Sri Lanka: The Plot Thickens

12 Little Known Laws of Karma (That Will Change Your Life)

Is there a Sangha State Behind the State?
by Laksiri Fernando

( July 9, 2017, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) There is no need to exaggerate or be

too alarmed, but there appears to be a state behind the State. Whether it is a
shadow state or a parallel one is subject to argument. It has reappeared after a
long slumber, and given Notice to the government not to inaugurate a New
Constitution. I am referring to the new statement by the Thri Nikaya
Mahanayake Theras (chief monks of the three Buddhist chapters) issued on the
5th July. The leading section of this shadow state, the Asgiriya Nikaya,
previously issued another statement more controversial than the present.
The President appears to have tried to mollify the concerns/pressures, when he
met with the Mahanayake Theras on the 6th July, but it is yet to be seen
whether the government would succumb to this shadow state, when it comes
to inaugurating a New Constitution.
This was not an anticipated hurdle for the new constitution making process
earlier. Obstructions were expected from the Joint Opposition (JO) or even foot
dragging from some dubious sections of the governing coalition itself. But now
the Nikayas appear to be an unexpected obstacle perhaps aggrieved by not
consulting them on the constitutional matter earlier.
Importance of Sangha
There is no question of accepting Maha Sangha as an important segment of public
life or public opinion. This is apart from their religious role. Even during the
Buddhas time, he was involved in social matters, but not politics, except offering
occasional saner advice to the rulers. He in fact left power politics in search of a
spiritual life. In todays Sri Lanka, given that the Constitution accords the
foremost place for Buddhism and announces that it is the duty of the State to
protect and foster the Buddha Sasana there is an implicit role for the
three Nikayas and their prelates, if not explicit. But this is in relation to Sasana but
not in respect of politics. Although there cannot be Sasana without Sangha, the
two are also not the same.
There are over 30,000 Buddhist monks in the country. They are ordained into
various levels by these three Nikayas. However, it is not clear how far the
Mahanayake Theras represent the opinions and wishes of the general Sangha. On
many occasions, divergent views are expressed and that is healthy for democracy
and it is also in accordance with the Buddhas teachings (Kalama Sutta). There are
also visible class differentiations within Sangha, apart from caste. There are rich
sangha and poor sangha. There are apprehensions expressed by poor sangha
particularly in remote temples who have to struggle for their day to day survival,
while rich temples are patronized by the State, politicians and the elite.
Then there are over 14 million Buddhists in the country, young and old, and it is
not clear how far they would adhere to the advice of the Mahayake Theras in
respect of politics and constitutional matters. From a historical point of view, it is
understandable that the Sasana and Sagha had to depend on the State or Kings
for their survival and propagation. This patronage was important particularly
when there were threats from other religions and other rulers. This is almost
common to all other religions. However, there were times that this patronage
turned into almost its opposite, in influencing and controlling the state. This may
be acceptable as a historical fact, but would create enormous problems under
modern democratic principles and circumstances of peoples sovereignty.
Mahanayake Theras Intervention
Sri Lanka at present is facing multiple crises, economic, social, political and
cultural, and one cannot say they are unique to our country alone. From a
religious or a moral point of view most alarming are the increasing crime,
robbery, social violence, drug/alcohol addiction, and corruption, not only of
material wealth, but also of values and behaviour. Many politicians are at the
centre of these degenerations. At least they are responsible. If the Mahanayake
Theras had intervened to reprimand the politicians on those lines, both in the
government and in the opposition, and advice the public to refrain from those
evils, then it would have made much sense.
There is much hyped talk about adverse international influence or pressure in the
country to its sovereignty and politics. Mostly criticised however are the human
rights and democratic influences. If specific influences or pressures are
unacceptable to the country, of course they could be rejected or negotiated.
These possibilities are part of the international rules and norms. Our statesmen
and diplomats should have the backbone to do so.
There are so much of other influences coming into the country in corrupting the
young generations through websites, literature, movies and the media
(particularly social), that our patriots (smart or otherwise) are mum about. I have
seen more adult content freely broadcasted in Sri Lanka than in Australia. There
are many TV programs not classified as adult and possibly both parents and
children must be watching them, perhaps uneasily. Sex and entertainment are
primary needs of humans, but distorted forms can lead to social dislocation and
serious sex crimes. Those crimes are already visible. It is possible that
Mahanayake Theras are not aware of them, but those who are behind or advise
them, could have brought these matters to their notice without dragging them
into politics, unnecessarily.
The Mahanayake Theras have expressed opposition to a New Constitution or any
fundamental amendments to the existing constitution except bringing changes to
the electoral system without giving any reasons for their positions. Are they
experts on constitutions? One would wonder. Anunayake of the Malwathu
Chapter, Ven. Dimbulkumbure Wimaladhamma Thera, has already admitted that
this opposition is like making a horoscope to an unborn baby.
They can have a valid concern, if the position of Buddhism is changed. If they have
had any bright ideas about other matters like independence of the judiciary or the
system of devolution they could have expressed them before. The public
consultation process on the constitution has been going on since January 2016.
The opposition to a New Constitution at this moment even without waiting for a
draft, does appear as extremely a political act and not a religious
mission. Therefore, all citizens have every right to criticise them on this matter.
The Mahanayake Theras have aired their positions on two other matters: on the
SAITM crisis and the Bill to implement the International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED). The first one is
a valid engagement if the intention is to mediate a solution to the SAITM crisis or
to request the government to resolve it as soon as possible. However, it is not
clear what the objections are on the ICPAPED as the government has already a
signatory to it since December 2015. It appears that the last one is perhaps
mooted on behalf of another party to the controversy, or just because the
Convention is an international one.
When taken all three positions together, it is very clear that the Mahanayake
Theras are entering the political sphere, undermining the democratically elected
Parliament and the government with the intention of acting as a shadow state
behind the existing one. The influence or the perceived influence of the
Mahanayake Theras are so powerful, the elected government has already
withdrawn or postponed the second reading of the ICPAPED Bill, earlier scheduled
for the 5th July.
Previous Asgiriya Statement
The emergence of Mahanayake Theras in politics on the wrong side of the fence,
was first marked in recent time by the so-called Asgiriya statement issued on the
20th of June. It was more reactionary and more political. It was titled as A Kind
Notice to the Government. It contained two preambular paragraphs and eight
hard-hitting operational paragraphs. It was like a political party manifesto.
It started declaring, We all know that the Buddhist monks acted devoting life
when there was any threat to the security of our motherland, Sinhala nation and
Buddhist Sasana. The threat to the security of our motherland that it talked
about was largely imaginary prompted by political ends. It mentioned about our
motherland, Sinhala nation and Buddhist Sasana, but nothing about Buddha
Dhamma.
Most controversial was its endorsement of Galaboda Aththe Gnanasara Theros
ideology, while disapproving his emotional behaviour. What it said exactly on the
matter was: Although we dont approve the emotional behaviour or the style of
expressing views by Galaboda Aththe Gnasara Thero, we dont dispel his ideology
(mathavadaya bahara nokarannemu).There are those who have translated the
term mathavadaya as viewpoint. That is, in my opinion, to paint a more
moderate picture to the statement. However, as far as I have used in teaching
political science and still understand, mathvadaya means nothing but ideology.
Whichever way you argue about it, the Asgiriya statement has declared some
affinity with the ideas of Gnanasara Thero and I would at least say the system of
ideas. They are not only of his own, but the ideas of the Bodu Bala Sena (Buddhist
Force Army BBS) and other similar organizations. This is what some have even
identified as ethno-religious fascism (Dayan Jayetilleka), right or wrong.
The statement has also attacked the Leftists, the liberal politicians, social activists
and civil society organizations. It is extremely political. A big issue has been raised
against the criticism of (political) Buddhist monks, as it says, without respect and
addressing them by name. I of course would not approve anyone doing so,
however emotional or even filthy the expression of views by those monks. But
what the Asgiriya Mahanayake Theras also should kindly realise is that, if the
monks get involved in controversial and rather muddy politics, then they also
should be able to face counter criticisms.
What Might be Necessary?
What might be necessary, in my opinion, is the Buddhist monks and other Priests,
Bishops and Imams keeping away from controversial politics. They can express
social, religious and moral concerns. Of course, there are some valid concerns
expressed in the Asgiriya statement in respect of historical Buddhist sacred sites,
even identified by the Buddhist Commission Report of 2002 which are in peril and
danger. This is the responsibility of the Minister for Buddha Sasana and the
government, as I have highlighted in my last article. At the same time, if there are
unethical conversions by the Evangelical groups that should be stopped. However,
physical attacks on them should be condoned but punished. It is best if some of
these matters are resolved through Interreligious Dialogue as I have been
advocating for some time.
My main concern about the Asgiriya statement has been its endorsement of the
BBS ideology, or let me say, Gnanasara ideology. When I raised this issue
previously, a critic with a bloated ego publicly asked me whether I want the
Asgiriya Mahanayake Theras to be arrested! Arresting anyone is not my main
concern. My concern has been about the evolving reactionary ethno-religious
ideology that they support. It is perhaps along this ideology, that the Asgiriya
Mahanayake Theras are dragging the other prelates into politics. More worrying is
the emergence of Mahanayake Theras as a state behind the state, dictating terms
undemocratically.
I have been appreciating and writing about Buddhism for a long time. I am almost
a Buddhist in my thinking, but not a Sinhala Buddhist for cheap political gains,
political projects or popularity. I am open to both Theravada and Mahayana and
also to other Buddhist traditions. In other religions, I dont see much of a
philosophy (or agreeable philosophy), except good ethics which I equally
appreciate. Buddhism as a philosophy has a lot to offer to this complicated world,
not only in Sri Lanka, but in the world at large. A major damage to this cause
would be inflicted, if the Mahanayake Theras get involved in politics or try to act
as a state behind the state, in partiality to other communities and religions.
Posted by Thavam