Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Obscure Elephant Facts I

The following essay has absolutely nothing to do with the Dhamma. But hey! Having a break even from the Dhamma every now and then is a good thing. Keeps the mind fresh. I wrote this years ago as part of a proposed book which never saw the light of day. It reflects my interest in elephants, Sri Lankan history and obscure and useless facts.
The first time elephants were seen in Europe was in 280 BC when Pyrrhus of Epirus and his army of 25,000 men and 20 elephants crossed from north Africa to Terentus in the heel of Italy to begin their march to Rome. The Romans were bewildered, not to say terrified, by the huge creatures and not knowing what to call them, dubbed them ‘Lucanian oxen.’ In the following centuries elephants from both Africa and Asia became a familiar sight in the amphitheatres, parade grounds and battle fields of the classical world. But with the fall of Rome and Europe’s decent into the Dark Ages, the elephant, although vaguely remembered, was rarely seen again until 802 AD.
In that year the caliph of Baghdad, Harun al Rasheed, gave Charlemagne, the Holy Roman Emperor, an elephant as part of a goodwill gesture. The creature caused a sensation until two years later, when it drowned while crossing the Rhine. About four hundred years later, Frederick II of Sicily (1212-50) was given an elephant by the sultan of Cairo. He rode it into Milan during his victorious entry of the city in 1237. It died in 1248. The first elephant in England since classical times arrived in 1255 as a gift to Henry III from Louis IX of France, who had brought it back from the Holy Land on his return from the Crusades. A special house was built for it in the Tower of London, but the harsh northern winter proved too much and it died in 1258. In 1550 before leaving Spain to return to Vienna, Prince Maximillian, later to become Holy Roman Emperor Maximillian II, made a quick trip to Lisbon to meet his uncle King John III. While there he visited the royal menagerie where he was fascinated by the many exotic birds and animals from the East, but in particularly by the elephants. Consequently, his uncle promised to give him one. He suggested that Maximillian name the elephant Sulayman, after the sultan of Turkey, who was then the West’s most feared enemy "so that in this way he becomes your slave and is properly humbled". When Maximillian disembarked in Genoa during his homeward journey in the summer of 1551, he was delighted to find that the promised elephant had arrived just before him. Soon after the royal entourage, together with Sulayman, set off for the long trek to Vienna, crossing the snow-covered Alps in mid-winter, and arriving in the city in March 7 1552. As the royal party rode through the streets, Maximillian was somewhat peeved to find his elephant attracted more attention and admiration than he himself did. It seems that in the crush to see and touch the strange creature, a child was separated from its mother and fell at the elephants feet. The creature gently picked him and placed him back in his mother’s alms. This so astonished the throng that a plaque was set up at the place where it happened and it may still be seen there today.
It is very difficult to know whether these and a few other elephants that turned up in Europe in the late Middle Ages were from Africa, India or Sri Lanka. One is tempted to think that the elephant given to Charlemagne by the Caliph was from India as the Muslims had already conquered Sindh by then. On the other hand, it is also known that the Arabs had a flourishing trade with Sri Lanka during this period. When Dom Lourenso landed in Colombo in 1505 he saw Arab ships loading elephants to be taken to Cambay.
So an elephant from ‘India’ could well have originally been shipped from Sri Lanka. Henry III’s elephant was almost certainly not Asian, as a drawing of it from life by Matthew Paris shows it with the sloping forehead and large ears of the African variety. This drawing by Paris can claim to be Europe’s first reasonably accurate representation of the elephant since Roman times. The picture shown a man near the elephant’s trunk and the script under its belly reads, ‘By the size of the man drawn here the dimensions of the animal may be imagined". Maximillian’s elephant may well have been from Sri Lanka, but the lack of documentation make it impossible to say.
At the beginning of the 16th century Portugal was still a small kingdom on the outer edge of Europe which nobody took very seriously. King Emmanuel I was proud of his newly conquered empire in the East and was anxious to get recognition for his achievements. To this end, he had taken to sending gifts of exotic animals - talking parrots, trained monkeys, brightly-plumed birds - to other European monarchs and prelates, but up to then this had earned him little more than derision. So finally he decided on a gesture so spectacular and so extravagant, that it would be bound to win him admiration if not envy.
On the 12th March 1515 an embassy from King Emmanuel to Pope Leo X arrived in Rome to an enthusiastic welcome. It was met at the gates of the city by a select body of gorgeously attired cardinals, and then led through the streets to the appointed accommodation. The embassy was headed by Tristan de Cunha - soldier, seaman, former Viceroy of India, and discoverer of the tiny south Atlantic island that still bears his name albeit in a distorted form - Tristan d’Acunha. De Cunha brought with him generous samples of all the riches and wonders of the East; jewels, fine cloth, aromatic gums, spices and especially strange animals. These included a panther that was trained to hunt like a dog, two leopards, and magnificent Persian steeds. A rhinoceros from Gujarat was to be included as well but the ship carrying it sunk, and the poor creature drowned. However, after its carcass was washed up, it was stuffed and exhibited throughout Europe. Albrecht Durer, the greatest German artist of the age, saw this stuffed rhino and made his celebrated engraving of it. The most famous of the exotic animals gifted to the Pope however was an elephant from Sri Lanka.
Many subsequent accounts of the Portuguese embassy say that this elephant was from India, but this is not correct. In the early days of Portuguese expansion ‘India’ referred to just about everywhere from the Straits of Hormuze to Malacca. When Don Lourenco landed in Colombo in 1505, the king of Kotte gave him cinnamon and an elephant "as tribute in return for Portuguese protection". That, at least, is how the Portuguese saw it. The Sri Lankan king however, was probably doing no more than trying to humor these pushy, potentially belligerent, strangers in the hope that they would go away and not return. The elephant was taken to Goa and later shipped to Lisbon. Gaspar Correa was referring to this creature when he wrote that "the viceroy (at Goa) sent a very small elephant, one of those brought (from Sri Lanka) by Don Lourenco, which was the first that ever went to Portugal". Details of the elephants subsequent stay in the Lisbon are meager. Undoubtedly, he was kept in the royal menagerie.
Led by a herald bearing the alms of the Portuguese kin, the embassy made its way to the pontifical palace where the Pope stood on the balcony to receive it. When the elephant arrived, it stopped and bowed three times to the Pope. This was taken as symbolic of the conquered pagan East submitting to the Truth of Rome. The gasps of amazement that accompanied the animals genuflection were due in part to the prevalence of the old superstition that elephants had no joints in their bodies. The elephant then took water in its trunk from a nearby trough and showered the multitudes, to the great amusement of the Pope and his court. Six days later, the public audience took place, and the gifts were handed to the Pope in the presence of the assembled ambassadors and grandees from all the royal courts of Europe. The extravagance and novelty of it all was dazzling, and it was clear to everyone that Portugal had arrived. The next day, the Pope and specially invited guests, retired to the pontiffs private garden to examine the animals more carefully. The panther’s hunting skills were demonstrated on some hapless rabbits and birds, much to everyone’s satisfaction. When the elephant was introduced to its new master, the Pope declared that he would name it Hanno (Annone).

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Beauty

Desired by all, possessed by few, flaunted but fleeting; exalted in by those who have it, evoking jealousy in those who don't; difficult to define, but known when its seen; said to be the twin of Truth, but to often just a thin veneer - Beauty. The Buddha had his own take on beauty. He said; 'If someone is jealous, selfish or dishonest, they are unattractive despite their eloquence or good features. But the person who is purged of such things and is free from hatred, it is he or she who is really beautiful' (Dhp.262-3).

Hears another interesting take on beauty, this time beauty in popular culture
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hibyAJOSW8U

And after you’ve watched that, watch this one too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-kSZsvBY-A&NR=1

Monday, April 6, 2009

Adultery

Adultery (aticariya) is having sexual relations with another person while married or with a person married to another. In the Tipitaka a male adulterer is called a paradarika and a female equivalent is called aticaryini (S.II,259). An adulteress might also be dubbed 'an owl-like one' (kosiyayayani) because she was thought to sneaks around at night (Ja.I,496). Adultery is probably the most common breach of the third Precept. Most marriage ceremonies include a solemn promise by both parties that they will be faithful to each other. Committing adultery breaks this promise and usually involves other negative behaviors such as lying, deceit and pretence. The negative results on others can include shattered trust, humiliation, heartbreak and a weakening of family cohesion. For these reasons the Buddha said: 'Being dissatisfied with ones, if one is seen with prostitutes and the wives of others, this is a cause of one's decline' (Sn.108).
Of the numerous people I council, either over the phone or in person, the largest number are the injured parties of adultery - and perhaps 70% of these being women. Whether this is because men are more likely to commit ad to be unfaithful or whether men are less likely to disclose that their wives have cheated on them I do not know. Whatever the case, when you see the results of adultery it really brings home its seriousness. Only two years ago a woman came to see me saying that she had been given AIDS by her husband. Remarkably, she seemed to have got over what must have been a terrible shock, but it had nonetheless turned her life upside down.

Sunday, April 5, 2009

In And Out Again

KUALA LUMPUR, March 16, 2009 - A Malaysian court ruled Monday that a convert to Islam has the right to return to her original religion, Buddhism, upholding an earlier decision favoring religious minorities in this Muslim-majority country. The Shariah Appeals Court in Penang upheld the lower court's verdict, dismissing the appeal by Islamic authorities to forbid Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah from returning to Buddhism, said Ahmad Munawir Abdul Aziz, lawyer for the state's Islamic Affairs Council. "They ruled that her conversion to Islam wasn't valid... Her declaration of faith was there but she didn't fulfill all the other conditions," he told The Associated Press. "She didn't practice." Ahmad Munawir said the court "has made it clear that Muslims can't simply renounce the religion as long as their conversion is done in a proper way and he or she is accepted as a Muslim." But Tan, whose first name before she converted was Ean Huang, said she never practiced Islam and converted in 1998 only to marry an Iranian Muslim. In 2006, she filed a request to renounce Islam after her husband left her. Christians, Buddhists and Hindus have increasingly complained in recent years that they face discrimination, including unfavorable court decisions in conversion cases and temple demolitions. Tan's case follows another victory for religious minorities earlier this month when an Islamic court ruled in favor of a Christian man who was given an Islamic name at birth. The National Registration Department had refused to allow the man to drop his Islamic name when he applied for a new identity card. But in many other instances in past years, courts have ruled in favor of Muslims, including refusing to let those who are Muslim-born leave Islam and accepting claims that people converted to Islam before their deaths despite family objections. Malaysia has a dual court system for civil matters - Shariah courts for Muslims and secular courts for non-Muslims, who make up more than a third of the country's 27 million people. In interfaith disputes, the jurisdiction of the courts has often clashed, and Shariah courts usually have the last word.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Nirvanic Inevitability

Recently I was perusing the internet in order to get some idea about what sort of misunderstandings of Buddhism are in circulation. It is, as American airmen during the first Iraq War used to say 'a target-rich environment.' And of course I'm just talking about the 'reasonable' stuff, the 'intelligent' but misinformed material. Putting it all together I got the impression that a good percentage of these misunderstanding are due to mistakenly attributing Hindu concepts to Buddhism. One such idea I found to be quite prevalent is what you could call the Doctrine of Nirvanic Inevitability. There seen to be two versions of this idea and they go like this. (1) Each time we die we are reborn into a gradually higher form (a germ, a cockroach, a frog, a mouse, a horse, a Republican, a Democratic, a Buddhist Democratic, a Buddhist monk, etc) until we eventually attain Enlightenment. The other version of this idea is that (2) we are here 'to learn.' Each time we are reborn we are given opportunities to learn about life and truth. As we learn we gradually move upwards until we…(fill in the gap) attain Nirvana/union with God/the Absolute/ see The Light, etc.
In a sense, this second version of the idea of Nirvanic Inevitability approaches the Buddha's Dhamma, but like the first version it includes or implies concepts that are not really Buddhist. (1) Both ideas suggest that Liberation or Realization is inevitable, and (2) both imply that there is some innate 'purpose' behind the process of birth and death
There is no hint of either of these ideas in the earliest record of the Buddha's teachings or even in the later versions (at least not that I know of. If anyone can correct me on this point please do - but it will be necessary to give chapter and verse). The only thing that comes near Nirvanic Inevitability is in the Tipitaka is the accounts of the teachings of Makkhali Gosala. He explained it by using the analogy of a ball of string, which, when thrown on the ground, continues to roll until it has completely unwound. 'Fool and wise alike go round and round until they (inevitably) put an end to suffering' (D.I,54). In early Medieval Hinduism the doctrine evolved that if you diligently adhere to your caste Dharma you will gradually be reborn into a higher caste until you are finally reborn as a brahman and from that position attain the goal - another version of the same idea. The Buddha's vision differed from all these ideas. There is, he implied, no 'purpose' or 'meaning' behind samsara; it is an impersonal and rather unpleasant process which 'just keeps rollin along', propelled by ignorance and craving. And until we reach what might be called the 'breakthrough point' or the 'critical mass', sotapati, there are no guarantees. We could go very high (one or another of the heaven realms) or very low. Further, the idea of a higher or lower rebirth in terms of caste, social or economic status, is nowhere suggested by the Buddha. In fact, he directly denied it. In the interesting he tells of an utterly poverty-strickened man who has a most advantageous rebirth (the implication is that he attained the sotapatianga) because he had faith, virtue, learning and wisdom. And in the Buddha's Dhamma there is no suggestion that we will just pick up these things as we go through life. They require an act of will, making an effort, trying.

Friday, April 3, 2009

Changed Perceptions

How we see things sometimes completely differently from how earlier generations saw them, is something that fascinates me. And nowhere is this difference in perception more obvious than in matters of religion. When I was in London, walking around looking at the sights, I noticed a statue on the other side of a very busy road. With the greatest of difficulties I managed to cross over and found myself standing in front of a graceful naked youth.
He was holding a sword so I assumed he must be commemorating some battle or some war, but so taken was I by his beauty that I didn’t bother to look at the inscription on the pedestal. When I did my feelings of admiration quickly faded. The monument commemorated Britain's First World War Machine Gun Corps. Now I don’t know much about that ghastly conflict, but I know enough to be able to imagine what sort of damage machine guns can do to the human body. I felt quite depressed. Then I noticed a much smaller inscription below the main one. It read, 'Saul hath killed his thousands but David hath killed his tens of thousands'. Now this looked to me like something out of the Bible. Later research confirmed that it is, it's a verse from I Samual 18,7. Thinking about this now, I'd have to admit that it is probably a rather appropriate quotation for a machine gun corps. But with how religious perceptions have changed since 1925 (when the statue was erected), would such words exalting carnage on a massive scale adorn a memorial, even a war memorial, today? Almost certainly not. In some ways we have changed. And mainly for the better.

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Learning From The Animals

Read and digest these words spoken by the Buddha to a group of monks who were arguing with each other. 'If animals can be courteous, deferential and polite to each other, so should you be' (Vin.II,162).
Now watch this thoroughly delightful video.
http://www.youtube.com/v/D85yrIgA4Nk