CAT'S EYE AND THE BHIKKUNI SASANA
(98 June 24)
It is good to know that the Tamil racists also read the internet edition of the "Kalaya" published by the Chintana Parshadaya. On the seventeenth of June in the Cat's Eye column, in "The Island" written by a NGO personality well-known in the seminar circuit and in the international centres for various studies in Colombo, and who happens to be a Tamil racist and a women's liberation activist as well, has referred to Re-establishment of the Bhikkuni Sasana, a short article published in the "Kalaya" of eighteenth March. The Cat's Eye column is published without a by line and it is not clear whether we could assume that Cat's Eye is the pseudo name of the writer as well. With or without pseudo or real names it is not difficult to identify the authoress of the column. She is known as a Hindu, but definitely not a Radha. After all Radha did not complain of male chauvinism to Krishna or anybody else.
The authoress quotes a few paragraphs from the "Kalaya" article and then asks certain questions, decides to reply to some of them having come to her own conclusions. However she does not name the website, as probably she does not want to give publicity to "Kalaya", but calls it the internet website of the ultranationalists. The words like ultranationalist, fundamentalist, which are not even properly defined concepts, are used by the westerners and their agents in this part of the world to discredit those who can think independently of the west and especially those who work against the cultural colonialism of the west.
The response of Cat's Eye to the "Kalaya" article is as follows:
(1) The opposition to the bhikkuni sasana is by the extreme nationalist strand of Sinhala Buddhist opinion and by some Mahanayake Theros. ( para 2 of her article)
(2) Oppositions on the grounds of the Vinaya or the discipline are technical objections and quibblings about rules of no merit made by patriarchs who are looking for any excuse to exclude women from religious and no doubt secular space. (para 4)
(3) How can fundamentalists who by definition must believe in the pure original teachings of the Buddha take a stand against the order of bhikkunis, established by the Buddha and introduced to Sri Lanka by the Emperor Asoka's daughter, Sangamitta? (para 5)
(4) If "Tamil racists" are behind the bhikkuni Sasana movement this is the first we've heard of it! May be we missed the LTTE statement supporting the bhikkunis. (para 8)
(5) How do bhikkunis through NGOs weaken the bhikku Sasana ? (para 8)
(6) What have western powers or NGOs got to do with promoting bhikkunis and weakening the bhikku Sasana? (para 9)
(7) If the bhikkus are the "guardians" of the Sinhala nation why can't the bhikkunis be the same? (para 9)
(8) Could it be that the Sinhala nationalist fear that in true Buddhist sprit, bhikkunis might campaign for peace, minority rights and equal rights for women and race awkward questions about cast and male biased in the bhikku Sasana? Or perhaps like today modern women may be ambitious to become Mahanayakes ? Intolerance and bigotry. (para 10)
(9) The idea that only males are the guardians of the nation is a very dangerous one which can only come from the most reactionary and chauvinist quarters what we call extreme Bamunu Matha, meaning obscurantist heavily patriarchal views on women's behaviour and roll in society. (para 11)
(10) That in the name of Buddhism Sinhala ideologues are trying to prevent equal access to the Sasana is incredible if not ludicrous. (para 12)
(11) It has been the practise of patriarchs and bigots over the ages and all religions to blame the ills of society or the decline of the "race" and "nation" on women. (para 12)
My response to the above appears below.
(1) It is not some Mahanayake Theros, but all the Mahanayake Theros. The vast majority of the Sinhala Buddhists including the upasikas, not the NGO women, are against this move. Could Dr. Neelan Thiruchelvam or some other parliamentarian known to the authoress request the government to conduct a referendum on this? Tamil racists and NGO's brand the Sinhala majority position as the extreme nationalist strand.
(2) The Vinaya ruling on the requirement of five bhikkunis is by the Buddha. No Buddhist will agree to exclude women from religious, secular space or even cyberspace for that matter. What is being debated is a Vinaya ruling and the Buddhists need no instructions from the NGO's on these matters. After all this country produced not only the first woman Prime Minister but also the first woman executive President in the world.
(3) & (10) As mentioned earlier fundamentalist is a western idea used against those who can think independently of the west. In any case Buddhists are not against a bhikkuni sasana in general. The objections are against the establishment of a bhikkuni sasana at this time in the history of the sasana. The cat's eye cannot see these important differences.
(4) What is stated in the "Kalaya" article is that all the NGO's and the Sinhala groups working with the Tamil racists are firmly behind the bhikkuni sasana movement. It is true that some of these NGO people are Tamil racists. However the Tamil racists in general may or may not be involved with the bhikkuni sasana movement but those in the NGO's and the Sinhala groups working with the Tamil racists are very much interested. It is not necessary for one to navigate through the Tamil net looking for statements by the LTTE on the bhikkuni sasana. Just read the Cat's Eye column.
(5) & (6) These are the most important questions and they need a somewhat longer reply. The western powers from about the sixteenth century have been dominating the rest of the world politically, culturally and economically. They want to see that finally there is only one culture in the world. While paying lip service to the other cultures they are doing their best to destroy them. This is being achieved through the system of education they have imposed on us, the mass media, the political parties, the NGO's etc. We have been trained to see the world in their eyes. All the theories and the concepts are created in the west and all we have to do is to just follow them. They have not given up their worldview but they want us to give up ours.
In Sri Lanka the British very early found out that the bhikkus were the most formidable opponents they had to face. It is on record the methods the British adopted to weaken the bhikku sasana. (Rev. Walpola Rahula gives some of these in "The Heritage of the Bhikku"). Once the bhikku sasana is weakened or destroyed the Sinhala culture and the Sinhala nation will find its downfall.
What is found in Sri Lanka is the Sinhala bhikku sasana and not a bhikku sasana in general. This sasana though established by the Arhant Mahinda was really nurtured by the Mahavihara bhikkus. Trevor Ling in his book "The Buddha" describes the Buddhist state that was established after the arrival of the Arhanth Mahinda, on the lines of the Asoka state. We conjecture that it was really the Mahavira bhikkus who improved vastly on this model to form the Sinhala Buddhist state.
The Sinhala bhikkus did not give up the lay life only with the idea of attaining Nibbana. They were the guardians of the Sinhala nation. Some bhikkus would have been "interested" only in Nibbana, but in general they were the full time "cadre" that looked after the interests of the nation. A modern day "intellectual Buddhist" (another tribe created by the westerners) may object to this interpretation, but they are interested only in the "Dhamma" and not the Sinhala Buddhist culture. If Cat's Eye is looking for the so- called fundamentalists then she should be interested in the members of this tribe.
The Sinhala Buddhists do not want a bhikkuni sasana on the model of the mahayana. The mahayana culture (not only the Dhamma) has relevance to the societies in which mahayana is practised. In certain mahayana sects the bhikkus can get married. One can argue that it is a fundamental right of an individual and nobody can deny him or her that right. But even fundamental rights are relative to the societies and the westerners cannot impose their fundamental rights on the Sinhala society and the Sinhala bhikkus, which is a subset of the Sinhala society. The Sinhala bhikku has to be a full time member of the "cadre" mentioned earlier. Bhikkuni sasana at this juncture is not in the interests of the Sinhala culture and the Sinhala nation. The NGO's are interested in the so -called rights of the Sinhala women not because they are in sympathy with them but because they want to reduce the bhikkus to the state of the ganinnanselas who had interests other than that of the Sinhala nation.
(7) In theory they can be. But in practise we all know that except for a few like Cat's Eye, in general the women are not as interested as the men in politics. Even among the men not many are interested in politics.
(8) No. There is no Buddhist spirit in the abstract. A Buddhist spirit in the abstract exists only in the cyberspaces of the "intellectual Buddhists". We live in a Buddhist society. Peace does not exist in a vacuum. There is no war in the country. If a bhikkuni sasana is established a Sinhala bhikkuni would know that the LTTE has taken up arms against the state and it is the duty of the government to defeat them and protect the state. The question of minority rights does not arise. This again is a concept created by the west, especially by the British. The ethnic communities in Sri Lanka have been demanding power in excess of their population ratios and against the history of the country. The Sinhala women are even more concerned about these than even the Sinhala men as they are more interested in the future of their children. A Sinhala bhikkuni would be familiar with the stories of Vihara maha devi, Soma devi , Samudra devi and the others and would have no hesitation to advise the upasakas to defeat the LTTE. It is very unlikely that a Sinhala bhikkuni would clamour to become a Mahanayake theri, unless of course a NGO woman had become a bhikkuni with that as the sole objective
(9) & (11) The "Kalaya" article nowhere mentions that only the males are the guardians of the Sinhala nation. The Sinhala Buddhists do not blame the ills of society or the decline of the nation women in general. In fact Vihara maha devi is held in the highest esteem by women as well as men, to the annoyance of the NGO women. It is not the fault of the Sinhala men if they cannot have any respect for the NGO women who are really a bamini caste(in the sense of a sect propagating western concepts and theories) in this country. If the Sinhala Buddhists blame Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga it is not due to the fact that she is a woman. They also blame Mr. Mangala Samaraweera notwithstanding the fact that he is a male. In fact Sinhala people will continue to elect women Presidents and Prime Ministers in the future as well.
The Sinhala bhikkus have played a historical role as the guardians of the Sinhala nation. The NGO women want us to forget that fact. The historical role assigned to the NGO men as women by the west is to go against the history of the country.