SHOULD WE REFORM THE BUDDHISM WE PRACTISE?

With reluctance, caution and innocent ignorance I approach to respond to Dr. Upul Wijawardhana’s above captioned article, as the President Maithripala Sirisena, it is reported, has said when declaring the Tripitaka as a national heritage, those Sangha and laymen should be punished for defaming or for not practising what is said in the Tripitaka. This stricture of President Maithripala Sirisena, perhaps he is not aware, runs against the preaching of Buddha as in the Kalama Sutta, where Buddha says ‘‘Do not blindly accept religious teachings, just because they are claimed to be true and passive acceptance, but rather with constant questioning and personal testing to identify the truth”.  

There have been several letters by Dr. Upul Wijawardhana, in his usual style, pointing out absurd practices, rituals and fabricated stories on the life of Buddha Gauthama and certainly not the sublime Dhamma. His above captioned piece, appearing in your issue of 20th March, needs few comments.  

He states, ‘‘According to scriptures, the Buddha in his sojourn through Samsara, is supposed to have committed nearly every sin, but one that he never committed is to lie. I disagree. According to Buddhist legends, it is said, when the Devas invited the Buddha in Thauthisa, to come down and preach the Dhamma. He accepted and came down to earth, after satisfying the five conditions -Pas Maha Balum. On the day of his birth, He is said to have walked on seven lotus flowers and proclaimed to the world that He is the greatest and will never be born again.- Aggohamasmin Lokassa, Jettohamasmin Locassa, Settohamasmin Locassa, -Ayamanthi, Majathi, Nattijati Punabbawo ‘- My question is why did he struggle to attain Buddhahood – Enlightenment – if he knew the way of attaining Nibbana and preach what he knew without inflicting physical pains and lead an ascetic life... Isn’t it a lie, may I ask?”   

Another statement he quotes from Prof. M.M.J.Marasighe, ‘‘He lived a simple life, walked bare-footed and followed the age-old ascetic practices of going round for his only meal of the day, if he did not have an invitation’. If He had led a simple life, why did He request Venerable Ananda to make elaborate arrangements for his Parinibbana – To quote from Parinibba Sutta “Then the Venerable said ‘ But how Lord, should they act respecting the body of Thathagatha?’  ‘After the same manner, Ananda as towards the body of a Universal Monarch’, But how Lord, how do they act respecting the body of a Universal Monarch?”   

‘‘The body of a universal monarch, Ananda, is first wrapped round with new linen, and then with teased cotton wool, and so it is done up to five hundred layers of linen and five hundred of cotton wool. When that is done, the body of the Universal Monarch is placed in an iron oil vessel, which is enclosed in another iron vessel, a funeral pyre is built of all kinds of perfumed wood. And so, the body of the Universal Monarch is burned; and at a crossroads a stupa is raised for the Universal Monarch …”  If this elaborate, expensive arrangements were made, could we say Buddha Gauthama led a simple austere life? It is also said there were several Bhikkhus in attendance to carry out His commands and Venerable Ananda was the chief. In Parinibbana Sutta it is said that a Buddhist monk Upawana was fanning Him, when the Devas were coming to pay their respects. Is that simple living? Could the Parinibbana Sutta also be a fabricated story?  

Then it is said Buddha Gauthama on the 3rd week after his attaining Enlightenment – Buddhahood, - in Sathsathiya- He built a golden bridge in the air and walked up and down to prove to Devas that He had attained Enlightenment- Isn’t this egoism?  

The next Dr. UW quite correctly states ‘‘Our Sangha, unashamedly, discouraged the re-establishment of Mehenini Sasana. They insult the Buddha by stating that even the Buddha was reluctant to ordain women”. The worst is the Vinaya rules placed on Bhikkhunis where it says– to mention only two – A Bhikkhuni should stand up and worship Buddhist monks. They should not argue with monks and accept whatever said. This clearly shows Bhikkhunis were made subservient to monks. Surely, Buddha Gauthama did not wish it to be so. 
These Vinaya rules have been framed by monks to claim superiority and at the same time debar the Bhikkhunis from running temples, which have become the domain of monks to carry out for self-interests, also the fear of Bhikkhunis taking over temples, which if they do, will be better for the fostering and propagating Buddhism.  

It is also said Buddha Gauthama refused, thrice, ordaining women when Prajapathi Gothami pleaded. However, as a last resort she had approached Venerable Ananda to intervene, which the Venerable did to convince. Does this not show, Venerable Ananda was more understanding and superior to Buddha Gauthama?  

Dr. UW, makes mention of the scholar monk Buddhagosa who came to Sri Lanka to study the Tripitaka and then went back to India to translate same to Pali. This is where the distortion took place. Buddhagosa, perhaps, to convert or accept Buddhism by Hindus and Brahmins had included Brahmin/Hindu customs, rites, rituals and beliefs into Buddhism, thus distorting the noble teachings of the Blessed One. 

For instance, the offering of Betel to the Sangha to gain merit by reciting the prayer Nagavalli Dalu Petan, Chunnapuasamauthan…Surely the Thathagatha did not chew betel. This is an Indian custom and also offering betel leaves to invite people for any function. The other is offering of flowers which is a Hindu custom. It is said in Parinibbana Sutta, when Venerable Ananda asked the Blessed One how he should be worshipped, He had said, ‘‘Yet it is not thus, Ananda, that the Thathagatha is respected, venerated,, esteemed, worshipped and honoured in the highest degree, But, Ananda, Bhikkhu or Bhikkhuni, layman, laywoman, abides by the Dhamma, lives uprightly in the Dhamma, walk in the way of the Dhamma , it is by such a one that the Thathagatha is respected. Venerated, esteemed, worshipped and honoured in the highest degree.” 

It is therefore clear the Buddha never wanted His followers to worship him but his doctrine the Dhamma. Surely, if offering flowers to show gratitude, then Buddha Gauthama would have brought flowers from Thauthisa Bavana or from the Himalayan forests and offered flowers to the Bo-tree which gave him shelter when attaining Enlightenment – Buddhahood. Instead, it is said He gazed at the Bo-tree for a week [ Sath Sathiya]  

It is therefore clear the Buddha never wanted His followers to worship him but his doctrine the Dhamma

Dr.UW says ‘‘ Buddhagosa is said to have been responsible for synthesising and translating a large number of commentaries written in Sinhala to Pali Canon. These Sinhala commentaries were burnt after translation.” What intrigues me, did the Chief monk of Maha Viharaya, Polonnaruwa, allow the original Tripitaka to be taken away by Buddhagosa to India. Surely not. If so where is the original text of Tripitaka?. In all ignorance and innocence may I know, if Tripitaka in Sinhala was available at Maha Vihara, Polonnaruwa, what was the necessity to write the Tripitaka at Aluvihara at a later date?.   

Dr. UW should be praised for his valiant effort, to expose the corruption of Buddhism and the life of Buddha Gauthama by our Buddhist monks and Buddhist fanatics and to educate the devotees the true Buddha Gauthama and His Dhamma. Those learned, intelligent and educated will certainly appreciate his bold approach. But will our Buddhist monks stop teaching the small children in Dhamma Schools, these fictitious stories and which will, when they reach the age of understanding , see the absurdity, give up not pursuing the real Dhamma?.  
Hope Dr. UW will carry on undeterred in his endeavour to reform Buddhism we practice today, for the benefit of future generations. It is best that young educated Buddhist monks are enrolled in this pursuit to safeguard and cleanse the hallowed name of Buddha Siddhartha Gauthama, and Dhamma in its true form.   

Dr. UW should be praised for his valiant effort, to expose the corruption of Buddhism and the life of Buddha Gauthama by our Buddhist monks and Buddhist fanatics