ព្រះបាទធម្មិក​ និង កម្ពុជា

In Search of the Dhammika Ruler

Heng Monychenda

Ideal Political Configuration in Cambodia

The ideal of political configuration in Cambodia is based upon the trinity of Jati (Nation) Sàsanà (Religion) and Mohaksatra (King), in which religion refers to Buddhism, the predominant religion in Cambodia. This can be seen in Cambodia’s National Anthem, which consists of three sections, starting with a prayer for the protection of the king, followed by a statement of pride in the nation and of being the Khmer who built Angkor Wat, and ending with recognition of the importance of Buddhism in maintaining peace and development.

The Jati (Nation) and the Sasana (Religion) pillars may be compared to the two wheels of the chariot that maintain balance in society while propelling it forwards: one wheel is called anachak (the ’wheel’ of state affairs) and the other is Buddhachak (the ’wheel’ of Buddhism). In Cambodia today there is tremendous interest among the people to embrace Buddhachak[1] (the way of life according to Buddhism) and to harmonize it with anachak (modern state governance) in an effort to rebuild the country.

The third pillar (king) is traditionally understood to be the charioteer who may steer the chariot of society towards victory or failure in warfare. The ideal king or leader in the Khmer imagination is known as Preah Batr Dhammik (the Dharmic King) or Just Ruler. The search for a Just Ruler has been going on for centuries and Khmer still foster hopes that one day the Preah Batr Dhammik will come to govern their country.

The Wheels of Power

In general, Khmer people believe that peace and development can only come about when the government knows how to unite modern state governance, anachak, with traditional state governance, Buddhachak, both conceptually and in practice. While anachak is more concerned with the system and structure of worldly power, Buddhachak focuses upon the personal capacity and qualities of the individuals who want to bring peace and development to their country.

Two institutions in particular are relevant to the Khmer understanding of the powers that influence socioeconomic life. The first of these is the wat (Buddhist Monastery), a grassroots institution that was traditionally under the common ownership of ordinary people. Wats provided literacy, economic assistance (loans), offered refuge in times of poverty and were the point of departure for dreams of approaching the second important institution, the veang (Royal Palace). To many Khmer, the veang represents a place in which everything is possible. It is the symbol par excellence of power and wealth, a kind of heaven on earth and the focus of the longings of ordinary people. The veang is also the place of residence of the king and the royal family, who are understood to be the reincarnations of Devadas (gods/angels) or of people who acquired great merit in previous lives, and it is therefore envisaged as the source of the power to rule and to save the people from suffering. Typically, when a villager comments on the magnificence of a large house, he might say: ‘Wow! This house is as big as the temple!’ while an urbanite would be more inclined to use the palace simile and say: ‘Wow! It is as big as the royal palace’. In essence then, the wat is a symbol of village prosperity and development while the veang symbolizes wealth and power in the city.

The wat may be understood as a source of fuel that inspires the lives of common people. It is a nuclear point around which people can unite in troubled times, and it is a wellspring of social and ethical values concerning leadership. Traditionally, a man who had never been a monk would not be considered ‘complete’ by his fellow villagers. Most of the post-Angkorean kings spent a period of time in the monkhood in order to fulfill the 10 perfections (parami). Cambodian Buddhists consider this period essential to achieving the status of a good king, a good royal family member, or a good leader; the present king ordained twice in Paris, Prince Ranaridh ordained for one week in India, and Sam Rainsy ordained for one week in Cambodia. The present Prime Minister of Cambodia, Hun Sen, has never been a monk but he often publicizes the fact that he was once a temple boy. The basic principles that anyone—ruler or commoner, monk or layperson—would acquire from the wat were: dana (generosity)[2], sila (precepts)[3] and bhavana (development)[4].

The relationship between the veang and the wat is dynamic and yet ideally it is finely balanced. The veang requires the support of the wat and its parishioners and it reciprocates by providing support and prosperity to the wat. However, the veang is also sensitive to the moral influence of the wat, and it is difficult for the veang to maintain its status if its power and wealth are not seen to be based upon dhamma[5], if they are not obtained through adherence to dhamma[6], and are not born of dhamma[7]. Indeed, a ruler must publicly declare before the monks that his leadership is based upon these three tenets before making an offering to the monks, be it for making merit, paying gratitude, or even for political purposes.[8]

Analogies for Just Leadership

The two wheels of the chariot (anachak and Buddhachak) need a charioteer or a driver to lead people towards a goal. The two cannot be separated and need to be in balance. However, nowadays when Cambodians talk about the importance of the leader they often use the analogy of the naval captain rather than that of the charioteer. For instance at the end of official speeches speakers often praise the leader by saying: ‘May the Lord Buddha blessing you so that you can navigate the Cambodian ship (doeknomm neavear Kampuchea) safely to land’. I ask myself why the traditional analogy of the chariot has suddenly been replaced in the popular imagination by that of the ship and the importance of the two wheels for peace and development has been lost while all focus is now upon the captain. I cannot help but ask whether this changing pattern of thought reflects a change in Cambodian leadership towards Caesarism: a captain with a ship, but no chariot that requires religious cooperation.

Ever since the time of Jayavarman VII, Cambodia has suffered foreign occupations or civil wars. Jayavarman VII has become the ideal ruler in popular Cambodian consiousness and Cambodians still nurture dreams of recovering the glorious days of Jayavarman VII. This king has come to represent the ideal ruler who truly controlled the two wheels of the chariot for leading the country successfully: he extended territories, he brought about development, and he was devoted to Buddhism. The search for someone similar to Jayavarman VII or Preah Batr Dhammik (the Messiah of Cambodians), and the hope that Preah Batr Dhammik will come to save the country, has been passed down from generation to generation, with support in the Buddha’s predictions. The book entitled the Put Tumneay (Buddha’s Prediction) describes what this ideal ruler will look like, and when and where he will appear. It is interesting to note that the Buddha’s Prediction mentions a Chinese man (from the incarnation of an angel called Visnukàra), who will be carrying a kompi (Prediction book, Sutra, Canon) that will help in recognition of the Dhammika king. Recently, I have indeed received two letters from an elderly man living in USA telling me that he has found a person who has the qualities of Preah Batr Dhammik and he is convinced that this man will save Cambodia from misery.

These hopes and this searching are motivated by the frustration that Cambodians feel about that fact that their recent leaders have not been able to reduce the suffering of the people. The more suffering they face, the stronger their hopes of finding Preah Batr Dhammik.

Who will be the Preah Batr Dhammik?

According to Cambodian thought, Preah batr Dhammik is a person who upholds the Tenfold Virtues of the Ruler[9] and who has supernatural powers such that enemies cannot harm him. People scrutinize the practice of the ruler closely to see whether he follows the Tenfold Virtues as prescribed by the Buddha. The Buddha also advised that rulers should practice the 12 Duties of the Great Ruler,[10] the Fivefold Policy of Socioeconomic Development[11], and accountability towards society and nature[12]. However, it is clear that Cambodians have failed to consider various other qualities of the rulers as taught by the Buddha, or perhaps our monks have failed to preach sufficiently about these. Or maybe it is greed, anger and ignorance that have made Cambodians ignore or fail to implement Buddhist teachings. Cambodians have therefore focused upon the Tenfold Virtues of the Ruler, which deal with the individual behavior of the leader, but have tended to overlook the Buddha’s teachings about system of government (Dhammadhippateyya)[13], the role of the government (Dhammikarakkha)[14], the rule of law (Ma Adhammakara)[15], wealth distribution (Dhananuppadana)[16], moral order (Samanabrahmana-paripuccha)[17] and political platform/public policy (Rajasaŋggaha 5)[18].

The Just Ruler and the Just Populace

The failure of Cambodians to identify and the interminable wait for the Dhammik to appear, the incomplete preaching of monks on the dhamma for the rulers, and the failures of Cambodia’s rulers have caused Cambodians much suffering. I therefore propose that Cambodians begin to actively cultivate a new Preah Batr Dhammik instead of passively waiting for a Preah Batr Dhammik to appear. It is time that we start to save ourselves before any Preah Batr Dhammik arrives to perform his task.

I would argue that Preah Batr Dhammik is simply a title for those who believe in dhammocracy[19] (dhammadhippateyya), respect for dhamma, love of dhamma, taking dhamma as the principle of life, and honoring dhamma as the ‘flagship’. Therefore, it seems to me, it is not only rulers who must comply with dhammic rules, but all citizens of the country should cultivate these qualities in themselves. A Just Ruler may well be able to lead the country towards peace and development but the Just Populace is essential in choosing the Just Ruler and for checking up on his performance. This may seem like an unrealistic pipe-dream, but I would argue that it is a more practical solution than waiting for the voluntary appearance of Preah Batr Dhammik or waiting for a Chinese fortune-teller to reveal the true Preah Batr Dhammik.

In one of my books, Preah Batr Dhammik (1991), I contend that everyone can and should be Preah Batr Dhammik in contemporary Cambodia. The issue that seems worthy of discussion is: how are we to change common understandings of the concept of Preah Batr Dhammik? How might we begin to integrate dhammocracy and dhammikaship into the Prime Minister’s cabinet and his public servants? How might the populace absorb dhammikaship, and what will be the role of the wat in this? Further, when power is no longer in the hands of the king, what kind of support might the king offer in order to realize the recurring dreams of his subjects? How may we make the subjects believe that by complying with dhammocracy and dhammikaship the government will be praised and reelected, and peace and development will prevail?

Reconfiguring power and moral order

Cambodians today face major questions concerning who holds worldly power and who is responsible for moral disorder. The veang is no longer the source of power and wealth. The wat has lost many of its former roles in society, and the charisma of the wat and of monks has been damaged by war and the destruction wrought by the Khmer Rouge, and it has been weakened by modern state government and by modern education. This decline can be seen in the replacement of the previous pronoun acchkdei, which monks used to use to represent ‘I’, by atma. Atma means I, while acckdei actually means the ability to understand and explain the correct way of life, ability to manage conflict, ability to manage the wat as a place to which villagers may send their children for education[20]. Cultivation of the kind of relationship between the wat/monks and the villagers, as articulated through the word acchkdei, may help recover trust among villagers that their monks can help them reconfigure power and shape a political culture based on dhammocracy.

The challenge for the wat would then be, on the one hand, to play a greater role in educating, explaining, and disseminating information to villagers so that they know what qualities good leaders and representatives should possess and what kind of government system would best protect the interests of Cambodians, provide peace and development, maintain the rule of law, manage fair wealth distribution, improve the moral order, make sound public policy, and take care of the environment.[21] This would help villagers and city people alike make better decisions in recruiting or electing their representatives and their leaders. On the other hand, the trustworthiness of the monks, in the eyes of the people, would be judged according to the extent to which the monks were able to influence power-holders and provide ‘therapeutic’ dhamma, or even detoxify maleficent power-holders. The task is not easy but it is not impossible.

Moral order in Cambodia is said to be declining. One example of this is the way in which primary and secondary school teachers, dissatisfied with their low salaries, oblige children to take extra, private classes with them. This destroys the morality of the children and becomes a blueprint for their own behaviour when they grow up. People assume that if the teachers were to receive a higher, more appropriate salary from the government they would stop this behavior. Corruption is another aspect of moral decadence, as is the increasing use of drugs by youths, which in turn gives rise to social disorder, and the high rate of HIV/AIDS infection. One may point out these problems to the monks and expect them to solve them, but this is not easy when the number of qualified monks does not match the magnitude of the problems. However, the socially-engaged Buddhism launched ten years ago by Buddhism for Development has proven effective in engaging monks actively in social work and in trying to help solve the problems Cambodia faces (see the story of the organization at and its founder at http://www.bfdkhmer.org/founder_2_1.html).

Socialization into a moral order must also be carried out by the government, parents and schools. Unfortunately, post-war trauma and the nightmare of the Khmer Rouge delay the recovery of moral order and they also provide good excuses that may be trotted out when power is mismanaged or the moral order is corrupted. Buddhism for Development is now launching a program called Mother Karuna that aims to cultivate the role of mothers in healing these problems and in ‘detoxifying the poisons’ of men, who are the dominant leaders in Cambodia today. We hope that our work will encourage women to become female Dhammika Rulers – another wheel that may match the traditional wheel of male Dhammika Rulers.

Conclusion

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with living in hope of good things to come, though doing so may take time. Good leaders will come and some of them may perhaps already have arrived. The real problem is whether these leaders are able to enact their just leadership. When the system of government is dhammocratized and the rule of law prevails, good people will be able to show their faces as Dhammika leaders.

The role of Buddhism in Cambodia is still vital for the future of political figures, for Cambodians as well as in the world at large. The role of monks and wats in helping to shape the behavior of the leaders and in making the government system more dhammocratic is important. This includes active engagement with the daily lives of the Buddhist laity, not only in terms of the four bhavana[22] or development issues but also regarding decision making about the system of government, policies, and leadership.

Monks need to be aware that they are monks, and that they must live within the framework of the Vinaya (law) taught by the Buddha, particularly regarding involvement in political maneuvering in relation to the government and political parties. Proper and adequate education for monks in this new world order needs to be considered in capturing and managing the changing opportunities and threats caused by globalization.

References

Indapañño Heng Monychenda (2003) Preahbat Dhammik, a publication of Buddhism for Development, third revised edition

Venerable Khiev Chum, a Buddhist scholar of the early 1970s, defined this as the system of democracy in his book Pracheathippateyya Chastum (Ancient Democracy). Treyrath Library, published in 1972,

---

[1] This refers to the Noble Eightfold Paths of the Buddha: Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Effort, Right Livelihood, Right Awareness, and Right Concentration.

[2] Dana: 2 kinds; material gifts and the gift of truth

[3] Sila: 5 precepts: abstain from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and intoxicants.

[4] Bhavana means development. There are four kinds of development: physical development, moral development, emotional development, development of wisdom.

[5] Adhammiko (the opposite of dhammiko).

[6] Adhammaladdho (the opposite of dhammaladdho).

[7] Adhammeneva (the opposite of dhammeneva).

[8] Offering Announcement: Ayaŋ no bhante pindapato dhammiko dhammaladdho dhammeneva uppãdito màt`pituadike gunavante uddissa imaŋ saparikkhàraŋ saŋghassa dema te gunavantadayo imaŋ attano santakaŋ viya maññamànà anumodantu anumoditvàna yathichitasampattihi samijjhantu sabbadukkhà pamuñcantu. (Dear Venerable monks! All of our food are based upon dhamma , obtained through adherence to dhamma, and are born of dhamma. We dedicate these foods to our ancestors, such as mothers and fathers. May they acknowledge these foods (merits) as theirs and then may they be released from all kinds of suffering. May they achieve the state of human being, the state of deities, and the state of nirvana as they desire.

[9] The tenfold Virtues of the Ruler (Dasabiddharajadhamma): dana (charity), sila (morality), pariccaga (self-sacrifice), ajjava (honesty), maddava (kindness), tapa (self-control), akodha (non-anger), avihinsa (non-violence), khanti (tolerance), and avirodhana (conformity to the law).

[10] Duties of the Great Ruler: cakkavatti-vatta

1. Dhammadhippateyya ca Dhammikarakkha (supremacy of the law and righteousness and provision of the right watch, ward, and protection: for one’s own folk(2), for the army (3), for administrative officers (4), for civil servants (5), for professionals, traders, and farmers (6), for town and country dwellers (7), for the religious (8), and for beasts and birds (9). NB this duty refers to the ideals presented in note 9.

2. Ma Adhammakara (to let no wrong-doing prevail in the kingdom) (10)

3. Dhananuppadana (to let wealth be given or distributed to the poor) (11)

4. Samanabrahmana-paripuccha (see and ask for advice from the men of the religious life (monks) who maintain moral standards (12). See Indapañño Heng Monychenda (2003) Preahbat Dhammik, a publication of Buddhism for Development, third revised edition, page 203.

[11] Ràjasaŋgaha: 1-Sassamedha (policy for agricultural development), 2-Purisamedha (policy for promoting human resources), 3-Sammapasa (policy for promoting employment), 4-Vacapeyya (policy for public relations), and 5-Niraggala (policy for national security). S.I.76; A.11.42 See Indapañño Heng Monychenda (2003) Preahbat Dhammik, page 205.

[12] The concept is taken from the Three Refuges of Buddhism: Buddha, dhamma, and sangha.

[13] When referring to Dharma or law this is called Dhammadhipateyya; when referring to a person who established it is called Pracheathipateyya (Democracy). Venerable Khiev Chum, a Buddhist scholar of the early 1970s, defined this as the system of democracy in his book Pracheathippateyya Chastum (Ancient Democracy). Treyrath Library Publisher, Phnom Penh, published in 1972, page 62–64.

[14] see note 9.

[15] see note 9.

[16] see note 9.

[17] see note 9.

[18] see note10.

[19] Dhammocracy = (Dhammo, Pali Language, is dhamma) + -cracy = this author’s own combination.

[20] Khmer Dictionary, The Buddhist Institute Edition, 1967, pages 1715

[21] see notes 9, 10, 11 and 12.

[22] See note 4.