groundviews is a Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiativeregister here.login.find out more
inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Response to Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya

April 2, 2010 at 7:00 am · Categories: Colombo, Identity, Religion and faith | by tis-a-small-world

[Editor's note: This article is a rejoinder to “Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka – A Monk's Response” by Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya published on the Buddhist Channel website on the 28th of March 2010. Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya's article was a response to the author's original article 'Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka'.]

I wrote “Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka” exclusively for Groundviews, a prominent citizen journalism website in Sri Lanka. I expressed my opinion on the “Akon issue” as a citizen of Sri Lanka. Groundviews published my article on the 27th of March 2010 and later ‘The Buddhist Channel’ website published it attributing the original article to Groundviews. The Constitution of Sri Lanka guarantees its citizens the freedom of speech, expression and publication [Article 14(1) (a)]. Therefore, as a citizen of Sri Lanka I have every right to publish what I think and write be it under my name or under a nom de plume.

I feel that Bhikkhu K Tanchangya has misunderstood the essence and the main argument of my article. The essence of my article was my perception of Buddhist philosophy. In order to communicate my perception, I referred to the primary principles of Buddhist philosophy and also quoted examples from the life of Lord Buddha that is detailed in Buddhist literature.

My argument was based on the politics surrounding the issue and the double standards depicted by the Government in denying Akon a visa for blasphemy and disrespect of Buddhism whilst issuing a visa to the Leader of Myanmar, Tan Shwe, whose administration has committed hundreds of atrocities against Buddhists and Buddhist monks in his country which I feel is far more damaging to Buddhists and Buddhism than Akon’s music video.

The writer mentions in his article that, “although Lord Buddha accepted thieves, murderers and prostitutes into the sasana, he never condoned such acts.” I am aware of this and I agree. Lord Buddha’s acceptance of these people into his Sasana as disciples demonstrates the non-violent approach in changing their lives by showing compassion and loving-kindness rather than by punishment. The best example in Buddhist literature is the case of the violent murderer, Angulimala. At a critical juncture, Lord Buddha himself took Angulimala into the Sasana even though the prevailing monarchy ordered him to be arrested and charged for his crimes.

Moving onto the Devadatta issue mentioned by the writer. The words, “ignorant bugs and trouble makers destined for hell” attributed to Lord Buddha seems uncouth. Lord Buddha did not approve of the misdeeds of Devadatta and his group of disciples and pointed out to his followers that engaging in these misdeeds will bring misery and could lead them to hell. At the same time, Lord Buddha asserted that demonstrating hatred and anger towards them will not benefit the followers or the monk Devadatta, and requested his followers to demonstrate loving kindness (Meththa), equanimity (Upekkha) and compassion (Karuna) towards them.

I feel that there is a huge contrast in the way most Buddhists in Sri Lanka have behaved towards Akon and the people associated with his concert, and the teachings of Lord Buddha as highlighted above.

The very fact that the MTV/MBC was attacked for promoting his concert portrays the intolerance in place of tolerance, hatred in place of loving kindness and ignorance in place of equanimity. My main argument is that if showing disrespect towards Lord Buddha and Buddhism was the reason for the denial of a visa to Akon, that same principle should have applied to General Tan Shwe- the Leader of Myanmar.

The oppression of the people of Myanmar by the rulers and atrocities committed against Buddhist monks is a well-known fact. Yet, General Tan Shwe was issued a visa while the true spiritual leader of Tibet- the Dalai Lama- was denied a visa last year by the Sri Lankan Government. This depicts the politics involved and the double standards practiced by the Government.

I neither have any personal regard nor animosity towards Akon. The artist’s morality, spirituality and ethics could be considered abhorrent or at the very least, controversial. Instead, my main concern is the misinterpretation of the basic principles of Buddhist philosophy in advancing the agenda of the Government.

Print this post
1,326 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:
  • Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka The Government on Tuesday (March 23rd) announced its decision to deny an entry visa to singer Akon who was scheduled to perform next month in Colombo with co-singers, J-Sean and Kelly. The basis for the denial of Akon’s visa was a music video of the singer, containing a clip of scantily clad models dancing against... tis-a-small-world, March 27, 2010
  • Aroused by Akon’s Sexy Bitch: the Rise of Sinhala-Buddhist Fundamentalism? Could it be that the sight of the Buddha statue was a complete turn-off to those who were utterly aroused by the dancing girls, the ‘sexy chicks’, seen in the music video ‘Sexy Bitch’, by David Gruetta, which featured Akon? If not, can such a scene, which in this particular video lasted for not more... Kalana Senaratne, March 25, 2010

| Share this article on Facebook

magerata said,

April 2, 2010 @ 9:24 am

Well said. I only feel sad about when I think of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. There may be good priests and good practitioners of the Dhamma in the island but what I hear and read about is the people who pretend to practice but full of hatred toward other people.
““although Lord Buddha accepted thieves, murderers and prostitutes into the sasana, he never condoned such acts.”” Well Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya, today’s sasana is full of these but I doubt about the prostitutes though because they might be better human beings.

Tis-a-small-world said,

April 2, 2010 @ 2:49 pm

Dear magerata, thanks! I completely agree with your points. The rise of buddhist fundamentalism in sri lanka worries me alot. The saddest part is the patronage it has recieved from certain monks.

niranjan said,

April 2, 2010 @ 3:22 pm

I wonder how much of this Buddhist fundamentalism is due to the strangelhold that the JHU has over the ruling SLFP regime?
Perhaps once this regime is out of power someday in the future Buddhsit fundamentalism will also disappear.

Suriya said,

April 2, 2010 @ 3:53 pm

I have a different take on this. We need Buddhist fundamentalism in Sri Lanka to stand up against Christian fundamentalism and people who want to walk all over Buddhists. The only reason Buddhism survives in Sri Lanka is because historically there were many Buddhists in the past who were ready to stand up for it (and the country) instead of “preaching metta and karuna” while they had their throats slit and their monasteries, temples and libraries burnt to the ground.

I support the denial of a visa to Akon. If you think that is “fundamentalism” you need a reality check. And if you think Buddhists are sensitive look at how Christians in Sri Lanka are up in arms over a cricket function taking place on Good Friday. Both The Island and The Daily Mirror have dedicated large amounts of space to the issue. Don’t forget before Akon was denied a visa the government banned The Da Vinci Code and The Last Temptation because Sri Lankan Chritians were opposed. They also banned Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses because Sri Lankan Muslims were offended.

Roshan said,

April 2, 2010 @ 4:19 pm

Dear Suriya,

If Buddha was alive do you think he will support your stand? Lord Buddha said, you need to practice loving kindness to fight hatred. My worry is in the process of ‘protecting’ “Buddhism” you allow it to lose its essential spirit. How sad the situation in the country is. I only can wish that “Methe Buddun” will appear soon without waiting for another time. We need him hear very badly to salvage Buddhism from its so called protectors!

Suriya said,

April 2, 2010 @ 5:05 pm

Dear Roshan, I knew there would be someone who would come out with your argument. I think it’s very easy to use Buddhism as a stick to beat many Buddhists with. But look what happened to the Tibetans – they lost their country and the only place where they can practice their religion freely are in the little pockets where they have fled to. Yes, world opinion may be on the Tibetan’s side, but what good is it in real life.

What needs to be realised is that in the past there were many Buddhist kings who went to war – not only in Sri Lanka, but in Thailand and Burma, Cambodia and China. If Sri Lankan kings in the past did not go to war, did not stand up for Buddhism, Sri Lanka would likely be a Hindu majority country. Preaching metta and karuna and upekkha is okay if non-Buddhists also held to such ideals. But it doesn’t help when the other side wants to convert you by all means necessary or destroy your religion (like the Christians did to Buddhists and Hindus in Sri Lanka). This may sound like a call to arms but it is not. I think that Buddhists need to stand up and be more assertive not only in Sri Lanka but around the world. Denying Akon a visa is one such move that I support. Being assertive doesn’t have to mean one is hateful. One can be filled with love and still be assertive. But if you wish to call that “fundamentalism” so be it…

james said,

April 2, 2010 @ 5:13 pm

IMHO, the rant that has been published on the Buddhist Channel website doesn’t deserve the dignity of a reply. If you read the article in full, at one point this ‘monk’ has used the expression ‘violently humping a 14 yrs old’ which to me is rather shocking language to be used by someone purporting to be a monk defending Buddhism!

Waruna said,

April 2, 2010 @ 5:46 pm

@ Suriya,

The Buddha’s take on that is that, Buddhism would get destroyed and teachings lost due to the misrepresentation of the 8-fold Path from *within* the Sasana. Not due to outsiders.

On a different not, I cannot believe that the SL Govt is banning books because the government thinks that they know best what the public should read and not read. The decision to read anything one likes or anything one wishes to see has to lie with the individual, not in a silly Govt! If you get offended by a particular book, please do not read that book; simple as that.

justitia said,

April 2, 2010 @ 7:35 pm

In my young days in the thirties,I used to see hindu ‘swamys’ and buddhist bhikkus in robes of almost same colour.We venerated both equally and gave alms to both.My mother said “they are all holymen” and their blessings are necessary.The bhikkus were doing ‘pindapaatha’ once a month and the swamys collected cash and rice especially during the Kataragama festival season.
Later,down south I saw villagers prostrating themselves before bhikkus even on the roadside. This no longer happens. The bhikkus have lost the respect of the buddhist people, by engaging in worldly pursuits which is against the tenets laid down by the Buddha. Now few respect them or their views.
The Akon ‘controversy’ has been blown out of proportion. In the west, Buddha images and statues have been used as ornaments and to promote commerce.
This is wrong. Many buddhists have pointed this out to the offenders and they have apologised and changed their habits.Same could have been explained to Akon who gladly would have deleted the few seconds of the tape, as I am sure that he and/or his directer/producer unintentionally included the images offensive to lankan buddhists.
But the issue has been made use of for politically motivated attacks on a TV station whic had nothing to do with the production or distribution of the video or for the invitation for Akon to perform here.
The government spokesman alleges/implies that Sirasa employees had waited
inside the building with stones and open doors/windows to pelt stones at ‘peaceful’ protesters outside, who too happened to be carrying stones, thus inviting retaliation! The police had arrested 18 and promptly released them.It is evident that they had political backing.
Our diplomats can and should explain to countries/persons who exploit the images and statues that this is offensive to buddhists and I am sure they will comply.

university student said,

April 2, 2010 @ 10:48 pm

As a practicing buddhist, i found it awfully disturbing to watch a bunch of Bikini clad girls dancing infront of a Buddha statue. i strongly protest against the act of disgracing any relegious object, statue,scripture, and believes that a mere apology from the artist is insufficient to absolve him for what he did.

However i was appalled after reading the article by Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya, which in essence supported the politically driven barbaric act, as justifiable means of showing dissent. Moreover the Bikku provided additional provisions for those who engaged in such acts by stating

“we cannot keep quiet in the name of Tolerance and Equanimity”

The Bikku should understand that AKON is merely the scapegoat,tied up in the periphery. The reality however is that a prominent politician from Kelaniya who has a long standing dispute with the MTV/MBC institution used this incident to release his accumilated vexation.

Later led the government took advantage of the situtation, to appease the hardcore Sighala Buddhist nationalist in there propaganda Potfolio by cancelling AKON’s Visa and denying any involvement by the Tourist board.

devotee said,

April 3, 2010 @ 2:12 am

The term “Fundamentalism” is often misquoted by many, if you look at the history this word fundamentalism was coined for a group of Protestant
Christians from USA in early 20th century they wanted to implement the bible word to word vs modern theory.
The definition of fundamentalism is that “the belief in a strict adherence to a set of basic principles” (often religious in nature), and this term is inserted into the oxford dictionary in 1989, If I apply this to the Buddhism I cannot help myself without naming these people who throw stone at an institution, shout slogan and breathe hatred as ANTI-BUDDHISTS rather than calling them Buddhist Fundamentalists. None of their action is within the purview of Buddha’s teachings. I love to be called a fundamentalist of my religion as I try my best to follow it.
I however, welcome the refusal of visa to akon for the following reasons.
1. he promotes scantily clad women dancing with bursting, thundering music in the name of artist which is alien to our culture and causing cultural erosion.
2. it has prevented a calamity as happened in Sharuk Khan concert a few years earlier.
3. it slowed down the anti-Buddhist element growth in our country.
But I agree with the author for the reason cited for visa refusal.
Thank you

Maha Kalu Sinhalaya said,

April 3, 2010 @ 2:43 am

To the person who said that one needs Buddhist Fundamentalism to protect Buddhism from Christian Fundamentalism; obviously he does not know the true nature of Buddhism. The thought that one needs to get to the lowest common denominator in order to defend something, especially religion, is assanine. The protests by these monks were nothing but a political act that was done to please their political masters. This had nothing to do with Buddhism.

These protests show the politicization of religion and the use of religion to gain political favors – which, until recently, was not so prevalant in Sri Lanka. It is indeed a sad fact that the deterioration of civil society has also taken route among some so called Buddhists. Obviously, these people don’t know the first thing about Buddhism, even if they happen to wear a robe. They are merely rubes

Rohana Arambewala said,

April 3, 2010 @ 3:44 am

I believe this writer is somewhat confused. In this the person is mixing an artist, buddhism and politics. The writer on one hand trying to compare the issue with buddhism by quoting Lord Buddha’s maithri and then the impression one gets is that it is the Buddhists have taken this decision due to this man’s behaviour. Then brings in visa issue, sighting issuing of a visa to a dictator of our time and trying to compare the two. I still find it very difficult to identify the connections between these issues. Is the writer trying to implicate the current government as the culprit with double standard or trying to whoever in Sri Lanka Buddhism the culprit for refusing the visa? If it is the govt the person is trying to put the blame, please let us know has the govt given a reason for refusing a visa? Have they said it is because of the issue at hand?

I would like to point out to the writer that any govt in the world has the right to issue or not to issue a visa to any person on various grounds. One of the most important issues is that if the govt believes the person can cause unrest, dissent, problems, can damage the country’s integrity, reputation etc and also believes that the person will be harmful for the culture, security etc they have all the right to do so. For example Sri Lanka govt refused visa to many important European Diplomats in the last year. Therefore I would like the writer to distinguish what is that you want to argue or bring to the notice of the world? Is it how unfair Sri Lankan Buddhists or the govt? If it is the govt then you must first find out the reason given and argue on that point.

I would also like to inform the writer, that this person was banned touring Australia last year due to his past criminal history and how that will be harmful to the country and to the young generation. No one had any argument about that. Australia has given visas to past criminals to enter the country but not this one as the govt has the right to choose who is allowed and not. Sri Lanka govt’s issuance of visa to a dictator is irrelevant in my view as no one objected to that in Sri Lanka. People like the writer should have organised objections to this dictator’s visit and if the govt ignored them and discriminated against this Akon person then the writer have a better chance of comparison of the two and argue.

Please clarify what is that you want the reader to know first and what is that you don’t agree and on what grounds.

Rohana Arambewala said,

April 3, 2010 @ 4:14 am

It is sad to read to some of the comments. Anything to do with Buddhism these idiots blame on so called “Buddhist fundamentalists” without any evidence. Can anyone of those people who blame “extreme Buddhists” or JHU provide any evidence to their claims. If they can’t please don’t make yourselves fools in front of the whole world. Don’t get out of the point in hand and go off track because of your frustrations due to your different political and religious views.

None of these people raise their voice if there were similar issues with Christianity or Islam. For example I still can’t understand how people can identify JHU as the Buddhist extreme party because these same people seems to have accepted Tamil extreme parties such as TNA, which clearly states that they are for Tamil interests only, and Muslim parties who openly declared they are for Muslim interests only. What do these people think of them? Are you prepared to declare them as fundamentalist extreme political paties and condemn them openly as you do to JHU?

Can someone please explain to me if Tamils and Muslims have political parties exclusively to protect their religion and culture, why is it wrong for the majority Buddhists to have a political party to protect their religion and culture? Now tell me who is discriminating who? Do these people think it is wrong to have a party to voice their concerns if and when the culture and Buddhism is threatened like that was happening from fundamental Christianity and Muslim groups in Sri Lanka and many other countries. I can provide enough evidence to these claims. I believe I will be labeled as a fundamentalist Buddhist by these so called pure, honest and educated people for expressing my views and asking questions that can put them in hot water.

They never argue about the exclusive Christianity political parties they have in Western countries and Muslims parties in Muslim countries. Can Buddhists go and open exclusive Buddhist political parties in these countries?

arshad said,

April 3, 2010 @ 6:31 am

Well said SURIYA.
Buddisum such an important religion . I myself as a non buddisht person sees the important of JHU.

in the past because of Buddhist patriotic people , Buddhism still prevail in our mother land. other wise this will another Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.
WAKE UP PEOPLE. Forget about your religious belief. understand it

PGLP said,

April 3, 2010 @ 7:09 am

Any Govt has the right to issue visa. It is unquestionable. However, the procedure for artists and religious leaders should be transparent. It should not be turned down at the last minute on flimsy reasons. Further, tourist minstry also involved in the process to a certain extent. I believe this sort of visa applications should be referred to the cultural ministry to clear the first hurdle.

wijayapala said,

April 3, 2010 @ 7:10 am

Suriya,

In some of my earlier comments I agreed with your above ideas. But take a look at some of justitia’s words:

Later,down south I saw villagers prostrating themselves before bhikkus even on the roadside. This no longer happens. The bhikkus have lost the respect of the buddhist people, by engaging in worldly pursuits which is against the tenets laid down by the Buddha. Now few respect them or their views.

Many buddhists have pointed this out to the offenders and they have apologised and changed their habits.Same could have been explained to Akon who gladly would have deleted the few seconds of the tape, as I am sure that he and/or his directer/producer unintentionally included the images offensive to lankan buddhists.

Now I don’t know whether Akon would have really deleted the (very brief) offensive scene, but justitia’s perspective is dead on (amazing, given that I disagree with everything else he says).

Justitia is CORRECT that the Sangha has lost a lot of respect from the lay community due to monks’ self-serving activities. There is still some respect for the Sangha but not nearly what it used to be.

Justitia is also CORRECT that we could have protested this video in many far more civilized ways. Did anyone try to contact Akon or his producer regarding the Buddha image?

In the late 19th century, the Christians were saying ugly and slanderous things about Buddhism. Did Gunananda Hamuduru gather a mob and pelt stones at Christian churches. No. Instead Gunananda Hamuduru challenged the Christians to an open debate and beat the stuffing out of them through a sound knowledge of Christian doctrine and its contradictions.

There are many ways to defend Buddhism, but we are not doing it in the right way. Instead we have entrusted people like Dr. Mervyn Silva to be the defenders of the faith.

Suriya said,

April 3, 2010 @ 7:23 am

“To the person who said that one needs Buddhist Fundamentalism to protect Buddhism from Christian Fundamentalism; obviously he does not know the true nature of Buddhism.”

Actually I am quite well versed in Buddhism. I find it to be a beautiful way of life. But in order to practice it freely one needs space. When others do not hold to the ideas of metta and karuna and try and trample you, I think you need to stand up and say no. As an example, if someone comes to your house in order to kill your wife and children, are you going to meditate on metta and karuna while he/she does the dreadful deed? Being mindful doesn’t mean one has to be stupid. Standing up for oneself doesn’t mean one has to resort to violence. It can be done in much less violent ways – like denying someone a visa in protest.

The thing is, a lot of people want Buddhists to be doormats, to walkover as and when they please. Luckily though, throughout history there were Buddhists who weren’t willing to fit into that mold.

Suriya said,

April 3, 2010 @ 8:41 am

“Instead we have entrusted people like Dr. Mervyn Silva to be the defenders of the faith.”

Have we? Or did Mervyn Silva see an opportunity to target MBC (considered to be anti-government), and bring some hired goons to the job? Tell you what, I’ll bet the same rent-a-thug mob that stoned the MBC offives would just as happily stone the Dalada Maligawa or another Buddhist temple for a few rupees.

Ekim said,

April 3, 2010 @ 9:08 am

Akon should be allowed to come to Sri Lanka and give a concernt, but if he lacks the cultural and religious sensitivity to adjust his performance to show respect to the country that has invited him, he should be kicked out on his hind-end. It takes a total lack of respect for other’s beliefs to do something as raunchy as Akon did, but for him to come to Sri Lanka and do the same, would be his downfall. This talk about Buddhist fundamenatlism is taken a bit too far. The majority of Buddhist Sri Lankans (lay or Bhikkus) pratice totally what they preach, lay off will you. If you don’t know, don’t speak ill of others or lump everyone into one basket. Think for a moment what happens when someone stupid enough does something to offend Islam, they get there heads chopped or at least have an international death threat on their heads. Not wanting Akon to come to Sri Lanka is common sense, not fundamentalism.

Laksumana said,

April 3, 2010 @ 9:51 am

With or without Akon, our guys themselves including robed robbers are gradually wiping this great philosophy out and it seems only strange that its never noticed maybe becuase “the answer my friend is blowing in the wind”.

The Observer said,

April 3, 2010 @ 11:17 am

Well said, Suriya. I am in agreement with your view one hundred percent.

Eli said,

April 3, 2010 @ 12:10 pm

@ Suriya,
Sounds like you are high on something. What exactly you are smoking sonny? you do know excessive use of marijuana make you paranoid, don’t you? it sounds to me like you overdoing it. I suggest you cut back so that your thinking process return to normal and your good Buddihst instinct once more return to the realm of peace and love. If you must smoke on something, cut your grass on your lawn and smoke that. Nothing will happen which is that you need

Tis-a-small-world said,

April 3, 2010 @ 3:35 pm

Dear rohana arambewala, thanks for taking your time to read this article. This is infact an elaboration of my previous article in response to bhikku Tanchangya. I think you have failed to understand what i’m talking. I do not wish to explain any further as i have already done it. I kindly request you to go through the article again. Thanks

Suriya said,

April 3, 2010 @ 7:24 pm

Hope the moderator will let me post an excerpt from the following article which was published today. This is the sort of thing that I think we need to see more from Buddhists – not a blase “whatever” attitude, but actually standing up and voicing concerns. Otherwise non-Buddhists will have no idea, and those who do have an idea and yet continue trying to demean Buddhists and/or Buddhism will have a free run to do as they please without any opposition at all. Is John Longhurst going to be labelled a “fundamentalist” for speaking out? I sure hope not.

—

It’s wrong to cheapen great eastern religions

By: John Longhurst

Have you heard about the Buddha Bar?

According to an ad in the Free Press, people who patronize Winnipeg’s newest drinking establishment can expect to find “chic interiors” and “exotic electronic beats” to go along with the usual cocktail, beer and wine specials.

One thing they shouldn’t expect to find there, though, are actual Buddhists. At least, not ones who take their faith seriously — adherents of this ancient religion are forbidden to drink alcohol.

Winnipeg’s Buddha Bar is just one more example of what has come to be called “Dharma Burgers,” a phrase made popular by Rod Meade Sperry of the Buddhist pop and culture website The Worst Horse. According to Perry, it refers to “any example of Buddhist ideas or imagery in the marketing or production of (usually non-Buddhist) services and consumables.”

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/fyi/its-wrong-to-cheapen-great-eastern-religions-89825972.html

DD said,

April 3, 2010 @ 9:55 pm

It’s a pity that the visit could have been used to address the larger issue all over the world vs. just stoning a media company for organising the event. Buddhism has unfortunately become a ‘fashion icon’ all over the world.
So as Buddhists we could have used his concert as a means to have our dissatisfaction heard to the rest of the world. Not just canceling his visa.
Sometimes for greater good is more important than the immediate picture. Buddhism traditionally is a non-aggressive religion.
As far as I am concerned those who stoned the media company is as responsible as Akon to damage the cause of Buddhism.
The image of Lord Ganesha is equally abused all over the world as a ‘cool sign of life’. So is Maha Lakshmi. On a visit to New Delhi in India a long ago I purchased two statues of Gnana Devi and Lakshmi, the concerned Hindu person next to me asked me for what purpose I was buying them – religious or as display. While informing them it was for religious reasons I explained to him carefully that I understand the religious importance and significance of those statues. Setting his mind at rest.
Sri Lankans all over the world are ready to march the streets for anything. Maybe a good start internationally would be for the UK High Commission to write an official letter to the London Clubs – Funky Buddha and Buddha Bar with copy to the Minister of Culture how these establishments cause offense.
Otherwise all this pundit epilepsy is just all in vain.

soloman said,

April 3, 2010 @ 10:11 pm

I too think that Rohanaa arambewala need to read the article again. the author is clear in his opinion.
Yes, it is correct that the Buddhist have all the rights to safe guard their religion or faith and if the JHU does that I welcome, but if you are little vigilant and look carefully. what JHU is doing is totally different, they interfere more with the minority rights and vandalizing the churches and assaulting the priests and in fact they even went to the extent of intimidating the mahanake thera’s maha samuluwa in kandy. they were instrumental in attacking many temples. and they approve the usage of alcohol in temple tree. they are really not protecting the Buddhism but destroying it. they create disharmony in the minds of minority in the name of archeology. these are some of the activity.
I appreciate some of the views of Suriya. he seems to posses a good knowledge of Buddhism, I want to ask him or any others a question. Did Buddha or his teaching ever ask his followers to erect a statue for him, if not, the basic problem here would not have arisen, If he really wanted a statue of his, I apologize for my lack of knowledge on Buddhism.

Carli said,

April 4, 2010 @ 3:49 am

I too strongly agree with you Suriya. While you make an effort to educate or let your views be known in a civilized and gentle manner, just look at the hatred and venom in people like Eli who I think do not belong to any religion, ranting and raving at you personally without trying to understand facts.

Jay said,

April 4, 2010 @ 7:00 am

I have seen a bar on Elgin Street in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada named Laughing Buddha and no one cares about it.But if anyone names a Strip Club “Mother Theresas” the whole world will be against it.
Why is this double standadrds for Buddhism only?.Can this mad dog AKON dance whith his sexy chicks in front of an altar?

Atheist said,

April 4, 2010 @ 8:13 am

Tis – a- small -world,

If you object to the fact that Sri-Lanka refused visa to AKON because of his video of scantily clad girls prancing around a Buddha statue, I am with you. By the way, we can’t expect him to be Duran Duran, can we?

However, let us put ourselves in a hypothetical situation where the government did grant visa to AKON. I am sure as hell that given such a scenario, Lanka Truth will lambast the government for insulting Buddhism as they did with the “tattooed woman” in the online Daily News. I am sure you know that this was triumphantly cited by Ground Views. Plus, allowing AKON into the country will provide much ammunition to the Buddhist bashers who will go around showing AKON’s notorious concert video taken in Trinidad. Pseudo feminists, fake journalists and all the activist mafia will have a heyday; this would give them the perfect opportunity to denounce the government on its lackadaisical attitude toward misogyny and violence.

The government is sure in a catch-22 situation. Anyway, I feel the government made the spineless move in removing the “tattooed woman”.

Suriya said,

April 4, 2010 @ 2:09 pm

“…just look at the hatred and venom in people like Eli who I think do not belong to any religion, ranting and raving at you personally without trying to understand facts.”

Thanks for your kind comments Carli. I try not to engage with people who engage in personal attacks; I have found from personal experience that they are unfruitful endeavours.

Malinda Seneviratne said,

April 4, 2010 @ 10:47 pm

I think people use the word ‘fundamentalism’ loosely. but that’s fine…why? well, FofE (Freedom of Expression) and Buddhists have to be ‘tolerant’ on account of being Buddhists even when people vilify Buddhists and Buddhism.

I posted the following comment on an earlier piece by this same author…it might be of interest….

I wrote a couple of articles on this subject, one in the Daily MIrror and one in the Sunday Lakbima News. Both papers omitted a quote from the bible which dictates ‘appropriate’ action relevant to a hypothetical situation I described.

If Buddhists are supposed to act like Buddhists, it follows that Christians should act like Christians. Right? The problem is that Christians can pick and choose from the Bible.

Here are the links to the two articles: http://www.dailymirror.lk/print/index.php/opinion1/7442.html

http://www.lakbimanews.lk/columns/col5.htm

And this is what was omitted:

” What part of the Bible would ‘Real’ Christians refer if such ‘works of art’ contained some kind of culturally offensive statement on the Christian faith or some element of Christian iconography and sought to entice Christians to serve some other faith?

“‘Forgive our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass upon us’? That would be ‘ok’ in that it will not result in any altercation or disruption of normality. What if some Christian chance upon or remember Deuteronomy 13: 6-10?

“This is what it says: ‘If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die.’”

Burning_Issue said,

April 5, 2010 @ 2:55 am

Dear Rohana Arambewela,

“None of these people raise their voice if there were similar issues with Christianity or Islam. For example I still can’t understand how people can identify JHU as the Buddhist extreme party because these same people seems to have accepted Tamil extreme parties such as TNA, which clearly states that they are for Tamil interests only, and Muslim parties who openly declared they are for Muslim interests only. What do these people think of them? Are you prepared to declare them as fundamentalist extreme political paties and condemn them openly as you do to JHU?”

You have written passionately and argued the rational for the JHU as a political party for the Sinhala Buddhists. That is all very well, but the fact remains that the people of Sri Lanka have been fragmented along their religious and communal identities; this is why Sri Lanka has miserably failed to build a nation. The majority community with 70% Buddhists is still not at ease; it is petrified that, the Buddhism in Sri Lanka is under siege and it is vulnerable to decline even to disappear all together. This fear is real and well alive among the Sinhala Buddhists; learned and the rest are alike.

I, as a Tamil, am not sure whether the fear is about Buddhism disappearing from Sri Lanka or the Sinhalese as an ethnic group is fearful of their very survival. This leads me to say that there is a dangerous cocktail in Sri Lanka: the insecure Sinhalse are the Buddhists in Sri Lankan exclusively (I know that there are exceptions); this has a disastrous effects on the Sinhala Buddhists in Sri Lanka. With this scenario, the people of Sri Lanka do not identify themselves as Sri Lankans first and foremost but by their ethnicity; hence, cannot pull together as a nation.

I pointed this out before, in the very first and second general elections, the many Tamil speaking people (Tamils and Muslims) did ally with the mainstream parties; UNP and LSSP enjoyed much following. This trend would have continued and the Tamil ethnic platform would have struggled to hold steady but for the SWRD factor and the prominence of the Sinhala Buddhist identity. I am not saying that, there weren’t any Tamil or Muslim nationalists at that time; there were nationalistic politicians and there will be always such people. However, a nation must not allow such elements to have a platform. The British National Party (BNP) still cannot enter parliament is a good example; if there is ever a possibility of that happening, all the main parties work together eschewing such a situation.

With Buddhism in the Constitution enshrined to be protected and fostered by the state; the country cannot move away from the ethnic politics. It is not the fault of the atheists, agnostics, and non-Buddhists that the minority of the Sinhala Buddhists feel insecure and whole country is held as hostage by these people. The Buddhism in Sri Lanka has survived three consecutive imperialistic rule and the Missionaries methodically converting the peoples with imperial support; yet, Buddhism is today thriving in Sri Lanka. Some may say that, it is because of Buddhist fundamentalists; I do not agree. Because, Hinduism was also faced the same threats; The Portuguese Missionaries had almost converted the entire population of the Mannar district. Yet, Hinduism survived and thrived because of its inner strength and the same goes for Buddhism in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan politics is at a watershed at the moment; if the MR regime were to pursue a Sinhala Buddhist hegemonic rule; on the basis of a Sinhala Buddhist identity, Sri Lanka will erupt in turmoil once again in the future. On the other hand, if they manage to galvanise all citizens as one and promote a Sri Lankan identity with a suitable political structure, Sri Lanka will emerge as a progressing nation. Only time will tell.

tis-a-small-world said,

April 5, 2010 @ 7:12 am

Dear Malinda Seneviratna,
Thank you very much for posting the links of your articles, and I of course read the article on Daily Mirror. I feel that just because Christians pick and choose from the bible as you have mentioned, as Buddhists we can pick and choose what we like from Tripitaka or Dhamma Padaya. Then there will be no difference between Buddhists and Christians.
As followers of the Lord Buddha and his philosophy, we shall stick to it’s teachings and not pick and choose like others, and demonstrate our greatness to the world!
Thanks again for taking time to read my article as a veteran writer and critique.

niranjan said,

April 5, 2010 @ 10:39 am

Rohana Arambewela,

Do we need the JHU to defend Buddhism? I think not. We have a Constitution and a majority Buddhist population to do that. From the first Republican Constitution onwards Buddhism has been given a special/foremost place. No other religion in this country enjoys a foremost place in the 1978 Constitution.
Therefore, both the SLFP and the UNP have given the foremost place to Buddhism in their Constitutions well before the JHU arrived on the scene.

niranjan said,

April 5, 2010 @ 10:47 am

Burning-Issue,

I agree with your comments. At least President Rajapakse is trying to reach out to the Tamil people by speaking in Tamil to the Tamil population when he visits the North and East. I think we need to give him credit for that.

tis-a-small-world said,

April 5, 2010 @ 1:34 pm

What do the readers of GV have to say about this, http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2010/04/04/buddhism-attacked/

wijayapala said,

April 6, 2010 @ 3:36 am

tis-a-small-world,

“What do the readers of GV have to say about this”

I have to say that the greatest threat to Buddhism in SL today probably comes from other Buddhists.

yapa said,

April 9, 2010 @ 8:36 pm

Dear Rohana Arambewala;

RE: Your comments on April 3, 2010 @ 3:44 am and April 3, 2010 @ 4:14 am

Don’t worry, it is the way things are happening. Most of the writers (Journalists), one of my friends say that “Not more than bothal paththarakarayas”. According to him when a “bottle” is given they write any thing to “paththaraya or to “cyber paththaraya”. According to him their motto is ” kanna denavanam- bonna denava nam,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,”

It is fortunate that writers like Martin Wickramasingha, Piyasena Nissanka etc… are not alive today. Otherwise, my friend says “I am sure they will commit Suicide not to see the “Nari natakas ” of their colleagues”.

Do you think this fellow is telling truth?

Thanks!

Jay said,

April 10, 2010 @ 5:36 pm

1. People and Government in a country should have the right to refuse entry VISA to someone based on his charactor or attitude to the society and if this person could do more harm than good to the younger generation. The question is why did Akon and his naked women dance in front of a Buddha statue?. Why didn’t they dance naked in front of a statue of Jesus Christ or Gord Siva or Prophet Mohamad.?

2. As Buddhists it is clear to us that the results and effects of every action of a person comes back to the same person whether it is a good action or a bad action..That person carries all this with him until his death and to his next life. Therefore, what Akon has done and said is his problem and not ours as Buddhists.

3. Akon has said that he didn’t know that Buddha statue was in the back ground and he is now a spiritual man( don’t know what he has done in the past), he should be allowed in to Sri Lanka next time. While he is in Sri Labnka, he should visit our Buddhist philosophy and learn about it so that he won’t insult th Buddhism or Buddhists in the future.

truthseeker said,

June 25, 2010 @ 7:27 pm

I’m a Buddhist myself. But I do not take pride in the fact that I’m one. Moreover, there is no place for the very concept of ‘attachment/passion towards one’s religion’, or for that matter respect towards it. Buddhism clearly explains that attachments are the roots of suffering. Besides we don’t take it with us when we die. These 2 facts point to the futility of this concept. It’s clearly indoctrinated in the Dhammapada that those who pursue futile things won’t get anything really worthwhile.The single-minded pursuit of saving or defending Buddhism won’t get you anywhere. Being unable to realize this is nothing but plain abysmal ignorance(Moha). What’s more the very attachment to one’s religion can ferment extremism and pave the way for the emergence of violence.(Islamic extremism in the Middle East and elsewhere and Hindu extremism in India clearly demonstrate this.)Another thing I wish to highlight in my comment is that whether one is a good Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc. is absolutely immaterial. What matters are the merits and demerits we have attained through our noble and evil deeds respectively. (Also, this is the message given by the Hindi movie ‘My Name Is Khan’) The whole world is one. Countries, religions-these are all artificial.
Finally, I wish to emphasize on certain things that don’t coexist with Buddhist doctrines. 1. Nationalism, militarism and excessive religious faith-based on hatred(dvesha) and abysmal ignorance(moha).
2. capitalism, consumerism, the urge rooted in the minds of most children to obtain white-collar jobs and accumulate material wealth -based on greed(lobha)
It’s simply disheartening to note that the overwhelming majority of the Buddhists in SL succumb to these mentalities that contradict with the Dhamma, although this country is proudly proclaimed as the ‘Land of Gautama Buddha’ .

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment

This is a moderated forum. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. Please do not post comments that are off topic, defamatory, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Comments are automatically scanned for spam and obscenity.

Comments are only approved if they are in line with the site guidelines. Those that do not will be edited or deleted without prior intimation. Comment approval may take up to 24 hours.

Thanks in advance for your civil and constructive engagement.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free