• The structure of the temple system itself creates certain vulnerabilities: insufficient oversight, no background checks, weak internal accountability mechanisms
• Vinaya rules related review processes are no longer functioning properly
• There's a great deal of sexual experimentation among young novice monks

For generations, Buddhist monasteries in Sri Lanka have been seen as places where children could receive religious education, discipline, and spiritual guidance or even a way out for impoverished families who cannot provide for their children. Many families from all parts of the country have entrusted their children to temples at a young age, believing that the monastic life would provide them with a meaningful and respected path in life or, at the very least, some comfort from material privations.

However, incidents of child sexual abuse within monasteries have continued to emerge from time to time, leading to discussions about the safety of children living in religious institutions and the systems in place to oversee their welfare. Although the issue occasionally comes into the spotlight, many survivors remain reluctant to speak about their experiences, and there is little reliable information available on how widespread the problem may be.

Dr Chandana Namal Rathnayake has spent years examining this issue through both personal experience and professional work. A psychotherapist, educator, researcher, and survivor of clerical child abuse, he entered the monastic life as a child and later disrobed. Since then, he has researched institutional child abuse and advocated for protections for children living in religious environments.

In an interview with The Daily Morning, he reflected on his experiences as a Buddhist monk, the challenges faced by children in monasteries, the long-term psychological impact of abuse, weaknesses within the existing systems, and the changes that he believes are needed to better safeguard children.

Following are excerpts of the interview:

Tell us about your own experience as a Buddhist monk and how it shaped your understanding of this issue?

I was ordained at the age of 10 in 1991 at the temple in my village. I later learned that I was ordained as part of then President Ranasinghe Premadasa's project to ordain 10,000 children to mark the 2,300th Mihindu Jayanthiya. By the time that I was 15, I had lived in four different temples in a few Provinces. I left the first temple because of sexual abuse. Problems arose in the subsequent temple as well, I remained in the second monastery before moving elsewhere. Across all four temples, I experienced abuse. I left monastic life in 2012. However, I didn’t fully understand what had happened to me until I was nearly 30. During the first five years of my monastic life, I experienced acts that I now recognise as child sexual abuse, I didn’t have the language or understanding to identify them as such at the time. I tried telling my parents, they didn’t understand what I was describing. In rural Sri Lanka, many people didn’t imagine that an adult man could sexually abuse a boy. Even discussions about relationships between men and women were limited. There was no vocabulary to explain these experiences, and there was very little awareness about them. My parents only realised that something was wrong after I ran away from the temple twice. They then removed me from that environment. When I studied psychology and trained as a psychotherapist and counsellor, I began to recognise my own experiences for what they were. Incidents of this nature occur to almost every novice monk, sometimes with the knowledge of senior monks and sometimes without it. Because it was treated as something normal within that environment, it took me nearly two decades to recognise that what I had experienced was abuse. Having lived through those experiences myself, I believe that I have every right to speak about them.

When did you begin examining this issue beyond your own experience?

After I started working in counselling and psychotherapy, my understanding broadened to a larger extent. In 2017, I organised three conferences involving Buddhist monks studying at major universities in Sri Lanka. Around 400 monks participated. Alongside those events, I conducted an informal survey. I was not approaching the issue as someone unfamiliar with what was happening. I had lived with those experiences for nearly 20 years. Finding a novice monk who had never experienced abuse was extremely difficult. The challenge is that novice monks live in a very isolated environment. They have almost nobody to talk to. Many feel unable to speak even to their parents. The findings of the informal survey reflected this reality. More than half of those who participated reported having experienced sexual abuse.

What does Buddhist disciplinary law say about sexuality and sexual misconduct?

There’s an important distinction between novice monks and higher-ordained Upasampada monks. There is no disciplinary framework governing sexuality for novice monks. The Vinaya rules apply primarily to higher-ordained monks. Sexual intercourse with a woman, a man, or even an animal is classified as a Parajika offence, which results in the loss of monkhood. Even spending time alone with a woman is prohibited under the disciplinary code. A higher-ordained monk should not be alone with a woman in private quarters. When discussing monastic discipline, another important issue is disciplinary proceedings. I spent around eight or nine years as a higher-ordained monk. During that period, I attended formal Vinaya proceedings only twice. That was not because I avoided them. Those processes are no longer functioning properly. Many temples don’t even have Seema Maalakayas where such proceedings are supposed to take place. Even where those facilities exist, monks don’t gather to conduct disciplinary reviews. Traditionally, monks are expected to meet four times a month and discuss breaches of discipline. For example, if a monk held a woman's hand, that would not lead to expulsion from the order,  it would require confession and an appropriate disciplinary response. Today, those systems are largely absent. There is also no effective mechanism to determine whether such practices are taking place.

How do you view the way that monastic life and ordination are presented in Sri Lanka?

Many monks present themselves as people making extraordinary sacrifices to protect Buddhism. My experience was different. Nobody asked me to go and save Buddhism. The Buddha's teaching is very straightforward. If a person cannot commit to a monastic life, then, they should not undertake it. If someone chooses to be a higher-ordained monk, they must live by the relevant principles. If they cannot do that, they can return to lay life or remain as a novice. When a child is ordained in Sri Lanka, they are taught that ordination is a permanent commitment. They are told not to think about returning home. By the time some of them have spent 20 years in the robe, they know little else. They have become dependent on that system and then try to build a life through qualifications and employment opportunities available within it.

As a psychotherapist, what impact can child sexual abuse have on survivors?

The consequences cannot be measured easily. Many survivors develop anxiety disorders, depression, and other psychological difficulties. The risk of suicide can increase too. Mental distress can affect education, employment, relationships, and daily functioning. There is also a risk of getting addicted to substance use.

How do you view certain misconceptions related to survivors of child sexual abuse?

Many people believe that a person who was abused is more likely to become an abuser. There is no research that conclusively proves that everyone who experiences abuse goes on to abuse others. However, when we look at the monastic environment, there are certain factors that may increase that risk. One thing I observed during my years as a monk is that there is a great deal of sexual experimentation among young novice monks. Many novice monks reach puberty inside temples. They don’t have parents around to discuss what they are experiencing. They have nobody to explain sexual development or answer questions. In that environment, experimentation takes place. When young monks are abused by older monks, there is a risk that such behaviour begins to appear normal. Looking at it from that perspective, it is possible to hypothesise that some adult monks who abuse children may themselves have been abused when they were young novices. I’m not saying that every abused child becomes an abuser. But, there are systemic conditions within the monastic environment that can contribute to that cycle. This also creates a difficult ethical and psychological question. If an adult monk is found to have abused a child, but he himself was abused as a child, how should the society respond? He is a perpetrator, he is also a victim. These are complex issues. That’s why I believe that Sri Lanka needs a serious national conversation on this subject.

What is your position on the ordination of children?

If you look at countries such as Thailand and Myanmar, novice ordination is usually temporary. Sri Lanka is different. Here, children are frequently ordained on a permanent basis. In Buddhist literature, we find examples such as Rahula, Sopaka and Sunita being ordained as children. Beyond those cases, there is no evidence that child ordination was widespread during the Buddha's lifetime. The current system is problematic at several levels. Sri Lanka is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. That Convention recognises the importance of parental care during childhood. At the same time, institutions such as the National Child Protection Authority and the Probation and Child Care Services Department require background checks and oversight for people who care for children. Even operators of day-care centres are subject to regulation. A child may spend only four or five hours a day in a day-care centre, a novice monk lives in a temple full-time. If a child is going to spend years under the authority of a chief incumbent, should that person not be subject to background checks and child protection requirements? That is a major gap in our system.

What lessons can Sri Lanka learn from other countries regarding child protection in religious institutions?

Countries such as the UK have developed safeguarding systems. Any organisation where children gather, whether it is a church, temple, school, charity, or community organisation, is expected to have a safeguarding officer. For example, within the Church of England, designated safeguarding officers are appointed in churches and schools. Organisations that fail to meet safeguarding obligations face legal consequences. As far as I know, Sri Lanka doesn’t have any such arrangements. Many people who abused children in temples are already the subject of rumours or concerns within their communities. However, children continue to be placed under their care. The system depends on trust and respect. Unfortunately, the harm caused to children is enormous.

What legal procedures are involved when a child is ordained as a novice monk?

That is another area where there are significant shortcomings. If a child is placed under the care of the Probation and Child Care Services Department, there are numerous requirements. Reports may be needed from the Grama Niladhari, Police officers, the school authorities and others. In reality, ordaining a child and placing a child in institutional care are not entirely different. In both cases, a child is being entrusted to an institution. However, when a child is ordained, almost none of those safeguards exist. Usually, the school leaving certificate is transferred to the pirivena. The child is then registered as a novice monk with the Buddhist Affairs Department. Beyond that, there is very little to no oversight. Nobody visits the temple to determine whether the child has proper accommodation, adequate food, suitable supervision, or safe living conditions.

Should there be legal reforms concerning the minimum age for ordination?

There is a traditional saying that a child old enough to throw a stone at a crow can be ordained. However, if we examine Buddhist teachings more carefully, we see that monastic life requires a deep understanding of suffering and spiritual commitment. When a person requests ordination, they recite words that essentially mean: "Grant me ordination so that I may bring an end to suffering in the cycle of rebirth." Can an eight-year-old or 10-year-old genuinely understand what that means? I don’t think so. We set minimum ages for voting, banking, and many other activities because we recognise that maturity matters when making important decisions. The same principle should be considered in relation to ordination. Children can be introduced to temple life. They can participate in religious activities. Temporary ordination should also be an option. But, any such arrangement should exist within a framework that guarantees safety and parental oversight.

What factors do you believe contribute to sexual abuse within temples?

The structure of the temple system itself creates certain vulnerabilities. There is insufficient oversight. There are no background checks. Internal accountability mechanisms are weak. When novice monks reach puberty, they usually have nobody to guide them through those experiences. There is very little discussion about sexuality. As a result, tensions can develop and find expression through unequal power relationships. An older monk has authority over a younger monk. A respected chief incumbent has authority over poor families in the village. Whenever there is an imbalance of power, there is potential for abuse.

What mechanisms currently exist to prevent abuse in religious institutions, and what should be introduced?

At present, there is no effective safeguarding system. Internationally, the accepted standard is that any place where children gather should have designated child protection personnel and clear reporting mechanisms. Children should have access to independent channels through which they can seek help. In Sri Lanka, those systems are absent from religious institutions. In some cases, when a novice monk reports abuse, investigators communicate with them through the very senior monk who may be connected to the allegations. It is impossible to conduct a truly independent investigation under those circumstances.

There are allegations that members of the clergy receive special treatment during criminal investigations and court proceedings. What is your view?

This is partly a question of power and culture. Sri Lanka has not fully separated religion from the State. Recently, even during the State Vesak celebration where the President spoke about these issues, one of the monks who addressed the event had himself been accused of abuse. That illustrates the depth of the problem. The issue has spread through the system. It requires serious intervention. The law should apply equally to everyone. In countries such as Thailand, a monk accused of a serious offence may be required to disrobe immediately. However, in Sri Lanka, accused monks appear in court and even enter prison still wearing robes.

Has the lack of comprehensive sex education in Sri Lanka contributed to these problems?

This is not only a problem for novice monks. It affects all children. Children need the language to describe inappropriate behaviour and abuse. They gain that language through proper sex education. Without it, they may not even understand what is happening to them. When I was a child, I could not explain my experiences to my parents. They could not understand what I was trying to tell them. A major reason for that was the lack of sexual education and awareness. One of the difficulties in Sri Lanka is that attempts to expand sex education frequently face resistance from religious groups, including sections of the Buddhist clergy. Some monks entered monastic life as children and have had little exposure to these subjects. Others may understand them but still oppose public education. Whatever the reason, the result is that children are denied information that could help protect them. Another issue is an empathy gap. Monks are expected to embody compassion. However, most of the monks do not live by those principles.

What responsibilities do parents and the community have?

If a child wishes to enter monastic life, families should thoroughly investigate the temple, the chief incumbent, the environment, and the systems in place to protect children. Some children genuinely want to become monks. They should be allowed to pursue that path if they choose. However, parents must do their due diligence. I have met novice monks whose parents had never even visited the temple before sending their children there. Sometimes, children are handed over through relatives, and the parents only see the temple months later during the ordination ceremony. Poor families are particularly vulnerable.

What is your assessment of how medical and legal professionals respond to such cases?

That depends on the specific case. Doctors and other professionals have a responsibility to protect children. However, challenges can arise. For example, what happens if the doctor investigating a case is a major supporter of the temple involved? Can that person remain completely independent? On the other hand, if the doctor belongs to another religious community, some people may question the findings and accuse that person of attacking Buddhism or the monks.  That is why professional standards are so important. Officials should act according to evidence and established procedures, regardless of status.  At the same time, we should remember that many survivors never enter the legal system at all. The people who abused me are still alive and holding positions today.

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the interviewee, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication