{"id":78607,"date":"2018-06-21T22:52:56","date_gmt":"2018-06-22T04:52:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=78607"},"modified":"2018-06-21T15:35:21","modified_gmt":"2018-06-21T22:35:21","slug":"the-greatness-of-the-great-chronicle-mahavamsa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2018\/06\/21\/the-greatness-of-the-great-chronicle-mahavamsa\/","title":{"rendered":"The greatness of the Great Chronicle, Mahavamsa"},"content":{"rendered":"

H, L. D. Mahindapala<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n

And the soothsayers, when they saw the seats prepared, foretold: \u2018The earth is occupied by these (bhikkus); they will be lords upon the island.\u2019\u00a0 \u2013 Mahavamsa XIV: 53.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In the opening paragraph Bhikku Mahanama, the Father of Sri Lankan history, makes it clear that he didn\u2019t sit down to write the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> because he had oodles of time hanging on his hands and did not know what to do with it. He declares in no uncertain terms that his mission was to write a new history from the available old histo ries (example: Atthakathas, Dipawamsa). <\/em><\/strong>The result was a classic text in historiography that gave meaning and purpose to the descendants of the Aryan First Settlers. Though there were pre-Aryans like the Nagas and the Yakkas the Aryan First Settlers were the pioneering makers of history in the island.\u00a0 In time they came to be known as the Sinhala-Buddhists who steered their way triumphantly down the passage of time into the 21st<\/sup> century. The Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> says that all those (followers of Vijaya) were (also) called Sihala.\u201d (MV \u2013 VII: 42).\u00a0 (Please note that all MV quotes in this article are from Wilhelm Geiger\u2019s translation).<\/p>\n

With or without the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>, the epigraphical and archaeological evidence would confirm that the Sinhala-Buddhists were the primary and the dominant makers and guardians of history. The monumental legacies left behind by the Aryan-Sihalas\u201d confirm incontrovertibly that it was they who laid the foundations for a new civilisation. And the accepted tradition in\u00a0 history is that territory belongs to those who made history with the\u00a0 sole objective of making the land a fit dwelling-place for men\u201d \u2013 the ultimate goal of humanity who have been struggling to find their feet in recorded history. From the Ten Commandments to\u00a0 the UN Charter the objective of the makers of\u00a0 history\u00a0 was to make the land a fit dwelling place for humanity. This principle is spelt out clearly in the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> which states that the first mission was to make our island a fit dwelling-place for men\u201d. (MV-1:43).<\/p>\n

In creating a new civilisation, new culture and new language the Sihalas\u201d were conscious of the role they were playing. They were driven by a deep sense of history, protecting and defending their identity and territory from S. Indian and Western invaders. The Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> shines today as the symbol and the transmitter of that deep sense of history. Though it dealt with the past it was meant for the future. It shaped the future of the evolving a nation. No other known text has had the ideological and political impact as Bhikku Mahanama\u2019s 37 chapters. There are 17 universities and 4,500 faculties in Sri Lankan university system\u201d. (The Island,<\/em><\/strong> 19\/6\/18 \u2013 Devenesan Nesiah).\u00a0 Which university or faculty has produced anything comparable to that of the Mahavamsa?<\/em><\/strong> The laboured doctoral theses of current holders of chairs in academia are gathering dust in the dark corners of university libraries where the MA and PhD theses pile up like cadavers in a mortuary, unknown, unread, unsung and unwanted.<\/p>\n

The Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>, on the contrary, remains as live force to this day, renewing its power with each passing century. Eminent scholars have been falling over each other to analyse its contents in minute detail. There are four main translations in English, starting from that of George Turnour (1837) of the Ceylon Civil Service. Before Turnour\u2019s translation there was a French translation done by Eugene Burnouf\u00a0 (1826). Scholars also have discovered Burmese and the Cambodian translations of the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>. Dr. Hema Goonatilake, UN adviser to Cambodia, has documented in her essays on Buddhism in South East Asia that epic scenes from the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> have been painted on the walls of the Myinkaba Kubyank-gyi temple by the Burmese King Kyanzitta in 1113 in\u00a0 honour of his dying father. (Goonatilake, 12th<\/sup> century paintings of Mahavamsa in Burma<\/em><\/strong>, Sri Lanka Puravidya Samhita, Vol 2, Archaeological Society of Sri Lanka, 2006). The Mahavamsa <\/em><\/strong>advanced further into Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. Dr. Goonatilake\u2019s research has revealed the role of Sinhala monks as missionaries who had to first combat\u00a0 legacies of Hinduism and Mahayana Buddhism in converting these nations to \u00a0Theravada Buddhism.\u00a0 The best known translation is that of the Indologist Wilhelm Geiger. It became so popular that one of the most respected historian \/ archaeologist, Prof. S. Paranavitana, said: Poor Mahanama! Everyone calls his book as Geiger\u2019s Mahavamsa!\u201d (p.21, Mahavamsa, The Great Chronicle of Sri Lanka, <\/em><\/strong>edited by Dr. Ananda Guruge, Lake House publications.)<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> has come in for criticism, and even derision, by the anti-Sinhala-Buddhist lobby, particularly in\u00a0 academia, because it had focused only on the history of the \u00a0Sihala\u201d people. \u00a0There is no doubt that the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> has given the \u00a0Sihalas\u201d a pre-eminent place in contemporary politics \u2013 a factor which\u00a0 is resented by the mono-ethnic extremists\u00a0 of the\u00a0 North. It is generally accepted that \u00a0those\u00a0 who dominate history also dominates politics. So it becomes an inescapable political necessity for those demanding disproportionate share of power and privileges to undermine the overarching and dominant\u00a0 history. Consequently, Sinhala-Buddhist history has been the common target of the federalists\/separatists. G. G. Ponnambalam, who raised the communal cry of demanding 50 % of power for 11 % of Tamils, led the anti-Sinhala-Buddhist lobby in the late 1930s by attacking the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> and the Sinhala-Buddhist history. The rest, of course, is\u00a0 history. Financed by foreign-funded NGs, some hired academics too rushed subsequently to follow the anti-Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> line initiated by Ponnambalam. Their political objective was to belittle and deride Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> as a partisan document of the Sinhala-Buddhists.<\/p>\n

Undoubtedly, Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> focuses essentially on the Sinhala-Buddhists. But as an\u00a0 objective historian Bhikku Mahanama documents the failures and the achievements of the Sinhala-Buddhists. What else could he do writing in the 5th<\/sup> century? What else was there for\u00a0 him to write about at the time? He couldn\u2019t write about the Tamils because they were not a part of the evolving historical events. Historians can deal only with the available material. There were no other makers of history at the time he wrote his magnum opus. The Aryan-Sihalas\u201d were the primary makers of history until the first wave of Tamil settlers established a base in Jaffna in the 11th<\/sup> century. This new colonizing wave (of S. Indian migrants) set forth from the Malabar coast and must have settled down before the 11th<\/sup> century,\u201d wrote Heinz Bechert. This group of\u00a0 people are in the main the Mukkuvas\u2026\u2026The second migratory wave \u2013 perhaps in the 13th<\/sup> and 14th<\/sup> centuries \u2013 brought mainly families of the Tamilian Vellala-caste, the high caste peasants (the so-called high caste sudras\u201d from the east Tamilian region to North Ceylon.\u201d (p.30 \u2013 Heinz Bechert, \u00a0The Ceylon Journal of Historical and Social Studies<\/em><\/strong>, Vol 6, January \u2013 June 1963, No. 1.). Bechert, a leading Indologist, outlines the decisive migratory waves of S. Ind of ouians that came across the Palk Strait to settle down as permanent dwellers in Jaffna. Even Tamil historians like S. Arasaratnam and K. Indrapala agree that the first Tamil settlements were in the 12th<\/sup> and 13th<\/sup> centuries.<\/p>\n

The role of Tamils in Sri Lankan\u00a0 history is put more precisely by Dr. Ananda Guruge. He wrote: : \u2026..(L)inguistically and culturally, the Dravidian element in the Sri Lankan population had remained sporadic, intermittent and secondary. On the whole, the material evidence of its presence and impact dates from a much later period than the arrival and the entrenchment of Indo-Aryan Sinhala population in the entire island. Archaeological and epigraphical evidence, as well as the place names of proven antiquity, confirm the distribution in all parts of the Island without exception.\u201d (p. 90 \u2013 Guruge). The extant evidence points to the fact that the Tamils did not put down their roots as permanent dwellers before the 11th<\/sup> century. They were all tied physically and mentally to S. India, their only homeland. Besides, they did not believe that they had a history of their own in Sri Lanka worth recording. If they did they would have certainly done so as they did in their original and only homeland in S. India.<\/p>\n

In fact, they had no inclination to engage in such creative or scholarly endeavours as writing\u00a0 history. It is the Dutch Governor, Jan Maccaras, who had to order the writing of a history of Jaffna for his guidance. This produced the so-called history of Jaffna, Yalpana Vaipava Malai, <\/em><\/strong>which came out of a Dutch order and not from a deep-rooted sense of history like the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>. So, considering the\u00a0 historical facts, there is no justification to blame Bhikku Mahanama for focusing only on the Sinhala-Buddhists. He is demonised as a racist historian who had deliberately downgraded the Tamils. But\u00a0 this is a perverse view of\u00a0 history :<\/strong> \u00a0if the Tamils of S. India had only settled down in and around the 11th<\/sup> century how could\u00a0 Bhikku Mahanama write about the incidental and\u00a0 inconsequential Tamils in the 6th<\/sup> century? Besides, there were many sojourners and\u00a0 drifters in Sri Lanka from\u00a0 the year dot and Tamils were among\u00a0 them. Like all other \u00a0histories the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> dealt only with\u00a0 the \u00a0permanent and constructive makers of history. The Tamils played a temporary and destructive role and due place was given to the Tamil invaders and marauders. Historian Mahanama did not miss any significant details. As he stated in\u00a0 his first line in he will recite the Mahavamsa of\u00a0 varied content and\u00a0 lacking\u00a0 nothing.\u201d (MV \u2013 1:1). If there was any significant contribution he\u00a0 would have recorded it dutifully and scrupulously as seen in the emphatic place given to Elara\u2019s bell of justice. Other than that the Tamils did not come into the\u00a0 picture until the 11th<\/sup> century. So how could historian Bhikku Mahanama write about a non-existent factors in the 5th<\/sup> century?<\/p>\n

The anti-Sinhala-Buddhist lobby denigrates the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> venomously because it does not substantiate their claim that the Tamils, like the Sinhala-Buddhists, were in possession\u201d of divided Sri Lanka from the dawn of time\u201d. (Opening line\u00a0 in the Vadukoddai Resolution). They need this\u00a0 historical fiction desperately to substantiate their claim to the Northern and Eastern territories, which constitute 2\/3rd<\/sup>\u00a0 of the littoral strip. Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> provides no evidence of the Demalas\u201d (Tamils) playing any historical or significant role in laying the solid foundations of Sri Lanka, or occupying the Northern and Eastern coastline. In fact, Bhikku Mahanama makes references to the Demalas\u201d as invaders, marauders, traders, and even gigolos in the court of Queen Anula more than the Sihalas\u201d. \u00a0He makes only two references to the Sihalas\u201d but makes numerous references to the Demalas\u201d describing the destructive role they played as colonisers who were driven away by the Sihala\u201d nation-builders.. But nowhere does he mention the Tamils as makers of the great new civilisation. They are recognised as colonial invaders, marauders and gigolos who were driven out each time they tried to occupy Sri Lankan territory. The credit for making a new civilisation goes decisively, on\u00a0 historical evidence, to the Sihalas\u201d.<\/p>\n

ButThe By writing this history as objectively as possible, which is remarkable for a Buddhist monk and a historian of the time, he was being faithful to the events as they happened. The roles of the Demalas\u201d and the Sihalas\u201d are recorded without bias. If he was a partisan historian he would not have given Elara, the Tamil coloniser, the respectable place he occupies in the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>. He does not demonise Elara the way our hack-ademics\u201d denigrate him. The problem with the detractors of the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> is that they are frustrated because Bhikku Mahanama did not write a history giving the pride of place to the Demalas\u201d as makers of Sri Lankan history. In other words, they wanted him to write fiction and not history as it happened. They would have praised him to the skies if he wrote script that would help them to legitimise the mono-ethnic politics of glorifying Jaffna jingoism of the 20th<\/sup> century.<\/p>\n

Historians and political scientists have been unsparingly critical of the Western imperialists who occupied Afro-Asia. But Bhikku Mahanama has been very considerate and just in dealing with Elara, the Tamil colonialist, whose primary objective would have been, like all colonial masters, to live off the Sinhala-Buddhist people. Dutugemunu is elevated to a central place in the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> not because he defeated Elara, which was inevitable, but because he overthrew an unwanted colonial regime and restored the territorial integrity and the unity of the nation. Anti-colonial leaders who triumphed over imperialists are given a place of\u00a0 honour in all histories. Bhikku Mahanama\u2019s account\u00a0 of Elara is\u00a0 no\u00a0 different from that of any other\u00a0 historian who would reject colonialists and embrace the national leaders who fought against the foreign invaders.<\/p>\n

Bhikku Mahanama\u2019s stated ambition in writing the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>, however, was humble and simple. He stated that his endeavours were to make his new text easy to read and understand unlike the faulty\u201d old texts. But he never dreamt that his classic would reverberate down the ages, inspiring generations to look back with pride about the achievements of their ancestors. It is a book that bound and held together the descendants of the Aryan First Settlers in a shared history. It made them feel that the Aryan First Settlers did not live in vain. They left their indelible mark on sand, rock, bo-tree and land. The overall design, the integrated structure, and the easy flowing narrative, placing the secular movement of history as the central drama, within the overarching ambience of Buddhism, had stood the test of time and proved to be an invaluable historical document throwing light into the dim distant past. In short, he had succeeded in achieving the mission he set out to fulfil: <\/strong>write a consolidated history of the people, or as he put it, to recite the Mahavamsa, of varied content and lacking nothing.\u201d (MV \u2013 Chapt 1: 1).<\/p>\n

His masterpiece which bound the people together down the ages is yet to be matched by any other academic, some of whom had derided his efforts. His skill in editing the available material has proved that he had mastered the art of historiography of his\u00a0 time . The interplay of Buddhist dynamics with the secular politics is handled deftly to maintain a convincing balance between the two competing forces in the evolving history.\u00a0 The relevance and the accuracy of his text have been acknowledged by international scholars exploring South Asian historiography. For instance, the missing links in the history of Emperor Asoka were filled by the records in the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>. George Turnour\u2019s first translation into English (1837) helped the restoration of India history.<\/p>\n

Besides Bhikku Mahanama\u2019s commitment to revise the available narratives, which, according to him, had not been told with clarity and felicity, his ambition to take the available material and give it depth of meaning, confirm that he was imbued with a deep sense of history. His basic methodology, as stated by him, was to cut here and chop there and edit the available histories to give shape and meaning to the daring and creative journey of the Sinhala-Buddhist, as the pioneering history-makers came to be known later. He wrote: That (Mahavamsa) which was compiled by the ancient (sages) was here too long drawn out and there too closely knit; and contained many repetitions. Attend ye now to this (Mahavamsa) that is free from such faults, easy to understand and remember, arousing serene joy and emotion and handed down (to us) by tradition\u2026.\u201d (MV 1: 2-4).<\/p>\n

Having redacted the text expertly, he emerges in his narrative as a scholarly analyst determined to put the record straight for posterity. The Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> he produced stands, even today, as a guiding historical source that had directly influenced the course of history just not in Sri Lanka but in the Theravada movement that fanned out across the South East Asia as\u00a0 well. In the forefront of this Theravada Movement were the Sinhala Buddhist monks, whom the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> predicted would be the lords of the island.\u201d (MV \u2013 XIV : 53). None of the subsequent historiographers in academia and elsewhere had produced a book of that magnitude. Detractors of Bhikku Mahanama had made a living, and also advanced their careers, in academia and in NGO circles by distorting the text with their perverse interpretations. But none ever attained the broad influential and over-determining heights of the Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

For the moment, forget the murals\u00a0 of Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong> painted\u00a0 on the sacred temples\u00a0 of Burma. Which\u00a0 chapters\u00a0 of any of the academic \u00a0detractors of Mahavamsa<\/em><\/strong>,(e.g. Professori Carlo Fonseka), have been drawn even\u00a0 in the streets of Slave\u00a0 Island?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

H, L. D. Mahindapala And the soothsayers, when they saw the seats prepared, foretold: \u2018The earth is occupied by these (bhikkus); they will be lords upon the island.\u2019\u00a0 \u2013 Mahavamsa XIV: 53.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In the opening paragraph Bhikku Mahanama, the Father of Sri Lankan history, makes it clear that he didn\u2019t sit down to write […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78607","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-h-l-d-mahindapala"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78607","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=78607"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78607\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78607"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78607"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78607"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}