Abha."'*' It should be remembered here, that the Abhaya giri monks took up residence at the Abhayagiri monastery and lived as a separate body purely due to personal and disciplinary reasons and that they were not identified as a separate sect until the coming of the Dhammarucis.
Neither the Mahavamsa, nor the Nikayasangrahaya gives any information about the teachings of the Dham maruci Nikaya or their original sect, Vajjiputta Nikaya of India. The Nikayasangrahaya only mentions that the Vajjiputta was one of the 18 sects into which Buddhism was
split up before it was introduced into Ceylon. From the words in the Nikayasangrahaya, "Acarya of Vajjiputta Nikaya ... accepting their doctrines joined them and
settled down under the title of Dharmaruci Acarya” , it can be inferred that the title 'Dhammaruci7 was bestowed
30
on the Acarya by the residents of the Abhayagiri monas tery and the former was elected as the chief of the sect,
•Dhammaruci1 which means 1 those who take pleasure in the dhamma1 or fthose who cause the dhamma to shine1 could well be a title chosett by the Abhayagiri monks with a view to outshine the opposing camp,
Buddhaghosa has given an account of some of the views held by the Va Jjiputtakas in his Kathavatthu commentary,'1' One of the views was that there was an individual personal entity (puggalavada) , which is a theory q u i t e .opposite to the principles of anatta of the Theravada. But it cannot be certain whether the followers of the Dhammaruci Nikaya
at the Abhayagiri monastery held the Vajjiputtaka views as described by Buddhaghosa,
However, one point Is clear; the Abhayagiri monks had a liberal and a progressive spirit and welcomed new
ideas from abroad. It was two centuries after welcoming the Dhammarucis, that the Vetulyavada was mentioned to have been recieved at the Abhayagiri monastery.
Though the Vetulyakas were suppressed as a religious body by the king at the time, V 0harika Tissa, it was only
31
a temporary measure. They officially came up again, in the reign of Gothabhaya (2U9-262 A.D.). We learn
1
from the chronicles that monks of the Abhayagiri monastery belonging to the Dhammaruci sect again put forward the Vaitulyavada as the true doctrine of the Buddha. One of the residents of the Abhayagiri
monastery itself, a thera called Ussiliya Tissa, rose against the Vaitulyavada, remembering the actions taken against those who followed Vaitulyavada on the earlier occasion,and left the Abhayagiri. He took three hundred monks and settled down at the Dakkhinarama. This in cident gave rise to another nikaya in the Buddhist
sangha, namely the Sagaliya Nikaya v/hose founder, a thera named Sagala, was among the monks who broke away from the Abhayagiri.
As on the earlier occasion, the king held an in quiry and finding that Vaitulyavada was not the true doctrine, suppressed the Vaitulyakas and burnt their books at the instigation of the Mahavihara monks. He branded sixty monks with marks on their bodies and
2
banished them out of the country, which gave rise to 1. N s . „ p.11
3 2
a series of events that seriously affected the Buddhist church* The exiled monks who reached Kavirapattana in the Cola country came in contact with a monk called Sahghamitra, who later became the champion of Mahayana in Ceylon. According to the Mahavamsa. he was "versed in the teachings concerning the exorcism of spirits and so forth" (bhutavi.1 .iadikovido) * This is the period,
during which the Yogacara school of Asanga and Vasubandhu was gaining ground in India and mystic and magical
practices became more wide spread when Yoga exercises brought great influence to bear on Buddhism?' Safighamitra who came over to Ceylon, with the determination of aveng
ing the action of Mahavihara monks and spreading Mahayana in the country took residence at the Abhayagiri monastery* He won over the favour of the king and v/as soon en trusted with the task of educating the k i n g ’s two sons. He found that the elder son could not be pursuaded to support him but the younger one was quite amenable.
When the elder son Jettha Tissa became king, Sanghamitra left for India in fear but returned as soon as the younger prince Mahasena (27^--3ol A.D.) succeeded his elder brother
33
to the throne. Even the consecration was conducted by Sanghamitrai Evidently his days of triumph had come and he set about his campaign to propagate the Mahayana. He made a vain attempt to persuade the Mahavihara monks
to accept Vaitulyavada. Nothing could change their faith, not even a royal order forbidding the people to offer alms to the Mahavihara monks on pain of a fine of 100 kahapanas. They stood steadfast by their faith, at the cost of their lives and left Anuradhapura for Rohana and Malaya. Sanghamitra had the seven-storeyed Lohapasada and many other buildings of the Mahavihara plundered and demolished. In these activities, he was assisted by the minister called Sona. The Nikayasang rahaya says the Mahavihara site was ploughed and sown
2
with beans. The Cetiyagiri monastery on the Ambatthala hill at Mihintale, one of the oldest seats of Buddhism,
3 -
was occupied by the Dhammarucihas. The Mahavihara was deserted for nine years. For the first time in the history of the sangha in the island, the authority of the Mahavihara, the citadel of orthodox Buddhism, was
1. 37.3.
2. N s . , pp.l2f
3. At the time Fa-hsien visited Ceylon, Cetiyagiri is said to have contained two thousand monks. BR,7,V. , p.J+8
3 4
entirely shattered. People were agitated at the disas ter brought upon the Mahavihara by the king and before long, public opinion rose against him. Minister
Meghavapna Abhaya raised an army and. declared war on him. The king and the minister met and came to a reconciliation: the former promised to restore the Mahavihara^ The wicked actions of Sanghamitra were also avenged. One of the king’s wives got Sanghamitra assassinated by a carpenter and the Vaitulya texts
burnt. The people killed the minister 3ona and the
2
dead body was thrown into a heap of refuse. Thus Mahasena’s reign witnessed the darkest period of the long established traditional seat of the Buddhist church, the Mahavihara. As Paranavitana points out, the history of these events have come down to us in the writings of one of the parties to the dispute; hence it can hardly be taken as impartial. The
Mahavamsa always uses most glowing terms in describing the supporters of the Mahavihara and the most degrading ones for those in the opposite camp. The violent form of
1. M v . , 37, 17-25. 2. Ns., p.13
35
revenge taken on Sanghamitra and Sona is not condemned by the author of the Mahavamsa, in the spirit of the
’true doctrine* which they were struggling to maintain.
It should also be mentioned in this connection that Sanghamitra accused the Mahavihara monks of not observing the Vinaya rules properly. It is possible that these accusations were not altogether groundless. A valuable piece of information is furnished in a frag
mentary inscription found in the precincts of the Jetavanarama monastery"!: Paranavitana has come to the following conclusion from the fragmentary contents:
the edict was issued in the first year of the reign of Mahasena and is related to the religious conflicts which followed his accession to the throne; the object
of the edict v/as to regulate the ecclesiastical affairs of the state and it was addressed to the monks of the
’Five Great Residences’ of the Mahavihara. (Here they
1. ** ...Proclaimed in the first year o f ...of the community of bhikkhus ... as the doctrines of the monks who belong to are unsettled, ...the
monks who are the followers of ... the Great Residences and the whole community ... though rebuked, sins
in various ways ... various ... (having written)
36
are referred to as 1 sinful monks’)^ It is particularly noteworthy that the inscription records the existence
of Vayatudala (Vaitulya) books*
We have seen how the personal jealously of the Mahavihara monks led to the first schism in the Ceylon sangha and the establishment of a new n ikaya. It was purely as a mark of gratitude that Vat'Jagamani Abhaya offered the Abhayagiri Vihara to the Elder Mahatissa* When the nation and the religion were being ruined by the Tamils, it was this thera who intervened and brought about a reconciliation* But for his action, the fate of Buddhism and of the Sinhalese race would have been
which creates (i*e. points out) the path of ••*»•• with faith one’s mind and .... of heart in the com munity of bhikkhus and in one’s own s e l f ... the
[exposition of] meaning and the books written ... in the Five Great Residences and ... towards those who cause disturbance to one another and •••••
create confusion ... any ... in the time of any king who desires the welfare of (the others) as well as his own self ... his own duty which causes the increase of merit to himself •••••• the great monastery of Abhayagiri ♦♦••* EZ • , IV. pp. 273 f^« 1. The Nikayasangrahaya mentions that Sanghamitra tried
in vain to persuade the monks of the ’Five Great Monasteries’ to accept the Vaitulya teachings. See N s . , p.lU
37
otherwise. The only charge against thera Mahatissa was that he frequented the families of laymen.
Similar punishment was enforced by the Mahavihara monks in another instance. When king Mahasena built the Jetavana monastery and offered it to thera Tissa from Dakkhinarama, he was charged with a very severe offence (antimavatthu) and expelled from the order against the wishes of.the king. The Mahavamsa speaks of Tissa in disparaging terms as “hypocrite, the plotter, the lawless thera Tissa, his [king!s] evil friend." The Nikayasangrahaya calls him by the appelation 'Kohon
p
Tissa1 (the hypocrite Tissa). However, a different picture of the thera is given in a tenth-century in scription, n ... in the great, royal monastery of Dena
established [of yore] for the benefit of the great elder Tis who was moderate in his desires, was content, and was known by the name of the great lord Saguli."^
The Theravadins according to the chronicles emerged victorious towards the end of the reign of Mahasena and
1. M v . , 37.32-33 2. N s . , p.13
38
the Vaitulyavada v/as officially suppressed. There is no further record in the chronicles of Mahayana elements penetrating into the country for nearly two and a half centuries. However, there is evidence for the existence of Mahayana ideas and their getting ab sorbed into the religious practices in the country. For the first time during this period, there is re
ference in the Culavamsa to an image of the Bodhisattva recorded with apparent approval of the Mahavihara.
This was a beautiful figure of a Bodhisattva seated on a chair with a back and having an umbrella and a
mandana with riewels^ similar in form to sculptures of» » L J Mahayana Buddhas and B 0(ihisattvas. The figure was made by Jet^hatissa II (328-337 A.D.) an ivory carver of renown at the request of his father Mahasena. This practice was later followed by Dhatusena (U55-473 A*D.) who installed Bodhisattva figures and constructed a
„ 2 m
Bodhisattva temple. Thus it is apparent that the period following Mahasena, which according to the chronicles
witnessed the victory of the Theravada and the suppression of Vaitulyavada, v/as a time when a basic Mahayana practice,
1. C v . , 37. 1-39 2. C v . , 38.65-69
39
namely the worship of* Bodhisattvas, was absorbed into the existing religious system.
Indirect evidence of* the prevalence of Mahayana in Ceylon during the third and fourth centuries can be deduced from another source. The legend associated with the Mahayana work Lankavatarasutra throws some
light in this connection,
Lankavatarasutra was the chief text for the doctrine of subjective idealism (vi.jflanavada) and was widely
popular in China and Japan. It was first translated into Chinese betwee 420 and 430 A.dI The full title of the work is Saddharmalankavatarasutra i,e, sutra of the entry of the good doctrine to Lanka, Lanka is mentioned in the Lankavatarasutra as a city on the peak of Mount
Malaya and as the citadel of Ravana. The sutra begins with the Buddha coming out of the palace of nagas situated in the ocean where he had been preaching for a week. Look ing at Lanka and remembering that previous Buddhas had preached the doctrine there, the Buddha smiled, Ravana who was inspired by the power of the Buddha, invited him to preach the doctrine of inner perception and the
1, D.T.Suzuki, Studies in the Lankavatara Sutra, London,
40
real existence of the mind. The Buddha went in Ravana's chariot to Lanka where the Buddha and his attendant
Bodhisattvas were adorned with jewellery by yaksa girls and boys. He created several mountain peaks on which he himself was seen with Ravana, All the peaks then vanished suddenly; Ravana finding himself alone had
_ i
a feeling of revulsion (paravrtti) and realized that his perception (of the mountains) was only in his mind.
— 2