What seems most unbefitting of a Buddhist is sometimes a most Buddhist thing to do under certain circumstances - for example, denouncing someone in public. What is known as "the act of information" during the Buddha's lifetime prompts us to rethink our preconceived idea of what is appropriately Buddhist.

With his secret desire to gain control over the community of Buddhists, Devadatta, one of Shakyamuni's chief disciples, urged his aged teacher to relinquish his responsibility and spend the rest of his life in leisure. Devadatta made the proposal twice and was rejected. Devadatta then asked Shakyamuni a third time in a public assembly: "Lord, the Lord is now old, worn, stricken in years...It is I who will lead the Order of monks" (The Book of the Discipline: Vinaya - Pitaka Cullavagga, vol. 5, I. B. Horner, trans., p. 264).

Shakyamuni replied: "I$B!D(Bwould not hand over the Order of monks even to Sariputta and Moggallana. How then could I to you, a wretched one to be vomited like spittle?" (ibid., 264).

The Betrayal of Devadatta

Shakyamuni rebuked Devadatta as "spittle" because the latter was indulging himself with extravagant gifts and honors from a wealthy prince. Shakyamuni felt that Devadatta's attachment to fame and status should be pointed out in public. His arrogance and sense of superiority over other practitioners should be kept in check by comparing him with Shakyamuni's two other leading disciples. Instead, unaware that there was compassion behind his teacher's rebuke, Devadatta schemed to destroy the harmonious community of practitioners.

Sensing Devadatta's intention to cause a schism, Shakyamuni asked the whole Buddhist community to denounce Devadatta in the city of Rajagaha, informing believers and nonbelievers alike of Devadatta's corruption and betrayal: "Devadatta's nature was formerly of one kind, now it is of another kind" and "Whatever Devadatta should do by gesture and by voice, in that neither the Awakened One nor dhamma nor the Order should be seen, but in that only Devadatta should be seen" (ibid., 264-65). The Buddha declared, "Let the Order carry out a (formal) act of Information against Devadatta in Rajagaha" (p. 264).

Protecting the Buddhist Community

The leaders of the Buddhist community, however, were reluctant to publicly denounce Devadatta because they used to speak highly of him, praising his great ability and dignified appearance. Shakyamuni reminded his disciples that Devadatta's present evil was "just as true" as his past goodness (ibid., 265).

Overcoming their confusion and reluctance, the Buddhist leaders went out to denounce Devadatta. Townspeople responded differently to such unprecedented public denunciation against this famed leader of the Buddhist community, carried out by the Buddha's own disciples. Those of "little faith" and "poor intelligence" said, "They are jealous of Devadatta's gains and honours" (ibid., 266). But others who "had faith and were believing, who were wise, intelligent," said, "This can be no ordinary matter in that the Lord has Devadatta informed against in Rajagaha" (ibid., 266).

Thus begins the story of Devadatta's failed attempt to harm the Buddha and destroy the Buddhist community, as related in one of the early Buddhist scriptures. The purpose of the early Buddhists in recording these events is clear - they wanted to protect the community of practitioners upon which the integrity and spread of Buddhism depended. They were realists who knew that corruption and schism, which had occurred even during the Buddha's lifetime, were more likely to take place after the Buddha's passing.

Facing Internal Corruption

Religion must spread to continue its existence. But, to spread over different lands and through future generations, religion must be organized, however loosely or inconspicuously. Although some may find "organized" religion problematic, no religion can be completely devoid of organization or leadership. Otherwise, religion could not spread or even survive beyond a few generations.

With organization and leadership, however, come the elements of corruption. Authoritative leadership may turn authoritarian. Teachings to liberate believers from their suffering may be transformed into dogmas to keep them down. Responsibility and influence may attract those hungry for status and power. Shared resources may be abused to benefit a select few. For as long as organizations and their leadership are composed of human beings, it is not a matter of if they will be faced with corruption but when. Buddhism - as the episodes of Devadatta and many like him indicate throughout its long history - is no exception to this sober reality of religion.

Internal corruption is religion's own poison; it is religion's dormant cancer that needs to be kept under control, just as human evil can be checked but never eliminated. To acknowledge and face this fact is the first step religion must take; then it must develop an antidote against its own poison if it wishes to hold true to its noble, original intent.

	Nichiren Daishonin speaks of those who, like Devadatta, attempted to destroy the unity of believers as follows: "Greedy, cowardly, and foolish, they nonetheless pass themselves off as wise persons" (WND, 800). How can we challenge such greed, cowardice, foolishness and hypocrisy that once in a while try to rear their ugly heads in our lives?
	In what sense is the public denouncement of Devadatta considered as Buddhist? Why is a failure to denounce evil considered as anti-Buddhist?
	No religion is immune to fundamentalism. From your own experiences, which humanistic aspect of Nichiren Buddhism is most effective to prevent a fundamentalist distortion of Buddhism?

In the story of Devadatta, Shakyamuni teaches us that the antidote to ensure the survival and integrity of Buddhism can be found in our wisdom and courage. Each member of the Buddhist community must develop the wisdom to perceive the truth beneath the surface and the courage to speak up against those of malicious intent, just like the Buddha's disciples did at the time of Devadatta's betrayal.

Although it should not be mistaken as license for emotional criticism or destructive slander, denouncing someone like Devadatta is our responsibility as Buddhists - an important way to repay our debt of gratitude owed to the precious community of practitioners.

We can develop the necessary wisdom and courage to carry out "the act of information" against Devadatta's kindred by first looking inward and challenging our own Devadatta - like inclinations such as arrogance and egotism. Only such honest self-reflection makes the act genuine and effective and prevents it from degenerating into ostracism.