Stories and true Buddha Dhamma: What do scholars advise?

• One thing about the old Vidyodaya University and Rev. Wachissara was that they deliberately refrained from calling it ‘Buddhism’ because any ‘ism’ is a dogma that should be accepted without critical review. For them, what was taught by the Buddha was Buddha Dhamma and it was this term that was used by the scholars of that era at the university.
• Rev. Wachissara’s critical approach to learning was in line with the learning philosophy pronounced by the university’s founder, Rev. Soratha. It is reported that this learned Buddhist monk had advised the first batch of university students that they should be ‘critical, probing, and challenging the orthodoxy’

Conforming to the tradition

Thus, I heard:

Recently I overheard two lady devotees of the Buddha having an intense conversation on a hotly debated current event in Sri Lanka, the alleged insultation to Buddhist tradition by a young lady stand-up comedian. 

One of the devotees in conversation was in her mid-seventies and the other in early eighties. The devotee in her mid-seventies has been a faithful practitioner of the Dhamma preached by the Great Master. She had devoted a great deal of her time for listening on the internet to discourses delivered by leading Buddhist preachers of the day and, therefore, was well informed of the crux of Dhamma. She had been sharing the virtues of those discourses with friends and all others who had been interested in listening to her. The other devotee was not so versed in the Dhamma but had a patient ear to listen to her. 

I heard the knowledgeable devotee telling the other: “You know this woman who is notorious for relating vulgar stories to amuse her audiences has openly defamed the Buddha and insulted the Buddhists by calling the Prince Siddhartha the ‘lad of Suddhodhana’ and ridiculing the miracle he performed by walking on seven lotuses immediately after being born. She has not only defamed the Buddha but also undermined the rich Buddhist culture.” 

The other devotee was listening without arguing. Emboldened by this captive listener, the first devotee went on presenting her view: “It is right for the Police to arrest her and institute legal action against this wretched woman who would have obviously been paid by some foreign elements to destroy Buddhism. She and those elements are mistaken because no one can destroy Buddhism as it is above all those religions in the world.”

The other devotee nodded her head in agreement. 

I do not find the line of their argument unusual because that was how even I had been instructed at the college and at the Sunday Dhamma School those days. Therefore, they were just conforming to what they had been told. 

Wisdom of the Founder of Vidyodaya University

But it took me back to mid-1960s when I started my university career in public administration at the old Vidyodaya University. The Vice Chancellor at that time was the world-renowned Buddhist scholar Rev. Professor Walpola Rahula. The University was founded by an equally renowned Buddhist scholar Rev. Weliwitiye Sri Soratha. In his wisdom, Rev. Soratha had made it compulsory for all students at the university, irrespective of the stream of education whether it is in arts, science, or management, to pass two papers, one in English and the other in Buddhist Civilisation, at both the first year and at the final year. To proceed to the second year, all students should pass these two papers in the first year and to get the degree, they should pass them at the final year. Even if they have scored sufficient marks to get a first class in the other relevant papers, they will not graduate from the university unless they have passed in these two papers. 

Hence, it was a real agony for students at the time but in hindsight, I consider it as a blessing. This curriculum involving compulsory English and Buddhist Civilisation continued till 1972 when it was abolished after the Vidyodaya University was redesignated the Vidyodaya Campus of the newly formed integrated University of Ceylon, an unsuccessful university reform done by the then Sirimavo Bandaranaike Government. That was because as in today, she had done it without consulting academia or experts on university education.  

Mandatory learning of Buddhist Civilisation by all students

The subject called Buddhist Civilisation at the old Vidyodaya University covered Buddha Dhamma, comparative religion especially those religions that prevailed in ancient India, and how the Buddhist culture evolved both in India and in ancient Lanka. The treatment of the subject was at a higher level in the final year than in the first year. The main textbook used to teach Buddha Dhamma was ‘What the Buddha Taught’ by Rev. Walpola Rahula, who incidentally happened to be the Vice Chancellor of the university at that time. Our lectures were conducted by another renowned Buddhist scholar of the day, the University’s Head of the Department of Theravada Buddha Dhamma Rev. Professor Kotagama Wachissara. Rev. Wachissara was known for his critical approach to teaching religion.

It is Buddha Dhamma and not Buddhism

One thing about the old Vidyodaya University and Rev. Wachissara was that they deliberately refrained from calling it ‘Buddhism’ because any ‘ism’ is a dogma that should be accepted without critical review. For them, what was taught by the Buddha was Buddha Dhamma and it was this term that was used by the scholars of that era at the university.

The stand-up comedian  

I recall that the lectures were conducted at the only available spacious hall at the university, named the Bandaranaike Hall, a tribute paid to the late Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike who had been instrumental in setting up the Vidyodaya University by upgrading the centuries-old Vidyodaya Pirivena. Rev. Wachissara who had joined the new university as a lecturer had been a teacher at the Ananda College after completing his doctorate in Buddhist studies at the University of London. He was driven around in a small baby Austin car though he was a giant of a six-footer’s dimension. 

He also walked around barefoot. Students had aptly nicknamed him ‘maha kalu sinhalaya’ or Big Dark Sinhalese not out of any disrespect but full of love and affection. He used to walk to the podium of the Bandaranaike Hall without any lecture notes and deliver the lectures for hours, keeping the audience's attention glued to the giant figure behind the podium. He kept the students with him by sending them into waves of laughter continuously by relating humour stories whilst delivering the lectures. Some of these stories were about the miraculous performances of Prince Siddhartha depicted in the Buddha Charitha such as walking on seven lotus flowers immediately after he was born. In this sense, Rev. Wachissara was a highly-rated ‘stand-up comedian’.

Need for being critical, probing, and challenging

Rev. Wachissara’s critical approach to learning was in line with the learning philosophy pronounced by the university’s founder, Rev. Soratha. It is reported that this learned Buddhist monk had advised the first batch of university students that they should be ‘critical, probing, and challenging the orthodoxy’. This philosophy, the foundation of scientific inquiry, has been beautifully incorporated into the anthem of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura, the successor to the Vidyodaya University, by one of its best products, Senior Professor Sunil Ariyaratna. Rev. Wachissara was simply following this rich tradition. 

Removing miracles from true Buddha Dhamma

He treated us as his children and addressed us also in the same way. He said in his stoic voice: “Children, the true Buddha Dhamma is different from what is being posited in literature which has been highly influenced by the extant Brahmic understanding of the world. Therefore, there have been many miracles incorporated into the Buddha’s character as well as his early childhood. It is said that Prince Siddhartha, immediately after being born, had walked on seven lotus flowers and pronounced his attaining Buddhahood in the future. This is very unusual for any human being. If we don’t remove these unbelievable stories relating to the Buddha from what we learn, we can’t spread the Buddha Dhamma in the Western world which will start laughing at us.”

 In this way, he put true Dhamma into our heads.

In other words, it is not through repressive measures or insultations that the critics of the Buddha or his Dhamma should be answered, but through friendly and constructive debate. These debates are encouraged by the Buddha as well as by the Buddhist traditions.

The Letchworth experience

Many years later in the early 2000s, I had the occasion to personally experience what he said in the late 1960s when my elder brother who was a Nayaka Thero and I established a Buddhist temple in Letchworth in the UK. A young Buddhist monk who had just graduated in Buddhist studies with honours from the University of Sri Jayewardenepura was installed as the head of this temple. 

Whenever I visited the UK, I made it a point to go and see this young Buddhist monk in his new temple. I was so happy to see his progress every time I went there. He had been spreading the message of the Buddha not only to those who have embraced the faith but also to those who have been practising other religions. 

When I spoke of his achievements in a congratulatory tone, he confided in me about his greatest difficulty. “There are high schools here which teach comparative religion as a part of the curriculum. When they came to know that I was here representing the Buddha, I was invited to deliver guest lectures. They were very inquisitive and wanted to know Buddha’s view on things like Einstein’s relativity or Darwin’s evolutionary theory. I knew what the Buddha had taught but didn’t know those new scientific concepts. I had to learn all of them anew. Also, they didn’t accept all those miraculous stories relating to Prince Siddhartha or the Buddha. I had to be careful not to talk about them at that audience. When I taught them the true Buddha Dhamma, they were very happy,” he said. Several years later, this young monk returned to lay life after getting the consent of the devotees of the temple but the temple at Letchworth is continuing its mission of spreading Buddha Dhamma among the residents. 

Value of free inquiry

Emphasising the value of free inquiry, Rev. Walpola Rahula in his 1932 book Sathyodaya, translated into English in 2019, says as follows: “The general approach to Buddhist teaching in our country today mirrors the episode of suppressing free inquiry by a saint like Saint Francis who had admonished a student for trying to be better than he. The students of Dhamma rarely challenge tradition, religious scriptures, or a viewpoint of the teacher. The teachers too tend to consider the students as subordinates. Diverse views and opinions are not usually tolerated. This prevents the students from exploring the teaching with a critical and inquiring mind” (p 69). 

Elaborating on this point, he further says that it is natural to have conflicting viewpoints on any subject including religion. He says: “If someone is unduly disturbed when faced with differing opinions, it reflects the person’s inadequate disposition.” Therefore, a chief Buddhist monk has no right to summarily overrule an opinion of an ordinary Buddhist who has studied the scriptures. Both have studied the same Dhamma and had had no opportunity to discuss the same with the Buddha. Rev. Rahula concludes that accepting anything in the scriptures without subjecting it to critical analysis is not in order.

Docile Sri Lankan society

Rev Rahula also notes the following in Sathyodaya: “The Sri Lankan society remains in a docile state in relation to exploring and probing the truth. Almost everyone, from the knowledgeable scholar down to the man in the street, accepts traditions and whatever written in books with much reverence. Little effort is made to validate and establish the truth. Unless a personal loss is envisaged, seeking the truth is of insignificance. Anything written in Pali is acknowledged as Buddha’s teaching without debate. No one inquires if our customs and views are in line with Dhamma. No one bothers to reflect why our ethical and moral values have declined despite our noble traditions.” (p 75). This was his observation about society in the 1930s, but it seems it is valid even in today’s Sri Lanka. 

Buddha’s advice to Bhikkus: Not to get offended by criticisms nor euphoric by praises

What Rev. Rahula has remarked here has been presaid by the Buddha in the Brahmajaala Sutta in the Digha Nikaya. Advising the Bhikkus on how they should respond to critics and praisers of the Buddha, he has said that the Bhikkus should not get offended by critical remarks made by anyone about the Buddha. If they get offended, it is not good for them. Instead, they should explain to those critics that because of these reasons, those criticisms levelled against the Buddha are not valid. Similarly, they should not be overjoyed by the praises that people will shower on the Buddha. Such euphoria is not good for them. 

Instead, they should examine whether those praises are genuine and valid. If they are, then, the Bhikkus should explain to them that under these circumstances those praises are correct and under these circumstances, they are not valid. What this means is that if anyone feels that some remarks about the Buddha or the Dhamma are defamatory, they should explain matters to them without seeking the legal powers of governments to suppress them. 

In other words, it is not through repressive measures or insultations that the critics of the Buddha or his Dhamma should be answered, but through friendly and constructive debate. These debates are encouraged by the Buddha as well as by the Buddhist traditions. It is an integral part of the Buddhist Civilisation that was taught to us in the old Vidyodaya University.

Honouring opponents in a debate

But how should the parties in a debate be treated? By hurling insults at them? Or by hurting them physically? The answer has been given by the leading Buddhist monarch, Emperor Asoka, in one of his rock inscriptions. The foresightful and learned emperor has dictated that when conducting debates and tackling disputations, “the opponents should be duly honoured in every way on all occasions”. He has further dictated that “anyone who upholds his religion and looks at all others disparagingly does the biggest harm to his own religion”. These words of wise counsel by Emperor Asoka should be chanted by every Buddhist like a mantra. 

Do stories matter?

Stories matter. Oxford-educated historian Yuval Noah Harari says that cultures are built not on scientific records but on stories. Harvard psychologist David McClelland with evidence has proved that heroic stories told to children by their mothers and grandmothers motivate them to go for high achievement targets in later life. We as children believed in every word in those stories and also acted on them but when we gained adulthood, we realised the difference between fiction and reality. If someone believes in those stories after adulthood, it is demonstrative of his immaturity. A nation with such immature people cannot prosper. 

When Martin Wickramasinghe fictionalised the life of the Buddha in Bavatharanaya in the early 1970s, many leading figures prevailed upon the then Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike to ban the novel and put Wickramasinghe behind bars. Like a true stateswoman, she rejected those calls. I have written about it in a previous article available at: 

https://www.ft.lk/columns/Sirimavo-B-s-statesmanship-through-Eric-J-de-Silva-s-eyes/4-743894 .  

Wise counsel of Buddhist Scholars

The Buddhist scholars who preached the virtue of tolerance and the importance of critical review of everything that one finds in the world like Weliwitiye Sri Soratha, Kotagama Wachissara, and Walpola Rahula are no longer with us. But their wise counsel should be practised by all Sri Lankans when handling matters that are not acceptable to them. The opponents should be defeated not by causing physical harm or subjecting them to repression. They should be defeated by subjecting them to critical review. 

The current fiasco involving a stand-up comedian should also be handled through constructive debate and not through repressive measures. Why cut off a finger to rid it of pain when the same can be attained by rubbing a soothing oil? It will permit a great learning opportunity to extant Sri Lankan society. 

In my view, Sri Lanka should not miss this opportunity. 

(The writer is a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, can be reached at [email protected] )