The Maha Sangha and its Potential: Lessons from Myanmar
Sri Lanka 2007: political turmoil, inflation and a never-ending civil war. Where did this all start? POWER; the quest for power has lead SWRD Bandaranaike, JR Jayawardene and the Maha Sangha to embrace the disasterous path of racism and injustice. We all know and understand how SWRD and JR are among the leading causes for the rise in the current problems of this nation. A relatively less discussed cause has been the negative influence of the Maha Sangha in Sri Lankan politics.
SWRD Bandaranaike, a member of the colonial aristocracy, recognized his inability to turn the electorate in his favour. He realized the the only way he would be able to achieve power was by swaying the majority Sinhala masses. Yet Bandaranaike was a person who had very little in common with the average peasant whose support he wished to gain- he was a notable member of the landed elite (who had close ties with the British Raj), he was educated at Oxford in “Western†classics and law and he was raised an Anglican. He could not even read Sinhalese proficiently. He turned to a tool that was waiting for someone to wield- the power hungry monks of the Maha Sangha.
The Sangha had lost the control and influence it had possessed in its heyday during the Anuradhapura, Polanaruwa and Kotte/Kandy periods. Through the period of British rule they attempted to build themselves primarily as an anti-colonial influence yet their failure and British influence prevented them from having any in power in the government envisioned under the Soulberry Constitution. Upon achieving independence, the monks who had been kept in check by colonial powers, began seeking opportunities to re-exert their dominance . The Colombo based, primarily Anglican hierarchy, prevented the re insurgence of the Sangha at a State level but it was busily at work in rural areas.
This lead to a “double coincidence of wants†with the Maha Sangha needing a member of the elite sic Bandaranaike and his needing of a popular base which the Sangha possessed in the rural Sinhala masses. This is the point where both the Bandaranaike and the Sangha forsook their ideals for Power; Bandaranaike’s vision for unyoking Sri Lanka from imperialism and poverty and the Sangha’ a desire to propagate the Buddhist philosophy. Instead of building national identity and extending the hand forsook erhood and toleration the Bandaranaike-Sangha coalition abandoned sÄ«la ie ethical conduct and embraced the chauvinist path of destruction. Their support was based on whipping up the base emotions of an oppressed and effectively disenfranchised populace. This lead to the “Sinhala Only†policy, the conscience decision to make the Tamils second class citizens and unfortunately landslide electoral victories.
This has lead to the current situation of unspeakable suffering; Bandaranaike’s aims have not been achieved with Sri Lanka falling into ever deeper dependence on aid and intervention from both the traditional imperial powers and the neo-imperial powers viz India and China. The average peasant still struggles to eke out and an existence. The country has effectively been divided in every manner possible; geography, race, religion, knowledge, capital, connections being but a few as a direct result of these decisions. The civil war which rages ever more ferociously is but one of the many divisions our nation is facing. This will continue until the Maha Sangha returns to a truly Buddhist political philosophy of tolerance, ahimsa and self-denial.
As our you read this, a model is developing of the positive power of the Buddhist clergy. The barefooted (not Mercedes-Benz shod) multi-ethnic monks walking peacefully and applying samÄÂdhi or mental discipline against the bullets and tear gas of the military junta in Myanmar. They struggle for humanity as they should. The Sri Lanka Sangha is effectively a traitor to its ethics and philosophy:
“It was to help humanity that the Buddha founded the Order. He intended it to be a voluntary association of dedicated persons who would devote themselves to the task of making the process of wayfaring through life easier for such among their fellow beings as were weak, helpless and stricken.
It is another matter that the order never quite became what it was meant to be. The Bhikkhus (homeless ones) very soon became Priests, living in temples built like palaces. Today the lazy and ceremonious Church, split into Nikayas based on caste divisions, maintains its place in society, not by tendering to the sick, the poor and the helpless but by placing a Messianic halo above the Buddha-myth, and by chanting faint Pali gathas to the cold, fruitless moon.â€Â
Buddhist Monks and Politics in Sri Lanka, James J. Hughes
The war-mongering clergy must undergo a revival again originating in Myanmar as it repeatedly has through its history. The Sangha has such potential for positive change, will it take the opportunity like its Burmese counter parts, or will it allow Sri Lanka to become a mockery of Buddhism and a place of hatred for the years to come.
“Do we… want a single nation or do we want two nations? Do we want a single state or do we want two? Do we want one Ceylon or do we want two? And above all, do we want an independent Ceylon which must necessarily be united and single and single Ceylon, or two bleeding halves of Ceylon which can be gobbled up by every ravaging imperialist monster that may happen to range the Indian ocean? These are issues that in fact we have been discussing under the form and appearance of language issue.”
Will the Sangha be a catalyst in hastening the process of dividing Sri Lanka in two bleeding halves, or will it serve only as a tool for the fulfilling the worldly desires of the elite?
Editors note: Article submitted to Groundviews by anonymous author.
11 Comments
Trackbacks
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
whatever the history in 1950s etc,
fighting and advocating defeat of ltte is not racism as this post seem to believe. fighting against ltte is in fact equivalent to promotion of and fighting for democracy and human rights. ( it is the position adapted by some that tamils support terrorist ltte/ ltte is fightig for tamils that is racist. )
in that fight against terrorist ltte, maha sanga should play an active part and some of them do
don’t you agree?
I don’t oppose anybody who chooses to state that the politicians who ruled the country after the Independence and equally those who were in the Opposition should be totally accountable for the current situation in the country. They [about 99.99%] have acted irresponsibly with a keen eye to maximize their private profits degrading the situation of the country and lives of Sri Lankans making sure that there will be only a little hope for the future Sri Lankans to- be as well.
But still I have got some questions.
+ Can you blame these men, maha sangha and power for the present situation in the country?
+ What about our duty as the citizens of this country?
+ Have we ever made the maximum out of what we’re given? After all, it’s we who send these stinking men and women to the parliament.
+ Wearing colored glasses will help to ease the current situation of the country?
Our leaders failed to see the difference between anti- western attitudes and the attitude towards other fellow ethnic groups. They saw everyone not belonged to their community as foreigners.
Sri Lanka which should have been a secular country sheltering several ethnic groups the failed to form a national identity which would encompass everybody.
Most of us still wander around unable to figure out our own identity.
Everything in this country is politicized to the last bone.
It’s high time we realize this.Playing an active role in fighting against the LTTE or in other issues concerning Sri Lanka and her citizens is everybody’s duty. We should know how to identify the true concern without falling into the trap of false nationalism.
There’s no point in pointing finger at others and having bitter arguments, all of us should realize our duty to our motherland.
If we’re ready to learn, we can draw lessons from all over the world, not only from Myanmar.
sittingnut:
The Maha Sangha cannot be the Maha Sangha if it condones or supports the killing of anything- including man. Furthermore, from my meagre knowledge of Buddhism I am of the opinion that the Maha Sangha as it exsists today does not reflect the compassion and respect that are so central to Buddhist philosophy.
Aliya:
+Though I cannot blame them ie these men and the Maha Sangha as the only reasons but I believe if they had chosen a different approach the country would not be in this state.
+ The average person in rural areas was not prepared for democracy and was has been enticed by passionate national extremism and well meaning if failed economic policies.
And I do agree that we should apply lessons from everywhere- but I consider Myanmar an especially relevant example.
ps. What exactly do you mean by coloured glasses
anon at october 2, 2007 @ 8:48 pm
standing up for democracy and human rights necessarily involves support for pursuit and apprehension ( and in case of resistance ) even death of criminal violators of democratic and human rights. this is true in every case everywhere ( in fact it is true of all crimes or even all violations of moral values ). difference is a matter of degree, depending mainly on the violence and resistance offered by the criminals. do you agree?
current situation here is very clear. if we want democracy and human rights, if we want to start end the culture of impunity enjoyed by violators of rights, we will have to fight against ltte criminals and we have to use violence ( whether we like it or not ). that is the nature of ltte . (maybe you think that is a wrong assessment of the situation? if so why?)
maha sanga too cannot escape from this reality if they want to stand up for democracy and human rights.
or do you think that maha sanga should stay our of politics altogether ( including standing up for democracy etc.)? (which is a legitimate view but so is the opposite ).
personally i do not want to curtail rights of anyone whether they are wearing a saffron robe or not ( esp based on my own interpretation of the philosophy they are supposed to obey or follow).
whether they are following the buddhist philosophy or whether pristine buddhist philosophy ( or for that matter any other religious moral system ) is practicable are questions that has not much relevance here and now, since answers will be highly subjective and non definitive. on the other hand it is hard to deny that maha sanga exist, they are influential, and they have played a part in political history of the country. so why should they stay out now?
to conclude ; if anyone wants to stand up for democracy and human rights here in srilanka now, they have to fight ( literary or morally ) ltte terrorism.
of course other ppl can, if they want, ignore the political state of the country and stay out of it ( they may even cite adherence to subjective interpretation of buddhist philosophy and non condoning of killing as an excuse for inaction while of rights of fellow sri lankans are violated by a convicted bunch of criminals ). i personally think that in a democracy ppl should participate . may be you don’t?
sorry for any typos. i always forget that this blog doesn’t have a preview option like most others
Ok, they should have chosen a different approach. But do you think sensible citizens in this country ought to have followed them as cattle?People follow their leaders.True. But at some point, people see the light, don’t you think?
Colored glasses= being biased.
May be the average person in rural areas as well as in urban area does not have a correct understanding of democracy. May be that’s why only UNF and SLFP have come to power in spite of their rotten histories and there’s no chance for a third party .
sittingnut,
1. I believe the Sangha is being unfaithful to buddhism by not only preaching war but also supporting the idea of a Sinhala only nation. As I have mentioned it goes against both ahimsa and tolerance. Leaving buddhist doctrine aside- why is it that the monks only highlight the llte’s viloence (horrific and systematic) while ignoring that of government troops and their henchmen. Why do they not condemn the Army’s violation of human rights? Why do I only see the Christian Bishops (ie among relgious leaders) signifying solidarity with the victims?
2. I don’t believe, in the long run guerilla wars can be won. It must be a battle for hearts and minds. btw, did the Sangha protest at the eviction of the loggers in colombo?
3. Our belief systems are vital as they determine the decisions we amke and hence the way we act. Hence any belief system is inherently practicale.
And Thank You for your comments and your contribuition to this debate.
Aliya,
No unfortunatly the people have followed such leaders- the problems started during the British period ie civil servants were mainly tamil created a vulnerable feeling of inequality which the Sangha developed and SWRD exploited. The UNP’s agricultural focus at that time was not sufficient to combat this trend. Greater emphasis should have been placed on education. The introduction of standardization was not the answer.
Indeed this country needs a 3rd party- but in this crony politics climate what can one do? Thugs, Malakas and Mervyns make life extremely difficult for innocnet politicians(if such a breed exsists)
anyways thanks for being involved in the discussion
and to both of you pls feel free to write more thos thank yous were not signifying a close
I’m really tired so forgive any errors
anon october 4, 2007 @ 12:11 am
i see that you sidestep the questions. that is as you wish, though i will repeat some of the questions after answering your points.
i don’t think monks are for war per se. what makes you think so? do explain. nor are they for sinhala only now. what makes you think so? do give details . it seems to me, you have created an imaginary maha sanga as warmongers and attacks them based on your imaginary creation, . why do you do that ?
(btw i hope this blog allows uncensored challenges to such attacks on maha sanga)
monks at the moment are doing exactly what anyone ( note this word anyone) who is really for democracy and human rights should be doing.
given the situation in the country only way to stand up for democracy and human rights is to fight ltte terrorists . i again ask, do you disagree with that ? hope you give an answer this time. sidestepping that question while attacking the imaginary position of maha sanga as you do will not get us anywhere in the debate
monks in myanmar may be fighting a hopeless struggle but they fight all the same. here even if we cannot win against ltte ( which is your personal opinion – terrorism has been defeated in some countries. even here vs jvp.- btw i notice that you do not use the word terrorism ) there is no other option but to fight ltte if you stand for democracy and human rights. a never ending struggle against terrorism is always better than submission and betrayal of fellow sri lankans to ltte oppression and terror. or do you prefer appeasement of terror and giving up millions of sri lankans to ltte terrorist rule? do you think that in addition to the horror of that move it will stop ltte any more than any other attempt at appeasement of fascists and terrorists throughout history ? why ?
you say monks don’t criticize human rights violations by armed forces in the same way they criticize ltte.
in the first place there is no comparison between armed forces of a legitimate democracy working under the law and a bunch convicted criminals rejecting law as you imply. if armed forces commit crimes they as long as there is evidence can be held to account.
in fact as far as i know all substantiated deliberate human right violations by criminal individuals in armed forces( given the numbers involved int is inevitable that few criminals will get in ) have been subjected to law. if not give evidence please
i don’t include unsubstantiated absurd white van conspiracy theories propagated by terrorists and their parrots to be human rights violations. monks unfortunately for some are not ltte parrots. may you want them to be?
if you have any valid evidence for human right violations by armed forces and if individual criminals involved were not punished after such evidence was advanced let us know with details. get the admin here to have a new post. then we will see whether monks criticize them or not.
as for expulsion case. i think you are have got yourself confused. i don’t think there was anything to criticize in the monks behavior there.
let me explain why i call you confused. if ltte and its leaders give up arms and submit to the sentences passed on them and to the process of justice and monks continue to advocate their death that is wrong and not motivated by human rights.
similarly if court were not allowed to hear the expulsion case or the court order was disregarded there was a case for action by the monks. but that never happened. anything else by monks is wrong and prejudicial. so their action in that case was perfectly correct. may be you want monks to file cases and be lawyers?
nor was it a case of ethnic cleansing as propagated by ltte. may be you think it was? why ? i don’t think so as i have explained in detail else where.
you say ‘any belief system is practicable’?! I don’t see the relevance of that statement to argument here pl explain.
as i said above whether monks behavior is in line with buddhist philosophy is a matter of subjective interpretation of that philosophy. what makes you think only your interpretation and not others ( including ones by politically active monks) is valid ? and i ask again do you approve monks engaging in politics and if so why should they not stand up for democracy and human rights and advocate defeat of ltte ?
you thank me for my contribution as if debate is over. you are welcome, but why now before the debate is over?
btw are you the author of the post above or are you teh admin here posting as an anon?
Sittingnut:
what is important here is that I think all three of us agree on the same end goal. But due to different perspectives and attitudes, the means to that goal differ among us. I would like to respond to a couple of things you stated.
You said “monks at the moment are doing exactly what anyone ( note this word anyone) who is really for democracy and human rights should be doing.”
This statement is riddled with problems. First when you say ‘monks’ I believe you are referring to the JHU monks. Most Buddhists in Sri Lanka reject the attitudes and policies of these monks. Several prominent monks have spoken out against them and criticized their ways. In my opinion they are not monks at all, but rather warmongers dressed up in saffron. Can you imagine Lord Buddha promoting WAR as the only way to defeat the LTTE? It surprises me that so called Buddhists can be so easily hoodwinked by this very un-buddhist rhetoric of these monks.
“given the situation in the country only way to stand up for democracy and human rights is to fight ltte terroristsâ€Â
This sounds exactly like George Bush. These ‘terrorirsts’ you speak of are freedom fighters for millions of tamils. So the problem is not the LTTE, since they are just a symptom of the larger problem- which is fulfilling the political aspirations of Sri Lankan Tamils. We have taken the easy route and chosen to attack the ‘visible’ LTTE, but war and ethnic problem will never end unless the ROOT cause of the problem is solved- which no one wants to deal with because it is a more difficult, time consuming issue.
I have spoken to many tamils and most hate the LTTE. They want to live in a united and peaceful sri lanka. But they say that for this to happen, they must be accommodated by the GOSL, which is not happening under the current MR government. With large scale abductions of Tamils, massive displacement of Tamils from their homes in the north-east, eviction of Tamils from Colombo lodges, and offering a pathetic devolution package, I don’t blame ordinary Tamils for being left with no option but to support the LTTE over the GOSL.
‘monks in myanmar may be fighting a hopeless struggle but they fight all the same’
How can you even compare the two situations? Monks in Myanmar are not espousing armed conflict and violence as a means of achieving their objectives. They are ‘fighting’ through peaceful protests. The JHU in sri lanka support ‘fighting’ with bullets and bombs.
‘do you prefer appeasement of terror and giving up millions of sri lankans to ltte terrorist rule?’
My friend, do not ever underestimate the power of peace. There have been many situations in the world where these terrorist/rebel movements have been neutralized through negotiations (Guatemala, el Salvador, Nepal, Indonesia etc.).
A country has every right to defend itself, but war should be a last option, only after all else has been pursued. All other options are far from pursued at the moment, which is why I do not support the spilling of blood.
As an observer familiar with Buddhism and its practice in Sri Lanka, I am amazed at the hypocrisy of Sri Lankan buddhist priests who run temples in the US. If you want to see some mudalali type Buddhist Monks come to the US and visit some temples here. Some of these temples also sprout business fronts like Meditation Centers. Considering all the fine pleasures enjoyed by these monks, I must say that they must have surely reached Nirvana!