Buddhism existed before Mihindu thera

1 July 2014 06:36 pm

Buddhism existed in Sri Lanka even before the arrival of Mihindu Thera says Professor Raj Somadeva an eminent Archaeologist in an exclusive interview with the.
He also says he has concrete evidence to prove that the history of Sri Lanka goes beyond the period of Vijaya and Kuveni.
 He was also involved with the excavations on the mass grave in Matale.  In an interview with the  Professor Somadeva said it was sad that Sri Lanka did not give much attention to the development of Archaeology. He says with time, there would be many additions to the already learnt history, but there seems to be no way of updating the knowledge for future generations. Excerpts:



Q You claim that the history of  Sri Lanka  goes back to more than 2500 years. This goes beyond the period of Vijaya and Kuveni. Do you have evidence to prove this?

The shortest answer I can give is that it is a truth. I have evidence to prove this point and also the findings of other scholars to
prove this.
The fact that our history begins with the arrival of King Vijaya is solely based on historical accounts. History of a society is a process. It is the society’s duty to give definitions to certain events according to time changes. Along with time, changes may appear in historical accounts. Since it is the present generation which gives various definitions to history, history belongs to the present.
I can answer your question in two ways.  First is according historians, the history of Sri Lanka runs more than 125,000 years.  Evidence has been found that Homo Sapiens have established themselves in Sri Lanka. Later they adjusted themselves and created a culture which was suitable to the environment. Second is that the transition period between the existence of Homosapiens and the confirmed history.
In other words that is the last period of the existence of early Homosapiens and the beginning of the history known to us. Accordingly there is a clear culture transition. But to confirm on this, we need to do more in-depth study.


Q According to you, Buddhism was already there in  Sri Lanka  and it was introduced prior to the visit of Mihindu Thera. But for many years we believed that Buddhism was introduced by Mihindu Thera. How can you contest this widely accepted belief?

The majority acceptance of a fact does not mean that it in fact, is true. For instance at one point of time majority of our ancestors believed that the earth was flat. But I emphasise I have no desire to challenge to a widely accepted fact. But when doing more research and reading changes might appear in to what is already accepted.
I said Buddhism existed in Sri Lanka even before the arrival of Mihindu Thera based on my observations. When I observed temples and their expansions. They share similar eminence with graffiti.
Also the fact that Lord Buddha visited Sri Lanka thrice indirectly suggests that Buddhism may have existed in the country during that period also. It is questionable as to why nobody embraced Buddhism after Lord Buddha visited three occasions.
The incidents which were based for Lord Buddhas’ arrival are connected with Yakka and Naga tribes affairs. This is authenticated by the frescoes we have found so far.
When I say that another might question whether there was writing proficiency by then as that was long before Mihindu Thera’s arrival. The commonly accepted fact was that letters were introduced during the reign of Emperor Asoka. But this is also contested now. Professor Shiran Deraniyagala found a piece of a pot which consisted of letters. This piece belongs to 300 BC. Many people did not want to accept this as it was different from what was already accepted.
However, my assumptions are based on the materials I find during the studies and excavations. We hope to carry on physical specialities in the caves we have carried on our observations.


Q What is your opinion with regard to Divaguhava? Have we actually found it or what is considered as Divaguhava is not the real one?

I have to say that I am unable to give an answer to the said question. It is very dangerous to compare archaeological facts with historical realities. Archaeological facts must be explained independently.  For example when you observe cave temples in Kalthota it is being found out that they are ancient. When digging further this also leads to the fact that Buddhism has existed before the period we think. Therefore in answering a question like this the better way is to investigate it in an empirical way. Even in an archaeological excavation it will be impossible to answer the question asked.


Q One of the incidents that drew great attention locally and internationally was the Matale Mass Grave. What are your conclusions about this archaeological finding?

I have provided my observations in the report I have submitted. When I got involved in that case some of my collegues were not happy about it. Their question was what an archaeologist can do in an issue as such. But I must say an Archaeologist always deals with material evidence. Therefore, we can give a definition to matter which belongs to any time period. In the report I have specifically mentioned that it was essential to mention to observe the material and evidence further and I have recommended the laboratory which provides such advanced services.  As a Professional I have rendered my service. The step byond that is with the Authorities.


Q Some feel that Archaeology is somewhat a neglected field in  Sri Lanka  . Do you agree? What are your thoughts about the place  Sri Lanka  has given for archaeology?

With the economy of Sri Lanka, it is impossible to expect the authorities would focus on empowerment of areas such as Archaeology. But that should not be a barrier to engage in archaeological excavations
and studies.
It is the duty of the professionals to explore the history and seek knowledge about a country. In fact archaeology is a separate discipline. Proficiency comes along with the experience. I do not think a Government Institute or Ministry could control the quality of such a discipline. The only way they can uplift is by providing financial bases
and principles.


Q Sri Lanka  has a rich history of more than 2,500 years. Considering this, how does the developments in the archaeology field compare with the rest of the world?

As a professional it is impossible to answer this question. Yet yes, there seem to be a laid back attitude in archaeological matters. There are many reasons for this. More than the wealth of knowledge, our younger generation chase after
materialistic comforts.


Q What action has been taken to safeguard archaeological findings of great importance? Are you satisfied about the protection given to such items?

The question is out of my tangent. This should be answered by the Department of Archaeology and National Museum Department. Unfortunately, the prominence given towards the field of Archaeology is highly unsatisfactory.