Return To Ellora

It was 1976 and I was a newly “gone forth” monk making my way through India to Sri Lanka, bare-footed, with almost no money and where feasible, begging for my  my food. I arrived in Ellora to see the famous cave temples. Walking along the scarp into which the caves are cut I noticed a very merger waterfall trickling over the highest and most vertical part of the cliff. I decided to climb up and have a look and although there was no path and it was very rough I managed to get to the top and walk along to where the waterfall was. An almost idyllic scene opened up before me. A small stream tumbled from one rock pool into another and eventually over the cliff. It ran through a narrow rocky gorge into the side of which were carved a collection of small cells and rooms, some with modest verandas in front of them. I inspected some of these and finding that they were all fairly clean and except for one, bat-free, I  decided to spend a few days in one of them. And so I did. For the next four days I slept and meditated in a cave just big enough for one person, bathed in  the rock pools and climbed down to the main caves with my begging bowl once a day to get food from the visitors, most of them Indians. These few days remains one of the highlights of my many trips to India. 

This rocky gorge is interesting. I strongly suspect that it is where Ellora started.  It seems likely that the first monks at Ellora lived in this gorge, originally under the few rock overhangs and  later, when they began to attract devotees, in the small cells cut out of the rock for them. Ellora’s main cave temples cut into the scarp below speak of highly institutionalized monasticism, lavishly patronized and probably both wealthy and powerful – the very opposite to the  simple modest caves in the gorge. After attending a conference in Pune last month I took the opportunity to revisit Ellora, and of course after seeing the main temples I wanted to see the place where I had stayed all those years ago. I clambered up the incline only to find when I got to the top that the Archaeological Dept. has built a path up there, although it did not look  as if it got much use. Anyway, I followed it and soon I was back at the gorge. But a path means people and people means rubbish and indeed most of the rock pools has plastic bottles and other rubbish floating in them. Almost as bad, the AD has built an unsightly iron railing around the stream, no doubt to stop people falling in or swimming in the water, something for which it is completely useless as one can easily climb through it. Initially these changes left me a bit disappointed. But it wasn’t long before the silence, the beauty and the spirit of those monks who lived in the gorge so long ago filled me with happiness once again.  

In India

Last month I attended the conference in Pune, India, organized by the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies. Some of the speakers included Dr. Louella Matsunaga (UK), Prof. Rey-Sheng Her (Taiwan), Grace Foster Pollard (UK), Richard Gombrich (UK), and several eminent speakers from India. Amongst these latter  Dr. Birendra Nath Prasad from Lucknow University delivered a truly fascinating  read a fascinating  paper of trends in Buddhism in Uttar Pradesh.  Quite by coincidence   Pankkaj Padghan who translated one of my books into Marathi and Venerable Mahavira who arranged for another of my books to be translated into Assami happened to be at the conference making it extra interesting for me. A good deal of the proceedings focused on the needs and problems of the Dalits, outcastes who are embracing Buddhism in increasing numbers to escape the caste system. Cittalaya accompanied me to Pune and after the conference we spent the next six days visiting some of the ancient Buddhist cave monasteries in Maharashtra. In Pune we were accommodated at the Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana’s Manuski Centre   and had the opportunity to learn about the truly inspiring work in helping some of India’s most downtrodden people. My friend Dr. Jivaka most generously took a day off from his work to drive us to Karla,  Bhaja and Bedsa, which I will write about in my up-coming blog post. Then we headed to Aurangabad where we were looked after by Buddhist friends at the TBMSG centre there and where I gave a talk. After visiting Ajanta and Ellora we drove the nearly 600 kilometres back to Mumbai and took the plain back to Singapore. You can find out about the Triratana Buddhist Community’s social work in India here.  

http://www.tbmsg.org/ 

http://www.karuna.org/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fwbo/sets/72157594342000805/

A Little-known Dhamma Practice

Sanctuary (abhayaṭṭhāna or pujjaṭṭhāna) is the right of asylum available in certain religious establishments and which is recognized by the government. The right of sanctuary in certain churches was recognized in English law from the 4^th to the 17^th century. Sanctuary in Buddhist monasteries  had a long history in  Sri Lanka lasting for at least 1000 years. Royal officers or those who believed a crime had been committed could easily be infuriated, jump to conclusions and dish out swift justice to whoever seemed to be the most likely offender. This sometimes led to innocent parties being punished. An accused who was able to flee to the nearest monastery would be protected from such mob justice. Sanctuary would give him an opportunity to explain himself and allow his accusers to calm down so that the facts could be more objectively examined. The  monks in the monastery the accused had sought sanctuary in would also be able to adjudicate on the accused’s behalf. Numerous documents from ancient Sri Lanka show that royal officers and others were forbidden to enter certain monasteries or sometimes even monastic estates, to apprehend offenders without permission of the monks.

The rules of sanctuary varied at different times and in different places but usually a person was given sanctuary for five days or until the next full moon. If the monks decided the person seeking refuge was guilty they would expel him or allow royal officers to enter the monastery to arrest him. On other occasions they might negotiate a settlement between the accused and his victim and the judicial authorities.
Sanctuary was usually given to those accused of committing what were called ‘the five grave offences’ (pañcamahaparādha), although exactly what constituted these is unclear. It might have been breaking the most serious of the five  Precepts or five of the six ‘acts of immediate retribution’ (anantariyakamma, Miln.25), i.e. murdering one’s mother, one’s father, an  arahat, injuring a Buddha or causing a schism in the  Sangha (As.358). In this context injuring a Buddha was understood as stealing or desecrating a Buddha statues or other sacred objects. Other versions of the five grave offences included assault, killing cattle, banditry and rape.

Violating the right of sanctuary could have very serious consequences for those who did it. The Mahavaṃsa records an example of this. During political upheaval in the reign of King Udaya III (934-937) a number of court officials fled to the monastery of some monks revered for their simplicity and holiness. The king and his soldiers pushed their way into the monastery and summarily executed the officials. As a protest against this violation of the right of sanctuary and the shedding of blood in their monastery the monks rose in a body and left the capital for the forest. In response to this protest riots broke out in the capital, sections of the army rebelled and the life of the king himself was threatened. To calm the situation the king had to send his senior ministers after the monks to beg for their forgiveness and plea with them to return to their monastery. The humiliated and chastened king had to promise never to violate the right of sanctuary again.

There is nothing in the  Tipitaka addressing the matter of sanctuary in monasteries although it is may have evolved from a general respect for the Saṅgha and the Buddha’s teaching allotting punishment with  compassion.