Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Sri Vijaya
By
K. A. NILAKANTA SASTRI
L26 JOUII,NAL, I],.A.S. (CEYLON) VoI VIII, part | (New Seriesy, \962
ding the Buddha image said to ha'e been taken from cevlon to Dharpara-j.a;Na-Sara (Ligor) in the Jinakatatnatinn; aIl thii despite the
hostilities between the two rulers. But this ail too hastv combination
of surmises with data from.desparate sources is directly precluded b1,
anktttale
eko a ar a- p anQitehi
C
Here. the last.phrase cannot possibly mean ,Coliya (country) and the
Tambaratfha' as Paranavitana intlrprets it, birt ieally in Tambaof thecola (countrJ'), note the ibsence of alocatir,'eending a{ter
1at'!na
cotrya anl the compound rvord coliya-Tambarattha, rvhich is" clear
warning that even if there be any other Tambaroiina' (which mav be
gerrated with rambaralinga), that is not what is meant in this coniext.
Likewise Anuraddha Thera's mention of his birth in a familv of Kd.viranagara in the excellent,Kaflcipura Ra!_tha, ancl his living in TaAja
nagara of rambaraltha leaves no doubt about the pro'enince of the
thera; obviously it was South India. But paranivitana discredits
this pri-rna facie view o{ 'some Pali Scholars,, saying: ,but there are
many.place names in the.Malay Peninsula of r,vhich Tinjong (meaning
'Cape') forms the first elemeni. There was, in fact, a'Tuiifne_pu.u
somewhere in the Malay Peninsula, rvhich would very well h^nE t."tt
the Taiij a-nagara referred to in the p ar am.atthaaini cciay a.There is also
a Tanjong Tambeling'(5). .8."t it should be obvious to any one who
has no interest in maintaining an 'original' thesis, that not all the
Tanjongs in Malaya-can help the argum-ent here relating to a passage
which is unmistakably and manifestly South Indian iil content. tVe
may_note further that. Paranavitana's ingenuity can offer no location
for_Kaflcipura in lfalayailgr does he-produce any evid.ence that
Malaya was reputed for Pali scholarship as we kn6w sruth lndia
the
T27
and zz of his article). Geiger has rightiy said that Tambarattha u'as
probably a province in South India (CV. tr. p. r55 n. z). We cannot
follor'v Paranavitana in referring to Tambralinga the data found in
Ceylon writings on Tambarattha (6).
1 (t\ctt:
'Se;'iics)'
That being so, \'vc may leave on one side the elaborate disquisition of ParanJvitana calcirlated to shorv that 1lalalas werc lfalays,
anrl to clistinguisb }lalaya of the east {rom I'Iala1'a-Nalabar on the
basis of a sinflc.o--odit1', the cubeb(takkola), said to have figured
among the tributes brouglrt to the Bodhisatta at Beuares; we may
"hower.er,
that lie is not sure of the provcnance ol the Malalas,
note,
wheiher they come from Malay Peninsula proPer or from Jambi (Sum-
Malays.
ThatCandrablranuwasaMalay(.}avaka)is<lircctlystatedby
thc Culqaamsa ancl needed t-tu ptooi. The reacler therelortl rubs his
,ui.n he finds Parana'itana solemnly rvriting: 'Candrabliamr
"y.,
#ho invacled Ceylon rvith a {orce of Javaka or Malala soldiers being
conclusivelv pro,red to be a prince from the Nlaiav Pcninsula, the
inference ttui Uagna, ivho similarly brought rvitir him au army oI
Nlalala r,varriors, r,r'is also a Malay from the same or an adjoining region,
seems justifiabie' (ro). There is nothing neu' hcre, ancl the rvhole
"rgo**t
have seen is next to ni1. But as the Cut,aaa'irzsa
(-]IIY],ON -\ND
1962
,lese
S]iI
\TIJAY;\
I29
Again, Paranavitana- tells us that in the earlier of thc trvo Sinliarreisions (A.D. r38z) of the Pali I'r'ork,under relcrencc, the expres-
-Faranervitana
,,"i o" inkling of thc u'eal<ness of his aigument, Ior he arclds: 'but it
rn:ry bc cltubied $,heihcr thcse tribes ancl srrch others r.r'ere numerous
,rrtrrrgh in those cla\,s trl provicle.a {orce of 24,ooa to l'Iagha.' (rz)'
illr",r"h" puts fonvaril thc istonishing proposition 'that "Kerala" is the
,',.,rrr,
,vh'i.h the ancicnt Inclian nir-me ior the pcoplc of Mal11'asia
Lncl l.-urther Inclia hacl assumed in ceylon, and tliat its iclentity of lorm
,r'ith the designation of the peoplc of I'Ialabar is accidental'. (rz)'-'fhe
,lirmonstra.tioir of tlic hrst pirt irf this proposition consists in a philoi,,gi.ol cxcursLls jn rvhich the Kiratas ir'ho inhabit thc l.nds east of
[,ii]nratavarsa accorclingto the Vayu Purlrna are successivelv. identi{rcd
ii'ith the Kirrharloi ol ijtolemy, und thc Cilata of the Nagarjurllkg+da
:llscriptions, :rncl tlien \ve a.re assured tliat the cleriYative lorm Kairata
and
r1l clcrlvent tr plronological progression I{er-ata} Kerata)- Kerada,
r
-.',he
tr-aclcrs
;rilrts ol
rlttrilliott. Until lr, ltel' ,'r irlcttee ['rr lnotlter r ierv js ["]-tlrcumitrg,
to accept the term Kcralas in the chroniclcs
ll Ccvktn in its establisliecl scnse of the people of tlie l'falabar coast in
nclia.
?450-li
30
Series)' 1962
ir"to'ruooot" tnat
(rr). Tlre'ugge'tion again
ii"'Ljo-J"^r" oi'-l't,,t.,,1*i.i-prnr, nurrce
tlrr- r'r'ell l<norvn lacts
overlouk:
ancl
tt
1"oi"a
:'JlH: t;l;";i'.:'i;
lristory
tlrrouglrorrt
ulriq.uit,,,'r
,.and
that thc llalayalis r,l, "' rrll*-
r."at'I" *"];;{'h;t"
ot it
""Tifr"t"ll"i"'t
iil''l'5i
ir.'""
|^f,';#;.,,,,r.
"I
Vij,aya '::*9 b"
Viiava rt'as correct. tr;;;li-iitt:as' Magh'a and Sri
Kalinga and i'e nationalitv
oi
r.,o-,'i.n,t
r-'i.
;;ii,'-i,'.;;Ji,.. ""riii jtt"ntliated to. bc ii ancl lrom Malaysia'
;i;i:.';t;";t h..'" 6"t,-''
i; identiiy Nan-pi undel whose mle
rvhich is by no mean;lit"-;;;;.j"tites the Devundara
4""',,eutu'l^ttituttu
Cevion is piaced Uy Cftutt
Vijayathe.family,of
that
pri'tiu#abrhu
stating
lI
.leh inscriotio,-t of
or his
placethe
and
somaraja'
;i;J'iTi'|u::';;;.,1';ii;;'a N"*bu'" 'Th.e Nan-pi o[ Chau '[u-Kua
birth was Namliabaral^'"na*-ntttraes: tn Vijavahahu llI or his home
must,lherelore, hc t;k;';';;;i;;;;t'
(r4' n' 67)'
town, rvhere
to
M.agha as
;pr;$;:liffi
"rr"'i,,r.J
the Culauath'sa
"re,,t.nt
i"hich has ,t;i t'"t" done' on the crther hand' '.Ma'qhadibasaying:
sharplv distinguishes Migl;; irom the.Jivakas
uaanol''rz (E3'4o\ - Lanka *'hich hadbeen
;J;;J;,
)ii'iiri
by llagha ancl
classed as a Javaka'
statement.utti"n.f."'iy "ti' ogoitttt Magha being
and l(alinga
Paranavitana hnds support for his vierv that Javaka
in the
statements
confuse<l
are interchangeable f;" fil admitteclly
tll,i
t
e
s
ep-ara
thiee
:'".11
late D a iifta ni - a sn a wnich m"ntions
fi*Pf
U1 *::""U
liaja' arrothc,
neainst Palakramaban""if -"n" by Kalinga
ct-'ti{uston
this
from
ancl
Raja'
itt*tt""-R;jt't"Jirtt trtircl by Ji'aka
oI one' ;"t""t 'tlre Kalinga I(ing
-ii,.
rvhic' makes three ';";;i;;'"tit
r<ineao,." of his grandtathcf" Paranavi.t^t.iif
i;;;;;;r;d
'llthe Kalinga King rvas
",
t"""'i..i, iustitied in a-tn'*ing the. inference:
to kings rvho- ruled at
related
t-hls
Cand.rabhanu, f't" *"t,^o"
"vide"ce'
PolonnarubeforethcDadrbadenipcriocl'(r5).\try'g66n'onlvstress
that il this is the
thc r/ withwnitti ttrela-*i ttnttnt" tegin-' end'strte to the Sinhalese
Candrabhami
oi
evidence on which d;;;ti;;ship
kings rests, we must hold it to be not proven'
'Enough evidence has
And now Paranavitana smugiy writes: I'Iagha'rvas-a Malav'
that
iii'i"ft, to"establish
been brought for*.Jl
-iro**ititit he hailecl ruai in Malayasia
ancl the Kalinga
have follor'ved him step.bl ttT, do not
wa";;'h"
(r5).
not in India'
the oropositions laid down
feel that lvc have found '"a'on to accept
llris'point' S'till considering
at
rvcll-siup
may
by Paranavit.n., "nJ'tt.(r
tminenie of the author rvho
tfi"'i-p".t""." "f tf" *tl'1"it o"a the.
lrL tts follow'him to thc
lrislorv'
advocrtes a ladical t""iti""'"iCeylon
thc rest o{ his learned
reasoning'ir1
bettei
discorrer
see i{ r,ve
harassed
a
it)1.
d' e
end and
article.
""tti.r,
"f
rakkhitcThera'shabitat'Paranrt,r'itan"tgttlumeinti-irredllratthe
a motlcl ft'r Sinhnlece
Jlalav Pt nint,tl^, ttit'io'itt-'a'a11ht-' frrrrli'ire'i Tanjong-pura' somervith'a
Pali iuthors (4-5),;ifi;"iintir lenl"
rvhere in the MalaYa Peninsula'
132
I'III,
withrvhich
to the
rve approach
reasonable doribt on
the assumptions
Then Paranavitana sets out to shor,r, that for the Sinhalese litcratii
of the tenth to the thirteenth centuries A.D., the pcriod with lvhich
we are concerned, the country named Kalinga is not the region o{ that
name in Eastern India, but a region in Malaysia, and to state tlie evidence on the question (r8). Tlie first piece of evidence is a st:rtement
in the Vinaydrthasamuccaya (later half of the trvelf_th centurv) that
'Andha is the language of the people o{ the Andha (Andhra) country,
and the Andha country is the same as the 'famalinga, tliat is to say
the Javaka country.' (The worl< is still in manuscript and is an extensive gloss in Sinhalese on a vinaya treatise). Pritna.facie this palperbly
erroneous statement has no bearing on Kalinga or its locatic-rn, ancl so
Paranavitana notes that (a) Telugu u'as spoken by inliabitants of
Southern Kalinga in r,r,hich rvere located Dantapura and Sirirhzrpura,
(D) that by the term 'Andharata' the author of the gloss cited probably
meant a linguistic and not a political tcrriton', cornprising all the
areas in which Telugu u,as the larnguage of the people, and (c) the
Siamese chronicles clerived from Sinhalese traclitions locate f)antapLrra,
T33
Tamalitti for Tan'talinganru (Tdmbalinga) in the Pali of the Dathavamsa is also found in the corrcsponding section of the Daladdsivita, and
(New
^Ser'jes),
I9{i2
it
how
I35
By way of evidence for the use of the name Kalinga for a country
i\{alaysia, Paranavitana recalls I-Tsing's Ho-ling and its capital
-and
9lro-plo, and prefers the identification of Ho-ling (Kahnga)
(Javaka)
Cho-p'o,
with places in the Maiay Peninsula, and once
again refers to the Vinaya Sanne equaling Tambalinga r,vith Jdvaka
_(rS).,H. then refers to a country called Kalangi in the storyof the
legendary founder o{ T ankaSuka tn the Kedak Annals, and says that
this is a form of Kalinga and has been identified with lower Burma
which agrees rvilh the datum furnished by Couto cited above (25).
Again the late Sun-da chronicle Carita-Payahyangan includes Keling
ana its ruler sang Sri Vijaya among the conquesls of King Saiijaya.
'This would establish that to the author of this chronicle Keling (Kafinga) w_as the name of Sri Vijaya' (26). The NagarakritAgamilikewise
includes Kelang in the Nlalay Peninsula among the dependancies of
1\{ajapahit'. In Seiangor again there is a place called Klang or Kelang
which has yielded important bronze antiquities, and 'its approximation in sound to the name Kalinga is clear' (26). This play with
names of like sound drar,vn from all and sundry sources leads Paranar.itana to the studiedly vague inference: 'Thus there is evidence for
the name Kalinga har-ing been in use in former times for more than
one, area in lfalavsia'(26), and he ascribes it to a desire on the part of
Malays to trace their descent to the mythical Kalinga Cakiavarti
famed rn Buddhist legend!
implausible suggestion in many
- a highly
rvays. Then he seeks to redeem
the position by trying to identify th-e
exact locality in Malaya which the Ceylonese chroniCles had in mind
when they spoke of Kalinga, and resorting to the name of the capital
Simhapura (Siliapura), identifies it with Singora on the basis of
Chinese evidence. We may well accept this identification of Singora
as a Simhapura in Sanskrit and Chinese parlance, and yet dechnl to
associate with it the Kalinga under refeience, unless the association
in
136JOURNAL,R,.A.S.(CEfLON)tr'ol.VIIl,Prtrtl(Neer'Series),1962
is established by tangible evidence. Towards this end, Paranavitana
orooounds the iheori that the name Ch'ih-t'u ctt Teh'e-t'ow oI Ihe
itatle *hose capital Si-h"potu was, generaifV tak91 to mean 'Red
Earth', should 6e taken to represent Sanskrit Setw,bidge or cause\'vay,
as this suits the region of theharrow neck near which Singora is located
and also Couto's original home of Vijaya (zB). It is on such gossamer
proo{s that Paranavitana wants us to rely, after rejecting.the very
ieasonable explanation of D.C. Sirkar for the occurrence of Simhapura
as the capital of Kalinga intlne Culaaaizsa.
r,vhere
VIJAYA
137
r38 JOUII,NAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) 7oI. tr'III, Part I (Netu Series), 19t32
of
(S+)!
It is needless for us to add to the length of this article by discusin detail Paranavitana's further surmises and postulates tvhich
are equally unfounded and qllestion-begging: his assumption of a
sing
Malay origin for Ni3Sankamalla on the ground that he must have had
a navy to harass all the coasts of South India (:+), as also on the ground
of his Buddhism (34-5); his postulate of Vijaya who made LankS"srlka
fit for human habitation being a replica of the rve1l knor,vn first King
of Ceylon (35); that of a Vijaya as founder of the Sumtaran Kingdom
of Sri Vijava (SS-6); his suggestion that Ni6Sankamalla came from
the family of Dantakumdra, though admittedly the King makes no such
claim in his many epigraphs (36); his location of Ayodhya of Jagatipala
and Kannakucci of Vihasalameghan in the Nlalay Peninsula, through
Ajotalay in Tenaserim and no Kannai<ucci could be identified in Nlalaya
66-SZ); and lastly, his identification of Viradeva with Viravamma
and of Palandipa with Palanda of Ptolemy identified rvith Perak by
Gerini (37-B), Paranavitana quotes Queyroz to give a Gujerat origin
for the Ariya Cakravartis of Jaffna; but rve have contemporary'Iamil
accounts from Jaffna directly deriving them from the rulers of Kalinga in India. (His. of Ceylon i. p.69r).
Paranavitana makes cne last jugglery with sounds; even though
undermines his location of Kalinga in North }Ialay Peninsula.
The Cillaaarhsa describes LokeSvara, a Kalinga King, as sulaltatayhsika
t,hich is translated by Geiger, correctly as we think, as 'who had been
u'ounded in the shoulder by a spear'; but Paranavitana denies the
nreanings 'spear' and 'shoulder' respectively to lula and ah.sa though
these meanings are given by the Monier-Wil1iams, he then affirms that
'the plrrase as it appeals in the text of lhe Culatath.sa is clearly
colrupt' (38); and runs to the sea of Salahat, the Arab name for the'
Strait of Singapore, and adds the l\{alay rvord laslA (sea) to it, and
concludes: 'Perhaps tl're error is due to the author of this part of
Culattarhsa himself, rvho did i-iot comprehend the meaning of a phrase
lll<e Salahat-tasih and rendered it as rve find it in the text nolv' (38).
Such is the hypnosis of the idea of a Malayan Kalinga on Paranavitanr's mind.
it
T39
might be
in Malaya!
wards Malaya'; this refers, according to Paranavitana, not to the mountainous Malaya region of the island, to which Kings in distress went
for re{uge, but the Malay Peninsula. He finds support for this vierv
in Sena reaching the confluence of Mahaveli Ganga and Amban Ganga
140 JOURNAL,
R,.A.S.
(CEYLON)
Vol,.
Series), 1962
of Sri Vijaya.