FOREIGN RELATIONS OF BUDDHISM
85
ordination on May 6, 1936 and began what was to have been a three-year program of Theravada studies. One by one, however, they disrobed and scattered.34 In 1940 Fa-fang arrived. He had been teaching in T'ai-hsu's seminaries since the early 1920's, and soon became lecturer in Mahayana Buddhism at the University of Ceylon. In 1945 he brought over two younger Chinese monks. They too disrobed, as did one or more of the monks who had gone to Thailand ten years earlier.35
This may partly have been because their sense of monastic vocation was undermined by exposure to foreign life and ideas. Another reason was the attitude of their hosts. From the Theravada point of view the Mahayana ordination was invalid. In fact some Theravadins considered that Mahayana Buddhism was such a dangerous heresy that its destruction would be a blessing for the world.36 They saw no question of dialogue, but only of correcting error. In this atmosphere Sinhalese laymen are said to have discriminated against the Chinese and refused to accord them the same deference as they gave to the Sinhalese monks, as, for instance, always taking a lower seat and presenting them with dana. Hence the Chinese monks became disillusioned and left. All the above information comes from a Mahayana informant, whose account may be colored.37 In any case it seems likely that the Sinhalese were entirely unaware of the sensibilities that they were offending.
In China itself the attitude towards Theravada Buddhism was ambivalent. On the one hand the Chinese regarded it as too narrow. Naturally they could not approve of its rejection of Mahayana doctrine and its air of superiority. On the other hand an increasing proportion of the Chinese Buddhist intelligentsia, both monks and laymen, came to accept the thesis that Theravada was indeed closer to Buddhism in its original form than was Mahayana. Quite aside from the changes the latter had undergone in India, there were the Confucian and Taoist accretions of which they became aware as they studied the history of Chinese Buddhism in the newly established seminaries. Furthermore Theravada, as expounded by Buddhist intellectuals in Ceylon and Burma, seemed less vulnerable to the charge of "superstition" and more compatible with the pronouncements of science. The elite of the Theravada sangha seemed to be less involved in
Page 90
Page 91
FOREIGN RELATIONS OF BUDDHISM
85
ordination on May 6, 1936 and began what was to have been a three-year program of Theravada studies. One by one, however, they disrobed and scattered.34 In 1940 Fa-fang arrived. He had been teaching in T'ai-hsu's seminaries since the early 1920's, and soon became lecturer in Mahayana Buddhism at the University of Ceylon. In 1945 he brought over two younger Chinese monks. They too disrobed, as did one or more of the monks who had gone to Thailand ten years earlier,35
This may partly have been because their sense of monastic vocation was undermined by exposure to foreign life and ideas. Another reason was the attitude of their hosts. From the Thera- vada point of view the Mahayana ordination was invalid. In fact some Theravadins considered that Mahayana Buddhism was such a dangerous heresy that its destruction would be a blessing for the world.30 They saw no question of dialogue, but only of correcting error. In this atmosphere Sinhalese laymen are said to have discriminated against the Chinese and refused to accord them the same deference as they gave to the Sinhalese monks, as, for instance, always taking a lower seat and presenting them with dana. Hence the Chinese monks became disillusioned and left. All the above information comes from a Mahayana informant, whose account may be colored.37 In any case it seems likely that the Sinhalese were entirely unaware of the sensibilities that they were offending.
In China itself the attitude towards Theravada Buddhism was ambivalent. On the one hand the Chinese regarded it as too narrow. Naturally they could not approve of its rejection of Mahayana doctrine and its air of superiority. On the other hand an increasing proportion of the Chinese Buddhist intelligentsia, both monks and laymen, came to accept the thesis that Theravada was indeed closer to Buddhism in its original form than was Mahayana. Quite aside from the changes the latter had under- gone in India, there were the Confucian and Taoist accretions of which they became aware as they studied the history of Chinese Buddhism in the newly established seminaries. Furthermore Theravada, as expounded by Buddhist intellectuals in Ceylon and Burma, seemed less vulnerable to the charge of "supersti- tion" and more compatible with the pronouncements of science. The elite of the Theravada sangha seemed to be less involved in
Page 90Page 91
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.