By Asoka S. Seneviratne –
Prof. Asoka.S. Seneviratne
“Victory breeds hatred. The defeated live in pain. Happily, the peaceful life, giving up victory and defeat.” — The Buddha, Dhammapada (Verse 201)
Sri Lanka stands at a historical crossroads, battered by the physical winds of the Ditwah Cyclone and the turbulent currents of political transition. In this hour of national vulnerability, the role of the Maha Sangha—the community of venerable Buddhist monks—is more critical than ever. However, a stark divergence has emerged within the Sasana. On one side, we see the Amarapura Maha Nikaya, representing 14,000 venerable monks, engaging in the quiet, disciplined restoration of the Upasampada (Higher Ordination) with the support of the state. On the other, we witnessed the Maha Sangha Conference on February 20, 2026, where a smaller collective issued a “10-point Charter” fueled by rhetoric that felt more aligned with a battlefield than a monastery.
As practitioners of the Buddha Dharma, we must ask: Where does the true protection of Buddhism lie? Does it lie in the “swords” of political agitation, or in the “lotus” of Metta (loving-kindness) and Karuna (compassion)? This article argues that the Dhamma is inherently self-protecting. When the venerable Sangha adheres to the Vinaya (discipline) and radiates compassion toward all beings—regardless of their political affiliation—they become an “unconquerable fortress.” When they descend into anger, they do not protect the religion; they merely mirror the chaos of the world they are meant to guide.
The Tale of Two Assemblies: State Patronage vs. Political Agitation
The contrast between the two recent gatherings in Colombo is a study in priorities. The Amarapura Maha Nikaya’s recent statement regarding the Upasampada Vinaya Karma was a moment of institutional grace. By acknowledging the National People’s Power (NPP) government’s role in restoring state patronage for this sacred ritual after nine years of neglect, the Nikaya demonstrated Upekkha (equanimity). They recognized a positive action for the Sasana without demanding political subservience.
Conversely, the Maha Sangha Conference appeared exclusionary. By failing to invite the leadership of the Amarapura Chapter, the organizers signaled that their “10-point Charter” was not a consensus of the venerable Sangha, but a manifesto of a specific faction. In the Buddha’s teaching, Sanga-Samaggee (concord of the Sangha) is the highest blessing. A divided venerable Sangha cannot protect the Dhamma. When a conference is built on exclusion, it loses the moral authority to speak for the venerable “Maha Sangha.” True protection for the religion comes from unity, not from fragmented groups attempting to dictate terms to a democratically elected administration.
The Dissonance of Anger: When the Saffron Robe Forgets Metta
The most troubling aspect of the February 20th conference was not the content of the charter, but the breadth of anger behind the words. Observers noted venerable monks speaking with “utmost hatred” and a “get the sword” attitude. This is a direct violation of the Kakacupama Sutta (The Simile of the Saw), where the Buddha taught that even if bandits were to sever one’s limbs with a two-handled saw, a monk who gave way to hatred would not be following his teachings.
A venerable monk’s power is derived from his Avihimsa (non-violence). When a venerable monk uses the language of war to “topple” a government or “attack” opponents, he is mentally disrobing. The Dhamma cannot be protected by the very poisons—greed, hatred, and delusion—that it seeks to extinguish. If the venerable monks at the conference had approached the government with Metta, seeking to guide the President like a father guides a son, their 10 points might have carried weight. Instead, by choosing the path of the “sword,” they have alienated the lay followers who look to the venerable Sangha for emotional and spiritual refuge, not political vitriol.
Misplaced Priorities: The Cyclone Victims and the Duty of Karuna
The ultimate litmus test of a venerable monk’s devotion to the Buddha is his response to human suffering. As the conference took place, about 100,000 Sri Lankans remained displaced by the Dithwah Cyclone. Homes are in ruins, children are without schools, and families are mourning the lost. In the Vyagghapajja Sutta, the Buddha emphasized the importance of the welfare of the laity.
If the energy, time, and significant financial resources spent organizing a 400-person political conference had been redirected toward cyclone relief, the venerable Sangha would have manifested the Dhamma in action. Imagine if those venerable 400 monks had been seen on the ground, distributing aid and offering spiritual solace to the displaced. Such an act of Karuna (compassion) would have done more to “protect Buddhism” than any 10-point charter ever could. When the clergy prioritizes political influence over the survival of the people, they deviate from the Bodhisattva ideal.
The “Rajapaksa Nikaya” and the Trap of Material Privilege
The admission by some venerable monks that they are the “Rajapaksa Nikaya” is a candid, if unfortunate, revelation. It suggests that their loyalty is tethered to a specific political lineage that provided them with material “privileges, assistance, and support.” This is the trap of Amisa-puja (material offerings) over Patipatti-puja (offering of practice).
The Buddha warned that the “gain, honor, and fame” of the world are a “bitter, harsh obstacle to the attainment of the unsurpassed surcease of bondage.” When venerable monks become accustomed to luxury and political clout, they begin to fear any government that promotes transparency or equal treatment. The current government’s instance not to grant special “material” favors is not an attack on Buddhism; it is an invitation for the venerable Sangha to return to its roots of simplicity and independence. A venerable monk who is not dependent on a politician for his jeep, his building, or his prestige is a monk who is truly free.
Manufactured Crises: The Trincomalee Incident and Political Remnants
The agitation regarding the Trincomalee incident—fully created by a small group of extremist-leaning venerable monks—illustrates how the Dhamma is often used as a cloak for territorial and ethnic nationalism. The Buddha’s Dhamma is universal; it does not recognize “mine” and “thine” in a way that incites conflict.
The presence of “political remnants” at the Sangha conference—individuals who were soundly rejected by the people in recent elections—reveals the true nature of the event. These politicians, having lost their democratic mandate, are using the venerable monks to regain a foothold. It is a symbiotic relationship of desperation. However, a venerable monk who allows himself to be a tool for a “political remnant” loses his sanctity. The Buddha taught that a venerable monk should be like a lotus—born in the mud of the world but remaining unstained by it. By entering the muddy waters of partisan politics, these venerable monks have stained the saffron robe.
The Invulnerability of the Dhamma: An Eternal Truth
There is a fundamental misconception that “Buddhism is in danger” and needs a government to save it. This is a theological impossibility in the eyes of a true practitioner. The Buddha’s Truth—the Four Noble Truths and the Law of Paticca-samuppada (Dependent Origination)—is a natural law. It is as gravity is to the physical world. No parliament, no president, and no “sword” can harm the Truth.
The only thing that can “disappear” is the Sasana (the dispensation/organization), and the Buddha was clear: the Sasana is only destroyed from within, like iron is consumed by its own rust. If venerable monks stop practicing Sila (virtue), Samadhi (concentration), and Panna (wisdom), the Sasana dies. If they continue to practice, no force on earth can diminish it. Therefore, the cry of “Buddhism in danger” is often a projection of the speaker’s own internal insecurity. To seek protection from a government is to admit that one has lost faith in the protective power of the Dhamma itself (Dhammo have rakkhati dhammacari).
The Illusion of Numbers: 159 vs. The Spiritual Mandate
Threatening to “topple” a government with a 159-seat majority is not only politically unrealistic but spiritually bankrupt. A venerable monk does not vote in the spirit of the world; his “vote” is cast in the realm of morality. The low attendance at the conference—only a few hundred against the expected thousands—proves that the “common venerable monk” and the lay devotee are no longer moved by the rhetoric of hate.
The people of Sri Lanka, having endured economic collapse and natural disasters, are yearning for Shanthi (peace). They want to hear the Metta Sutta, not a declaration of war. When a venerable monk shouts that “159 is nothing,” he forgets that those 159 seats represent the hopes and the will of the people he is meant to serve. A venerable monk who stands against the peaceful will of the people, without a moral or spiritual cause, stands against the Dhamma.
The Path Forward: Returning to the Bamboo Grove
The solution to the current tension is a return to the Middle Path. The government must continue to support the institutional needs of the Sangha—as seen with the Amarapura Upasampada—without being held hostage by political factions. Simultaneously, the venerable monks of the Maha Sangha Conference must engage in Atma-Nireekshana (self-reflection).
If they were to replace their 10-point charter of demands with a 1-point commitment to Metta, the entire atmosphere of the country would change. The “right thing” for the President to do is to govern with justice and help the cyclone victims. The “right thing” for the venerable monks to do is to provide the moral compass for that journey. When the venerable Sangha returns to the forest and the temple to practice, and comes to the street only to feed the hungry and comfort the grieving, Buddhism will be more “protected” than it has been in decades.
Summary
The current friction between the state and a segment of the clergy is a symptom of a deeper spiritual crisis: the entanglement of the venerable Sangha in material and political power. While the Amarapura Maha Nikaya has shown the path of cooperation and institutional focus, the Maha Sangha Conference has unfortunately mirrored the aggression and disappointment of fallen political powers. By using the language of hatred and ignoring the suffering of about 100,000 cyclone-displaced citizens, these venerable monks have stepped away from the Buddha’s core teachings of Metta and Karuna. The Dhamma does not need political “swords” for its survival; it requires only the virtuous conduct of its followers.
Conclusion: The Self-Protecting Truth
In conclusion, the outcry that “Buddhism is in danger” is a fallacy. The Dhamma is an eternal mirror; it simply reflects the faces of those who look into it. If the venerable monks look into the mirror with anger and political ambition, they will see a world of danger and enemies. If they look into it with the heart of the Buddha—overflowing with compassion for a suffering nation—they will see a world in need of healing.
Let the venerable monks of Sri Lanka put down the “charters” of political demand and pick up the “charter” of the Dhamma. By serving the displaced, abandoning the quest for material privilege, and radiating loving-kindness toward all, they will find that they are already protected. No government can harm a venerable monk who is rooted in the Truth, and no government can save a monk who has abandoned it.
“Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.” — The Buddha, Dhammapada (Verse 5)
*The writer, among many, served as the Special Adviser to the Office of the President of Namibia from 2006 to 2012 and was a Senior Consultant with the UNDP for 20 years, and a Senior Economist with the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (1972-1993). He can be reached at asoka.seneviratne@gmail.com
