Myth of the Ramayana Trail and the Distortion of Archaeological Evidence

by Dr. Malini Dias
Joint Secretary, Royal Asiatic Society and Former Deputy Archaeological Commissioner of Epigraphy

Sanskrit literary critics say that the present day Ramayana, A Veera Kavya or an Epic had taken a very long period of time to be evolved from its original form by episodic additions and subtractions to its matter. The great sage Valmiki had dexterously invented the story of the brave prince Rama and his beautiful consort, princess Sita into a magnificent epic revered by the Hindus world over.

It is said that prince Rama (incarnation of Lord Vishnu) and princess Sita were living in royal splendor in Ayodhya in Bharata. A mystically powerful seven headed monarch called Ravana was so imbued with supernatural powers, traveled about by air in a flying device. King Ravana hearing of the beautiful and virtuous princess Sita wanted to make her his spouse and abducted her to much of her distress and brought her to Lankapura and imprisoned her in a hideout. Ramayana tells us how Prince Rama with the prowess of Monkey Chief Hanuman brought back Sita to Ayodhya. The addition of many vivid sub stories to this and brought as one poem is the much loved epic Ramayana in Sanskrit literature.

The Ramayana cannot be set aside as another oriental classic. It is the forerunner to many a Sanskrit literary works such as Meghaduta and Kumarasambhava of the great poet Kalidasa.

The Indians classify this epic as the ‘Adi Kavya’ when it is described as ‘Ramayanam Adi Kavyam’ or the most ancient poem of the Sanskrit literature. It is the opinion of Sanskrit scholars that while the fundamental characteristics of the Sanskrit poetry is shown embedded in the epic Ramayana, it had immensely contributed to the moulding of the Sanskrit literature as a whole.

"Though the Sanskrit poets and choreographers had vigorously made use of the Ramayana legend for their ventures, its influence on their works had been mainly in the region of poetic rules, methods of Sloka or metrical composition, and methods of poetic descriptions. For these very reasons the Ramayana had been referred to as the Adi Kavya or the most ancient classic." (Jayadeva Tilakasiri, Sanskruta Kavya Sahityaya, p. 28)

Ramayana though acclaimed as an epic poem depicting valor, its substance gives the reader a view of the descriptions of townships, seasons, cliffs, forests, rivers, oceans, events on matrimony, separation etc., which are the characteristics of a Maha Kavya and therefore, Ramayana cannot be categorized under ‘Purana’ or ‘Itihasa’.

In a paper presented at the International Ramayana Seminar, former Archaeological Commissioner Dr. C. E. Godakumbure has stated thus:

"There is an abundance of folklore in Ceylon connected with the story of Rama and Sita. Some of these explain place-names; some point to special geographical features, others the lay of the land, the positions of hills, nooks and bend in rivers, the colour of the soil and various curiosities. All this is folklore and nothing archaeologically provable or tested historically." (Ramayana in Sri Lanka and Lanka of the Ramayana, 1975, New Delhi.)

However the fact that the folklore with which the Ramayana is intertwined and acclaimed as historicity and used to distort the ancient history of Sri Lanka is indeed a matter to ponder in antipathy.

We should not distort archaeological evidence to suit our whims. In a paper titled "Historical Evidence of Ramayana & Rawana in Sri Lanka" presented by Mr. N. C. K. Kiriella, Chairman of the Ramayana Trail Executive Committee of the Ministry of Tourism, who is not an authority on inscriptions of Sri Lanka, has distorted some of the early Brahmi inscriptions at a Symposium held at the Indian Cultural Centre. He has committed this to bring proof saying that "there are many inscriptions of Rawana and his dynasty misconstrued and published in "Inscriptions of Ceylon".

I would like to emphasize the fact that most of the ancient inscriptions of Sri Lanka of a Buddhist background, inscribed on caves, rocks, pillars and slabs are notices for the benefit of the contemporary society. They came down from the time Buddhism was introduced to Sri Lanka in the 3rd century B.C. We have archaeological evidence to prove that Thera Mahinda, son of Emperor Asoka of India came to Sri Lanka to propagate Buddhism and lived in Sri Lanka until his demise.

Thera Mahinda’s presence in Sri Lanka has been established by a rock inscription from Rajagala in Ampara District mentioning that it was the stupa where the ashes of Theras Itthiya and Mahinda who came to the island for its good fortune have been deposited.

The Archaeological Department takes ink impressions from the inscriptions, from the time it was established. The ink impression taken from the inscription is in black and white and is clear for reading. The early Brahmi cave inscriptions have been read by Dr. Senarat Paranavitana, the former Archaeological Commissioner and the renowned Epigraphist of Sri Lanka, having read the inscriptions from these ink impressions, had translated them into English and included them in the Inscriptions of Ceylon Volume I, which is the Corpus of Early Brahmi Cave Inscriptions, published by the Archaeological Department in 1970.

In the paper read by Mr. Kiriella at the so called Symposium on the Ramayana Trail, the cave inscription from Wegiriya Devale in the Kandy District has been misinterpreted and translated to suit the mythical story of Ramayana.

The cave inscription at Wegiriya Devale in Kandy District distorted with white ink.

The text of the inscription given by Dr. Paranavitana is as follows:

Bata Sumanasa Tisaha, upasika Sumanaya upasika Tisalaya upasaka............... Kumarasa gapati Dutakasa kubakara Sonaha datika Sumanasa manikara Date patike manikara Cude Sapatike (No. 807, Inscriptions of Ceylon, No. I)



Translation:

The cave of Lord Sumana, of Tissa, of the female lay devotee Sumana, of the female lay devotee Tissala, of the lay devotee................... Kumara, of the householder Dutaka, of the potter Sona, and of the ivory worker Sumana. The lapidary Datta is a partner. The lapidary Cuda is a co-partner. (No. 807 of the Ins. of Ceylon) Mr. Kiriella’s distorted text of the inscription.

Bata Sumanasa Tisaha Upasika............ naya upasika................ Thisalaya Upa................. Marasa gapathy dutakasa kubakana........ Sonaha dathika Sumana Translation -

Lord Sumana Upasika Tissa naya Upasika Thishalaya Upasika householder Marasa pilot Kubakana..... Sonaha Ivory worker Sumana (In accordance with Ramayana)

The word Kubakara meaning potter in English, kumbalkaru in Sinhala and Kumbhakara in Pali is misinterpreted as Kubakana, taking it as the name of a donor and his name Dutaka to mean a pilot.

The cave inscription from Molagoda Vihara in the Kandy District has been misrepresented.

By applying white ink on the inscription Mr. Kiriella has distorted the inscription.

Distorted inscription from Molagoda Vihara

Following is the text from the Inscriptions of Ceylon Vol. I. No. 812 given by Dr. Paranavitana.

Parumaka Suri Putaha Bamana Datakaha lene Sagasa Translation:

The cave of Brahmana Dataka, son of the chief Suriya, was dedicated to the Sangha

The distorted version of Mr. Kiriella is as follows:

Parumaka Suri putaha Bimana Duthakaha lene sagasa and translated as: The cave owned by the pilot of an aeroplane, son of chieftain Suri was donated to Mahasangha, (in accordance with Ramayana)

Here the reader is misled by the change of the word bamana meaning brahmana to bimana and translating it as aeroplane. In this Dataka, the name of the Brahmana is translated as pilot. The speaker Mr. Kiriella is very much confused when applying the word pilot to Dutaka and Dataka the names of donors in both inscriptions.

The next distortion is made on an inscription from Alulena in Aranayake in Kegalla District, which the speaker named as Rahalgala. The text of this inscription is given in the Inscriptions of Ceylon Vol. I as No. 799.

Text:

Parumaka Ijhu puta parumaka Agiya lene sagasa and the translation is

The cave of the chief Aggi, son of the chief Ijhu is given to the sangha.

Mr. Kiriella produces the inscription as Maharajhaha Rawana putha Parumaka Ikdhu putha Parumaka Agiyaha lene and translates it as - Emperor Rawana’s son parumaka Indrajith son Parumaka Agiya’s cave (in accordance with Ramayana)

He has painted the letters in white ink and has photographed the inscription.

Though he adds

Maharadhaha Rawana puta meaning Emperor Rawana’s son to the text in his paper, it cannot be read even in the inscription painted in white.

The advice given to him by the so called ‘experts’ is wrong and has made him to go astray and the exercise of distorting the inscriptions had been a failure.

Some cave inscriptions at Vessgiriya in Anuradhapura have been misinterpreted as well. The text given as No. 86 of the Inscriptions of Ceylon Vol. I is as follows:

Gana codaka Dataha lene sagasa

Translation: The cave of Datta, the Director of the Corporation [is given] to the Sangha

Mr. Kiriella gives the text as follows:

Tana Codaka Dataha lene sagasa

Mr. Kiriella has changed Gana Codaka to Tana Codaka

Gana codaka has been misinterpreted as Thana Codaka and translated as

The cave of Thrunabindu is given to the sangha

The text of No. 88 from Vessagiriya is as follows:

Parumaka Visadeva-puta Parumaka Sumanaha lene saga-niyate

Translation:

The cave of the chief Sumana, son of the chief Visadeva is dedicated to the Sangha

The text of the distorted inscription of Mr. Kiriella is as follows:

Paramaka Visrava puta parumaka Sramanaha lene shagasha

Translation:

The cave of parumaka Visava is given by parumaka Sumana to the sangha

The name Sumana is misinterpreted as Sharamana and taken as the name of the donor and says that he could be a great grandson of sage Visawa.

The next inscription of Vessagiriya is taken from the book titled Sri Lanka Rawana Rajadhaniya by Mr. Ariyadasa Seneviratna. This inscription has been edited at first by Dr. D. M. De Z. Wickramasingha in Epigraphia Zeylanica Vol. I in 1904. The text is:

Sidha Mahayaha (kani) maha(la)ka Asalayaha dini

Translation: Hail! The cell of Mahaya is given to the venerable Asalaya

The speaker gives the reading as

Siddha Mayaha Kuni mahalaka Asala Yaha (di)ni

Without any research being done on the inscription by himself, Mr. Kiriella gives the translation as -

Princess Kuni is the wife of elder Asala.

He has copied everything from Sri Lanka Rawana Rajadhaniya.

The early Brahmi inscription No. 869 of the Inscriptions of Ceylon Vol. I from a cave at Sigiriya reads:

Parumaka Naguliya lene

The speaker Kiriella refers to Naguliya and connects it to Sita’s stay in the cave. He mentions that Sita was called Naguli as she was born or found on a ploughshare. Naguli is the person who donated the cave. This looks a very weak argument to refer to Naguli and connecting it to Sita.

Next are the archaeological sites that have been distorted by the speaker. The well known archaeological site at Sigiriya, identified as the palace of king Kashyapa I and now a heritage site declared by the UNESCO has been branded as the Chitrakoota Palace of Lankapura, the abode of King Kuvera, elder brother of King Rawana. He has misinterpreted the statement made in the Chronicle Mahavamsa, that King Kashyapa like Kuvera lived in the palace resembling a second Alakamandava. The historical evidence and the architectural characteristics of the ruins of the palace and the frescoes found at present at Sigiriya would not in any way go beyond the 5th century AD.

Not far from Vessagiriya and below the bund of the Tissaveva Tank is the Isurumuniya Vihara in Anuradhapura. Figures of a pair of lovers carved on stone at this site is one of the best pieces of sculpture known from anywhere in the island. The rock at the edge of the pond at the site carries sculptures of elephants. At a niche cut into the rock at a point above these elephants are the figures of a man seated in the Rajaleela posture and the head of a horse. It has been taken as a work of the Pallava school and has been dated in the seventh century A.D. Isurumuniya Vihara could have been a part of an extensive Buddhist monastery but it had been desecrated by the speaker Mr. Kiriella by interpreting it as the temple of king Rawana’s parents, Visravasmuni and his wife Kaikali.

Source:http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=5401