In ancient Sri Lanka, especially during
the Anuradhapura kingdom period Buddhism formed an important portion of the responsibilities
of the monarch. This is particularly due to inseparable connection maintained
between the ruler and the Buddhist monastic community which has its roots back
to the period of king Devanampiyathissa.
It was the duty of the monarch to preserve Buddha Sasana under any circumstance.
What was characteristic of Sri Lankan culture and society is that the ruler and
the Buddhist monastic community operated as the protector of each other without which neither was possible. Further, the monastic community had a
substantial part to play in the consolidation of power of the king which was
peculiar for the Sri Lankan setting. At first glance it would appear that it is
not possible for the bhikkhus to maintain such an influence over the power of
the ruler since these two don’t reveal any visible connection on the surface. Therefore,
to acquire a better understanding this aspect should be examined along with the
cultural and religious influences of the time.
The practice of reigning in the track of
Buddhist principles finds its origins back to 3rd century BC and was
continued unbroken until 19th century BC during which period those
who occupied the throne were necessarily Buddhist monarchs who shaped their
lives in conformity with Buddhist principles. Thus, the king made an effort to
proceed with every aspect of his reign such as political, social and cultural
in agreement with Buddhist principles. Consequently, the reciprocal connection
between the ruler and the Buddhism regularly developed which had the outcome of
Buddhism becoming the state law. Later on, who became distant from Dharma were
deemed public traitors. Because of this very fact only a Buddhist was given
power by law to receive the Sri Lankan kingdom. Mahavamsa mentions that Sena
and Guththika who took away the
throne from the native king Surathissa
afterwards became Buddhists and ruled piously. It also mentions that Elara who afterwards occupied the
throne also ruled piously and benefitted Buddhist premises and further mentions
about his justice and fair play which overshadowed his love for his own son. Mahawamsa’ account sheds light in to the
fact that even the invaders became Buddhists. But a fact that is not directly
revealed by Mahavamsa is that they
did so in order to secure their position as the ruler and to maintain
stability.
On such a background the ruler was put in
charge of safeguarding Buddhism both in time of prosperity and in time of
crisis whose role was noted as the protector of Buddha Sasana in Sri Lanka. Given
that, the rulers from the very primitive stage arranged suitable dwelling
places for Buddhist monks. The monarchs who were considered as the benefactors
of Buddhism were great patrons of Buddhism in a variety of ways. Likewise, the ruler
acted as the protector of Buddhist monastic community in Sri Lanka. This connection
maintained between the monarch and the Buddhist monks was to a great extent
distinctive for the Anuradhapura royal ancestry which had an impact on its
political history as well. From then onwards, the patronage received by the
monastery from Anuradhapura royal ancestry for the benefit of Buddha Sasana was
substantial. Unlike the Anuradhapura royal ancestry, the Sangha didn’t always
receive the proper treatment from the kings ruling elsewhere. For instance,
King Kalanithissa who ruled Kalaniya by the time Kavanthissa ruled Ruhuna committed the murder of a monk by boiling him in the oil
notwithstanding the monks were held in the highest honor. The legend has it that
this crime of Kalanithissa aroused
the wrath of the sea gods. The chronicles such as Mahavamsa mentions that the king’s daughter Viharamahadevi had to be sacrificed to the sea to appease the gods’
anger to put an end to the inundation. King Kalanithissa often comes up in history as a murderer of a Buddhist
disciple which inevitably has drawn public strife of the time against him.
Similarly, the Buddhist monastic community
also in turn operated as the protector of the ruler which is a feature peculiar
to Sri Lanka by that time. The faith and the support of and the recognition
of both monastic community and the people over the ruler depended to a large extent on
how Buddhism was treated by the ruler. The religious work and the religious
conduct of the king had the impact of obtaining the interest of the people
towards the king. Here two important facts should be taken in to account,
firstly, the kingship and Buddhist monastic community was interdepended as each
influenced the other. Secondly, the Buddhist monastic community played a key
role in functioning as the bridge which connected the people with the ruler. Therefore,
the beneficial activities performed by the rulers were important to promote a
positive view about the ruler as a pious Buddhist. The monks possessed the
power to influence the society and the proper treatment on Buddhism had the
positive effect of ensuring the stability of the ruler. It is due to the nature
of Sri Lankan society and owing to the ruler’s role as the protector of Buddhism
provided the deep-rooted Sinhalese Buddhist concept of the time that the monks
were able to exert such an influence over both the society and the ruler.
In ancient Sri Lanka especially during the
reign of king Dutugamunu the
Buddhist monks involved in political affairs though it is contrary to the original
teachings of Buddhism. They acted as the advisers of king and showed proper
guidance to the rulers not to mention their active conduct in time of crisis. For
instance, during the reign of Dutugamunu
the monks didn’t even hesitate to join the army in the war against the
south Indian invader Elara. It was altogether
forbidden by Buddhism for the monks to witness a war by means of buddha’s bhikkhu
discipline. Despite that, 500 monks attended the battlefield as Dutugamunu’s
campaign was carried out for the most part on behalf of Budddha Sasana which
consequently made it a religious war. Therefore, the presence of the monks in
the battle field should be justified in the light of the prevalent political
condition of the time which placed Buddha Sasana at stake. For instance, Pujavaliya mentions that Dutugamunu, following the death of his father,
in great kindness for the Buddha Sasana, with the knowledge of the Tamil
invader who was destroying Sasana, occupied near the Mahaweli River. Pujavliya further mentions that being a
mother to Loka Sasana, Dutugamunu set
forth in his war campaign. Mahavamsa
mentions a similar account of the intention of Dutugamunu as, to enlighten the Sasana, I’m going across the river.
As evident by such accounts, although their presence stands in stark contrast
to Buddhist teachings, the intention behind their participation was altogether
religious which should not be subjected to blame.
Further the Buddhist monastic community functioned
as mediators in conflicts and interfered in problem solving while proceeding as
the protectors of kings. But it should be noted that they were not officially
assigned to a duty of any sort but it was owing to the
high regard they were held in the Sri Lankan society that they were deemed
fitting to perform any important duty. It was none other than the monks who
protected Saddathissa during the war
between Saddhathissa and Dutugamunu which was an instance the
monks were even humble enough to carry Saddhathissa
over their shoulders in secret to Dutugamunu
which shows how they committed themselves for the protection of the royalty.
Further, they prevented the war between Saddhathissa
and Dutugamunu by making their
appearance in the battlefield where the war was taking place, before causing
more loss of human lives.
However,
information provided in primary sources such as Mahavamsa and Saddharmalankarya
point to the fact that even the kings expected the interference of the monks in
time of conflicts. To illustrate this, such sources mention how Dutugamunu demanded the presence of the
monks in the battle field as a correction of the previous mishap of the monks
which made the error of not taking actions to put down the war between Dutugamunu and Saddhathissa at the very beginning. Thupavamsa mentions the moment Dutugamunu
set forth to engage in war as “I’m going across Mahaweli River to establish
Buddha Sasana, provide men with monks to worship and to carry with me to the
war’’.
Besides such roles performed by the
monastic community the royal family even received consolation from the Buddhist
monks for their grievances. For instance, it was to the monks that Viharamahadevi went seeking for a
solution when she was unable to become a mother and to provide a future
successor to the throne. Especially their involvement in kings’ religious
activities is substantial. In this regard the best example is the help of Chullapindapathikatissa thero who was
the nephew of Viharamahadevi in
establishing the Seruwila temple.
Though it was the generally followed custom that either the kingship passed
from father to the son or from the elder brother to the younger brother, there
were other factors which had an effect in choosing the next heir to the throne.
To put it differently this custom pertaining to inheritance was more determined
by circumstance than by theory as it didn’t always happened in the same way.
For instance, though prince Saliya who was the son of Dutugamunu and his successor according to the custom, owing to his action of marrying himself to a woman of
the Sadol caste he was deprived of
kingship which was accordingly passed to Saddhathissa,
the younger brother of Dutugamunu. Given
that the royal succession was found to be an instance in which the involvement
of monks was apparent. In this respect, we come across a practice where in the
death of a king the monks together with royal outrage formed a part in
selecting the next king who is noted for his favorability especially to
Buddhism. For instance, the interference of Buddhist monks for the succession of
Thulathana the younger son of Saddhathissa. This illustrates another
tendency of the Buddhist monastic community who took part in selecting a ruler
whose conduct is in accordance with required Buddhist principles.
At the same time the relationship ancient Sri Lankan monarchs maintained with the monastery, who had the capacity
to influence over thoughts and wishes of the community, have ultimately turned
out to be an aid in the consolidation of the power of the monarch. When
considering to what extent Buddhism influenced on the rulers in the history of
Sri Lanka, a best instance in proof of this can be drawn from the reign of Kawanthissa.To further illustrate, it
was as a result of Kawanthissa’s action of building the Seruvila temple that the remaining provincial rulers in Ruhuna recognized the authority of the
king thereby enabling him to unify Ruhuna
which until then remained scattered under a number of rulers. This shows
how the rulers were unable to go against Buddha Sasana.
Not only during the reigns of Kawanthissa and Dutugamunu but also during the reign of king Valagamaba, the heroic role of the Buddhist monks was existent. It
was when the Tamils invaded the territory that Valagamba fled to Malaya rata
for safety where a monk named Kuppikkala
Mahathissa helped him while he was in hiding with whose help he regained
his power. After coming in to power he built Abayagiriya and Kuppikka
Mahatissa thera was appointed its Chief Incumbent as a mark of gratitude
for his support when the Tamils landed the territory. This can be taken as
another instance where a bhikkhu operated protecting the king and how the king
in return saw to the wellbeing of the bhikkhus. Lastly it is much fair to
assume that the role played by the Buddhist monastic community is altogether
heroic to whom we owe the wellbeing of the Buddha Sasana in today’s Sri Lanka.
Mrs. Karunarathne,
University of Peradeniya,
Sri Lanka
References
Deerananda.,H.,Ven.,
Rajyathwaya, Rajya ha Agama, Ariya publishers, Warakapola., 2004
Somathilaka.,
M., Sri Lankeya Baudda Sasanayehi Samarambhaya, S.Godage and brothers, Colombo, 2014
Pagngnaloka,
M. Ven., (ed.), Saddharmalankaraya, Buddhist cultural center, Dehiwala, 2011.
Wimalajothi,
Ven., (ed.), Mahavamsa, Buddhist cultural center, Boralasgamuwa, 2003
Norman,
S., Dhathuvansaya, Samyawardana book shop and company, Colombo, 2011
0 comments:
Post a Comment