Browsing by Author "Kumara, V."

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6

Diversity of Elephants: with Reference to Pali Literature
(Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, 2016) Kumara, V.
Pali literature uses multiple terms for elephants such as gaja-nāga-hatthi-kuñjara-mātaṅga-ibha. Nevertheless, the aforesaid terms have varied meanings in different contexts. The most famous term in Pali literature was “hatthi” while the term “gaja” is also significant. Apparently, the term hatthi was used in a sacred sense. Particularly, it appears with an adjective ratana – gem (hatthiratana). Nonetheless, the different terms stand for different meanings. In a deep study, it is found that the Pali commentaries namely differentiate the elephants into ten groups based on their powers. Especially, describing the bodily power of the Buddha, the Pali commentaries reveal that the Buddha had congenital power which is ten times the power of the elephant Chaddanta. The clan Chaddanta is considered to be the tenth and the highest group of all kinds of elephants that appears in the commentaries. All ten groups, respectively are known as kālāvaka gaṅgeyya, paṇḍara tamba piṅgalaṃ gandha maṅgala hema uposatha and chaddanta. Though the texts note that these groups are recognized by their bodily power, any acceptable criteria has not been given to measure their energy. In this case, the certainty with which the elephants are grouped in Pali texts could be questioned. Therefore, this paper attempts to find possible meanings of the terms of ten groups and an authentic basis for grouping elephants in Pali literature.
Does Jainism Reject Mental-Actions? - A Comparative Study of the Uttarajjhaya-sûya and the Upâli-sutta of the MN
(Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, 2017) Kumara, V.
Does Jainism Reject Mental-actions? - A Comparative Study on the Uttarādhyayana-sūya and the Upāli-sutta of the MN
(Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, 2017) Kumara, V.
A sentient being, as Buddhism defines, is formed with both mind and body. However, certain sutta-s and the Dhammapada explain that the Dhammas (actions?) [sometimes, a being (loko)] are led by the mind. Besides, the Upāli-sutta of the MN also teaches that the mind is the leading door among three-doors [kāya, vacī and mano]. As the same source unfolds the Nātaputta’s teachings, the bodily restrain becomes crucial among the three restrains. In this respect, the well-established view of the three-restrains introduced by Mahāvīra was physical body-centered. Nonetheless, the Uttarādhyayana-sūya, a text of four mūla texts in Jain [setambara] canonical literature describes that Jainism accepts all three sorts of actions; mind, speech and body under the “guptī-s.” A group of verses in chapter 24 of the Uttarādhyayana-sūya clearly explains how the mind leads to the Kamma-s. According to the above references, the present understanding on the Kamma taught in Jainism is based on the Upāli-suttahas to be re-discussed. This paper aims to examine what view to be admitted and where the historical or modern scholars have made mistakes in understanding the Kamma in Jainism with reference to the Pali Canon. Also, my study will focus on inquiring the stance of the Upāli sutta and its dependability regarding the existed viewpoints.
An Inquiry into Likelihood of Religious Pluralism in Buddhism
(Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya, 2015) Kumara, V.
An Inquiry into Likelihood of Religious Pluralism in Buddhism
(Centre for Asian Studies, University of Kelaniya, 2015) Kumara, V.
The well-known fact is that the Buddhism emerged in a multi-religious society in the 6th century BC in India. But, it guides explicitly how to practice harmony amongst other religious followers. It doesn’t mean that it is impossible to observe Buddhist criticism towards the contemporary heretical views in India. The notable fact, in this regard is that the remorseless Buddhist criticism aimed at the practitioners of self-indulgence only. Even though, the Buddha and his disciples experienced a number of difficulties from the other religious groups, they practiced religious harmony constantly. The attitudes of the Buddha towards Jains, Śramaṇa practitioners, and well-versed Brahmanas imply how Buddhism practiced religious tolerance. The tolerance cannot be defined that a religion accepts what opposing religion teaches. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the religious pluralism goes far beyond the tolerance. The aim of this paper is to prove that the Buddhism manifests pluralistic teachings in different layers while it presents the nonsoul theory as its unique teaching. Particularly, the sources utilized in this research will be limited to the Sutta-piṭaka only.
Pluralistic Teachings on Polity in Buddhism and The Manusmṛuti with Special Reference to The Yassaṃdisaṃ-Sutta of The Aṅguttara-Nikāya
(Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, 2016) Kumara, V.
Though the Pali canonical literature stands for tolerance towards the Brahmanism, pluralistic teachings are infrequent. However, the Yassaṃdisaṃ-sutta of the Aṅguttara-Nikāya (AN) describes five basic qualifications that a great King should possess. They are brief; well-born on both parental sides, wealthy, powerful by fourfold army, possesses a wise chaplain and glory. Particularly, the first qualification among them is atypical to Buddhism because it contradicts the teachings of the Vaseṭṭha-sutta (MN), which teaches that a being does not become a Brahmin or a pariah by birth. Nevertheless, the Yassaṃdisaṃ-sutta of the AN reveals that the King should gain his first qualification by birth. The point to be addressed here is why this Sutta admitted this first qualification while Buddhism heavily criticized the caste system introduced by Brahmanas. Though the Manusmṛuti does not prescribe the all the qualities spelled out in the the Yassamdisam-sutta in the same place, the five qualities found in the aforementioned Sutta throughout the 7th chapter of the text can be found in the Manusmṛuti as well. In this regard, my hypothesis is that Buddhist teachings on polity is pluralistic, like Brahmanism, since the polity is more of a worldly practice than a spiritual practice. The Buddha may have referred to the practicability of polity in Indian social-culture. This paper examines the reason for enclosing pluralistic Brahmanic teachings in the Pali Sutta and the significance of the political theories presented in the Manusmṛuti. The comparative method will be employed throughout the research.