Woman with the Buddha tattoo: Much more economics in episode than religious sentiments
An apology to the deported woman by tourism authorities
Two weeks ago, a British woman tourist
sporting a tattoo of the meditating Buddha on her upper arm was
deported from Sri Lanka on the orders of the courts. Interestingly, the
order had been sought from the courts not by the Tourist Police or the
Immigration Authorities but by the ordinary Police. According to
reports, the learned magistrate had delivered the order of deportation
on the ground that her presence in the country will hurt the religious
sentiments of the majority faith in the country.
The judgment, one may ponder, would have been made to avert two
disasters: save the tourist from possible attacks by the enraged
Buddhists and prevent it from escalating to violent agitations in the
country. It that were so, it could be considered a precautionary action
taken by him.
It was also reported that after she was confined to a prison cell,
Sri Lanka’s Tourism authorities had visited her and offered her return
journey in business class and a free visit to Sri Lanka on a future date
since she could not enjoy her visit to the country this time. The
apparent damage control move by the Tourism authorities implies that
they are not in agreement with the action by the Police or the lowest
court in the country.
An appeal to the conscience of Buddhists by Chief Sanga Nayaka of America
The reaction of the local population to this episode was mixed. Some
had expressed their anger at the authorities, while some others had
approved of their action. But even those who had disapproved of her
deportation had not raised the issue from the point of view of the
arbitrariness of the action or violation of human rights or disregard of
the Rule of Law.
Even the learned Buddhists had been silent on whether there is any truth
in the charge that the tourist had insulted Buddhism by having a tattoo
of the Buddha on her body. It was only the Chief Sanga Nayaka of
America, Ven Walpola Piyananda, who had raised the issue from that point.
The Venerable Sanga Nayaka having appealed to the rational side of
the Sri Lankan Buddhists had asked the question whether the Thai
Buddhist monks with similar tattoos on their bodies will also be
returned to Thailand in the event of their visiting Sri Lanka. He had
also asked Sri Lankan Buddhists to consider how they would feel if a
Buddhist monk wearing a saffron robe is thrown out of USA on the ground
of being disrespectful to society just because they look different in
their dresses.
The appeal by the Venerable Sanga Nayaka to the Buddhists back at
home has been that they should come out of their childish world outlook
and learn to appreciate and tolerate emerging global differences in
religion and religious practices.
The deportation is not just religious
Many might consider the incident as an extreme reaction by
authorities driven by religious sentiments. But that is not so when one
looks deeper into it. It raises several issues from what is known as
‘economic sociology’ that dates back to the time of the British
Economist William Stanley Jevons who coined the term in 1879.
Max Weber, the late 19th century German philosopher, later expanded
the frontiers of the subject by analysing the relationship between
economics and religion and cultural disenchantment which the modernity
had brought to society in the current era. In a path-breaking book
titled ‘The Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism’ and published in
German in 1905 and in English in 1930, Weber argued that modern
capitalism and its entrepreneurship were born after individuals were
freed from the crutches of the church and secularism was propagated in
society.
It caused the private enterprise to flourish, the backbone of modern
capitalism-based economic development. In the same book, Weber argued
that society gets disenchanted from old traditions, values and emotions
as motivators of people’s behaviour and embraces, instead, rational
approach to life. Rulers don’t have absolute powers
In traditional societies, authority is derived from traditions –
whether it is from royalty or from religious power. Weber argued that in
modern societies, it is the legal power guided by rational thinking
that gives one authority to rule others conceptualised as
‘rational-legal-authority’. He identified three important
characteristics of modern states that are guided by this
rational-legal-authority.
First, there is an administrative and legal order that has been
created and can be changed by legislation. Second, the ruler has
authority over citizens and their actions within its jurisdiction.
Third, the ruler has the right to use physical force ‘legitimately’
within its jurisdiction. Thus, the rational-legal-authority is not
absolute but bounded by laws that prescribe fairness and justice. And
these laws are also not unchangeable but could be amended or abolished
if they do not adhere to fairness and justice. Fairness and justice lead
to another conception in society – the Rule of Law – that no one is
above law and everyone is equally subject to law.
Rule of Law is twisted in societies ruled by religious leaders
Societies ruled by religions or religious leaders are not guided by
rational-legal-authority but by traditions, practices and unchangeable
customs. The Rule of Law in such societies is twisted since the
religious clergy holds a superior position over the rest. Hence, the law
provides a distinctive impunity and power to those who belong to the
ruling religious class. This class enjoys the same powers and privileges
even when a country is ruled by lay rulers who are guided and directed
by religious leaders. In such countries, laws are enacted by lay
legislators or government organs are created by rulers purely on the
advice of religious leaders.
There could be two types of oppression in such societies. First, if
society is composed of people of the same religion, those who are
critical of religious leaders or their practices are oppressed. Second,
if society is pluralistic, both the dissenting individuals in the same
religion and those who belong to other religions, ethnic groups or
classes are oppressed.
In other words, everyone in such a society is coerced to follow the
rules framed by religious leaders without exception. Some do so
willingly because they are materially rewarded by the religious
establishment; some others do so because they have been emotionally
brainwashed of the benefits of following those rules. But many others do
so because they do not have any other alternative since disobedience
results in harsh punishments.
Faith leading to identify dissenters as enemies
Religion addresses to the spirituality of people which cannot be
perceived objectively. Hence, it belongs to the emotional side of human
beings who, unlike animals, can imagine things in their minds. These
imaginations, then, inculcate faith in people and faith is guided by
emotional build-up of individuals. Faith and emotions nourish each
other. Thus, a society ruled by religions or religious leaders is full
of collective faith and collective emotions. This collective faith and
collective emotions immediately classify people into two groups.
Those who adhere to the same collective faith and collective emotions
are reckoned as friends; those who do not, as foes. When emotions run
high, the use of violence to subdue foes is justified though the basic
tenets of the underlying religion may underscore peace, peaceful
coexistence and non-violence when it comes to dealing with other
religions or ethnic groups. At this stage, rationality is overcome by
insanity. The appeal by the Chief Sanga Nayaka of America to Buddhists
back at home was not to allow insanity to rule over rationality.
Disagreements: Key to progress
In a pluralistic world with diverse ideas, it is quite natural for
people to disagree with each other. In fact, such disagreements are
beneficial for mankind to gain wisdom and attain enlightenment.
Societies have moved forward and civilisations have flourished not by
agreement but by disagreement which leads to free inquiry, criticism and
questioning the prevailing knowledge.
This was beautifully put by the founding Vice Chancellor of the
former Vidyodaya University, Venerable Weliwitiye Sri Soratha Thero, in
his advice to students of that university. The learned Thero said that
‘university students should be probing, critical and rebellious’. In
other words, university students should not accept anything without
examining, should carefully evaluate both pluses and minuses and
question the prevailing knowledge if they were to be useful members of
society.
The Nobel Laureate in economics, F.A. Hayek said the same in a
slightly different way in his 1960 book, The Constitution of Liberty,
that: “If we are to advance, we must leave room for a continuous
revision of our present conceptions and ideals which will be
necessitated by further experience.”
The Buddha welcomed disagreements
Buddhism is a unique religion because its Master, the Buddha,
welcomed disagreeing views. His method was to clarify, analyse and
establish with facts and logic what he preached instead of coercing his
followers to accept them. Every discourse made by him starts with an
inquiry from the Bhikkus in the audience what they had been discussing
before his arrival at the Sermon Hall and asking them whether they would
wish him to clarify the issue. He preached only after the Bhikkus
invited him to do so.
In Brahmajala Sutta in Diga Nikaya, he advised the Bhikkus not to get
angry even when others have insulted him or the Dhamma or the Sangha or
not to get elated when others have praised him or the Dhamma or the
Sangha. The Bhikkus were advised to clarify the position without getting
angry or overjoyed, as the case may be, because both anger and joy
disturb the peace in mind and become an impediment to attaining
enlightenment.
Disagreements to be resolved through open dialogues
Thus, when there is a disagreement, what is necessary is an open
dialogue but conducted using ethical and moral means. In Kathavatthu
Sutta in Anguttara Nikaya, his advice to the Bhikkus was that when a
question is asked of them, not to wander from one thing to another, not
to pull the discussion off the topic, not to show anger, hatred and
displeasure at his opponent, not to seek to crush the opponent by
ridiculing him or grasping at his little mistakes or not to come up with
irrelevant matters.
In Kalama Sutta in Anguttara Nikaya, he advised the Kalama clan that
they should not accept anything as true because it has been repeatedly
said, in accord with tradition, in a scripture, heard as rumour, related
by a teacher or in agreement with reasoning and logic. Instead, they
should ponder on it and accept it if they find it beneficial and good
for someone. His advice to all was that they should not accept his
Dhamma until they have personally verified its truthfulness. Thus, in
Buddhism, judgments are not made through emotions but by applying
rational thinking.
The Buddha image: Universal symbol of wisdom, enlightenment and inner peace
The Buddha did not approve of anyone worshipping his body or
materials he has used in a bid to attain enlightenment. They were,
according to him, attachments that impede one’s journey toward attaining
enlightenment. Hence, he advised everyone to follow his Dhamma and not
him.
In Vakkali Sutta in Samyutta Nikaya, he advised Bhikku Vakkali who
had been enamoured by the Buddha’s body and could not keep his eyes off
him that if the latter desired to see the Buddha he should follow his
Dhamma faithfully. For about 400 to 500 years after the Buddha’s passing
away or Parinibbanam, his disciples followed this wise counsel and
Buddhism was the only religion which did not have an idol to worship.
This was to change after the Gandhara sculptors who had been
influenced by the Greek sculptural and art traditions created the Buddha
statue around the second century BCE. It was not the exact replica of
the Great Master who had lived some 400 years ago but a representation
of Dhamma he had preached. The beauty of the Buddha image created by
these artists is that when one sees it from any angle, one sees the
ingenuous smile of the Buddha that represents his wisdom, enlightenment
and inner peace. Thus, one who worships the Buddha statue is expected to
acquire these qualities which invariably help him in his march toward
enlightenment. Today, the Buddha image is universally used in this
sense.
Thais with the Buddha image as amulets
In different cultures, the Buddha image is used in different ways to
support one’s faith in the religion. In Thailand where about 95% of the
population are Buddhists, it is common among the Thais to wear amulets
of the Buddha images around the neck and have such images tattooed on
the upper part of their torso. The emotionally driven belief here is
that if the Buddha is close to someone, he is close to his path as well.
Thus, it is not considered as an insult to the Great Master or the
Dhamma he has left behind for people to follow.
Instead, it is
considered as supportive for one to inculcate his faith in the Dhamma
the Buddha has preached.
The Westerners who have embraced Buddhism too have followed this
greater cultural tradition to display their faith in the Master.
However, faith is emotional and when individual faith develops into a
collective faith and collective emotions, it also brings forth the
notion of enemy who does not follow the tradition as one has followed.
That is what has happened to the Sri Lanka’s Buddhists today.
The woman with the tattoo is a rebel against Christian culture
The British woman with a tattoo of the Buddha on her upper arm should
be considered a rebel in her pro-Christian culture. According to
reports, she had been a nurse for mental patients and she had been bold
enough to display her new religious faith without the fear of being
persecuted by a predominantly-Christian society. This is possible only
in cultures that tolerate opposing views and recognise diversity in
faiths. The non-tolerant faith and emotion-driven Buddhist culture of
the day in Sri Lanka is far from these ideals.
Sri Lanka’s shame: Callous system infested with corruption
But what she revealed after she returned to the UK should be an
eye-opener for all Sri Lankans. She charged that the Police had
attempted to extort money from her, the lawyer she had retained had not
supported her, there were open sexual gestures by some when she was in
the cell and the Magistrate did not give an opportunity for her to even
explain herself. All these point to corruption in the system and absence
of the Rule of Law, which does not bring any credit to Sri Lanka’s
Buddhist led system of government and governance.
These are serious issues which Sri Lanka has to resolve on a priority
basis if it wants to assure progress, peace and harmony among different
ethnic, religious and social groups in society. Sri Lanka is moving
away from rationality and embracing emotionalism as its value system as
posited in economic sociology. Hence, there is much more economics in
the incident involving the woman with the tattoo of the Buddha than
religious sentiments. (By: W.A Wijewardena )
1/
2/
3/
4/
Home Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)