I don't even know where to start with this one. Check out this article on the Buddhist Channel site about Athurliye Rathana, Sri Lanka's "Parliament Monk."
Rathana is a celebrated figure in this predominantly Buddhist nation, where monks are cherished for their spiritual guidance. But he is known for more than just his religious leadership. Dubbed the Parliament Monk and the War Monk by the Sri Lankan press, he is a legislator who has pushed for the use of military force to end this island nation's 25-year civil war, which has left 70,000 dead and displaced nearly a half-million people at its height.
I've said it before, but I suppose it bears repeating. According to the Tipitaka, monks are not really supposed to be involved in politics. The relevant sections are in DN 2:
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these — talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.
...
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to running messages and errands for people such as these — kings, ministers of state, noble warriors, priests, householders, or youths [who say], 'Go here, go there, take this there, fetch that here' — he abstains from running messages and errands for people such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.
Also see Buddhist Monastic Code II, Chapter 10. As stated in a previous post, it also appears impossible to maintain a monk's standard of virtue as a ruler.
I can sympathize with people in Sri Lanka wanting to get the civil war over with, but it's distasteful enough for a "king" or regular politician to be pushing for military action to "finish off" a conflict. Assuming this is even necessary, pushing for violence to end a conflict seems to me like a layperson's duty, not the duty of a monk. People are going to find enough reasons to kill each other without religious leaders encouraging it in any way shape or form. If I were a monk I'd either be discouraging violence or remaining silent.
Anyway, I have to wonder if this means that Sri Lanka is going to go the way of Tibet with monks running the government like this.
2 comments:
It seems like samanas in certain places have acted in very unskillful ways that are in blatant violation of the way of life the Buddha set out for them. This one is quite remarkable. I can't imagine him actually taking office in the first place and then pressing for military action. I wonder if any of his fellows in the robes have chastised him for his outrageous views/practices?
I take heart that there are members of the laity and the ordained sangha that still hold true to the spirit and the letter of the Buddhas teachings. The unfortunate thing is the image that the world sees when they think of Buddhism will be tainted by the unskillful actions and wrong views of those that are supposed to be upholding the noble lineage as set down by the Buddha.
It would seem intuitive that a monk should not have the right to take up a seat in government, or maybe even have the right to vote. The fact that monks in Sri Lanka arguably have more political power than anywhere else in Southeast Asia seems to be one of the factors leading to the downward spiral in which the country currently finds itself. Sinhalese militarists will argue that the Sinhalese identity and Buddhist faith need to be protected, and that, in the past, kings used force to protect country and faith. If they stick to that thinking, then the carnage which gripped medieval SEAsia is bound to repeat itself. Unfortunately, and like the conflict in Tibet, the civil war in Sri Lanka is a messy, complex, tangled issue--everyone claims to be a victim, blaming the other side, and there is no trust anywhere, not even within the Sri Lankan government, let alone between the SLG and the LTTE. Sri Lankan culture has been suffused with violence, and with no one, not even an ineffectual Scandinavian monitoring mission, there to document human rights abuses, the situation looks bleak indeed.
Post a Comment