Page images

reason of the Arāma having belonged to Giri, and by reason of the wihāra having been made by the king Abhaya, therefore it was called Abhaya-giri Wihāra' (Mah., i, p. 131). Thus the account shows that the monastery was between the fortified city of that period and the village to the north-west where the battle was fought.

In the account of Paṇḍukābhaya's arrangement of the suburbs (Mah., i, p. 43) it is stated that a range of buildings for Vaeddas was established on the northern side of the cemetery, and to the eastward of these dwellings, that is, on the northeast of the cemetery,' he provided a residence [the Titthārāma] for five hundred persons of various foreign religious faiths.’ Unfortunately the site of the cemetery is unknown. It was crossed by the consecrated boundary fixed by Dēvānam-piya Tissa (Mah., i, p. 62), and the route followed by the king shows that it was on the western side of the city. A site to the northeast of it could not therefore be very far from the position occupied by the dagaba now wrongly termed Jētavana.

The clearest independent evidence in favour of this identification is contained in the account of Anuradhapura supplied by the Chinese monk, Fa Hien, in his narrative of his travels. He came from China to India for the purpose of obtaining copies of Buddhist manuscripts, and after spending six years there, he devoted two years to the same research in Ceylon, returning to China in the following year, 413 A.D. His words are (Dr. Legge's translation, p. 102):-' When Buddha came to this country, wishing to transform the wicked Nāgas, by his supernatural power he planted one foot at the north of the royal city, and the other on the top of a mountain [Adam's Peak], the two being fifteen yōjanas apart. Over the footprint at the north of the city the king built a large tope [dāgaba], 400 cubits high, grandly adorned with gold and silver and finished with a combination of all the precious substances. By the side of the tope he further built a monastery, called the Abhaya-giri, where there are five thousand monks.' At this time, he states that the Mahā Wihara had only three thousand monks, and it was thus inferior in size to the Abhaya-giri monastery.

The Chinese traveller's reiterated statement that the monastery was at the north of the city must be conclusive as to the identity of the only great dāgaba in that neighbourhood. I shall therefore refer to the two dagabas by the names that appear to me to belong to them, terming the northern one the Abhaya-giri, and the one to the east of the Sela Caitya the Jētavana dāgaba.

There is, however, further evidence regarding the identity of the northern dagaba. When part of the débris collected round its base was removed by Mr. S. M. Burrows, late of the Ceylon Civil Service, he discovered a series of large stone reliccases placed behind one or more of the wāhalkaḍas which are annexed to the dome at the cardinal points. Several of these were uninscribed, but round two of them the following sentence was deeply cut in one line (see Fig. No. 153 for facsimile).

Siddham. Matu Tisa Maharajaha raji nimi tabi hada tani jani. Hail! Fashioned, established (for sacred purposes), put in the prepared place (in) the reign of the Great King Maļu-Tissa.

The characters are those of the second century A.D., and the dedication belongs to the time of Kaniṭṭha-Tissa (165195 A.D.). In an inscription at a monastery at Ussayppu kallu, about nine miles from Marisi-kaṭṭu, and near the Mōdaragam-oya, this king styles himself the Great king Malu-Tissa, son of the Great King Nāga.' As Kaniṭṭha-Tissa was the

1 As this inscription is in a somewhat inaccessible part of the island I have given a facsimile in Fig. No. 153.

The transliteration is:-Siddham. Naka maharajaha puta Malu Tisa ma (2) haraji ma ganaņe kariyihi wawa Luwimitayah (i) Cuḍataka wawiyi ca (3) jabo awiyi ca, mata karawiyi ca, tapawana awiyi ca, me c(e)taka wawiya (4) bojiyapati, Karakalaya Kuba wihara kahi paca wata hiti. Ihata mula c(e)ta mawati (5) ya jina palisatiriya kotu dini.

Hail! The Great King Malu-Tissa, son of the Great King Någa, having formed and protected a tank of a great quantity of karishas (in extent) at Luwimitaya, and the Cuḍataka tank, and (thereby) caused rejoicings; and having protected the Ascetics' Forest; after having assigned the tank belonging to this dãgaba, built the Karakalaya Kumbha wihāra, suitable for the observances connected with the

younger son of King Mahallaka-Nāga, this proves that he is the monarch who terms himself Malu-Tissa, 'Tissa-the-youngerbrother' (maluwa in Elu or old Sinhalese) to distinguish his name from that of his elder brother, King Bhatiya-Tissa 'Tissa-the-elder-brother' (141–155 A.D.).1

It is clear that a relic-case with a dedicatory inscription of this king of the second century could not be placed in a dagaba which was not erected until the last years of the third century. Its discovery in the northern dagaba proves that this structure was in existence a century before Mahā-Sēna built the Jētavana dāgaba, and is quite fatal to the nomenclature commonly accepted.

The dimensions of the bricks in the domes of the two dāgabas also strongly support the identification; and in fact it was the discrepancy in their sizes compared with others of the respective periods which first led me to investigate this subject more than twenty years ago. Those of the dagaba to the east of the Sēla Caitya have a length of 15.82 inches, a breadth of 8.41 inches, and a thickness of 2.26 inches; Bt. is 19 square inches, and the contents 301 cubic inches. The table of dated bricks already given proves that they must belong to some date from the first to the fourth century A.D., inclusive.

In the northern dagaba, the bricks measure 18.92 inches in length, 9.62 inches in breadth, and 3.20 inches in thickness;

requisites [clothing, food, bedding, and medicine]. Having constructed the chief dagaba at this place, he repaired the dilapidated buildings.

This inscription is a duplicate of one copied by Dr. E. Müller at Galkowila (No. 98 in his list), the purport of which his defective copy led him to misapprehend. The meaning of the word mata, which I have translated 'rejoicings,' is doubtful. Ļuwimitaya (Lumitiya at Galkowila) = Lōkamita; compare Alu wihāra = Alōka wihāra. 'Protecting the tank probably means arranging for its maintenance and appointing a Guardian for it.

King Udaya II (952-955) nearly lost his life through his violation of the sanctity of the Ascetics' Forest (Mah., ii, pp. 82, 83). It was a 'Sacred' forest to which ultra-ascetic monks, especially those termed Pansukūlikas, retired, and it was evidently a sanctuary for offenders of all kinds. Its position is not known.

1 In Dr. Müller's Inscription No. 16, Kaniṭṭha-Tissa describes himself as Tissa, the younger brother of the Great King Bhātiya-Tissa, (and) son of the Great King Naga.'

Bt. is 30.7 and the contents 583 cubic inches. The only dated bricks of this type are those in the Miriswaeți dăgaba. While they are large even for the time when Waṭṭa-Gāmiņi was king, it is practically impossible that such extreme dimensions should have been suddenly reverted to nearly four centuries later, as would be the case if this were the Jētavana dāgaba.

So far as I am aware there is only a single line in the Dipavansa (xix, 17) which can be held to support the common nomenclature. This work says of King Waṭṭa-Gāmiņi Abhayagirim patiṭṭhapesi Silathūpam cetiyamantare, 'He built Abhaya-giri between the Silāthūpa and the Cētiya.' Mr. Bell understands this to mean 'between the Sēla Caitya and Mihintale' [Cētiya-giri].1 But Mihintale is eight miles away, and there is no authority for assuming that the old author omitted the word giri after Cetiya. I suppose that by the word Cetiya the author meant the Abhaya-giri dāgaba, and that the Silā-thūpa is the Silā Sobbha Kandaka Thūpa, now called Lankarāma, which the same king built. The line would then mean that he built the Abhaya-giri (wihāra) between the Lankārāma dāgaba and the Abhaya-giri dāgaba,' this being the actual position of a great part of the ruins of the monastery.


Although the histories contain numerous references to the buildings which formed the Abhaya-giri wihāra, little is said respecting the great dagaba itself. It is recorded of GajaBāhu I (113-135 A.D.) that 'raising the Abhayuttara Thūpa he constructed it of a greater elevation' (Mah., i, p. 132), a result that might naturally be expected if he raised it. Doubtless this refers only to the works above the dome, in the lower part of which no bricks of this period are to be seen.

It is possible that when King Kaniṭṭha-Tissa placed his reliccases there he at the same time built the wāhalkaḍas. The decorative work on their flanking pillars is of a type intermediate between that of the Ruwanwaeli and Miriswaeti dāgabas and that of the Jētavana dāgaba, in some details 1 Annual Report for 1895, p. 2, footnote.

agreeing with the first two and in some with the other. King Vōharaka-Tissa (215-237 A.D.) is said to have caused the chatta to be repaired (Mah., i, p. 144); the original work in it must have been done by Gaja-Bāhu I. Probably the spire possessed one from the first, resembling in that respect those of the other great dagabas. Dhātu-Sēna (463–479 a.D.) again repaired this chatta.

Moggallāna presented a new cloth covering to the dāgaba, and Kassapa II (652-661 A.D.) fixed a jewelled pinnacle on the spire, the top of which is thus shown to have passed through the chatta (Mah., ii, p. 32).

Sena III (955-964 A.D.) laid a stone paving round the dāgaba at a cost of forty thousand kahāpanas (Mah., ii, p. 83). It is surprising to find that at this important monastery such a necessary work had been neglected for more than a thousand years. It is safer to assume that the statement refers to some additional work in laying paving than to suppose that all the earlier zealous Buddhist monarchs had omitted to carry out such an obvious improvement. The sum paid for the work also appears to be totally insufficient to cover the cost of laying the whole paving.

The dagaba was repaired by Parākrama-Bāhu I (1164-1197 A.D.) with the others at Anuradhapura, all, it is stated, having been seriously damaged by South-Indian invaders long antecedent to that period, that is, in the middle of the preceding century, when they held Northern Ceylon.

It is not specially mentioned as having been broken into during the reign of the invader Māgha (1215-1236 A.D.), but as all the other large dagabas were injured at that time no doubt considerable damage would be done to this one also; and it was one of those repaired in the time of ParakramaBahu II (1240-1275 A.D.), when all are said to have been in a ruinous state and overgrown with jungle.

This was again its condition in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. It was then surrounded by thick jungle and covered by a forest of trees and interlaced undergrowth. This was felled and the re-growth kept under control, but no repairs have been undertaken yet.

« PreviousContinue »