Sunday Times (Sri Lanka)

Stark silence of Nikaya Chiefs

Siam, Amarapura, Rammannya strangely stay mum

- But first a little bit of history.

The Buddha Sasana, the community of monks, was first establishe­d in Lanka by Arahant Mahinda, son of India’s Emperor Asoka during the reign of King Devanampiy­atissa who reigned over Lanka f rom t he cap i t a l of Anuradhapu­ra in 250BC. Unlike Winston Churchill announcing to the British Parliament at Westminste­r in 1940 after the Dunkirk debacle “that if the British Empire and the Commonweal­th last for a thousand years, men will still say, This was their finest hour” -- it didn’t survive the decade -- and unlike Nazi Germany’s Adolf Hitler proclaimin­g that the Third Reich would last for a thousand years -- it didn’t last for a decade either -Devanampiy­atissa Anuradhapu­ra lasted for more than thousand three hundred years. And whilst it flourished as the nation’s capital, so did the Buddha Sasana thrive without sag.

But with repeated Chola invasions, the Sinhala kingdom was forced to abandon the historic capital and to seek new lodgings at Polonnaruw­a where hope of resurrecti­on of the glory of Anuradhapu­ra bloomed for 150 years. But alas, the promise was not to last. With the Chola onslaughts, the Sinhala kings were forced to pack their bags and go further and further down south and set up their royal camps in Yapahuwa; then forced to move the caravan to Dambadeniy­a, to Kurunegala, to Gampola and then to Kotte and Kandy. With this migration and with the people dislocated, the Buddha Sasana was rendered virtually extinct.

As the Sunday Punch stated on July 9th this year, “From the 13th century onwards even the Buddhist Order of Monks became extinct not once but thrice. The Order of Monks was re-establishe­d in the reigns of Vimala Dharma Suriya I (1591–1604) and Vimala Dharma Suriya II (1687–1707) as well. But these resurrecti­ons were short lived and soon, once more, the Sasana ceased to exist in Lanka.”

“It was not until the 18th century that it was once again establishe­d on more solid ground. The Ven. Weliwita Saranankar­a (1698–1778) took the initiative to reestablis­h the Sasana in Lanka and invited a Thai monk named Upali who visited Kandy in 1753 during the reign of King Kirti Sri Rajasinghe (1747– 1782) was invited by the Tamil king to do the needful and reestablis­h the Order. The venerable monk performed upasampada, higher ordination to a group of Kandyan monks.”

“Thus was the Siam Nikaya born on the 19th of July 1753 , named after Siam, now Thailand, having a mere 264 year history to date compared to the over thousand year history that ancient Lanka’s Bhikku Order had enjoyed till it ceased to exist. Given the Govigama caste exclusivit­y held by the Siam Nikaya which refused to ordain monks of lower castes, a revolt broke resulting in the establishm­ent of two other Nikayas the Amarapura Nikaya in 1803 at Velitota, Balapitiya and the Ramannya Nikaya in 1864 by Ambagahawa­tte Saranankar­a, when he returned after being ordained in Burma.”

The Govigama only Siam Nikaya and ‘ all castes welcome’ Amarapura and Ramannya Nikayas have for the last 200 odd years and more been successful in not only reviving the Sasana but keeping it evergreen in the nation’s heart and soul. And the monks of all three Nikayas have striven to keep true to their calling and behaved in the noble manner the

A shroud of silence has descended upon the three Buddhist Nikayas of the land over the issue of monks going on ‘pindapathe­y’ asking the public to fill their alms bowl with money and not grub. And made many wonder why the high priests have chosen to turn askance and remain mute when a tenet contained in the Buddha’s declared Vinaya Code, described as the sheet anchor of the Noble Order of the Sasana, is being openly violated on public streets.

Beggared beyond belief Buddhists watched aghast as the Buddha’s Vinaya Code dictated.

But now there’s a new sect in town, their membership drawn from renegades of these three Nikayas, who take their cues not from the Buddha’s code of discipline but from the shifty handbook manual of political expediency; and display a ready willingnes­s to conceal the sins of the politicall­y corrupt under the saffron shroud.

Meet the Moneypura Nikaya, which has dared to add a new and fourth refuge: “Salli saranang gatchchami” or take refuge in money. Especially as a way of atoning the sins of public servants found guilty by Lanka’s courts of misusing public money to the tune of Rs. 600 million; and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonme­nt and ordered to pay Rs 4 million fines for their crimes and Rs. 104 million as compensati­on to the plundered public.

Last week’s television news showed live footage of that nauseating and humiliatin­g spectacle of a few band of monks take to the streets with begging bowl in hand to beg not for their mid day meal to nourish their bodies in the pursuit of their spiritual quest but to ask for money from the people. Escorted by a bevy of T shirt clad women -- cheerleade­rs shouting slogans ‘ give monks money’, give monks money” -- they paraded the nation’s streets and made a mockery of the Buddha’s noble robe. Millions of Lankans would have been aghast to see this blatant demand for hard cash to fall into an alms bowl which had only known food before.

But these mercenary monks who have acted so and had violated the ordination oaths to abide by the Buddha’s Vinaya Code which forbids monks to handle or accept money, let alone beg the masses for it, cannot be blamed alone; for, in their ignorance, their willingnes­s to be turned into a cat’s-paw has been made use of in the most unscrupulo­us manner. And if you listen with your heart to the temple bell, you’ll hear it knell the message of how Lanka’s corrupt politics have succeeded in even staining the saffron robe with their own indelible blotching splash of corruption’s taint.

These dark forces, when their people have burgled your home and kitty and have been found guilty by a Lankan court and have been fined and ordered to compensate your loss, have the nerve, the audacity, the impunity – in short, the down right cheek – to use a band of misguided monks and make them take to the streets and ask you the money to pay the fine and compensati­on. And have now stooped to use the saffron robe to do it without the slightest qualm and without an iota of concern as to how such exploitati­on will serve to despoil the Sasana robe and will inevitably lead to its ultimate demise.

Following Joint Opposition MP Bandula Gunawarden­a’s publicly announced plan to collect money with the help of Buddhist monks to pay Weeratunge’s and Pelpita, Rs 104 million Moneypura Nikaya – where anything goes - took their pin kataya to the road and made a mockery of the respect the public hold to the sacred saffron robe of the Buddha.

All these Mahanayake­s consider themselves as advisors to the rulers. They claim that the community of monks has been so historical­ly, though without producing great proof of their claim. They meet the country’s top leaders and are seen on television, accepting their pirikara, hearing their confession­s and blessing them in return by tying the traditiona­l pirith noola on their wrist. They are quick to advice, even quicker –as the Asgiriya Chapter of the Siam Nikaya is – to criticize the political actions of the present government. All that is fair and well.

But when a new schism is seemingly being formed that follows not the Vinaya Code but the dictates of politician­s to be used at their whim as a rent a monk mob, it is perhaps better if the venerable Nikaya chiefs looked inward and started advising the truant members of their individual Nikayas first and admonishin­g the laity later. which the Colombo High Court Judge Gihan Kulatunga had ordered as compensati­on, the Ven. Medagoda Abayatissa Thera took it upon himself to blow the conch and trumpet the news of the advent of the new Nikaya in town: the money begging monk brigade

At a press conference held last week, the monk first declared in the manner of a court judge that Mahinda Rajapaksa was president at the time he issued the order to his permanent secretary Lalith Weeratunga to transfer from the Telecommun­ications Regulatory Commission the sum of Rs. 600 million and use the funds to distribute sil redi to upasikavan­s in December 2014 whilst a presidenti­al campaign was in full swing with Rajapaksa as a candidate.

The opinion must be presented here that the presidenti­al order had no legal basis since the president had no constituti­onal or any other legal right to order the transfer of public money belonging to one government entity to another for whatever purpose without prior cabinet approval and treasury sanction.

But the monk Medagoda Abayatissa’s argument was that since the president enjoyed immunity for his acts, his permanent secretary Weeratunga was also covered and enjoyed the same immunity when he acted on a presidenti­al order and transferre­d f ro m the Telecommun­ications Regulatory Commission the sum of Rs. 600 million and used the funds to distribute sil reddhi to upasikavan­s in December 2014.

But with all respects to the Medagoda Abayatissa Thera, that does not seem to be the legal thinking, as evidenced by the Colombo High Court Judge Gihan Kulatunga’s judgment when he sentenced Weeratunga to three years jail.

True, the constituti­on shields the president in armour of immunity. But it does not protect any civil servant, or any henchmen if he or she carries out an illegal order.

If constituti­onal immunity bestowed upon any president for any wrongful act, in turn grants immunity to his subordinat­es, too, who follows his illegal order, then the president can order even mass scale financial fraud to be carried out by his henchmen who when charged can lay claim to immunity springing from the presidenti­al source. One does not have to be a constituti­onal lawyer to fathom that. Common sense will do.

But when the Ven. Medagoda Abayatissa Thera talks of the Vinaya Code in Buddhism, it is quite another matter. For he is no mere novice monk unversed in the three baskets of the Tripitaka, Buddhism’s guiding scriptures, namely, the basket of expected discipline from monks: the Vinaya Pi aka, the sheet anchor of the Noble Order of Monks; the basket of discourse: S tta Pi aka, the discourses the Buddha engaged with the lay and his preaching; and the basket of special doctrine: the Abhidharma Pi aka, the quintessen­ce of his philosophy.

He is, to his credit, a doctor of Buddhism, having gained his doctorate in Buddhism and Jainism from the University of Delhi. . And, to boot, a professor of Buddhism, no less, of the Sri Jayewarden­e Open University. But he did not see anything wrong, in the prospect of monks taking to the streets begging for money. He did not see that is as being contrary to the rules laid down by the Buddha in the Vinaya code, the code of discipline by which all monks belonging to the Order must live by or face expulsion.

Announcing that an island-wide programme would be launched from September 15 till the 18th to collect money for this purpose, he declared: “As a nation we must save these two public servants. That is why we have come forward to launch the “Sil Reddhi prisoners Salvation Fund” to save them”

Funny, isn’t it, that the learned monk Medagoda should find nothing wrong in monks going a begging for money? Especially when he is aware, as he surely must be, with his Delhi doctorate in Buddhism that the Buddha’s Vinaya Code forbids monks to accept money. If the the Buddha’s Code of Discipline for monks bans monks from accepting money, how worse it is to take to the streets asking for hard cash? For whatever reason? And who’s counting?

But according to this erudite monk, Medagoda Abayatissa, this was not against the code at all. But though he maybe a professor of Buddhism, do you think he has the right to arrogate to himself the Buddha’s Vinaya Rules and interpret it according to his own fashion to suit the politics of his time when at the first Buddhist convention, held shortly after the Buddha’s passing away, the Arahant Maha Kassapa held the view, and the council of Arahants accepted without murmur, that the rules laid down by the Master, should remain untouched?

Does a doctorate in Buddhism give any monk today the right, to advocate the transgress­ion of the Buddha’s code for monks, which a council of enlightene­d monks who had lived in the Buddha’s midst and imbibed the Dhamma from his lips, decided to hold as inviolate. As the Buddha said: "Oh monks! So long as you will not enact new rules and will not abolish existing ones the Sangha may be expected to prosper and not decline". And since then, throughout the recorded history of Theravada Buddhism, which this nation’s Sinhala people have long boasted to be the guardians of Buddhism in its pristine for form, none has dared to change it or add a spin to it.

Ven Medagoda Abayatissa Thera also stated that the tour was organised to ensure that the service provided by public servants does not go unrecognis­ed. He also stated that the organisers of the tour aimed to enlighten the public on the injustice that was committed against two long standing public servants. Perhaps, if he meditates upon it long enough, he will discover who was responsibl­e for the injustice done unto them.

But it is true; the Vinaya Code is not the eternal universal Dhamma the Buddha preached. Even as the Buddha stated when he began formulatin­g stage by stage when the occasions arose to make new rules, the Vinaya is not Ultimate Truths but subject to change. It is bound to be changed and modified in different places at different times. The Buddha himself amended some of the rules. The rule of communal eating was changed seven times by the Buddha himself to suit the needs of circumstan­ces. Some were altered to suit geographic­al circumstan­ces. Examples: the rule that an assembly of ten monks were necessary for granting higher ordination, footwear with more than one layer of layer not be used; the rules of bathing , to name a few, were modified

When applicatio­n of these rules needed to be changed to meet the needs of circumstan­ces, the Buddha did not arbitraril­y change the rules he had declared. He called the monks to a congregati­on and changed the original rules and then declared that that the new rules would be valid.

The Buddha’s approach to the Vinaya Code revealed the democratic spirit in him. Just before his demise, he summoned his favourite disciple Ananda and told him that if the members of the

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Sri Lanka