Sri Lanka: Where “Southern Buddhism”
Rules
Buddhistdoor International Sean Mós 2015-04-30
A
saffron-clad Buddhist monk is one of the most common sights in Sri
Lanka, where the doctrine of the Buddha has been venerated for over
2,000 years. During the early 1980s, however, a different type of
monk could often be seen walking the island’s streets. Foreigners,
they carried a flat-faced drum in one hand and a stick in the
other, which they used to beat the drum as they went along. And
while they also wore saffron robes, these were different in style.
Thus, the curious general public slowly became aware of a school of
Buddhism that had been absent in Sri Lanka since the period of the
Anuradhapura kingdom (377 BCE–1017 CE). Its existence came as
something of a revelation. Eventually, people learned that the
foreigners were Mahayana Buddhist monks, and that they had come to
Sri Lanka from Japan.
The
Anuradhapura period, when the Mahayana tradition commenced in Sri
Lanka, saw some of the greatest Sri Lankan kings, along with the
emergence of some of the foremost archaeological structures to be
built in ancient Ceylon. The era saw the dawn of the two great
schools of Buddhism in Sri Lanka: the Mahavihara and the
Abhayagiriya, named after the respective monasteries where they
flourished. It is well known that while the Mahavihara became the
epicenter of the Theravada tradition, the Abhayagiriya Vihara
eventually became the home of the Mahayana, or more accurately, an
offshoot known as Vaitulyawada. In 410, the Chinese Buddhist monk
Faxian (337–422), who traveled on foot to Sri Lanka, noted in his
travelogue that the pro-Mahayana Abhayagiriya Vihara housed as many
as over 5,000 monks (Beal 1869, 151). This clearly shows that,
while the great Sri Lankan chronicle, the Mahavamsa,
downplays the significance of the Mahayana tradition in Sri Lanka,
it was in fact a well-accepted school of Buddhism, and one which
also attracted royal patronage.
The
Abhayagiriya Vihara was founded by King Vattagamini (r. 89–77 BCE)
during a time in which Theravada popularity was at its height. It
is generally accepted that the Mahayana was brought to Sri Lanka
soon after it was made popular in the Indian subcontinent by
Nagarjuna in the 2nd century. However, the arrival of the Mahayana
tradition did not stand favorably with the orthodox practice of
Buddhism that had existed on the island since Venerable Mahinda
arrived there from India in the 3rd century BCE. By the 9th
century, during the reign of King Sena I (846–66), Vajrayana had
also been introduced to Sri Lanka from eastern India, perhaps
through the goodwill of the Abhayagiriya Vihara monks. Although
both were important for the successful establishment of Buddhism in
Sri Lanka, the Mahavamsa omits the activities of the
Vajrayana and Mahayana schools to a great extent, while recording
almost all the important activities relating to the orthodox
Theravada tradition. Nor does the Mahavamsa make mention
of the existence, much less the construction, of such colossal
archaeological sites as the Mahayana temple Buduruwagala in the
south, which features seven giant statues of
bodhisattvas.
The Mahayana
and Vajrayana schools of Buddhism enjoyed only a relatively brief
existence in Sri Lanka. As the royal patronage and power of the
Mahavihara increased, eventually the unorthodoxy was brought to a
halt. Writing in the 13th century, Jayabahu Dharmakirti states in
his Nikayasamgrahaya (Collection of writings on the books
of the doctrine) that the acceptance of Vajrayana by King Sena I
was like a “grasshopper reaching the flame thinking it is gold
unaware of its danger” (Fernando 1908, 22). It is easy to
understand the condemnation of the Mahayana and Vajrayana
traditions in what was otherwise a largely orthodox Theravada
nation.
Venerable
Swarna of Nepal has been a resident student monk in Sri Lanka for
over eight years. Well versed in the Buddhist doctrine, fluent in
eight languages, and with a degree in psychology, he has some
interesting insights into the current practice of Buddhism on the
island. “There are so many characteristics of Vajrayana and
Mahayana intermixed into the Theravada practices of Sri Lanka,” he
told this author. “Hewisi [the daily adoration of
the Buddha using drums and horns] is specifically a Mahayana
tradition. The inclusion of bodhisattva worship and their statues
in temples is also a tradition that belongs to Mahayana, while we
can also connect it to the worship of the 24 past Buddhas as well
as the future Buddhas. We also have the practice of chanting
mantras, which has a definite relationship with the Vajrayana
practices of Tibet. I would like to state that, while the practice
of the Theravada Vinaya [monastic discipline] is strong, the
Mahayana Vinaya practice is more strenuous and applied, contrary to
the belief of the Theravadins.”
While a
minority of Theravada Buddhist monks like Ven. Swarna have an
understanding of Mahayana, most seem to be against its existence in
Sri Lanka, in any form. On 25 September 2011, violent protests
erupted at a Mahayana temple belonging to the Nichiren Shoshu sect
in Colombo, with over 100 Sri Lankan Theravada monks attacking it
and refusing to let the practitioners leave. “The Buddhist monks
forcibly entered the premises shouting out that we stop our prayer
session. The monks said we should only have Theravada Buddhism in
Sri Lanka and not Mahayana,” said one worshipper, according to a
report in the Tamil Guardian. Another practitioner who visited the
temple on the day reported that it took police nearly four hours to
rescue the practitioners from the custody of the Theravada
monks.
While such
incidents have occurred in history, there are still a few Mahayana
temples and prayer groups operating throughout the country. HBS, or
Honmon Butsuryu-shu, temple in Colombo has its roots in Nichiren
Buddhism. Its chief prelate, Sri Lankan-born Ven. Dileepa Ryojun,
smiled calmly when I asked him about their practice in Sri Lanka.
“Initially, we also received a lot of resistance,” he revealed.
“Yet, once a chief Theravada monk of a local temple invited me to
visit him. After the meeting he understood that we pose no threat
to Theravada Buddhism. Now we are very friendly with each other.”
Ven. Dileepa disclosed that his temple has a membership of over 700
families spread across the island. “People are very enthusiastic
about learning our system of practice. We offer ‘primordial pure
Buddhism’ and practices which create vibrant energy for the
practitioner, which would help his spiritual well-being. We have a
spacious, newly constructed temple where people are free to visit,
practice, and change their lives in a positive way.”
Past records
indicate that Sri Lanka has long favored orthodoxy in many aspects
of life. Even today, we are known to be very traditional and
resistant to change. But however much we value such attributes,
they have not paved the way for society to change for the better.
The present is as much divided as the past, the result being that
our chances for peace, prosperity, and harmony are minimized. It is
not the way of the Theravada that will give Sri Lanka what it
needs—but we cannot say that Mahayana or Vajrayana will bring it
forth, either. It is not the name of the tradition that will save
the nation, but rather how well the practitioners of the various
traditions conduct their spiritual life. As things currently stand,
Sri Lanka is very far from achieving such spiritual equilibrium or
freedom.