THE ENTERPRISING CASE OF A MODERN DAY ARHANT REVISITED
December 14th, 2022By Rohana R. Wasala
I wrote a long feature article (entitled ‘Case of a modern day arhant’) in September/October 2017 about a controversial Buddhist monk named Pitiduwe Siridhamma. This person (b. 1975) became a bhikkhu in his mid-twenties, as he claims, on leaving the university with a bachelor’s degree in science. In the course of time he earned a name among Sri Lankan Buddhists as a popular preacher. However, Siridhamma later gained a different kind of popularity and identity under the alias Siri Samantabadra from what was originally associated with him. He conferred this title on himself after allegedly achieving the rare spiritual state known as arhanthood. ‘Samantabadra’ being a special name or epithet exclusively reserved for the Gautama Buddha himself, Siridhamma’s irreverent assumption of that name as a self-proclaimed arhant is an abomination in itself to most ordinary Buddhists. The monk has done worse more recently. It’s begun to appear as if he is trying to replace the Buddha in the hearts of the pious Buddhists, though seemingly living in the lap of luxury as it were, which is quite contrary to the simple way of living that a bhikkhu (a mendicant monk) is expected to adopt.The renewed notoriety that the monk is apparently enjoying these days prompted me to have my article published again as a small contribution to efforts by concerned monks and lay Buddhists towards ensuring the unimpeded perpetuation of the country’s dominant Buddhist religious cultural establishment, which has an unbroken history of over two millennia, whose demise will be the death of our unique nation. I am offering you below my article published in Lankaweb and elsewhere five years ago. It is here divided into four sections for reading convenience under a slightly changed title. RRW
THE ENTERPRISING CASE OF A MODERN DAY ARHANT – I
There is no doubt that Buddhists were shocked and pained and gravely upset by what Ven. Samanthabhadra Thera recently said about two of the most venerated objects of Buddhist worship in the country: the Dantha Dhatu or the Sacred Tooth Relic and the Lalata Dhatu or the Sacred Frontal Bone Relic, both believed by them to be those of the Buddha. During acts of worship, these sacred relics make the devout Buddhist worshippers feel as if the Buddha were before them in flesh and blood. But Ven. Samanthabhadra Thera remarked that the first is a tooth of a wild boar, and that the second is a seashell. He further said that the foolish devotees worshipping these things will be reborn as mala perethayo” (a class of manes in local Buddhist belief born into a state of misery) for what he called this foolish superstitious practice (of worshipping what he alleges to be animal bones). He also referred the lay official in charge of the Tooth Relic as ‘mala perethaya’). This information is from a You Tube video recently posted by Siri Sadaham Ashramaya, where the maverick monk resides.
Ven. Samanthabhadra Thera styles himself as an Arahant. It is well known that the monk who now appears by that name was ordained, and until a few years back known, as Pitiduwe Siridhamma. Of course, if he is really what he says he is, only he will know it. But are we obliged to take his word for it? Certainly not! Accepting anything on mere report or hearsay or scriptural authority without experiential evidence is not the Budddhist way as explained in the Kalama Sutta. In this case, Buddhists/or other interested observers must look for external signs (evidence) of his Arahanthood to convince themselves of the authenticity of his claim. I don’t mean that he must possess miraculous powers that some simple unsophisticated ordinary Buddhists attribute to Arahaths in popular tradition such as alleged abilities of clairvoyance, mind reading, magical aerial transportation etc. Instead, one should look for characteristic behaviours of his that convince us that he is a person who has annihilated the illusion of self and put a final end to samsaric suffering. Though he could have attained that state for all we know, his recent actions and speeches in the course of his normal religious ministry leave at least some of us sceptical about his claims.
At the very outset, I’d like to kindly remind my readers that, as usual, my attitude as an essayist or newspaper columnist can be simply expressed thus: ‘This is what I think about this matter, i.e., here, the case of Ven. Samanthabhadra Thera, and these are my reasons for my opinion. What do you think, if you happen to take an interest in the subject?’ My personal belief is that jointly searching after the truth in any situation is socially beneficial and individually satisfying, promoting the central goal of Buddhism: social harmony and individual happiness (an idea articulated to me by a Buddhist scholar I personally know, who, I believe will prefer not to be named, because he is least concerned with name and fame or selfhood). I am mindful of the fact that by some of my readers I could be reduced to the position of one among ‘Fools (who) rush in where angels fear to tread’ as the early 18th century English poet Alexander Pope wrote. He was writing ‘An Essay on Criticism’ (1711) about good literary criticism and bad. I am here applying it to a critical characterization of a controversial personage who is important to us which I am indulging in at present, but I don’t feel like a fool at all.
I have the highest regard for Ven. Samanthabhadra’s scientific attitude to Buddhism. His incisive, analytical explanation of the Dhamma to the average Buddhist upasaka upasikas (male and female followers of the Buddha Dhamma) in simple clear language is admirable. His criticism of popular Buddhism in Sri Lanka as a false deviant version of the original teaching of the Buddha is a valid one. That there are avaricious, corrupt, worldly monks who resist a reestablishment of the true Buddhist way of life among themselves and their followers is also a fact. My focus here, however, is the undesirability of the monk’s bull in a china shop behavior (as seen in his indiscriminate attack on fellow bhikkhus and the Mahanayake Theras among whom many, I believe, are as virtuous and as erudite as he is himself) which ultimately is bound to defeat his purpose. There is no question about the need to reform these aspects of the Buddhasasana. But it is up to the Maha Sangha themselves to set things right in a non-political religiously acceptable manner without letting well intentioned lone monks play the role of the skilled physician, called upon to cure a person suffering from indigestion, who boasted, when his patient died during his treatment: Although my patient died, he purged well”! My friends who disagree with me are kindly invited to produce counter arguments to demolish mine.
According to Ven. Dr Walpola Rahula Thera, an unrivalled authority on both Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism, an Arahant is one who is free from all fetters, defilements and impurities through the realization of Nirvana in the fourth and final stage, and who is free from rebirth” (‘What the Buddha Taught’ {First published by Gordon Fraser, London, 1959; but I am using here the 2006 edition of the book published by the Buddhist Cultural Centre, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka} p. 142. This is the most comprehensive yet succinct treatise on Buddhism that I have read). Verse 92 of Dhammapada as translated by Indian monk Ven. Sri Archarya Buddharakkhita (1922-2013)describes ‘The Perfected Ones’ (Arahants) as
‘Those who do not accumulate
and are wise regarding food,
whose object is the Void,
the Unconditioned Freedom –
their track cannot be traced,
like that of birds in the air.’,
where the translator elucidates accumulate as also including accumulation of kamma, and food as referring to physical nutriment, sensory impressions, volitional activity and rebirth consciousness, all of which feed the process of continued existence. In his translation of the Dhammapada, German oriental scholar F. Max Muller (1823-1900) defines ‘the Void, the Unconditioned Freedom’ of Verse 92 as ‘Nirvana’.
The illusory I” consciousness, the illusion of self/soul/ego, is a great source of the unsatisfactoriness of life according to the Buddhist teaching. An Arahat has completely eliminated the erroneous sense of self. But, to me it appears (my observation could be wrong, of course) that Ven. Samanthabhadra constantly shows a deep preoccupation with himself (egoism), in fact, egotism, the notion that he is superior to all others. How could he celebrate his birthday, calling it an alms giving though, in the form of a buffet lunch with flower-bedecked uniform-clad young women in attendance, with a vast array of dishes to choose from including a ‘pork curry’ (to which he drew special attention), a far cry from a simple frugal meal that bhikkhus (mendicant monks) would be normally satisfied with, particularly at a time when many poor people of the country fail to properly feed their children most days? This is puzzling to me as it must to many others as well. If such behavior were found in an ordinary person, I’d have wondered: ‘Could there be something gone wrong here?’ But such a notion about Ven. Samanthabhadra Thera, of such spiritual attainments, is inconceivable.
The reason is this: My observation reminded me of something I read in neuroscientist and student of Buddhism Dr Sam Harris’s book ‘Waking Up: Searching for spirituality without religion’(Transworld Publishers, London, September 2014); he claims that he has done meditation, including vipassana meditation taught in Buddhism, for many years. (Incidentally, Ven. Samanthabhadra often stresses the importance of this form of Buddhist meditation for final Emancipation and communicates to us a lucid practical explanation of the subject.) The book has some valuable advice for serious practitioners of meditation. It warns them about the danger of pathological responses to meditation occurring, a field where little research has been done, as he points out. Dr Harris thinks that this is something that both teachers and students of meditation should guard against. Buddhist scholars are not unaware of this danger. Ven. Dr Walpola Rahula Thera devotes one whole chapter of the aforementioned book to the subject of meditation: Chapter VII ‘Meditation’ or Mental Culture: Bhavana’ (pp. 67-75). The chapter begins with a statement of the Buddha, which says that there are two kinds of illness in the world, physical and mental, and that although there seem to be people who stay physically healthy for one or two or even for a hundred or more years, few in this world are free from mental illness even for a moment, except those who are free from mental defilements (i.e., Arahants). The chapter spells out the prescribed way for meditation that forestall pathological responses (though of course, Dr Harris’s phraseology is not anticipated there).
To be continued.
