Aloka

LETTERS ON BUDDHISM

 Appeared in Sri Lankan News Papers

PAGE IV

LETTERS INDEX Page-4

 

Journal

News

Letters

Books

Personalities

Articles Index

.. A fishy question on meat

It is encouraging to note the protests against the proposed slaughterhouse. While this is commendable, this protest is rather an indirect way of responding to the issue. The primary emphasis should be made on stopping, abolishing and terminating all slaughter, in fact, all killing. It is unfortunate that all those who talk about animal slaughter some how restrict themselves to the slaughter of cows. This is clearly a result of Hindu influence, which deifies the cow. On the contrary, we must strive to put an end to all types of killing.

In our current way of protesting against animal slaughter that is fashionable today, other types of killing are conveniently overlooked. We must remember that ultimately all kinds of killing destroy life. There is no way we could give more value to a life that is housed in a physically larger mass of flesh. If we go on this basis, all those sumo warriors would be considered more valuable than Citizen Silva. However, as far as I can feel, this is the perception held by many Buddhists. A person thinking nothing about eating small fish, will be horrified at the death of a stranded whale, or at cattle slaughter. Unconsciously, he has linked the value of life to physical mass. To this day I could not verify to my satisfaction whether this line of thinking has any support in Buddhist philosophy. Whether this is so or not, I am sure that the Buddhist public at large entertains this view.

Once in a while, you come across the odd individual who has grappled this problem and has come to his own conclusions about it. Thus you find the Buddhist who has logically decided that the value of life has nothing to do with the size of the physical body. I heard of one who proudly announced that he prefers beef to fish as a Buddhist, as the former involves destroying one life that can satisfy the food requirements of many, whereas the latter option, i.e. eating fish involves destroying a large number of lives.

This man has recognised the problem for what it is worth: there is no escape from destroying lives; therefore, better kill the minimum to the maximum benefit rather than destroying a large number and becoming more sinful. Talking of sin, if destroying life is essential, how come it is a sin? In other words, why is something that is part and parcel of nature considered sinful? Are all the big fish that gobble down smaller fish, or the carnivorous animals that have to kill for food if they are to survive, all sinful? But I am wondering from the point.

The fact is that the sooner we can find a convincing answer to this question whether life-value is linked to body-mass or not, we can approach the issue in its proper perspective. If the answer is 'Yes, life value is related to body-mass,' then we can maintain the protest against killing larger species, the intensity of protest, too, being kept at par with the mass of the species involved, while ignoring, in a way, the killing of smaller forms of life such as fish and poultry. But the exact criteria to be exercised are somewhat vague at the moment. I mean whether we should link the importance of life only to the weight of the animal involved, only to the size, or to both, that is to the mass (scientific meaning intended,) or we should also take into account other factors such as the level of usefulness to man, the animal belonging to an endangered species, it being a harmful animal, etc. These fine points are left to experts, but the sooner we can clear this matter up the better it is for the future Buddhist generations.

On the other hand, if the Buddhist principle is found to be that life-value has nothing to do with the mass etc. of the animal, the outcome would be that all life is of equal importance irrespective of the size. In this case, we have a massive task at hand. Judged from this stand, cattle slaughter pales in to insignificance in front of the enormity of killing fish in their thousands, and mosquitoes in their millions. I really am at a loss to understand how we can tackle the implications of this stand. All of us who are appalled at bovine slaughter would have to get involved in the more serious task of protesting against the fishing industry, in a much more intense manner.

In an effort to dissuade the fish-eating public, we will have to come up with dramatic write- ups on how the fish is lured towards the net or the hook as the case may be, how it gets hooked, how the sharp iron hook pierces through its body cutting the intestines in to pieces, in fact all the gory details to the point it is served on the table. Coming to think of it, killing fish is done in a crueler manner than bovine slaughter. We may even opt to explore ways to make fishing humane. Anyhow, there is a lot to be done, but the start would be to resolve the question I stated above, i.e. whether the value of life is related to the body-mass of animal.

Anura Kuruppu - Narahenpita

The Island - 20 Feb 02

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Buddha poojas and not Bodhi poojas

By George Tillekeratne

It is perhaps a paradox profoundly true that in a world seething with joy and hatred some people tend to believe anything and everything on face value without analysing them logically. Even what appears to be palpably false is accepted as the truth without any examination. It may sometimes be a strange quirk of human nature. In this regard, I quote below Lord Buddhas advise to Prince Kalama.  

"Prince Kalama do not believe what I said, thinking that it is correct because I said it. Do not believe anything because it is an age-old belief coming down from generation to generation. Do not believe anything, thinking that it was said by ancient religious teachers. Do not believe anything because it is stated in the Tripitaka. Do not believe anything said by your teacher because he is Bhikku." 

"Examine what you heard thoughtfully and think carefully whether it is correct, whether it is of some benefit for the human being and whether it has been said thoughtfully with purity of mind and after you have examined and understood it clearly that it will be of benefit to you and to the others as well then only should you accept it."

Sometime ago the erudite monk Dr. Walpola Rahula lamented that Buddhists have Bodhi poojas instead of Buddha poojas thus relegating Lord Buddha to second place and giving pride of place to the Bo tree which is a thoughtless member of the plant kingdom. Buddhists have Bodhi poojas expecting relief from disasters etc. as if a tree is capable of granting relief to human beings in distress; which is itself a thoughtless act. If you ponder upon it carefully and intelligently you will not believe in such fantasy.

Being a member of the plant kingdom it is only sensitive to external stimuli and cannot do more. To believe that it is capable of granting relief from distress is being apish. Unlike in the case of Buddha pooja no merit is accrued to the devotee for offering poojas to a thoughtless tree.

When an offering is made to a Buddha however, it is not only for that particular Buddha, but it is intended for all past, present and future Buddhas and the merit accrued from it is said to be immense. Lord Buddha has never told his disciples to worship the Bo tree but the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sangha only. The tripe gem. In fact he has said that after his death his Dhamma should be considered as supreme and has never mentioned the Bo tree for any religious consideration.

The advocates of Bodhi poojas adduce the argument that in gratitude for providing shelter from sun, wind and rain the Buddha spent his first week after enlightenment gazing at the Bo tree without batting an eyelid, and that we too in turn should worship the Bo tree.

This is a complete distortion of facts and a departure from the truth. Bodhisatvas or aspirants to Buddhahood sit under large trees having canopies which provide some protection in a limited form from the sun, wind and rain. They sit under them in mediation.

However there is no sanctity attached to such trees. In fact, all previous Bodhisatvas also sat under large trees -- not only Bo trees but other types of trees too. None of those trees have been venerated. After they reached enlightenment such trees were a forgotten lot. They were never venerated or considered holy. This is a fact which cannot be disputed.

Such trees grow in the wild like the Bo tree in question, and the Bodhisatva just sat under it. To prove my argument, I would like to refer to the book titled Bauddha Dharshanaya Saha Sanscrutyhiya written by professors Chandima Wijebandara who appears often on T.V. Buddhist panel discussions, and H.M.M. Moratuwegama.

They are two eminent persons well versed in the Dhamma and who has written this book after a perusal of numerous Buddhist texts. In page 13 of this book it is stated that the Buddha spent only four weeks after he attained enlightenment in peaceful serenity. The first week he has spent under the Bo tree in the same posture with his back to it contemplating on his valuable discourse the Patticchcha Samupadaya or the doctrine of dependent origination in ascending and descending order. He was not gazing at the Bo tree without batting an eyelid as mistakenly believed.

The second week has been under the Ajapal Nuga tree, the third week under the Muchalinda alias Midella tree and the fourth week under a Kiripalu tree.

The authors say that the Buddha spent only four weeks under the said trees and that someone had later interpolated another three weeks to say that the Buddha spent seven weeks in peaceful contemplation. It is therefore crystal clear that the Buddha never sat gazing at the Bo tree as mistakenly believed or made to believe.

After he departed from the place Lord Buddha has never revisited the Bo tree and neither did he ask his disciples or followers to pay homage to the Bo tree.  

Now let us examine the life style of the Buddha. It is said that he slept for only two hours a day and the rest of the day was spent on the moral befuddlement of the people His aim was to see that people attained nirvana through meditation. To say such a Buddha wasted one week gazing at the Bo tree is unbelievable. It is sheer baloney I would say.

Another practice among Buddhists is to wrap a yellow robe around the branch of a Bo tree. The Buddha himself designed the yellow robe to be worn only by himself and his disciples. Is the Bo tree equal to the Buddha to be draped by a yellow robe? At Sunday schools it is taught that the Bo tree is enlightenment by saying Bodiya num Budubavai.

There is nothing in this world which can be compared to the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sangha as stated by the Buddha himself. Yang Kinchi Rathang Loke Vijjathi Vivida Putu Rathana Buddha Samang Naththi Thasma Sotti Bavantu Te, the meaning of which is that there nothing in this world which can be compared to the Buddha. So how can you equate a thoughtless Bo tree to enlightenment or Buddhahood? Lord Buddha possessed great wisdom or Gnas as they are called including the Dasa Bala Gna or the ten great wisdoms. He also possessed the Mahakarunasamaptti Gan which only a buddha has.

All this great wisdom is a part and parcel of enlightenment and is therefore a part and parcel of the Buddha himself. Now to equate a thoughtless Bo tree to Lord Buddha and enlightenment is utter nonsense. The Bo tree being a member of the plant kingdom can respond to external stimuli affecting its growth but it can do nothing beyond it. It is a sad sate of affairs to see Bo trees that spring from the droppings of crows being venerated and Bodhi poojas offered to it. Can you call such trees sacred?

Lord Buddha is the only religious teacher who said that people of other faiths who lead meritorious lives would be reborn in low spiritual planes or higher spiritual pains depending on the merit gained by them. The beings on low spiritual planes often take refuge in Bo trees. When people offer Bodhi poojas to such Bo trees they offer merit to beings in the Bo trees. These beings accept the merit offered to them and get elevated in the spiritual world. It may be that some of them are capable of granting relief to persons in distress who offer Bodhi poojas to the Bo tree seeking relief.

Unlike Buddhists in Sri Lanka, their counterparts in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Nepal appeal directly to the Buddha for relief and favours. They do not pray to gods or offer Bodhi Poojas in the firm belief that all Buddhas after their sojourn in this world take refuge in a "Buddhas realm" and that they could therefore assist humankind.  

This seems to have some relevance to an age-old belief among Buddhists that just before the end of the world Buddha relics all over the world would unite to form the living Buddha who would deliver his last sermon.

I cannot understand why a Bo tree is referred to as "Bodinvahansa". The word "Vahansa" is a very highly respected form of address to the King and Queen when they are addressed as "Devayanvahansa," Lord Buddha as "Budurajananvahansa" and the member of the Maha Sanga as "Swaminvahansa". They are all human beings except for Lord Buddha who is superhuman, being above all men and gods.

However all chaityas, some with Buddha and arahath relics enshrined in them, are commonly referred to as "chaityarajaya". The Ruanweli maha chaitya, the most sacred of all chaityas since it has a Buddha relic enshrined in it, is referred to as Ruanaweli maha chaitya, but a thoughtless Bo tree is referred to as Bodinvahansa. Here pride of place has been given to a Bo tree ignoring the chaityas most of which contain relics.

In order to buttress my arguments I would like to quote two verses from the Dhammapada - Buddha Vaggo, verse 10.

Bahu ve Sranga Yanthi, Pabbathani Vanananicha

Arma - Rukha Chetiyani, Manussa Bhaya Tajjita. 

This literally means, "People afflicted by fear seek the protection of rocks, woods, animals trees and chaityas."

 Verse 11:

Nethang ko saranang kehamnag, Nethan saranamuttaman

Nethan sarana magamma, Sabba dukka pamuchchati

This means: "But this does not give any assistance to man, it does not help him to overcome his suffering or fear."

These two verses prove beyond any doubt that Lord Buddha never advocated the worship of trees. As such, how could one say that Lord Buddha spent the first week after enlightenment gazing at the Bo tree in gratitude without even battering an eyelid?

Sunday Leader - 27 Jan 02

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Are we human? 

Mr. Godwin Withana's article "Save Cattle From Inhuman Treatment" (The Island, Saturday, November 03, 2001) brought back memories of the cattle my colleagues and I rescued in 1996 and 1997.

Back then, when my friends Shanka Manawadu, Niranka Perera and I were young boys of 14, it was considered quite an odd thing to do by our friends. I still remember the taunts and jeers of a few schoolmates who thought we were beyond the realm of sanity to go around saving cows. "Save it from what, machan?," they would ask during the recess whilst munching on beef toasties their mothers had so lovingly prepared for them. And the answer to that is exactly what I wish to share with all those who have a taste for beef today.

We used to love it. Beef, for us, was a gastronomic delight. We never gave a sliver of thought for how exactly it ended up so tender and succulent on our dinner plate, until one day, quite by chance we overheard a sermon by Ven. Thalgaswawe Seelananda of Parama Dhamma Chetiya Pirivena, Ratmalana.  

This happened when the three of us decided to obtain sil for Vesak, albeit for dubiously boyish reasons better best left unsaid! The thero's message was simple, his method direct. He told us, very systematically, of how exactly a cow would be slaughtered. He didn't miss a single detail. Truly a sermon like no other.

Most of us eat meat with gusto, but how many of us, if any at all have stopped to think of what pain and suffering an animal would have endured to end up as chops? The agony of being transported to an abattoir in overcrowded lorries without adequate space to even breathe, the anticipation and mortal horror of not only waiting for death but the torture beforehand... the list goes on. Often have I heard people argue that bovine intelligence is not so advanced as to know it is about to be killed or to fear death. But any one of us who has passed by the suburbs of Negombo or Panadura in the early hours of the day would disagree. For, many of us have seen the hapless cattle being mercilessly dragged to the slaughter-houses which are rampant in these areas.

It's a heart-rending sight. Yet, a vast majority of us would turn our heads and pass by undisturbed.

How can we call ourselves human?

What sets us apart from the other creatures as the most advanced species? Is it not our ability to think or our capability of comprehending the difference between right and wrong?

We as humans, abhor suffering. We try our utmost to insulate ourselves from pain. But we are not worried about the suffering of other beings.

My appeal to one and all is to refrain from consuming meat that has been butchered inhumanely, and at least to spare a thought for the animal before consuming it.

That alone would be a simple but meaningful start to a gradual deviation from our food which seem to be simply saturated with meat in present times.  

Suneth Rajawasan - The Island

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. The Buddhist Commission must conduct public sittings and extend deadline

 By Senaka Weeraratna: Secretary - German Dharmaduta Society

The establishment of a Presidential Commission on Buddha Sasana comprising learned members of the Maha Sangha, accomplished scholars and experienced administrators to inquire into a wide range of matters bearing on the well-being and long-term survival of the Buddha Sasana, is most welcome. It is a sensible step particularly in view of the new challenges confronting the traditional status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and the need to formulate strategies to overcome them.

Sri Lanka has been nourished for over twenty-three centuries, with the quintessence of human thought, the sublime teachings of the Sambuddha. Buddhism, more than other ideology or religion, has played a singular role in creating a unique civilization and shaping the destinies of this country. It falls on the current generation therefore to ensure that Buddhism continues to flourish in Sri Lanka, and that the State performs its historic public duty, as enshrined in the National Constitution, to extend patronage, protection and foster Buddhism both within and outside the country.

However there are a few considerations involving the format of the inquiry on which we have some reservations and misgivings. They are as follows:

1.It is an incontrovertible fact that Sinhala Buddhists see around them forebodings of a disastrous turn of events that, if allowed to continue unchecked, may reduce them to a marginalized status as has happened to Buddhists in South Korea in the last few decades. This perception of such a future disaster has little force unless it receives articulation through a reasoned presentation of facts and arguments.

This is not an easy task given that the Buddhists of Sri Lanka do not have, relatively speaking, the kind of 'Think Tanks' and other sophisticated institutional devices dedicated to safeguarding their interests. The Buddhist public who try to make good this deficiency need considerable time to prepare a well-thought out analysis of the state of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and the remedial measures that require to be taken.

2.The issue of the viability of Buddhism in Sri Lanka - its continued existence as the dominant moral and spiritual force in this country - has become inextricably mixed with extraneous issues involving politics and ethnicity. The highly adversarial nature of the latter makes a dispassionate analysis of the claims of the Buddhist majority of Sri Lanka difficult to examine. This moment i.e., during a General Election campaign, is inopportune. The attention of the public is diverted to the larger political scene. Further, the general authoritarian framework within which we are compelled to operate is also unlikely to be helpful in addressing matters that require long and careful study.

3.In contrast to the frail defenses of the Buddhist nation, there is arrayed against the Buddhist majority, a formidable consortium - both local and foreign - that has made an industry of the business of belittling Buddhist claims. For long decades, these institutions have had the kindly ear of governments installed in power.

Not only must the Buddhists present their case - they are faced with the more formidable task of turning the tide that has been running against them for some time. This tide of anti-Buddhist sentiment flourishes in some key public institutions in this country - notably in the state-controlled Media. There is, thus, a huge imbalance in the 'ideological warfare' currently being waged and it would be a near-impossible task to redress matters by quick presentations or position papers delivered to a quick-fix inquiring authority. The background needs to be explored with great thoroughness.

4.A Buddhist Commission should work ideally with the people through its direct mandate. The existence of short-term deadlines (November 30, 2001) and time frames violates this principle. Time frames, if any, ought to be determined by the scope of the investigation and the ability of the people involved to see through the salient issues. Not by the expediency of a fast-evolving political scenario. We state this regretfully because it must not reflect in any way on the goodness and integrity of those called upon to function as Commissioners.

In this context it, must be noted that the Buddhist Committee of Inquiry established by the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress in 1954 (later popularly known as the Buddhist Commission) took nearly two years to complete its work. This Commission held sittings throughout the length and breadth of the country, beginning in Ratnapura on June 26, 1954 and concluding in Anuradhapura on May 22, 1955. This Commission travelled approximately 6,300 miles and heard evidence from organisations and individuals representing all sections of Buddhist society, both laity and Sangha.

In recent times, other Public Commissions e.g., The Presidential Commission of Inquiry into involuntary removal and disappearances of certain persons, was given a tenure of two years (through extensions) to submit its findings.  

5.The scope of investigation by this Presidential Commission on Buddha Sasana should not be confined to the acceptance of only written submissions. There should be public sittings (like in the Truth Commission) to entertain verbal submissions from any aggrieved sectors of the Buddhist public.

Therefore, we call upon the Government as a preliminary measure to take the following steps:

1)Allocate a period of six months for written submissions. Extend the deadline to April 30, 2002.

2)Conduct public sittings in Colombo and outstations. 

3)Make available to the public the Reports of the:

 a) The Buddhist Committee of Inquiry (published in 1956), and

 b) The Buddha Sasana Commission Report (published in 1959).

These Reports provide a well-researched historical background and empirical data that are yet relevant to the understanding of the various issues and challenges confronting Buddhism in contemporary Sri Lanka.

The Island

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Survival of greatest brutality 

By Dr. S. K. Vadivale 

Hinduism, the oldest religion in the world, considers lives of all beings as sacred. It upholds that every living being, big or small, experiences feelings of pleasure and pain, and postulates the doctrine of compassion, mercy and kindness to ants, worms, birds, animals etc. The tenet "don't kill, don't eat the flesh of living beings", finds a place in the pages of the religious works of the Hindus. Generations and generations of Hindus have been and are vegetarians to this day. Hindus adore and worship the cow as second mother.

Lord Buddha who came after the ancient Rishis, realising that the people of his time would not accept his Dhamma if it was as rigid as those of the Rishis, relaxed the maxim viz: "Don't kill, don't desire to eat flesh of animals, but if offered, eat".

Buddha does not make any speciality to eating the flesh of living beings because only killing, or aiding and a betting in the act, is prohibited.

Lord Jesus Christ who came next, relaxed the law further, viz. "Thou shalt not kill in vain, but if need be, kill and eat. The gospel according to St. Luke, chapter 15, on the return of the prodigal son, says. When Jesus heard that the prodigal son had returned, he was so over-joyed (that, his son was dead and is alive, was lost and is found) he ordered, "let us kill the fattest calf and feast on his flesh".

Prophet Mohamed, the last in the line of law-givers appears to have given a blank cheque on the matter of killing living beings for food. "Animals and plants are created for man - the cattle, the sheep, the camel, the birds etc. He had given man, for food". During the past several hundreds of years millions of dumb creatures have been slaughtered mercilessly in the Holy City of Mecca during Haj. One of the purposes of going to Mecca is to reduce animal population which otherwise, would increase four-fold more than human population.

If one section of the community could live a long and healthy life eating only non-animal food, it is strange that another section should deem it of paramount importance to kill and eat flesh of living beings for its existence and sustenance. It is also unfortunate that while one section reveres the cow as second mother, another section should consider the meat of the cow as the most delicious of all meat. While the words, mercy, kindness and compassion are boldly and indelibly printed on the pages of the scriptures of the Hindus and Buddhists, it is strange that other religious leaders had failed to plead with their followers to show feelings of mercy and compassion on dumb animals, and to abstain from eating their flesh.

The omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient, knows the degree of faith each person has in him. A practical test to assess the faith of an individual is therefore not necessary. Does god consider the life of a human as more precious than that of a worm, bird or human?

As religious leaders hold divergent views on killing and eating the flesh of living beings, one wonders whether there is more than one God governing the universe. Many enlightened members of the Sri Lankan society, irrespective of the faith they follow, have given up eating the flesh of animals and birds and are happy that they are pure vegetarians.  

1."Let not the living, nourish the living". - Emperor Asoka

2."If animals could talk, would we then dare to kill and eat them". - Voltaire

3."The time will come when men will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of humans". - Leonardo de Vinci

4."Meat eating is a survival of the greatest brutality. The change to vegetarianism is the first natural consequence of enlightenment". - Tolstoy

5."What wickedness to swallow flesh into our own flesh to fatten our greedy bodies by cramming in other bodies, to have one living creature fed by the death of another". (Ovid 43-17 B.C.)

The Island - 22 Nov 01

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. 'Meet TV programme butchers' - rejoinder 

I wish to state quite categorically that Buddhism has no connection whatsoever with meat eating. A follower of the Buddha's teaching is free to eat or not to eat meat as he chooses subject to the guidelines laid down.

In one discourse the Buddha gives several reasons why he is held in such high esteem. Two of the reasons are extremely significant. They are (a) he does not accept uncooked grain and (b) he does not accept uncooked meat. Since cooked grain was accepted by the Buddha the obvious implication is that he accepted cooked meat.

Furthermore the controversy that arose as to his last meal viz. whether it was pork or mushroom, could never have arisen, if it had been well-known that he was a vegetarian.  

Buddhist priests have been offered and have accepted cooked meat and fish for centuries. Buddhists in other countries too eat meat. Vegetarians and animal lovers should stand on their own feet without invoking Buddhism to their aid.

The animal kingdom is one of the four hells mentioned in Buddhism. The Buddha has declared that few human beings will be reborn as human beings in their next birth.

The implication undoubtedly is that the vast majority will be reborn in one of the four hells. We need not be surprised at this because we see the sins, crimes and high-handed acts committed by human beings even when there is no election around the corner. Hell is a place of suffering.

The bull attracts the butcher's knife not because a Buddhist eats beef but because it has been born to suffer in various ways for its sins in the past. Even pampered animals are unfortunate creatures.

They are the slaves of their masters who can restrict their freedom or kill them at will. Animals in the wild are always in danger of death or injury and suffer through man, predator and the forces of nature.

(1) Though animals and man inhabit the same planet and see each other, they are on two different planes of existence.

(2) The animal world is one of the four hells mentioned in Buddhism and therefore it is natural that animals "should" suffer in various ways.

(3) Rebirth in any of the four hells is due to grave sins committed in past lives.

(4) Those who shorten the lives of others (man or animal) will find their own lives shortened in subsequent births and that those who cause suffering to others will suffer in turn in various ways through incurable diseases, attacks by animals, meeting with accidents etc. Once all this is understood a Buddhist can watch the TV programmes without his mind being affected by it in anyway.

Bhikkhu C. Mahinda - Makola

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. More on animal suffering 

Bhikku C. Mahinda ("The Island" 14.11.2001) seems to think that suffering that is the fate of the animal - inevitable, unavoidable, being the results of various sins committed in the past, not by the animal itself, but presumably in a previous human existence. One might then conclude that all suffering, even of human beings, is justly deserved, and does not deserve any sympathy or practical help to alleviate such suffering.

In any case animals are not accountable for their actions either good or bad. In other words, their actions are not volitional. Therefore, on taking an animal embodiment one's so-called karma should be exhausted, and there need not be a further incarnation.

The question of human suffering is certainly not ignored by theistic religions that do not seek to explain suffering by promulgating the doctrine of karma and rebirth. The three so-called revealed religions, namely, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, besides Zoroastrianism do not teach reincarnation based on karmic actions.

Nevertheless the question of undeserved suffering of the righteous and the undeserved prosperity of the wicked occupied the thinking of the writers of the Old Testament. Partial solutions of the problem are offered. (1) The wicked may prosper in this life, but their "latter end" will be terrible; (2) Their sins will be visited on their posterity; (3) The righteous may suffer by way of moral discipline; (4) Suffering of the righteous may have a vicarious value.

The most direct treatment of the whole problem is found in the Book of Job. Here the orthodox doctrine is expounded with persuasive eloquence, only to be decisively rejected as untrue to the facts of life. Traditional theology is thus in ruins, and no theory is offered to replace it. (Prof. C. H. Dodd: The Authority of the Bible p. 175)

R. C. Peries - Wellawatte

The Island - 22 Nov 01

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. A call to the Maha Sangha 

Today we are facing a crucial time in our history. Our economy is in the doldrums. Governance has completely broken down in our country. The law and order situation is getting worse day by day, with murders, robberies, rapes and assaults becoming a daily habit. Our moral environment is deteriorating unbelievably fast. Our cultural traditions and values are disappearing so fast that our younger generations may not be aware of them at all. How can we rescue our nation from the abyss to which it is being dragged with increasing speed. The time has come for us to stand up and strive to save our country, save our nation from the dismal future that we are facing today.

The time has also come for the Maha Sangha to lead the nation and our people again at this crucial time, as they have always done during critical periods in our nation's history. The advice and direction of the Maha Sangha has become essential and urgent to guide our people who are being led astray by the many forces of evil of our time.

The several generations of our people would remember how they were guided and advised by the Maha Sangha. Every Buddhist man and woman in this country from their young days have been taught the five precepts. The Maha Sangha guided the people to practice the noble eightfold path. The Maha Sangha educated our society on virtue seela; introduced the concept of wholesome and unwholesome actions that were called Punnya and Paapa and Kusala and Akusala.

The entire Buddhist teaching implores the people not to do evil actions and to do wholesome actions and practice wholesome deeds. In our country Buddhism played the role of forming our present civilization based on Buddhist principles and on Buddhist ethics, always under the guidance of the Maha Sangha.

But to-day where are we? We seem to have lost our way as a country, specially when it comes to ethical and moral values. Our rulers seem to have even forsaken the five basic precepts we were taught. We observe killing and violence across our society; our society has become brutalized and the degree of violence is growing like a cancer in its body.

Suicide has become common. Is this a sign that we are increasingly progressing towards anarchy? Take the second basic precept that we will refrain from stealing. But seeing the extent of corruption, abuse power and waste of people's money in our society, can we pretend that it is not stealing in a scale never seen before in the history of our nation? Take the degeneration of our moral standards and values, specially among the so-called high. Look at the vast amount of lies and deceit heaped on our unsuspecting people. Consider the fifth precept and observe the large number of bars and taverns proliferating around the country. Consider the vast strides made in drug use and drug peddling. It is obvious that our nation, and its rulers, of whom the vast majority are Buddhists have dismally failed to even follow and abide by the five basic precepts.

This is why the people of this country are yearning for the leadership of the Maha Sangha today, to lead them away from the certain abyss that they are facing. The Maha Sangha has always been in the forefront of every national struggle. They have protected and protected and nurtured Buddhism against all odds. The time has come again for the Maha Sangha to lead the nation to prosperity, and away, from anarchy, chaos and despotism.

Siri Hattotuwegama - Ratmalana

The Island - 1 Nov1 01

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Stop victimisation of Buddhist monks 

Are the Buddha Sasana Ministry, Buddhist organizations, the clergy and the public aware of the spate of nefarious activities carried on in our country by NGO funded organizations to oust Buddhist monks from their temples? Several hapless monks have been harassed and tormented till they were forced to vacate their premises.

The methods adopted are varied; some monks are accused of sexual misconduct, some of raping minors, yet others of forging currency notes and some, like the monk in Tanamalwila of unearthing buried treasure.

These false stories are disseminated among the people in the area and the gullible public, lap them up. The tactics adopted to gain their mean and sordid ends vary according to the available circumstances. These organizations operate from "behind the scenes" using the unsuspecting public as a catspaw. Police officers and other relevant people of clout are heavily bribed into collaboration. Many are the monks who have fallen victim to these evil machinations.

These unscrupulous gangs have effectively silenced Ven. Aryadhamma, the Nikarawetiye Thera, the Dolukanda Thera and Ven. Sumangala Thera of Devram Vehera. The Ven. Sumangala Thera is being cruelly harassed in order to chase him out of his temple.

The reason for these pernicious deeds is that these harmless monks draw massive crowds. Hasn't the public noticed that the temples that conduct "daham paselas" are targeted for such deeds? Whoever draws crowds is not spared. For crowds mean potential converts. These activists are not in the least concerned that they give their religion a bad name.

Then, there are the self-styled preachers supposed to be 'Sovan' who go about propagating their own brand of Buddhism - a highly distorted version. The tragedy is that there are unwise people who fall for these charlatans. If their atrocious and insidious activities are not stopped forthwith, it will spell doom for Buddhism. And that is exactly what they are aiming at.

Many were the monks who were assassinated ostensibly for political reasons, such as the Dimbulagala monk. At Tanamalwila, a monk who was conducting a 'daham pasela' was shot point blank and killed by an unknown assailant. Strangely, there are no inquiries initiated into this killing. Some temples have been petitioned against for chanting 'pirith' and stopped from doing so.

We urge the Buddha Sasana Ministry and other Buddhist organizations to lose no time in taking action to prevent the monks being harassed and ousted from their temples. To achieve this, such NGOs should be banned forthwith. The victimized monks should be exonerated and re-instated in their respective temples. Time is running out. Please save Buddhism from annihilation before it is too late.

Concerned Buddhist - Nugegoda

The Island - 29 Aug 01

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Beliefs and practices in relation to the Bo-tree

"Prince Kalama do not believe what I said thinking it is correct because I said it. Do not believe anything because it is an age old belief coming down from generation to generation. Do not believe anything thinking that it was said by the ancient religious teachers. Do not believe anything because it is stated in the Tripitaka. Do not believe anything said by your teacher because he is a Bhikku. Examine what you heard thoughtfully and think carefully whether it is correct, whether it is of some benefit for the human being and whether it has been said thoughtfully with purity of mind and after you have examined and understood it clearly that it will be of benefit to you and to the others as well then only should you accept it" - The Buddha.

I have been toying with the idea of writing this article for sometime consequent to a statement made to the Press sometime back by the erudite monk Rev. Dr. Walpola Rahula when he quite rightly lamented about Buddhists who hold Bodi Pujas instead of Buddha Pujas thus relegating the Buddha to the second place and giving pride of place to a thoughtless Bo Tree which itself is a thoughtly act. Buddhists hold Bodi Pujas expecting relief from distress etc. as if a tree is capable of granting relief to human beings in distress. If you ponder over it carefully and intelligently you will not believe in such fantacy. Being a member of the plant kingdom it is only sensitive to external stimuli and nothing more could it do. To believe that it is capable of granting favours or relief from distress to human beings is being apish. Unlike in the case of a Buddha Puja no merit is accrued to the devotee for offering pujas to a thoughtless tree. But when an offering is made to a Buddha, it is not only for that particular Buddha but it is intended for all past, present and future Buddhas so that the merit accrued from it is said to be immense. The Buddha has never told his disciples or lay Buddhists to worship the bo tree but the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sanga the Triple Gem. In fact, he said that after his death his Dhamma should be considered as supreme and never mentioned the Bo Tree for any religious consideration whatsoever. So Buddhists must always strive to hold Buddha Pujas and not Bodi Pujas.

The advocates of Bodi Pujas adduce the argument, that in gratitude for providing shelter from sun, rain and wind the Buddha spent his first week after Enlightment gazing at the Bo Tree without batting an eyelid and that we in turn should worship the Bo Tree. This is a complete distortion of facts and a deliberate departure from the truth. Bodisatvas or Aspirants to Buddhahood sit under large trees having large canopies which provide some protection from sun, rain and wind, besides it is very cool under such large trees. They sit under them in meditation. However, there is no sanctity attached to such trees. In fact all previous Bodhisatvas too sat under large trees not only Bo Trees but trees of other kinds too. None of those trees have been venerated. After they reached Enlightment such trees were a forgotten lot. They were never venerated or considered holy. This is a fact which cannot be disputed. Such trees grow in the wild like the Bo Tree in question and the Bodhisatva just sat under it and did not select it as a tree of sanctity. To prove my argument I would like to refer to a Book titled Bauddha Dharshanaya Saha Sanscruthiya written by Professors Chandima Wijebandara who often appears in the T.V. Buddhist Panel discussions and H. M. Moratuwegama. They are two eminent persons well versed in the Dhamma and who has written this book after a perusal of numerous Buddhist Texts. In page 13 of this book it is stated that the Buddha spent only four weeks after he attained Enlightment in peaceful serenity. The first week he had spent under the Bo Tree in the same posture with his back to the Bo Tree contemplating on his valuable discourse the Pattichcha Samupadaya or the Doctrine of Dependent Origination in ascending and descending order and not gazing at the Bo-tree without battling an eyelid as mistakenly believed. The second week has been under the Ajapala Nuga Tree, the third week under the Muchalinda alias Midella Tree and the fourth week under a Kiripalu Tree.

The authors say that the Buddha spent only four weeks under the said trees and that someone had later added another three weeks to say that the Buddha spent seven weeks in peaceful contemplation. It is therefore crystal clear that the Buddha never sat gazing at the Bo Tree as mistakenly believed or made to believe. After he departed from the place the Buddha has never revisited the Bo Tree and neither did he ask his disciples or followers to pay homage to the Bo Tree. Now let us examine the life style of the Buddha. It is said that he slept for only two hours per day and the rest of the day was spent for the moral upbringing of the people. His aim was to see that people attained Nirvana through meditation. To say such a Buddha wasted one week gazing at the Bo Tree is unbelievable. It is sheer baloney I would say. Another thing some Buddhists do is to wrap a yellow robe around the branch of a Bo Tree.

The Buddha himself designed the yellow robe to be worn only by himself and his desciples. Is the Bo Tree equal to the Buddha to be draped by a yellow robe. In the Sunday Schools it is taught that the Bo Tree is Enlightment by saying Bodiya num Budubavai. There is nothing in this world which can be compared to the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sanga as stated by the Buddha himself.

"YANG KINCHI RATHANANG LOKE VIJJATHI VIVIDA PUTU RATHANANG BUDDHA SAMANG NATHTHI THASMA SOTTI BAVANTU TE", The meaning of which is that there is nothing in this world which can be compared to the Buddha. So how can you equate a thoughtless Bo Tree to Enlightment or Buddhahood. Lord Buddha possessed several great wisdoms or Gnas as they are called including the Dasa Bala Gna or the Ten Great Wisdoms. He also possessed the Mahakarunasamapatti Gna which only a Buddha has. All these great wisdoms are a part and parcel of Enlightment and is therefore a part and parcel of the Buddha himself. Now to equate a thoughtless Bo Tree to Lord Buddha and Enlightment is utter nonsense. The Bo Tree being a member of the plant kingdom can respond to external stimuli affecting its growth, it can do nothing beyond it. It is a sad state of affairs to see Bo Trees sprung up from the droppings of crows being venerated and Bodi Pujas offered to it. Can you call such trees sacred.

Lord Buddha is the only religious teacher who said that people of other faiths who lead meritorious lives would be reborn in in low spiritual plans or higher spiritual plains depending on the merit gained by them. These beings of low spiritual planes often take refuge in Bo Trees. When people offer Bodi Pujas to such Bo Trees they at the end offer merit to beings in the Bo Trees. These beings accept the merit offered to them and gets elevated in the spiritual world. It may be that some of them are capable of granting relief to persons in distress who offer Bodi Pujas to the Bo Tree seeking relief.

Unlike Buddhists in Sri Lanka their counterparts in Singapore, Malaysia, Hongkong and Nepal appeal directly to the Buddha for relief and favours and they do not pray to Gods or offer Bodi Pujas in the firm belief, that all Buddhas after their sojourn in this world take refuge in a "Buddha Realm" and that they could therefore assist them. This seems to have some relevance to an age old belief by Buddhists that just before the end of the world Buddha relics all over the world would unite to form the living Buddha who would deliver his last sermon.

I cannot understand why a Bo Tree is referred to as "Bodinvahansa". The word "Vahansa" is a very highly respected form of address to the King and Queen when they are addressed as "Devayanvahansa", Lord Buddha as "Budurajananvahansa" and the members of the Maha Sanga as "Swaminvahansa". They are all human beings except for Lord Buddha who is a super human being above all men and Gods. However all the Chaityas some containing Buddha and Arahath relics enshrined in them are just commonly referred to as "Chaityrajaya". The Ruanweli Maha Chaitya the most sacred of all Chaityas since it has Buddha relics enshrined in it is referred to as Ruanweli Maha Chaitya but a thoughtless Bo Tree is referred to as Bodinvahansa. Here pride of place has been given to a Bo Tree ignoring the Chaityas most of which contains relics.

Lord Buddha is referred to as "Asamasama" or incomparable. Hence it follows that Enlightment too is Asamasma or incomparable since it is the Buddha who is the Enlightened One. So by what logic could one equate Lord Buddha or Enlightment to a thoughtless Bo Tree which has no human feelings. It is perhaps a strage quirk of human nature in that some people tend to believe what is palpabably false as the Truth despite evidence to the contrary. With that mental attitude they tend to influence others too to accept their beliefs and practices. As a matter of fact people generally resent the introduction of changes as such some people just stick on to old beliefs and practices come what may.

I therefore call upon all Buddhists, the Clergy as well as the Lay Buddhists who disagree with the findings of these two Authors to adduce relevant documentary evidence from the Buddha Dhamma not only to prove that they are wrong but also to prove convincingly adducing relevant documentary evidence that Lord Buddha spent his first week after Enlightment gazing at the Bo Tree without battling an eyelid as an act of gratitude. In conclusion I would like to state that the purpose of this article is two fold, firstly to sift the grain from the stalk in relation to Buddhist Religious Beliefs and Practices and secondly to open the eyes of those entrenched in age old beliefs contrary to the pristine incomparable Dhamma preached by Lord Buddha. In case I have erred anywhere in this article I would like to be corrected.

George Tillekeratne

The Island - 14 Jun 01

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. 'Bodhi' worship vs 'Bodhi puja'

Response to George Tilekeratne by D. G. B. de Silva

"Bahu ce saranam yanti - Pabbatani vanani ca; Arama rukkha cetyani - Manussa bhaya tajjita" - [Dhammapada-Buddha Vagga]

["People afflicted with fear seek the protection of rocks, woods, shrines, trees and chaityas"]

This quotation from Dhammapada [The translation is mine] should settle what Buddha's thoughts were on the question of worship of these objects. That includes the Bodhi tree which is the subject of our discussion here. However, the issue of Bodhi worship in Buddhism cannot be dismissed with this quotation as it has become part and parcel of Buddhist lore and ritual and has come down to us to this day as a chief element in Buddhist worship.

Mr. George Tilekeratne [here after Mr. T.] has questioned the significance attached to the Bodhi tree worship and the validity of present day Bodhi-Pujas by the Buddhists of Sri Lanka. [The Island, 12th June, 2001]. He observes that the Buddhists in Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong appeal direct to the Buddha and says they do not pray to Gods or offer Bodhi Pujas. As such, he has tried to draw a distinction between the worship of the Buddha which he accepts and the worship of the Bodhi tree which he does not. In support of his arguments he brings out the following:  

1] The Buddha has never told his disciples to worship the bo tree but the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, the Triple Gem.

2] He never visited the Bodhi tree during the time of his mission after he left the tree.

3] The findings of Professors Wijebandara and M. Moratuwegama, who are claimed to have asserted that there is no evidence that Buddha spent a week gazing at the Bodhi tree as it is popularly believed. He places so much faith on what these two academicians have said not because of the validity of their research but they are exponents of Buddhism on the TV etc. What a non-Buddhist approach if one considers what Buddha told in the Kalama Sutta?

At this point itself one may ask where in the canonical literature the Buddha asked his disciples to worship him, the Dhamma and Sangha. For inferences one has to scan the later literature and the evidence could be very encouraging but that has to be distinguished from Buddha's teachings. Positive recommendation to worship the Buddha, that is also not Sakya Muni Gautama but Amitabha Buddha, also appear in Mahayana texts like the Amitayur-dhyana-Sutra which deals with [Buddha explaining to Ananda] the manner of perceiving the Buddha as part of Meditation on Amitabha. In brief it says: "Every Buddha Thatagata is one whose [spiritual] body is the principle of nature. [Dhammadhatu-kaya] so that he may enter into the minds of any being. In fine, it is your mind that becomes Buddha, nay, it is your mind that is indeed Buddha...." et all. Did the Buddha-worship itself creep into the southern schools as a response to the growing popularity of Mahayanic concepts which began to represent Buddha in a cosmic aspect? That is the point at which Buddha passes from his human form as a popular teacher to the divine aspect.

Mr. T's second question as to the reference where the Buddha asked the followers to worship the Bodhi tree is answered in the Divyadana where Buddha is quoted as saying the "tree is my personal abode" [mano nibaddha vaso viya]. It is also answered in the Ananda Bodhi Katha found in Sinhala Bodhi Vamsaya. In it the latter Buddha is quoted as saying: "Ananda, the Bodhi 'used' by the Buddha is the Chaitya when Buddha is living". Even if the meaning may not be clear in this direct translation done by me, the next statement put in the words of Buddha does. It says: "All right, Ananda, Go ahead. Plant it. [a sappling from the Sri Maha Bodhi at Gaya]. Then it would look as if I am residing there." (Sravasti). Here one can see the convergence of the two ideas of the [Bodhi] tree as the abode of the Buddha. Yet there is no evidence that he recommended it for worship as much as his own person.

Obviously this is a later attempt by the fraternity of the Bodhi tree worshippers centred at Buddha Gaya to answer the very question Mr. T. is asking namely why the Buddha did not visit the Bodhi tree after he left Gaya. By the time the sculptures appear at Bharut [2nd c.B.C.], the Bodhi tree sculpture is definitely referred in the accompanying inscription as 'Buddha' (Bhagavato].

Buddha's First Seven Weeks

Mr. T's third point is about the veracity of the Animisa-locana puja' by the Buddha during the second week after the attainment of Enlightenment. Based on the findings of the two academicians he takes up the position that there is no evidence to support that Buddha spent the second week in front of the Bodhi tree paying gratitude to the tree. It was known to any one who perused earlier texts like Majjhima Nikaya, Mahavagga Pali and even later texts like Udana Pali, that there was no reference to the week spent by Buddha in the popularly believed "Animisa - locana" posture in front of the Bodhi tree. The textual reference to the seven weeks [Sat-satiya] and "Animisa - locana" [2nd week], to produce textual evidence of which Mr. T has thrown a challenge, appears first in the 5th century commentary Samantapasadika by the famous commentary writer, Buddhagosa; and again in the Sinhala Jataka-pota that followed much later. Buddhagosa is such an authority that what he wrote cannot be easily ignored. Besides, he was a resident at Bodhimanda at Gaya before he came over to the Island. As such, one could agree that he wrote with personal knowledge of a strong tradition present there. Heun-Tsang writing in the 7th century confirms that an image named 'Animisa-locana' which had open eyes was seen by him at Buddha Gaya and also the weeks' offering of "Animisa-locana" showing gratitude to the tree.

One can see how the idea of five weeks [Mahavagga Pali on which Buddhagosa wrote the Commentary] and of three weeks [Udana Pali], changed to seven weeks by the time commentaries were written. Buddhavamsatthakatha and Atthasalini [another commentary] says Buddha was gazing at the seat. Mahavastu Avadana speaks of three weeks but devotes one to 'Animisa-locana'. Adhikaram has concluded that Buddha was gazing at the tree as well as the seat. E. J. Thomas, one of the early researchers in the 19th century observed that four weeks could be clearly discerned and a later writer had expanded this. What is the purpose of Mr. T getting so excited as to throw out a challenge to any one to contradict the two academicians when the subject is old hat? It has been examined by a number of early researchers on Buddhism like Rhys David, E. J. Thomas and E. W. Adhikaram.

These contradictory positions about the manner Buddha spent the first weeks after the Enlightenment as found in the early canonical works on the one hand and the commentaries on the other hand, have to be understood as the result of ideas and actual practice that had developed during the intervening centuries. There is strong evidence that a strong section of the fraternity had made Buddha Gaya the centre of their worship and they were able to attract the attention of the Buddhist world to this centre. It became the naval of the Buddhist world. [Read Ven. Dhammika's informative monograph on Buddha Gaya, published in Singapore, for information. He is an Australian researcher].

The controversy over how Buddha spent his first few weeks does not enter into the discussion of the historical and religious significance of Bodhi worship. As one understands from the interpretations given in the old lexicons like, Pali-nighandhuva, Abjhidanappaddipika, Amarakosa, Sabda-kalpa-drma and Vyavaspatya; and modern lexicons like, Pali-English Dictionary [Rhys Davids/PTS]; and Sumangalasabdakosa; as well as interpretation of sculptural and textual traditions and ritual practices, the term Bodhi stood to denote Buddha himself, in all aspects including his Enlightenment, his perfect wisdom, his fundamental teachings and Nirvana rather than in the limited aspect of the Asvattha tree. In other words what really matters is that the Bodhi tree represents as the learned editors of UNESCO volume on "Buddha Image" observed something much more significant, namely, the place where Buddha attained enlightenment to start with, later transformed to the very symbol of enlightenment itself. That is an understatement in the light of evidence in texts and lexicons.

Pre-Buddhist Practice Continued  

The worship of trees and the Pipal tree in particular, has been a very ancient religious practice which one finds from pre-Buddhist forms of beliefs and worship. The practice is alive more so today as it had been over four to five millennia ago. From mere animistic belief tree worship elevated itself in Buddhism to a higher form of worship but the Buddhist practices seem to have lapsed back, to a certain degree, to days of animism and superstition. The distinction has to be made clear and the Buddhist cloak given to lower forms of beliefs and practices has to be clearly differentiated. Hindus too, while persisting in animistic beliefs to an extent, consider the Pipal tree to be a symbol of God Vishnu and believe that all sins could be expiated and Moksha could be reached by making offerings to it.

On a visit to Buddha Gaya in April 1983 I met another visitor, a Hindu from Bangalore, who had come to perform certain vows on behalf of his childless wife. There were many others like him that day carrying on their 'pujas' for the same reason. In fact, some women whom I was told were without children were seen taking a dip in the algie-covered pond behind the Sacred Bodhi tree which they [mistakenly] called 'Neranjana'. Later I found that this was a common custom among the Hindus in India. They believed that such 'pujas' and a dip in the pond would answer the problem of barren women. The link of the worship of the Bodhi tree with the ancient 'nature' cult or fertility cult is being continued.

The second important thing I observed during my train journey from Gaya station to Madras was that up till one reached Andhra Pradesh it was a very common sight to see a Bodhi tree in every small village. [Not giant trees as we have but smaller ones]. People were seen using the Bodhi tree as their meeting place, as much they seemed to hold the tree in great veneration. Comparatively, in Sri Lanka the practice is not so wide-spread in our rural setting. Bodhi trees which are chosen for veneration are rather rare. In our villages they are found exclusively in the compounds of Buddhist temples.

Mr. T's assumption that "every bo tree" including 'Kaku-bo' grown from bird's dropping is venerated is not correct. For that matter, how many such trees are there in the vicinity of the National Hospital which are ignored but only the Bodhi shrine at Punchi Borella is venerated and used as a shrine by the visitors to the hospitals nearby and by people living around? I watched so many bo trees, some of great size, being felled on the Elvitigala Mawatha during the last few months and weeks without any protest from the people. One was a huge tree near the temple at the entrance to Timbirigasyaya road. Evidently there is a long tradition attached to those Bodhi trees which are used as shrines. It is true that some insignificant Bo trees like the ones which existed on a threshing plot on the marshes close to the historic Bellanwila temple have been turned into a profitable business venture and impressions could be created that every Bo tree is worshipped. The superstition is such that building workers would not even pull out parasitic Bo plants from a building. Many hundreds of Bo plants one could see even this day in the niches of the Dawatagaha Mosque provide good examples.

The connection between the Bodhi worship and the fertility cult is also manifest in the old tradition of the Rajarata people holding the 'Alut Sahal Mangalya' at the Sacred Bodhi tree at Anuradhapura just as much as the people in the hill districts perform the ceremony at the temple of the Sacred Tooth Relic. The worship of the Sri Maha Bodhi at Anuradhapura has deviated much from the original purpose and the shrine is used as a place for multiplicity of ritual conducted for different purposes. The Indian idea of seeking the blessings of the Bodhi tree to have children is not without its correspondence in Sri Lanka as the following popular pilgrim's verse shows:

"Etena sitan pevi pevi uda maluvata yantay - Uda maluva bodi samy pirimi putek dentay".

It contains an appeal to the Sacred Bodhi tree [at Anuradhapura] to bless the pilgrim with a male child.

Bodhi Tree in Aniconic Worship of Buddha

The importance that the Bodhi tree gained in Buddhism can be seen from its early appearance in sculpture as a symbol in aniconic worship of Buddha. His place is taken by a vacant space where one finds the symbol of the Bodhi tree, the Stupa and the Wheel, sometimes with the seat [Vajrasana] and the foot-prints appearing in front of the Bodhi tree and the wheel [but not before the Stupa]. This was when during the phase between Buddha's demise and the emergence of the Buddha image in human form, people used numerous non-personal aniconic symbolism to visualise and represent Buddha and his teachings [represented by Dhamma Chakra] for the purpose of veneration. This was, as it was put in the UNESCO publication: Buddha Image, "Creating in the midst of a teeming crowd of figures, a centre of quiet emptiness suggesting the Buddha's Nirvana state much more convincingly than any

human figure among the multitude of other human figures could have done." These symbols some of which, like the [Bodhi] tree which was certainly pre-Buddhist, were used separately but also arranged in combination as one finds at Amaravati where the order of priority in ascending order is the [Bodhi] Tree [Person or Enlightenment], the Wheel [first Sermon] or Dhamma, Stupa [Entry into Nirvana]. Some times the order is changed with the Stupa in the centre and the bodhi tree and the wheel on the two sides. Each of them was already a cult object by that time the sculptures appear as worshippers are seen around each symbol.

In Sri Lanka the requirement of a symbol was fulfilled by the early introduction of Bodhi worship itself when a sapling branch from the Bodhi tree at Gaya, followed by the planting of 'astaphala' and later of 32 Bodhi saplings and others throughout the Island. this could account for the lesser frequently of the presence the Bodhi tree in the sculptures of the Island compared to India. In contrast the wheel symbol and the foot prints occur more frequently in the sculptures of the Island. Stupa worship [place where Buddha's bodily relics were enshrined], also went side by side with the worship of Bodhi trees. Even after the stupa followed by the Buddha image became two major objects of worship, the worship of the Bodhi tree as a shrine [and also the foot print] continued. The foot print in temple complexes disappeared from the scene but a single cult round the [conceived] foot print has replaced it.

The Bodhi tree worship occupies to this day a priority in the ritual of worship of the Buddha over the image house while the wheel has disappeared, only the Stupa remaining besides the Bodhi tree. Why is this importance which continues to be attached to the Bodhi tree? Is it because it symbolised Buddha's abode, place of Enlightenment, and the whole spectrum of Buddha's achievements as we shall see later? Or, else, is it because, as Mr. T assumes that Buddhists are recollecting the gesture of gratitude (Animisa-locana) that Buddha is claimed to have extended to the Bodhi tree as the tree that provided him shelter when he attained Enlightenment?

No doubt, the virtue of gratitude is highly praised by Buddhists as shown to parents and teachers; but that alone is not a major cause to be isolated from among many other virtues extolled in Buddhism or the many Buddha qualities. It is true that the 'gratitude' aspect received emphasis at some stage with the 'Animisa-locana' idea and an image of the Buddha in Animisa-locana attitude had been seen at Buddha Gaya by Heun-Tsang (not a stupa as stated in Buddha Sasana Ministry publication - PhD thesis written by Ven. Welamitiyawe Dhammarakkhita Thero, Kelaniya Uv., 1991; nor was it seen by Fa-Hien as asserted by the venerable Bhikku quoting Beal's translation.). Here we are presented with two propositions, namely, Bodhi tree as representing Buddha, in all aspects; and the Bodhi tree in the limited perspective symbolising gratitude. One has to isolate the more profound cause.

Bodhi-Symbol of Enlightenment

The UNESCO publication referred to earlier, edited by a panel of world renowned scholars, observes that "The tree, like other symbols, was already in pre-Buddhist times an object of miraculous efficacy, and therefore worthy of worship (puja). The simple tree, as soon as it received in the Buddhist cult this new function, was thus turned into an enclosed sanctuary and later into a temple-like edifice. Thus the 'Place of Enlightenment' (bodhimanda) developed into the 'House of Enlightenment' (bodhigara)ÉÉ Besides its specific ritual function, the tree was still used to indicate Enlightenment as such; correspondingly, the Wheel can stand for the Law and Doctrine, and the Stupa for NirvanaÉ Holy person, holy place, holy object - these three are the three variant meanings of those symbols. Seen sub specie acternitatis they are identical because their ultimate truth is one and the same. The various meanings and functions are therefore not always clearly discernible, since several meanings may overlap or fuse. Sometimes careful analysis may reveal anachronisms and discrepancies, but these are resolvable if we understand that in the early phase the Buddha and all events of his career were thought of as transcending historical time and space. He represented a mere temporal manifestation, for the benefit of suffering world of living beings, of absolute truth and transcendental Buddhahood."

The conclusions to be drawn from a perusal of texts and old lexicons are that the Bodhi worship, as it became a Buddhist object of worship from being a pre-Buddhist popular cult object, first took the form of a symbolic object as a reference to the place where Buddha attained Enlightenment; or representing the momentous event of Enlightenment itself. Certainly, in the later phase it represents the latter but also Buddha himself in the Enlightenment, Supreme Wisdom, Fundamentals of his teachings and Nirvana aspects.

The sculptural representations belong to the post-Asokan period; but that Asoka had venerated the actual Bodhi tree at Gaya is illustrated by literary evidence as much as the strong tradition present in Sri Lanka of the introduction of a sapling from the Sacred Bodhi Tree at Buddha Gaya. Emperor Asoka is seen in the sculptures looking at the withered Bodhi tree in order to revive it.

Problem Solution

Against the evolutionary background of the Bodhi worship discussed above, the Bodhi worship which has become an essential element in the Buddhist ritual, whether it is on account of limited perspective of symbolising the virtue of 'gratitude', or, the broader concept of Buddha himself in varied aspects, cannot be set aside without casting away the worship of the Buddha itself which was a late introduction to Buddhism. That is the price one has to pay for trying to go to the very root of Buddha's teachings to find reasons for rejecting Bodhi worship. In the life story of Buddha whether he sat with the Bodhi tree behind him (Pallamkam); or later whether he spent another one week facing the Bodhi tree as the account goes, in the "Animisa-locana puja", i.e., showing gratitude to the tree, which Mr. T. degrades as a "thoughtless tree," are details that have crept in when the Buddha legend developed.

Mr. T quotes the two academicians mentioned, to reject the strong tradition of Animisa-locana (gratitude) first recorded in Buddhagosa's commentary, Samantapasadika, that Buddha spent a week standing in front of the Bodhi tree showing gratitude to it. According to him, for us to worship the Bo tree in turn 'is a complete distortion of facts and a deliberate departure from the truth'.

The idea that the Bodhi tree is worshipped following Buddha's example of gratitude may be only a interpretation which took into account the belief that had grown by the 5th century when Buddhagosa wrote. After all, he was writing with personal knowledge since he was a resident of Bodhimanda in Gaya. One has to contend as well with the evidence of the presence of the Animisa-locana image seen by the Chinese traveller.

How is it that in Buddhist ritual the worship of the three objects associated with the Buddha, namely, the Bodhi tree (Enlightenment), the Stupa (Bodily relics), and the Image (personification), that the worship of the Bodhi tree received priority starting from the early days of anicronic representation of Buddha? Is it not clear from this order of priority as also depicted in the Amaravati sculptures where in the scheme of arrangement the Bodhi tree symbol is alongside the wheel symbol and only secondary to the Stupa (Nirvana), that Bodhi worship arises from a much more profound reason than emphasising the virtue of gratitude: or simply an idea borrowed from early animistic beliefs? It arises, as the learned editors of the UNESCO volume I quoted observed, from the fact that Bodhi tree symbolises the Enlightenment. Historically and Buddha's carrier-wise that is the starting point of Buddhist thought. The UNESCO editors statement as well as what is taught at the Sunday School that Bodhi tree is 'Enlightenment', to which Mr. T. seems to take exception, are but understatements when one compares with what is stated in ancient lexicons and by some of the greatest authorities on Buddha-lore. It is the symbolism relating to Enlightenment that has been taken into account perhaps for reasons of brevity, leaving out others, i.e., Buddha himself including the essence of his teaching and Nirvana. Rhys David also summed up the different connotations given in the texts and ancient lexicons on the term 'Bodhi' when he said that "what the Buddhists mean by worship of the Bodhi tree is the Teacher himself who achieved the highest form of wisdom, namely Enlightenment." On expanded meaning given in the ancient lexicons it means even more, i.e., The Buddha himself and all the fundamentals of Buddha's teachings - the Supreme Wisdom and Nirvana (attainment of Bodhi) included.

Mr. T. seems to have mixed up the true significance of the Bodhi worship with the ritual practices that have grown round it, particularly, the confusion created by present day Bodhi pujas. Attempting to isolate the un-Buddhistic practices surrounding the Bodhi worship is commendable; but for that reason the baby should not be thrown away with the bath water.

The island - 29 Aug 01

 [ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. Buddhism is incomparable

I write with reference to the letter appearing in newspapers by Bhikkhu Horowpothane Sathindriya. In his letter the priest says: "People of our global society belong to various faiths, religions and philosophies. It is extremely narrow-minded to consider that everybody in the world should believe in or follow only one religion or faith".

As you read the first paragraph of this particular letter, it gives the impression that there is some strong external influence behind this opinion expressed.

Even the scholars who think and act with equanimity in the world have unanimously agreed that the enlightenment of the Lord Buddha to the people of this world of the Four Noble Truths rediscovered by HIM is the greatest among the other teachings on this earth.

The teachings of the Lord Buddha cannot be compared with any other religion. Moreover, Buddhism is not a religion, but a philosophy.

I doubt whether the Ven. Thero is at least aware of the meaning of the pali stanza, "Svakkhato bhagavata dhammo, sanditthiko, akaliko, ehipassiko, opanayiko, paccattam veditabbo vinnuhiti... which means ‘Well-expounded is the Dhamma (doctrine) by the Lord; to be self-realized; with immediate fruit; inviting investigation; leading on to Nibbana; to be comprehended by the wise, each for himself.

In what religion do you find these values? 

In what religion does the concept of three characteristics (Thilakshana) which is taught in Buddhism that all the beings in this world are subject to Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and non-substantiality). When we fail to recognize these three characteristics of existence, we regard that which is impermanent as permanent, that which is unasatisfactory as pleasure, and the selfless as possessing on unchanging self. The Buddha compiled these tendencies in the Pali word avijja, ignorance. Being ignorant of our own true nature, and of the true nature of the things around us, we engage in actions based on these delusions and thereby we accumulate kamma which keeps us in bondage to the cycle of birth and death.

It is through understanding these characteristics that wisdom arises. Then only one can free oneself from the bonds of rebirth and attain Nibbana, the permanent end of suffering.

Most of the other religions approve killing of animals and intoxication. Ven. Sir, do you approve this kind of deeds while being a Buddhist priest and by consenting to follow other religions at the same time?

Jesus Christ had advised people to love their neighbours as they love themselves and animals are not included here. But the concept of the Lord Buddha as explained in Buddhism is "Sabbe Saththa Bavanthu Sukiththattha.. which means May all beings be well and happy!"

The history of Buddhism is older than the history of Christianity. Even before Buddhism and Christianity came into this world, people knew as to how they should segregate good and bad. Further, people had been protecting the five precepts even before these religious leaders came into this world.

It is vital to know that the philosophies are the significant factors of a religion. I wonder as to how and why the Ven. Thero is in robes? What is the motive? It is important that the Ven. Thero examines as to what principles he is following as a Budhist priest rather than exploring into other religions.

I am writing this letter with much pain and I have no any malicious thoughts towards the priest. I kindly request the Ven. Thero to be careful when expressing opinions about religions. I being a Buddhist do not tolerate a Buddhist priest having disgraced Lord Buddha or His teachings while attiring the yellow robe!

Manjari Peiris, Maharagama.

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

.. This is Vesak, not Valentine's Day 

Vesak is here. It should depict a most solemn and holy day where people engage in observing religious rites. It is in fact a day when Buddhists all over the world revere and venerate the birth, death and attainment of the Lord Buddha.

But, what do we see here in Sri Lanka, the land that the Buddha himself said his pure doctrine would flourish for 5,000 years after his passing away? A time for carnival and vulgarism, at least in some quarters.

Although the majority believe in spending the day in quiet contemplation, observe sil, or the eight precepts, (three more than the usual five a layman is supposed to follow in daily life), and most Buddhists refrain from consuming meat, fish and liquor, there are those who believe that a good bajawwa is how the day should be commemorated. Musical shows, olubakko dancing etc. are performed in various parts of the country and many young people enjoy themselves as though this were a day for gaiety.

The Vesak cards available for sale during this time too tell us a story; a story of greed and how commercialism has crept in to desecrate this holy of holy events in the calendar.  

As Ven. Maduluwawe SobithaThero said on television recently, some of the Vesak cards today are more suited for Valentine's Day.

The Sunday Leader visited several Vesak card stalls in the city and what were we greeted by? Among the genuine cards conveying the true spirit of the day, were multitudes of cards depicting romantic images and verses and pictures of scantily clad females. Are these the values we instill in our young, socially, culturally and morally and what are the authorities doing about it? It seems most of the cards are designed with young people in mind. There is nothing wrong in creating aesthetically pleasing cards, but when they overtly represent romance and sometimes even vulgarism, obviously meant, in some twisted sense, to be sent from one lover to another, it goes completely against the very essence of piety the occasion demands. It is amazing that Sri Lanka being basically a Buddhist majority country, which once boasted of a rich cultural heritage, such perversion and commercialism is allowed to seep into young minds, quite contradictory to its values and tradition.

It is perhaps a rich market catering to an overwhelming demand or part of the carefully planned out strategy to eradicate Buddhism in this isle of ours.

Voicing his opinion on the subject, Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero told The Sunday Leader, 'I have been speaking out against this for many years now. It is entirely the fault of the government and it's mode of education. Childrens' little minds are being poisoned and this is what prompts them to buy Vesak cards of this nature. Values instilled into them are all wrong and demands urgent attention to preserve our heritage. This is what I am agitating for. For the higher authorities to take serious note of this calamity that would worsen in the future if not addressed fast. Vesak is a religious affair and not an affair of the heart between two people. This is not a time for merrymaking and carnivals. We should educate them and this is upto the government.

Meanwhile, Dr. Harischandra Wijetunge, President, Sinhala Maha Sammathe Bhumi Puthra Party told The Sunday Leader it was indeed tragic that such things were allowed and that it was the NGOs with their vested interests that are probably causing this wanton destruction in the minds of our people.

'There are about 75 to 80 such organisations that are advocating other religions and other such westernised literature and culture in an organised manner. Even the office of president in Sri Lanka is not a Buddhist one and it is not a state religion according to the constitution."

Businessman Ranjith Fonseka voicing his opinion said, 'We try hard to bring up our children and instill in them proper values but how can we prevent them from digesting all this rubbish that has entered the open market? Do we have to stop them from walking on the streets? It is obvious that they are being brainwashed and diverted. Something ought to be done immediately to prevent our children from losing touch with their religion and get back to the cultural values that were once abundant. We must maintain our own identity as

a country.'

Ministry must act on it 

Neranjan Wijeyeratne - Diyawadana Nilame, Dalada Maligawa, Kandy:

'We are aware of this and totally object to the depths people stoop to, to even print this type of disgusting forms of greeting on this sacred day, Vesak day, when we should actually be observing religious rites and remind ourselves of what actually Vesak denotes. It is a total disgrace to Buddhism. I call upon all Buddhists and others not to purchase these cards and instead spend this money in helping poor children in remote areas who are suffering untold hardship. Unfortunately I cannot do anything about this particular situation but the Ministry of Buddha Sasana should take stern measures to crack down on these culprits who should be dealt with very severely. It is upto the ministry to safeguard Buddhism and project the true meaning of Buddhism.

 'We are unaware' - Personal Assistant to the Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Buddha Sasana:

'We are completely unaware of this situation where the whole idea of Vesak is being abused by printing this type of greeting cards by

unscrupulous individuals. I am sure Minister Ratnasiri Wickramanayake and Deputy Minister Ediriweera Premaratne (who were not available for comment ) would take serious note of this and should it be happening, take action against the culprits concerned.

Vidyani Varma

Sunday Leader - 6 May 2001

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Are we true Buddhists? - a reply

I read a most interesting article by Mrs. Nalini Colonne on the above subject. Yes, I am ashamed as she says we Buddhists do not practice our religion. I fully agree with her.

I think 80 per cent of Buddhists in Sri Lanka especially in big towns like Colombo, Kandy, Galle etc. to name a few and in the suburbs, they are name-sake Buddhists. They repeat the precepts like parrots.

I wonder whether most of them even know the meaning of them. "Metta" is compassion and kindness shown towards other living beings. These Buddhists and even some animal-lovers forget the suffering these poor animals go through in the early hours of the morning in the abattoirs. When they eat the beef steaks, mutton chops, ham, bacon and sausages, they don’t realize that this is the flesh of animals which were killed just that morning.

The Buddha preached "Ahimsa" and Metta. Metta is compared to a mother’s feeling for her only child. If so, they should not eat the flesh of these poor, dumb animals who cannot plead for themselves. Those who want to eat flesh say that the Buddha said, not to kill and did not forbid them eating. This is like the age old Sinhalese saying "Ugurata hora behetha Kanawa" meaning swallowing medicine with out the knowledge of the throat.

The Lord Buddha said not to kill in the first of the five precepts and not trade in flesh is one step of the Noble Eight-fold Path. If people do not eat, then there won’t be sales &emdash; so no killing. Does this not stand to reason. They do not kill &emdash; to throw the flesh to the dust bin or feed the dogs.

I have often heard the butchers saying &emdash; We would not kill if you’ll don’t eat.  

Dr. C. D. Godamunne, Kandy Humanitarian Society

The Island - 27 Aug 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Of meat eating and compassion

Newspapers give a lot of publicity to people who collect money and free cows destined for the dinner table. I’d like to question the effectiveness of this practice in saving the animals. When someone or an organisation collects money and frees a cow, what will happen after the much hyped freeing?

The owner of the slaughter house will use that money (mind you, he will get more than what he paid for the cow in the first place or may be even close to what he could have got for its meat) and buy another animal for slaughter in its place. Its not as if the slaughter house will put up shutters on that day just because the animal was sold. Only the individual animal which was bought by the organization will survive.

It will not do a thing to reduce the number of animals killed. Moreover the ‘mudalali’ will earn extra money. The only way to help the animals is to stop people from eating meat altogether. 

Much has also been said about eating beef. More people seem opposed to eating beef than to eating chicken or fish. Songs have been written and programmes shown on TV to dissuade us from eating beef.

If all beings are equal and if the amount of animal products eaten by us remain the same (i.e. we don’t reduce our meat intake), isn’t it more humane to kill one cow to feed say 50 people than to take the lives of 20 chickens or fish to feed the same amount of mouths? Do cows suffer more when killed than chicken or fish?

Janaka Seneviratne, Boralesgamuwa

 The Island - 2 Aug 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Einstein Christian or Buddhist?

In his letter Island 24th July 2000, Asoka Devendra of Maharagama states "The eminent scientist Einstein has himself stated that the only doctrine he can accept is the Buddha Dhamma". However has not stated when and where Einstein made this acceptance. I trust Mr. Devendra would make good this shortcoming. It should be noted that the Encyclopedia Britannicaloa 1971 Edition in the Chapter on Einstein inter alia states "He once summed up his general outlook by saying ‘God is subtle but he is not malicious"’

Does not this show that Einstein accepted God?

Goonetilleke

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Amoeba and rebirth

This is a reply to the letter written by Mr. Asoka Devendra of Maharagama on the above title (The Island July 24 ) 

Mr. Devendra has completely misunderstood my letter. May I also state that he too, is free to write under a pen name. What was stated was that the original Amoeba on maturity divides into two, to produce two new Amoebae to lead a new life.

If we were to apply this to human beings, it would be like Mr. Asoka Devendra splitting into two and producing two identical Asoka Devendras to lead a new life. These two will not have anything of a dead person in them. I‘m quite aware that human beings produce only human beings.

Could I very clearly state that newly produced human beings are a product of the cells of the two parents. Here too, the newly produced baby has everything that life needs, contributed 100 per cent by the two parents only. I fail to see how a dead man contributes anything to the newly produced baby.

In other words, all births are new births and not re-births. In short, man is born again long before he dies. He is never reborn after death.

He also mentions at the Dhamma does not refer to a process of re-birth, but to a process of re-becoming. If so why has he got involved in a letter dealing with re-birth.

Re-birth is a mere concept. It has never been proved. I’ll be thankful to Mr. Devendra if he could give step by step all details of what happens to a dead man till he is re-born again.

Free thinker, Avissawella

The Island - 3 Aug 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Population explosion and rebirth

There has been recently, a number of letters in ‘The Island’ relating to the question whether the amoeba is capble of rebirth in the Karmic sense. The answer was in the negative as the amoeba divides itself, giving rise to new, identical amoebae. Both start on a new life and when they mature, they repeat this same process of multiplying. And so the process goes on and this creature has no chance of getting on to another plane of existence and qualifing finally to enter the human realm.

I wish to bring to the notice of your readers another problematic situation concerning rebirth. From the time European history began in the sixth century up to the year 1800 - that is, through the course of twelve centuries, the European population was fairly static, around 180 million inhabitants. from 1800 to 1914 - in a little more than a century - the population of Europe mounted from 180 to 460 millions! In three generations it produced a gigantic mass of humanity.

A number of questions propose themselves could it be that there was a movement of beings from the animal and insect worlds into the human realm which would explain this sudden influx? But why at this particular point of time? For twelve hundred years the population of Europe was fairly stable and then within three generations all the statisticians were confounded.

How and why this happened needs explanation, if it is within the realm of possiblity to find rational answers to such questions.

N. De Silva, Welisara

The Island - 8 Aug 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..The Karma of an Amoeba

The Free-Thinker from Avissawella has misdirected himself in two ways - (I) On the karmic status of a micro-organism. (II) On the nature of the re-linking process that is vulgarly called rebirth. birth. Let us take up the first issue - on the status of an asexually reproducing micro-organism’ (such as the Amoeba) vis-a-vis the Buddhist doctrine of Karmic Catenation.

There is the prior assumption (on the part of the skeptical Free-Thinker) that we are dealing here with ‘sentient beings’ - defined in Buddhism as the temporal flux of the Five Aggregates. There is no warrant for such an assumption since a key ingredient is lacking in the likes of amoeba- ‘consciousness’ or reflexive awareness (Vinnana) It would be foolhardy indeed to suppose that an amoeba or Paramecium is equipped with this high-level property of complex nervous systems. The same goes for a Sea Urchin or a Green Beetle. To suppose that these humble creatures have pangs of conscience and are caught up in an inexorable karmic succession is an anthropomorphism that has no foundation in authentic Buddhist thinking. Nobody talks of a California Redwood Tree as a sentient being though it is an enormously complex living system. It is excluded because it lacks the architecture of the Five Aggregates.

The issue of asexual multiplication is secondary. When monozygotic Twins or Triplets are delivered by a mammalian parent, there is covert asexual reproduction (polyembryony) and the question of the fissioning’ of karmic lines arises in an acute form. There is no need to drag in the ‘akarmic’ microfauna to settle this matter. As pointed out by the gentleman from Maharagama, the common opinion of non-Buddhists that karmic succession involves a reincarnation of some enduring entity of the deceased (metempsychosis) is taken over from the Folk-Beliefs of the Buddhist masses. It is not part of the Abidharma - where the key issue is that of linkage or catenation of the developing ‘Aggregates’ that are commonly identified as ‘persons’. When a ‘person’ dies here is no hasty exit of a soul or replica to continue business in another body. The connection with the karmic successor is merely an ‘informational’ congruence that sets in sympathy the new-born with a defined karmic past. What Buddhists call the ‘re-linking consciousness’ (pattisandhi-vinnana) is no more than an informational signal that puts the conspectus (fertilized egg) in a special relationship with a deceased predecessor. It does not override the biological link between the new-born and its parents. It follows from this brief review that there is no Law of Conservation of Karmic Lines as Buddhists do not believe in a Book-Keeping God Upstairs that zealously checks out the fate of each line for the degree of infringement of the rules of good behaviour. Lines can split (as in identical twins) or be extinguished when the likeness of a Prabhakaran is ‘reborn’ as a Reticulated Python.

Let me hasten to add that these are my personal views and are at variance with the doctrinal interpretations heard often on Radio and TV. A few words on Einstein and Buddhism. This great scholar was an open admirer of Buddhism though it would be wrong to call him a Buddhist. He found the Judaeo-Christian conception of a personal jealous god an abomination and rejected petitionary prayer as a demeaning and pointless exercise. However, he was a Deist - he believed in a Divine Intelligence that had links with the human mind - especially the mind of the mathematician. In this respect he was close to other great thinkers in the European tradition such as Spinoza and Voltaire. Those who have internet access can view the Einstein Home Page or the Einstein Archive to read all that he has said on these subjects.

R. Chandrasoma, Colombo

The Island -10 Aug 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

 

..The myth of humane slaughter

The animal’s head is placed in a restrainer box. The bull gets the smell of death from those that went before him and bellows and tugs to get himself free. No freedom comes but instead a compressed-air gun, fires a bolt of steel into its head. Often the bolt does not stun outright but causes excruciating pain and horrible injuries. With eyes rolling and screaming in pain he is shot again and again until a final bolt stuns him. Larry Gallagher a writer who spent a month working in a slaughterhouse writes. "Stunned is the appropriate word to describe the expression on the animal’s face: eyes and mouth frozen open, tongue sticking out, teeth biting into tongue - an expression which, were it human, would be asking ‘How could it all come to this?’ The pathos of that look catches me by surprise. I thought that a few weeks of gut cutting had numbed my feelings, but I still have to bite down on my tongue to keep the tears from welling." Nobody asks the bull whether he feels pain in that stunned state; nobody really cares when he is moved to the man with the knife called the sticker, who slits his throat. Eyes still rolling, stunned and denied even the temporary relief of screaming when in pain he bleeds profusely from the gaping wound in his throat until several minutes have passed and thirty pounds of blood has poured out of his throat. Then he dies.

The stripping of the skin, the gutting and the cutting of the flesh with the aid of conveyer belts happens very quickly thereafter, as this is a modem slaughterhouse a boon to the meat industry. Many humanitarian organizations in Sri Lanka today agitate for humane slaughter methods in the mistaken belief that the process by which an animal is put to death in a modern slaughterhouse is more humane than those that are used today in this country. They forget that modernization and mechanization is entirely for the purpose of the growth of the meat and leather industry and not because of any humanitarian considerations or for alleviating the pain and comment of the animal that has to die. If they kill twenty animals a day in one of our slaughterhouses today, under a modern system, in an hour 400 cattle and a 1,000 pigs will undergo the agonizing torture of the restrainer box, the captive bolt, and the sticker’s knife. In India the introduction of mechanized slaughter caused untold agony for animals due to the increased demand that these slaughterhouses created. Even India’s age old traditions were laid aside in the hunger for money, and Shiva’s sacred cows that had been protected from ancient times were transported and marched over hundreds of miles to modern city based slaughterhouses. Those animals reluctant to move due to starvation thirst and fatigue were prodded and induced to march by the use of cruel tortures such as their tails being broken and chili powder being rubbed into their eyes. Others unable to move because of broken legs as a result of being pushed out of lorries and those that are near death were left to die in the blazing heat of the Indian sun. Despite international indignation and protests by humane organizations, and despite the many films and articles depicting this horror, the cruelty goes on as a result of the increased demand created by mechanized slaughter and the hunger for the flesh of living things.

The horrors of a mechanized slaughterhouse do not end with the animals. They have found that slaughterhouse workers have higher rates of job related injuries than any other profession. Slaughterhouse workers in other countries wear protective equipment such as forearm guards, steel aprons and metal gloves, but even all this equipment offers inadequate protection on the rushing slaughterhouse lines. In a country like Sri Lanka where people are often seen doing hazardous jobs with little or no protection it is reasonable to believe that job related injuries in a mechanized slaughterhouse if there were one, would be high. Amputated fingers and severed hands and arms are common injuries in developed countries that have mechanized slaughterhouses. In this country that has long been plagued by a fierce civil conflict and terrorism people are gradually reaching the saturation point of seeing broken bodies and severed limbs. Surely we can do without investing in another Chamber of Horrors for both humans and animals.

Ravi Jayewardene

The Island - 22 Sep 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Nirvana behind bars

The International News Week Magazine of September 18 carried the above captioned story authored by Sudip - Mazumdar in relation to a successful experimentation programme of meditation conducted at Tihar Jail - a major prison house in India. According to Mr. Mazumdar some of the hardened convicts who participated in regular meditation exercises conducted by acknowledged meditation masters had shown a marked improvement and reformed demeanour in their physical and mental behavioural patterns much to the appreciation of their officials.

In advanced countries, their prisons are generally known as Penitentiaries where the prisoners are treated in such a manner as to turn them out to be tractable human beings. In contrast, the space scope and trained staff - availability in our prisons leave much to be desired. However, the innovative and much thought out meditation exercises introduced in the aforesaid Indian prison - prison house deserve approbation as exemplary reformative methods. Mr. Mazumdar has dealt with the steps taken to formulate a regular series of meditation commencing with its elementary stages to advanced Vipassana meditation forms. He has quoted examples of some of the criminally minded convicts who had by regular and committed meditation exercises reformed themselves to be normal human beings sans violence and vindictiveness. Of course, those who had not wilfully cultivated the meditation - practices could not achieve the desired result.

Our own prison welfare authorities too could emulate the good example set by the Indian authorities to conscientiously carry out such meditation programmes at least in the major prison houses and hope for the best in their endeavours.

The term used to identify the News Week story as "Nirvana" is a misnormer. "Regeneration of peaceful conduct behind bars" - or some such suitable epithet could have been used to name the story. By Nirvana what scholars specify is a lofty state of total &emdash; total emancipation from all mental and physical defilements of the human entity where pristine purity of existence is envisaged or as some others believe, it could be a state of non existence of the generally known physical qualities.

Nirvana cannot be achieved behind bars in restricted cells without freedom for indepth - religious realisation. What has been achieved, in this context is the palpable softening of - an earlier violent conduct and the regeneration of a tractable disposition in the behaviour of some of the prison inmates - by means of limited meditation practices.

R. M. A. B. Dassanayake, Matale

The Island - 2 Oct 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Our Urumaya

The one word 'Urumaya' (inheritance, heritage) has often fascinated me. I as a follower of Jesus Christ, would claim my inheritance spoken of by the writers of the Good News of Jesus Christ. Let me give one such quotation.

"Giving thanks to the Father for having made you worthy to share the inheritance of the Saints in Light. "

I know experientially the value of this claim. The two words Sihala Urumaya when I first encountered as a name of a political party, my reactions were of a mixed one. Urumaya - a word that had a sacred connotation for me, to be now associated with the muck that is party politics in Sri Lanka was negatively speaking a sacrilege, but the potential for blessing was the positive one that surfaced within me. "Blessing upon blessing" is the Urumaya of this country of over well nigh 2,500 years that should be claimed and not allowed to lie fallow and disappear from the face of this lovely isle.

The word "Sihala" conjured up images of a people whose country bore the name Sinhale once upon a time (not of a particular race). Naturally Urumaya seen in this context would mean the inheritance of all its people, whatever ethnic group they belonged to. However, the image of a people who could boast of a way of life that can be a challenge to any, in any part of the world, appeared stark and clear. Let me share with you an experience of mine. 

"I remember the day as a young seminarian in a small group, in the early fifties, walking into a Buddhist village, exhausted after having trekked close on 15 - 2O miles on a hilly terrain. Our request was only for a little water to drink, we were served with the most refreshing king-coconuts. One of my pals, before we parted, offered the poor villager a 'santhosam'. The mildly expressed riposte hit me right on my eyes. A blinding, but an enlightening shot. Let me repeat what he said, in his own words.

"You are our guest, how can we accept this" 

It was a death-resurrection experience for me. Buddhism did it. And today! Yes today, it is still valid in spite of all the 'isms' we have and are importing !

I am a Catholic priest. I am happy to be one. I like to say, 'give Buddhism a chance' in this country once again. When I say Buddhism, I mean the liberative core experience shared by the Buddha and not the 'religion' with all the enslaving accretions that selfish man had attached to it."

Buddhism was given a chance in this small island, once upon a time. An experience that me all can be proud of. A lot of it.

- Respect for life, even for the insignificant ant.

- Respect for elders

- Worship of parents

- Simple life style (Alpeichathavaya)

- Tolerance of other ethnic groups and religions

- Seemingly 'patriarchal' but the mother was the 'Buddha' of the home

- Communal life, a challenge to the 'individualism' of today

- And more, and more and more" (1st January 1998 - Daily News)

It was a way of life, for the most part nurtured by (call it aspiration, a wish, a hope, an expectation or blessing).

It was a way of life that was characterised by the four Brahma Viharas - Maithreya, Karuna, Muditha and Upeksha.

It was a way of life that was primarily communal, though for economic reasons grouped into what currently carries the tag - caste. It was community life that brought people together in an environment for mutual help, support and cultivation of say, the pancha seela. The caste system of this Urumaya I take it, was not that oppressive or hugely belittling of the supposed to be low castes. Though such like negative aspects did prevail, because of the ordering of its economic and administrative life, but as an overall way of life, that revolved round the Dagoba, the pansala and the Wewa, it did provide a life that was free from want. Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, were taken care of, while the life of the people was in perfect harmony with the environment according to the locality they lived in. What an Urumaya this, that could be claimed, promoted and made relevant to meet the needs of our people today in the 2000 millennium! It is my contention that a people stuffed into a political and economic system that makes the poor poorer and rich richer and makes close upon 30% live on the verge of destitution, could be liberated by having recourse to this 'Urumaya'. We are getting more and more lost in the glitter of the various types of ideologies that have been ruinously forced upon us. I find myself often amused when I watch the programmes in the electronic media where our great leaders peddle their ideologies to the benefit of none, but themselves or their kith and kin, henchmen and party loyalists. Heretofore I maintain that this Urumaya has had its inspiration from the Buddha Dhamma. I want to posit with all the conviction that I could muster, that I am indeed proud of being an inheritor. I wish that the people of this country whatever race, ethnic group or religious persuasion, claim it as theirs and not of a particular race or group. May this Urumaya be further enriched by the inheritance that may be very very specific to any ethnic group. Then, we have a country and people so blessed that they will not be clamouring for and murdering one another for 'Rights' but for the good life for all.

[ Note: Political comments made by the writer were deleted. -Web Master ]

We repeat to 'Turn around to the Dhamma' is our call, however difficult or foolish the whole enterprise may sound or appear to be. The time, the place, the way we shall deem opportune and proper after prayer and a communal discernment process.

May I, in my fondness for paradoxes, hold both idealism and realism in both my hands together and call on for the establishment of a few Dharmic people, Spiriual Men of stature preferably lay, drawn from the four great Dhamma of Sri Lanka, to be an indispensable advisory council to political parties and politicians.

To be The Dharma Dveepaya is our Urumaya.

by Fr. Siri Oscar Abayaratne

The Island - 10 Dec 00

[ LETTERS INDEX Page-4 ]

..Jesus mysteries, Buddha mysteries - a reply

I refer to Mr. Jude Grey's article on the "Jesus Mysteries, Buddha Mysteries" appearing as a 'Point of View' in The Island of November. In particular he has seen to make fun of various events in the Buddha's life. Particularly, he seems to want to belittle the Buddha by magnifying a few events in a long, illustrious life while declaiming Jesus Christ as a very ordinary person, despite a life filled with miracles from beginning to end. I have not followed the original debate but I would like to respond to Mr. Grey's scorn filled remarks at the end.

First of all, Mr. Grey makes fun of the birth of Prince Siddhartha. If Mr. Grey would really like to get technical, the Buddha cannot be born anymore. It is the Bodhisattva who was born as Prince Siddhartha. His first words were, to refresh Mr. Jude Grey's memory were:

"Aggo hammasmi lokassa, Jetto hammasmi lokassa, Setto hammasmi lokassa

Ayamanthi ma jathi natthi thani, punabbhavo"

The events described have at times been argued as being exultation, at other times explained by saying that he was carrying over the knowledge and consciousness of all his previous births. Whatever the events, Prince Siddhartha was born in a very human manner. If Mr. Grey would like to quibble about miraculous births, I don't believe we need go further than the immaculate conception. Now that really was miraculous.

Secondly, if the angels heralded the birth of Christ who was the Son of a God in perpetual struggle with the almighty demon himself, Satan, why could not the Buddha have preached sermons to assemblies of gods and demons? If their existence is not miraculous in the time of Christ, why should it be any less in the time of the Buddha, several hundred years earlier?

The third and fourth events were not miracles. They were the results of compassion, a trait available to all human beings. The elephant and Angulimala were both calmed by the serene aura of the Buddha. He did not exude hate or disgust. Indeed, he showed much more compassion to a psychopathic killer than Jesus Christ showed to the greedy money lenders, who I believe, were chased out with a whip.

Fifthly, Mr. Grey has problems with the Buddha's travel through the air without external means of propulsion. Frankly, I have the same problem with Jesus Christ's walk on water. Whatever was powering him must have been what was powering the Buddha. And surely, Mr. Grey can understand that there was no need for air traffic control at that time several hundred years before Christ. There really was not that much aerial traffic.

On the last point, again, the Buddha was not involved in the "miracle", the Naga King chose of his own accord to pay respect to a great man. Mr. Jude Grey has a problem with the protective hood of a large snake. I have a problem with the promise of a protective wing of a being I can't see.

The Buddha's "miracles" were few and far between. Jesus Christ's list is endless: he was born of a miraculous conception, he raised a man from the dead, he gave sight back to the blind, made the lame walk, walked on water, fed a multitude on a loaf of bread and two fish turned water into wine, and finally after his death, rose up from the dead. All this, yet Mr. Jude Grey says Jesus Christ was not like the Buddha, to whom miracles were a daily occurrence.

Jesus Christ, Mr. Grey says, performed miracles to demonstrate his divine ability. Yet paradox abounds when Mr. Grey says his life's emphasis was on his humanness. The Buddha, on the other hand, forbade the performing of any miracles, precisely because he did not want the people to see either him or his disciples as divine. His emphasis was that a man's salvation, his own heaven or hell was in his own hands, and that any person can attain Nirvana if he follows the right way.

Off the top of my head, I know very little of the miracles of the lives of either, but I do know they both left great teachings, the center of both being compassion. The "miracles", whether they were or were not are incidents, and therefore incidental to the real landmarks - Their philosophies and teachings.

Mr. Jude Grey's almost vitriolic and patronizing attack seems to be a far cry from the words of the Son of God. Does he believe the Son of God's existence is so weak that he needs to resort to insulting other religions and their teachers? Or is he trying to erase the sins of a people (from whose language his name comes) that good Christians despise as having crucified Christ.

To quote from the article that appeared right above Mr. Grey's article, "There is chaos. There is hatred. But there is also hope". Don't destroy that hope, Mr. Grey.

And always remember the Golden Rule: do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.

by R. Ariyaratne

The Island - 12 Dec 00

Journal

News

Letters

Books

Personalities

Articles Index

©Aloka 99-02

Mail to Aloka

| Home | Letters | Journal | News | Books |

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1