Child Ordination-through a Mother’s Eyes!
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/child-ordination-through-a-mothers-eyes/
As a mother, the following is one of the most emotionally challenging articles I tasked myself with, as I see a son of mine, in each child-Samanera (novice Buddhist monk)!
At
a recent alms-giving ceremony I attended, there were many such, of varying
ages. Some as young as 7 - 8 years of age, while some of pubertal age.
These
‘little ones’, with shaven heads, and their thin bodies swathed in saffron
robes, sat on the floor with their elders. It was hard to miss, their
expressions of sheer wonder, coupled with mischief on their faces, as they
watched the children of the laity, of similar age, running wild with chocolate
smeared faces, brandishing their favourite toys.
One
of these ‘miniature monks’ in particular, had his gaze fixed longingly on a
teddy bear, and another on a train set. While those, in their mid to late
teens, gazed appreciatively, at the pretty young girls prancing around, before
quickly hiding their faces, behind their over-sized palm-leaf fans, when
frowned upon, by a disapproving adult monk.
It
was obvious, that these young children, thrust into monkhood, were oblivious to
the fact, that they had been robbed of their innocent childhood, for no fault
of their own!
In
all their innocence, how could they realise, that their young lives will change
forever, when asked to commit themselves with those profound words, as they are
being ordained-“Venerable
Sir, I respectfully ask you to ordain me as a novice monk, in order that I may
be free from the cycle of existence and attain Nibbana”.
How can a child
of seven-years understand what it means to be “free from the cycle of existence and attain
Nibbana”?
Can this little, child-Samanera
understand, that he cannot be carried, hugged and kissed by his mother
thereafter, and seek her maternal warmth and security, when struck with a
fever, or frightened by a nightmare, thunder and lightning?
Further, this child-Samanera of
seven-years, is committed to observe the ‘Ten Precepts’ as training rules-
- I undertake to abstain from harming or taking life
- I undertake to abstain from taking what is not given
- I undertake to abstain from false speech
- I undertake to abstain from any sexual contact
- I undertake to abstain from the use of intoxicants
- I undertake to abstain from taking food after midday
- I undertake to abstain from dancing, singing, music or any kind of entertainment
- I undertake to abstain from the use of garlands, perfumes, unguents and adornments
- I undertake to abstain from using luxurious seats
- I undertake to abstain from accepting and holding money
Save for some, the rest of these 'rules' are those, that even un-ordained children, in a health family environment, abide by. So, why must a child, be ordained a Buddhist monk, to abide by such?
Furthermore, is it in the best interest of this child's mental and physical development. to make him "abstain from taking food after midday?" Do those who promote and encourage child-ordination, realise or give a damn, for the physical and mental damage, caused to a growing young child, be depriving him of nourishment, for more than half a day?
Also, is it ethically correct, to commit a young child, to a life-long sentence of deprivation he never chose, viz from married life, family life, celibacy and a whole host of other taboos, at an age when he cannot understand the high price, he has been called upon to pay?
The Buddha himself followed his
chosen path, according to his own free will; no one forced him to do so. And
this too he did, at the age of twenty-nine, after having married and fathered a
child.
So what gives one the right, including parents, to
commit these innocent and trusting young, to a life-sentence of deprivation?
According to the Laws of Sri Lanka, a
person cannot be less than eighteen-years of age, to marry or vote. So
similarly, why can’t there be similar laws that apply, to the ordination of
Samaneras?
If this is not Child Abuse, what does one call it?
Why Buddhists ‘donate’ their sons to the
Temple
Buddhist
legend has it, that the Buddha had his son Rahula ordained, at the tender age
of seven-years. This gave rise to a belief amongst Buddhists, that it was a
meritorious act, to ‘donate’ their young sons to the temple.
Given
the level of wisdom of the enlightened one, it is hard to believe, that the
Buddha would have done such a thing, given the age of the young child.
So, could this
have been a ruse of Buddhist monks of yore, which continues to date, to
encourage gullible parents, to ‘donate’ their young sons, in order to swell the
numbers of the Sangha?
Malefic
Horoscopes
Astrology
is not a facet of the Dhamma, but one, amongst many beliefs, customs and
traditions, borrowed by Sinhalese Buddhists, from Hinduism. Therefore, many,
amongst the average Buddhists believe, that a son born, under the ‘wrong stars
(malefic horoscope)’, must be ‘donated’ to the temple. This, they believe, in
all their ignorance, will ward off the ill-effects on the rest of the family,
of such a horoscope, of an ‘unlucky’ child.
'The fool may
watch for lucky days,
Yet luck he shall always miss,
The luck itself is luck's own star,
What can mere stars achieve? – The Buddha
Since the
Buddha, as stated above, did not advocate one to live by, what the stars predicted,
and the Sangha knows this only too well, could this be another ruse of Buddhist
monks, to add numbers to their flock?
Poverty
Then
there is poverty, which is a plausible reason, as to why the poorest of poor,
mostly against their wishes, ‘donate’ their young sons to the temple. When
these poor parents find it hard to make ends meet, the only option, available
to them, is the temple.
Here,
the question arises, is it ethically correct for such children of the poor, to
be committed to a life-sentence of the monastic life, for lack of funds to feed
and educate them?
Though the temple provides his food,
clothing, shelter and education, is he also protected against evils such as
sexual-abuse, from pedophiles amongst the clergy? What could his poor parents do in such an
instance, if their young sons were victims of such, except to turn a blind-eye,
due to their poverty? What of the psychological damage caused to such children?
Why
cannot those ‘affluent’ Buddhist monks, if there are any benevolent amongst
them, help these poor families, to keep their sons within their family unit?
But then again, there may be those who want to keep these families poor, to
ensure a constant ‘supply’, of ‘soldiers’ to the ‘Buddhist Army’!
National Child Protection Authority?
Where in all this, is the role of the National Child
Protection Authority (NCPA) of Sri Lanka,
which states the following, on its website-
“Sri Lanka, as
a member State of the United Nations, was a signatory to the Child Rights
Convention (CRC) in the year 1990 and ratified it on 12th July
1991. This was followed by the preparation of a Children’s Charter approved by
the Cabinet of Ministers, and the establishing of a National Monitory Committee
charged with the responsibility to monitor the CRC and also report to the
international CRC committee when required.
In December 1996, the Presidential Task Force on child
protection was appointed. This body recommended a number of Legal amendments
and administrative reforms, which were included in the report of Presidential
Task Force.
One of the most important recommendations of the
Presidential Task Force was the establishment of the National Child Protection
Authority (NCPA), by ACT No.50 of 1998 under the Presidential Secretariat.
In the year 2006, a separate ministry was formed by the
incumbent president of Sri Lanka to establish a proper protection and welfare
mechanism for children and women and NCPA is under the purview of the Ministry
of Child Development and Women`s Affairs.”
The website states the NCPA VISION as: To create a child friendly and protective environment for children. And, its MISSION as: To ensure children are free from all forms of abuse.
All well and good, but what about those children of Sri Lanka, ordained as
child-Samaneras? Don’t they come under the purview of the NCPA?
Can this little, child-Samanera
understand, that he cannot be carried, hugged and kissed by his mother
thereafter, and seek her maternal warmth and security, when struck with a
fever, or frightened by a nightmare, thunder and lightning?
- I undertake to abstain from harming or taking life
- I undertake to abstain from taking what is not given
- I undertake to abstain from false speech
- I undertake to abstain from any sexual contact
- I undertake to abstain from the use of intoxicants
- I undertake to abstain from taking food after midday
- I undertake to abstain from dancing, singing, music or any kind of entertainment
- I undertake to abstain from the use of garlands, perfumes, unguents and adornments
- I undertake to abstain from using luxurious seats
- I undertake to abstain from accepting and holding money
Save for some, the rest of these 'rules' are those, that even un-ordained children, in a health family environment, abide by. So, why must a child, be ordained a Buddhist monk, to abide by such?
Furthermore, is it in the best interest of this child's mental and physical development. to make him "abstain from taking food after midday?" Do those who promote and encourage child-ordination, realise or give a damn, for the physical and mental damage, caused to a growing young child, be depriving him of nourishment, for more than half a day?
Also, is it ethically correct, to commit a young child, to a life-long sentence of deprivation he never chose, viz from married life, family life, celibacy and a whole host of other taboos, at an age when he cannot understand the high price, he has been called upon to pay?
The Buddha himself followed his
chosen path, according to his own free will; no one forced him to do so. And
this too he did, at the age of twenty-nine, after having married and fathered a
child.
If this is not Child Abuse, what does one call it?
All well and good, but what about those children of Sri Lanka, ordained as
child-Samaneras? Don’t they come under the purview of the NCPA?
1 comment:
Hi Sharmini Serasinghe, I just wanted to contact you to get a few important pages written for an upocoming website. But unfortunately there was no way to contact you directly.sorry for commenting here. anyway, please do drop me an email to nimeshka (at) gmail (dot) com. I will let you know more info. thanks,
Post a Comment