By P.K.Balachandran
In medieval Sri Lanka, adherence to Buddhist principles was essential to exercise sovereignty. Exercise of coercive power alone did not entitle a Sinhala-Buddhist King to claim sovereignty.
His claim had to be backed by adherence to certain Buddhistic principles, such as observance of royal traditions, protection of Buddhist relics, following the prescriptions of the Buddha Sasana, and controlling the Sangha.
These hallmarks of a true Sinhala-Buddhist sovereign are described by cultural historian Anne M. Blackburn of the University of Hawaii in her book “Buddhist-Inflected Sovereignties across the Indian Ocean – The Pali Arena, 1200–1550.”
Blackburn explains the essential requirements of sovereignty in medieval Sri Lanka by taking the case of the early rulers of Dambade?iya, a Kingdom in South West Sri Lanka.
The Kingdom of Dambadeniya was established by a mix of coercive force and commercial successes in the 13 th.Century. Vijayabahu III (1232-1236), the founder of the Dambadeniya Kingdom, had established himself first in Ratnapura.
But he and his son Parakramabahu II (1236-1270) expanded their domain by defeating local rulers and foreign mercenary armies serving Kalinga Magha, the ruler of Kalinga (present day Odisha in Eastern India) and Chandrabhanu, a Javaka Prince from present-day Malay Peninsula.
Eventually, Vijayabahu III secured control of South Western Sri Lanka called “Maya Ra?a or Maya Rajya”, and set up his capital at Dambade?iya in the present North Western Province.
Burgeoning Indian Ocean Trade
Vijayabahu III and Parakramabahu II were successful in their military campaigns because of the strategic location of Maya Ra?a. The mountainous area around present-day Kurunegala and Dambade?iya, provided natural protection from military threats from the North and East. In addition, Dambade?iya offered easier access to the island’s Southern and South Western seaports which were booming at that time due to vigorous trade across the Indian Ocean.
In the Indian Ocean ecosystem, Sri Lanka offered valuable commodities such as spices, gems, pearls, and areca nut. And the island’s Southern and Western ports provided the most effective access to most of these items found in the hinterland.
Therefore, ports like Mantai in the North and Trincomalee in the East declined. The decline of the ancient Kingdoms of Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa could be partially attributed to the changing international l trade scenario.
Quest for Sovereignty
Indeed, Vijayabahu III and Parakramabahu II had acquired political power and a domain of their own, but they had to acquire legitimacy or sovereignty and for that they needed to acquire certain hallmarks. And they strained every nerve to do it.
Wisely, they chose the earlier articulations of sovereignty in Sri Lanka. The Dambade?iya Kings drew on the attributes of the earlier sovereign Kingdoms of Sri Lanka, namely, Anuradhapura and Po?onnaruwa.
Dambadeniya’s intellectuals led by the scholarly (Panditha) Parakramabahu II himself, delved deep into Pali, Sanskrit and Sinhala texts on the Buddha Sasana dating back to the middle of the first millennium AD to find attributes of true Kingship. Through Anuradhapura, they even established a link with Emperor Asoka of India whose son and daughter had brought Buddhism to Sri Lanka.
Iconic Parakramabahu I
Parakramabahu I was an icon. He unified the three sub kingdoms of Sri Lanka, oversaw the expansion and beautification of his capital, Polonnaruwa, constructed extensive irrigation systems, reorganized the country’s army, reformed Buddhist practices, encouraged the arts and undertook military campaigns in South India and Myanmar.
The adage “not even a little water that comes from the rain must flow into the ocean without being made useful to man” is attributed to Parakramabahu I.
To cement his links to Polonnaruwa, King Parakramabahu II of Dambadeniya, undertook renovation of the buildings in Polonnaruwa such as the Hatthavanagalla Vihara near Gampaha. He intered the remains of his father Vijayabahu III there.
Mahawamsa
The Mahava?sa, composed in the middle of the first millennium AD, had delineated the attributes of royal conduct and sovereignty. For generations, the Mahavamsa had served as a compendium on the authorization of regimes and enunciated principles of statecraft. The Mahawamsa was updated during the first half of the second millennium and thus covered generations of rulers, scholars, and officials, enhancing its influence.
Key Role of Buddha’s Relics
The Mahava?sa’s chapters on Anuradhapura stressed the centrality of the Buddha’s relics in claiming sovereignty. A monarch’s right to rule, including the celebration of coronations and major military victories, was demonstrated by highly public, large-scale, royal patronage of the Buddha relic sites.
This was strongly expressed in the Du??hagama?i narrative in the first instalment of the Mahava?sa. Six chapters were devoted to the King’s offerings to Buddhist relics after military victories.
Kelaniya and Sri Pada
However, long distances, limited infrastructure, fragile alliances, and military uncertainties all ensured that for the South Western Kingdom of Dambade?iya, there could be no consistent ritual merit-making access to the famous Buddha-relic sites in the former capital of Anuradhapura, such as Thuparama and Ruvanvalisaya.
Therefore, the rulers of Dambade?iya focussed on relic sites associated with the Buddha located closer to the city, in addition to protecting and displaying the Buddha tooth relic and alms bowl relic that were portable royal palladia.
There were two locations of particular interest in the South Western region, Kelaniya and Sri Pada.
Both the Dipava?sa, a fourth-century Pali work, and the first instalment of Mahava?sa had narrated a visit by the Buddha to Kalaniya, near Colombo. In addition to Kelaniya, the auspicious footprint of the Buddha on Samantaku?a (Peak of Peaks) was recognized as a relic since at least the time of the first instalment of the Mahava?sa. Sri Pada was created during the Buddha’s rest atop the summit.
At King Parakramabahu II’s request, a leading official titled Devappatiraja, referred to in Pujavaliya as his confidant-minister (Amatya), undertook to act on the King’s behalf a massive set of renovations and infrastructural improvements at Sri Pada.
An image of Saman, a protective deity, was installed on the Peak of Peaks. Bridges were built to improve access to the Peak from various directions, as were pilgrims’ rest houses. The Amatya himself performed exacting rituals on behalf of his sovereign to underscore his chief’s sovereign status.
Sangha Katikavata
The determination of Parakramabahu II to portray himself as inheriting the mandate of earlier rulers in Sri Lanka manifested also in his promulgation of a Sangha Katikavata, a regulatory prescription for all monks within his realm.
The genre of Sangha Katikavata he promulgated appears to have originated with Parakramab?hu I ruling from Po?onnaruwa, The latter had issued this document as a stone inscription while attempting to reorganize the monastic community in the areas under his control.
Subsequent Sangha Katikavatas followed the language of the original. For instance, some version of Parakramabahu I’s Sangha Katikavata was available to the royal house of Dambade?iya, which incorporated parts of it into its own new regulatory text.
Control Over the Sangha
In addition, the Dambade?i Katikavata shows that efforts to control the Sangha was considered central to statecraft.
R. A. L. H. Gunawardana’s work on Anuradhapura inscriptions showed, and later inscriptional references continued to attest, that Buddhist monks and their institutions often played central roles in Sri Lanka’s economy. Lankan monasteries and monastic lineages owned land from the Anuradhapura period onwards as a result of donations, especially from ruling families. They also owned or controlled agricultural workers and artisans.
It is possible that monastic residences were involved in cash or credit transactions. In addition, there are indications that high-ranking monastics tended to be persons of high family status, which suggests they would have had relatives or other close associates in powerful institutions such as the King’s court and the military.
This explains why sovereigns attempted to centralize control over the Sangha and why control tended to become more elaborate as polities expanded geographically.
Like his predecessors in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa, King Prakramabahu !! of Dambadeniya controlled the Sangha in his domain through the Katikavata proclaimed by him, thus underling his sovereignty over the most important institution in it.
