{"id":103421,"date":"2020-06-11T16:54:39","date_gmt":"2020-06-11T23:54:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=103421"},"modified":"2020-07-03T15:18:48","modified_gmt":"2020-07-03T22:18:48","slug":"ven-ellawala-medhananda-part-7c","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2020\/06\/11\/ven-ellawala-medhananda-part-7c\/","title":{"rendered":"VEN. ELLAWALA MEDHANANDA Part 7C"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

Revised 21.6.20<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Historians agree that between the rule of King\nDevanam Piyatissa (<\/em>247-207 BC) and king Dutugemunu, (161-137) there was a separate\nkingdom in Ruhuna. The founder of this Ruhuna kingdom was king Mahanaga, brother of\nDevanampiyatissa. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mahanaga left Anuradhapura after a\ndisagreement with his brother and set up a separate kingdom in Ruhuna, with the\ncapital at Magama. This kingdom continued until Dutugemunu went up to\nAnuradhapura, kicked Elara out and  \nunited the two kingdoms. The Ruhuna kingdom was in existence therefore\nfrom 3rd century BC to\n2nd century AD. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Historians heartily agreed that there was a\nsignificant kingdom in Ruhuna, but avoided researching deeply into the kingdom.\nIt did not seem important, attention was on Anuradhapura.  Ven. Ellawala Medhananda, however, while\nexploring the Buddhist ruins of the present day Eastern Province, came face to\nface with the Ruhuna kingdom. Madanakanda\ninscription spoke of an eastern kingdom, said Medhananda. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda has\nresearched into two aspects of the Ruhuna kingdom, its boundaries and its\nkings. Medhananda said \u2018I explored theRuhuna area on foot, staying in caves\nin forests.  It was scary but also\ninteresting. Ruhuna history is interesting. Whenever they were in trouble, at Anuradhapura,\nnot only princes but also monks ran to Ruhuna\u2019.  This Ruhuna was the Ruhuna settlement of\nBaddhacacchana, said Medhananda.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ruhuna of the Magama kings was a very fertile area, said Medhananda. Medhananda\nhad looked for Talapat   wewa, mentioned\nin the inscriptions, but could not find it. It was not recorded anywhere.   Digamadulla in ancient times included Ampara\nand Batticaloa. Gal Oya was the\nboundary between Ruhuna and Pihiti, added Medhananda. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Magama kingdom\ndid not start in the Tissamaharama – Kirinde area said Medhananda.  He had explored that area. There are absolutely\nno contemporaneous inscriptions of the early Magama kings south of the\nKumbukkan oya. But there were plenty of inscriptions north of Kumbukkan oya. Indicating\nthat t<\/strong>he Magama kings ruled north of\nKumbukkan oya. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first Ruhuna settlement\nwas north of Kumbukkan oya towards Heda oya, declared Medhananda.   The evidence lies in the Magul Maha vihara,\nLahugala. This vihara was known as Ruhunu Maha vihara. I decided that Magul\nMaha Vihara was called Ruhunu Maha Vihara because it was the main temple within\nthe Ruhunu kingdom. Medhananda   found\nthat the word \u2018Ruhuna\u2019 was not mentioned in inscriptions from Kirivehera,\nTissamaharama, Yatala, Situlpavva, or in the viharas in Yala, like Akasa\nchetiya. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The original\nRuhuna settlement thereafter extended over Hulannuge, Karandahela,\nLahugala,    and upwards to Pottuvil and\nDighavapi, said Medhananda.  Malyadikanda inscription, found by\nMedhananda, showed that Dighavapi was known as the’ pracheena rajya’ or\n‘eastern kingdom’.  Medhananda\nalso found an inscription which spoke of \u2018Dighavapi porana\u2019 (nagara) and about\nthe traders there. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The capital, Magama, Medhananda speculated, was at Pottuvil\nnear the 15th<\/sup> milepost. Medhananda said that at this milepost there\nis a small village called Magama in the map. Also at Vettumbagala close by\nthere was an inscription which referred to the Magama kings .Namaluva, also\nclose by, threw up an inscription which referred to \u2018Mahagama\u2019.  Rohana kingdom was not very large then, Medhananda\nobserved. <\/strong>Yalpota  was a \nimportant  village in Magama. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Medhananda, therefore, the\noriginal Ruhuna kingdom was a small one, situated bang in the middle of the\npresent day Eastern province. Inscriptions show that   the middle of the present Eastern province\ncontains the history of the [first] three Magama kings, said Medhananda.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the Magama\nkings were ruling in Ruhuna, there was a smaller kingdom in Kataragama ruled by\na family of ten brothers, the \u2018Kataragama dasa be\u2019. They were there from the\ntime of king Devanampiyatissa. Their capital was at Tissamaharama. Their symbol\nwas the fish. This symbol could\nbe seen in Henanegala\ninscription and elsewhere.    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bowattegala,\nKotademuhela, Budupatunkanda inscriptions gave information on these Kataragama\nrulers. Bowattegala\ninscription spoke of the Kataragama family, including their great grandson, Mahatisa.\n Mahatisa would later be the father of Vihara Maha\nDevi. Budupatunkanda cave inscription showed that the\nKataragama family was powerful in their area. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contemporaneous inscriptions for Mahanama and\nGotabaya were all found north of Kumbukkan oya, I did not find a single\ninscription south of Kumbukkan oya, said Medhananda. I decided therefore that the Kataragama family\nruled Kumbukkan south and   Magama family\nruled Kumbukkan north, said Medhananda. This writer, (Kamalika Pieris) found an\nobservation from historian R.A.L.H. Gunawardene that Kataragama\nkings ruled between Kumbukkan oya and Menik Ganga.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There appears to have been some contact\nbetween the two ruling families. Henanegala inscription had valuable information\non the Magama kings interaction with Kataragama kings, said Medhananda. Kotahamula inscription, a\nlittle away from Bowattegala, also indicated a link between the Kataragama\nroyal family and Mahanaga royal family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inscriptions indicated that king Gotabaya thereafter entered the\nKataragama area and eventually took it over. <\/em>  Inscriptions\nfound on the left bank of Kumbukkan showed that his power was expanding, said\nMedhananda. Mahavamsa said he killed\nthem. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda found that inscriptions of Kavantissa\nwere found south of Kumbukkan oya. It appears therefore that Kavantissa had   taken over the administration of the Kataragama\nterritory. Kavantissa also took over\nseveral small principalities ruled by minor princes, said Medhananda.  In this way, Kavantissa united Ruhuna under\nhim. The\ncapital of Ruhuna then moved to Tissamaharama. The\nRuhuna kingdom which was of such historical importance under Dutugemunu had\nbeen created. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda\nhas given us vital information on the rulers of Ruhuna, also some nice\npersonal information. He may be the first to do so. The information was taken\nfrom the inscriptions he had collected.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

These\ninscriptions indicated that there was a clear, uninterrupted, succession of\nfive kings in the Ruhuna kingdom.  The\nsuccession was Mahanaga, his son Yatalatissa, his second son, Gotabhaya,   Gotabhaya\u2019s son Kavantissa and Kavantissa\u2019s\nson, Dutugemunu.   Medhananda states\nfirmly that   Gotabaya and Yatalatissa\nwere brothers, the sons of Mahanama. They were not father and son as the\nMahavamsa said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda\nhad found inscriptions   that were\ndecisive. The first of these is the cave inscription at Ahugoda Raja Maha Vihara.  This inscription gave the succession from Mahanaga\nto Dutugemunu in one sentence. The\ninscription said Mahanaga, son Gotabhaya, son  \nKavantissa, son Dutugemunu\u201d.Samangala aranya inscription\nspoke of uparaja Mahanaga, the brother of Devanam piyatissa\u2019, kings Gotabhaya and\nKavantissa and Saddhatissa. Such inscriptions are rare, said Medhananda. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There were other inscriptions. Malayadi kanda\nvihara, Ampara inscription speaks of the royal line, Mahanaga,         Gotabaya,        Kavantissa.  It says Yatalatissa was Mahanaga\u2019s son.  Kusalan kanda Inscription speaks of Mahanaga\nking of Magama, followed by mention of    \nGotabhaya and Kavantissa. \nKudulupothana malai  \ninscription   speaks of king\nGotabaya and king Kavantissa. Henannegala len\nvihara inscription said that Gotabaya ruled Ruhuna south and Yatalatissa ruled\nthe north. They were brothers.    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Malayadi kanda\ninscription said that during the rule of Mahanaga, his son Yatalatissa ruled\nDighavapi, then it was ruled by Gotabaya and Kavantissa. Thereafter Dighavapi  was ruled by Saddhatissa.   Inscription at   Piyakalutota vihara ( near Rugam wewa)  said thatYatalatissa was administering Digamadulla, when Mahanaga was king.      <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\ninscriptions  found by Medhananda  also \ngave information on the viharas constructed by these Magama  kings. Illuppiti Raja\nMaha Vihara, Gal oya, inscription \nstated  that the vihara was built\nby king Mahanaga. Inscription\nat   Piyakalutota vihara shows that Yatalatissa\nbuilt it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inscriptions such\nas Malayadikanda provided  information on Kavantissa,. Kavantissa had built many arama  in Dighavapi when he was \u2018ruling\u2019 there\nbefore he became king. Inscriptions\nalso showed that Kavantissa had established Kudimbigala, Habutagala vihara and Ilupitikande\nvihara.  Habutagala was in Hulannuge, Ilupitikande\nnear Hingurana sugar factory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda decided that the\nswastika-on-stand  appearing in\ninscriptions  which mentioned Kavantissa,\nwas the signature of king Kavantissa. It was there on several  caves. \n Henanegala \nand Karanda hela vihara, Hulannuge    had this in their inscription s.\nit was   cut\ninto  the rock at Habutagala\nvihara.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda found\nseveral inscriptions on Vihara Maha Devi,. Madanakanda len arama inscription\nsaid that this cave was donated by the queen of Pachina bhumiya  , Abi Shavera, the daughter of king Damaraja\u2019\nson, Mahathisa,   and mother of  \nthe ruler of the east. This valuable inscription\n is not protected observed Medhananda . <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Paranavitana\u2019s\nfindings on Vihara Maha Devi are confirmed in the Malyadikanda inscription, said Medhananda. It\nstated that after Kavantissa died, Viharamaha Devi had come to Dighavapi   and became a nun. The inscription found at\nMundikulammalai refers to Shavera Shamani, which may be a reference  to Vihara Maha Devi, said Medhananda .  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda said that\nAmpara had lots of inscriptions  on\nVihara Maha Devi, on how she came to Digamadulla,  to become an upasika. Medhananda found an\ninscription at Mahanahera cave,  Mullikulam on this subject. The cave was being\nbroken up , Medhananda had managed to stop this and had taken down the\ninscription .<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda said\nhe founda lot of inscriptions on\nDutugemunu and Saddhatissa.<\/strong>\nSamangala inscription spoke of Saddhatissa . In\nthis collection, Medhananda found inscriptions  giving information on the family of king\nDutugemunu. Piyangala\ninscription  said that Dutugemunu\u2019s\nwife’s name  was Rajitha and that  Dutugemunu\u2019s \ndaughter was married to Sunama, son of Nandimitra. Katupotakande  inscription \nrefers to a gal lena gifted by Dutugemunu.. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda also provides us with  information on  Dutugemunu\u2019s \n\u2018dasa maha yodayo\u2019 .Medhananda \nsaid in our society we view the story of Dutugamunu’s Dasa maha yodayo\nwith derision.  Most see these as\nhilarious stories invented by the vamsa writers. But Medhananda found\ninscriptional evidence to show that at least one of the yodayo, Nandimitra was\na historical person. Diyatitta wewa\ninscription states that Nandimitra was a Senepati of Dutugemunu. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda found\nmany inscriptions, in places like Horowopotana,\nKorawakgala, Vavuniya, Periyapuliyankulam, Piyangala \nwhich gave information on Nandimitra. \nThese inscriptions give  full\ninformation on Nandimitra’s lineage on father\u2019s side, and  information on his wife and  daughter. He had two wives.  They were called Pussa and Ihana.    Beravayam\nkande inscription gave the  lineage of\nNandimitra\u2019s wife and his own. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Omunugala   had inscriptions on Nandimitra. His\ndaughter  Gutta was married to Prince\nTilakana. I was the first\nto find this and record this in newspapers, said Medhananda . Another inscription was on\na donation from daughter of Nandimitra. An inscription found at Maha kachcha\nkodiya vihara.( Vavuniya) showed that \nthe descendants of Nandimitra were active there. Omunugala\ninscription indicated that  Nandimitra\u2019s\ndescendants lived there as well. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an interview given to Sunday Observer in\n2007, Medhananda provided more information on Nandimitra. Medhananda said he\nhad gone to Diyatitta Wewa, a mountainous area bordering the Eastern province,\nto encourage villagers there to remain in the threatened village. Medhananda\nthen stumbled upon a rock-inscription at the cave of the Buddhist monk of the\nvillage temple, leading to the finding of a series of rock-inscriptions in that\nmountainous and rather scarcely inhabited area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medhananda discovered 30 rock-inscriptions in\nthe mountain range of Diyatitta Wewa, Madaya Kanda and Berawaya Kanda.   The rock-inscriptions showed that Nandimitra,\nwas descended from a lineage of commanders. Nandimitra\u2019s father, was a\nSenapati, and his mother\u2019s name was Sunama. Nandimitra’s wife was Kusha, daughter\nof Sata Natata. This was  mentioned in\nthree rock-inscriptions, Diyatitta Wewa, Berawaya Kanda and Maha Cachakodiya.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nandimitra’s daughter Upassica Gutta, was\nmarried to  prince Tilakana .  Nandimitra’s son was Duta Sumana, an\nambassador. His son, as mentioned in Piyangala and Tonigala rock-inscriptions,\nwas Padumaca Abaya. An inscription  found\nby Medhananda  at \nMaha kachcha kodiya vihara, Vavuniya indicated\nthat the descendants of Nandimitra had operated there. <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Paranavitana and Medhananda have looked at the\nimplications of these inscriptions. There have \nbeen three  sets of rulers in\nRuhuna in Magama time,,  the Magama\nkings, Kataragama kings and the   Kelanitissa kings. ( The   history of the Kelanitissa kings  is well known, I am not relating it here.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Kelaniya referred to here, is considered\nto have been situated in Ruhuna itself, not the modern Kelaniya near Colombo. It was not possible for Vihara Maha Devi to\ncome from Colombo all the way to Magama in a boat, without drowning on the way.\nVihara Maha Devi was put to sea in Ruhuna and had come ashore at  Pottuvil, said Medhananda . <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Paranavitana thought that there was a close\nconnection between Anuradhapura royal family and  the Kataragama royal family. He thought they were related. Medhananda\nagreed. The Kelanitissa clan is  also linked\nto Anuradhapura clan,  said Medhananda . There\nis an  inscription at Yatala vihara,\nKegalle which proves this. The Magama kings were of course,  part of the Anuradhapura royalty. Therefore  the \nmarriage between Kavantissa and Vihara Maha Devi simply  brought together two strands of the same\nfamily. This means that during  the\nRuhuna period, the north, south and east of Sri Lanka  were all ruled by one single Sinhala royal\nfamily, concluded Medhananda .  (\ncontinued)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Appendix. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  • Medhananda  interpreted the word ‘Javacanaya’, in  the rock-inscription at Pottaya Kallu (near\nOmari at Kanchi kudichchiaru)  seen\nearlier by Paranavitana, to mean,\u2018Navicanaya\u2018 suggesting that  king Mahanaga had  once served as a  naval leader. Subsequent inscriptions  had proved that Mahanaga had served in the\nPuttalam District as a naval leader prior to his  departure to Ruhuna.  <\/li>
  • Rugam piyakaluta vihara  inscription showed that Mahanaga has been the  yuva raja in Magama, and Yatalatissa was\nruler of Digamadulla. He  had set up an\naramaya there. <\/li>
  • Inscription\nat Kadolupotana\nkanda ,Eravur had been destroyed. But Medhananda\nhad found three cave inscriptions which showed that this area was\nunder Kavantissa. <\/li>
  • Udagala Dagoba Inscription dated to\n9  century AD refers to Dutugemunu. <\/li><\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    KAMALIKA PIERIS Revised 21.6.20 Historians agree that between the rule of King Devanam Piyatissa (247-207 BC) and king Dutugemunu, (161-137) there was a separate kingdom in Ruhuna. The founder of this Ruhuna kingdom was king Mahanaga, brother of Devanampiyatissa. Mahanaga left Anuradhapura after a disagreement with his brother and set up a separate kingdom in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-103421","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-kamalika-pieris"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103421","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=103421"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103421\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=103421"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=103421"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=103421"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}