Distorted views promulgated in Buddha’s name

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

No doubt, there would have been many a sigh of relief on reading the excellent piece “Second thoughts on the last thought” by Bhante Dhammika of Australia (Sunday Island December 18). After all, death is the only certainty in life and some of us are closer to it than others. For those who are reaching the ‘end of life’, either due to advancing years or terminal illnesses, there is always the fear of death, unless one has developed a very high mental degree of non-attachment.

This fear is made worse by the added fear that one’s last thought may be defiled, resulting in a bad rebirth. This added worry is entirely due to the misinterpretation of the concept of the final thought (Chuti citta} and thanks to the clarification by Bhate Dhammika, we should be able to face death with less worry and fear.

What happens after death is purely conjectural, there being no confirmatory scientific data available so far. There are, perhaps, four possibilities. First, is the rationalists view that there is nothing beyond and we have to accept that birth is a chance occurrence and death is the end of the process. However, most humans, for a long time have believed that there is something beyond.

Religions have come to fill this vacuum and have invented eternity with or without resurrection. For actions committed during a very brief period of existence in this world, committal to an eternal hell or heaven on death seems rather drastic. Perhaps to overcome difficulties in judgement, some religions have introduced confessions; stairway to heaven. The third possibility, according to Indian religions, is reincarnation where there is continuity of a self. The fourth is the Buddhist concept of rebirth which is purely a mental phenomenon. Though reincarnation and rebirth are very different concepts, even academics seem confused about the usage of these two terms.

Having given a lot of thought to this question since retirement, as far as I am concerned there is only one possibility for the afterlife, if there is one, and that is rebirth. Some have accused me of not being a proper Buddhist as I harbour doubts about rebirth and I readily agree that I am not a traditional Buddhist but a follower of Gautama Buddha who, in my opinion, laid the foundation for scientific thinking and encouraged the freedom of thought. Therefore, rather than blindly believing, I am in continuous search for scientific evidence for rebirth.

As rebirth is a mental phenomenon, the first thing to establish is whether the mind can be independent of the body. The increasing body of scientific literature on Near Death Experiences (NDEs), wherein some describe out of body experiences, clearly show that the mind can be separated from the body, at least for a short period. Thanks to my dear friend Dr Manasara Wedisinghe, I was able to read the excellent book After by Dr Bruce Greyson which has the tagline “A doctor explores what Near -Death Experiences reveal about life and beyond”.

I have read this book twice, in spite of not being an avid reader, and am in the process of studying carefully the notes I made whilst reading the book. This monograph provides ample evidence for the ability of the mind to be independent of the body for a transient period. Of course, the next question is whether the mind can jump across death to another life; which seems a possibility.

The transfer of Citta is well described by the Buddha but as Bhante Dhammika points out, this has been distorted, at least misinterpreted. Most our Bhikkhus, in their sermons, give dramatic examples to induce fear in us; a technique never practiced by the Buddha. Though no mention is made in international literature, the rebirth of Emperor Ashoka is an oft repeated episode in Bana preaching’s to highlight the importance of Chuticitta. Ashoka, son of Bindusara and the grandson of Mayura dynasty’s founder Chandragupta, captured the Kalinga kingdom too after a brutal war.

It is said that he killed his brothers to succeed his father, in addition to killing thousands during the wars to create an empire that extended from modern day Afghanistan to Myanmar. Full of remorse, he embraced Buddhism and devoted the rest of his life propagating Buddhism. If not for him, Buddhism would have been a minor religion confined to India and if not for his Edicts, we would not have had proof of even Buddha’s birth.

Though I was aware of the Ashoka’s rebirth story, as I did not know the details, I did a search and found on YouTube, a Bana Preaching, the Sinhala title of which would be translated as: “Why did Ashoka who built 84,000 Buddhist shrines become a python?” In this, which dealt with the importance of the last thought, the Venerable Monk, after describing in detail all the good done by Emperor Ashoka, states that he was born a python as his last thought was defiled.

The story goes that the attendant who was fanning the dying king accidentally let the fan hit the king which made him angry and that was his last thought. He added that, fortunately, the king’s son Arahant Mahinda saw, with his divine-eye, the predicament of his father and salvaged the king who went to heaven. After a sojourn, he was born a human, in Sri Lanka of course, and became an Arahant by the name of Kujjatissa; his contemporary King Devanam Piyatissa becoming Arahant Vyaggatissa at the same time. I would have been better convinced had I been told that Ashoka became a python, for a short period, for all the killings, instead of the last bad thought.

This is one of the many examples of distorting what the Buddha taught and I may have to write a book, if I were to expand. It does not mean that this is not done in good faith. Stories may have been weaved to explain complex things to lay people but they are far from relevant in this modern scientific age. When there is so much substance in Buddhism warranting discussion, I wonder why our Venerable Monks devote so much time relating stories of no significance. By the way, the comments on the sermon referred to, were all highly appreciative; it looks as if this is what the average Buddhist still unfortunately wants.

Coming back to Chuticitta, for a long time I have held the opinion that the usual interpretation lacks sense but, unfortunately, I lacked the depth of knowledge of the Dhamma which Bhante Dhammika has to dispute. We should be extremely grateful to him for the clarification. May he continue to write, educating us.