EDITORIAL

Defending The Faith 

Inasmuch as the death of the Venerable Gangodawila Soma was exploited for their own ends by the proponents of race-hate and bigotry, it precipitated a genuine outpouring of public grief. Soma Thero argued for a reversion to personal, introspective Buddhism, and campaigned for the shunning of ritual, idolatry and tree worship. He urged true Buddhists to meditate and to adopt the discipline - the vinaya - of Buddhism. This did not endear him to the Buddhist establishment, which maintained a stony public silence on his teachings while denigrating him behind his back. It did win him disciples among the thinking Buddhist laity however: people who wanted to practice Buddhism in the way the Buddha taught it.

But even as Soma Thero's authority grew, so did his political ambition - not for power, but for influence. He soon began adding a hefty dose of Sinhala bigotry into his sermons, arguing not for the racial supremacy of the Sinhalese (no neo-Nazi he) but for the defence of Sinhala culture, territory and tradition against dilution as a result of the influences of other religions. He even unabashedly argued against family planning for Buddhists on the grounds that they should breed on par with or faster than the minorities.

Soma Thero's death thus became the forum for a resurgence of Sinhala-Buddhist bigotry, fanned and fuelled by the Sihala Urumaya in consort with the JVP. His body was hijacked by the neo-Nazis and used to unleash a (thankfully futile) wave of provocative attacks, both through the media and through posters on the nation's walls, against Christians in general and Lalith Kotelawela in particular (presumably because of his perceived advocacy of peace at any price). The focus on Christianity was not without foundation: many people see the proselytization of Buddhists into Christians of the fundamentalist evangelical kind as a direct affront to their culture. Buddhists have long grumbled about the manner in which their members have converted to Christianity, joining the churches mushrooming across the country.

Evangelical Christianity is unquestionably a lure to the people of a poor country such as ours. Foreign money flows in to fund not just these churches' charitable deeds but also the construction of places of education cum worship, at which unsuspecting Buddhists are alleged to fall prey to the missionary zeal of 'born again' preachers and their 'hysterical,' ecstatic preaching. Unlike Buddhism, in which one must work hard indeed for enlightenment, Christianity offers a quick fix: immediate salvation, a place at the right hand of God himself, if only the prospective convert asserts that he believes in Christ and expresses a willingness to be 'saved' while having his sins forgiven at the same time. Add to this the fact that many evangelical churches have plenty of volunteers to give each convert personal attention and assistance, and often even funds to help them out of a bad patch, and you can't go wrong.

The catch? Evangelical Christianity requires its converts to go out and themselves convert others: this was not so much the doctrine of Christ as the doctrine of Paul, who never actually met Jesus Christ but was conveniently adopted by the early church because he supplied the dogmatic policies Christ himself had failed to provide.

Traditionalist Sinhalese-Buddhists face an unremitting frustration in seeing members of their families, their friends and neighbours converting and joining the congregations of new churches, resulting not just in a change of personal religion, but also cultural and social outlook. What is more irksome to the traditionalist Buddhist, it often seems that these churches unethically bribe people to join them, by offers of money or, in the words of one critic, a bottle of Orange Barley to a neglected patient in hospital. They also prey on their fears by threatening eternal damnation should potential converts resist. Evangelical Christianity has got the Buddhist establishment worried, and with good cause.

Let us dwell a moment then, on the apprehensions Buddhists feel given this onslaught on their numbers. We need first to face the fact that the vast majority of the people on this planet do not consciously choose a religion: we have our religion thrust upon us at birth. Forced to adopt the religion of our parents, from our earliest childhood, religious practices are drummed into us leaving us no choice to examine the options given this indoctrination. Surely, we each have a right to choose our own religion, but this right is usurped at the very moment of our birth by our parents, who force us into the stereotype of whatever religion it is that they happen to espouse. Few stop to think of the immorality of this 'conversion' and there is little discussion of the lack of ethics involved. This in fact is where the 'unethical conversions' begin, be it by the Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhist or any other religion.

From our very birth, each of us is culturally nurtured within our parents' religious doctrine, making us good Buddhists, Hindus, Moslems or Christians as the case may be. Religion has thus become part of our demography and cultural identity. That then, is why the SU and JVP get mixed up in the defence of Buddhism. It is not Buddhism as the Buddha taught that they have in mind, but the Sinhala-Buddhist culture and set of values, which they think is imperilled. If it was Buddhism they seek to protect, they should be out there arguing for truly Buddhist principles. To start with, they might have lamented publicly the fact that Soma Thero was, because of his 'low' caste, ineligible to be part of the Sangha that belongs to the Siyam Nikaya, which is reserved for the goigama. They have to even wear their robe differently to show the distinction. Yet, none of the leaders of the SU or JVP has argued for reform on this score - something that discriminated directly against their hero. They obviously do not believe in putting their own house in order first, particularly in relation to the 'caste' distinctions practised by many a diehard Buddhist. It is not politically prudent to do so and much safer to focus on the danger to the true practise of Buddhism from outside than within.

Look in today's classifieds and you will see dozens of marriage advertisements by Sinhala-Buddhist parents of one case or another seeking a like-pedigreed spouse for their offspring. Are these Buddhists? Not, alas, in the opinion of the Buddha. The fact that the evangelical Christians accept all people as equals regardless of caste is surely a trump in their hand when it comes to welcoming the downtrodden into their number.

Astonishingly, even as the anti-Christian hysteria built up over the past weeks, the Catholic Church issued a hasty statement distancing itself from evangelical Christianity. Heaven knows that the Catholics have been as much a victim of the Born Agains as the Buddhists have. But the Catholic Church forgot to mention how it is that they got themselves established here in the first place: not by inducing members with offers of Orange Barley, but by herding them to baptism at the point of a sword and then threatening them with eternal damnation if they dared decamp. And inasmuch as many Buddhist priests (including at least one of the most prominent advocates of the JVP and SU) drink alcohol and eat a hearty dinner, we must not forget reports that cardinals of the Catholic Church have been engaged in mass paedophilia.

We have to bear in mind that a significant minority of Sri Lankans of all faiths live in abject poverty. Of course, they will cling to any glimmer of salvation. After all, it is better to drink Orange Barley than Folidol, which many of them in desperation opt to do. We claim to be a Buddhist country, but have the world's highest rate of alcohol consumption. Who's drinking all that arrack? The eight percent that is Christian? What is the worth of Buddhists who do not practise the vinaya but abandon it the moment an alternative beckons?

We need to remember that people have a fundamental right to choose and practice their religion. If we object to Christians operating in Sri Lanka, does this mean that the Buddhist Vihares in London, Washington, Melbourne, Rome and countless other foreign cities must be closed down? After all, are not people in those countries converting to Buddhism, which is claimed to be the world's fastest-growing religion? And what of Christians who have adopted Buddhism, even the opportunistic ones like S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike and J.R. Jayewardene, who did it only because it was politically expedient? Could they have aspired to leadership if they honestly said they would retain the faith to which they were born, rather than converting to Buddhism? Are these then not unethical conversions rewarded not by just 'Orange Barley' but Head of State status?

The world is changing too fast for most of us. The proliferation of Western culture that accompanies the adoption of a market economy can be very threatening, indeed. Lax morals on television, unrestricted access to the internet, McDonalds, Pizza Hut, Kentucky Fried. It is a new world, and many of us are frightened because our system of values is challenged and the integrity of our culture is threatened. That is only natural. But, like everything else, we must recognize first and foremost that religion is personal and is not a part of culture. Many Buddhists celebrated Christmas last week: they drank a bit extra, ate well, gave presents and sent cards (Christmas, after all, is a pagan festival that has no place in Christianity: what is a Christmas tree if not a carried-forward ritual of tree worship?). Likewise, many Christians will tour the city to see the Vesak decorations, many even decorating their homes and lighting fireworks. This is not a threat to either religion: it is a celebration of culture.

Even as the nation struggled to find its morals, it is cause for rejoicing that at least one person had the courage of her convictions. President Kumaratunga, unafraid of the political consequences, stated publicly and clearly that she would not tolerate the intimidation of minorities over Soma Thero's death. She went so far as to have places of non-Buddhist worship guarded against provocative attacks. We give her special praise for this as it was hardly the 'popular' thing to do at a time when extremists among the JVP she is courting were themselves fomenting hatred. She also did not seek to score points off Soma Thero's funeral, sending her former secretary to read out a message, in effect distancing herself from the proceedings. The UNF government might well take a leaf from her book on both leadership and governance, and in future take a courageous and open stand on matters of public controversy. That's what leadership is all about.

The Sunday Leader has been frequently accused of Christian bias, possibly because we take a contrary and often controversial stand on issues of public interest. Adherents of almost every religion will find the contents of this article irksome. That is because we say it like it is, unbowed and unafraid. Among our five-member board of directors are three Buddhists inclusive of the Chairman (yes, Sinhala Buddhists), one Hindu and one Christian: so much for Christian bias! We stand for a secular Sri Lanka in which each one is free to practice a religion of their choice; a Sri Lanka which is free of bigotry; and a Sri Lanka which is progressive and not poised to move into a dark age in which religion is dangerously mixed with government. If that is heresy, so be it.