Taking a clear look at Dhammakaya issue, the following is what I have observed:
The media groups attacking the temple are Nation group, Amarin group, T-News and Naewna. Regardless of what’s really happening, you will never see any good story about Dhammakaya temple from them. Unbiased media report both good and bad stories. When news reports are so biased, I’m hesitant to believe the whole story, and have to fact check with another credible media. Eventually I stop reading these biased media for good.
Famous Thai people also commented on this issue. These include Uuy Buddhabless, Dee Nitipong, Moo Pimpaka, Dr. Seri, Phra Buddhaisara. Their comments sparked public interest. Some might have a sincere intention but some might be biased. I am not really sure what their motives are. But their comments are in the same direction, going against the temple
Let me be straight. For those of you who are movie stars, singer, song writer, you earn money by making people fixated on sensual desires through your acting or your song. The Buddha taught us that images and sounds, etc., are sensual desires that we should not attach to. How could you claim to understand the Buddha’s teaching? What qualifies you to justify who is the real monk and what is the real Buddha teaching in the Tipitika, the real Buddhism. You refer to the previous head of Sangha’s statement that Luang Phor was no longer a monk , and the his teaching did not fit with any Buddhist sect. You said that government should not allow people to provide food to the temple. Your most unacceptable false claim was that the temple that has been around for 50 years was a bandit’s den.
I want to ask you some simple questions. How many of you have ordained as a monk, and for how long? Have you had a chance to really read the Tipitika? Or do you just take the words from other people’s mouth. You can’t disrobe a monk, just because you want to. Every day, you sing a song, write a song, or act. Have you ever visited the temple to make merit? How many times have you listened to Dhamma talk? You’d better think before you answer. If it’s only very few times, stop criticizing. I know that you are very good at what you are doing. But you are not good at everything. The comments from these four people bear nothing to me. You should study that subject carefully before giving comments. That’s all I want to say. I don’t want to argue with anyone. It is so annoying.
There are also some professors and others who support Article 44. They said that they want democracy back for Thailand. Don’t you know that there is not even one democratic country that supports Article 44.
The Government tries to justify their actions. They claim that they follow the law. Let’s assume that I had the same authority allowed by Article 44. and that I had done whatever I wanted against you, just like the way you did against the temple. Would you still accept and follow that kind of laws? People are fed up with excessive and inappropriate use of Article 44. Put yourself in others’ shoes and you will understand others’ feeling.
Yesterday, I learned another most disgusting thing the military government did. The military government used Article 44 to replace the current director of Buddhism Department with Pol. Lt. Col. Pongsaporn Bhramsaneh, a DSI officer who worked on the case of Somdej Chuang. I’m dumbfounded that the Pol.Lt.Col, besides having such a high competence at catching thieves, also has great knowledges about the livelihood of monks. This is so ridiculous.
Once the new director was appointed, the government used the law to order the Buddhist department to cooperate with the government officials. They ordered the Sangha heads of all regions to prohibit all monks in their region from coming to join with Dhammakaya temple. I don’t know whether all monks will believe this order or not. What I know is that a group of monks from Chiangmai province does not. They set a good example.
Let me be straight. I think our Sangha as a whole is weak. The governing monks have less concern about the livelihood of monks than if the monks break the law. They are not concerned whether Buddhism is already in trouble. The Buddhist department that used to support monks now puts restriction on monks. It is the twilight time of Buddhism in Thailand.
Let’s focus on the real problem here. Thai people forget things easily and do not look deep at the cause of this problem. I’ll tell you how it all happened and propose a way to resolve this problem that is better than using Article 44.
The abbot is accused of accepting money from a thief and engaging in money laundering. The charge is only against the abbot, not the other monks or the temple. This kind of lawsuits is so common, and is among 10,000 other cases in Thailand.
This was only the initial process of informing the charge to the abbot. No one was found guilty yet. To better understand the whole process, I need to mention Mr.Supachai’s case. He is still on trial to see if he is at fault. After his lawsuit is finalized, then the will be a trial on the abbot for accepting the property from a thief (Mr. Supachai) and money laundering will begin. I don’t know how many years it will it take to start the trial for the abbot.
DSI needed to deliver the charge to the abbot. The abbot asked DSI to deliver the charge at the temple because he was ill. The public attorney of DSI stated that the abbot’s request was against the law, he has to accept the charge at DSI office only. On the contrary, the deputy director of public attorney office and previous director of police department insisted that the charge can be delivered anywhere. At this point you might wonder what law school the public attorney graduated from? I believe that the abbot has no problem to go on trial. He did that 10 years ago.
DSI made the temple mistrust them by not accepting the doctor’s note confirming the illness of the abbot. DSI did not send a doctor to examine the abbot at the temple. They went to get a warrant from the court instead. When the temple representatives mentioned it, DSI said that the ongoing process went beyond that step already. In summary, why don’t DSI deliver the charge at the temple? Why did DSI insist that it’s against the law? Why? Additionally, DSI said that if they get the abbot in custody, they will disrobe him. If you were him, would you come to DSI? I hope this will bring some light to many people who keep saying ‘if you did nothing wrong, why are you so scared?’.
DSI then submited the case to the court. The public attorney told DSI to interrogate and gather more evidence from the defendant. The suggestion from the court shows that this is a weak case. There is no strong evidence to support it. If the case is submitted to court, it might be dismissed.
This summarized how we all get to this point.
Click here for Part 3.