[Buddha-l] Dharmapala

[L.S. Cousins]

  Artur Karp wrote:

> And - no, I do not agree that Dutthagamani participated in some
> ordinary battle. The text (XXV, 108) says:
>
>
> Kathannu bhante assāso mama hessati, yena me
> Akkhohiṇīmahāsenāghāto kārāpito" iti.
>
> [Geiger] "And thereon the king said again to them: 'How shall there be
> any comfort for me, O venerable sirs, since by me was caused the
> slaughter of a great host numbering millions?'".
>
> Although akkhohiṇī doesn't mean "millions" (akṣauhiṇī = 218 700), the
> number suggested is big enough to justify the use of the word
> "slaughter" (ghāta).
>
I rendered this:

"How can there be comfort for me by whom the slaughter of a mighty great
army has been induced ?"

and in v. 103 (Kataṃ akkhohiṇīghātaṃ saranto na sukhaṃ labhi):
"recollecting that he has carried out the slaughter of a great army."


The dictionaries give the alternative meaning of a 'complete army' for 
akkhohiṇī. I have preferred that. It is of course typical of accounts of 
ancient battles that they ascribe very high numbers of casualties to the 
losers. But I would suppose that an army is notionally of this size, but 
in practice might be smaller or larger. In any case, we are agreed that 
Geiger's translation somewhat exaggerates the case.
>
>
> In the first verse of XXV, while preparing for war, the king inserts a
> relic (of the Buddha) in (the tip of) his spear (kunte dhātuṃ
> nidhāpetvā). Not in his shield, not in the breastplate - but in his
> spear, which is an offensive weapon.
>
> Could you share your thoughts on this particular use of relics?
>
I will render kunta as 'lance'. Well, I would, wouldn't I :-) In Ja I 
273 it is used to strike, not to throw (and gets stuck). [tassa 
allīnabhāvaṃ ñatvā kuntena pahari]  The full verse here is (from the 
Burmese CD):
kunte dhātuṃ nidhāpetvā, sayoggabalavāhano ||
gantvā Tissamahārāmaṃ, vanditvā saṅgham abravi.
The usual assumption is that this is in order to carry it in battle. 
That may be right. Or, it may be something to do with his going to the 
holy site of Tissamahārāma which is a very large monastery in the South 
with a stūpa that is one of the major centres of pilgrimage on the 
island. In any case, I do not believe there is any possibility of 
actually utilizing the lance/spear in battle. At most it is being used 
as a royal standard which according to Geiger is always carried before 
the prince. Or, it may be a question of displaying it to rally the 
troops before any actual fighting.

I presume that the idea is derived from Ja III 375 where after the death 
of the bodhisatta (in the form of a mahākapi) a funeral is held and a 
shrine constructed, but the skull is sheathed in gold, set on the tip of 
the king's lance and placed in front. Pūjā is performed with flower 
garlands and the like (kuntagge ṭhapetvā purato katvā gandhamālādīhi 
pūjento) and then it is taken to Benares where a seven day relic pūjā is 
held before constructing a shrine for it.

Two more general points:

1. The Mahāvaṃsa is a literary epic. And it is clearly very influenced 
by the Indian epic tradition. So we should expect elements from there to 
be imported from time to time. We do not know its date. (It is later 
than Buddhaghosa. It is earlier than the Mahāvaṃsaṭīkā which is itself 
earlier than the twelfth century.) This means that we do not know the 
context in which it was written. It might for example have been written 
at the time of one of the various Tamil invasions.

2. In case there is confusion, nothing I have said is intended to 
dispute that there is a martial element in all forms of later Buddhism.

Lance Cousins