BAPTISINIG THE OLCOTT BUDDHISTS
Mr. Tissa Devendra is "amused at the convoluted logic of NdeS that 'Olcott Buddhists have been there before Colonel Olcott arrived'". It is clear that Mr. Devendra does not know that what is known as Buddhist logic had been there before Buddha. Very often one finds Catuskoti logic being referred to as Buddhist logic but it is not a logic that Buddha formulated. Catuskoti had been in existence for some time when Prince Siddhartha was born but the Buddhists had made use of that logic which has come to be recognised as Buddhist logic. As far as the Buddhists (this is a word coined by the British after they "invented" Buddhism.) are concerned this particular logic is helpful in trying to understand, that is to create knowledge, of what is observed through the sense organs and the mind (mind is also a sense organ in "Buddhism"). However as Ven. Nagarjuna has shown this logic would not be helpful to attain Nibbana. In spite of the fact that Catuskoti had been there before Buddha and that it is not helpful in attaining Nibbana, the logic is referred to as Buddhist logic.
Mr. Devendra questions my credentials as a Mathematician which I am not as I explained in these columns on July 7th, for saying that Olcott Buddhists had been there before Colonel Olcott arrived. Olcott Buddhists is a name given to a set of people whom I have described on number of occasions. It is not a group of people created by the Theosophist Colonel. A group of people, a place, a plant or even a phenomenon could be named after a person or "ism" (as in the case of Buddhist logic) even though what is named had existed before the person after whom it is named. Horton planes had been there before a man called Horton stepped on this island. However Horton place in Colombo 7 came into existence after he came to this country. I only hope that either an Olcott Buddhist or somebody else would not tell me that Horton discovered the Horton planes or it was he who constructed the road known as Horton place. Places, planes, trees and other things are named after a person sometimes to honour him/her, sometimes to remember, and may be due to some contribution by him/her to the development of the thing that is named after the person. Some deceases are named after persons who identified it for the first time though the disease had existed perhaps for thousands of years before that particular person was born. Sometimes names are changed due to political and/or cultural changes as in the case of Victoria Park becoming Vihara Maha Devi Park. Even Ananda College had been known earlier as Buddhist English School and I do not think that any "Anandian" would begin the history of Ananda College from the day the School was named Ananda College. The history of Ananda College began before it was named after Ven. Ananda Thero.
One could say that the park referred to above was named after Vihara Maha Devi who lived long before the Europeans constructed the park. That is not an argument in favour of Mr. Devendra. The Park has been named to honour Vihara Maha Devi (whether she is honoured by that act is a different matter altogether) and if the authorities desire it could be renamed after Chandrika Kumaratunga or Hema Premadasa who were obviously born after the park came into existence. All that I want to emphasise is that a place or a phenomenon, or any thing else for that matter, could be named after a person who was born or was associated with it after the place or the phenomenon came into existence.
If Olcott Buddhists were there before Colonel Olcott arrived in Sri Lanka why call them Olcott Buddhists? We could in fact change the name and call them Devendra Buddhists, after Mr. Tissa Devendra who has come forward very bravely to defend the Olcott Buddhists as he understood them. Did Colonel Olcott "discover" or identify the Olcott Buddhists? Do we name the Olcott Buddhists after the colonel to honour him? We call this group of people Olcott Buddhists because it was Colonel Olcott who made them conscious of being Buddhists by religion by giving them an identity.
The Olcott Buddhists, before the theosophists arrived, were not conscious of their identity. With the spread of the western education and together with it, the ideas of western Christianity, a group of people had dissociated from Sinhalathva way of living but were claiming themselves to be Buddhists following the separation of religion from the way of life, as introduced by the westerners. This group was initially confined to the English speaking Sinhalas and had been influenced by western modernity. They had no difficulty in winning the "arrack rent" and still claim to be Buddhists. They had some pride in being Buddhists and unlike some others who had become Christians, they had towards the second half of the eighteenth century realised that they could win favours from the British by trying to live as British in culture without changing the religion. They had also realised by this time that the religion as such could be separated from the "way of life" and that religion was something that could be practiced similar to practicing a profession.
It is this group of people who imitated the Christian way of life, even in the case of practicing Buddhism. They went to the extent of having benches in "Dharmashalas" in the temples following the benches in the Christian churches ( The Dharmashala of Rankoth Vehera in Panadura is the classic example), discarding the mats that the "upasaka upasikas" had been using. However, they were hurt when some Christians said that Buddhism (or the religion of the Buddha as the British first referred to it) was wrong, and they could not remain silent any more. Perhaps, rationalist ideas had also crept into their minds and they had begun to think of Buddhism as a rationalist religion while thinking that Christianity, that was a product of western modernity itself, was not rationalist. One should not be surprised if they thought, and their cultural descendants think now, that the west would become Buddhist in time to come. If Buddhism is rational and if we live in a rationalist period (age of enlightenment etc.) then Buddhism should become the religion of enlightenment! They would not have understood for a moment that Christianity of Calvin, Luther and others had the same Chinthanaya as the western science. The cultural descendants of this group of people would today claim that Buddhism is scientific, referring of course to western science, and would take pride of being a Buddhist, based on a statement on Buddhism attributed to Russell or Einstein.
The group of people who had become Buddhists were not prepared to keep quiet when Buddhism as a religion was challenged by some evangelists. They took up the challenge and organised the debates now known as the "pancha maha vada". Of course, they had to get the "services" of the Bhikkus for these debates, as they do now for other mundane things, and the Bhikkus though they were no Olcott Buddhists, responded with a different attitude altogether. As far as the ordinary Sinhala Buddhists were concerned the debates were part and parcel of the struggle against western Christian colonialism, and the way of life and misery that the latter had introduced.
The theosophists came to Sri Lanka after the five debates and for them the debates constituted a fight against Christian religion. In essence their attitude was not different from those of the Olcott Buddhists and they had no difficulty in working together. The theosophists were against western Christianity of Luther Calvin variety and were not Buddhists even by religion. Some of them were adherents of what is known as occultism while some others were inclined towards some kind of rationalism though they did not like Christianity that stemmed from the same Chinthanaya as rationalism. As far as the theosophists who believed in a "parama vinnana" Buddhism was an instrument that could be used to fight against Christianity as a religion and not the Christian way of life and western Christian colonialism. With their belief in theosophy they were more Mahayanist than Theravadins in their attitudes but it so happened that they had to come to Sri Lanka and not to Japan or Korea. Colonel Olcott became a Buddhist in Sri Lanka but he never became a Sinhala Buddhist. He became an Olcott Buddhist (could Colonel Olcott have become any other Buddhist) in religion.
In this connection the colonel should be compared with Ven. Mahinda Thero who came to Sri Lanka from Seekim, though referred to as Tibet Jathika S. Mahinda Himi by the Olcott Buddhists. Mahinda Thero became a Sinhala Buddhist unlike the colonel and lived as an ordinary Sinhala Buddhist in a village temple about four miles from Panadura. The Venerable Thero took part in the struggle against western Christian colonialism and was the author of many poems asking the Sinhalas to fight for their freedom. Colonel Olcott did not take part in a struggle against the western Christian colonialists as he was only working against Christianity as a religion. Perhaps he would have been happy if the westerners became Olcott Buddhists giving up Christianity as a religion and continued with their way of life.
As the Olcott Buddhists have a hegemony in matters connected with Buddhism the colonel who did not become a Sinhala Buddhist came to be known as "Olcottthuma" as if his nationality did not matter (he was made an objective "Olcottthuma" with no nationality by the Olcott Buddhists who believe in an objective world following western Christian culture) while the Venerable Thero who became a Sinhala Buddhist was referred to as Tibet Jathika S Mahinda Himi! In fact the British were so much concerned with the activities of Mahinda Thero they had suspicion of him being a German spy. A section of the NGO "intellectuals" sometime ago wanted to rekindle this spy story and brand the Thero as a German spy, but the Sinhala nationalists were able to expose this group and the attempt of the former was foiled. It is interesting to note that neither the British did not entertain any spy stories nor the present day NGO "intellectuals" are after the colonel the way they are "researching" into the life of Anagarika Dharmapala. After all the colonel wanted to give a conscious identity to the Olcott Buddhists who had been there even before his arrival in the country and the British were not much concerned with his activities.
(To be continued)
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>