RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THERAVADA - I
At the outset I wish to thank Dr. Usvatte-aratchi for the kind words he has expressed in his article "On universities on TV" in respect of a discussion we had on the Rupavahini on the Universities. In the course of the discussion apparently I had given a wrong impression on the nature of the universities by claiming that they dealt with the universe of knowledge. This impression would have been created by the use of the words samastha denuma. As Dr. Uswatte-aratchi himself has pointed out no institution could have dealt with the entire knowledge at any given time, whether the knowledge has been "created" or "discovered". Perhaps I should have been more explicit on it and explained what was meant by samastha denuma, as for me it means not the entirety of knowledge but integrated knowledge, and I suspect a better word would have been anukalitha denuma. The university, in my opinion integrates the knowledge dealt in different faculties, if there is more than one faculty, and a faculty integrates knowledge that is dealt by different departments or individuals, as the case may be. It is a concept that could have been evolved in Medieval Europe and not in modern Europe where the tendencies are towards fragmentation. The concept of a University has slowly changed over the centuries, but very rapidly after the so called second world war, when modernity entered a new phase wrongly identified by some intellectuals in the west as post modernity. It is unfortunate that today faculty members from two different departments in the same faculty, let alone from two different faculties, are unable to engage in a meaningful conversation as they seem to talk two different languages. I suppose this is a phenomenon that C. P. Snow has discussed in his book "Two Cultures" though in a different context. Today, knowledge is fragmented and like any other commodity in the modern west, comes in the form of capsules and tablets called course units and modules. In any event I am thankful to Dr. Uswatte-aratchi for identifying this deficiency on my part.
However, what I would like to discuss is something else that Dr. Uswatte-aratchi had mentioned in his article. In the Rupavahini discussion I mentioned very briefly that since about fifth century AC no new knowledge has been produced in this country on the whole. Also I said something along the lines that we should create new knowledge independent of the modern western knowledge. I would have preferred to deal with these subjects at length as I myself have created some knowledge in these areas since I am also interested in epistemology. However the so called ethnic problem has taken much of space and time available to me (space time within my light cone) and I am compelled to write on related subjects as I believe that it is more important in the present context. However I have been contributing some articles to Vidusara on epistemology and related subjects, and an interested reader would find them in the website www. kalaya.org maintained by the Chinthana Parshadaya. Of the two topics mentioned by Dr. Uswatte-aratchi I would deal briefly with the problem of creation of knowledge in our country after the fifth century, as matters discussed are in a way relevant to the so called ethnic problem.
Though I was trained by the universities to become a Mathematician and a Theoretical Physicist I would always want to have a dialogue with my colleagues in the other faculties and departments. The ideas I express in this article are mainly in the field of History. However, I am not a Historian of any sort having had only a formal education in that subject only up to the Junior level (Fourth Form or post eighth standard class) though due to some irony of history I was able to win the Junior History Prize at school, almost fifty years ago. In that sense one could say that my formal knowledge of history itself belongs to history!
It is my considered opinion that the fourth century and the fifth century have determined our subsequent history to a very large extent. By the fourth century the Sinhala people had become Buddhists, and Anuradhapura was the world centre of Theravada Buddhism. The learned Bhikkus at Mahavihara had been creating knowledge and Abhayagiriya had tolerated other sects as well without giving up the Theravada tradition. The Atuvas, Teekas and the other books written during and prior to this period provide ample testimony to the creativity of the Bhikkus and others. The wevas and dagabas and the hydraulic civilisation of the Sinhalas are a monument to such creativity. However, what happened during this particular period has to be investigated in depth as it would lead to an understanding of ourselves better.
There are three important factors that we have to consider in respect of the political and cultural life during this period. It is very unlikely that the economic factors played an important role with respect to social changes during this period. The Kalaweva built by King Dhatusena would have made an impact on the economy but it could not save his life, though he himself treasured it very much. The relevant political and cultural factors are (i) the ascendancy of the Lambakarnas and the determination by some other group to dethrone them and capture power, (ii) the rise of Tamil power in South India and (iii) the threat to Theravada in Andra Pradesh. After Anuradhapura and Mahavihara, Andra Pradesh was the stronghold of Theravada, with Kanchipuram presently situated in Tamil Nadu as a result of demarcation of states by the British, being one of the Theravada centres in that part of the world.
Theravada which agreed with the discourse of the Third Sanagayana was practised by people in Andra Pradesh as well as those in Sri Lanka. There were certain philosophical concepts, the Theravadins adhered to, and in the second century some of these concepts came under attack by the great Philosopher and intellectual Nagarjuna Thero, of Sunyathavada fame. In my opinion Nagarjuna Thero was heads and shoulders above Newtons and Einsteins yet to come, and being a native of Andra Pradesh the Bhikku was a threat to Theravada in Andra Pradesh particular and in the other parts of world in general. The Theravadins could have criticised Sunyathavada, however at that time they did not know how to formulate an anti Sunyathavada philosophy. As Buddhism was also an intellectual attraction, Theravada began to lose its base in Andra Pradesh after great Nagarjuna Thero.
This threat to Theravada would have been discussed by the Theravada Bhikkus in both Andra Pradesh and Sri Lanka and naturally they would have been worried by the spread of Madhyamikavada of Nagarjuna Thero. It is said that the chief disciple of Nagarjuna Thero was Ariyadeva Thero a Bhikku who went to Andra Pradesh from Sri Lanka. The translation of Theravada texts to Pali or the Prakrit in which texts were written would not have been a decision of Buddhaghosha Thero alone. It was most probably a result of a joint decision taken by Theravada Bhikkus in Andra Pradesh and Sri Lanka in order to protect Theravada from an attack by the Madhyamikavada. Long before Holmes we ourselves had our R2Ps. It was the responsibility to protect Theravada that the Bhikkus in Mahavira and Andra Pradesh would have taken jointly. This responsibility is illustrated by the steps taken to translate Theravada texts to Pali. Buddhadatta Thero who preceded Buddhaghosha Thero also came to Anuradhapura from Andra Pradesh, was also involved in these translations. It is said that on his way back home Buddhadatta Thero met Buddhaghosha Thero who was coming to Sri Lanka to undertake the translation work. There were travelling in different ships in different directions and perhaps had a meeting "in transit". These Bhikkus would have come to Sri Lanka for the purpose of translating the Theravada texts into a language probably not spoken by many, so that the texts would not have been corrupted, as books written an a language used by people could be "altered" or given different interpretations.
(To be continued)
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>