one-year postgraduate diploma course and one-year Masters course. In addition, the Institute conducts classes in Pali and Sanskrit for those who pursue higher studies. Currently, there are about fifty graduate students, both local and foreign, who have been registered for higher degrees. The Institute has a publication programe under which, since 1994, it has already published nine books,9 six in English and three in Sinhala, on Buddhist philosophy, history, and culture. The Institute has a lending and reference library containing a large number of ancient and modern texts on Buddhism and related subjects. The general flavour of the research conducted by the students is 8  The Institute is presently located at: No.113, Dutugemunu Street, Kohuwala. 9  OH de A Wijesekera, The Syntax in the Nikāyas, 1993; Asanga Tilakaratne, Nirvana and Ineffability: A Study of the Buddhist Theory of Reality and Language, 1993; G Panabokke, History of the Buddhist Sangha in India and Sri Lanka,1994; LPN Perera, Sexuality in Ancient India: A Study Based on the Pali Vinaya Piṭaka, 1995; Chandima Wijebandara, Early Buddhist and Its Intellectual Milieu, 1995; D.J Kalupahana , Nagarjuna and Sinhala Buddhism, 1995; Bkikkhu Dr. K Dhammajoti, The Chinese Version of the Dhammapada, 1996; Akuretiye Amaravansa Nayaka Thera and Hemachandra Disanayaka, trs., Vamsatthappakāsinī-Mahāvaṃsa Tīkāva (Vaṃsatthappakāsinī, the Sub-commentary of the Mahāvaṃsa), 1994; Yatadolavatte Dhammavisuddhi Thera, Polonnaru ha Dambadeni Katikāvat (Katikāvats of Polonnaru and Dambadeni, 1995; and Kapila Abhayawansa, Emmanuel Kantge Jnanavibhagaya (The Epistemology of Emmanuel Kant), 1997.

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

329

conceptual and philosophical. Historical and textual studies come next. The department for Buddhist sources has produced a number of studies in editing, annotating, and translating into English the Chinese Buddhist texts under the guidance of its head, Dr. Dhammajoti, a Buddhist monk of Chinese origin and expert in Buddhist Chinese texts. The Institute has taken steps to publish two academic journals called Anveeṣaṇā in English and Sinhala. The English journal, Journal of Pali and Buddhist Studies, will appear in the course of 1998.

Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology Like its counterpart in Buddhism, Postgraduate Institute of Archeology is a part of the University of the Kelaniya.10 Established in 1986, it specialises in archaeology of Sri Lanka. Since the majority of the studies of archaeology in this country is focused on the Buddhist monuments, this Institute has developed to be a centre of Buddhist studies in addition to its broader focus on the subject in general. Its main function is to guide advanced students in MA, MPhil, and PhD in different branches of archaeology. It also conducts postgraduate diploma and MSc courses, the course-work programs with emphasis on methodology and techniques. Professor Senake Bandaranayake, a well­known archaeologist of Sri Lanka, has been the Director of the Institute from its inception. His major work, Buddhist Monastic Architecture in Sri Lanka, is a standard work in the field.

Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka The University11 was established in 1981 by the Government of Sri Lanka as a separate institute for higher study and research in Pali language and Buddhism. The idea was conceived by Walpola Rahula Thera, a well-known Sri Lankan Buddhist scholar monk. He was the first chancellor and Dr. Kakkapalliye Anuruddha Thera, a reputed Pali scholar, was the first Vice-Chancellor. Originally it comprised four campuses located in four different leading monasteries, and only the Buddhist monks were admitted as undergraduate students. Later, the four-campus arrangement was given up and the university was moved to one campus at Homagama close to Colombo. The students are mainly but not exclusively Buddhist monks. Pali language and a study of the fundamentals of Buddhism are compulsory for all the students. 10  Located at: No. 240, Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo 11  Administraterial Office: 214, Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo; Campus: Gurulugomi Mawatha, Homagama, Sri Lanka

330

Asanga Tilakaratne

Non-monks are admitted as external students. The University has three departments and runs under two deans, a vice-chancellor, and a registrar. The University has a research unit under a director of research (first Professor NA Jayawickrama and subsequently Professor Oliver Abeynayake) in order to facilitate graduate studies. The subjects range from the teaching of the Buddha, Pali grammar and literature, Sanskrit literature, and history of Buddhism to Sri Lankan Buddhist culture. Generally, the medium of study is Sinhala. The research unit has also published a collection of papers on the nature of Sri Lankan Buddhism. The university has a journal published annually in English medium, Sri Lanka Journal of Buddhist Studies. The university has a well-equipped library for Buddhist studies consisting of books in Sanskrit, Pali, Sinhala, and English.

Buddha Sravaka Bhikkhu University, Anuradhapura The university was started in 1969 as Buddha Sravaka Dharmapithaya and situated in the sacred city of Anuradhapura. The original plan of the institute was to train the young members of the Sangha in Buddhism and related disciplines. The institute functioned as a centre for traditional education with success for about two decades. Lately, however, due to various internal and external difficulties, the institute was in disarray. Currently, the institute has been re-established under a new act as a university functioning under the Ministry of Higher Education. The present Vice Chancellor (1999) is Dr. Waragoga Pemaratana Thera, a Buddhist Sanskrit scholar by training from University of Peradeniya. It is hoped that the new university will grow up to be a centre of excellence for higher studies in Buddhism.

Societies and organisations devoted to Buddhist Studies and research Royal Asiatic Society (RAS), established in 1845, is perhaps the oldest academic society in the country. From its very beginning, Buddhism and Buddhist literature in Sinhala, Pali, and Sanskrit have been prominent among the areas of focus although by no means it was confined to Buddhist subjects. In 1915 Sir Robert Chalmers established a fund with the society to print the Pali Tripiṭaka and he wished it to be named Aluvihara Edition in recognition of the Sri Lankan textual tradition started at Aluvihara, the monastery where the Tripiṭaka was first committed to writing. The Papancasūdanī, the commentary to the Majjhima-nikāya

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

331

was printed under this project completely in two parts. The second part came out in 1930. In 1938 Malalasekera’s edition of the Mahāvaṃsaṭikā was published. Due to insufficiency of funds the project did not continue. More recently RAS has started a project to translate into Sinhala the Pali commentaries of Tripiṭaka. The initial proposal was made by the late Dr. Nandadeva Wijesekera, a well­known social historian whose research done well within the field of history of Buddhism. The idea has been revived in early 1990s and with financial assistance from the Buddha Sāsana Fund the work is now progressing under the direction of Professor MB Ariyapala. So far, parts of several commentaries have been translated but they are yet to be printed.12 Oriental Studies Society (OSS), started by the British Government in 1902 with the participation of the erudite members of the Sangha including Hikkaduwe Sumangala Thera and Ratmalane Dharmarama Thera, the Principals of Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara respectively, is one of the oldest academic societies of the country. OSS has done a great service for the development of the Oriental scholarship of the country. The successful completion of all the three parts of the examination conducted by the society upon which he is conferred the Panḍit degree is still taken to be the mark of high traditional scholarship. From its conception, the society has been the intellectual forum of the learned monks and laymen. The society has been publishing a journal which characterises the traditional knowledge of the country. Buddhist Publication Society (BPS), Kandy, originally conceived in the mind of AS Karunaratne, a devout Buddhist in Kandy, and started in a very simple manner in 1958 with the association of another devout Buddhist, Richard Abeysekera, under the guidance of Nyanaponika Thera (1901-1994), a German scholar monk resident in Sri Lanka. BPS is by far the largest Buddhist publisher in the country. It publishes in both English and Sinhala. There are two series of regular English publications, The Wheel and Bodhi Leaves. The former consists of substantial tracts covering a wide range of topics, from meditation to the Buddhist perspective on contemporary social problems, and translations from the canon. Bodhi Leaves is a series of shorter essays, more informal in tone. Damsak, the Sinhala counterpart of The Wheel was added in 1960 and was edited by Piyadassi Thera, a well­known Buddhist missionary and scholar. In their 1997-98 catalogue, they list 336 publications in English including the two series and 60 full scale publications. Their 12  This project is now complete in 47 volumes, and published by Buddhist Cultural Centre with assistance from Buddha sāsana Ministry of Government of Sri Lanka.

332

Asanga Tilakaratne

Sinhala publications are also more than one hundred. Except its founder, Nyanaponika Thera, there are two other names of distinguished scholar Buddhist monks, namely, Nyanatiloka Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi. Nyanatiloka Thera, a monk of German origin, lived in Sri Lanka and wrote a large number of books on Buddhism both in English and German. His better known works include: The Buddha’s Path to Deliverance (BPS, 1982), a systematic exposition in the words of the Sutta Piṭaka; The Word of the Buddha (1981), An Outline of the Buddha’s teaching in the words of the Pali Canon; and Buddhist Dictionary: A Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines (1991). Bhikku Bodhi, a monk of American origin, is the President of BPS since 1994. He is one of the most reliable interpreters of the Theravada tradition in English language. Sāsana Sevaka Samitiya: It is a multifaceted Buddhist social and religious organisation which runs several institutes including a major centre for monastic Buddhist education, the Dharmāyatanaya, and a centre for research and information of Buddhism. The society was started in 1957 by Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera, who can be regarded as the foremost of the socially active Buddhist monks in the country with a view to train young Buddhist monks to meet the spiritual and social challenges of the present-day world. While training monks in the traditional and modern fields of knowledge, the Dharmāyatanaya has started two very significant academic projects: Pali Dictionary Project, and Encyclopaedia of Tripiṭaka Project. The Dictionary provides the Sanskrit equivalents to the terms, their Sinhala and English meaning, and the context. Three volumes have been published and the work up to ba in Pali alphabet has been completed. The medium of the Encyclopaedia is Sinhala and one volume of it has been released so far (The two projects remain incomplete as of this revision (2018). Sri Lanka Tripiṭaka Project: carried out by a group headed by Mettavihari Thera, a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk of Danish origin under the guidance of Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera. Its aim is primarily to computerise the Pali Canon, the commentaries, the subcommentaries, and the other classical treatises of Pali literature. The computerisation has completely done for the Pali Canon; and presently it works on Pali treatises skipping the commentaries and the sub­com mentaries for the work has been already completed by Vipassanā Research Institute of India with which the project works in close association. Buddhist Cultural Centre: Headed by K Wimalajoti Thera, the centre is a multipurpose Buddhist religious institute. In addition to its

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

333

many religious activities, the centre basically functions as a publishing and distributing house for Buddhist books both in Sinhala and English mediums. It has reprinted a number of books on Buddhism which are out of print and has published a fair amount of new books too. A series of books on the life of the Buddha meant for young children has been complied by Sanath Nanayakkara and has been published by the centre. Among its other activities, the project to present the Tripiṭaka in simple Sinhala language is noteworthy and the complete simplified versions of the Dīgha-nikāya and the Saṃyutta-nikāya are already out. Kirti Narampanava, a traditional scholar of Buddhism, is responsible for the translation. Tulana Research Centre: started in 1974 by an eminent Christian theologian and scholar in Buddhism, Fr. Aloysius Peiris SJ The centre has a strong element of comparative study between Buddhism and Christianity. The strength of Fr. Peiris is that he is equally competent in both religious systems. His contribution to interpretation of Christianity is so highly recognised that so far twenty-five Masters and doctoral dissertations have been written on his own Asian theology of liberation. For his doctoral research in Buddhism, he studied one of the major Buddhist commentators, Acariya Dhammapala of the 7th century. He has published a large number of papers on Buddhism and several major works on comparative studies between Buddhism and Christianity. Love Meets Wisdom: A Christian Experience of Buddhism (New York: Obris Books, 1988) and Fire and Water: Basic Issues in Asian Buddhism and Christianity (New York: Obr i s Books, 1996) are worth mentioning. For the last many years, with the assistance of Robert Cruz, he has been editing Dialogue, an international review for Buddhists and Christians, which is published by Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue. Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue: started in 1953 as the study centre for the Methodist church in Sri Lanka, the Institute subsequently developed a division for Buddhist studies. Presently, in addition to these two divisions, the Institute has another section for the studies of other faiths and ideologies. In 1962 Rev. Lynn de Silva who had a great interest in Pali and Buddhism became the director, and he gave more emphasis on Buddhist studies and Buddhist Christian dialogue. Between 1963-1973 Rev. Lynn de Silva had edited twentyeight issues of Dialogue, and in 1974 the new series of the journal started with Fr. Aloysius Peiris and several others in the editorial board. Today it is the major journal which is almost entirely devoted for the Buddhist

334

Asanga Tilakaratne

Christian dialogue. Among the themes so far it has focused, Gotama and Jesus as Teachers; Monastic Education, Christian and Buddhist; Woman and Man in Buddhism and Christianity; Religion and Slavery Then and Now; and Spiritual Authority and Secular are noteworthy. Presently, the Institute is headed by Marshall Fernando who is a keen student of both religions. The Institute has a library equipped with texts belonging to both religious traditions and it provides facilities for local and foreign students who wish to carry on their advanced studies in comparative religion and philosophy.

An overall characterisation and assessment of Buddhist research in Sri Lanka today Buddhist studies and research in Sri Lanka today may roughly be classified under the following categories: textual, conceptual and philosophical, historical and sociological, and comparative.

Textual studies Presently, the leading scholars who work in the field of textual edition and translationare Professors NA Jayawickrama, Professor Mahinda Palihawadana, and Lilly de Silva. Their work is focused on Pali texts and we have referred to them earlier. All of them are now retired from university service but still very much active in their studies. Oliver Abeynayaka, professor of Buddhist Studies at the Buddhist and Palli University of Sri Lanka, Colombo has worked on the information of the Khuddaka-nikāya (A Textual and Historical Analysis of the Khuddaka-nikāya, Colombo, 1984). Outside university circle, Bhikkhu Bodhi of BPS, referred to earlier, is one who has done considerable work in the area of textual translation and interpretation. His translation of the Sāmaññaphala-sutta (1989), the Brahmajāla-sutta (1992), the Mūlapariyāya-sutta (1992), and the Mahānidāna-sutta with their commentaries (1995); and the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha (1995), jointly with Bhikkhu Ñānamoli who translated The Visuddhimagga: The Path of Purification and many other Pali texts into English, are noteworthy.13 There are a few younger scholars who work in this field, but they have yet to establish their identity. Among those who work on doctrinal issues basing themselves on textual interpretation, Professor Sumanapala Galmangoda at the Kelaniya University and Toshiishi Endo may be mentioned. The former has worked in the Pali commentarial 13  Bhikkhu Bodhi has more recently translated the Aṅguttara-nikāya as The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha (2012) and the Saṃyuttanikāya as The Connected Discourses of the Buddha (2000), both published by Wisdom Publishers, Boston.

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

335

interpretation of Abhidhamma whereas the latter has worked on the commentarial developments of the concept of dāna (Dāna: the Development of Its Concept and Practice. Colombo, 1987) and the concept of the Buddha. His Buddha in Theravada Buddhism (Colombo, 1997) is a comprehensive analysis of the development of the concept of Buddha in the Theravada tradition. The Pali Aṭṭhakathā Correspondence Table (PTS, 1994) which Dr. Endo compiled jointly with Professors Sodo Mori and Y. Karunadasa is a useful guide to Pali textual studies . In the field of Buddhist Sanskrit literature, Professor Ratna Handurukanda of Peradeniya University is a leading figure. She is currently the professor of Sanskrit and quite active in the field. She has published on Sanskrit and Tibetan Vajrayana literature. Dr. Waragoda Pemaratana Thera of the same department has worked on the Yogacara literature. Another leading scholar in Buddhist Sanskrit, Professor Mahinda Palihawadana, the emeritus professor of Sanskrit at Jayawardenepura University, is a Sanskrit scholar of high standing who specialises on the Dhammapada studies. His joint edition and translation of the Dhammapada with John Ross Carter, Dhammapada New English Translation: With the First English Translation of the Commentarial Explanations of the Verses (Oxford University Press, 1987), has been well received and is a result of comparative study of Pali, Sanskrit, and Prakrit texts. The latest Sri Lankan addition to the Dhammapada studies is a Chinese version of Dhammapada by Dr. K Dhammajoti Thera of the Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies (Colombo, 1995). This is a study based on Pali, Sanskrit, Prakit, and Chinese texts and represents the latest developments in the field. The Buddhist Sources Department of the Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies with Dhammajoti Thera as its head is the only place where textual studies in Chinese Buddhist literature are done in Sri Lanka. W Wijesinghe and Kahapola Sugataratana Thera of Kelaniya Sanskrit Department, and Professor Gunapala Dharmasiri and Professor Gunaratne of Peradeniya University too need to be mentioned. Among the recent publications on Pali literature, Russell Webb’s An Analysis of the Pali Canon (BPS, 1991) is a short but helpful analysis of the canon, and Somapala Jayawardhana’s Handbook of Pali Literature (Colombo, 1995) is a useful introduction to the entire Pali literature arranged in alphabetical order. Textual edition and translation has been a highly developed field in Buddhist studies in the country. It is amply testified by the

336

Asanga Tilakaratne

Hewavitarana Commentary edition, Buddha Jayanti Tripiṭaka edition and translation etc. It is interesting to note that all the editors of the Hewavitarana project were Buddhist scholar monks. The entire editorial board of Buddha Jayanti edition too were Buddhist monks.14 However today, it seems that this scholarly tradition of Buddhist monks is on the wane. With the renewed emphasis on monastic education along with the establishment of Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka and the Buddha Sravaka Bhikshu University, it is hoped that the situation may change for better in future.

Conceptual and philosophical studies Doctrinal and philosophical analysis of Pali Canon can be considered a strong area in contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhist studies. One of the earlier work of this genre is Professor Ediriweera Sarachchandra’s Buddhist Psychology of Perception (Colombo, 1954; reprint 1994). Although this is a pioneering work in the field of psychology, the author himself did not continue this line of research. KN Jayatilleke’s Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (George, Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1963) remains one of the most significant contributions to the understanding of the philosophy of early Buddhism. Subsequently, Jayatilleke wrote on Buddhist ethics and social problems. Buddhism and Race Question, which he wrote in collaboration with GP Malalasekera, was published by UNESCO. His lectures on Buddhist Jurisprudence in The Hague (1967) marks the modern studies in Buddhist Law. Jayatilleke’s influence on Sri Lankan Buddhist studies is quite crucial. Continuation of his empiricist interpretation of Buddhism and comparative studies in Buddhist and Western philosophy can be seen in: David J Kalupahana’s History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities (Hawaii, 1992), Nagarjuna: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism (SUNY, 1987), Buddhist Psychology (SUNY, 1980), and many other writings although these have been published in the USA; Padmasiri de Silva’s Buddhist Psychology and Freudian Psychology (Macmillan, 1987), and other writings; PD Premasiri’s writings on Buddhist ethics and psychology; Gunapala Dharmasiri’s Buddhist Critique of Christian Concept of God (Colombo, 1971), and Nature of Medicine (Kandy, 1997); and Asanga Tilakaratne’s Nirvana and Ineffability: A Study of the Buddhist Theory 14  In addition, a project similarly constituted by Buddhist monastic scholars is the one to translate Tripiṭaka into simple Sinhala (283). The list of names included under the relevant sections can be considered representing the Buddhist monastic scholarship in the country from the beginning of the last century when Hewavitarna Commentary project was started to the present.

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

337

of Reality and Language (Colombo, 1993). Most of these works are comparative in their approach to the subject matter. Studies in Buddhist monastic law have been a prominent aspect in Sri Lankan studies. Professor Jotiya Dhirasekara’s (later bhikkhu Dhammavihari) Buddhist Monastic Discipline (Colombo, 1981) is an indepth study of the Theravada Buddhist monastic legal code. Following KN Jayatilleke’s line, recently Professor Nandasena Ratnapala, professor of sociology at Sri Jayawardenepura University has published both in Sinhala and English on Buddhist Jurisprudence. His Crime and Punishment in the Buddhist Tradition (Colombo, 1993) is an example. Dr. Ananda Grero’s An Analysis of Theravada Vinaya in the Light of Modern Legal Philosophy (Colombo, 1996) is a lucid presentation belonging to the same genre. Professor LPN Perera’s Sexual Life in Ancient India (Colombo, 1994) is based on the Pali Vinayapiṭaka. Analysis and exposition of the doctrine is an area in which a large number of Sri Lankan scholars are engaged in. A very popular, useful, and accurate introduction to the teaching of the Buddha is What the Buddha Taught of Walpola Rahula Thera (1907-1997), originally published in 1959. Piyadassi Thera’s The Buddha’s Ancient Path is a longer exposition of the basics of Buddhism. Professor Y Karunadasa’s Buddhist Analysis of Matter (1967), based on Abhidhamma and the discourses, has remained virtually the last word on the subject for the last thirty years. A large number of his papers dealing with early and later problems of Buddhist philosophy are a valuable addition to this category. Dr. Hammalawa Saddhatissa Thera who spent his latter half of his life in England as the head of The London Buddhist Vihara and edited several Pali texts for PTS is a Sri Lankan Pali scholar of international reputation. His Buddhist Ethics: the Essence of Buddhism (George Allen and Unwin, 1970) belongs to this category. Gnanananda Thera’s Concept and Reality (BPS, 1997), and Magic of the Mind (BPS, 1997); and Bhikkhu Bodhi’s The Noble Eightfold Path (BPS, 1994) are quite illuminating discussions of the early Buddhist doctrine. Professor MMJ Marasinghe’s Gods in Buddhism is a discussion on the development of the idea of divine beings in the early Buddhist literature. Dr. Pategama Gnanarama Thera’s Mul Budusamaya ha Vivarana Gatalu (Early Buddhism and Problems of Interpretation, Colombo, 1976) discusses problematic issues in early Buddhism. Asanga Tilakaratne’s Abhidharma Adhyana (Studies in Abhidharma, Colombo, 1995) is a collection of papers, mostly translated from English, containing the most recent developments in Abhidharma studies.

338

Asanga Tilakaratne

Buddhist philosophy of education has been a subject that has attracted attention of an emerging group of scholars. Professors LG Hewage and UD Jayasekera who were basically the historians of education were the pioneers of this field of study. Dr. Henry Weerasinghe (1934) of the University of Colombo has published a number of monographs on the Buddhist view of education. Political and social philosophy of Buddhism has attracted a number of scholars recently. A pioneering work in the genre is D.C. Wijayawardhana’s Revolt in the Temple, published in 1952. Senerat Wijayasundera has written Budusamaya ha Arthakramaya (Buddhism and Economics) which deals with economics from a Buddhist point of view. Dr. Dharmasena Hettiarachi’s Bauddha Arthika Darsanaya (Buddhist Economics Philosophy, Colombo, 1994) is so far the most comprehensive book in the field. Pategama Gnanarama Thera’s An Approach to Buddhist Social Philosophy (Singapore, 1996) is a useful introduction to the subject. Beligalle Dhammajoti Thera of the Rahuna University and Udagaladeniya Somaransi Thera (1996) too have published in this area in Sinhala. WG Weeraratna’s Individual and Society in Buddhism (Colombo, 1976) and Piyasena Disanayaka’s Political Thought of the Buddha (Department of Cultural Affairs, Colombo, 1977) too fall into the same category. One of the early works on the social and political applicability of Buddhism is Tissa Gnanatilaka Thera’s Minis Gatalu Pilibanda Bauddha Vigrahaya (Human Problems in a Buddhist Perspective, Colombo, 1979). The latest addition to this category is Nandasena Ratnapala’s Buddhist Democratic Theory and Practice (Colombo, 1997). Conceptual and philosophical studies have become very popular among the emerging scholars of Buddhism. Nevertheless, in many instances, the end results have never been as impressive as in the case of the pioneers of this field, e.g. KN Jayatilleke, Y Karunadassa etc. Lack of sufficient knowledge in primary languages such as Pali, Sanskrit, Tibetan etc., and secondary languages such as English, French, and German etc., has made the field of these scholars very narrow. What is needed is to curb the desire to go for quick result and re­establish the tradition of scholarship as a life-long process. Historical and sociological studies: The historical and sociological studies represent a highly developed field in Sri Lankan Buddhist studies and research. The tradition of historical studies of Buddhism has a long history in Sri Lanka. From their early beginnings, the Theravadins seem to have had a great sense of history. They started recording their

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

339

history at a very early date and the tradition has continued up to date. In contemporary historical studies of Buddhism, a pioneering work was done by Dr. EW Adikaram. His work, Early History of Buddhism in Ceylon (Colombo, 1947; reprint 1993), is based on the material available in the Pali commentaries and covers, up to the 5th century, the period covered by Mahanama Thera’s Mahāvaṃsa. It is simultaneously an excellent analysis of the nature, subject matter, and the history of the Pali commentaries. The history of Buddhism up to the end of the Anuradhapura period was covered by Dr. Walpola Rahula Thera’s History of Buddhism in Ceylon (Colombo, 1956). There is a group of historians who have covered the entire history of Buddhism in the country and its specific aspects. Among such studies, Ralf Gunawardane’s Robe and Plough: Monasticism and Economic Interest in Early Medieval Sri Lanka (The University of Arizona Press, 1979); Mangala illangasinghe’s Buddhism in Medieval SriLanka (Colombo, 1992); Mandis Rohanadheera’s Sri Lankave Sangha Sanvidhanaya; Madhayatana Yugaya (Organization of the Sangha in Sri Lanka: Medieval Period, Colombo, 1974); Professor Yatadolawatte Dhammavisuddhi Thera’s doctoral research on the Buddhist Sangha in Sri Lanka during 12001600 (PhD thesis, University of London, 1970); and Kitsiri Malalgoda’s Buddhism in Sinhalese Society 1750-1900 (California University Press, 1976) must be mentioned. The history of sacred Buddhist objects has been a popular subject since the ancient times. In the recent scholarship, Dr. Kumburugamuve Vajira Thera’s work on the history of the tooth relic and Dr. Welamitiyave Dhammarakkhita Thera’s (1927-) work on the history of Bodhi tree, Sri Mahabodhinvahanse: Ehi Itihasaya ha Tadanubaddha Sanskrutiya (Bodhi Tree: Its History and Culture, Colombo, 1994), are noteworthy. The history of society in ancient and medieval Sri Lanka has been dealt with by a group of able scholars. Among the earlier studies, Wilhelm Geiger’s works stand out. In addition to translating the entire Mahāvaṃsa into English and writing on the history of the country extensively, he wrote on the culture of the medieval Sri Lanka. Among the studies of the Sri Lankan scholars, Professor MB Ariyapala’s Society Medieval Ceylon (Colombo, 1956), its Sinhala translation: Madyakalina Lanka Samajaya (Colombo, 1962), and Hema Ellawala’s research on the same period are noteworthy. Dr. Walpola Rahula Thera’s Bhiksuvage Urumaya (Heritage of a Bhikkhu, Colombo, 1947) is a short but important contribution to the development of the selfconsciousness of the contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhist monk.

340

Asanga Tilakaratne

Studies in Buddhist art, architecture, and archaeology form an integral part of the studies of Buddhism. The field of study has had a great history with eminent scholars like S Paranavitana whose views on the pagoda, moon-stone, and many other aspects of Buddhist monastic architecture are quite established. Presently, there are a number of scholars who are working in this field attached to the government department of archaeology, university departments of archaeology at Peradeniya, Kelaniya, and Jayawardenepura, and Central Cultural Fund (CCF): Roland Silva, Senake Bandaranayake, PL Prematilaka, Shiran Deraniyagala, SB Hettiarachchi, Sirinimal Lakdusinghe, TG Kulantnge, Sudarshan Seneviratne, T Basnayaka etc. Professors Bandaranayake and Basnayaka have worked respectively on monastic architecture in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa periods. Professor Chandra Wickramagamage of Sri Jayawardenepura University has published a number of books in the field. Principles of Buddhist Iconography (Colombo, 1997) and his many other writings on Buddhist monuments deserve to be mentioned in this regard. Tiranagama Ratanasara Thera has published on the evolution of pagoda and Buddha statue (Colombo, 1967). Dr. Ananda Guruge (1928), a substantial writer on Buddhist themes, has published on Anagarika Dharmapala (Return to Righteousness) and other more recent Buddhist scholars of Sri Lanka (From the Living Fountains of Buddhism, Colombo, 1982), and The Buddhist art in India. Mahāvaṃsa: An Annotated New Translation with Prolegamina (Colombo, 1969) and Asoka: A Definitive Biography (Colombo, 1993) are major contributions by Guruge. Professor Bellanwila Wimalaratana Thera has published on The Concept of Mahapurisa and the Evolution of the Buddha Statue. Professor Anuradha Seneviratne of Peradeniya University and Professor JB Dissanayake of Colombo University too have written on the ancient Buddhist monuments. Sociological and anthropological study of Buddhism has been a fast growing field in recent years. It seems that Buddhism in Sri Lanka has been an extremely attractive subject for scholars all over the world. This may be described partly as a mark of increased interest in Buddhism particularly in the West. It is in fact not easy to record all the relevant events in this field of study for its vastness. What is given below is necessarily a sketch. Nur Yalman’s works in early 1960s are well-known: The Ascetic Buddhist Monks of Ceylon,’ Ethnology, Vol. 1, 1962; and Under the Bo Tree (University of California Press, 1967). Michael Ames is a recognised name in the field and has published on westernisation

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

341

and modernisation of Sinhalese Buddhism. Gananath Obeyesekera is a pioneer in this field. His concept of Protestant Buddhism has been accepted as a proper category by scholars working in the field. His article, ‘The Great Tradition and the little in the Perspective of Sinhalse Buddhism,’ Journal of Asian Studies (Vol. XXll, No. 2), has become a classic. One of his most recent publications on Sri Lankan Buddhism is Buddhism Transformed (Princeton 1988), jointly written with Richard Gombrich. Hienz Bechert is one of the leading scholars of modern history and sociology of Sri Lankan Buddhism. Some of his representative writings in the field are: ‘Theravada Buddhist Sangha, Some General Observations on Historical and Political Factors in its Development’ in Journal of Asian Studies (Vol. XXIX, No. 4); ‘Contradictions in Sinhala Buddhism’ in Tradition and Change in Theravada Buddhism, edited By Bardwell Smith; and ‘Sangha, State, Society, ‘Nation’: Persistence of Traditions in ‘Post-traditional’ Buddhist Societies’ in Daedalas (Vol. 102, No. 1). Stanley J. Tambiah is another well-known scholar who is working in this field, his more recent writings being focused on the Tamil conflict in Sri Lanka (Buddhism Betrayed?, Chicago, 1994). Richard Gombrich’s Precept and Practice was published in 1971 (Oxford University Press) and it is a major event in this area of study. Bardwell L. Smith is a scholar in contemporary Theravada Buddhism, particularly of Sri Lanka and Thailand. More historically and socially oriented is Urmila Phadnis’s Religion and Politics in Sri Lanka (New Delhi, 1976) which studies in particular the role of Buddhism in politics in 1956 and after. George D Bond’s The Buddhist Revival in Sri Lanka (University of South Carolina Press, 1988; Delhi, 1992) examines the Vipassanā meditation movement and socially active movements of Buddhism, particularly Sarvodaya movement, in post- 1956 Sri Lanka. HL Seneviratne has recently written, with S Wickramaratne, on the popularity of Bodhipūja among the Sri Lankan youth (American Ethnologist, Vol. IV). There is a considerable number of scholars who are working and publishing locally in the field of sociology and anthropology of Buddhism. Their writings are scattered in journals and newspapers, local and foreign. Dr. Newton Gunasinghe wrote on religion, caste, and social change in Sri Lanka. Dr. Jayadeva Uyangoda, a senior lecturer in history and political science at the University of Colombo is working in the area of Sangha and its social and political role with particular emphasis on caste, gender, and ethnic issues. His writings regularly appear in Pravāda, a journal edited by him Charles Abesekera, another social scientist who is interested in similar issues, for the Social

342

Asanga Tilakaratne

Scientists Association of Sri Lanka. Professor Kumari Jayawardena has been writing on contemporary history of Buddhism and religion in gender and ethnic issues. Senerat Wijayasundera has written extensively in favour of re-establishing the Order of Nuns in Lanka. Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera, Professor Nalin de Silva, Dr. Sasanka Perera, Nirmala Salgado, and several others are working on these issues presently. Comparative Studies: Comparative studies is a popular and growing field in contemporary Sri Lankan Buddhist studies. These studies may be subdivided into (i) comparative philosophical studies, (ii) comparative religious studies, and (iii) studies on Buddhism in relation to science. Comparative Philosophical Studies: Recent studies in Buddhist philosophy particularly by university teachers have been increasingly going in the direction of comparative philosophy. A pioneer in the field is KN Jayatilleke who studied western philosophy, in particular analytical philosophy and Wittgenstein, thoroughly. His Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (1963) which is a monumental work in Buddhist epistemology and his papers on Buddhist four-cornered logic which appeared in University of Ceylon Review (UCR) and Philosophy East and West (PEW) and his lectures on Buddhist jurisprudence in the Hague (Principles of International Law in Buddhist Doctrine, Recueil des Cours, Vol. II, 1967) are pioneering work in comparative philosophy by a Sri Lankan author. Subsequently, many of his students and those who were influenced by him continued in this line. Professor Padmasiri de Silva’s Buddhist and Freudian Psychology (Colombo, 1973); Professor DJ Kalupahana’s article, ‘Buddhist Tract in Empiricism,’ in PEW and his more recent writings on Buddhist psychology; Professor Gunapala Dhamasiri’s Buddhist Critique of Christian Concept of God (Colombo, 1971; California, 1988); Professor PD Premasiri’s work on Buddhist ethics; and Asanga Tilakaratne’s Nirvana and Ineffability: A Study of the Buddhist Theory of Reality and Language (Colombo, 1997) are some examples. Dr. Kapila Abhayawansa’s Emmanuel Kantge Gnanavibhagaya (The Epistemology of Emmanuel Kant, Colombo, 1997) is a comparative study of Kantian and Buddhist epistemology and the latest addition to the field.

Comparative religious studies Sri Lanka’s comparative religious studies has a long history. Before the arrival of Christianity, the Buddhist authors had to deal only

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

343

with Hinduism. The 15th century poet Weedagama Thera who wrote Budugaṇālankāraya has an incisive criticism of Hindu theism in it. However, the struggle with Hinduism has been there from the very beginning of Buddhism. The 19th century marked a new form of confrontation with Christianity by way of public debates and printed matter.15 This literature and encounters are basically confrontational. With the dawn of the century the confrontation debates gradually died out although the literature persisted here and there. The latest phase of comparative studies comes with the idea of inter-religious dialogue basically put forward by Christianity. In Sri Lanka, pioneers in this field are Christian theologians and educators such as Dr. Lynn de Silva of Ecumenical Institute for the Study and Dialogue, Fr. Dr. Aloysius Peiris of Tulana Research Centre, and Dr. Anthony Fernando of the University of Kelaniya. Most of the books written in this area are by Christian authors who wish to compare and contrast the two religions. A large part of the encounter takes place through such journals as Dialogue (edited by Fr. Aloysius Peiris). The papers published are usually academic and serve both religious and academic purposes. There is a literature grown outside the inter-religious dialogue and it is more for academic purposes. Some of the works, referred to in the discussion of comparative philosophical studies, fall well into this category. A recent addition to this literature by a veteran Christian educator is Fr. WLA Don Peter’s Buddhist and Benedictine Monastic Education (Colombo, 1990). Studies on Buddhism in relation to Science: It is a popularly held belief by certain Sri Lankan admirers of Buddhism that it is scientific. What they mean by this is that certain statements occurring in Buddhist canon are confirmed by natural scientific investigations. This popular belief gets expressed in every now and then in popular media such as daily newspapers, journals commemorating significant religious days such as Vesak and Poson (the day of the Buddha’s birth, Buddahood, and parinibbāna, and the day Buddhism arrived in Sri Lanka, and public talks etc.). However, there is a more serious and growing genre of literature which looks at science and Buddhism at a deeper level and comes up with a theory of affinity between Buddhism and science, particularly theoretical physics, chemistry, and logic. 15  Bentara Atthadassi Thera’s Kristhiyani Prajnapthiyata Pilithurak, a palm leaf book produced in the middle of the 19th century, is an example of this genre. (Kristhiyani Prajnapthiyata Pilithurak saha Kristhiyani Prajnapthiya, Ananda Tissa Kumara, S. Godage saha Sahodarayo, Colombo, 2005).

344

Asanga Tilakaratne

An early writing in this genre is RG de S Wettamuni’s work ( Buddhism and its Relation to Religion and Science, Colombo, 196 ) which discusses both similarities and differences between Buddhism and science. The theme of rebirth or life after death has become a concern among academics for sometime now. In Sri Lanka this interest was renewed in early 1960s when a girl of four years started talking about her previous birth. Professor KN Jayatilleke took a key interest on the phenomenon and conducted a methodical research into it. The results have been published in HSS Nissanka’s Navata Upan Dariya (The Girl Born Again, Colombo, 1964). Researches into extra-sensory perception and parapsychology are taking place in a scattered manner. Lately, there has been a renewed interest in Buddhism and science among certain academics. JKP Ariyaratne, professor of chemistry at the University of Kelaniya, has written Bududahama saha Vidyava (Buddhism and Science, Colombo, 1994) which tries to establish that the functioning of chemical substances and human mind is similar to each other. He has published an English version of his theory in Kalyani, the journal of the University of Kelaniya. If established, his thesis at physical and mental functioning is isomorphic can have far-reaching implications for natural and social sciences. In May 1997, a group of scientists and Buddhist academics got together and held three days seminar on Buddhism, Science, and Realism and the general consensus was that the Buddhist analysis of physical reality has certain striking similarities with the modern physicist analysis of reality. The papers of this seminar will be published in Buddhism, Science, and Realism Question: Beyond the Metaphysics of Common Sense (Editors : Arjuna de Zoysa, Champika Ranawaka, and Asanga Tilakaratne, Colombo, 1999 ). Lastly, there is a widely use mode of publishing academic writings on Buddhism which deserves our attention. It is the mode of anthologies or collection of papers. Usually such collection of papers are put together and published as felicitation volumes to felicitate distinguished living academic or religious leaders; or as commemorative volumes to commemorate a deceased distinguished personality; or to mark a religious event like a conferring a honorific title or a chiefhood upon a distinguished Buddhist monk, or an opening of a religious institute etc. The publications belonging to this category mostly appear in Sinhala. One recent example is Budusamaya ha Puja Caritra (Buddhism and Rituals, Colombo, 1996), edited by Kotapitiye Rahula Thera to honour Labugama Lankananda Nayaka Thera (1901- 1997), one of the leading

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

345

traditional Buddhist scholar monks of the country. Of the publications in English : Ananda (Colombo, 1990) to honour Dr. Ananda WP Guruge edited by Y Karunadasa; Buddhist Culture and Philosophy (Colombo, 1997) edited by K Dhammajoti Thera, Asanga Tilakaratne, and Kapila Abhayawansa to felicitate Professor Y Karunadasa. Commemorative academic speeches and publications arising too from an important element of this genre of literature. An example is annual KN Jayatilleke memorial lecture on Buddhist philosophy organised by KN Jayatilleke Foundation. In a situation where there are not many academic journals devoted for Buddhist studies this genre of literature seem to fill the gap.

Conclusion Buddhist studies and research in Sri Lanka has a long history of more than two thousand years. In this long course of history there has been many ups and downs. Nevertheless, it is one tradition that never completely died out at any juncture in the history. After two and half centuries of low activities, the tradition gradually revived from the middle of the 18th century. And after independence in 1948 and with the religious and cultural renaissance at the Buddha Jayanti in 1956, the Buddhist scholarship of the country had a new beginning. Editions and translations of the Tripiṭaka, the commentaries, and other Sinhala and Pali books was a key feature of this trend. With the opening of universities, the learning of languages such as English, and travels abroad to study, a new phase of Buddhist studies began which is primarily comparative Today conceptual. and philosophical studies in Buddhism has reached a high standard in Sri Lankan Buddhist studies. Historical, sociological, and anthropological studies in Buddhism too have become a very popular and substantial field in the Buddhist studies. One notable deficiency, however, is that the traditional scholarship of texts which in particular existed among the erudite Buddhist monks has sunk to very low profile today. Once the two traditional educational centres, Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara, were elevated to the university level, the tendency for modernisation was very much in the air. The result was initially an identity crisis, and subsequently the assumption of the role of secular universities. The tendency of the students was to go for economically more viable subjects, and as a result the traditional studies were very much in danger. As a single group it still remains true that the Buddhist monks are the most learned group of people in the Sri Lankan society. Nevertheless, the number that goes beyond the Bachelors or coursework Master degree remains very small. For example there are only very

346

Asanga Tilakaratne

f e w doctorate h ol d e r s among the S a n g h a . The Panḍit degree which was given at the completion of the final examination of the Oriental Studies Society is no longer attractive to the young members of the Sangha. Among the lay people, those who study languages such as Pali and Sanskrit are very few. The situation may well be contrasted from what it was during the first five decades of the century. The Hewavitarana Commentary edition was completely done by learned monks. The Buddha Jayanti Tripiṭaka edition and translation too was wholly done by the learned monks, but today after that generation of monks is gone, there does not seem to a new generation emerging. There are only few scholars, most of them are associated with universities, doing Pali and Sanskrit textual studies today. Even among them, majority are now in retirement.This is a situation that requires urgent attention. With the recently renewed interest in Buddhist studies, the situation ma y hopefully change for better. Another deficiency suffered by the majority of the emerging academics in the country today is the lack of necessary language proficiency, particularly in English. Every year, a large number of books on Pali and Buddhism are being published in man y European and Asian languages like Japanese. In Sri Lanka, only a few know Japanese. Knowledge in German and French are a little better, but it was English that our scholarship depended on to gain access to higher and wider knowledge. Unfortunately, most of the emerging young Buddhist scholars suffer from lack of English knowledge. If Sri Lanka can have an aggressive translation program, the problem will not be felt with this acuteness, but such a venture does not seem to be likely in near future. Therefore the only way out is to put more effort to English. In fact, the Buddhist scholars i n Sri Lanka today have to learn not only English and Pali but also several other traditional Buddhist languages such as Sanskrit, classical Chinese, Tibetan, and modern languages such as Japanese. Untill recently, Sri Lankan scholars focused on early Buddhism represented by the Pali Canon. However, today the horizons of the Buddhist scholarship have expanded so vast that the knowledge of Pali and English has become hardly sufficient. The very idea of early Buddhism has been expanded to inlude the versions of the canon in Chinese, Tibetan, and certain forms of Prakrit languages. In such a situation Sri Lankan Buddhist scholars have to recognise the need for expanding their academic horizons. Looking in an overall manner, the future of the Sri Lankan Buddhist studies does not seem to be bleak. Positively, it is becoming more and more popular. The necessary infra-structure support is being provided by

Buddhist Studies and Research in Sri Lanka...

347

the government and by many generous private citizens. What is needed is to locate the situation of the local scholarship in the global context of Buddhist studies and try hard to reach high standards which, by any means, are not unknown in the long history of Sri Lankan Buddhist scholarship.

19. Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera: Their Contribution to the Buddhasasana*

Introduction In order to mark the appointment of Rajakiya Pandita Tirikunamale Ananda Mahathera as the seventh Mahanayaka of Amarapura Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa Maha nikaya, it is nothing but fitting to reflect on the contribution of that nikāya not only to the sāsana of Sri Lanka but also to the worldwide Buddhasasana. In this essay, while an overall assessment of some of the leading members of this nikāya to the sāsana is made, a particular assessment will be made on the two of the past Mahanayaka Theras, namely, Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera, a pupil and successor of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera. This preferential treatment of these two Mahanayaka Theras, I consider, is justified because if not for their contribution, Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa nikaya, too, will be just another tradition of the Sangha without much substance and uniqueness. Furthermore, it is important to note that the newly appointed Mahanayaka Thera, being a pupil of Madihe Mahanayaka Thera, is a direct descendent of both these illustrious monks.

The establishment of Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa Nikaya The Amarapura Sri Dharmarakshita vamsa nikaya owes the first part of its name, ‘Amarapura’, to the country or the region of Myanmar (Burma) known by that name. It owes its second part, ‘Dharmarakshita’, to the pioneer who established this lineage of the Sangha. At the turn of the * Initial version of this paper was published in Vajralekhā edited by Denipitiye Somarathane Thera et al., at the occasion of re-dedication of Siri Vajiraramaya, Bambalapitiya, Colombo to the Buddha Sasana, 2009. pp. 26-29.

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

349

18th century, some Buddhist monks from the Southern part of Sri Lanka went to Myanmar in order to seek higher admission (upasampadā) from the Maha Sangha of that country. This was necessitated partly due to the difficulties and restrictions these monks from the ‘low country’ experienced from the Siam nikaya monks of ‘up country’; and partly due to the concerns the low country monks had about the purity or authenticity of the higher admission found in the country. One who pioneered the risky task of travelling to Myanmar was Ambagahapitiye Gnanawimala Tissa Thera who, on returning from Myanmar where he received higher admission established the Amarapura Maha-nikaya (in 1802). It is about a decade later that Attudave Dhammarakkhita (17551834) went to Myanmar, received the higher admission and returned to Sri Lanka and established the lineage of the Sangha which later came to be known by his name. Attudawe Mahanayaka Thera, who was revered by his contemporaries for his impeccable character and great erudition, served as the leader of his group untill his demise in 1834. Attudawe Mahanayaka Thera was succeeded by Tangalle Siri Sumanatissa Mahanayaka Thera of Ariyakara Viharaya of Mihiripenna, who served as the leader of the group for 62 long years (1834-1896). Ahangama Siri Dhirananda Maha Thera of Bimbaramaya in Eliketiya, Ahangama, was the next Mahanayaka (1896-1917). Pelene Siri Vajirañāṇa Maha Thera became the fourth Mahanayaka of the nikāya in 1918, and by the time he passed away in 1955 the Dharmarakshita nikaya had become a leading sangha organization in the country, mainly due to his own personality, erudition and the illustrious pupils he had trained.16 Madihe Pannasiha Thera succeeded his teacher Pelene Mahanayaka Thera and held the position untill he passed away in 2003. Under the leadership of Madihe Mahanayaka Thera, the nikāya continued to grow in both quantity and quality. From 2003 to 2014, Weligama Gnanaratana Thera was the Mahanayaka Thera and succeeded in maintaining the high standards of the nikāya achieved under the two previous illustrious Mahanayaka Theras. With the demise of Weligama Mahanayaka Thera in 2014, the need arose to appoint a new Mahanayaka Thera. Accordingly, Tirikunamale Ananda Anunayaka Thera was appointed as the new Mahanayaka Thera of the Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa Maha nikaya. It is not an exaggeration to say 16  Sources: Siri Damreki Sanga Parapura by Tangalle Dirilakuru, 1978. Colombo: Sri Dharmarakshita Sanghasabha; Buddhavamsaya-sasanavamsaya ha Amarapuravamsaya by Madihe Paññāsīha Mahanayaka Thera, 1990. Maharagama: Sasana Sevaka Samithiya.

350

Asanga Tilakaratne

that Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa Maha nikaya became a landmark in the recent history of the Sri Lanka sāsana owing mainly to two of its leaders, Pelene Mahanayaka Thera and his pupil, Madihe Mahanayaka Thera. In the remainder of this essay, the contribution of the nikāya to the Buddhasasana will be illustrated through the life and work of these two great Sangha leaders.

Pelene Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and the Vajirarama tradition The silent revolution brought about by Pelene Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera, with Vajiraramaya of Bambalapitiya as its base, gave birth to what may be described as ‘the Vajiraramaya tradition’. One may feel as an exaggeration to say that one single Vihara provided the base for a revolution in the sāsana. What in fact happened was a renewal of the ancient monastic traditions rather than the commencement of one anew. The ancient and correct tradition was long lost to the society and many felt the act of renewing the ancient traditions to be an introduction of a new tradition. Renewal of the ancient traditions as well as the determination of what is right in the face of the new changes in society are two outstanding contributions of the Pelene Mahanayaka Thera’s service to the sāsana: ‘The unique feature of the vision of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera was the amalgamation of modernity with antiquity. In other words, within the Vajirarama tradition both antiquity and modernity co-exist harmoniously.

Beginning of Vajiraramaya Pelene Mahanayaka Thera (1878-1955), born in Pelena near Matara and received initial entrance to the monkhood from Weragampita Siri Revata Thera, came to Colombo in order to attend the well-known Vidyodaya Pirivena for his higher studies. In 1900 he completed his Pirivena studies with distinction, and started living at a place called ‘dharma-śālā’. The latter was a building the people in the surrounding area had built for their religious functions, which later became Vajiraramaya. This was in 1901, and the only available room in the building was reserved for Vajiranana Maha Thera and the rest of the monks had make-shift rooms with partitions made by robes. The monastery with these simple beginnings became Vajirarama proper when Muhandiram PJ Kulatilake built the library with two rooms and donated it to the Sangha. This happened in 1909.

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

351

The Vajirarama group of monks The graceful public behaviour of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera and his pupils was winning the hearts of people not only in Colombo but also outside of Colombo. Gradually, the monastery became the centre of religious activities in Colombo. Pelene Mahanayaka Thera did not send his pupils outside for their studies. He attended to this need of his pupils by himself, aided at times by some visiting erudite monks. Gradually, a group of young and energetic monks endowed with knowledge and vision emerged from Vajiraramaya. Some of these monks were known both nationally and internationally, and among them were the following great theras: Narada, Madihe Pannasiha, Mahanama, Piyadassi, Denipitiye Sumanasiri, Rohana, Metteyya, Ampitiye Rahula, Soma, Kheminda, Walgama Sugatananda, Vipassi, Urugamuve Senananda, Gunasiri, Kassapa, Siridhamma and Ñāṇamoli and Nanavira who were English nationals. There were also such great theras as Kapugama Sumanawansa Thera, and Weligama Nanaratana Thera who spent their formative years at Vajiraramaya under the guidance of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera. This group of monks of Vajiraramaya became outstanding among the Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka from their graceful public demeanour as well as from their knowledge of the Dhamma and their skill in its communication. It must be reiterated that under the able guidance of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera the ancient monastic tradition of Sri Lanka received a new leaf of life. A prominent feature of this group of monks was their refine public conduct.

Public demeanour At a time when even the leading members of the Sangha were not unanimous about the proper public conduct of the monks, Pelene Mahanayaka Thera did a yeoman service by bringing into life through his own example and that of his pupils, the correct method of conduct appropriate for the Sangha. It is a known fact that the organization of the Sangha of Sri Lanka suffered a setback both morally and educationally with the arrival of colonialism in the country in the 16th century. It is said that people around Kandy did not know the meaning of a monk going from house to house with his alms-bowl at midday when Asaranasarana Saranankara thera first did so. This was in the middle of 1700’s or in the18th century. Thanks to the efforts of the Sangharaja Thera, the sāsana of the country started thriving. This, however, was not effective everywhere owing to human weaknesses of some of the members of

352

Asanga Tilakaratne

the Sangha themselves. The Vajirarama tradition initiated by Pelene Mahanayaka Thera can be described as a crystallization of the movement initiated by Sangharaja Thera. The monks of Vajirarama were outstanding among their counterparts. There was a clear difference in them in so far as their external behaviour was concerned. The visible difference was indicative of a deeper inner transformation. Pelene Mahanayaka Thera was known for his attention for details when it came to proper monastic conduct. While the basic Pātimokkha rules (ādibrahmacariyaka-sīla) received utmost care, the precepts associated with good conduct (ābhisamācārika-sīla) too were given equal emphasis. The result was that the monks of Vajirarama were easily identified in a group by their splendid external conduct. What follows are some unique features found in this group of monks: i. Shaving both head and beard together; ii. Using the alms-bowl for eating and carrying it along with them in their journeys as a requisite of a monk; iii. Abstaining from robes with glairing colours, and using robes dyed with natural colours made by boiling the root of Jack trees and bark of Banyan trees; iv. Not handling money. The colour of the robe of the Vajirarama monks was not plain yellow but reddish brown. This unique colour of the robe came to be known as the ‘Vajirarama colour’; and the dye made by incorporating this colour was known ‘vajirarama-dye’. It is correct to say that the Vajirarama monks set the standard for monks in this country. Following the instruction of the Buddha that his disciples should have a way of conduct different from that of others (añño me ākappo karaṇīyo: Dasaddhamma-sutta), the members of the Vajirarama tradition distinguished themselves always from the rest of the monks.

Tradition and modernity The pupils of Pelene Vajiranana Nayaka Thera were not only well disciplined but also were well educated and articulate. Although these monks did not receive the traditional Pirivena education, they had mastered the Dhamma and gained other forms of knowledge from Pelene Mahanayaka Thera, and from some other erudite monks who were residents of Vajirarama and also by their own efforts. Two things

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

353

need to be mentioned here: one was the competence of this group of monks to present the teachings of the Buddha in a manner applicable to contemporary society. The other was the ability they possessed to communicate the teaching of the Buddha in English. Some of the students of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera such as Narada, Piyadassi, Rahula, Soma, and Kheminda had the latter ability even before they entered the Sangha. Some others had acquired it once they came to Vajirarama. This language tool enabled them to have easy access to other forms of knowledge such as science, philosophy and world literature. The library of Vajiraramaya was at that time one of the best modern libraries in Colombo with a large collection of Pali, Sanskrit, Sinhala and Burmese texts and in particular, English books on Buddhism as well as on other subjects. It was open for visiting researchers. Narada Thera and Piyadassi Thera were pioneers among the modern-day dharmadūtas who took the message of the Buddha to the West. In addition to his dhamma missions to the West, Narada Thera was the first to take the Theravada tradition to South East Asian countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia. Bhikkhus Soma and Kheminda translated the Vimuttimagga from a Chinese text into English (for the Pali version had not yet been discovered). The first Theravada Buddhist centre in North America (Washington Buddhist Vihara) was established in 1964 under the guidance of Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera. In addition, London Viharaya, Sri Lankaramaya of Singapore, and Berlin Viharaya are three other Buddhist centres that benefitted directly from the monks of Vajiraramaya. After several decades from the days of those pioneering Theravada Buddhist missionaries to the West, today Sri Lankan Buddhist monks travelling abroad for dharmadūta work is a common phenomenon. It is true to say that for a large majority of such monks who leave for Western countries what they do under the pretext of dharmadūta work is to look after their own Sri Lankan Buddhists who have migrated to those countries (which, by all means, is a very valuable service), and for most of these monks, English or any other Western language is still a far cry. From this perspective, the contribution made by the monks of Sri Dharmarakshita nikaya to the spread of the word of the Buddha outside Sri Lanka, mainly in the West, is of great importance. At a time when learning English by a monk was perceived as a sign of decadence, Pelene Mahanayaka Thera, otherwise a firm upholder of the tradition, showed remarkable openness for this skill. Among the Vajirarama monks, the knowledge of English which was a feature of modernity was balanced by strict adherence to the tradition

354

Asanga Tilakaratne

of the Dhamma and the Vinaya. It is correct to say that in them both modernity and tradition found harmonious existence. In addition to these local monks who used English as a means to communicate the Dhamma, there were several well-known monks of Western origin who were either direct pupils of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera or who later identified and joined the Vajirarama tradition. Of Nanamoli Thera and Nanavira Thera, referred to above, the former during his relatively short life span contributed immensely to Buddhist studies in the English language. A towering contribution from him, among many others, was his translation of the Visuddhimagga as ‘Path of Purification’. Although the latter did not publish anything during his life time, some very important notes on the Dhamma have been published posthumously. Nanatiloka Thera, a Buddhist monk of German origin, who received his initial admission and higher admission in Myanmar, identified himself and his pupils with Vajiraramaya. Nanatiloka Thera and his pupil Nyanaponika Thera are world renowned writers on Buddhism. They wrote in both German and English languages, and translated canonical texts into both these languages. The latter founded in 1958 the Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy, an organization known for its quality publications on Buddhism (under such series as The Wheel, and The Bodhi Leaves). Large and small books published by these monks have contributed greatly for the spread of Buddhism in the West. Bhikkhu Bodhi Thera, a Buddhist monk of Jewish American origin, although not a direct pupil of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera, identifies himself very much with this tradition. He lived at Udavattakele and worked together with Nanatiloka and Nyanaponika theras in translating the Majjhima, Saṃyutta and the Aṅguttara-nikāyas of the Pali Canon into English. These translations now have been published by Wisdom Publications, Boston, and Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy, Sri Lanka. Subsequently, Bhikkhu Bodhi Thera succeeded Nyanaponika Thera as the head of the Buddhist Publication Society. A particular service that was rendered by the Vajirarama monks was the taking of the teaching of the Buddha to the urban intelligentsia of the country who were mostly Buddhist only by name not for their fault alone. The Dhamma was covered with a thick crust of tradition and was not accessible to those who had modern education. In order to carry the Dhamma to this group of people, the Vajirarama monks had to ‘liberate’ Buddhism from mostly archaic phraseology and out-dated modes of presentation. The monks of Vajirarama were capable of explaining the

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

355

Dhamma in a logical and scientific language familiar to the educated of the country. Clean and simple physical surroundings of Vajiraramaya may have provided an extra incentive for these urban Buddhists to restart visiting monasteries.

New trends in dhamma-communication Although the monastic tradition of Sri Lanka was known to the ancient world for the very high standards of knowledge in the Dhamma (pariyatti), starting from the colonial period this seems to have deteriorated rapidly. One example that characterized this unfortunate condition is what is known as ‘pin vākyaya’ (statement of merit) recited at the conclusion of a meritorious deed, i.e. a dāna (offering meals and other requisites to the monks). This was to be remembered and recited out of memory at the conclusion of dāna, a device meant for those who did not have enough knowledge and ability to utter a few words on their own by way thanking the donors. It was symbolic that the monks at Vajiraramaya rejected this practice for they had ability to attend to lay people’s religious need to reciting formulae prepared by others. The Vajirarama tradition is responsible for introducing a new structure for the Dhamma sermons. Traditionally the preaching of the Dhamma had turned out to be an all-night affair in which finally a larger majority of people would end up falling into sleep in the vicinity where the sermon took place. This was unacceptable not only because it took too much time but also because listening to the Dhamma only for the sake of acquiring merit did not serve the purpose of listening to Dhamma in order to practice it. The Dhamma sermons of one hour duration were an innovation introduced by Vajirarama monks. Introduction of radio in the early last century too was instrumental for this change. The first Dhamma sermon through the radio was preached by Pelene Mahanayaka Thera. This was a new experience for the Buddhist public in the country and one hour duration too was new to people. At this early stage it is mostly the Vajirarama monks who conducted Dhamma sermons through radio. The full moon day sermon was the monopoly of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera during this early period. The Dhamma sermon of one hour duration organized according to definite topic was an innovation for which we are indebted to the Vajirarama tradition. In addition to this change in the structure, style and the content of Dhamma sermons, the practice of conducting the poya day religious observances according to a definite time table too was popularized by

356

Asanga Tilakaratne

Vajiraramaya. Before the full moon day was made a public holiday, the monks at Vajiraramaya conducted day-long programs of sil observance on every last Saturday of the month. The practice started from Vajraramaya gradually spread all over the country. It is clear that the Vajirarama tradition has played a crucial role in defining the Buddhist monk and in shaping the Buddhist religious practice of contemporary Sri Lanka. As I stressed at the beginning of this discussion, the Vajirarama tradition has to be understood as renewing an ancient tradition than introducing a new one. Accordingly, the appearance of a properly dressed monk with simultaneously shaven head and beard and pleasant demeanour is not a new tradition. It is how the early Buddhist tradition would define a monk. Likewise, the Vajirarama tradition laid emphasis on such practices as the recital of the Patimokkha on Poya days, eating uncooked food containing seeds only after the donors make such food ‘appropriate’ (kappiya), not accepting money, and using language appropriate to the Sangha, to the daily monastic life. It is clear that the Vajirarama tradition has set precedence in bringing these age-old traditions into the contemporary monastic life. The Vajirarama tradition has been open to modern technology with which the Dhamma was communicated to the contemporary society, and also it has found ways and means of interpreting and presenting through new similes and metaphors the teachings of the Buddha to suit the needs of the modern world. The contribution made by the Vajirarama tradition to the upliftment of the Buddhist religiousness in the contemporary Sri Lanka in particular and in the world in general is worth carrying to the future. It is hoped that one will not have to talk about this phenomenon in the past tense. The path cleared by Pelene Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera and the group of his illustrious disciples should serve as the path not only for the posterity of the Vajirarama tradition but also for the entirety of Sangha in the Theravada world.

Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera It is Madihe Pannasiha Thera who succeeded his teacher as the Mahanayaka of Dharmarakshitavamsa nikaya in 1956 after the demise of his teacher. Thera was born in Madihe, Matara in 1913, and entered the sāsana at the tender age of thirteen. His parents were James Carolis Pujitha Gunawardhana and Bella Angelena Pujith Dhirasekera. The father (untill he later became a Buddhist by accepting the five precepts

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

357

from his own son) was a Christian by faith and a school teacher (and later a principal) by profession, whereas his mother was Buddhist. Both being sincere religious people, there was no conflict at home and all five children of them grew up in a broad religious atmosphere. Thera’s monastic teacher was Weragampita Siri Revata Nayaka Thera of Devagiri Viharaya, Kamburugamuva, Matara, but he grew up under the guidance of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera who was both his monastic elder brother and preceptor. Vajiraramaya of Bambalapitiya was then a small monastery in the centre of Colombo, and, under the guidance of Pelene Mahanayaka Thera it was gradually becoming a renowned Buddhist centre. Madihe Nayaka Thera, along with such great theras as Narada, Mahanama, Kassapa and Piyadassi, was a product of what came to be known as ‘Vajirarama tradition’ (referred to above) or the ‘Vajirarama mark’ of contemporary Sri Lanka Buddha sāsana. Although it may look unlikely or even paradoxical, it is true that Vajiraramaya, under the guidance of its conservative and traditional chief incumbent Pelene Nayaka Thera, paved the way for a kind of Buddhist modernism. This modernism was basically characterized by its openness to urbanity in its social behaviour and efforts to present Buddhist social philosophy in particular as fitting and applicable to those who have come under western education and Western ways of thinking and behaviour. At the turn of the century the situation of the Sangha was such that either they were traditional and good or modern (or English educated) and bad (or prone to be morally lax). The Vajirarama tradition cut through this dichotomy and showed that Buddhist monks could be both modern in outlook and linguistic behaviour and traditional in morality. In other words, the pupils of Pelene Nayaka Thera combined tradition and modernity and became pioneers of the new tradition which reasserted the position of Sri Lanka as the main Theravada centre in the world.

Events of national and religious significance 1950’s proved to be decisive in particular to religion and culture of the country. The Committee of Inquiry established by Professor Malalasekera was the first effort to understand the real situation of the Buddhists in the post-independent Sri Lanka (then Ceylon). Madihe Nayaka Thera still in his early forties was appointed a member of this committee along with many other senior members of the Sangha and laity. Thera travelled all over the country meeting people of all walks of life and listening to their problems and challenges. In 1955, at the

358

Asanga Tilakaratne

demise of his teacher who was also the Mahanayaka of Amarapura Sri Dharmarakshita nikaya, he was appointed to the Mahanayakaship, which showed the confidence the Sangha had in his leadership. 1956 saw Bandaranaike coming into power with a promise to uplift Sinhala culture. And more importantly for Buddhists, it was also the year of the dawn of Buddha Jayanthi, which marks the completion of 2500 years from the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha. Madihe Mahanayaka Thera was among those who were at the forefront to make maximum use of the great opportunity that came up with Buddha Jayanthi. The resurgence of Buddhist activities all over the country was unprecedented. Almost all government ministries and departments started their own Buddhist societies. Madihe Mahanayaka Thera was advisor to the congress of Buddhist societies of the state sector. The practice of lay people’s spending the poya day at the monastery following a well-planned program was an innovation introduced from Vajiraramaya during this period. It is not an exaggeration, thanks to such leaders as Madihe Nayaka Thera, that the Buddha Jayanthi marked a beginning of a renaissance of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. With the establishment of Buddha Sāsana Commission by the Bandaranaike government in 1957, there came another opportunity for the Mahanayaka Thera to travel all over the country to meet both clergy belonging to all religious traditions of the island including Buddhist monks and the laity of various social and educational levels, and receive a first-hand experience of and exposure to all kinds of social, economic, religious and cultural problems faced by people. The report that came in two volumes remains even up to date one of the most comprehensive and most insightful diagnostic documents on Sri Lankan society although, unfortunately Bandaranaike did not live to implement it. Based on his vast experience of the condition of the people in the country, Nayaka Thera formulated a philosophy of development informed by the teachings of the Buddha, and started putting it into practice at some selected villages in the Anuradhapura district. Madihe Nayaka Thera perceived that development as mere economic growth was one-sided and hence unsatisfactory, and advocated that if a society were to achieve true development it has to be developed both externally in wealth and goods and internally in noble human qualities. The development philosophy of the Nayaka There had in it health, education, religion and wealth, all in a good balance. In fact, it is Madihe Mahanayaka Thera, who not merely spoke but also practiced what is

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

359

called Buddhist economic, way before EF Schumarcher wrote about it in his world best seller classic Small is Beautiful.

Samastha Lanka Amarapura Sanghasabha The problems faced by his monastic brethren did not escape the compassionate attention of Madihe Mahanayaka Thera. Two major areas that captured his attention and imagination were the unity of the Sangha and monastic education. Concerning the first, the Mahanayaka Thera’s involvement, which was quite successful, was to unite the Sangha belonged to the Amarapura fraternity which was divided into two dozens of sects. Mahanayaka Thera was instrumental in creating what has come to be known today as ‘Samastha Lanka Amarapura Sangha Sabha (All Sri Lanka Amarapura Sangha Council). On monastic education, the Nayaka Thera felt that it was both unsatisfactory in its content and inadequate in its scope. He believed that young monks should get an education which preserved the traditional monastic virtues while, at the same time, broad enough for its recipients to face successfully the challenges of modernity. It is in order to implement his vision of monastic education that he started, along with Ampitiye Rahula Maha Thera, an educationist of rare qualities, Siri Vajiranana Dharmayatanaya which is also known as the Bhikkhu Training Centre. The Nayaka There often referred to the Buddha’s characterization of a good monk, namely, erudite, disciplined, confident, learned, well versed in the Dhamma, and living a life of Dhamma (viyatto, vīnito, visārado, bahussuto, dhamma-dharo, dhammānudhamma-paṭipanno), and encouraged those who underwent training at this centre to emulate these noble qualities.

Unity and integrity of the Nation It is impossible to summarize what Madihe Nayaka Thera was and did in a piece of this short length. Nevertheless, no discussion of him is complete unless there is some mention of his views on unity and integrity of the nation. He firmly believed that Sri Lanka should be an undivided political entity in which Sinhala Buddhists as the traditional majority should have its warranted place from which they had been deprived for about four and half centuries under colonial rule. In a situation where resources are limited, the Nayaka Thera believed, the proper way of distribution should be proportionate to the percentage of the population of each ethnic group. He did not advocate violence; instead he believed in reasoned dialogue in order to solve what is known as the ‘ethnic problem’.

360

Asanga Tilakaratne

The idea of development which covers both internal and external aspects of human life seems still a far cry from our current ways of thinking. The country is still experimenting with economic policies that depend heavily on income derived from sale of liquor and from gambling, two means utterly rejected by the late Mahanayaka Thera as unacceptable and unsatisfactory. The aim of Mahanayaka Thera’s involvement in monastic education (not to mention his involvement in general school education of the youth) was basically to straighten and forge a new identity to the Sangha. To his utter dismay, if he were to live today, he would notice that some groups of Buddhist monks seem to have lost their proper sense of identity and are bewildered to the extent that they either march on May day rallies or take upon themselves the thug’s role on the pretext of saving Sinhala race and protecting Buddhism, little understanding that they violate in the process the very things that they claim to protect. The Sinhala, Tamil and Islamic communities are yet to learn how to view the other with magnanimity and compassion. It is in these social, cultural, religious and economic contexts that one finds the philosophy and the activism of the late Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Thera has meaning.

Community of pupils Perhaps the single most service to the sāsana by Madihe Mahanayaka Thera is the group of pupils he trained. This group of Sangha includes Maharagama Dhammasiri Nayaka Thera, presently heading Washington Vihara in Washington DC as the chief pupil of the Mahanayaka Thera, and other accomplished monks including but not limited to Gangodawila Soma Thera, who may be considered the source of the recent revival of Buddhist activism, Madawala Punnaji Thera, Kimbi-ela Kassapa Thera, Naotunne Aravinda Thera, Hingurakgoda Vibhavi Thera, Pelene Suvinita Thera, Tirikunamalaye Ananda Thera (the present Maha Nayka Thera), Digamadulle Wimalananda Thera, Hakmana Sumanasiri Thera, Talalle Chandakitti Thera, (the late) Dhammavihari Thera, Deanmark Mettavihari Thera, Rajawelle Subhuti Thera, Mahaoya Anuruddha Thera, Talpavila Kusalanana Thera, Ududumbara Lankananda Thera, and Pasannamanasa Thera. All these monks are with traditional and modern ways of knowledge, and are continuing the rich tradition initiated by their own teacher as well as the teacher of their teacher, Pelene Mahanayaka Thera.

Pelene Siri Vajiranana Mahanayaka Thera...

361

Conclusion The modern revival of the Buddha sāsana and the Sangha started in the middle of the eighteenth century with Asarana-sarana Saranankara Sangharaja Thera whose indefatigable dedication for restoring the lost Buddhist monastic lineage and its academic tradition was exemplary. The forces beyond his control seem to have restricted the scope of this revival only to some selected groups. It is as a response to this undesirable state of the Sangha that some motivated and pioneering monks from the ‘low country’ risked their life to travel to Myanmar and receive higher admission from the Myanmar sangha and contribute to the revival of Buddhism to have a wider basis. Attudawe Siri Dhammarakkhita Thera was one such pioneer whose monastic lineage came of age during the periods of leadership of PeleneVajiranana Thera and Madihe Pannasiha Mahanayaka Theras. The newly appointed Mahanayaka Thera, Tirikunamalaye Ananda Thera, is a direct pupil of Madihe Mahanayaka Thera, and one with all the Sangha-enriching (saṅgha-sobhana) qualities, such as, clever, disciplined, fearless, learned, well versed in the Dhamma, and practising the Dhamma. Ananda Mahanayaka Thera, like his own teacher, assumed the duties of his monastic leadership at a relatively young age of his life. I wish him, good health, longevity and happiness in order for him to carry out his duties most effectively and continue with the tradition of his illustrious predecessors.

20. The Heritage of the Bhikkhu A Preface to its Thai translation

The Heritage of the Bhikkhu by the late Aggamahapandita Dr. Walpola Rahula Thera (1907–1998) is one of the most influential books produced by a Sri Lankan author in the recent past. It provided an eloquent justification for the Buddhist monk’s engagement in political activities, introducing in the course of it a new concept ‘political bhikkhu’ to the field of Buddhist studies. It was really the manifesto of ‘politically engaged Buddhism’. Originally written in Sinhala in 1946, the Book was translated into English in 1974 with a postscript by the Author covering the developments of the Sri Lanka Sangha up till the early 1970’s. The historical context of the book was the early 1940’s when the Sri Lanka was struggling to gain independence from the British Government and the Buddhist monks were awakening to the changing social realties and challenges posed by the foreign power, foreign religion and the foreign language. The socialist thinking was being introduced and many young and intellectual monks found it attractive as a possible solution to the ills of the country which was struggling to come out from its feudal legacy as well as colonialism. In the meantime, a very powerful group of monks decided that they need to come out from their cloistered life in the monasteries and actively take part in activities that would decide the fate of the country. Walopla Rahula Thera belonged to this group. The ñññorigins of the present book is a public lecture given by the Author at a public rally held in the Municipal Council of Kandy (the capital of the central hill country of Sri Lanka) in which Walpola Rahula justified Buddhist monks’ participation in social activities. Participation in social activities is not a new phenomenon for the monks in Sri Lanka. Not only in Sri Lanka but also in all Theravada Buddhist countries monks always attended to the welfare of the people

The Heritage of the Bhikkhu

363

who provided them with material support and maintenance. Although, in the Theravada societies, there has been from very early times a tension between the way of life of the grāma-vāsī (village-dweller) monks and that of āranya-vāsī (forest-dweller) monks, the existence of the two forms of life has been very much a settled issue. The new debate that emerged in the early part of the last century should not be understood as a mere resurgence of this old issue. While it is true that the larger issue was a resurgence of the old debate the new problem was more to do with Buddhist monks getting involved in politics characterized by activities of the political parties headed by lay people, which was an aspect of modernity. The work of the Vidyalankara group which included many young and vibrant monks like Rahula can be considered as the first systematic response to a key challenge of modernity on the part of the Sangha. Thus, this whole issue may also be viewed as a tension between modernity vs. tradition. The Buddhist society of the both clergy and the laity was divided on this issue. The more orthodox among both groups vehemently denounced any efforts at justifying monks involving in party political activities, and the more progressive groups were vociferous about the monks ‘duty’ to engage in such activities. The latter group was represented by Vidyalanka Pirivena whereas the former group was identified with Vidyodaya Pirivena, two highest centres of classical monastic learning in the Country (till the end of 1950’s). Obviously Walopla Rahula belonged in the Vidyalankara group. He adduced historical arguments in support of the case for politically engaged Buddhism. (Although I could very well use the term ‘socially engaged Buddhism’ here, I do not do so for two reasons: one is to distinguish the issue from what is popular by this term in the contemporary Buddhism in the West in particular, and the other is to lay stress on the difference in the present project from the simple and relatively uncontroversial ‘social service’ of grāma-vāsī monks (ubiquitous in all Theravada countries.) The effect of Rahula’s work was almost immediately seen in the Sri Lanka political scene: the two subsequent decades marked a phase of most intensive political activities of the Sri Lanka Sangha. The 1956 General Election was the testing ground. SWRD Bandaranaike, supported by the monks of Walpola Rahula’s persuasion, won the election and became the Prime Minister. This victory was perceived as a vindication of religious and nationalist claims championed by the monks of this genre. It is ironical however, after several years, in 1959, Bandaranaike who was the beneficiary of the ecclesiastical political activities himself became a victim of it. He was assassinated by one of those monks who helped

364

Asanga Tilakaratne

him come to power. This does not mean, however, that all those monks who took into politics were of bad morals. It shows only that some of those people had their own agendas behind their political activities. This type of behaviour goes very much against what Walpola Rahula hoped a ‘political bhikkhu’ should be: Moreover the “sons of the Buddha” (i.e. bhikkhus) who keep away from crooked and dishonest practices, who have a pure character, who have received a higher education in keeping with the needs of the time, who will not bow down before wealth or power, and will work for the benefit of the common man; altruistic, bold, upright, and honest monks will be regarded as political bhikkhus. (Introduction to the second Sinhala edition) Walpola Rahula anticipated that social activism in a broad sense will evolve to be a third ‘dhura’, similar to earlier gantha-dhura and vipassanā-dhura, in the monastic life. It is more than a half century (62 years to be exact to 2008) since Walpola Rahula Thera originally wrote this book. It would be good to turn back and see the aftermath of this debate and know where it has led the Buddhist monks of Sri Lanka. The two subsequent decades, particularly 1960’s and 70’s, witnessed intense political engagements on the part of the monks. The end result, however, proved that the monks had been used by the political leaders to support their own ends. While some monks seems to have got some personal benefits the group as a whole may have got nothing. Although some members of the Sangha would occasionally still support in public a particular political party or a candidate, the involvements of the Sangha in political parties headed by lay people seem to have receded greatly buy now. Some critics, however, seem to feel that the movement spearheaded by Walpola Rahula Thera and others did not go exactly the way it was intended by them. For example, according to HL Seneviratne (The Work of Kings: The New Buddhism in Sri Lanka, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London 1999), although Rahula Thera’s is “a work that has influenced the monkhood more than any other in the recent history of Sri Lankan Theravada Buddhism” (p.135), it ultimately paved the way for the emergence of a monastic middle class with money and power and who paid only lip service to proper Buddhist monastic ideals. My point here is not to discuss merits and demerits of this critique which I have done elsewhere in detail, (See. “The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Conflict” in Buddhism, Conflict and Violence in Modern

The Heritage of the Bhikkhu

365

Sri Lanka, Ed. Mahinda Deegalle, Routeledge: London and New York, 2006, pp.210-225), but to highlight the significance of Rahula Thera’s work in understanding the current academic debate on the role of the Sangha in one of the leading Theravada countries. Clearly one cannot by-pass Walpola Rahula Thera in studying the contemporary history of Theravada Buddhism. The most recent development in the trend defended and promoted by Walpola Rahula is a group of Sri Lankan monks, going beyond supporting political parties headed by lay people, creating their own political party, contesting general elections and winning and becoming the members of the Parliament. Today in Sri Lanka Parliament there are nine members, who are Buddhist monks, elected by popular vote, representing the party named ‘Jatika Hela Urumaya’ –National Sinhala Heritage. Walpola Rahula Thera who passed away in 1998 did not live to witness the dawn of this new movement of bhikkhus to safeguard the Sinhala Buddhist heritage, which is the logical conclusion of the movement heralded by his Heritage. While a large segment of the Buddhist public is supporting this move by the Sangha there is an equally large group of people who opposes the political involvement of this magnitude. Today the debate is not so much on whether or not monks should engage in politics as how should they get involved in it. These latest developments testify to the fact that Walpola Rahula’s The Heritage of the Bhikkhu has not worn out its relevance even after a half century. The translation of Rahula Thera’s book into Thai language is important not simply because it is a vital book on history and sociology of Buddhism in Sri Lanka but because a book of this nature could throw much light into efforts at understanding the Thai Buddhist tradition itself. In the globalized world of today no one tradition can exist isolate from the rest of the world. Challenges to Theravada have to be faced collectively and not individually. Walpola Rahula Thera’s South Asian Theravada experience can surely have implications on its South East Asian counterparts. I hope that the translation of Walpola Rahula Thera’s Heritage into Thai language will mark a milestone in religious and academic studies of Theravada in Thailand. I congratulate the learned young monk, Phra Maha Pocana Pettiankura Thera, a PhD scholar who is doing his research under my guidance, for undertaking and completing this difficult task successfully.

366

Asanga Tilakaratne

Primary Sources and Abbreviations A.

Aṅguttara-nikāya – Part I. Ekanipāta, Dukanipāta and Tikanipāta, ed. R. Morris, Pali Text Society, London, 1961. Part II. Catukka Nipāta, 1955. Part III. Pāñcaka Nipāta and Chakka Nipāta, ed. E. Hardy, 1976. Part IV. Sattaka Nipāta, Aṭṭhaka Nipāta and Navaka Nipāta, 1979. Part V. Dasaka Nipāta and Ekādasaka Nipāta, 1979. Volume VI. Dasaka Nipāta and Ekādasaka Nipāta, R. Davids, 1960.

AA.

Manorathapūraṇī – Vol. I. Eka-Nipatā-Vaṇṇanā, ed. M. Walleser, Pali Text Society, London, 1973. Vol. II. Eka-DukaTika-Nipāta-Vaṇṇanā, eds. M. Walleser and H. Kopp, 1967. Vol. III. Catukka-Pañcaka-Chakka-Nipāta-Vaṇṇanā, ed. H. Kopp, 1966. Vol. IV. Sattaka-Aṭṭhaka-Navaka-NipātaVaṇṇanā, 1979. Vol. V. Dasaka-Ekādasaka-Nipāta-Vaṇṇanā, 1977.

Ap.

The Apadāna – Part I., ed. M.E. Lilley, Pali Text Society, London, 1925.

ApA.

Visuddhajanavilāsinī nāma Apadānaṭṭhakathā, ed. C.E. Godakumbura, Pali Text Society, London, 1954.

Buv/Cp.

Buddhavaṃsa and Cariyāpiṭaka, ed. N.A. Jayawickrama, Pali Text Society, London, 1974.

BuvA.

The Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning (Madhuratthavilāsinī), ed. I.B. Horner, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

CpA.

Achariya Dhammapāla’s Paramatthadīpanī, ed. D.L. Barua, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

D.

The Dīgha-Nikāya – Vol. I, ed. T.W.R. Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1949. Vol. II, 1966. Vol. III, ed. J.E. Carpenter, 1976.

DA.

Sumaṅgala-vilāsīnī – Part II, and III ed. W. Stede, Pali Text Society, London, 1971.

Dhk.

Dhātu-Kathā Pakaraṇa, ed. E.R. Gooneratne, Pali Text Society, London, 1963.

Dhp/DhpA. Dhammapada, eds. O Von Hinüber and K.R. Norman, Pali Text Society, London, 1994. The Commentary on the Dhammapada – Vol. I, II, III and IV ed. H.C. Norman, Pali Text Society, London, 1970.

367 Dhs.

The Dhammasaṅgaṇi, ed. E. Muller, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

DhsA.

The Atthasālinī, ed. E. Müller, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

Dukap.

Dukapaṭṭhāna – Vol. I, ed. R. Davids, Pali Text Society, Oxford, 1996.

It.

Iti-Vuttaka, ed. E. Windisch, Pali Text Society, London, 1975.

ItA.

Paramattha-Dīpanī Iti-Vuttakaṭṭhakathā of Dhammapālācariya – Vols. I ed. M.M. Bose, Pali Text Society, London, 1977. Vol. II ed. H. Kopp, 1980.

J.

The Jātaka – Vol. I, ed. V. Faus Boll, Pali Text Society, London, 1962. Vol. II, III, IV, and V, 1963. Vol. VI, and VII 1964.

Khp.

The Khuddaka-Pāṭha – Paramatthajotikā I., ed. H. Smith, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

KhpA.

The Khuddaka-Pāṭha – Paramatthajotikā I, ed. H. Smith, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

Kvit.

Kaṅkhāvitaraṇi, eds. K.R. Norman and Pruitt, W., Pali Text Society, Oxford, 2003.

Kvu.

Kathāvatthu – Vols. I, II, ed. A.C. Taylor, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

KvuA.

Kathāvatthuppakaraṇa-Aṭṭhakathā, ed. N.A. Jayawickrama, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

M.

Majjhima Nikāya – Vol. I, ed. V. Trenckner, Pali Text Society, London, 1979. Vol. II and III ed. R. Chalmers, 1960, 1977. Vol. IV, ed. R. Davids, 1974.

MA.

Papañcasūdanī Majjhimanikāyaṭṭhakathā of Buddhaghosācariya – Part I, eds. J.H. Woods and Kosambi, D., Pali Text Society, London, 1977. Part II, 1979. Part III, ed. I.B. Horner, 1976. Part IV. Part V, 1977.

Mhv.

Mahāvaṃsa,trans.W.P.A. Guruge, Associated Newspapers of Ceylon, Colombo, 1989.

Nd.I.

Mahāniddesa – Parts I and II, eds. L. De La V. Poussin and E.J. Thomes, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

NdA.I/II.

Saddhamma-Pajjotikā – Vols. I, II, ed. A.P. Buddhadatta, Pali Text Society, London, 1980.

Ps.

Paṭisambhidāmagga – Vols. I, II, ed. A.C. Taylor, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

368 PsA.

Saddammappakāsinī –Vol. I, II, and III ed. C.V. Joshi, Pali Text Society, London, 1979.

Pug.

Puggala-Paññatti and Puggala-Paññatti-Aṭṭhakathā, eds. G. Landsberg and Davids, R., Pali Text Society, London, 1972.

PugA.

Puggala-Paññatti-Aṭṭhakathā, eds. G. Landaberg and R. Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1972.

S.

Saṃyutta Nikāya – Part I. Sagātha-vagga, ed. M.L. Feer, Pali Text Society, London, 1973. Part II. Nidāna-vagga, 1970. Part III. Khandha-vagga, 1975. Part IV. Saḷāyatana-vagga, 1973. Part V. Mahā-vagga, 1976. Volume VI. ed. R. Davids, 1980.

SA.

Sārattha-ppakāsinī – Vol. I. Sagāthā-Vagga, Vol. II. NidānaVagga, Khandha-Vagga, Saḷāyatana-Vagga (First Part), Vol. III. Saḷāyatana-Vagga (Second Part), Mahā-Vagga, Pali Text Society, London, 1977.

Sn.

Sutta-Nipāta, eds. D. Andersen and H. Smith, Pali Text Society, London, 1965.

SnA.

Sutta-Nipāta Commentary being Paramatthajotikā II, Vol. I and II Uragavagga Cūḷavagga, ed. H. Smith, Pali Text Society, London, 1966. Vol. III, 1972.

Thag/Thīg.

Thera- and Therī-gāthā, eds. H. Oldenberg and R. Pischel, Pali Text Society, London, 1966.

ThagA.

Paramattha-Dīpanī Theragāthā-Aṭṭhakathā the Commentary of Dhamapālācariya – Vol. I, ed. F.L. Woodwerd, Pali Text Society, London, 1971. Vol. II, 1977. Vol. III, 1984.

Tikap.

Tikapaṭṭhāna – Part I. Paccayavibhangavāra, ed. R. Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1988.

Ud.

Udāna, ed. P. Steinthal, Pali Text Society, London, 1948.

UdA.

Paramattha-Dīpanī Udānaṭṭhakathā of Dhammapālācariya, ed. F.L. Woodward, Pali Text Society, London, 1977.

Vbh.

The Vibhaṅga, ed. R. Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1978.

VbhA.

Sammoha-Vinodanī Abhidhamma-Piṭake Vibhaṅgaṭṭhakathā, ed. A.P. Buddhadatta Thero, Pali Text Society, London, 1980.

Vin.

Vinaya Piṭaka – Vol. I, ed. H. Oldernberg, Pali Text Society, London, 1969. Vol. II, 1977. Vol. III, IV, and V 1964.

VinA.

Samantapāsādikā – Vol. I, eds. J. Takakusu and Nagai, M., Pali Text Society, London, 1975. Vol. II, 1969. Vol. III, 1968.

369 Vol. IV, 1966. Vol. V, 1967. Vol. VI, 1947. Vol. VIII, ed. H. Kopp, 1977. Vism.

The Visuddhi-magga of Buddhagosa, ed. C.A.F. Rhys Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1975.

Vvu/Pvu.

Vimānavatthu and Petavatthu, ed. N.A. Jayawickrama, Pali Text Society, London, 1977.

Yam.

The Yamaka – Vol. I and II, ed. C.R. Davids, Pali Text Society, London, 1987.

370

Secondary Sources and Translations

Adikaram, E.W. 1946. Early History of Buddhism in Ceylon: Or State of Buddhism in Ceylon as Revealed by the Pāli Commentaries of the 5th Century A.D. Colombo: Buddhist Cultural Centre. An-Na’im, Abdullahi. 2002. “Religion and Global Civil Society: Inherent Incompatibility or Synergy and Interdependence?.” Global Civil Society 2002, eds. Glasius Marlies, Mary Kaldoe & Helmut Anheier, The Centre for Study of Global Governance. Badiner, Allan Hunt. 1990. Dharma Gaia: A Harvest of Essays in Buddhism and Ecology, California, Berkeley: Parallax Press. Balasooriya, Somaratna, at el. 1980. Buddhist Studies in honour of Walpola Rahula, London: Gordon Fraser. Baochang; Jung-hsiLi. 1981. Biographies of Nuns: Pao-Chang’s Pi-chiu-nichuan. Tohokai Inc. Osaka,. Batchelor, Martine and Brown Kerry. eds. 1992. Buddhism and Ecology, London: Cassells. Indian edition 1994. Beyer, Peter. 2003. “Social Forms of Religion and Religions in Contemporary Global Society.” in Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, ed. Michele Dillion, Cambridge University Press. pp. 45-60. Blackburn, Ann M. 2001. Buddhist Learning and Textual Practice in Eighteenth-Century Lankan Monastic Culture. Princeton: University Press. Bodhi, Bhikkhu. trans. 2000. The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Saṃyutta-Nikāya. Vol.I. USA: Wisdom Publications. . 1984/1984. The Noble Eightfold Path. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. . trans. 2000. Saṁyutta-nikāya Vol.I. 537. London: Pali Text Society. Bond, George, D. 1992. The Buddhist Revival in Sri Lanka: Religious Tradition, Reinterpretation and Response. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas Publishers. Carrithers, Michael. 1983. The Forest Monks of Sri Lanka: An Anthropological and Historical Study, Delhi: Oxford University Press.

371 Chung, Chai-Sik. 2001. Korea, Religious Tradition and Globalization, Institute for Modern Korean Studies, Korea: Yonsei University. Coperahewa, Sandagomi. 2010. Visi Vana Siyawase Sinhala Bhāsha Vyavahāraya: Sāmājavāgvidyatmaka Adyanayak (Sinhala Language Usage in the Twentieth Century : A Socio-linguistic Study). Colombo: S. Godage & Brothers. pp. 85-91. Davids, C.A.F. Rhys. 1941. Wayfarer’s World. London: Luzac. de Silva, Padmasiri. 1987. Buddhist Psychology and Freudian Psychology. London; Macmillan. de Zoysa, Arjuna, Champika Ranawaka, and Asanga Tilakaratne. eds. 1998. Buddhism, Science, and Realism Question: Beyond the Metaphysics of Common Sense. Colombo: Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies. Dharmasiri, Gunapala. 1971. Buddhist Critique of Christian Concept of God. Colombo: Lakehouse Publishers. . 1997. Nature of Medicine. Kandy. Dhirasekera, Jotiya. 1981. Buddhist Monastic Discipline. Colombo: Ministry of Higher Education. Dillon, Michele. ed. 2003. Handbook of The Sociology of Religion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Disanayaka, Piyasena. 1977. Political Thought of the Buddha. Colombo: Department of Cultural Affairs. D’Souza, Leela. 2005. The Sociology of Religion: A Historical Review, Author Publication: Jaipur, India. Ellison, Banks. 2000. Women’s Buddhism and Buddhism’s Women: Tradition, Revision, Renewal. Findly, Boston: Wisdom Publications. Eppsteiner, Fred. 1988. The Path of Compassion: Writings on Socially Engaged Buddhism, Berkeley, California: Parallax Press. . The Path of Compassion: Writings on Socially Engaged Buddhism, ed. Parallax Press, Berkeley, California. Findly, Ellison Banks. 2000. Women’s Buddhism and Buddhism’s Women. Boston: Wisdom Publication. Gellner, Ernest. 1992. Postmodernism, Reason and Religion, Routledge: London and New York. Gnanananda. 2000. E Ama Nivansuva Boho Dura Nove: (That great bliss of nirvana is not far away), Colombo: Dayawansa Jayakodi Publishers.

372 . 2001. Ape Budu Samindu Tawama Veda Veseti (Our great Buddha is still living) Colombo: Dayawansa Jayakodi Publishers. . 2002. Vismita Avabodhaya (Wonderful Understanding), Colombo: Dayawansa Jayakodi Publishers. . 2016. Kiyannam Senehasin – Miya Noyan His Atin ( I will say with love – Do not die empty-handed”). Gombrich, Richard. 1988. Theravada Buddhism: A social history from ancient Benares to modern Colombo. London: Rutledge and Kegan Paul. . and Gananatha Obeyesekere, 1988. Buddhism Transformed: Religious Change in Sri Lanka, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Gnanatilaka, Tissa. 1979. Minis Gatalu Pilibanda Bauddha Vigrahya (Human Problems in a Buddhist Perspective). Colombo: Ministry of Cultural Affairs. Grero, Ananda. 1996. An Analysis of Theravdda Vinaya in the Light of Modern Legal Philosophy. Colombo. Gross, Rita M. 1993. Buddhism after Patriarchy: A Feminist History, Analysis and Reconstruction of Buddhism. New York: SUNY Press. Gunawardane, RALH. 1979. Robe and Plough: Monasticism and Economic Interest in Early Medieval Sri Lanka. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. Guruge, W.P. 1984. From the Living Fountains of Buddhism. Colombo: The Ministry of Cultural Affairs. . 1965. Return to Righteousness: A Collection of Speeches, Essays and Letters of the Anagarika Dharmapala. Sri Lanka: The Government Press. Harris, Elizabeth J. 2006. Theravada Buddhism and the Buddhist Encounter. London and New York: Routledge. Haynes, Jeff. 1997. “Religion, Secularization and Politics: a postmodern conspectus.” in The Third World Quarterly, Vol 18, pp.709-728. Haynes, Jeff. ed. 1999. Religion, Globalization and Political Culture in the Third World, New York: St. Martin’s Press. Hick, John. 1989. An Interpretation of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. Hinüber, Oskar von. 1996. A Handbook o f Pali Literature, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1996, Vol 2, p.104.

373 Illangasinghe, Mangala. 1992. Buddhism in Medieval Sri Lanka. Colombo. Jayatilleke, K.N. 1949. “Some Problems of Translation and Interpretation (1).” in University of Ceylon Review, Vol. VII, No.3. eds. O.H.de A. Wijesekera & G.C.Mendis, Colombo: The University of Ceylon. pp. 228-224. . 1950. “Some Problems of Translation and Interpretation (II).” in University of Ceylon Review, Vol. VIII, No.3, eds. O.H.de A. Wijesekera & G.C.Mendis, Colombo: The University of Ceylon. pp. 45-55. . 1963. Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Jayawardhana, Somapala. 1995. Handbook of Pali Literature. Colombo: Karunaratne and Sons Ltd. Johansson, Rune E.A. 1969. The Psychology of Nirvana. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Jones, Ken. 1993. Beyond Optimism: A Buddhist Political Ecology. Oxford: Jon Catpenter. Juergensmeyer, Mark. 1993. The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State, Berkeley: University of California Press. Kalupahana, David J. 1976. Buddhist Philosophy: Historical Analysis. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. . 1980. Buddhist Psychology. Albany: State University of New York Press. . 1986. Mūlamadhyamakakārikā of Nāgārjuna:The Philosophy of Middle Way. New York: State University Press. .1992. A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Kemper, Steven. 2014. Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World. Chicago and London; The University of Chicago Press. Kinnvall, Catarina. 2004. “Globalization and Religious Nationalism: Self, Identity, and the Search for Ontological Security.” in Political Psychology, Vol.25, No.5, 2004. pp. 741-765. Kuhn, Hans. 1993. Declaration Toward a Global Ethic, Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, Chicago. Liyanage, Gunadasa. 1995. On the Path. Nedimala: Buddhist Cultural Center.

374 Mahinda, Deegalle. 2006. Popularizing Buddhism: Preaching as Performance in Sri Lanka. Albany: State University of New York Press. . 2008. Dharma to the UK: A Centennial Celebration of Buddhist Legacy. London: World Buddhist Foundation. Malalasekare, G.P. 1952. The Buddhist Flag in South Asia. . 1960. Dictionary of Pali Proper Names. Vol.II. London: Pali Text Society. Malalgoda, Kitsiri. 1976. Buddhism in Sinhala Society. 1750- 1900. California: California University Press. Mallawarachchi, Udaya. 1980. “Walpola Rahula: A Brief Biographical Sketch.” in Buddhist Studies in honour of Walpola Rahula, Somaratna Balasooriya, at el. ed. London: Gordon Fraser. pp. vii-x. Mendis, N.K.G. 1993. The Question of King Milinda. Kandy, Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society. Murti, T.R.V. 1955/1980. The Central Philosophy of Buddhism: A Study of Mādhyamika System. London: Unwin Paperbacks. Nakamura, Hajime. 1987. Indian Buddhism: A Survey with Bibliography Notes. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. Ñāṇananda, Bhikkhu. 1971/1997. Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist Thought: An Essay on Papañca-Saññā-Saṅkhā. Sri Lanka: Buddhist Puplication Society. . 1997. Magic of the Mind. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu. trans. 1997. The Path of Purification (Visuddimagga), Singapore: Singapore Buddhist Meditation Centre: Taipei: The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation. . and Bhikkhu Bodhi, trans. 2001. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of Majjhima-Nikāya. (The Teachings of the Buddha). Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. Nanarama, Pategama. 1996. An Approach to Buddhist Social Philosophy. Singapore. Narada, Thera. 1978. The Dhammapada. Malaysia: Buddhist Missionary Society. Obesekara, Gananath. 1997. “The Vissisitudes of the Sinhala-Buddhist Identity through Time and Change” in Sri Lanka, Collective Identities Revisited Vol. 1. Michael Roberts. ed. Colombo: Marga Publications.

375 Olcott, Henry S. 1915. Buddhist Catechism, London and Benares: Theosophical Publishing Society. Oldenberg, Hermann. 1982. Dīpavaṃsa. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services. Pannasinha, Madihe Thera. 1981. Sri Vajiranana Sahithyaya Vol.II. Maharagama: Sasana Sevaka Samithiya. Peiris, Aloysius S.J. 1988. Love Meets Wisdom: A Christian Experience of Buddhism. New York: Obris Books. .1996. Fire and Water. Basic Issues in Asian Buddhism and Christianity. New York: Obris Books. Perry, Edmund. 1980. “Can Buddhist and Christians Live Together as Kalyana-mitta?” in Buddhist Studies in honour of Walpola Rahula, Somaratna Balasooriya, at el. ed. London: Gordon Fraser. pp. 201212. Preston, Paul. 2001. Evangelicals, and Politics in Africa, Asia and Latin America, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Chapters on Asia: pp. 61-101.] Petra, Keifer Pulz. 2000. “Ceremonial Boundaries in Buddhist Monastic Tradition in Sri Lanka” in Wilhelm Geiger and the Study of the Culture and the History of Sri Lanka, eds. Ulrich Everding & Asanga Tilakaratne. Sri Lanka: Goethe Institute and Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies. Pulz, Petra Kiefer. 1996. “Restoration of bhikkhunī Sangha in the Theravada Tradition” (www.congress-on-buddhist-women.org). Queen, Christopher S. and Sallie B. King. ed. 1996. Engaged Buddhism: Buddhist Liberation Movements in Asia, New York: SUNY Press. Rahula, Walpola. 1946/1992. (Revised edition 1948). Bhikshuvage Urumaya. Colombo: S. Godage Brothers. . 1956. History of Buddhism in Ceylon: Anuradapura Period. Colombo. . 1974. The Heritage of the Bhikkhu. New York: Grove Press. . 1978/1959. What the Buddha Taught. (Paperback Edition). London: The Gordon Fraser gallery Ltd. Rawls, John. 1967. “Distributive Justice.” in Justice, ed. Allan Ryan, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1993. Roberts, Michael. ed. 1997. Sri Lanka: Collective Identities Revisited. Sri Lanka: Marga Institute, , 355-384.

376 Ryan, Allan. 1993. Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schalk, Peter. 1989. “‘Unity’ and ‘Sovereignty’: Key Concepts of a Militant Buddhist Organization in the Present Conflict in Sri Lanka” inTemenos 24. pp. 55-82. Seager, R.H. 1999. Buddhism in America. New York: Colombia University Press. Searle, John R. 1970. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press. Seneviratne, H.L. 1999. Work of Kings: The New Buddhism in Sri Lanka. Chicago: The University of Chicago Pres. Seth, Noel S.J. 1988. “Buddhism and Communalism.” in Religion and Society, Vol. XXXV, No/4, December. Sharma, Arvind et al. 2009, South and Southeast Asia Culture and Religion Vol. III. New Delhi. Skilling, Peter, Jason A. Carbine, Claudio Cicuzza, Santi Padeekham. eds. 2012. How Theravada is Theravada: Exploring Buddhist Identities. Thailand: Silkworm Books. Spohn, Willfried. 2003. “Multiple Modernity, Nationalism and Religion: A Global Perspective.” in Current Sociology, May/July 2003 Vol. 51. pp. 265-286. Sponberg, Alan. 1992. “Attitudes toward women and feminism in early Buddhism” in Buddhism, Sexuality and Gender, ed. Jose Ignacio Cabezon. New York: SUNY Press. Stcherbatsky, Th. 1993. Buddhist Logic. Vol. I. II. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas Publications. Tambiah, S. 1992. Buddhism Betrayed: Religion, Politics and Violence in Sri Lanka. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Tilakaratne, Asanga. 1993. Nirvana and Ineffability: A Study of the Buddhist Theory of Reality and Language. Colombo: The Post-Graduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya. . 1998. Madihe Nahimi: Carithaya ha Chinthanaya. Maharagama: Sasana Sevaka Samithiya. . 1997. “Globalization: A Buddhist Perspective to Economics.” in Dialogue (NS) Vol. XXIV, Colombo. pp. 53-65. . 2005. “Personality Differences of Arhants and the Origins of Theravada: A study of Two Great Elders of thhe Theravada Tradition:

377 Mahakassapa and Ananda” in Dhamma-Vinaya: Essays in Honour of Venerable Professor Dhammavihari (Jotiya Dhirasekara), eds. Asanga Tilakaratne et al. Colombo: Sri Lanka Association of Buddhist Studies (SLABS). . 2006. “The Buddhist View on Religious Conversion.” in Dialogue (NS) Vol. XXXII & XXXIII, Colombo. pp. 58-82. . 2006. “The Role of Buddhist Monks in Resolving the Conflict.” Buddhism, Conflict and Violence in Modern Sri Lanka, eds. Deegalle Mahinda. London: Routledge, pp. 210-225. Timmerman, Peter. 1994. “It is Dark Outside: Western Buddhism from the Enlightenment to the Global Crisis” in Buddhism and Ecology, ed. Martine Batchelor and Kerry Brown, Indian Edition. Tissa Kumara, Ananda. 2005. Kristhiyani Prajnapthiyata Pilithurak saha Kristhiyani Prajnapthiya, Colombo: S. Godage saha Sahodarayo. Van Der Veer, Peter. 2002. “Transnational religion: Hindu, Muslim movements.” in Global Networks, 2, 2. pp. 95-108. Victoria, Brian. 1997. Zen at War. New York: Weatherhill. Walshe, Maurice, trans. 1987. Thus Have I Heard: The Long Discourses of the Buddha. London: Wisdom Publication. Wickremeratne, Ananda. 1984. The Genesis of an Orientalist: Thomas William Rhys Davids in Sri Lonka, Dehli: Motilal Banarsidass. Wriggins, William Howard. 1960. Ceylon - Dilemmas of a New Nation. Princeton U.P.: The University of Virginia.

Index of Subjects

A Abhidammatthasaṅgaha 318 Abhidhamma 321 absolutism 131, 138, 139, 303 absolutist 281, 284 ābhisamācārika-sīla 352 ādibrahmacarika-sīla 352 agga-sāvaka 175 agreement 1815: 126 Ajivikism 138 alms-bowl 5 altruism 304 ancient Indian society 161 anti-social 297 Apadāna 13 arahant 304 - ideal 300 arahanthood 81 araññavāsī (forest dwellers) 192, 238, 252, 363 asceticism 185 āśirvāda-pūjā 220 Atman 139 āyurveda 93

B Bhāṇaka (oral) tradition 65

bhikkhunī 6, 90, 149 -169, 253 - sāsana: 6, 32, 33, 254, 293 - order 6, 32, 99, 149, 254 - Sangha 6, 106, 165 Korean Mahayana - 165 - upasampadā (full admission to Buddhist nuns) 293 - tradition 300 bhikkhus 90, 149-169 - and Politics 42, 45, 47 - training center 359 political – 362, 364 Bhiksuvage Urumaya 27, 42, 44, 246 bhūmiputra 192, 194 Sinhala - 195 Tamil – 195 Bodhi: - tree 5 - pūja 116, 216, 218, 219 - Gnana Sabha 227 -leaves 331, 354 Bodhicaryāvatāra 322 bodhisattva 106 - yāna 91 - ideal 304 Brahman 139, 157 Brahmanism 138 British 17 Buddha 240

379 - Jayanti 26, 44, 216, 320, 321, 345, 358 - Jayanti celebration 44, 45 - Sāsana Commission 46, 47, 52, 53, 58, 60, 358 - hood 53, 70 -Sāsana Council 53, 61 2500th – Jayanti 57, 58 - Sāsana 119 - putra 192 - pūjā 245 - Jayanti Tripiṭka Granthamālā 320, 346 Buddhavaṃsa 13 Buddhism 78, 125, 307, 345 protestant – 39, 115, 118, 128, 215, 232, 276 eco – 78, 91, 103, 284, 297 Sri Lankan – 78, 183, 214, 278 engaged – 89, 103, 104, 107, 284, 297, 298, 301 trans-yanic – 91, 93, 99, 102, 104, 107, 271, 284, 296 American – 100, 101, 294 green – 103, 297 - in Sri Lanka 87, 111 post-Protestant- 116 trans-traditional – 129 early – 148 Global - 263-273 globalized – 266 diaspora – 271 cultural – 271 Western – 272, 305 world – 279, 289 Eats Asian – 283 social engage – 306 - studies of Sri Lanka 315 anthropological study of – 340, 341 - and science 344 Buddhist: Cambodian- 100 - modernism 27, 113, 114, 116, 184

- monuments 16 - Catechism 24, 38, 95, 114 - Theosophical Society (BTS) 38, 39, 233 - school 38, 113, 114, 263 - committee 43 - activism 45, 360 - Committee of Inquiry 52, 53, 57, 58, 75 - monastic education 64 -culture 83 - tradition 90, 96, 161 - environmentalism 91, 284 - teachings 95 - women 99 Vietnamese – 100 - Sangha Council of Southern California 101 - ecologist 103 - Christian debates 120 - monks regarding Sri Lanka 124 - and Christianity 135 Southern – 135 - ethic 168 - monk 183, 187, 210 - monastic 189 - ness 214 - universalism 275 - studies 316, 317, 322, 325, 326, 327, 333, 345 - logic 317 - Sanskrit 324 - Publication Society (BPS) 335, 358 - Philosophy of education 338 - phycology 342 - religiousness 356 - activism 364 Budugunālankāraya 17, 343

C cakka-ratana 172 capitalism 188

380 Cariyāpiṭaka 13 Catechism 289 Chapter (nikāya) 31 Chinese: - monk 92 - Buddhist history; classical – 346 Christianity 23, 25, 55, 77, 84, 125, 133, 137, 138, 191, 280, 343 - came to Asian counties 133 cold-war 141 Colonial domination 133 Colonialism 113 commentaries 12, 313, 314 Hewavitarana- 350 commercialization 221 comparative studies 342 compassion 309 conflict 309 Confucianism 279 constitution 1978: 126 conversion 229, 302, 303, 304 conventional truth 205 Council (saṅgāyanā) 31 first – 65, 151 Christian: - missionaries 23 - schools 38, 113 - churches 87 - virtue 125 - culture 211

D Dambadeni Katikāvata 16 dāna 355 dasa-sil-mātā 32, 164 defeat (pārājikā) 299 definitive proclamation 163 dependent origination 309 determinism 281 de-traditionalization 128 devatā-ārādhanāva 245 development 358, 360

dhamma 310 - sermons 85, 355 - School 227, 228 dhammadūta 31, 357 -ship 73 - work 73 dhammakathika 191, 250 Dhammapada 12 Dhamma-senāpthi 175 Dharma pūjā 245 Dharmarājyaya 28 Dharmārāmaya 332 dhutanga 252 dialogue 92, 333, 343 Dīgha-nikāya 320 Dīpavaṃsa 163 discrimination of women 178 dukkha 305 duppaññā 158 Dutch 17, 18, 133

E early or ideal Buddhism 198 ecology 297 education 64 - system of the country 75 state – system 77 modern – 91 Encyclopedia of Buddhism 98, 292, 321 environmentalism 104 ethics 307, 308 ethnic conflict 183, 202 ethnicity 203 European 197, 211 - powers 84 - invaders 126

F Faith 138 female-faculty 149

381 femininity 149 feminism 167 four groups (cattāro parisā) 159 freedom 270 French 346 fruit of steam-entry (sotāpatti-phala) 177 fundamental Buddhist beliefs 94, 109 fundamentalism 232

G gāmavāsī (village dwellers) 192, 238, 239, 250, 363 gaṇinnānse 19 gantha-dhūra (‘yoke of books’) 66, 237, 246, 248, 364 Gender 149-169 Germen 346 global ethic 179, 180 Declaration toward a – 179 globalization 86, 129, 131, 133, 135, 141, 146, 169, 182, 221, 291, 297 God 138, 140 groundless confidence 241 guardian deity 194

H hearers 122 Heritage of the Bhikkhu 129, 362, 365 Higher Admission (upasmapadā) 15, 19, 81, 106, 244, 303 highest punishment 209 Hīnayāna 81, 91, 279 Hindu 317 - influence 14, 16 - beliefs 16 - theism 343

Hinduism 17, 84, 87, 117, 125, 137, 280 Historical 338 household discipline 204 human rights 63, 131

I independence 42 individualism 104, 107, 188 inner-purification 177 inter-religious: - dialogue 92, 93, 98, 286, 287 - harmony 139, 302 intolerance 92, 283 intra-Buddhist dialogue 97, 291 invasions 7, 13, 83, 196 Cola - 14 Islam 125, 137, 138, 280 - came to Asia 133 Itivuttaka 13 itthi-indriya (female faculty) 148

J Jainism 138, 282 Japanese 346 Jātaka 12 - literature 157 Jnānaprasthāna 322 Judaism 138, 280 Judeo-Christian 306 justice 111 - and rights 125

K Kathāvattuppakaraṇa 86 Khuddaka-nipāṭha 12 kula-devatā (family God) 238

L low-caste 190

382 lay: - preachers 231 - Buddhist leadership 232 learnedness (pariyatti) 83 Light of Asia 267 liṅga or nimitta 149 liṅga sampatti 162 Logical Positivism 112 low country 349, 361, 365

M Magna Carta 144 Mahāparinirvāṇa-sutta 26 Mahabodhi: - Society 40, 96, 135, 198, 264, 265, 290 - journal 267 Mahāvaṃsa 86, 125, 163 Mahā-thūpa 8 Mahayana 88, 91, 92, 100, 235, 279, 285, 286, 295 - Doctrines 13-80 - Buddhism 89, 91 - view 104 - nun 300 - text 322 Majjhima-nikāya 320 male: - faculty 149 - chauvinism 167 Mantrayāna 91 Manusmṛtiya 153 Māra 152, 167 masculinism 167 materialism 86 Meditation 116 - on filthiness (asubha bhāvanā) 160 Mindfulness – 271 man-ness (purisa bhāva) 162

miśrayāna 130, 271 modern period 17 modernism 142 monastic education 20, 65, 66, 70, 116 - centers 49 - life 199 - discipline 204 - activism 211 monk: - the employee 49 - in the national issue 50 pseudo – 61 judiciary system for the – 64 non-Theravada – 91 - travelers 93 Buddhist – 118, 119, 125 Sri Lankan Buddhist – 239 monotheism 84 moral: - absolutism 280 - norms 307 morality 307 Mūlamādhyamikakārikā 322 multi-religiousness 127

N nakṣhatra 93 nationalism 276 New Kadampa group 270 New World Order (NWO) 168, 169 Niddesa 13 Nikāya tree 43, 89 Nirvana 139 non-killing (mā-ghāta) 10 non-theistic 240, 280 nuns’ order 54

O Olcott’s school 117

383

P pabbajjā 150 Pali 317, 318, 323, 325, 326, 328, 330 - language 9, 21, 329 - Buddhist canon 26, 81, 248 - Text Society (PTS) 134, 135, 317 - commentaries 312, 319, 331 - tīka 319 Panadura debate 23, 38, 94, 135 Pandita degree 317, 346 Parinirvāṇa 31, 65, 249 pariyatti (learning) 10, 64, 199, 238, 250, 355 Path of Purification 354 patipatti 10, 64, 199 Paṭisambhidāmagga 13 paṭivedha 64, 238 patron saint 148, 159 pāṃsukūlika 191, 250 pārājikā 73, 299 Pātimokkha: - rules 154 - recital 299 Peace 62, 308 - and justice 119, 123 - and harmony 309 perahera (procession) 84 Peta-vatthu 13 Philosophy East and West 342 physical power 205 pin-vākyaya (statement of merit) 355 Pirivena education 27, 193 pluralism 184, 187 plurality of religion 111, 125, 137 political activism 210 Polonnaruwa period 198 positivism 133 post-independence Sri Lanka 357

post-positivist thinking 112 practice (paṭipatti) 83, 238, 250 preserving the teaching 237 primary pirivena 67 promoting peace 111 pure science 267 purisa-indriya 148

R rājā cakka-vatti 170 Rājāvaliya 3 Rāmañña (Myanmar) 15 - nikāya 22, 31 Ratana-sutta 14 rational confidence 241 rationalism 133 re-traditionalization 128 realization 238 reality 205 reconciliation 192 relativism 132, 139, 140, 283, 302, 303 relativist 281, 284 religion 142 - and ethics 112 - of Asia 131, 133, 310 plurality of – 136 history of – 141 western – 146 Asian – 146 religious: - freedom 111, 120 - modernism 113 - globalization 135 - fundamentalism 141, 142 - exclusivism 188 - studies 342 right 283 righteous rule 28 Roman Catholicism 120

384

S Sakyadhita (Daughters of the Sakyamuni Buddha) 99, 106, 165, 295, 300 sāmagriyāna 284, 287 sāmaṅera (novices) 32, 188 sāmaṅerī 32 Sambuddhatva 310 samsara 304 Saṅgāyanā 80, 81, 82, 158, 162, 249 third 2 Fourth – 9 first – 253 Sangha 11, 72, 76, 155, 238 The King of – 19, 315 Adhikaraṇaya 61 governance of the – 69 leader for the – 69, 71 Sri Lankan – 74, 165, 192, 193, 194, 199, 200, 243, 289 Buddhist – 85, 324 Mahavihara – 86 - bheda 105, 299 British – 272 Mahayana – 289 sānghika (communal System) 74, 84, 200 Sanskrit 21, 318, 328, 330, 346 - language 317 Sāsana 76, 82, 150,151, 152, 256 Buddha – 352-365 satta adhikaraṇa 156 Satyodaya 245 science 343 secularism 86, 142, 144, 178 Sela-sutta 173 self-sacrifice 107 Siam (Thailand) 20 - Nikaya 349 sīmā 5 Sinhala 330

- Bauddhaya (Buddhist) 25, 186, 195, 213, 359 - the state language 26 - Buddhist nationalism 29, 183, 187 - Bala Manḍalaya 52 - Buddhist tradition 55 - Buddhist culture 83, 231 - community 124 - Buddhist ideology 183 - Buddhist chauvinist 188, 190 - homeland 197 - Buddhist fundamentalism 195 - Buddhist hegemonic ideology 199 - ness 214 - Buddhist identity 215 six-coloured flag 98, 291 skill-in-mean (upāyakauśalya) 209 Small is Beautiful 359 Social Philosophy 338 social: - activism 103 - service 187, 239, 240, 241 sociological studies 338 sociology 341 srāvaka-yāna 91, 106, 300 Sri Dharmarakshitavamsa Nikaya 348, 357 Sri Lanka Ttipiṭka Project 332 Sri Lankana Theravada monasteries 270 state and religion 55 study of religion 111 Success 229 Sun Buddha 216 Sutta-nipāta 12 Syāmarāja price 318 Syamopalivamsa Nikāya 164

T Tamil 189, 190 - separatism 184

385 - community 187 - politician 197 - Buddhist community 210 tantryāna 91 Taoism 279 tathatā 139 Textual Studies 334, 346 Theosophical Society 95 theosophy 276 Theragāthā 13, 166 Theravada 8, 79, 80, 92, 100, 235, 279, 285, 286, 294 - Sangha 8 - interpretation 13 - tradition 29, 81, 82, 85, 88, 89, 242, 285 - teachers 91 - Buddhism 1, 133, 185, 269, 364 west to – Buddhism 134 - Buddhist Vihara 135 - bhikkhu 243, 252, 258 - school 295 - nuns 300 - societies 363 Theravadins 235 therīya 81 Tibetan 270, 346 Tipiṭaka 320 tolerance 184, 187, 284 tooth relic 12 traditional Buddhist education 23 trust (saddhā) 122 truth 137, 138, 139 religious – 302 two-truth 205

U Udāna 13 ultimate truth 205 unconditional altruism 107 unethical conversion 76, 87, 121,

122, 135, 136 united vehicle 284 universal monarch 172, 206 universalism 187, 276, 278 University of Ceylon Review 346 UNP government 46 upāsaka 90, 152, 159 upasampadā (higher ordination) 19, 31, 82, 107, 164, 188, 300, 315, 349 upāsikās 90, 152, 157 upāyakauśalya (skill-in-mean) 209 Up-country 21, 349

V Vaitulyavāda (Vetullavāda) 86, 104 Vaitulya-piṭaka 10 Vajirarama Tradition 350, 352, 354, 356, 357 Vajralekhā 348 Vajraparvata 14 Vajrayana 14, 88, 91, 92, 100, 235, 280, 285, 286, 289, 294 - Buddhist 102 -texts 322 Vesak 295 Vidyalankara faction 185 - ideology 185 - monk 188 - declaration 246 Vidyodaya: - activism 189 Vietnam war 100, 294 Vimāna-vatthu 13 vinaya 82 Viññaptimātratāsiddhivādaya 322 violence 203, 283, 309 non – 184 - and peace 124 Vipassanā meditation (insight meditation) 88, 100, 285, 295

386 Theravada – 91 vipassanā-dhūra (‘yoke of insight meditation’) 66, 194, 237, 249, 364 Visuddhimagga 12, 156, 160, 354

W West 269 Western culture 211 wheel 331, 354 Wheel of Doctrine (dhammachakka) 172 wheel-turner monarch 170-177 wisdom 309 women (itthi) 155 -ness (iithi-bhāva) 162 - hood 165 Indian – 166 wrong: - religion 39 - views 86

Y yāna 91, 168, 285, 286, 298 yoga 273 Yoke of Text 237

Index of Proper Names

A Abayawansa, Kapila 342, 345 Abeynayake, Oliver 334 Abhayagiri 8, 10, 12, 14, 80 - nikāya 9 Adikaram EW 83, 339 Aggabodhi-I 10, 14 - IV 14 - VII 14 agreement (Katikāvta) 14, 15, 16 - Polonnaruwa Ajaan Cha 295 All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC) 33, 40, 43, 53, 55, 57, 97, 120 Āmanḍagāminī 10 Amarapura: -chapter 22 -fraternity 105, 299 - Mahanikāya 349 -Siri Dharmarakshita Nikaya 358 Ananda (thera) 81, 148, 150, 151, 158, 191, 252-254 Ananda Tissa (thera) 343 Ananda, Tirikunamale (thera) 348, 360 Annada Maithriya, Balangoda (thera) 216

Anula (queen) 5 Anuradhapura 2, 11, 14 Anuruddha, Mahaoya 360 Anvratha (Anurudda) 15 Aravinda, Naotunne 360 Ariṭṭha Bhikkhu 4 Ariyadhamma, Panadure (thera) 216 Ariyaratne JKP 344 Arnold, Sir Edwin 267 Asoka (emperor) 2, 83, 206, 279, 309, 310 son of – 3 Atthadassi, Bentara (thera) 343

B Bahalamassu Tissa (thera) 9 Bandaranayake, SWRD 26-28, 45, 215, 363 - government 48 Bandaranayake, Seneke 329 Bartholomeusz, T 192 Berlin Viharaya 353 Blavatsky, Helena 24 - Petrovna Blavatsky 38, 93, 136, 263, 287 Blavatsky, Madame 135 Bodhi, Bhikkhu 332, 334, 337, 354 Bodhiñāṇa 225

388 Britain 270 Buddha Jayanti Tripitaka Granthamala 324, 350 Buddha Sravaka: - Dhamma Pithaya 30, 49, 50, 68, 330 - Bhiksu University 30, 50, 330 Buddhadatta (thera) 314 Buddhadatta, Polwatte (thera) 318 Buddhagaya 96, 264, 265, 273, 276, 290 Buddhaghosa (thera) 1, 12, 13, 312314 Buddhist and Pali University 30, 68, 329 Buddhist Cultural Center 332 Buddhist Publication Society (BPS) 331, 354 Buddhist Theosophical Society (BTS) 38, 39, 230 Budumaga Sanvidhanaya 220 Buvanekabahu VI 19

C Cambodia 79, 82, 163 Candawimala, Rerukane (thera) 321 Chandakitti, Talalle (thera) 360 Chandrabhanu 35 Channa (thera) 206 Ceylon Times 135 China 6, 285, 286 Cittala-pabbata 7 Cola 15 Colombo 17 Cornfield, Jack 298 Cruz, Robert 333

D Dakkhiṇa-vihāra 11 Dalai Lama 88, 271

Dāsiyā Bhikkhuṇī 6 Davids, Rhys 134, 172, 317 de Silva, CR 192 de Silva, KM 23 de Silva, Lily 323, 334, 347 de Silva, Lynn 343 de Silva, Nalin 342 de Silva, Padmasiri 342 de Silva, Wettamuni, RG 344 de Zoysa, Arjuna 344, 348 de Zoysa, AP 320 Devanampiyatissa 2, 4, 5, 83 Devsara Bhikkhunī 6 Dhalhanemi 170, 172 Dhammadassi, Walpola (thera) 244 Dhammadinnā 152 Dhammajoti, K (thera) 345 Dhammanandi Bhikkhunī 99 Dhammapala 13, 314 Dhammapala Bhikkhunī 6 Dhammasiri, Maharagama (thera) 360 Dhammavihari (thera) 360 Dhammmaloka, Uduwe (thera) 221 Dharmaloka, Ratmalane Sri (thera) 21, 48, 316 Dharmapala, Anagarika 24, 39, 96, 114, 135, 184, 190, 198, 215, 257, 260, 272, 270-274, 290, 316 Dharmarakkhita, Attuduwe 349 Dharmarama, Ratmalane Sri (thera) 21, 316 Dharmarama, Yatramulle (thera) 317 Dhirananda Siri Ahangama (Thera) 349 Dharmasiri, Gunapala 322, 336, 342 Dhirasekera, Jotiya 337 Dolukande Hamuduruvo 219 Don Peter, WLA 343

389 Duṭugemunu, king 7, 8, 83, 197

E Ecumenical Institute of Study and Dialogue (EISD) 333 Elara, king 8 Endo, Toshi-ishi 334 England 269 Europe 269, 271

F Fa Hsien 11, 92 Fernando, Antony 343 Foster, Mari Elizabeth 266

G Galmangoda, Sumanapala 334 Giriddhi Bhikkhuṇī 6 Gnanananda, Katukurunde (thera) 341 Gnanananda, Kiribagoda (thera) 224 Gnanarama, Pategama (thera) 337 Gnanaratana, Weligama (thera) 349, 355 Gnanavimala Tissa, Ambagahahapitiye (thera) 349 Goenka 295 Goldstein, Joseph 295 Gombrich, Richard 116 Goṭhābhaya 11 Grero, Ananda 337 Gunananda (thera) Gunananda, Migettuwatte/Mohottiwatte (thera) 23, 38, 117, 118 Gunasiri 351 Gunathilake M 322 Guruge, Ananda WP 275, 345 Guttika 198

H

Handurukanda, Ratna 328, 335 Hettigoda, Victor 244 Hewavitarana, Simon 319 -commentaries 346 Hick, John 139, 302

I India 165 Indra 171 Insight Meditation Society 296 Iriyagolla, IMRA 49

J Jampa Tsedron 99, 293 Jana Vijaya Foundation 223 Janatha Vimukti Peramuna (JVP) 50-51, 194 Japan 285, 286 Jatika Hela Urumaya (JHU) 28, 77, 121, 129, 259, 365 Jatika Sangha Sabhava 52 Jayagrahanaya 229 Jayasuriya, WF 322 Jayatilleke, KN 324, 346, 342, 344, 345 Jayawikrama, NA 323, 324 Jetavanaramaya 11, 14 Jeṭṭhatissa 11 Jones, Ken 104, 298 Jotipala 14

K Kabilsingh, Chatsumarn 99, 293 Kalinga 15 Kalupahana, DJ 336, 342 Kandy 21 Kapilawatthu 150 Karma Lekshe Tsomo 99, 293 Karunadasa, Y 328, 337, 345 Kassapa 351

390 Kassapa IV 14 Kassapa, Kimbi-ela (thera) 360 Kāvantissa, king 7 Kemper, Steven 274 Khema, Ayya 99, 293 Kheminda (thera) 351 Kirti Sri Rajasinha 20 Kohon Tissa (thera) 11 Korea 285, 286 Kotte 17 Kulatilake, PJ 350 Kumaranatunga, Chandrika Bandaranayake 29 Kusalanana, Talpavila (thera) 360

L Lankananda, Labugama (thera) 321, 344 Lankananda, Udukumbara (thera) 360 Laos 79, 82, 163 Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE) 34, 51, 203, 209, 210, 213 London Buddhist Vihara 135, 266, 269, 353

M Magha 15, 83, 197, 210 Maha Kashyapa, Dimbulagala (thera) 15 Mahakassapa (thera) 82, 252, 253, 254 Maha Tissa 160 Mahāgāma 7 Mahamaya 84 Mahanama 12, 314, 351 Mahasena 11 Mahā-thūpa 8 Mahavihara 2, 8, 65

- Sangha 9 - monks 10, 11 Mahila Bhikkhunī 6 Mahinda Thera 313 Mahinda, arahant 3-6, 73, 83 Mahinda, Deegalle 365 Malalasekera, GP 25, 43, 59, 98, 245, 291, 321, 323, 357 Manathunga, P de S 320 Marasinghe, MMJ 337 Marx, Karl 112 Mavubima Surakeeme Vyaparaya 52 Mettavihari (Denmark) (thera) 322, 360 Metteyya 351 Myanmar 19-21, 79, 82, 163, 164, 348, 361

N Nanamoli, Bhikkhu 334, 351, 354 Nanaratana, Weligama 351 Nanavira (thera) 351, 354 Nanawimala, Bellana (thera) 62 Nanasiha, Henpiṭagedara (thera) 322 Nanatiloka 354 Narada (thera) 30, 100, 318, 351, 353 Needham, Joseph 283 Nigrodharamaya 150 Nissanka, HSS 344 Nissanka-Malla, king 15 Nyanaponika (thera) 331, 354 Nyanatiloka (thera) 332

O Obeyesekere, Gananath 116, 176, 276 Olcott, Henry Steel 24, 38, 93, 94, 96, 109, 113, 114, 135, 263, 287, 289, 290, 316

391 - school 117 Oriental Studies Society 66, 68, 317, 331

Punnaji, Madawala (thera) 360

P

Rahula 353 Rahula, Ampitiye (thera) 223, 351, 359 Rahula, Kotapitiye (thera) 344 Rahula, Walpola (thera) 27, 34, 41, 42, 44, 47, 50, 128, 210, 243, 244, 329, 337, 362, 363, 365 Rakkhanga (desa) 19 Ramañña-desa 15 -nikāya 22, 32 Ranawaka, Champika 344 Ratnapala, Amaradasa 322 Ratnapala, Nandasena 337 Rohana 351 Rohana village 7 Royal Asiatic Society (RAS) 330

Palihawadana, Mahinda 337, 335 Pandya 15 - kingdom 13 Pannasiha, Madihe (thera) 47, 189, 190, 194, 223, 332, 348, 349, 351, 353, 356-358, 360, 361 Pannarama, Yakkaduwe (thera) 317, 320 Pannasekhara, Kalukondayave (thera) 60 Parakramabahu 15 - II 16, 35 - VI 16 Paramadhamma Cetiya Pirivena 21, 117 Parliament of World Religions 115, 136, 145, 179 Pasannamanasa, Panadure 360 Peiris, Fr Aloysius 333, 343 Pemaratana, Waragoda (thera) 324, 330 Perera, Sasanka 342 Perera, LPN 337 Pirivena Teacher Training Collage 68 Piyadassi (of Vajirarama) (thera) 30, 318, 337, 351 Piyatissa, Vidurupola (thera) 317, 367 Popper, Carl 112 Portuguese 17, 84, 120, 133 Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies 328, 335 Prajapati Gotami 149, 151, 154 Premasiri, PD 323, 336, 342 Presidential Commission of Buddhist Sāsana 29, 33

R

S Saccaka 151 Saddhammanandī Bhikkhunī 6 Saddhatissa 8 Saddhatissa, Hammalawa (thera) 337 Sakyadhita (organization) 100, 107, 164, 293, 303 Samastha Lanka Amarapura Sangha Sabha 359 Salgado, Nirmala 342 Sanghamittā Bhikkhunī 5, 6, 7, 11, 163 Sarachchandra, Ediriweera 336 Saranankara (thera) 19, 117, 188, 315 Saraṇankara Sangharāja, Asarana Sarana 19, 48, 53, 65, 165, 315, 319, 361 Saranath 165 Sarvodaya Sramadana Movement 216

392 Sasanaratana, Moratuve (thera) 322 Sasana Sevaka Samitiya 332 Schumacher, EF 359 Sena 196 - I, 13, 14 - II 13, 14 Senananda, Urugamuve (thera) 351 Senanayake, DS 41, 42, 55 Senaviratne, HL 257, 278, 200, 364 Siam 20 -nikāya 20, 352 Siddhartha 150 Sīhala-dīpa 2, 3 Silakala 10 Silva, David (Fr.) 23 Siri Meghavanna 12 Siri Revata, Weragampita (thera) 357 Siri Vajiranana Dharmayatanaya 359 Siri Vajiranana, Palene (thera) 41, 189, 255, 318, 348-361 Siridhamma 351 Sitawaka 17 Sobhita, Omalpe (thera) 121 Soka Gakkai 270 Solzberg, Sharon 298 Soma 351, 357 Soma Bhikkhunī 6, 149, 167 Soma, Gangodavila (thera) 28, 221, 360 Sorata, Welivitiye (thera) 317 South and South East Asia 133 South India 7, 13, 83, 124 - Asian 20, 82 down – 21 Sri Lanka 1, 82, 137, 163, 164 - Social Republic 35 Democratic Socialist Republic of – 35 contemporary Buddhism in – 84 Buddhism in – 88 - shall give to Buddhism 126

Sri Lankaramaya 353 Sri Subhuti, Waskaduwe (thera) 317 Sri Sumangala, Hikkaduve (thera) 21, 48, 94, 117, 118, 262, 264, 288, 316 Subhuti, Rajawelle (thera) 360 Suddhodana 84 SUCCESS 232 Sugatananda, Walgama (thera) 351 Sumanasara, Paragoda (thera) 244 Sumanasiri, Denipitiye (thera) 351 Sumanasiri, Hakmana (thera) 360 Sumanatissa, Tangalle Sri (thera) 349 Sumanawansa, Kapugama (thera) 351 Sumangala, Kolonnave (thera) 220 Sumangala, Suriyagoda (thera) 318 Sumangala, Hikkaduwe (thera) 166, 117 Suvinita, Palene (thera) 360

T Tambapaṇṇi-dīpa 3 Tambiah, S 51 Thailand 20, 79, 82, 163, 315 - (the Siam) 164 Theosophical Society 93 Thich Nhat Than 88, 102, 296 Thūpārāma 4, 6 Tilakaratne, Asanga 324, 331, 336, 337, 342, 344, 345 Toynbee, Arnold 93 Tulana Research Center 333, 343

U Udaya I 14 United Nations 143, 272 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 143, 178 University of Ceylon Review

393 (VCR) 342 University of Kelaniya 325, 328, 329 University of Peradeniya 323 University of Ruhuna 325, 327 University of Sri Jayawardenepura 325, 326 Upali 284 USA 269, 298 Ussiliya Tissa (thera) 11 Uttama Sadhu 216 Uttaritara Sangha Sabha 52, 54 Uttiya 7

V Vajiraramaya 31, 189, 318, 351, 353, 356 Varuna 171 Vaṭṭgāmanī 8 - Abhaya 83, 198, 199 Vienna Circle 112 Vibhavi, Hingurakgoda (thera) 360 Vidyalankara Pirivena 117, 184, 188, 189, 259, 316, 319, 331, 345, 363 Vidyodaya Pirivena 21, 42, 48, 116, 184, 188, 189, 257, 262, 316, 319, 345, 350, 363 Vijayabahu I, king 15 Vinita, Bope (thera) 31 Vipassana Research Institute 322 Vipassi 351 Visākhā 158 Vivekananda, Svami 135 Voharika Tissa 10

W Washington Buddhist Vihara 88, 353, 360 Weber, Max 112 Weedagama (thera) 343

Wikramagamage, Chandra 326 Wimaladharmasuriya II 19 Wimalajoti, Kirama (thera) 332 Wimalananda, Digamadulle (thera) 360 World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC) 98, 292 World Fellowship of Buddhists (WFB) 97, 271, 291 World Conference of Buddhist Leaders and Scholars 62 World Parliament of Religions 114, 135, 146, 181

Y Young Men’s Buddhist Association (YMBA) 40, 117 Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) 117

X Xuan Zang 92

Asanga Tilakaratne

Born in Tissamaharamaya of Southern Sri Lanka in 1952 Asanga Tilakaratne received his primary education at Debarawewa Vidyalaya (now Debarawewa Central College), Tissamaharamaya. Subsequently, he received monastic education at Mallikaramaya, Ratmalana and Siri Vajiranana Dharmayatanaya, Maharagama. He received his first degree, Tripitakavedi, from Buddha Sravaka Dharma Pithaya (currently Sri Lanka Bhiksu University), Anuradhapura and also, he completed his Pracina Pandit examination of Oriental Studies Society, Sri Lanka. Next, he joined Peradeniya University, Sri Lanka, and received his bachelor’s degree specializing in Buddhist Philosophy and offering Pali and Sanskrit as his subsidiary subjects. Receiving East-West Center graduate fellowship he studied Western Philosophy at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa for his Masters. He completed his Doctorate at the same university in Comparative Philosophy writing his dissertation on the problem of the ineffability of religious experience. From 1992 to 2007 Prof. Tilakaratne taught at Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, and served as its Director from 2004 to 2007. He joined the University of Colombo as the Professor of Pali and Buddhist Studies in 2009 January and taught there till his retirement in 2018. Meantime, he became instrumental in establishing the Department of Buddhist Studies at Colombo where he became the founder Head. During 2010-2012 he served as the President of Arts Faculty Teachers Association (AFTA) of the University. Prof. Tilakaratne received the Colombo University award for the best researcher in Faculty of Arts in 2013 and in the next year he was awarded the Best Senior Researcher Award in Humanities and Social Sciences by Council of Vice-Chancellors and Directors (CVCD). Respected

395

by his students for his undergraduate and postgraduate teaching Prof. Tilakaratne has guided more than twenty-five PhDs in various aspects of Buddhist studies. Prof. Tilakaratne was the recipient of Commonwealth Senior Fellowship 1999-2000. He spent one year at Oriental Institute, Oxford University working with Professor Richard Gombrich and was affiliated to Wolfson College as a fellow. Prof. Tilakaratne has served as visiting professor at Yonsei University, Korea (2007-2008), Otago University, New Zealand (2015), Savitribai Phule Pune University, India (2017) and more recently at Sitagu International Buddhist Academy, Sagaing and Mandalay, Myanmar (2018-2019). He has published, both in Sinhala and English, more than one hundred papers on Buddhist studies. He has authored and edited more than twenty books in both Sinhala and English. Of his more recent academic works, Theravada Buddhism: The View of the Elders (2012) was published by University of Hawai’i Press in the series of ‘Dimensions of Asian Spirituality’. He co-edited with Prof. Oliver Abenayaka 2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening (2012), a work covering the history and the current status of global Buddhism of all three traditions, published by Ministry of Buddha Sāsana, Government of Sri Lanka. In addition to his academic work, in 2002, Prof. Tilakaratne founded Sri Lanka Association of Buddhist Studies (SLABS), an academic and professional organization of Buddhist scholars in Sri Lanka. Having served as its Joint Secretary from the beginning in 2017 he became its president. Also, in 2002, he founded, with a group of academics and professionals, Damrivi Foundation, a government registered not for profit organization for economic, social, educational and spiritual development and continues to function as its founder Chairman.

396

Editorial Board Raluwe Padmasiri Thera BA (University of Peradeniya); MA (National University of Singapore); Professor and Head: Dept. of Buddhist Thought, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Miriswaththe Wimalagnana Thera Royal Pandit (Sri Lanka); BA, MPhil (University of Peradeniya); Professor and Head: Dept. of Buddhist Culture, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Wimal Hewamanage Royal Pandit (Sri Lanka); BA, MA, MPhil (University of Kelaniya); PhD (University of Wuhan); Senior Lecturer: Dept. of Buddhist Studies, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka. D. Denzil Senadeera BA (University of Sri Jayewardenepura); MA, MPhil, PhD (University of Kelaniya); Visiting Lecturer: Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Ashoka Welitota BA (University of Peradeniya); MA, PhD (The University of Hong Kong); Senior Lecturer and Head: Dept. of Buddhist Sources, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Bertram G. Liyanage Royal Pandit (Sri Lanka); BA (University of Peradeniya); MA, PG Dip. (University of Pune); Deputy Editor: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Sri Lanka. Sheila Fernando BA, MA, MPhil, PhD (University of Kelaniya); Research Assistant: Tulana Research Centre, Sri Lanka.

Editorial Assistants Thich Nu Khanh Nang Bhikṣuṇī MA, PhD (University of Kelaniya); Tu Nguyen Pagoda, Thach Lam street, Tan Phu District, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Sewwandi Marasinghe BA (University of Colombo); MA (University of Kelaniya); MPhil Candidate: Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri lanka. Nuwanthika Ariyadasa BA (University of Colombo); MA (University of Kelaniya); MPhil Candidate: Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri lanka.