|
<< Click to Display Table of Contents >> Navigation: Historical Background > Incorrect Theravāda Interpretations – Historical Timeline |
April 29, 2017; revised December 8, 2021; October 30, 2024
1. Degradation of Theravāda Buddha Dhamma occurred gradually over the past 1500 years. Still, two drastic changes took place during that time: (i) Buddhaghosa’s introduction of Hindu meditation techniques 1500 years ago, (ii) misinterpretation of anicca and anatta by the European scholars when they translated both Tipiṭaka and Visuddhimagga to English in the late 1800’s.
▪I will discuss the complete historical timeline in this post, which is critical to the discussion.
▪As I explained in earlier posts in this section, branching out of various sects based on Mahāyāna, Zen, and Tibetan (Vajrayāna) led to significant distortions of Buddha Dhamma. This started with the rise of Mahāyāna in India about 500 years after the Buddha.
2. Here we look at the timeline of Theravāda Buddha Dhamma from the beginning, and see whether we can discern when the pure Dhamma started going underground. Most people agree with the following historical facts.
(BCE = Before Current Era, CE = Current Era = AD):
▪563 – 483 BCE: Buddha Gotama
▪377-307 BCE: The city of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka, was established by King Pandukabhaya. But there is evidence that human colonization in Sri Lanka goes back to at least 30,000 years; see the detailed article on Sri Lanka on Wikipedia : WebLink: Wikipedia: History of Sri Lanka
▪247 BCE: Ven. Mahinda Thero introduced Buddha Dhamma to the Sinhala Kingdom in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. It is possible that Buddha Dhamma was already there in the Eastern part of Sri Lanka. However, this has not been confirmed.
▪161-137 BCE: For the first time in history, King Dutugemunu united all of Sri Lanka under one kingdom.
▪29 BCE: Tipiṭaka (the version recited at the Third Buddhist Council —Dhamma Sangayana — around 247 BCE), was written down in Sri Lanka at the Fourth Sangayana, which was the last Sangayana attended by all Arahants. This is the Pāli Tipiṭaka that has survived to this date.
▪100-200 CE: Ven. Maliyadeva, the Last Arahant with psychic powers by some accounts, lived in Sri Lanka : WebLink: Wikipedia: Maliyadeva (However, it is likely that there have been “jāti Sotāpannas” who attained Arahanthood since then but may not be that many).
▪100 BCE: It is likely that Mahāyāna Buddhism originated when the earliest Mahāyāna sūtras (the Prajñāpāramitā series,) along with texts concerning Akṣobhya Buddha, probably written in the 1st century BCE in the south of India : WebLink: Wikipedia: Mahāyāna
▪150-250 CE: Life of Nagarjuna; considered the founder of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Nagarjuna’s central concept was the “emptiness” (shunyata) of all dhammas. The most influential work is Mulamadhyamakakarika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way).
2. It is clear that the Pāli Tipiṭaka that we have today has the Buddha’s original teachings since Arahants wrote it down. However, Buddha Dhamma started to decline within 100-200 after being written down.
▪Still, there was no significant impact on Theravāda Buddhism up to the writing of Visuddhimagga by Buddhaghosa around 450 CE.
▪The other major work that influenced Theravāda teachings to date was Abhidhammattha Sangaha by Acariya Anuruddha, who was there around the same time as Acariya Buddhaghosa. However, since not many study Abhidhamma, it has not impacted Theravāda as much as Visuddhimagga.
▪By this time, a critical had already taken place. The Mahāyāna influence successfully introduced two new words to the Sinhala language: අනිත්ය (aniyta) and අනාත්ම (anātma.) Those two words replaced the Sinhala words අනිච්ච (anicca) and අනත්ත (anatta); see #4 below. It is critical to note that many Pāli words Like saṅkhāra and viññāṇa do not have separate Sinhala words, i.e., the exact words (සංඛාර and විඥ්ඥාන) appear in the Sinhala language.
▪Another critical development occurred in the late 1800s, when early European scholars translated the Tipiṭaka into English. That was when the key Pāli terms anicca and anatta were incorrectly translated as impermanence and “no-self.” By then, even in Theravada, anicca, and anatta had been established to be the same as the Sanskrit words aniyta and anātma.
3. To first discuss the influence of Buddhaghosa, let us look at the timeline of events that led to his visit to Sri Lanka roughly 950 years after the Parinibbāna of the Buddha. Here is a timeline compiled by Bhikkhu Nyanamoli, taken from his introduction to Ref. 1 (see the references below).
King Devanampiyatissa (307-276 BCE):
▪The arrival of Ven. Mahinda in Anuradhapura and establishing Dhamma in the kingdom of King Devanampiyatissa.
▪Ven. Mahinda founded Mahāvihāra monastery.
King Vattagamini (104-88 BCE):
▪The King founded the Abhayagiri monastery, which became separate from the Mahāvihāra monastery.
▪Sensing insecurity, Mahāvihāra monastery writes down Tipiṭaka (away from the royal capital).
King Bhatikabhaya (20 BCE-9 CE):
▪Public disputes started to break out between Abhayagiri and Mahāvihāra monasteries.
King Vasabha (66-110 CE):
▪No Sinhala commentaries on Tipiṭaka were compiled after his reign.
King Voharika-Tissa (215-237 CE):
▪King supported both Mahāvihāra and Abhayagiri monasteries.
▪Abhayagiri adopts Vetulya (Mahāyāna?) piṭaka.
▪King suppressed the Vetulya doctrines.
King Gothabhaya (254-267 CE):
▪King supports Mahāvihāra monastery.
▪The King banished sixty bhikkhus in Abhayagiri for upholding Vetulya doctrines.
▪Indian Bhikkhu Sangamitta supports the Abhayagiri monastery.
King Jettha-Tissa (267-277 CE):
▪King favors Mahāvihāra monastery; Sangamitta flees to India.
King Mahasena (277-304 CE):
▪King supports Sangamitta, who returns from India.
▪Persecution of Mahāvihāra by King; its Bhikkhus are driven from the capital for 9 years.
▪Mahāvihāra (with its libraries of seven stories) burnt to the ground.
▪Sangamitta assasinated.
▪Rebuilding of Mahāvihāra.
King Sri Meghavaṇṇa (304-332 CE):
▪King favors Mahāvihāra.
▪A Sinhala monastery was established at Buddha Gaya in India.
King Jettha-Tissa II (332-334 CE):
▪Dipavamsa composed.
▪Some of Buddhadatta Thera’s works.
King Mahānama (412-434 CE):
▪Buddhaghosa arrives in Sri Lanka and composes Visuddhimagga and other works.
4. I recommend reading the Introduction to the English translation of Visuddhimagga by Ven. Nyanamoli (Ref. 1). To quote Ven. Nyanamoli (starting on p. xxvii of Ref. 1):
“…Now by about the end of the first century B.C. E. (dates are very vague), with Sanskrit Buddhist literature just launching out upon its long era of magnificence, Sanskrit was on its way to becoming a language of international culture. In Ceylon the Great monastery (Mahāvihāra), already committed by tradition to orthodoxy based on Pāli, had been confirmed in that attitude by the schism of its rival, which now began publicly to study the new ideas from India. ……In the first century C.E., Sanskrit Buddhism (“Hīnayāna”, and perhaps by then Mahāyāna) was growing rapidly and spreading abroad. The Abhayagiri monastery would naturally have been busy studying and advocating some of these weighty developments while the Mahāvihāra has nothing new to offer. …….King Vasabha’s reign (66-110 CE) seems to be the last mentioned in the Commentaries as we have them now, from which it may lie dormant, nothing further being added. Perhaps the Mahāvihāra, now living only on its past, was itself getting infected with heresies. ……in King Mahāsena’s reign (277-304 CE) things came to a head. With the persecution of Mahāvihāra with royal assent and the expulsion of its bhikkhus from the capital, the Abhayagiri monastery enjoyed nine years of triumph. But the ancient institution rallied its supporters in the Southern provinces and the king repented. The bhikkhus returned and the king restored the buildings, which had been stripped to adorn the rival”.
“Still, the Mahāvihāra must have foreseen, after this affair, that unless it could successfully compete with the “modern” Sanskrit in the field of international Buddhist culture by cultivating Pāli at home and aboard it could assure its position at home. It was a revolutionary project, involving the displacement of Sinhala by Pāli as the language for the study and discussion of Buddhist teachings, and the founding of a school of Pāli literary composition. ………It is not known what was the first original Pāli composition in this period; but the Dipavamsa (dealing with historical evidence) belongs here (for it ends with Mahāsena’s reign and is quoted in the Samantapasadika, and quite possibly the Vimuttimagga (dealing with practice), was another early attempt by the Mahāvihāra in this period (4th century) to reassert its supremacy through original Pāli literary composition”.
5. Here is another account of the destruction of the original Mahāvihāra during the reign of King Mahasena (277-304 CE) from Ref. 2 (p. 46): “..the Mahā-Vihāra, the Brazen Palace, and all such religious edifices, built by generosity of devout kings and pious noblemen for the use of the orthodox Saṅgha, were razed to the ground. Some three hundred and sixty-four colleges and great temples were uprooted and destroyed, says an ancient chronicle (Nikāya-Sangraha, p.14), ...”
6. Thus it is clear that the historical tradition of compiling Sinhala commentaries (on Tipiṭaka) was abandoned somewhere in the 4th century or even before that, and many of the original Sinhala Atthakatha could have been burnt when the original Mahāvihāra was burned. The Mahāvihāra initiated by a concerted effort to compile literature in the Pāli language to counter the onslaught of Sanskrit Mahāyāna literature in India that was benefiting the Abhayagiri monastery. The appearance of Buddhaghosa on the scene in the early fifth century accelerated this effort to compile Pāli literature.
▪More details can be found in the Mahāvaṁsa, the Pāli historical account of the history of Sri Lanka compiled in the 5th century (Ref. 3).
▪However, most accounts in the Mahāvaṁsa — especially regarding the history of Sri Lanka — are not correct. I will write a post on this issue later.
▪However, since Mahāvaṁsa was written around the time of Buddhaghosa, it is possible that accounts about Buddhaghosa may be correct.
7. In the two posts, “Buddhaghosa and Visuddhimagga – Historical Background” and “Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga – A Focused Analysis,” I discussed the events leading to Buddhaghosa’s writing of Visuddhimagga, and how it introduced the first significant contamination of Buddha Dhamma by incorporating Hindu vedic meditations — breath meditation and kasiṇa meditation.
The second major contamination — even more damaging — was the incorrect translation of anicca and anatta as impermanence and “no-self”. This is discussed in the last two posts: “Background on the Current Revival of Buddha Dhamma” and “Misinterpretation of Anicca and Anatta by Early European Scholars.”
All relevant posts in “Historical Background.”
References
1. The Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga), by Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa (translated by Bhikkhu Nyanamoli), BPS Edition, 1999. The Introduction (by Bhikkhu Nyanamoli) provides the historical background.
2. Pāli Literature of Ceylon, by G. P. Malasekara (Bharatiya Kala Prakashan, Delhi, 1928), 2010 edition.
3. WebLink: THE MAHĀVAṀSA – The Great Chronicle of Lanka, by Wilhelm Geiger (1912).
– සරල සිංහල මහාවංසය (Sinhala Translation of Mahāvaṁsa, by Vijayasiri Vettamuni, (Sri Devi Printers, 2002; fourth printing 2013).
Next, “Buddhaghosa and Visuddhimagga – Historical Background.”