If Luang Pho is not guilty, why Luang Pho does not surrender?
Answer – Since the beginning, the accuse from DSI was the accuse of money laundering and receiving stolen property. It is unusual to accuse the monk like this. From the beginning of this nation, there was no monk, in anywhere on earth, received this charge. It didn’t fall into the elements of crime of this charge.
Monk is not businessperson to do business for profit. Luang Pho has ordained for 47 years. As venerable monk, layperson came and and practiced dana by their faiths. Dana has been accepted and immediately forwarded to the temple management committee to manage. From the eye witness, there are various constructions in Wat Phra Dhammakaya and branches. These dana were used for propagate Buddhism. And the most important thing, these constructions were built from the donation money of the faithful. By law, properties of Wat or foundation must be the state property, not belong to anyone.
The officers gave charges wrongly in the first place. This is INJUSTICE. Would it be safety of receiving justice if he decided to proceed as officer’s inquiry. There were many evidences of suspicious death. It’s not trustable because of the vague accuse and illegal from the beginning. As a result, it is questioning on the executions of officers in many aspects.
In addition, the amount of money that Khun Suppachai donated has already been returned to Credit Union by devotees despite it’s not necessary to do so by law. And the amount of this accused money is far less than the value of properties of Wat Phra Dhammakaya and branches from around the world. There is no reason to accuse that Wat Phra Dhammakaya to be incooperated with Khun Suppachai. It is definitely not…, just finding the reason to confiscate Wat Phra Dhammakaya. Wat Phra Dhammakaya has been built since 1970, totally 47 years. Credit Union has been founded for not many years back. Khun Suppachai came to Wat Phra Dhammakaya also for not many years.
Khun Ui, the singer that has been widely mentioned, was not borne yet at the time that the temple built. He has never been here, never donate here even one cent. Though he is a well-known singer, it doesn’t mean that what he said is right. To be capable of singing, but do not have knowledge of law or do not know thoroughly about monk discipline. By just simply hear or read, how can he decide to condemn other people and claim that he had studied Dhamma, only saying in a perfunctory way, making a farfetched, and no logic. This is not credible and cannot be used as norm.
Moreover, the recent policy of military government in dismissing director of National Office of Buddhism, amending the law to take possession of Wat, taking things from monks, you should ask yourself, try to see it through. Who claim to use the law for justice, but behave like thief, ruin Buddhism.
Please share!
