Lankan leader sought India's return to Buddhism
BUDDHISM: Anagarika Dharmapala, the famous Sri Lankan Buddhist leader
who spearheaded a successful movement to revive Buddhism and Buddhist
culture in his island country in the late 19th and early 20th centuries,
had also urged the Hindus of India to return to Buddhism.
He fought hard, against great odds, to secure for the Buddhists,
spread across Asia, control over the main Buddhist shrines in India like
Bodh Gaya. He helped restore these shrines to their past glory, and
founded the Maha Bodhi Society to sustain his mission.
Anagarika Dharmapala |
While this was a great achievement, he would have been immeasurably
happier if Buddhism was restored in India, its birth place. That would
not only be in the interest of Buddhism, but in the interest of India
itself, for its social, intellectual, political and economic progress,
he argued.
Dharmapala deeply lamented that Buddhism had vanished from its land
of birth, where it was a principal religion for many centuries, spawning
a great civilisation. He wondered how powerful Buddhism would be in the
world, and how wonderful relations between India and Sri Lanka would be,
if only India, with its teeming millions, were to go back to Buddhism.
Dharmapala was by no means an enemy of Hinduism.
He did not desire the annihilation of Hinduism. He recognised the
basic differences between the two systems of beliefs and practices, and
yet he saw a basic commonality, which made co-existence possible and
desirable.
To him, Hinduism and Buddhism were part of a continuum, with Buddhism
being a higher stage of development in a long series. Dharmapala set out
his thoughts on this very lucidly, in a lecture he delivered at the
Albert Hall in Calcutta on October 25, 1891. Giving his view of Buddhism
in contrast to all other religions, Dharmapala said that the Buddha had
preached to Indians, "a realistic doctrine" and not an abstract
principle.
He promulgated a religion "free from all super human agencies and
devoid of all anthropomorphic conceptions." Anthropomorphism is the
attribution of human form or human attributes to God or the Gods.
The Buddha had acquired the stored wisdom of ages. After studying
them and the limits of asceticism for six long years, he "discovered the
law of Truth for the attainment of beatitude by liberating the human
being from his own acts." The Truth was revealed to five ascetic
Brahmins at the Deer Park in Rishipatana near Benaras (Varanasi) more
than 2,500 years ago.
"The day on which this grand discovery was made, opened a new era in
the history of men and thought," Dharmapala noted. "The doctrine of
supreme purification and intelligence, the panacea which was revealed to
the world has given relief to hundreds of millions of human beings,
converted many of them into sages and saints, and has given a thorough
moral tone to the religions of the world," Dharmapala asserted.
Buddhist rule was India's golden age Arguing for a return to
Buddhism, he recalled that Buddhism had moulded the destiny of the
Indian nation in its "brightest, palmiest and most glorious days."
"The best historians and the most impartial writers of India have
admitted that at no time was India more in her glory than when the
Buddhist system was prevailing." Quoting Hunter he said that it was to
Buddhist impulses that Indian architecture owed its development. It was
in Buddhist institutions that the science of medicine flourished. Public
hospitals came up for the first time during Buddhist rule.
In his History of the Civilisation of Ancient India RC Dutt said: "It
was in the Buddhist age that the most brilliant results were achieved in
astronomy. For six centuries after 1200 AD the history of the Hindus is
blank." Dharmapala attributed the decline of Buddhism and Buddhist rule
to Muslim invasions from the North West.
"The darkest days of India were during the Mohomedan period, and the
religion of enlightenment (Buddhism) was nowhere to be found," he said.
And describing the decline, he said that with the loss of Buddhism, "a
reign of inanition (emptiness) set in." "Bigotry, intolerance,
persecution, worked heavily during this period," he said. But British
rule, which supplanted Muslim rule, brought about a tangible difference,
he noted.
"The past one hundred years had been a kind of filing off the rust
which had accumulated during the dark period. We see now a spirit of
tolerance setting in."
"Education is spreading and with it, expansion of intellect. With the
progress of thought, man aspires to independence to grapple with the
mighty problems to which theology gives no consistent and satisfactory
answer," Dharmapala observed.
This augured well for the wide acceptance of an advanced and
progressive philosophy like Buddhism, he proposed. Evolution of thought
Dharmapala said that Buddhism represented the high point of thought in
an evolutionary process.
"Looking back, we find that in the unprogressive and undeveloped
state of mind of man, he always looks for extraneous help." "The powers
of nature are so grand and awe inspiring that in his poverty of
intellect to solve them, he apotheosises and commences adoring them."
"Hence we find polytheism (worship of many Gods) in the early days."
Rituals, sacrifices, the development of a priesthood and hierarchies
appeared during the effort to appease the Gods as seen as in the forces
of nature. Worship also began to be directed towards worldly gains. When
the intellect grew, new ideas came into existence, as seen in the
celebrated Upanishads, Dharmapala pointed out. On the Upanishads, he
could do no better than quote the well-known German Indologist, Max
Muller.
In his Hibbert Memorial Lectures on the Upanishads, Max Muller had
said: "The object of the Upanishads was to show the utter uselessness,
nay the mischievousness of all ritual performances; to condemn every
sacrificial act which has for its motive a desire or hope of reward; to
deny, if not the existence, at least the exceptional and exalted
character of the Devas; and to teach that there is no hope of salvation
and deliverance except by the individual self recognising the true and
universal self."
Dharmapala said that the Bhagawat Gita was but a development of the
Upanishads. Further, he saw links between the ideas expressed in the
Gita and Buddhism. "It is almost generally admitted that the Bhagawat
Gita contains a Philosophy more comprehensive and compact than the
Philosophy of the Upanishads."
"Now it will appear strange to those who take Buddhism as a system of
materialism to be pointed out the remarkable identity of doctrines in
the Buddhist Books and the Gita," he said.
Dharmapala went a step further and said that Buddhism went deeper
into the mysteries of life than either the Gita or the Upanishads. To
underscore this point, Dharmapala quoted a well-known contemporary
authority on comparative religions, Justice Telang of the Bombay High
Court, to say that Buddhism had concepts, which had appeared in "less
thorough-going manifestations" in the Upanishads and the Gita.
"The Upanishads, with the Gita and the Precepts of the Buddha, appear
to be the successive embodiments of the spiritual thought of the age,"
Telang had said. Buddhism is not nastika Dharmapala corrected the
widespread impression that Buddhism had no God and that it was
materialistic.
It was Prof HH Wilson who first propagated the notion that Buddhism
was materialistic. And he might have done this because his Sanskrit
teachers had confused the Charvakas, the sensual materialists in the
Gita, with the Buddhists. Dharmapala pointed out that the Charavakas
were not Buddhists. "If there ever was a teacher who systematically
combated the views of materialists it was the Buddha," he asserted.
"Even today, Brahmin scholars have put down in the most careless way
that Buddhism is a nastika system. They may as well condemn the
Upanishads and the Gita, wherein the uselessness of ritual performances
is demonstrated," Dharmapala quipped.
"Buddhism is the highest - expression of philosophical thought. The
highest spirituals conceptions have been found therein," he asserted.
And in support, he quoted Max Muller again, who said that the moral code
of Buddhism was "one of the most perfect the world has ever known."
According to Prof Kunte, "The Buddhist Yoga Philosophy is more
transcendental than the yoga system of Patanjali.
In its comprehensiveness in ethics, transcendental metaphysics and
yoga, no system can compare with the Buddhistic one, because it is the
highest aspect or rather the climax of Aryan philosophy." Prof Rhys
Davids had called the Buddha an agnostic. Others had said that his was a
pessimistic doctrine, only because he had said that existence was a
misery. But Dharmapala argued that the Buddha was never an agnostic.
As far as pessimism went, he said that there was no place for
pessimism in the Buddhist system, which rested on "realistic idealism".
Nirvana too had been wrongly interpreted as "annihilation". But
Dharmapala, following Max Muller, asked: "Where is the pessimism of the
Nirvanee swimming in the sea of calmness and delight exemplified in the
life of the Buddha and the Arahants?"
The Buddha asked his followers, the Bhikkhus, to avoid the extremes
and stick to the Middle Path, a very practical and yet noble way to live
and be happy in this world, Dharmapala pointed out. The Buddha had said
that there are two extremes: (1) sensuality (2) asceticism. The former
was low, ignoble, sensual, unworthy and unprofitable for the attainment
of spiritual happiness; and the latter was painful, unworthy and
unprofitable.
There was the Middle Path discovered by the Buddha, a path which
would lead to peace of mind, higher wisdom and full enlightenment,
"Nirvana". Dharmapala said that these ideas would be acceptable as the
society progressed in terms of education and intellect.
"With the progress of education and development of intellect, the
barriers raised by priestcraft and selfishness, between man and man,
will be removed; and man breathing pure air of love, will see that it is
far better that a spirit of brotherhood should be fostered for the
elevation of humanity. Then and then alone Buddhism will be
appreciated," he said.
Challenges theory that Sankara drove Buddhism out of India Dharmapala
challenged the popular theory that Adi Sankara (8th century AD) drove
Buddhism out of India with his Advaita philosophy and relentless
India-wide debating campaign.
Quoting Prof HH Wilson, Dharmapala said that Adi Sankara did not
engage in any particular controversy with Buddhists. He had no quarrel
with the Buddhists.
Wilson had said: " The most prominent objects of his opposition are
the Mimansakas, as represented by Madana Misra, with whom he holds a
long and acrimonious discussion, and the Nyayakas and Sankhyas; and the
vulgar sects of Vaishnavas and Saivas; he is especially hostile to the
latter and particularly to the Kapalikas, a class of Saiva worshippers,
who again are his most active enemies, and on occasion assail his
existence." Dharmapala also exploded the myth that Adi Sankara headed a
movement to persecute the Buddhists.
Quoting from Orissa Antiquities by Dr RL Mitter he said: " The belief
is pretty common that a general persecution headed by Sankaracharya was
the main cause of its (Buddhism's) disappearance, and that a long and
protracted war was carried on to effect that object. There is nothing,
however, in the records of the Buddhists and Hindus to support it."
Dharmapala said that during the lifetime of Adi Sankara in the 8th
and 9th centuries AD, and till the 11th.century, Buddhism was
flourishing in North-West India, Kashmir, Magadha and other parts of
India. Blamed Muslims Dharmapala pointed that if any force destroyed
Buddhism in India, it was the Muslim invader from West Asia, who
pillaged and plundered Buddhist and Hindu temples and persecuted
Brahmins and massacred Buddhist monks.
"The last massacre took place in 1202 AC at Odentapuri where two
thousand Buddhist monks were put to death by Bakhtiyar Khilji. After
that event Buddhism disappeared from the land of its birth."
"Though efforts were made one or two centuries later to plant
colonies of Buddhist Bhikshus at the central shrine of Buddha Gaya, all
of them failed.You will, therefore, see that it was the iconoclastic
Mohomedan that destroyed Buddhism in India," Dharmapala said. In his
view, "the civilisation that India enjoyed before Mohamedan conquest was
suited to her nature."
Dharmapala also argued that India would be united into a "compact
whole" only if the polity was based on Buddhism.
The Sri Lankan revivalist concluded his oration with a quote from The
Hindu of June 16, 1891: "If there is anything in the intellectual and
moral legacies of our ancient forefathers, of which we can feel proud,
it is that sublime, pure and simple conception of a religious and moral
system which the world owes to Buddha."
"Educated Indians need not hesitate in helping Buddhism to find a
commanding and permanent footing once more in their midst, and to live
in invigorating and mutually purifying amity with Hinduism itself."
PK Balachandran is Special Correspondent of Hindustan Times in Sri
Lanka.
|