|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 23 June 2002 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Sigiriya narratives - Part II : Building 'Sigiriya' in 18 years - a 'fiction' not a forgery In this section I shall discuss further the relevance of the folk tradition for understanding historical texts and briefly consider the antiquity of the particular folk tradition I am dealing with. One of the most complete stories in my possession is by a physician P. Kiribanda (84 years) from Kalundava village. Owing to its length I cannot discuss it here except to mention that it deals with Dhatusena's earlier years, his amours with a Tamil woman from who he had a son, Kasyapa; the death of this lady and his marriage to a Sinhala woman whose son was Mugalan. It also emphasizes the stepmother's discrimination against Kasyapa.
Mugalan came back and sent messengers to Kasyapa to enter into battle. But that time Kasyapa had a dream during the day and tried to run away. His two queens restrained him. "Don't heed such things," they said. But he couldn't sleep owing to the sorrow he felt for the sin he had committed. He used to get into a fright and run. It was at this time that Mugalan sent his two emissaries. The emissaries told the king that he must go fight his brother but the queens urged him not to go. He said, "I shall not let him be. I'll eat him up," and descended the rock. And with his army he is now going to confront Mugalan. Sigiri-Kasyapa went in front of his elephant. Now he saw the vision of his father, dead, with his head bent, broken, in front of him, like a shadow, or an illusion. This must have been an apparition (avatara). In order to avoid his father's ghost he turned his elephant around and his army thought, "Now he is lost and retreating," and they all ran away. This was between Sigiriya and Anuradhapura. Now Kasyapa thought, "If he captures me he'll kill me or if not I'll be killed by an assassin." So it is said that he severed his head with his own sword and fell down. The moment his two queens heard about it they jumped to their deaths below, according to what we have heard. I have analyzed elsewhere the profound psychological significance of this part of the story, especially the apparition of the dead father appearing before the guilt-stricken parricide at the onset of battle. Here I want to emphasise the concluding scene where the two queens jumped to their deaths from the mountain top of Sigiriya. Many storytellers referred to this event, though they disagreed about the number of wives involved - one, two, five hundred! Some mentioned interesting details: when Kasyapa died his followers raised a white flag and the queens saw this sign and jumped to their deaths below. Proof that at least the conclusion of this story might well be very ancient came from my reading of the Sigiri Graffiti edited and translated by Paranavitana in his monumental two-volume study. Almost a dozen of the graffiti poems have references that are relevant to our present discussion, and I shall list a few of these (the numbers and translations are Paranavitana's). No. 18 Why is this rock dear to her who, having been aggrieved as the king died and having spoken to this and that corner, appears as if she is hurling herself from the summit of the rock. No. 20 Hail! We ascended the rock and looked at the golden-coloured one on the rock wall of Sigiriya. How does she remain there I wonder - she who is like those falling from the summit of the rock? (This suggests that there were at one time paintings depicting the suicide of the queens). No. 22 You reside on the rock, thinking (as it were) "We do not see a desirable man even though we reside here this length of time without having died when he died." No. 73 Heaven, indeed, is not enough (for these damsels). So (thinking), did not the king leave them here and die. (But) did not the damsel fall down from the rock by the force of the wind and run (into the midst of) the flowers and tender na leaves (which are) in the vicinity. No. 92 I am Tindi Kasub. I wrote (this). (Your) heart did not break, either. Lightning did not fall on you. Oh! What is a death as cruel as this? Your heart (indeed) was hard. History and Chronology When we read Kiribanda's narrative we know what these and numerous other graffiti poems implicitly refer to. It seems obvious that the present residents of the villages around Sigiriya neither had access to the graffiti nor could read them. It is therefore very likely that we have tapped in the stories of our informants an ancient tradition of story telling. One of the key issues that emerge from the Mahavamsa history is how Kasyapa could have built Sigiriya within a period of 18 years. Historians and archaeologists have greatly admired Kasyapa for having built Sigiriya in the first part of his reign of 18 years. Now this reckoning is probably outright false and it is not unlikely that Kasyapa reigned for much longer. A long reign is not only consonant with the psychology of the parricide - the shift from hedonism to asceticism - but also fits in nicely with the conventions of practical Buddhism where renunciation and ascetic practices in old age are normative. As far as Dhatusena's patriline is concerned the number 18 is a kind of "fiction" but not a forgery or falsehood. This has implications for the history of the period by compelling us to recognize that the chronology of that line maybe historically suspect. This recognition not only applies to Dhatusena alone but to all members of his patriline. In which case the reference to Kasyapa in the Chinese chronicles now receive considerable plausibility. Geiger notes: "According to Chinese sources another embassy came from Ceylon to China, sent by King Kia-che, i.e., Kasyapa, in the year 527 A.D." Geiger says that "it is impossible that this could be Kassapa I," because according to him Kasyapa reigned in 478-96 CE (473-91 according to the University of Ceylon History). It is no longer necessary to postulate that the Chinese made a mistake in identity, because it was perfectly possible for Kasyapa to have been alive, if not well, in 527. History tellers as story writers In my examination of the stories I noted that these versions are a product of a debate on karma, on religion and on the necessity for a human sacrifice. Thus one story tells us that the meditating monk was buried under the earth as a sacrifice to Bhairava; another argues against it - how can you really kill an arahant with supernatural powers? If so, another might say a sacrifice was not really offered and the Kalaveva bund is not going to hold; not to worry says another story, Dhatusena himself was buried in the Kalaveva bund and served as the much-needed sacrifice. Not all stories give all the details; there is some discourse that is hidden in each. But one story helps to surface the discourse hidden in the other. Debate then points to the contentious discourses that erupt in history. This is clearly evident in the folk versions that I collected. For example, some texts mention the enmity of the brothers, but others say that Mugalan had no intention of killing Kasyapa. The debate here is obviously provoked and complicated by kinship values that emphasized fraternal love and solidarity. Herat Hami (66 years) of Siyana village has a story that nicely illustrates this: Now Mugalan came back. He sent a message to the brother to face him in battle on such and such a day. Then accompanied by his retinue from there (India) he advanced into battle. When he came to the lake of Hirivadunna, he spread white sand over it and sent a message to Kasyapa to come to battle on such and such a day. Kasyapa advanced with his force, riding his elephant... In spite of the white sand Kasyapa's elephant got stuck in the mud. The elephant turned around to extricate itself and Kasyapa's followers thinking that the king was retreating also fled. Kasyapa now thought: "I am sure I'll get killed by my younger brother, better to kill myself." He then cut his throat with his own hand and died. And when he was about to do that his brother, Mugalan, shouted, "Brother, please don't," but it was too late. Some informants stated that after his victory, Mugalan gave Sigiriya and the monasteries around it in charge of Mahanama, his granduncle, the author of the Mahavamsa, and then returned to India. A few said that Mugalan stayed on in Sigiriya while others insisted that he went back to the capital city of Anuradhapura - which is what the Mahavamsa says. Not a single informant gave the Mahavamsa version that Mugalan was a cruel person nicknamed the raksasa (demon) because I suppose it does not fit well with the prevalent village view of him as the loving brother. The Mahavamsa account therefore reflects another debate about Mugalan unknown to contemporary folk culture. However, one modern story invented by the great scholar and myth-provocateur Paranavitana develops the Mahavamsa view of Mugalan in a totally unexpected direction, namely, that he was called "demon" because in his anger he gritted his teeth and showed his canines (and also killed, mutilated or banished his brother's supporters.) Paranavitana weaves the Mahavamsa idea into a long and elaborate story. Mugalan was called demon because he emulated Kuvera, king of the demons, and actually put a mechanical gadget into his mouth so that the canines clearly protruded and terrified the beholder. Not to be outdone by the Mahavamsa Paranavitana makes Mugalan put the leading householders of Anuradhapura into the fire alive. He had picked up these nasty habits (including the mouthpiece) during a sojourn among a group of cannibals in the wilds of Sir James Frazer's Malaysia, Paranavitana's favourite land. Mugalan had apparently better taste than these cannibals and did not actually eat the householders. But then this version of Sigiriya is one of the many circulating in newspapers and scholarly and not so scholarly books, the most popular theme among them is the idea that Sigiriya itself was the origin of a great civilization headed by one of our five headed ancestors, Ravana. And this must surely remind us that history writers are also tellers of stories and perhaps there is more history to our village story tellers than there is among our history-tellers. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
The rest of the story is close to the Mahavamsa version, except that it
describes Migara's wife's adultery with a palace official, the husband
finding this out, and beating her. Dhatusena then seeks his son-in-law to
punish him but he flees; therefore the king displaces his rage and burns
Migara's mother (his own sister, or half-sister) alive. The later events
are also close to the Mahavamsa, except the conclusion which deals with
the return of the brother, Mugalan, the battle between the armies of the
two brothers, and the final suicide of the king. Let me present
Kiribanda's own version of this fascinating conclusion.
