The virtues of a responsible bhikku

APoison once, a delicacy later: This Sinhala proverb is important for us today. The Lord Buddha’s teaching on sadness and happiness, insult and appreciation embodied in the Dhamma (Ata Lowa Dahama) is relevant to the wellbeing of society.

Buddhist clergy are revered by Buddhists the world over. They are regarded as Buddha Puthra or the sons of the Buddha. I wish to explain to readers some observations relating to a recent happening at which members of the Maha Sangha were present.

I recollect a time when Ms. Sirima Bandaranaike claimed that Dr. N.M. Perera was responsible for her husband's death, by his words, if not in deed. Dr. Perera later served as Finance Minister in her Government! Though a socialist party leader, he did not reject a capitalist lifestyle.

Thus criticism at one time can change to appreciation at another, and deeds and actions regarded as good can become bad over time.

After the 30-year-war ended during President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s administration, the country saw development. An airport was built in Mattala, a port in Hambantota and many rural areas received electricity. But he also realised that there were shortcomings in his administration. He called for election, two years before his term ended and lost. Conceding defeat and accepting the people’s verdict teach us a valuable lesson in democracy. Two months before the January 2015 Presidential election, I attended a Pirith ceremony to mark the birthday of President Rajapaksa at the President's House.

A Bo sapling was planted at the President’s House by Namal Rajapaksa under my guidance. I advised him to erect a fence around the Bo sapling. At that time there was no hint of an election. However, Namal Rajapaksa told me, “Hamuduruwane, we won’t be in power forever. It might change. If it happens a successor should do that, shouldn’t he?'

I was happy to note that the young parliamentarian had understood the doctrine of success and failure while being at the helm of power. Despite the many achievements of his father, he was aware that defeat was a possibility.

The Lord Buddha has preached about ‘Kalyana Mithra’ (True friends). I believe that President Rajapaksa’s biggest mistake was appointing some ‘papa mithra’ (friends with bad virtues) instead of Kalyana Mithra (friends with good virtues) to key positions in the government.

The Lord Buddha preached that one should eliminate unwanted things without desire, affiliation or attachment and live wisely by overcoming wrongfulness. Former President Rajapaksa’s recent statement that he would topple the government this year caused a ripple in the country. Some welcomed it, some censured him. I believe that he should have been more careful and spoken more wisely.

One of the causes for Mr. Rajapaksa’s defeat was his close ties with China. He was accused of selling the country to China. At a time when the present government is trying to strengthen ties with China, Mr. Rajapaksa could have gained political mileage by talking about his China policy. That would have been statesmanlike, and would have helped Government and opposition members to ponder and understand certain matters clearly.

China is not our enemy. It has been our friend since ancient times. China and Sri Lanka have many similarities – our value systems, culture and even religion. In the past, Chinese businessmen married Sri Lankan women, set up their businesses and lived in Kompannaveediya and Maradana.

In most countries, there is a ‘China Town’. This is evident to show what a progressive and hardworking people the Chinese are.

China too has faced revolutions. The Chinese revolutions were driven by socialism, similar to the 1971 JVP insurgency in Sri Lanka. But China was able to survive and gain strength from its crisis.

I have lived in the United States and Britain for six years in each country. In the US, I started a temple. I am also a US citizen. But when the US brought resolutions against Sri Lanka at the United Nations Human Rights Council, I gave leadership to a campaign to break 3,000 coconuts in front of the US Embassy in Colombo. Our slogan was: ‘We don’t curse you. Please don’t harass us when we are suffering’. That was the peaceful nature of our protest.

But the opposition’s recent protest against allocating land for a Chineseled industrial zone was far from being peaceful. The participation of the clergy who we refer to as the sons of Buddha (Buddha Puthras) in such protests is inappropriate.

Although this was not the first time that the clergy had taken part in protests, it is time for the Venerable Maha Nayakes of All Nikayas to give a ruling on this. We have also seen in the past that the behaviour of some monks was inappropriate and detrimental to the Sasana. In the 1950s, we saw the rise of ‘Thapasa Nikaya’. Some perceived it as a non-Buddhist entity detrimental to Buddhism. During that era, Bhikkus did not even get alms. Then, in 1959, a Bhikku was accused of assassinating Prime Miniter S.W.R.D Bandaranaike. As a result, bhikkus could not even walk on to the road. There was a time when some Bhikkus protested against temples while others started planting Bo saplings and building Buddha statues at every Junction.

In the 1970s the then government took punitive action against the Lake House group and the ‘Dawasa’ group – two newspaper groups owned by the families who were the dayakas of the Gangaramaya and the pirivena. A large number of bhikkus gathered at the Gangaramaya. This was during a time of political unrest and protests in the country. But I did not allow a single monk in the temple to participate or get involved in such protests. Only with the deputy incumbent of the temple, Ven. Dewundara Rathanajothi Thera, I attended the protest meeting. Such should be the virtue of a responsible bhikku.

It is the most appropriate time for the Maha Nayakas of All Nikayas to think and implement a set of rules for the wellbeing of the Sasana (Buddhist clergy). Today, some bhikkus have emerged to initiate and participate in protests and processions. By recalling the ‘Thapasa Nikaya’ and the era of the Bodhi Poojas at street junctions, we are able to see through this campaign.

Whatever, the protest or procession we should think twice or even thrice before engaging the Buddhist clergy in such events. It is not inappropriate for bhikkus to participate in a national protest. But to get involved in the China matter last week, on the pretext of a nationalist cause is irrational. The present government deals with China in the same way that the previous government did. Therefore, the role of the bhikkus should have been to enlighten the Government of the previous acts. This incident may leave a black mark in the hearts of Chinese people regarding the Bhikkus of Sri Lanka. I hope that due to the farsightedness of the people of China, this will not happen. The China-Sri Lanka friendship should not be tarnished. The Buddhist clergy should refrain from unnecessary action and participate in only what is necessary.

The Gangaramaya has always been given first preference in every religious ceremony at the President’s house. Last week too, at the Offering of Alms by President Maithripala Sirisena, bringing the Sacred Relic Casket was entrusted to the Gangaramaya. But the Buddhist clergy were welcomed as ‘Sri Lanka Nidahas Paksha Bhikkshu Peramuna’. When I heard it, I was upset. This was not due to a personality issue, but that the President, being our leader, should leave politics aside and welcome the maha sangha from the three sects. There was no anger but sorrow, fearing for what the future can hold.

It is time to be wise for both parties, the Dayakas who offer alms, and the Bhikkus who partake them. When the knot which ties and secures the sticks together, is loosened, then there will be nobody to retie it.

Easier said than done, a critic would remark. And that acerbic comment would most probably be true. Underlying the comforting rhetoric, there is a simple truth at play. If the Government does not offend the proprieties too much, then one may assume that no terribly unpleasant consequences will ensue where the trade benefit is concerned.

However, that does not really offer much reassurance to the people of Sri Lanka. And it is telling that even though the inclusion of labour rights into the monitoring process is welcome, the EC’s assessment report this week treats highly problematic performance failures with a flippancy that is regrettable. For example, the EC’s conclusions in regard to Sri Lanka’s compliance to the Convention against Torture or CAT (as a key international treaty which the country must commit to implement before qualifying for GSP Plus) are remarkably disingenuous to say the least.

After a lackadaisical reproduction of some paragraphs of the Committee against Torture’s Concluding Observations issued last year following consideration of Sri Lanka’s Periodic Report to the Committee, the EC notes that ‘salient shortcomings have been identified in a relatively low number of areas’ while there have been ‘significant elements of progress.’ It concludes thereafter that ‘there is no serious failure to effectively implement the Convention.’

Patterns of systemic failures

Yet this airy conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the CAT Committee’s own findings which identified serious systemic failures and breakdowns in implementing the Convention against Torture CAT. The Committee expressed disquiet in regard to the total inability of State

Dissecting each and every similar discrepancy belongs elsewhere than in the limited spaces of a newspaper column. But it must be said that the EC’s cursory treatment of the proposed Counter-Terror law, which is far worse than any national security legislation proposed by any Government since independence, is equally disappointing.

It was cautioned earlier in these column spaces that GSP Plus restoration should only be after full and firm knowledge (as opposed to vague assurances) that the proposed draft law has been amended to be in conformity with the Rule of Law. However, the EC’s gingerly handling of the issue invites considerable derision.

Thus we are told that the Government has ‘committed’ to replace the Prevention against Terrorism (PTA) with a new Bill on counter-terrorism, to be presented to the Parliament in January 2017 which ‘is to be compatible with international human rights conventions and counter-terrorism standards.’ No further concerns are articulated, not even the need to ensure that the revision of the draft law needs to be placed before the public for transparent scrutiny.

Taking bitter realities into account

It is hoped that the review of the EC’s report by the European Parliament and the Council during the coming months will evidence a somewhat more rigorous assessment than what is reflected in this report. Given what has transpired during the past two years, the people of Sri Lanka cannot (with good reason) afford to be as sanguine as the EC in its sunny reliance on the Unity Government’s ‘commitment’ in regard to adherence to the Rule of Law.

That singularly bitter reality needs to be properly taken into account if these assessment exercises are not to degenerate into mere farce.