The advent of agriculture:

A critical reflection on pre-Buddhist Sri Lanka

By Dr. Sean PERERA

[Part ii]

Another example is the ceremonial offering of the first rice harvest to Buddhist monks. In many Sri Lankan villages to this day the first rice harvest is taken in a procession (viz. “Perahera”) to be offered to the local temple. Moreover, the grandest of all peraheras, the Esala Perahera in the City of Kandy, serves to complement the rain-based rice farming cycles in Sri Lanka, since it is essentially a rain-seeding ceremony.

This ceremony takes place annually for ten days in the month of July or August, during which the Scared Tooth Relics of the Buddha are paraded in a grand procession around the City of Kandy. Social-anthropologists believe that the Esala Perahera, in doing so, mimics the elements that accompany heavy rainfall.

For instance, the cracking of whips and fire-dances simulate thunder and lightning, while the beating of drums echoes the pitter-patter of raindrops. It is customary on the morning of the eleventh-day to experience a huge downpour, which helps to prepare rice-land for the agricultural cycle that commences soon afterwards.

The Esala Perahera is regarded a national institution, symbolic of Buddhist values and the agriculture-based social system in which the sovereign state of Sri Lanka is deeply rooted and on which it is believed to be founded.

I argue, conversely, that the Esala Perahera may not essentially be Buddhist in origin; and that, in fact, it may be a practice which links Sri Lankans more strongly with their hunter-gatherer ancestors than their more recent Buddhist-farmer forefathers.

According to the Great Chronicle “Mahavamsa”, Buddhism was first introduced to Sri Lanka in the Third Century BCE during the reign of King Devanampiyatissa by the Venerable Mahinda, who was the son of the Emperor Asoka the Great. Reference to this historic event encompasses two important facets.

First and most significantly, is the popularly accepted historic fact that Buddhism was introduced to Sri Lanka on the full-moon in the month of June (i.e. “Posson Poya”), while King Devanampiyatissa was hunting in the forests (near Mihintale).

Consequently, the King adopted the practice of non-violence by discarding his bow and arrows, and converted to Buddhism by paying homage to the Venerable Mahinda. Second, is the reference to the Mayuran Emperor Asoka the Great who ruled the Indian Subcontinent form 269 to 232 BCE. During this period Sri Lanka was a tributary to the Mayuran Empire.

Let us now regard these historic events in context. Around 260 BCE, after almost a decade of ruthless and bloodthirsty rule, the Great Emperor Asoka had converted to Buddhism and taken proactive measures to reinvent a non-violent Mayuran Empire. In doing so, the Emperor wished to transform his public image from Asoka the Terrible (i.e. “Chandasoka”) to the more benevolent - Asoka the Follower of the (Buddhist) Dhamma (i.e. “Dhammashoka”).

Several stories, legends and, more recently, Bollywood movies celebrate his conversion. However, we need to consider more carefully the socio-political climate that would have ensued from such drastic reform.

It is possible to extrapolate that a warring Indian society pre-260 BCE would not have observed the practice of complete non-violence against animals.

For instance, they would have hunted animals for purposes of food. It is maintained in the Narrative of Asoka (i.e. “Asokavadana”) that, even as a prince, Asoka was admired as a fearsome hunter. Furthermore, animal sacrifices played an important part in Hindu religious ritual at that time.

It would be correct to assume, therefore, that the practice of hunting animals for food would have been accepted and practised by people in the Mayuran Empire. This is evidenced by the engraved Edicts of Dhammashoka, which survive to this day on lion-crowned stone pillars in several locations across the Indian Subcontinent and Asia Minor.

The Edicts state clearly that imperial protection was granted to all four-footed animals, even those that were inedible.

A conversion to complete non-violence would have constituted a radical social reform for Emperor Asoka’s subjects. Social reform of such radical magnitude would have been unfeasible unless it was buffered by appropriate counter measures.

This would mean that if the Emperor wished to truly reinvent himself as “Dhammashoka” he would have had to implement a sustainable substitute for animal hunting, especially for purposes of food. I argue, therefore, that farming, grain-based agriculture in particular, was introduced aggressively at this time to the Mayuran Empire and its tributary states as a counter measure against hunting.

From this perspective, the visit by the Venerable Mahinda in the Third Century BCE to Sri Lanka during the reign King Devanampiyatissa assumes a more political purpose than the religious one which is maintained popularly by the Sri Lankan Buddhist masses.

The Venerable Mahinda, a son of the Great Emperor Asoka turned Dhammashoka, would represent an imperial emissary to a ruler of a Mayuran tributary state.

Consequently, he would command significant political power and his delegation of monks would have formed, what we would call today, an imperial embassy.

Therefore, I argue that King Devanampiyatissa’s compliance; i.e. discarding his bow and arrows and converting to Buddhism, was more a gesture of accepting the mandates of a neighbouring superpower, than a deep spiritual awakening of non-violent sentiments.

Such practices of political compliance to the decisions and rulings of powerful global states can be observed even today.

It may have been, however, as the Great Chronicle “Mahavamsa” maintains, that it was the close friendship between King Devanampiyatissa and Emperor Asoka that paved the introduction of Buddhism to Sri Lanka.

For instance, King Devanampiyatissa’s name which means “the delight of the gods” resembles closely the name “Priyadarsi”; i.e. “favoured by the Gods”, which the Emperor Asoka used to refer to himself in his Edits.

Nevertheless, I maintain my original argument that, while Buddhism was introduced to Sri Lanka on the directive of the Mayuran Empire, it reinforced a social-system based on agriculture by detracting from the earlier hunter-gatherer way of life.

I premise this argument firstly on the development of the tank-reservoir system in Sri Lanka’s dry zone. As it so happened, Anuradhapura, located in the central dry zone of Sri Lanka, was the seat of power when Buddhism was first introduced.

Large quantities of water, which were not readily available in the area, were required in order to cultivate rice, the grain-crop of choice. To address this need, Sri Lankan kings, including King Devanampiyatissa, commenced an elaborate system of inter-connected tank-reservoirs; i.e. “vaw”. Such an unprecedented scale of tank-reservoir construction was not documented in pre-Buddhist Sri Lanka.

The hydraulic-civilization that resulted in Anuradhapura was continued long after King Devanampiyatissa by the Lambakaranna Dynasty and later rulers of Sri Lanka when the seat of power shifted to Pollonaruwa in the Eleventh to Thirteenth Centuries CE.

The impetus for such a large-scale, longitudinal intervention could only be explained as a purposeful social transformation directed towards rice-based agriculture.

Secondly, I refer to propaganda, in particular the slogan “mada sodagath kala, goviya rajakamatath sudusui”, which translates to “when a farmer cleans the mud from the rice-fields off his body he is fit to be king”.

This slogan was revived more recently Post-Independence to corroborate the superior status of the Sri Lanka famer-caste (i.e. Govigama versus Salagama and Durawa castes). I believe, however, that such slogans constituted as propaganda in earlier times and were meant to influence the public attitudes in favour of farming, by implying the potential for rulership possible for those engaged in farming, as opposed to hunting.

The socially superior status of rice-farmers in contrast to hunter-gatherers is summed in my third premise: the Veddas. The Veddas are hunter-gatherer societies which exist in dwindling pockets in the dry zone of Sri Lanka. Recent anthropological findings refuse to recognise Veddas as tribal aboriginal societies.

They suggest that Veddas were rendered peripheral to mainstream Sri Lankan farming societies not because they were assimilated later though conquest. Instead, the studies reveal that Veddas were, in fact, ostracised because they continued in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

One example cited is the “Vedi Perahera”; i.e. the Vedda procession in the City of Mahiyanganaya.

The Veddas who participate in the procession clearly identify themselves as externals to members of the farming society by manner of their ritual-offerings, dress and dance.

More importantly, the Veddas’ dance identifies Buddhism as the point of admission to a rice-farming-based livelihood. For instance, it is only when the Veddas in the perahera discard and ceremonially break their spears that they are granted admission to the sanctuary within the Buddhist temple.

Anthropologists believe that this dance is highly symbolic and suggestive of the pivotal role Buddhism played in controlling social transformation from hunter-gatherers to farmers in early Sri Lankan society. Veddas are, therefore, essentially, pre-Buddhist Sri Lankans who refused to accept a livelihood based on rice-farming. One could even argue that the ceremonial discarding of Veddas’ spears, mentioned above, is evocative of King Devanampiyatissa renouncing his bow and arrows when he converted to Buddhism.

It does suggest a Buddhist hegemony at the time, which compelled hunter-gatherers to accede to a non-hunting way of life which was represented by grain-based farming.

Finally, and most importantly, I refer to the exact day in the Third Century BCE when it is believed that Buddhism was first introduced to Sri Lanka: the full-moon in the month of June. Sri Lankan children to this day create models of the Venerable Mahinda preaching non-violence atop Mihintale to King Devanampiyatissa, who is depicted in hot pursuit of a stag under a full-moon. I do not believe that the occurrence of this event on the night of a full-moon is merely coincidental.

As was mentioned previously, the night of the full-moon was important to hunter-gatherer societies, as it was the night of the big-hunt when a large number of animals was hunted for food. I believe, therefore, that celebrating the introduction of Buddhism to Sri Lanka on a full-moon night serves to remind that Sri Lankans were, in fact, originally hunter-gatherers.

They didn’t adopt Buddhism due to a deep spiritual awakening.

Instead they were mandated by a powerful imperial embassy which perpetuated a Buddhist hegemony in which there was no room for hunting animals even for food.

In order for Sri Lankan society to continue to enjoy the privileges of a Mayuran tributary state they needed to comply fast with this radical social reform. They needed to find alternatives to animal-based food sources which they could control production.

The subsequent hydraulic civilization in the dry zone of Sri Lanka responded to the demand for infrastructure to support this new way of life: rice-farming. Radical social reform dictated drastic repercussions for those who did not comply; as in the case of the Veddas who were marginalised because they refused to participate in the popular Buddhist, rice-farming lifestyle.

It is not a simple task, however, to completely eradicate values and beliefs in an attempt to reform an existing social order.

Often times, as has been observed in Christian and subsequent Anglo-Saxon hegemonies, social practices of the old order are replaced with traditions that encapsulate the values and beliefs of the invading hegemony while being framed within the previous, existing knowledge-system. One example is the Christian Feast of Easter.

This Feast celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, thus promoting values and beliefs about revival and new life.

When Christianity was adopted as the new faith of the Roman Empire, the Feast of Easter was framed within an existing pagan Roman feast for fertility.

Likewise, I believe that when Buddhism was first introduced it would have been difficult for Sri Lankans at that time to completely abandon their existing systems of knowledge; in particular those that involved the full-moon, which was an important event in their hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

Although they conceded to accept the Buddhist principles of non-violence, these new values and beliefs would have been framed within knowledge-systems that were familiar to earlier hunter-gatherer Sri Lankans.

This is why, I believe, important Buddhist festivals in Sri Lanka continue to be celebrated on calendar days that coincide with the full-moon.

It is possible to argue, therefore, that when the Sacred Tooth Relics of the Buddha were brought from Kalinga (modern Orissa, India) to Sri Lanka in the Fourth Century CE and proclaimed by King Kirti Sri Megavanna (also known as Kit Siri Mevan) to be paraded around the City of Anuradhapura in grand ceremony on a full-moon night, the King was, in fact, framing this new Buddhist festival within a much earlier hunter-gatherer knowledge-system.

Therefore, although, the Esala Perahera which parades the City of Kandy to this day has morphed into a rain-seeding, agro-Buddhist ceremony (and one in which Sri Lankan rulers have continued to make bold political statements), its inception several centuries ago was conceived in a knowledge-system of non-Buddhist hunter-gatherers.