Dr Ruwan M Jayatunge M.D. PhD
Professor Gananath Obeyesekere's work,
"Dutthagamani and the Buddhist Conscience," enquires into the
intricate details of the historical figure Dutthagamani (Dutugemunu), a king of
ancient Sri Lanka, and the moral and ethical dilemmas that he encountered. His
commitment to Buddhist principles often clashed with the harsh realities of
military strategy, leading him to reflect on his conscience. Obeyesekere
examines how the king's actions, particularly his military campaigns and the
establishment of a Buddhist state, reflect the complexities of Buddhist
conscience and the philosophical underpinnings of moral responsibility within
the context of governance. He explores the tension between the king's pursuit
of power and the Buddhist ideals of compassion and non-violence, highlighting
how Dutthagamani's legacy is interpreted through various lenses of Buddhist
thought. By analyzing historical narratives and religious texts, Obeyesekere
provides a nuanced understanding of how cultural and spiritual beliefs shape
political actions, ultimately contributing to a broader discourse on the
intersection of religion and statecraft in Sri Lankan history. Moreover, Obeyesekere
highlights the historical development of an "ambivalent conscience"
within Sinhalese Buddhism, centered on the complex figure of King Dutthagamani
aka Dutugemunu.
King Dutugemunu
encountered a profound moral conflict in the aftermath of the Battle of
Vijithapura, shaped by his upbringing in a devout Buddhist environment. In the
midst of battle, he was compelled to kill a large number of enemy soldiers.
These actions later shattered his consciousness.
Growing up in a
Buddhist setting, Dutugemunu's values and beliefs were deeply influenced by
Buddhist principles. He perceived the world through this lens of understanding.
From an early age, he was taught that taking a life is a grave sin that
condemns one to hell, leading him to grapple with the implications of his
actions during the war, where he was responsible for the deaths of his
adversaries. This internal struggle manifested as a tug-of-war between the
concepts of sin and virtue, as well as the contrasting realms of hell and
heaven. In this tumultuous state, the Buddhist monks provided solace to King
Dutugemunu by suggesting that the enemies he had slain were heathens, thus
downplaying the severity of his actions. However, Obeyesekere critiques this
perspective, arguing that the Buddhist monks were manipulating Buddhist
teachings for their own pragmatic ends.
A parallel can be drawn with Emperor Ashoka, who, after the Kalinga War,
experienced a similar transformation in thought, leading him to forsake
military conquest (Digvijaya) in favor of a path of righteousness
(Dharmavijaya). Nevertheless, historical records indicate that Ashoka's
Buddhist empire was ultimately short-lived, raising questions about the
sustainability of such ideals in the face of realpolitik.
Every religion consists of two essential components: its beliefs and the way
those beliefs are put into action. In Buddhism, violence and killing are
fundamentally viewed as wrong. However, throughout history, there have been
instances where some Buddhist monks have justified violent acts against
adversaries to protect Buddhism during critical conflicts. A similar pattern
can also be observed in the history of Christianity.
The notion of
exterminating heretics as a pathway to divine reward emerged prominently during
the Crusades, articulated through the fervent sermons of Pope Urban II and
echoed by Islamic military leaders such as Saladin. This ideological framework,
rooted in ancient traditions, has historically served as a justification for
warfare, allowing both sides to frame their conflicts in a context of religious
righteousness.
In this light,
Obeyesekere highlights that these enduring concepts similarly influenced the
military strategies employed by King Dutugemunu. The intertwining of faith and
warfare in this manner illustrates how leaders have harnessed religious
narratives to galvanize support for their military endeavors, thereby shaping
the course of history through the lens of spiritual conviction.
King Dutugemunu (Dutthagamani)
Dutugemunu
was a prominent monarch of the Anuradhapura Kingdom, reigning from 161 BC to
137 BC. He is celebrated for his pivotal role in unifying the entire island of
Sri Lanka, a feat accomplished through the defeat and subsequent overthrow of
Elara, an aggressor from the Chola Kingdom, who had invaded Anuradhapura in 205
BC. This victory not only marked a significant turning point in Sri Lankan
history but also established King Dutugemunu as a national hero. In addition to
his military conquests, he undertook extensive efforts to expand and enhance
the city of Anuradhapura, transforming it into a center of cultural and
political significance. His reign is characterized by the projection of the
Rajarata kingdom's influence across the island, fostering a sense of unity and
identity among the diverse populations of Sri Lanka. Through his leadership,
King Dutugemunu left an indelible mark on the nation's history and heritage,
solidifying his legacy as a unifier and visionary ruler.
King
Dutugemunu occupies a significant place in the collective unconscious of the
Sinhalese people, symbolizing the ideals of heroism, unity, and resilience. His
legendary status stems from his pivotal role in the unification of Sri Lanka
during a tumultuous period marked by conflict and division. Dutugemunu's
triumph over King Elara is not merely a historical event; it represents the
struggle for identity and sovereignty that resonates deeply within the cultural
psyche of the people. His efforts to promote Buddhism and support the
construction of stupas and monasteries not only reinforced his authority but
also played a crucial role in the cultural renaissance of the time. His
narrative is interwoven with themes of sacrifice and valor, serving as a source
of inspiration for generations. The king's legacy is celebrated in various
forms, including literature, art, and folklore, which perpetuate his image as a
national hero.
Professor
Gananath Obeyesekere emphasizes the complexities of Dutugemunu's character and
the socio-political context of his reign. By examining the interplay between
myth and history, Obeyesekere argues that the king's legacy is not merely one
of military conquest but also reflects the intricate dynamics of power,
religion, and cultural identity in ancient Sri Lanka.
Obeyesekere
challenges the dominant narratives that have shaped national consciousness,
calling for a critical reassessment of how historical figures are celebrated
and remembered in contemporary society. Thus, while Dutugemunu is revered as a
national hero, the darker aspects of his reign, marked by violence and the loss
of life, complicate the narrative of his achievements and highlight the duality
of his legacy.
It is a
historical fact that King Dutugemunu emerged victorious in the battle against
his enemies. Can we file a charge sheet against him for defending his homeland
and eliminating threats to it? In confronting an invader, there are typically
two courses of action: one can either capitulate or resist. Dutugemunu chose
the latter, embodying the spirit of defiance that has characterized many
leaders throughout history. Figures such as King Leonidas, William Wallace, and
George Washington etc., also exemplified this resolve, risking their lives to
oppose foreign domination. Given this context, it raises a critical question:
how can the struggle against an invader be labeled as an unjust war of
genocide?
The
complexities of warfare often blur the lines between aggression and defense,
and the motivations behind such conflicts are frequently rooted in the desire
for sovereignty and the protection of one’s homeland. Thus, the
characterization of these battles requires a nuanced understanding of the
historical and cultural significance of resistance against oppression.
King
Kavantissa
King
Kavantissa, the father of King Dutugemunu, presided over the Ruhuna Kingdom
from 205 to 161 BC. His reign was marked by strategic alliances, notably
through his marriage to Viharamaha Devi, the daughter of King Kelanitissa of
the Kalyani Kingdom. This union not only strengthened ties between the two
kingdoms but also aligned the interests of the Kelaniya Magama with those of
Kavantissa. Despite the presence of the Dravidian ruler Elara in Anuradhapura
during his reign, Kavantissa chose a path of non-confrontation, laying the
groundwork for Elara's eventual defeat without engaging in direct conflict.
When
his son, Prince Dutugemunu, sought permission to wage war, Kavantissa adopted a
cautious approach, prioritizing political prudence over immediate military
action, a decision that the Mahavamsa later interpreted as cowardice. This
reluctance to engage in battle at that time may have created a rift in
understanding between father and son, as Dutugemunu struggled to grasp his
father's strategic foresight until Kavantissa's death.
Historical
texts such as Pali Rasavahini, indicate that Kavantissa was actively preparing
for the conflict with Elara by overseeing the production of weapons and
enhancing agricultural output to mitigate potential food shortages during
wartime. His reign lasted approximately 45 years, concluding when he passed
away at the age of 64.
Prince
Dutugemunu struggled to comprehend the motivations and actions of his father,
King Kavantissa, which ultimately resulted in a series of conflicts between the
ambitious young prince and the seasoned monarch. As noted by Obeyesekere, these
disputes transcended mere familial disagreements, hinting at deeper, more
troubling tensions that may have included Dutugemunu's contemplation of
regicide or even a coup against his father. (Dutugemunu may have harbored
ambitions that led him to conspire against his own father, potentially plotting
his assassination). Following a failed attempt to assert his power, the prince
sought refuge in Kotmale, while King Kavantissa, intent on capturing his son,
faced the grim possibility that arresting Dutugemunu could lead to a death
sentence for the young prince. Obeyesekere posits that this fraught
relationship, marked by conflict and the weight of guilt, would later haunt
King Dutugemunu, shaping his reign and personal psyche in profound ways.
The
Conflict Between Father and Son
Prince
Dutugemunu's tumultuous relationship with his father, King Kavantissa, seems to
have been marked by conflict from an early age. The young prince, known for his
fiery temperament, was adamant about waging war against Elara, a stance that
created significant tension between him and his father. Despite Prince Dutugemunu's
repeated requests and permission to engage in battle, King Kavantissa
steadfastly refused to acquiesce to his son's demands. In a moment of
frustration, Prince Dutugemunu insulted his father by suggesting that
Kavantissa was weak, even going so far as to send him a set of women's clothing
as a derisive gesture.
This
act of defiance incited the king's wrath, leading him to consider binding
Prince Dutugemunu in chains, a decision he contemplated with the intention of
using gold chains, reflecting a certain affection for his son. However,
according to the narrative from Kotmale village, Kavantissa's anger escalated
to the point where he contemplated killing the young prince. This drastic turn
of events suggests that the young prince may have been involved in plotting
against his father or attempting to usurp the throne. In a twist of fate, it is
said that Viharamaha Devi, the prince's mother, secretly facilitated Prince
Dutugemunu’s escape to Kotmale, indicating that the threat to his life from
King Kavantissa was indeed serious and imminent.
Obeyesekere
posits that Prince Gemunu's flight to Kotmale symbolizes a manifestation of the
Oedipal conflict experienced between fathers and sons, a theme prevalent in
South and Southeast Asian cultures. In contrast, based on Erik Erikson’s
theories, one can interpret this escape as a delay in addressing the
psychological turmoil that often accompanies adolescence, which is
intrinsically linked to the Oedipus complex.
Historical
texts, such as the Siamese manuscript "Jinakalamali," indicate that
Prince Dutugemunu was merely sixteen years old when he sought refuge in the
mountains following a confrontation with his father. Local legends from Kotmale
further elaborate on this narrative, suggesting that the prince concealed his
identity for a span of twelve years, adopting the alias "Gutta"
during his time in hiding.
Sibling Rivalry
Conflicts
arose between Prince Dutugemunu and his younger brother, Saddhatissa, soon
after the death of their father, King Kavantissa. In the power struggle that
ensued, Saddhatissa initially seized control, but Prince Dutugemunu, determined
to reclaim his rightful place, engaged in a fierce battle against his younger
brother and ultimately emerged victorious.
Although
Prince Dutugemunu had the opportunity to kill his brother, he chose mercy over
vengeance, sparing Saddhatissa's life. This act of restraint would later prove
significant, as during the subsequent conflict against the invader Elara,
Saddhatissa demonstrated his loyalty and support by supplying essential
provisions, including food and resources, to aid Prince Dutugemunu in the war
effort. This complex relationship between the brothers, marked by rivalry and
eventual cooperation, highlights the intricate dynamics of power and familial
bonds in their tumultuous era.
A
significant conflict emerged between Prince Dutugemunu and his brother,
Saddhatissa, as they vied for the throne, igniting a fierce war that resulted
in substantial loss of life on both sides. This tragic confrontation, marked by
its intensity and the fervor of familial rivalry, ultimately proved to be a
devastating struggle that claimed the lives of countless individuals, many of
whom were their own subjects. The futility of the conflict became apparent as
the brothers' ambition for power led to the suffering of their people, raising
questions about the true cost of their aspirations. In the aftermath of the
war, it is believed that King Dutugemunu grappled with feelings of guilt and
remorse, reflecting on the senselessness of the bloodshed that had occurred in
pursuit of a crown that had ultimately brought only sorrow and annihilation.
King
Ellara
Ellara, known as Ellalan in Tamil, was a prominent Chola king who ruled
a large part of Northern Sri Lanka, including the ancient capital Anuradhapura,
from 205 BC to 161 BC. According to Mahāvaṃsa (Sri Lanka's historical records
are centered on the Mahavamsa), his reign is marked by a reputation for
fairness and justice, which earned him the title 'the Just King.
Notably,
even the Sinhalese people recognized him as a just ruler, as documented in the
Mahavamsa, which highlights his equitable treatment of both allies and
adversaries in legal matters. This chronicle recounts a particularly striking
episode where he ordered the execution of his own son for committing a grave
religious offense, underscoring his unwavering commitment to justice. Despite
being an invader, Ellalan is often celebrated as one of Sri Lanka's most
sagacious and fair monarchs, a sentiment echoed by his rival, King Dutugemunu,
who, upon defeating him in battle, commanded the construction of a monument at
the site of Ellalan's cremation, signifying the respect he commanded even from
his enemies.
King
Elara is believed to have practiced Zoroastrianism rather than Hinduism or
Buddhism, which is exemplified by his drastic actions, such as executing his
son by running him over with a chariot, a punishment aligned with the laws of
Hammurabi. This act could have been motivated by a desire for political gain or
popularity. Notably, even Sinhala generals served under his command, indicating
a complex political landscape during his rule from 205 BC to 161 BC.
According
to Professor Senarath Paranavithana, Elara was a leader of merchant ships, and
there is speculation that he may have been linked to the Mutasiva dynasty,
possibly embodying a blend of Hela and Ara heritage. Interestingly, it is
suggested that there were Buddhists within Elara's administration, which
complicates the narrative of the Elara-Dutugemunu war, often mischaracterized
as a Sinhala-Tamil conflict. Instead, it can be viewed as one of the early
religious wars in history, reminiscent of earlier conflicts in Egypt, with
reports indicating that the Sinhalese were internally divided during this war,
leading to tragic consequences among their own ranks.
Obeyesekere’s
analysis of the seventeenth-century text, Rajavaliya, offers a fresh
perspective on the historical figure of Elara, portraying him as an
unequivocally malevolent ruler. The narrative describes Elara as a king who
commanded a formidable force. This vast military might be responsible for the
destruction of the revered Dagoba in Anuradhapura, a significant cultural and
religious site. Elara's reign, characterized by tyranny and cruelty, lasted for
an astonishing forty-four years, during which he is depicted as ruling with an
iron fist, leaving a legacy marked by oppression and devastation.
Obeyesekere
highlights that Elara and his military forces engaged in the harassment of
local populations and the desecration of sacred religious sites, actions that
incited significant unrest among the communities in the Ruhuna region. This
persistent mistreatment and violation of cultural sanctity ultimately
culminated in a conflict against Elara, as the local inhabitants united in
their resistance to protect their homes and beliefs. The situation escalated as
the local populace, fueled by a sense of injustice and the need to defend their
heritage, organized themselves to confront the military might of Elara, leading
to a broader struggle that would define the historical landscape of the area.
The repercussions of these actions not only affected the immediate community
but also reverberated throughout the region, marking a pivotal moment in the
ongoing narrative of resistance against oppression.
The Decisive Battle
The
Battle of Vijithapura stands as a pivotal war in Sri Lankan history, marked by
King Dutugemunu's determined efforts to expel the South Indian invader Elara.
Initiating the campaign to reclaim his homeland, King Dutugemunu successfully
seized several of Elara's formidable strongholds before reaching the strategic
location of Vijithapura.
Intense
combat erupted at the southern gate of the city, where the king's vast army
engaged in a perilous struggle. Over the course of four months of relentless
warfare, Dutugemunu's forces achieved significant victories, demonstrating
their resilience and strategic prowess. Historical evidence suggests that the
site of the Vijithapura fort, where this monumental clash occurred in 161 BC,
is likely situated in Polonnaruwa. The successful capture of Vijithapura played
a crucial role in facilitating the Sinhalese army's advance towards
Anuradhapura. Ultimately, King Dutugemunu fulfilled his military objectives by
defeating Elara in 161 BC, thereby unifying the nation and solidifying his
legacy as a national hero.
In the
climactic confrontation, a staggering number of soldiers from both factions
perished, with casualties reaching into the tens of thousands. Amidst the chaos
and carnage, Dutugemunu faced his rival in a fierce duel, ultimately emerging
victorious by slaying his opponent. This decisive moment, while pivotal in the
context of the battle, was overshadowed by the overwhelming tragedy that
unfolded on the battlefield. The final clash was marked by a profound sense of
loss and despair, as the echoes of clashing swords and the cries of the wounded
filled the air, leaving an indelible mark on the collective memory of those who
survived. The sheer scale of the devastation and the personal toll it took on
the soldiers and their families rendered the events of that day a deeply
traumatic experience, one that would haunt the survivors long after the dust
had settled.
King Dutugemunu and Post-Combat Depression
The
experience of depression is often closely linked to individuals who have
participated in combat. Post-combat depression is a significant psychological
condition observed in certain veterans who have endured harrowing experiences
during warfare. These individuals often grapple with the aftermath of traumatic
events, which can manifest in various emotional and mental health challenges.
The intensity of these feelings can be exacerbated by the memories of violence
and loss encountered on the battlefield, leading to a profound impact on their
overall well-being. The affected soldiers may grapple with unresolved internal
conflicts that arise from their actions during combat, leading to feelings of
survival guilt—an emotional burden stemming from the belief that they have
survived while others did not. This condition can also manifest through a
negative reinterpretation of combat experiences, where individuals may focus on
perceived failures or moral dilemmas rather than the complexities of their
circumstances.
King Dutugemunu may have faced the burden of
his actions, grappling with the loss of life and the destruction wrought during
his campaigns. The weight of leadership, combined with the haunting memories of
battle, could have led to a profound sense of isolation and melancholy,
reflecting a struggle that transcends time and culture. The aftermath of his
victories raises important questions about the psychological toll of warfare,
particularly the phenomenon now recognized as post-combat depression.
After
the Wijithapura battle, King Dutugemunu found himself engulfed in a profound
emotional crisis, marked by an overwhelming sense of despair and sorrow. This
turmoil was largely a result of the immense burdens and expectations that
accompanied his role as a monarch, which were further exacerbated by the brutal
realities of warfare. The relentless pressure of leadership, coupled with the
aftermath of the battle, began to cloud his once-clear vision of purpose,
plunging him into a period of deep reflection and melancholy. As he grappled
with the weight of his responsibilities and the consequences of the conflict,
his thoughts became increasingly heavy, leading him to question not only his
decisions but also the very essence of his reign.
The
challenges faced during the war undoubtedly left a lasting impression on King
Dutugemunu throughout his life. The immense pressure and turmoil of conflict
likely weighed heavily on his conscience, profoundly shaping his thoughts and
actions. Obeyesekere emphasizes that this internal struggle may have influenced
his leadership and decisions, as the memories of hardship and loss lingered,
serving as a constant reminder of the sacrifices made and the resilience
required to navigate the aftermath of such a tumultuous period.
War Trauma Experienced by King Dutugemunu
and Emperor Ashoka
Emperor
Ashoka, who ruled over India from 274 to 232 BC, renowned as one of the most
significant Buddhist monarchs in Indian history, experienced profound remorse
following his military campaign against Kalinga, a conflict that resulted in
immense suffering and loss of life. This remorse, however, should be viewed as
a reaction to the immediate consequences of his actions rather than the root
cause of his militaristic approach. The deeper motivations behind Ashoka's
initial decision to engage in warfare stemmed from a complex interplay of
political ambition, the desire for territorial expansion, and the need to
assert his authority over rival kingdoms. As he grappled with the moral
implications of his conquest, Ashoka's transformation into a proponent of
Buddhism marked a pivotal shift in his reign, leading him to advocate for
peace, compassion, and the welfare of his subjects. This evolution not only
reshaped his legacy but also had a lasting impact on the spread of Buddhist
principles across Asia, illustrating how the burdens of leadership can catalyze
profound personal and societal change.
Combat
trauma can lead to significant alterations in an individual's personality,
often manifesting in detrimental ways. However, research has revealed that
there can also be beneficial transformations resulting from such experiences.
This phenomenon, known as posttraumatic growth, allows individuals to derive
meaning from their trauma, ultimately fostering personal development. Numerous
case studies have documented instances of individuals who, after confronting
their traumatic experiences, have managed to transcend their suffering and
adopt a renewed outlook on life. These narratives illustrate how, despite the
profound challenges posed by trauma, there exists the potential for resilience
and a deeper understanding of oneself and the world.
There
are many similarities between King Dutugemunu and Emperor Ashoka. King
Dutugemunu and Emperor Ashoka both engaged in extensive military campaigns that
marked significant periods in their respective histories. Initially, these
leaders were driven by the ambition to expand their territories and assert
their dominance over rival factions. However, as they witnessed the profound
suffering and devastation wrought by warfare, their perspectives began to shift
dramatically. The brutal realities of conflict, including the loss of countless
lives and the destruction of communities, led them to a deep sense of
disillusionment with the ideals of conquest and violence. This transformation
in their outlook prompted both rulers to seek alternative paths, ultimately
embracing principles of peace and compassion.
The
spiritual journeys of Ashoka and Dutugemunu were profoundly shaped by the
trials and tribulations they faced during times of war. Both leaders, emerging
from the crucible of conflict, found themselves grappling with the moral and
ethical implications of their actions on the battlefield. Both underwent a
transformative experience following the brutal warfare. This shift not only redefined their approach
to governance but also instilled in them a deep sense of responsibility towards
their subjects and the broader world. Through their respective journeys, both
Ashoka and Dutugemunu exemplified how the adversities of war can catalyze
significant personal growth and a commitment to higher ideals, ultimately shaping
their legacies as benevolent rulers.
King Dutugemunu’s Consciousness
King
Dutugemunu unified the entire island under his leadership, establishing a
cohesive Sinhala-Buddhist identity that would shape the cultural and spiritual
landscape of the region. His reign marked a significant turning point in the
history of Sri Lanka, as he sought to consolidate power and promote the
principles of Buddhism, which were integral to the Sinhala identity. His
efforts to build temples and promote Buddhist teachings further solidified the
connection between the monarchy and the faith, creating a legacy that would
endure for centuries. This unification under a singular national identity laid
the groundwork for the development of a distinct Sinhala-Buddhist civilization,
influencing the island's social, political, and cultural dynamics for
generations to come
The
narrative of Dutugemunu's moral struggle in the Mahavamsa draws parallels with
the internal turmoil experienced by Arjuna in the Mahabharata. In the epic tale,
King Arjuna faces a profound ethical dilemma as he prepares to engage in battle
against his own kin, leading to a significant conflict within his conscience.
King
Dutugemunu initiated his military campaign with the noble intention of
promoting Buddhism, framing the conflict as a righteous endeavor aimed at the
spiritual upliftment of his people. However, as the war progressed, the initial
ideals began to erode, giving way to a harsh reality marked by increasing
violence and brutality. The fervor that once inspired his troops transformed
into a relentless pursuit of victory, leading to inevitable suffering and
devastation on both sides. The noble cause that had sparked the campaign became
overshadowed by the grim consequences of warfare, revealing the complex
interplay between ambition and morality in the pursuit of religious and
nationalistic goals.
This
viewpoint presents a disturbing rationale for the bloodshed that occurred under
the guise of strengthening state authority, all while invoking the language of
Buddhism. Such reasoning prompts critical ethical inquiries regarding the
relationship between religious beliefs and political aspirations, indicating
that the fundamental principle of the sanctity of life, which is central to
Buddhism, was eclipsed by the relentless quest for power and dominance.
Obeyesekere
contends that the moral integrity of King Dutugemunu was profoundly shaken by
the atrocities that unfolded during the Battle of Vijithapura. When the king
experienced turmoil within his conscience, the counsel offered by the Buddhist
monks aimed at alleviating his mental distress was met with criticism from Obeyesekere.
This guidance was deemed inconsistent with the core principles of Buddhism,
leading to the conclusion that it represented a form of hypocritical deception
masquerading as religious wisdom.
King
Dutugemunu, known for his sagacity and deep understanding of the Buddha's
teachings, would likely have found it challenging to accept such advice.
Consequently, it is plausible to suggest that the king carried the weight of a
guilty conscience throughout his life, perhaps even until his final moments.
This internal struggle reflects the complexities of leadership and moral
responsibility, particularly in the context of adhering to spiritual beliefs
while navigating the burdens of power.
The
circumstances surrounding the Crusades bear a striking resemblance to conflicts
initiated under the guise of religious fervor. Initially framed as sacred
missions, these campaigns gradually devolved into a brutal and savage struggle,
leading to a significant erosion of ethical standards. The Crusades were marked
by rampant violence, the slaughter of innocent civilians, and severe religious
persecution, alongside acts of unimaginable cruelty, including instances of
cannibalism. Such actions starkly contradicted the moral and religious values
of the era. Although these endeavors were presented as holy quests, the
underlying motivations often revolved around the pursuit of political
dominance, financial enrichment, and personal accolades, which ultimately
eclipsed any genuine spiritual intent. This shift not only contributed to a
profound moral decline among the crusaders themselves but also sowed the seeds
of enduring animosity between religious groups, fostering a legacy of hatred
that would persist long after the battles had ceased.
The
integration of Buddhism into military endeavors can be traced back to events
preceding the Battle of Vijithapura. Historical accounts suggest that the
Aryans' invasion of the Yakka tribes' settlements in prehistoric Sri Lanka,
which resulted in significant violence and extermination, was often framed
within a Buddhist narrative. This narrative perpetuates the notion that the
Yakka tribes were ultimately subdued by the teachings of the Buddha, leading to
their retreat into the island of Giri (mountainous regions, specifically
Hunnasgiriya). Such interpretations not only reflect the complexities of
religious influence on warfare but also highlight how historical events can be
recontextualized to align with prevailing ideologies, thereby obscuring the
harsh realities of conquest and subjugation.
As the
tale unfolds, Buddha's initial recorded journey to Sri Lanka is traditionally
believed to have occurred nine months after his enlightenment, specifically to
the region of Mahiyangana, where he is said to have subdued the Yakkhas. This
narrative, however, is intertwined with the historical use of Buddhism as a
tool for political power, a practice that predates even King Dutugemunu. The account
of the Buddha's conquest over the Yakka tribes and their subsequent banishment
to the island of Giri can be interpreted as a form of propaganda, potentially
serving to rationalize acts of violence and genocide. Despite the Buddha's
teachings advocating for non-violence, the reality suggests that it was the
Aryans who perpetrated the violence against the original inhabitants, the Yakka
tribe, leading to their displacement from their ancestral lands. Such patterns
of mass extermination echo historical events witnessed in places like Australia
and North America. The figure of God Sumana Saman may represent an Aryan noble
or warlord, and it is plausible that the narrative of the Buddha subduing the
Yakkhas was constructed to legitimize the extensive invasion and slaughter that
occurred during this period.
Obeyesekere
explains that Dutugemunu's relationship with his father, King Kavantissa, was
fraught with tension and played a significant role in shaping his character. As
a young prince, Dutugemunu struggled to understand his father's military
strategies and, in his frustration, wrongly labeled Kavantissa a coward. This
conflict escalated to the point where Dutugemunu was unable to attend his
father's funeral. The weight of these choices, along with the inner turmoil
they created, left a lasting mark on Dutugemunu and deeply influenced the way
he would lead in the future.
Obeyesekere’s
central argument revolves around the idea that, in contrast to King Dutugemunu,
who is depicted as having a robust moral framework, the monks of that period
exhibited a notable deficiency in ethical accountability. This observation
underscores a significant contrast between the king's principled governance and
the moral laxity of the spiritual leaders of his time. While Dutugemunu is
characterized by a deep commitment to duty and righteousness, the monks appear
to fall short of these ideals. This critique prompts critical inquiries into
the responsibilities of religious figures within society and their role in
maintaining moral integrity, especially during an era when their influence was
paramount. Moreover, Obeyesekere encourages a thorough exploration of the
ethical dynamics of that historical period, inviting reflections on the
expectations that society places on both secular and religious leaders.
Obeyesekere
portrays King Dutugemunu as a complex individual whose moral challenges are
intricately linked to his identities as a son, brother, husband, and father,
rather than simply depicting him as a triumphant warrior. He highlights the
profound implications of Dutugemunu's decision to wage war against Elara, a
moment that becomes a turning point in the monarch's life and serves to
illustrate the heavy burden of his conscience. In the aftermath of this act,
Dutugemunu's initiatives to foster peace, such as erecting a monument in memory
of his vanquished foe, further illuminate his internal struggles and the
tension between his responsibilities as a leader and his personal moral
beliefs. Obeyesekere interprets these internal conflicts as reflective of a
larger societal imperative for cultivating a culture that encourages a peaceful
conscience among all individuals, extending beyond those who hold positions of
authority.
The
Mahavamsa briefly references the duel between Dutugemunu and Elara, yet it is
evident that the confrontation was both intense and pivotal. While some
interpretations suggest a clash between youth and age, this oversimplification
overlooks the complexities of their encounter. Dutugemunu, brimming with
youthful vigor, faced Elara, a seasoned warrior whose extensive experience in
combat made him a formidable opponent. The battle was not a swift affair; it
unfolded over an extended period, marked by fierce exchanges and strategic
maneuvers. Ultimately, Elara sustained fatal wounds during the conflict,
leading to his demise. It is reasonable to infer that Dutugemunu also endured
injuries, though the Mahavamsa provides scant details regarding the specifics
of their physical tolls. This lack of elaboration leaves much to the
imagination, inviting further exploration into the nuances of this historic
confrontation.
Dutugemunu
may have harbored a perception of his father as lacking courage, while
simultaneously viewing Elara as a valiant adversary. This complex dynamic could
suggest that, on a subconscious level, Dutugemunu recognized a paternal
archetype in Elara, despite their status as enemies. Such an identification
might have led him to grapple with conflicting emotions regarding his father’s
legacy and his own sense of honor. Consequently, it is plausible to consider
that this internal struggle influenced his decision to erect a monument in
Elara's memory and to pay homage to him, even after having defeated him in
battle. This act of commemoration could reflect a deeper acknowledgment of
Elara's nobility and valor, which resonated with Dutugemunu's own ideals,
thereby complicating the narrative of enmity between them.
Obeyesekere
reflects on Dutugemunu's powerful testimony, highlighting the deep influence of
historical invasions on the minds of Sri Lankans, especially since the Battle
of Vijithapura. This historical background is essential for understanding the
communal tensions that erupted during the 1983 riots, where the attackers
invoked Dutugemunu's legacy, portraying their violence as a continuation of his
fight. They saw the conflict between Dutugemunu and Elara not just as a
historical event but as a symbolic struggle against the Tamil community, thus
twisting an important part of Sri Lanka's history to justify their actions.
This distortion of history shows how stories can be reshaped to serve current
goals, ultimately deepening societal divisions and fueling ongoing cycles of
violence.
Gananath
Obeyesekere offers a profound examination of the intricate relationship between
historical accounts and the moral tenets of Buddhism, particularly in relation
to King Dutugemunu. The author investigates how the king's deeds, often
celebrated as heroic and virtuous, are deeply intertwined with the fundamental
Buddhist values of compassion and non-violence. Through a careful analysis of
the historical backdrop and the subsequent mythologization surrounding King
Dutugemunu. Obeyesekere uncovers how these narratives not only elevate the
king's status but also mirror the evolving ethical consciousness of the
Buddhist community. This inquiry prompts essential reflections on the essence
of morality within Buddhist philosophy, the influence of historical figures on
the formation of religious identity, and the mechanisms through which cultural
memory is shaped and perpetuated through storytelling. Ultimately,
Obeyesekere's exploration encourages readers to reassess the significance of
these narratives in light of modern interpretations of Buddhist ethics and the
enduring legacy of influential figures like King Dutugemunu.
