Certain statements made by a stand-up comedian on Buddhism have added fuel to a fire ignited by Pastor Jerome Fernando several weeks ago. Now, following a backlash from followers of Buddhism and Buddhist monks, who alleged that the content of the jokes delivered by the comedian offend them and is an insult to Buddhism. With complaints mounting, the exit attempt by the comedian via the airport resulted in her being arrested and remanded till 7 June.

Throughout history, freedom of speech and sensitivities surrounding religion has clashed. The knee-jerk reaction to comments from comedians, art by cartoonists and opinions from authors around the world. It is a clear indication that many communities and cultures have not yet advanced adequately to differentiate hate speech from comedy, nor rational reasoning from rhetoric. The Sri Lankan community, fragmented due to decades of conflict, and  with fault lines, often exploited by politicians and at times by foreign actors, are yet to forge a common understanding, where sensitive topics such as commentary about religion, culture and practices,  can be openly discussed without controversy.

Many of those who are concerned about the said statements by the comedian, express concern that such statements would affect Buddhism’s image in society. The argument that action needs to be taken to protect Buddhism, and other philosophies, religions from words and ideas expressed at a stand-up comedy routine, lacks merit. The claim that those who ‘insult’ should be rehabilitated or face mandatory imprisonment for life, is something one would expect to hear from extremist or fundamentalist elements like the Taliban in conflict strife Afghanistan. Needless to say, Sri Lanka has a long history of religion and race being used to stir division and promote politics. Is the new trend of being ‘offended’ or ‘insulted’ in relation to one’s religion, 2023’s political mobilisation tool? That remains to be seen.

In the case of the comedian, the million dollar question is, what constitutes an insult and how do we gauge the adverse impacts of an insult. Can a statement made in jest, at a clearly organised comedy event be viewed as an insult? Those who are willing to look at similar issues with an open mind would concur that almost any statement regarding a religion or a similar belief could be interpreted as an insult depending on how one looks at it, and therefore, defining what an insult is an extremely sensitive matter.

The comedian’s comments can hardly be interpreted as an insult to Buddhism. Majority of her statements regarding Buddhism merely questioned practical and scientific aspects of what is being taught about Buddha’s early life, the myth and the legend. Of course, there was some sarcasm, which is part of comedy.  One question that was raised in regards to this incident was, how could such a statement with little or no depth, and intended merely to make some people laugh, be interpreted as an insult to Buddhism, which preaches tolerance and forgiveness? How can a philosophy that has been accepted in almost every continent and survived for over two millennia, be hurt by a joke?  

The information available on the life of Buddha’s and other religious leaders, often indicate how they responded calmly and objectively to criticism. Or chose not to engage.  However, in todays’ society many ‘followers’ of religion easily get ‘offended’. The manner in which some ‘followers’ or ‘practitioners of religion’ behave in response to criticism or questioning, cannot be farther from the teachings of their idols or teachers. What’s worse, is that communities tend to easily get offended by statements that do not resonate with their beliefs. This fact, which could indicate a degree of intolerance, erodes the strands that bind a secure social fabric that Sri Lanka is supposed to represent.   

Further, religious leaders, be they Buddhist, Catholic, Christian, Hindu or Islamic, should not be fragile and narrow-minded. The way to protect a religion is not legal action, but logical discourses, understanding and educating others. Build mutual respect, and all religions will be less trifled with. Buddhist monks should also have the maturity to tolerate, and diplomatically and logically deal with criticism and different opinions. These are the main qualities Buddhism promotes, and are an essential quality the people of a democracy that recognises the freedom of expression should have.