International Buddhist Conference on New Millennium Challenges for Buddhism 17-19 February, 2012 Sub-theme- Tradition and Change

AbstractThe Post of Chief Monk (Sangha-Nyaka) in Sri Lanka and Its Credibility, Utility and Accountability: An Introspective Note Bakamoone Indaratana
Doctoral Candidate, Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 11006705 India

The Buddha, in his life time, did not appoint any supreme monk as the care-taker or authority of his disciples even though there were some demands for the same from some of his monks. Besides, the Buddha assigned the supremacy to his teaching and disciplinary rules (Dhamma and Vinaya) which he prescribed as the administrator of the Sangha community after his death. Yet, He assigned some duties and responsibilities in the Sangha administration to his great disciples as suitable to the positions according to their specialized status and qualifications. But, as Buddhism spread to many countries, Buddhist tradition had to be adjusted, changed, or modified according to the political, geographical, economic, social and cultural conditions and circumstances of that particular region. Availing themselves of the permission granted by the Buddha to the Sangha that if they desired they could remove or abolish minor rules, bhikkhus with the help of the States started to hold Sangha councils, make some declarations, pass resolutions, and appoint supremacies for the smooth continuation of the Sangha community. In many of the Theravada Buddhist countries, the king appointed a monk as the sangha-rja (supreme patriarch) for the regularization of the institution. Following this historical tradition, Sri Lanka too witnesses the post of mahanyaka (Chief High Priest/Arch Bishop) as replenishment for the sangha-raja in different sects of Sangha (nikya) or councils of Buddhist monks (sangha-sabh). Under the headship of maha-nyaka, the hierarchical order consists of the posts such as anunyaka (deputy chief high priest), pradhna-sangha-nyaka (chief monk), upapradhna-sangha-nyaka (deputy chief monk), adhikara a-sangha-nyaka (judiciary chief monk). These posts are conferred with relevance to a particular district, region or an area in Sri Lanka and outside the Island by the main-fraternities or sub-fraternities or councils of monks. Hence one can see a number of maha-nyakas, anu-nyakas and so forth among the Sri Lankan Buddhist monks in the world. Fortunately or unfortunately, the nuns in Sri Lanka still do not own such kind of institution. The institutionalization of this system in the recent past merits our attention as the current system was established by the Act of Appointment by the British with a view to keeping the nyakas loyal and faithful to the English Government and even using them as spies to provide the government with certain information. This fact is still rendered partially in the credentials given to the chief monks when they are conferred. At present,

the conferring and acceptance of the chief monkhood seems to be a mere continuation of the tradition. Most of the posts are merely ceremonial. The post-holders or the granters seem to be unaware of the duties or responsibilities of their function. Yet the competition among the monks to receive the post is very high where even money seems to be a decisive factor thus contributing to an increase in worldliness rather than spiritual realities. One can see that in many regions in Sri Lanka, monks have established Councils of Monks which have departed from the so called official fraternities or councils, irrespective of sects for the regularization of the institution and they work well in addressing the day today circumstances. Therefore, it is time for an introspection of what we are doing, what should be the purpose of holding and continuing such an institution, what kind of system we should have for the exact and real protection and preservation of the order of monks. This paper intends to address the issues such as the history of the institution of Chief Buddhist Monk and the present status of the same, and its credibility, utility and accountability in relevance to the future needs. These issues will be compared with the similar systems which are practiced in other Theravada Buddhist countries. The paper will also emphasize some introspection within the tradition since some major changes seem to be required rather than embarking upon criticism.