A.T.

ARIYARATNE

David Simon (ed.). (2006) Fifty Key Thinkers

on Development. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Lakshman Yapa

A.T. ARIYARATNE (1931–)

A.T. Ariyaratne’s distinctive contribution as a key thinker lies in his life-

long efforts to follow a new path to development, independent of both
capitalism and socialism. He is the leader of the Sarvodaya Shramadana
movement, the largest non-governmental organisation (NGO) engaged in
development and poverty alleviation in Sri Lanka today. Sarvodaya’s vision
for a new society with ‘no poverty’ and ‘no affluence’ was based on
Gandhi’s philosophy of ‘truth’, ‘non-violence’, and ‘self-sacrifice’. The
term ‘Sarvodaya’ comes from two Sanskrit words ‘sarva’ (universal) and
‘udaya’ (awakening). Ariyaratne uses the word ‘sarvodaya’ in two ways, to
mean the awakening of all people and the awakening of individuals in all
spheres – psychological, moral and spiritual, as well as social, economic and

25
A.T. ARIYARATNE

political. The term ‘shramadana’ is also derived from two Sanskrit words,
‘shrama’ (labour) and ‘dana’ (gift), that is, the gift of labour.
In the Sinhalese language the two words ‘sarvodaya shramadana’ have
come to mean ‘the sharing of one’s time, thought, and energy for the
awakening of all’ (Dana, Feb. 1987: 15). Sarvodaya believes that develop-
ment involves more than material growth. It involves psychological, moral
and spiritual dimensions as well as social, economic and political ones.
Shramadana or gift of labour implies both physical and mental labour.
Ariyaratne’s shramadana draws on social networks, donated labour, skills
and co-operation, showing how social capital can create material wealth.
Dr Ariyaratne was born in Unawatuna village, Galle District, and after
graduation worked as a teacher in Galle town before attending a teachers’
training college. In 1958, as a newly arrived science teacher at Nalanda
College, a Buddhist high school in Colombo (where he served till 1972),
along with his students he organised the first of several voluntary work-
shops (a shramadana) in one of the poorest villages on the island. The
workshop consisted of digging wells, building pit latrines, planting gardens,
and opening up rural roads using the co-operative labour of students and
villagers. Performing manual labour alongside poor villagers was a
transformative experience for students who came from upper- and middle-
class urban homes. This was an early example of what we now call ‘service
learning’.
Ariyaratne received a Bachelor of Arts general degree from the
Vidyodaya University of Sri Lanka, graduating in economics, Sinhalese
language and education. Later he received an honorary doctorate from the
same university, and a doctor of humanities from Amelio Aguinaldo Uni-
versity in the Philippines. As the founder and leader of the Sarvodaya
Shramadana movement, Ariyaratne has received a number of international
awards including the Raman Magsaysay Award for Community Leader-
ship from the Philippines (1969), Feinstein World Hunger Award from
Brown University in Rhode Island (1986), Niwano Peace Prize from
Japan (1992) and the Mahatma Gandhi Peace Prize from India (1996).
Although there are many publications under his name (Ariyaratne 1988,
1999) and many more about him (Bond 2004; Macy 1985), Ariyaratne is
not widely regarded as a development theorist. According to his own
homepage (www.sarvodaya.org), ‘he was not guided by theory. He
wanted to practice first and enunciate theory later. And the practice should
be meaningful; the theory should only follow it.’ Today at the age of
seventy-four, Ariyaratne has remained active in community development,
but increasingly has turned his attention to one of the central problems of
Sri Lanka, political violence and the long-drawn-out military conflict with
the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The Liberation Tigers have

26
 A.T. ARIYARATNE

been fighting since 1983 for a separate state for minority Tamils on the
grounds that they have suffered discrimination at the hands of the Sinhalese
majority.
Since its inception in 1958, Sarvodaya seems to have evolved through
four phases (Bond 2004: 7–42). During the period 1958–67, Sarvodaya
was primarily a volunteer work camp movement. The work camp begun
by Ariyaratne and his students in 1958 was very successful and it launched a
larger social movement that quickly spread to other high schools and vil-
lages. At this time resources came entirely from local donations and volun-
tary labour. During the second period (1967–83), Sarvodaya became a
formal NGO. In 1972 the movement was recognised by an Act of Parlia-
ment and incorporated as a legal body. It began to attract generous foreign
funding, became a fully fledged NGO with a large portfolio of projects for
village economic development, and adopted methods of cost accounting,
monitoring and evaluation. As it grew, Sarvodaya moved away from the
ideology of social revolution, co-operated more closely with the govern-
ment, and acted in the capacity of an extension agency. Apart from local
village schemes, Sarvodaya also undertook several well-funded national
projects for enterprise development, alternative technology and child care.
During the third period (1983–97), the conflict between the government
and the Liberation Tigers intensified and spread; civilian life for both Sin-
halese and Tamils was severely disrupted. With funding from overseas,
Sarvodaya operated a large programme offering rehabilitation and relief
work in villages most affected by the Tiger insurgency.
During this period the close co-operation with the government came to
an end because Ariyaratne opposed the policy of seeking a military solution
to the LTTE problem. Drawing on Gandhian and Buddhist principles of
non-violence, Sarvodaya laid out a plan for the peaceful resolution of the
conflict through spiritual means but the larger conflict continued. In the
final period (1997– ), we see clear evidence of Sarvodaya taking an even
stronger stand against a military solution. Sarvodaya publicly declared that
neither the government nor the LTTE could ‘win’ the war; all they can do
is to draw out the conflict (www.sarvodaya.org). On the other hand,
Sarvodaya claimed it knew how to help transcend the war. To that end it
organised a large-scale peace movement, announced an alternative frame-
work of power for conflict resolution, and held several well-attended pub-
lic peace meditations. It also started a programme of ‘sister villages’ with
villagers from the south travelling to the war-ravaged villages of the north
to do rehabilitation work repairing houses, wells, tanks, schools, toilets and
places of worship. Since Ariyaratne remains central to Sarvodaya, this brief
history shows the potential of his philosophy to achieve both personal

27
A.T. ARIYARATNE

empowerment and national reconciliation through non-violence, spiritu-

ality, compassion and Buddhist principles of ‘right livelihood’.
The Sarvodaya philosophy has a strong moral and spiritual foundation.
Ariyaratne was well aware that religion, in its institutional form, historically
has not played a progressive role in the material transformation of society.
And yet he chose this vehicle for his programme of social advancement, a
path not unlike that taken by Gandhi in India, and by the worker priests of
the Catholic based communities in Latin America. Sarvodaya philosophy is
founded on Buddhist teaching; Ariyaratne’s contribution has been to show
that Buddhism can be used to address two principal problems facing contem-
porary Sri Lanka – poverty and violence. The Sarvodaya philosophy is vast
but for the purpose of this exercise I shall present it under three headings.
Personal agency in structural change: Sarvodaya holds that structural change
in society must begin with personal change. According to Buddhism, the
principles of virtuous living include loving kindness, respect for all living
beings, compassion for others, sharing joy in the completion of projects
intended for someone else’s benefit and even composure in the face of both
joy and sadness. All Sarvodaya workers are urged to practise these in their
routine everyday engagements. Beginning with personal awakening
(puroshodaya), Sarvodaya expands outwards to community or village
awakening (gramodaya), and beyond that to the awakening of the country
(deshodaya), and finally to the awakening of the world (vishovodaya). All
social change must radiate out from the agency of the individual living and
practising a righteous life.
Buddhist theory for overcoming suffering: central to Sarvodaya philosophy is
the Buddhist notion of four ‘noble truths’. The first states that the normal
condition of existence is suffering (Dukkha). Second, the root cause of suf-
fering is greed, craving and desire (Thanha). Third is the claim that suffer-
ing can be overcome (Niradha). Finally is ‘Marga’, the Buddhist path to
overcome suffering in the world. ‘Marga’ contains eight elements: right
understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood,
right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. The ‘Eightfold
Path’ points to the centrality of personal agency in both Buddhist and
Sarvodaya philosophy. Ariyaratne uses the first of the ‘Four Noble Truths’
(there is suffering in the world) by starting from an actual village with great
poverty. This becomes the basis for analysis and reflection on the realities of
the village. The second principle (craving as a cause of suffering) is pre-
sented to villages by describing how distrust, competition, enmity and
egocentricity sap the energy of villagers. The third principle (suffering can
cease) is translated into a discourse on affection, compassion, kind words,
sharing and mutual self-help. Finally, the eightfold path of ‘Marga’ recom-
mends the avoidance of two extremes – the pleasure of sensual indulgence

28
 A.T. ARIYARATNE

and the pain of self-mortification. Ariyaratne adapted this Buddhist con-

cept of the ‘Middle Way’ by recommending a development path of ‘no
poverty, no affluence’. Sarvodaya does not believe that poverty can be
eradicated through creation of wealth and economic development.
Sarvodaya begins this task by stating a manifesto of ten basic human needs
which includes: a clean and healthy physical environment, water, clothing,
food, housing, health care, communication, fuel, education, and spiritual
and cultural needs (www.sarvodaya.org). These needs can be satisfied by
using local resources, self-reliance, and shramadana. Sarvodaya believes
that the dominant models of economic development constitute obstacles
to meeting basic needs because such models emphasise increased
production, expansion of desire, unlimited growth and open markets.
Non-violence in conflict resolution: a core principle of Buddhism and Hin-
duism is non-violence which advocates respect for all sentient beings. Fol-
lowing the examples of Gandhi and Vinoba Bhave in India, Ariyaratne
argued that fundamental social change can be achieved through non-
violence. The adoption of the eightfold path of right livelihood automati-
cally excludes the use of physical violence as a means of achieving objec-
tives. Sarvodaya has reached out to the Tamils through membership of the
organisation and by doing relief and rehabilitation work in villages of the
North. It has organised peace marches, mass meditations, and offered to
mediate between the government and the LTTE.
Ariyaratne attributes Sri Lanka’s current economic problems to British
imperialism which destroyed self-reliant village economies. In that regard
his analysis is very similar to that of dependency theorists like Andre
Gunder Frank (Frank 1966) and Fernando Henrique Cardoso.
Ariyaratne also believes that unequal global structures and giant transna-
tional organisations are responsible for increasing poverty, armed conflict
and ecological destruction in Sri Lanka and throughout the world. Despite
that structural analysis, his proposals do not focus on changing global struc-
tures but on personal agency and right living. By rejecting the notion that
human behaviour is the result of larger forces which actors neither control
nor comprehend, Ariyaratne’s views are consistent with Western social
theories such as structuration (Giddens 1984) and post-structuralism
(Foucault 1980).
Sarvodaya’s material critique of development arises from its explicit
rejection of affluence. The rejection of capital-intensive, high-technology,
open economies is clearly at odds with the dominant models of develop-
ment. Economic growth requires the constant expansion of consumption
and desire, which according to the Buddhist theory of craving is what leads
to suffering. Economists measure living standards principally by how much
people consume. Sarvodaya rejects this path of development.

29
A.T. ARIYARATNE

Even though the concept of no affluence has the potential to yield a

serious critique of development, Sarvodaya has weakened the argument by
enframing it entirely within the context of Buddhist advocacy of control-
ling one’s craving. Craving is presented in Sarvodaya philosophy as an
intrinsic human condition that must be overcome through reflection and
moral advancement. But it is not enough to advocate the voluntary limit-
ing of consumption without also addressing the myriad forces of modern
capitalism that drive consumption.
Sarvodaya’s advocacy of a non-violent solution to the ethnic problems of
Sri Lanka is very courageous. A number of Tamil Sarvodaya workers have
been killed by the Liberation Tigers, and Ariyaratne himself lives under con-
stant threats to his life. But there are some ironies to Sarvodaya’s offering
non-violence as a solution to the ethnic problem. Despite its ecumenical
outlook, Sarvodaya in Sri Lanka is perceived primarily as a Buddhist organi-
sation. The current conflict in Sri Lanka arises from Tamil reaction to what
they perceive as the hegemony of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism. The identity
of the Sinhalese and their perception of self, are both intricately tied to Bud-
dhism, its social history and its myths. Conversely, the Sinhalese perception
of the Tamil is that of ‘the other as non-Buddhist’, a dynamic which the
Tamils in turn have incorporated into their perception of the Sinhalese and
of themselves. Given the signification of Buddhism to the two main parties
in the conflict, it is important to reflect on the limits of a social movement
that uses Buddhist theology to bring about a non-violent resolution of the
protracted ethnic conflict. Nevertheless, Sarvodaya philosophy can contrib-
ute to peace in Sri Lanka in two important ways. First, as evidence shows, it
provides a means for engaging in peaceful negotiation. Second, the emphasis
of the middle path on no affluence and no poverty removes the intensive
competition for resources which is one of the driving forces of the ethnic
conflict in Sri Lanka.

Major works
Ariyaratne, A. T. (1988) The Power Pyramid and the Dharmic Cycle, Ratmalana, Sri
Lanka: Sarvodaya Vishva Lekha Press.
—— (1999) Collected Works, 7 vols (ed. by N. Ratnapala), Ratmalana, Sri Lanka:
Sarvodaya Vishva Lekha Press.

Further reading
Bond, G.D. (2004) Buddhism at Work: Community Development, Social Empowerment
and the Sarvodaya Movement, West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press.
Dana: Journal of the International Sarvodaya Shramadana, 1987.
Foucault, M. (1980) Power/Knowledge, New York: Pantheon Books.
Frank, A. G. (1966) ‘The Development of Underdevelopment’, Monthly Review
18: 17–31.

30