THE BASIC TEACHINGS OF BUDDHISM

Philosophy of Religion

Stages in the History of Buddhism

Copyright (c) 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved

The Basic Teachings of Buddhism, Note 1

It has proven uncommonly difficult to run down how "Sārnāth" is written in Devanāgarī. Articles on line about Sārnāth do not show it, although some indicate the long vowels (Sārnāth) and some don't (Sarnath). With the long vowels, writing the name the way it looks would be . However, if we go to Google Maps, and look at Sarnath on the map of India, it is written below as , "Sāranātha." Since Hindi does not pronounce the short final "a's" of Sanskrit, and sometimes even loses medial "a's," this writing will be pronounced "Sāranāth," and perhaps even "Sārnāth."

So "Sārnāth" simply does not seem to be a Sanskrit name. In the Wikipedia article on Sarnath, it says that the name is derived from Sanskrit , "Sāranganātha," based on a word for a deer, , probably because of the Deer Park at Sārnāth.

For the versions of the names of Benares, see the note.

Another "Deer Park," of very different significance, was that of Louis XV of France, the Parc auc Cerfs. This is where a veritable assembly line was established for the mistresses of the King. Most the monarchs of Europe, from Charlemagne to Charles II of England, had mistresses and illegitimate children, who were generally given titles and sometimes became valuable agents of the King. With Louis XV, there was an unusually quick turnover of these favorites, and one of them, who became the Madame de Pompadour (Jeanne Antoinette Poisson, d.1764), came up with the idea of preserving her status by becoming the Procuress of the King, finding girls and then providing them for him, at a facility, the Parc auc Cerfs. As the girls became pregnant, they were pensioned off, modestly titled, and then replaced with a new girl. The scale and organization of this, more than its nature, is what became a disgrace to the Monarchy. Poor Louis XVI, who seems to have had no excessive sexual appetites, ended up paying the price for the scandal.

A 1979 movie, Winter Kills, fictionalized the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and it included a part played by Elizabeth Taylor (d.2011) as "The President's Procuress." From what we know now, the sexual appetite of President Kennedy may have been comparable to Louis XV, but he does not seem to have needed a Madame de Pompadour. Modern politicians have had an endless line of available young women from interns, campaign workers, secretaries, etc. Many may even count as what are called in the music industry "groupies," i.e. young women who seek proximity to celebrities just to provide sexual services. A paternity suit can also be counted on to provide income even from brief encounters. Thus, actress Liv Tyler was only the illegitimate daughter of singer Steven Tyler and was born Liv Rundgren, after her mother's husband. Her actual paternity was concealed from her until she was 11 -- although her mother had never sued Steven Tyler as the biological father. The prudent celebrity need not engage in any harassment or coercion. The puzzle of Bill Clinton, for instance, is that the availablity of willing women was not enough, and his preferences came to include sexual assault. If Clinton had any illegitimate children, this has not come to light.

Return to Text

The Basic Teachings of Buddhism, Note 2;
Why Buddhism Is True:
The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment,
by Robert Wright, Simon & Schuster, 2017

While we can get the right idea about distortions of Buddhism from "YogaGlo," a weightier example may be this book by Robert Wright (a journalist who, however, teaches classes at Princeton University and the University of Pennsylvania -- without graduate credentials? -- I thought that no one got hired at universities anymore without a Ph.D. in hand -- that's what they told me....), which was excerpted in the "Review" section of The Wall Street Journal of July 29-30, 2017 [p.C1].

This was not a review of the book, but an essay by the author himself. The piece is titled "The Meditation Cure" and subtitled "A basic practice of Buddhism turns out to be one of the best ways to deal with the anxieties and appetites bequeathed to us by our evolutionary history." The "evolutionary history" part involves Charles Darwin, who is featured on the second page in a pair of matching photographs of Darwin and a statue of the Buddha. The implication is somehow "separated at birth."

For a book entitled Why Buddhism Is True, we find substantial portions of Buddhist doctrine and practice ignored. It might as well be titled, Fake Buddhism for Narcissistic Snowflakes. Thus, there is nothing about karma (, कर्मन्), karmic recompense, or rebirth. Certainly no heavens or hells. This erases doctrines of "causal practice," 因行, yīngxíng (Japanese ingyō), and "resulting merit," 果德, guǒdé (Japanese, 果徳, katoku). In the simplest terms, it erases all moral accountability from Buddhism.

Nor does the practice here involve something essential to the practice of Buddhism ever since the Buddha, namely, monasticism. No "truth of Buddhism" is going to motivate Robert Wright to renounce the world and become a mendicant, as did Siddhartha Gautama. Probably Wright has never seen a dead man, or a mendicant (panhandlers don't count), by the roadside -- sights that are not all that unusual in India today.

These are characteristic oversights in the materialistic and naturalistic treatment of Buddhism by modern secular elites; and the result is an idiosynscratic and ahistorical version of "Buddhism" that would not be recongizable to most Buddhists in history, let alone the Buddha himself. The loss of karmic recompense, of course, entails the loss of the entire moral dimension of Buddhism, i.e. of the Dharma, (धर्म), itself a moral doctrine. That Buddhist practice was to acquire merit, upon which spiritual progress depends, is entirely avoided, and voided. This is characteristic in its own way of the "feel good, anything goes" principles of pop psychology. Carl Jung could recognize here a development of his "self-realization" psychology, but he would be appalled at the amoral form it has taken. In Buddhist terms, the rejection of karmic recompense and other essential features of Buddhist doctrine makes someone like Robert Wright an icchantika, (इच्छन्तिक), someone who, from unbelief, is incapable of salvation and destined for the Avīci Hell. In Buddhism, heresy has its karmic consequences.

The trivialization of suffering is going full blast here, as we find Wright saying:

Though the Buddha is famous for asserting that life is full of suffering, some scholars say that's an incomplete rendering of his message and that the word translatted as "suffering," dukkha [sic], could be translated as "unsatisfactoriness."

I have noted this "translation" of , duḥka (दुःख). While "unsatisfactoriness" is a problem, birth, death, disease, and old age are more what we would consider in terms of how "unsatisfactoriness" itself is an "incomplete" characterization of the human condition. Wright does not consider these canonical examples of suffering, which no amount of meditation alone will remedy. Instead, Wright worries about modern anxieties and addictions, including the fear of public speaking. The Buddha's own example of public speaking is cited, but not his assertion, "there still remain birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, and despair, for the extinction of which in the present life I am prescribing," which could easily be addressed specifically to Wright's idea of the goals of Buddhism.

The most revealing thing about Wright's approach is his attempt to link Buddhism with Darwin and Evolution. Thus, "We don't generally think of Darwin and the Buddha as being on the same wavelength, but in this and other ways their worldviews turn out to harmonize nicely." Not, as it happens, in the least. Their "worldviews" are more in the manner of opposites and contradictions than of "being on the same wavelength."

Thus, the basic principle of Evolution is, as Wright admits, survival. But survival means the continuation of life, while the goal of the doctrine and the practice of the Buddha was the "extinction" of rebirth and the avoidance of further life in samsara. Thus, Wright sees Buddhist practice as a way of reconciling us to the nature of human life. There are, indeed, some Mahāyāna schools, like Zen, that promote this idea. If the antinomian character of Zen had not also erased moral discourse and allowed, by implication, the Rape of Nanking, we might take this more seriously.

Mr. Wright, of course, doesn't examine any of these problems. He has entirely psychologized Buddhism and, by the implicit denial of karmic causality and recompense, and the implicit affirmation of naturalism and materialism, he has committed several errors that have always been regarded as serious heresies in Buddhism. Indeed, the traditional accusation of Hinduism against Buddhism, that it eliminates morality (by ignoring caste), would be true with Robert Wright.

And if Darwin were around today, and joined the mindfulness meditation movement, he might thank the Buddha for coming up with a way to address the problem.

Note that "right mindfulness," , is only the 7th part of the Eightfold Way. So Mr. Wright has forgotten the 8th part, , "right meditation," even though he seems to be talking about meditation.

I doubt that Darwin would thank the Buddha, or the Buddha either Darwin or Robert Wright. Calming anxiety is a means of Buddhist practice, not its goal. Calming enables us to let go of attachments, not just to addictions, but to everything. Without attachments, karma will not cause rebirth, and we will find the "extinction" of "birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, and despair," all of which continue even if Wright is able to do his Power Point presentations. The alternative is , Nirvāṇa, which Wright does not mention.

The true reconciliation of Buddhism and Darwin is in Arthur Schopenhauer, who matches Darwin's principle of survival (and lived to see the publication of The Origin of Species), with the blind drive of the all-consuming Will. No more than Natural Selection, the Will cares not the least for our feelings or happiness. And Schopenhauer's response is the denial of the Will, which is much closer to Buddhist detachment than is Wright's prescriptions for anxieties and addictions. Wright, after all, does not anticipate the extinction of "craving," only its moderation to the reasonable level commensurate with prudent self-realization and flourishing, amid an abundance of consumer products. The addiction, to both the Buddha and Schopenhauer, is to life itself, not to some imprudent magnification of its desires. Mr. Wright has wholly missed this, and certainly wouldn't like it if confronted, say, by the Buddha himself -- with his simple garment and begging bowl. Wright has not and will not be joining the Sangha.

Reviews

Return to Text

BASIC BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES

There are some philosophical doctrines that are so early and so fundamental to Buddhism that denials of them tend to be regarded as profoundly non-Buddhist heterodoxies. All forms of Buddhism endeavor to maintain these principles.

Momentariness: Nothing exists for any length of time. There is no substance or duration to things. Each moment is an entirely new existence, which is succeeded by an entirely new existence. The only connection between one thing and the next is that one causes the next. This doctrine sounds much like the Greek philosopher Heraclitus. You cannot step into the same river twice. The "things" tend to be called the dharmas in Buddhist thought.
Relative Existence or No Self Nature: Nothing has a essence, nature, or character by itself. Things in isolation are , shūnya, "empty." The nature of things only exists in relation to everything else that exists. Existence as we know it is thus completely relative and conditioned by everything else. Only Nirvāṇa would be unconditioned, although we cannot know what it is like.
The distinction between the conditioned reality that we know and the unconditioned reality that we do not know is similar to the distinction between phenomena and things-in-themselves made by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. The notion that the dharmas derive their nature from everything else has led to comparison with the "monads" of another German philosopher, Leibniz. The monads also represent the whole universe. However, since the dharmas are momentary, and the monads are not, this is actually more like the "actual entities" postulated by Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) in his "Process" philosophy.
Shūnyatā, , "Emptiness," is easily misunderstood. It is not nothingness. Emptiness is neither existence, nor non-existence, nor both existence and non-existence, nor neither existence nor non-existence. At the very least, this means that we don't know what is left when we take away all conditioned relations. Beyond that, it can mean that we cannot know what that is. No Self Nature means that there are no essences, just as Momentariness means that there are no substances.
No-Ātman, अनात्मन्, anātman, or अनत्ता, anattā, in Pāli: In Buddhism there is no Self (the , ātman, in Vedānta), either as an essence or as a substance. What we call our self is a collection of things, the "aggregates" (skandhas, स्कन्ध): 1) the body, or "form," 2) feelings, 3) ideas, 4) impressions, & 5) momentary consciousness. There is no enduring thing present in the aggregates. This critique of the self as just a collection is very similar to the view of the Scottish philosopher David Hume -- though without Hume's critique of causality. An implication of No-Ātman is that reincarnation cannot be transmigration, since there is nothing to migrate.
Where Wikipedia says:
While often interpreted as a doctrine denying the existence of a self, anatman is more accurately described as a strategy to attain non-attachment by recognizing everything as impermanent, while staying silent on the ultimate existence of an unchanging essence.

We must be warned whenever popular presentations say things like "more accurately" about Buddhism. This is always a way of avoiding the full force of Buddhist doctrine, lest it upset the snowflake students of modern education. In fact, the non-existence of essences and substances is fundamental to Buddhist metaphysics. That is what "impermanence" is all about, and its edifying purpose is indeed "non-attachment." The "more accurately" discourse wants to preserve the New Age possibility that Buddhism is all about finding your "true self," as we see in treatments like the absurd Why Buddhism is True book, while dispensing with most of Buddhist doctrine, especially the mean stuff, like moral accountability. The Buddha was just too "judgmental."
No-God: There is no Brahman or any other such ultimate enduring substance or nature to reality. Nirvāṇa, , thus cannot be characterized as realizing either Self, Brahman, or God. No-Self and No-God simply follow from the basics of Buddhist metaphysics.
Dependent Origination, Pratītyasamutpāda, प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद: Everything has a cause. A momentary existence occurs as it does because of a previous momentary existence, but the cause itself is also momentary. Dependent Origination combines the doctrines of momentariness and relative existence and is why in the Second Noble Truth desire and ignorance cause each other. That relationship can be expanded:
1. thirst, desire, craving, greed (), which causes
2. clinging, grasping (उपादान, upādāna), which causes
3. becoming, arising, the will to be born (, arising), which causes
4. rebirth (), which causes
5. old age & death (जरामरण, jarāmaraṇa), which in turn causes
6. ignorance (अविद्या, avidyā).
Nirvāṇa is thus not the removal of an ultimate cause but the simultaneous removal of all causes, all of conditioned existence. The interpretation of Buddhist doctrine discussed above, that "suffering" is really more like unhappiness or dislocation, puts forward the notion that our understanding of Dependent Origination (now often called "Interdependent Arising") enables us to adjust to the world and thus live a happy and normal life.
This may be a reasonable Mahāyāna or Japanese interpretation, but the point of the original teaching (the Third Noble Truth) is that Nirvāṇa is to be attained by the removal of the causes of suffering, which means the entire system of causation in Dependent Origination -- to be free of the world, not adjusted to it. The normal in this world, which necessarily includes birth, old age, and death, is what the Buddha wanted to avoid.
Indeed, no amount of "adjustment" to life will actually remove birth, disease, old age, and death, without the sort of magical remedies that one finds in Taoism, where adepts achieve immortality -- which, to be sure, we might find bleeding over into Chinese or Japanese Buddhism.
Karma: Because there is no substance or duration in Buddhism, the Buddhist view of karma is different from that in Hinduism or Jainism. Karma is only causation, without the mediation of any substance (apūrva, causal body, etc.). Reincarnation thus consists in our being caused by something in the past, and our karma is simply the effect now of past actions.
Causality poses a problem for the nihilistic modern. The clever sophist of academic philosophy claims that Hume proved that causality doesn't exist. Or something. That is not correct, but there is a further problem. We always think of causality in terms of natural and physical causality. But karma is moral causation, which does not operate in terms of physical law. This is off the map for the modern materialist. But it is essential to Buddhism, as it is for Hinduism and Jainism. The modern philosopher who would allow for it would be Immanuel Kant, who never heard of "karma," but who does provide that causality can operate among "things-in-themselves" as it cannot among phenomena, which makes free will possible. Karma will fall under the same provision.

In the history of Buddhist philosophy, these doctrines created some difficulties. If there is no self, then what is it that attains enlightenment or Nirvāṇa? It is not me, for I am already gone in an instant; and if it is not me, then why bother? Also, if there is no enduring self, then the rewards and punishments of karma are visited on different beings than those who merited them. Why do I, instead of someone else, deserve the karma of some past existence? The Buddha himself probably would have been irritated with the doctrines that created these difficulties, since he rejected theorizing (it did not "tend to edification"), and he would have expected no less than that such theories would lead to tangled and merely theoretical disputes.

The important philosophical lesson of these difficulties, however, is whether the concept of causality (which is accepted with none of the skepticism visited upon substance and essence) can be used as a substitute for the concept of substance. In all honesty, no. Something rather like the Buddhist position, however, can be formulated by Kant, for whom the concept of substance applies to phenomena but has only uncertain meaning when applied to things-in-themselves. Phenomena are only "provisional existence" to Buddhism, and the Buddhist doctrine of no enduring Self could easily be adapted to the Kantian transcendent.

The Six Schools of Japan

Philosophy of Religion

Ceylon, Kings of Lanka & Kandy

Copyright (c) 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2007, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2023, 2024 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved

STAGES IN THE HISTORY OF BUDDHISM

The history of Buddhism in India, which lasted about 1500 years, can be divided into 500 year periods, during which distinctive forms of Buddhism emerged. This is an idealized and schematic picture, but it is convenient, and it can be matched up with where Buddhism spread during these periods and what forms of Buddhism became dominant there.

Buddhist doctrine and practice in the earliest period were agreed upon in a series of Councils, sometimes reckoned to be three, or four.

The First Council was held shortly after the Buddha's death, at Rajagriha (capital of the Kingdom of Magadha). Issues about the conduct of the Sangha, the monastic community, in the absence of the Buddha appear to have been settled.
The Second Council was held about a century after the Buddha's death, at Vaisali (under Magadhan control). Sometimes this is considered the First Council, or is confused with the previous one. It began to agree on the content of the Buddhist Canon and on the monastic discipline, the vinaya.
The Third Council was called by the Emperor Aśoka and held at Pataliputra. The content of the Pāli Tripiṭaka, "Three Baskets," is supposed to have been settled at this Council, or thereabouts in this period, consisting of the Sutra-piṭaka [Sutta in Pāli], the sermons of the Buddha, the Vinaya-pitaka, the monastic discipline, and the Abhidharma-pitaka [dharma is dhamma in Pāli], the philosophical development of Buddhist doctrine. Buddhism was introduced into Sri Lanka (Ceylon) as the result of Aśoka's own efforts, and the Canon in Pāli was preserved there.
The Fourth Council was called under the Emperor Kanishka I and held at Jalandhara (or Purushpura, Peshawar, Kanishka's capital). This is not attested in Pāli sources, and so one often hears that there were only three Councils. The Council is supposed to have supervised the translation of the Tripiṭaka into Sanskrit. The Canon apparently had not only existed in Pāli, but in other Prakrits, which were all consulted for a standard Sanskrit version. It appears to be the Sanskrit texts that were subsequently spread to China. The sutras of the Mahāyāna may have existed only in Sanskrit from the beginning.

Theravāda, थेरवाद ("Teaching of the Elders") Buddhism (called "Hīnayāna," हीनयान, the "Lesser Vehicle," by the Mahāyāna): In India, 5th century BC to 1st century AD.
- Places where Theravāda spread: Theravāda Buddhism is presently practiced in Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Burma, Thailand, and Cambodia. These places preserve the Buddhist canon, the Tripiṭaka (the "Three Baskets"), in the Pāli language. During the Theravāda period, Buddhism also spread into Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Indonesia; but all those places subsequently converted to Islām.
  An exception to that is in territory that now belongs to Vietnam. In what recently was South Vietnam, the long-lived kingdom of Champa had a Theravāda culture. So did the Mekong Delta, which belonged to Cambodia. Both of those areas were conquered and absorbed by the northern kingdom of Đại Việt, which was within the cultural and often imperial domain of China. The Cham language survives; and it is a Malayo-Polynesian language (among "Chamic" languages) unrelated to Vietnamese. The Cham people, meanwhile, have themselves largely converted to Islām; and then almost half of those who lived in Cambodia were murdered by the Communists in their infamous "Killing Fields."
Mahāyāna, महायान ("Great Vehicle") Buddhism: In India, 1st century AD to 6th century.
- Distinctive doctrines:
  1. The Gautama Buddha is not gone, and individual practitioners are not on their own. Instead, the Buddha taught the dharma out of compassion, and his compassion would prevent him from being unavailable to practitioners now. Indeed, to emulate the compassion of the Buddha, practitioners become bodhisattvas, who vow to carry all beings with them into salvation. Bodhisattvas are also available, like the Buddhas, to help people work out their salvation. Maitreya is presently a bodhisattva, but the most important bodhisattva is probably Avalokiteshvara, who developed into the Chinese goddess of Mercy, Guanyin (Kwan-in in Wade-Giles, Kannon in Japan).
  2. The Buddha was not unique, and individual practitioners who have become bodhisattvas can become Buddhas. There are already multiple Buddhas besides Shakyamuni. Most important are Mahāvairocana and Amitābha. Amitābha is famous for his Western Paradise, or Pure Land, where he has Vowed to cause anyone who calls on him for help to be born, so they will be free of the world of suffering to work out their ultimate liberation. In Japan Amitābha is known as Amida and Mahāvairocana as Dainichi. Most of the famous Buddha statues in Japan are not Shakyamuni: the great outdoor bronze Buddha at Kamakura is Amida, and the Buddha enshrined in the Tōdaiji ("Great Eastern") Temple in Nara (the largest wooden building in the world), is another Buddha named Locana.
  3. Nirvāṇa and samsāra are no longer definitely different. The "Fourfold Negation" is applied to the relationship between the two. Samsāra and nirvāṇa are thus neither the same, nor different, nor both the same and different, nor neither the same nor different. This allows some room for maneuver, which may have made Buddhism more palatable in China, where Confucianism never did approve either of the world-denying metaphysics or the monasticism of Buddhism. Distinctively Chinese schools of Buddhism developed, like T'ien-t'ai (Tendai in Japan) and Ch'an (Seon [Son] in Korea, Thien in Vietnam, Zen in Japan), for whom samsāra and nirvāṇa were virtually identical, so that enlightenment and nirvāṇa transformed the world rather than eliminated it. The paradoxical metaphysics of Buddhism could be assimilated to the similar paradoxical doctrines of the native Chinese philosophical school of Taoism.
- Places where Mahāyāna spread: Mahāyāna Buddhism is presently practiced in China, Korea, Vietnam, and Japan. Buddhism was propagated in China by missionaries from India, like Kumārajīva (344-413), who arrived in China in 401, and Buddhabhadra (359-429), who arrived in 408, and by Chinese pilgrims who traveled to India, like Fa-hsien (Fǎxiǎn, 337-c.422), who travelled to India between 399 and 414, Hsüan-tsang (Xuánzàng, 600-664), who went to India between 629 and 645, and I-ching (Yìjìng, 635-713), who was in Indian between 673 and 787.
  The earlier of these figures concern a China of the Northern and Southern Empires (266-589), when the country was fragmented, and when barbarians, perhaps more susceptible to a foreign doctrine, ruled the North. These journeys were difficult, either by sea around Malaya, where many ships were attacked by pirates or sunk by storms, or by land through Central Asia, on the "Silk Road" caravan route, through deserts and over some of the highest mountains in the world.
  The highest peaks of the Pamirs and related mountain chains, called , Bām-e Donyā in Persian, "the Roof of the World," are all over 24,000 feet [note]. One story of a Buddhist missionary crossing the Pamirs, Kumārayāna, father of Kumārajīva, is that he carried a Buddha image during the day -- and the Buddha image carried him during the night!
  Kumārajīva, Fa-hsien, Hsüan-tsang, and I-ching all brought Buddhist texts from India to China and translated them. The Buddhist canon as it arrived in China was in Sanskrit, and it included many special Mahāyāna Sūtras that are not in the Pāli Canon (though some are now suspected of being Chinese forgeries). The stories of Fa-hsien and Hsüan-tsang's travels are important parts of Chinese literature, and Fa-hsien's account of India during the reign of Chandra Gupta II (375-415) is an important document for the history of India.
Vajrayāna, वज्रयान ("Thunderbolt Vehicle") Buddhism: In India, 6th to 11th century.
- Distinctive doctrines: Vajrayāna Buddhism is Tantric Buddhism, often called "esoteric" Buddhism. Although it is sometimes also translated as "diamond" (i.e. "hard"), the vajra (kongō in Japanese) was originally the thunderbolt of Indra; and in Vajrayāna it symbolizes the magical power of Tantrism.
  We see a vajra in the right hand of the esoteric deity at right, in an illustration from Robert van Gulik's Judge Dee story, The Phantom of the Temple [1966]. The staunchly Confucian Judge Dee, of course, strongly disapproves of this kind of religion.
  Tantric magic could be worked through maṇḍalas, sacred diagrams, mantras, sacred formulas for recitation (the most famous one being, "Om, mane padme hum" -- "The jewel is in the lotus"), and mudrās, sacred gestures. This Tantric magic could be merely thaumaturgical ("wonder working") or could be regarded as means of achieving liberation in addition to or apart from meditative or meritorious practices. Just as Hindu Tantrism expresses its magical power through goddesses like Kālī, Vajrayāna emphasizes female figures. Vajrayāna comes to balance male Bodhisattvas with female Bodhisattvas as attendants of the various Buddhas. And while Buddhas tend to be regarded as male in all branches of Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism supplies female figures corresponding to each Buddha, like the "savioresses" Green Tārā, White Tārā, and Māmakī, who actually vow to always be reborn as women in the process of leading all beings to salvation.
  Vajrayāna symbolism always balances male and female: the Vajra Maṇḍala (or the "jewel" above) corresponds to the Womb (or Matrix) Maṇḍala (the "lotus"). The extent to which Vajrayāna practiced real sexual union, been the physical male "vajra" and the physical female womb, as part of its Tantrism is unclear and disputed. Often "right-handed" Tantrism is distinguished from "left-handed" Tantrism, in which the former practiced the union of male and female, in symbolic, iconographic form, while the latter practiced it literally. While the "right-handed" forms are mainly what remain in Tibet and in Japanese Shingon today, there is little doubt that real "left-handed" practices existed in the past and survive to an extent in the present, and Tibetan art sometimes still portrays the more violent and disturbing aspects of Tantric practice -- rape, bestiality, etc.
- Places where Vajrayāna spread: Vajrayāna Buddhism most importantly spread to Tibet and then Mongolia. In Tibet it assumed distinctive forms that are usually called Lamaism, since the monks are called Lamas. The present Dalai Lama, who was the priestly ruler of Tibet until he fled the Communist Chinese in 1959, is from a line that is reputed to be successive incarnations of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara. Vajrayāna Buddhism also entered China, Japan, etc., as special "esoteric" schools, like the Japanese Shingon school. This often influenced other Buddhist sects without otherwise replacing their doctrine or practice. Mongolian Lamaism also spread to Manchuria, so that the Ch'ing Dynasty of China was observant of its forms. The great temple at Borobudur, outside Jakarta on the island of Java, dates from this period (c.800), and embodies Vajrayāna maṇḍala forms; but in Indonesia Buddhism soon thereafter gave way to Islām, leaving only the island of Bali, mostly Hindu, observing older religion.

The end of Buddhism in India. Buddhism may have died out in India in the 11th century because: 1) It had become almost indistinguishable from the Tantric forms of Hinduism. Sophisticated Buddhist doctrine did not appeal to most people, and the actual practices and iconography of Vajrayāna could easily be assimilated into Hinduism. And, 2) Islām arrived in earnest in India with the Afghan prince Maḥmūd of Ghazna, who defeated a coalition of Hindu princes in 1008 and soon annexed the Punjāb. Unlike Hinduism, Buddhism could not make the case to Maḥmūd that it was really a Monotheism like Islām and should be protected like Judaism and Christianity (and Zoroastrianism). As Buddhism was persecuted, conversions to Islām increased, and Buddhism declined. By the time the British arrived, about 25% of India was Moslem. That ultimately led to the partition of the country into India and Pakistan. The Gautama Buddha himself has ended up being regarded as the 9th Incarnation (Avatar) of the great Hindu God Viṣṇu, although the unflattering take on it is that he deliberately taught a false doctrine (i.e. Buddhism) in order to deceive and destroy demons.

The Final Dharma Age

Another way of dividing the history of Buddhism emerged in the Buddhist tradition as a way of dealing with the prediction of the Buddha himself that the Dharma would only last 500 years. This became a matter of concern in China, where Buddhism did not even become established until nearly 1000 years after the time of the Buddha. Indeed, there was uncertainty about when the time of the Buddha had been, but soon enough it was obvious that far more than 500 years had passed. The doctrine that was formulated in response to this we find in K'uei-chi (Tz'u-en, 632-682), founder of the Fa-hsien school early in the T'ang Dynasty, in his I-lin-chang, "The Grove of Meanings." There we find a division into three periods based on the existence of Buddhist teaching, Buddhist practice, and Buddhist "proof," i.e. results -- supernatural powers and Nirvāṇa:

The Age of the True Dharma (Sanskrit Saddharma, सद्धर्म; Chinese, 正法, Zhèng Fǎ; Japanese Shōbō). In the first 500 years of Buddhism (sometimes put at 1000 years, however), the teaching, the practice, and the proof of Buddhism are all evident and effective. This becomes the Buddhist equivalent of the "age of the Apostles" in Christianity or of the "companions of the Prophet" in Islām -- when the best exemplars of the religion lived, people whose achievements are now largely beyond the reach of believers (as most Protestants do not believe that any modern Christians can perform miracles on the scale of the Apostles). It becomes, naturally, particularly associated with Buddhism in India, the first step in the Sangoku, or "three nations," ideology that later developed in Japan.
The Age of the Counterfeit Dharma (Sanskrit Saddharma-pratirūpaka; Chinese, 像法, Xiàng Fǎ; Japanese Zōhō). In the 1000 years following the True Dharma, the teaching and the practice of Buddhism are evident but the proof fails. While uncertainty about the length of the True Dharma Age could postpone a reckoning, Buddhism in China -- which now becomes particularly associated with the second Age -- eventually had to face the fact that the full force of the Dharma, as defined by the Buddha himself, was spent. This would seem to remove the point of Buddhist belief and practice altogether, but it was also something whose full implications most Buddhists were unwilling to accept. One result was the popularity of devotionalistic forms of Buddhism, which substitute intermediate goals before final Nirvāṇa. In Pure Land practice, the Vow of the Buddha Amitābha enables devotees to be reborn in a Pure Land, where they will be free of suffering, let alone the Hells, and can work out their salvation without distractions (like hunger or sex). Pure Land Buddhism, indeed, became the most popular form of Buddhism in China and Japan. Another approach, which we see in the T'ien-tai (Japanese Tendai) and Ch'an (Zen) Schools, was to redefine the "proof," so that avoiding rebirth was no longer the goal of Buddhist practice. Instead, life in the world of samsāra can become the equivalent of Nirvāṇa. This gives to Buddhism itself a very different character, unlike the world-denying tendencies of India and more conformable to the sensibilities of both Confucianism and Taoism. This goes along with discussions about whether it was really necessary to keep Buddhist Precepts. Nevertheless, we do have a continuation of traditional monasticism, and of course not everyone agrees with the new tendencies in thinking.
The Age of the Final Dharma (Sanskrit Saddharma-vipralopa; Chinese, 末法, Mò Fǎ; Japanese Mappō). If the Counterfeit Dharma posed a disturbing challenge for Buddhism, the Final Dharma was even worse. At that point the real practice and proof of Buddhism are both supposed to no longer be possible. Only the teaching remains. While K'uei-chi didn't yet quite have to worry about that, by the time we get to the Kamakura Period (1186-1336) in Japanese history, it becomes widely accepted that the Final Dharma, Mappō, is upon them. This is expected to last no less than 10,000 years. After that, Buddhism will simply be forgotten, and ages will pass, perhaps a million years, before the arrival of the Future Buddha, Maitreya. By this time, of course, Buddhism was already vanishing in India itself. Some Japanese expected this, or were aware of it, others didn't believe it. But it was the kind of thing to reinforce the sense of the fading of the Dharma.
The response was a period of religious creativity, in which a number of Chinese schools were adopted and reworked (Tendai, Zen, Jōdo), and some original Japanese schools (Jōdo Shin, Nichiren) emerged. Japanese monks ceased taking full monastic vows, clerical marriage became tolerated, sometimes sanctioned (in Jōdo Shin), later even expected, and Japanese monks could easily gain reputations as formidable drinkers, despite the Precept against intoxicants. To Buddhists elsewhere, this kind of thing often makes it seem that Japanese monks are no longer proper Buddhists. In the Japanese tradition, however, this is all of a piece with Mappō, and the development of Japanese Buddhism was seen as actually making it the living center of the Buddhist world. Thus, in the Sangoku ideology, Japan itself becomes the exemplar of the third Age. This would have some unfortunate implications, when Imperial Japan saw itself as exporting its superiority to the rest of Asia. Japanese Buddhist "missions" in Korea helped discredit Buddhism to many, resulting in large numbers of Koreans converting to Christianity. Nevertheless, Japanese religious creativity remains impressive, as groups of "New Religions" and even "New New Religions" continue to draw on Buddhist, Shinto, and various eclectic sources, and some schools, like Nichiren, have managed to establish themselves among non-Japanese around the world.

While many Buddhists now no longer worry about the problem of the fading Dharma, there is no denying the statement of the Buddha, or the role that dealing with this has played in the history of Buddhism.

The Himalayan Realms, Nepal, Bhutan, & Sikkim

Culmen Mundi

The Six Schools of Japan

Philosophy of Religion

Copyright (c) 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2023 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved

The Himalayan Realms,
Nepal, Bhutan, & Sikkim

NEPAL

Licchavi Dynasty

Jayavarma (Jayadeva) c.185 AD

Varsavarma

Kuberavarma

Harivarma

Siddhivarma

Haridattavarma

Vasudattavarma (Vasuraja)

Sripativarma

Sivavrdhivarma

Vasantavarma

Supuspavarma

Visvadeva (Vrshadeva) c.400 AD

Sankaradeva c.425 AD

Dharmadeva c.450

Manadeva I c.464-505

Mahideva 505-506

Vasantadeva 506-532

Manudeva

Vamanadeva c.538

Ramadeva c.545

Amaradeva

Gunakamadeva

Ganadeva 560-565

?

Gangadeva 567-573

Bhaumagupta regent?
567-590?

Manadeva II c.575

Sivadeva I 590-604

Amsuvarma 605-621

Uayadeva c.621

Dhruvadeva 624-625

?

Bhimarjunadeva (Jisnugupta) 631-633

Visnugupta c.633

Bhimarjunadeva 640-641

?

Narendradeva 643-679

?

Sivadeva II 694-705

?

Jayadeva II 713-733

?

Sankaradeva II 748-749

Manadeva III c.756

?

Baliraja (Balarjunadeva) c.826

Baladeva c.847

Manadeva IV c.877

Raghavadeva Dynasty

Raghavadeva c.879

Jayadeva

Vikramadeva

Narendradeva I

Gunakamadeva I

Udayadeva

Nirbhayadeva c.1008

Rudradeva I c.1008-c.1015

Bhoja c.1015

Lakshmikamadeva I c.1015-c.1039

Jayakamadeva c.1039-1046

Thakuri Dynasty

Bhaskaradeva 1046-1059

Baladeva 1059-1064

Pradyumnakamadeva 1064-?

Nagfarjunadeva ?-1068

Shankaradeva 1068-1080

Vamadeva 1080-1090

Harshadeva 1090-1118

Shivadeva 1118-1128

Indradeva 1128-?

Manadeva c.1130's?

Narendradeva II ?-1146

Anandadeva 1146-?

Rudradeva II ?-1176

Amritadeva 1176-?

Ratnadeva c.1180's?

Somesvaradeva ?-1187

Gunakamadeva II 1187-1193

Lakshmikamadeva II 1193-1196

Vijayakamadeva 1196-1201

Malla Dynasty

Arimalladeva 1201-c.1216

Ranasura c.1216

Abhayamalla c.1216-c.1235

Jayadevamalla c.1235-c.1258

Jayabhimadeva c.1258-c.1271

Jayasimhamalla c.1271-c.1274

Anantamalla c.1274-c.1310

Jayanandadeva c.1310-c.1347

Jayarudramalla c.1320-c.1326

Jayarimalla c.1320-c.1344

Jayarajadeva c.1347-c.1361

Jayarjunamalla c.1361-c.1382

Jayasthitimalla c.1382-c.1395

Jayadharmamalla c.1395-c.1408

Jayakitimalla c.1395-c.1403

Jayajyotimalla c.1395-c.1428

Jaya Yaksha Malla c.1428-c.1482

Nepal divided into Bhatgaon, Katmandu, & Patan, and later Gurkha

State of Katmandu, Malla Dynasty

Ramamalla c.1482-c.1520

Suryamalla c.1520-c.1530

Amaramalla c.1530-c.1538

Narendramalla c.1538-c.1560

Mahendramalla c.1560-c.1574

Sadashivamalla c.1574-c.1583

Shivasimhamalla c.1578-c.1620

Lakshminarasimhamalla c.1620-c.1641

Pratapamalla c.1641-c.1674

Jayanripendramalla c.1674-c.1680

Parthivendramalla c.1680-c.1687

Bhupendramalla c.1687-c.1700

Bhaskaramalla c.1700-c.1714

Mahendrasimhamalla c.1714-1722

Jagajjayamalla 1722-1736

Jayaprakasamalla 1736-1768

Annexed by Gurkha

State of Gurkha, Kingdom of Nepal

Prithvi Narayan Shah/Pati 1669-1716

Narabhpati 1716-1742

Prithvi Barayana 1742-1768

King of Nepal,
1768-1774

Prithvi Narayana 1768-1774

Pratapa Simha 1774-1777

Rana Bahadur 1777-1799

War with China and Tibet, 1788–1792

Girvan Yuddha Bikram 1799-1816

War with the Sikh Punjab, 1809; with British India, 1814-16; dominance of the Thapa family, 1806–37

Rajendra Bikram 1816-1847

dominance by the Rana family, 1846-1951

Surendra Bikram 1847-1881

War with China, 1854-1856; British Protectorate, 1860

Prithvi Bir Bikram 1881-1911

Tribhuvana Bir Bikram 1911-1950,
1951-1955

Gyanendra Bir Bikram 1950-1951

Rana family deposed, Royal sovereignty restored, 1950-1951

Mahendra Bir Bikram 1955-1972

Birendra Bir Bikram 1972-2001

killed in coup by Crown Prince

Dipendra Bir Bikram 2001

massacred Royal family, suicide

Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah restored,
2001-2008

dismissed the government, Feb. 1, 2005, assumed autocratic rule, alliance with China; Communist-Maoism insurgency, 1996-2005; monarchy abolished, 2008

NEPAL
Licchavi Dynasty
Jayavarma (Jayadeva)	c.185 AD
Varsavarma
Kuberavarma
Harivarma
Siddhivarma
Haridattavarma
Vasudattavarma (Vasuraja)
Sripativarma
Sivavrdhivarma
Vasantavarma
Supuspavarma
Visvadeva (Vrshadeva)	c.400 AD
Sankaradeva	c.425 AD
Dharmadeva	c.450
Manadeva I	c.464-505
Mahideva	505-506
Vasantadeva	506-532
Manudeva
Vamanadeva	c.538
Ramadeva	c.545
Amaradeva
Gunakamadeva
Ganadeva	560-565
?
Gangadeva	567-573
Bhaumagupta	regent? 567-590?
Manadeva II	c.575
Sivadeva I	590-604
Amsuvarma	605-621
Uayadeva	c.621
Dhruvadeva	624-625
?
Bhimarjunadeva (Jisnugupta)	631-633
Visnugupta	c.633
Bhimarjunadeva	640-641
?
Narendradeva	643-679
?
Sivadeva II	694-705
?
Jayadeva II	713-733
?
Sankaradeva II	748-749
Manadeva III	c.756
?
Baliraja (Balarjunadeva)	c.826
Baladeva	c.847
Manadeva IV	c.877
Raghavadeva Dynasty
Raghavadeva	c.879
Jayadeva
Vikramadeva
Narendradeva I
Gunakamadeva I
Udayadeva
Nirbhayadeva	c.1008
Rudradeva I	c.1008-c.1015
Bhoja	c.1015
Lakshmikamadeva I	c.1015-c.1039
Jayakamadeva	c.1039-1046
Thakuri Dynasty
Bhaskaradeva	1046-1059
Baladeva	1059-1064
Pradyumnakamadeva	1064-?
Nagfarjunadeva	?-1068
Shankaradeva	1068-1080
Vamadeva	1080-1090
Harshadeva	1090-1118
Shivadeva	1118-1128
Indradeva	1128-?
Manadeva	c.1130's?
Narendradeva II	?-1146
Anandadeva	1146-?
Rudradeva II	?-1176
Amritadeva	1176-?
Ratnadeva	c.1180's?
Somesvaradeva	?-1187
Gunakamadeva II	1187-1193
Lakshmikamadeva II	1193-1196
Vijayakamadeva	1196-1201
Malla Dynasty
Arimalladeva	1201-c.1216
Ranasura	c.1216
Abhayamalla	c.1216-c.1235
Jayadevamalla	c.1235-c.1258
Jayabhimadeva	c.1258-c.1271
Jayasimhamalla	c.1271-c.1274
Anantamalla	c.1274-c.1310
Jayanandadeva	c.1310-c.1347
Jayarudramalla	c.1320-c.1326
Jayarimalla	c.1320-c.1344
Jayarajadeva	c.1347-c.1361
Jayarjunamalla	c.1361-c.1382
Jayasthitimalla	c.1382-c.1395
Jayadharmamalla	c.1395-c.1408
Jayakitimalla	c.1395-c.1403
Jayajyotimalla	c.1395-c.1428
Jaya Yaksha Malla	c.1428-c.1482
Nepal divided into Bhatgaon, Katmandu, & Patan, and later Gurkha
State of Katmandu, Malla Dynasty
Ramamalla	c.1482-c.1520
Suryamalla	c.1520-c.1530
Amaramalla	c.1530-c.1538
Narendramalla	c.1538-c.1560
Mahendramalla	c.1560-c.1574
Sadashivamalla	c.1574-c.1583
Shivasimhamalla	c.1578-c.1620
Lakshminarasimhamalla	c.1620-c.1641
Pratapamalla	c.1641-c.1674
Jayanripendramalla	c.1674-c.1680
Parthivendramalla	c.1680-c.1687
Bhupendramalla	c.1687-c.1700
Bhaskaramalla	c.1700-c.1714
Mahendrasimhamalla	c.1714-1722
Jagajjayamalla	1722-1736
Jayaprakasamalla	1736-1768
Annexed by Gurkha
State of Gurkha, Kingdom of Nepal
Prithvi Narayan Shah/Pati	1669-1716
Narabhpati	1716-1742
Prithvi Barayana	1742-1768
King of Nepal, 1768-1774
Prithvi Narayana	1768-1774
Pratapa Simha	1774-1777
Rana Bahadur	1777-1799
War with China and Tibet, 1788–1792
Girvan Yuddha Bikram	1799-1816
War with the Sikh Punjab, 1809; with British India, 1814-16; dominance of the Thapa family, 1806–37
Rajendra Bikram	1816-1847
dominance by the Rana family, 1846-1951
Surendra Bikram	1847-1881
War with China, 1854-1856; British Protectorate, 1860
Prithvi Bir Bikram	1881-1911
Tribhuvana Bir Bikram	1911-1950, 1951-1955
Gyanendra Bir Bikram	1950-1951
Rana family deposed, Royal sovereignty restored, 1950-1951
Mahendra Bir Bikram	1955-1972
Birendra Bir Bikram	1972-2001
killed in coup by Crown Prince
Dipendra Bir Bikram	2001
massacred Royal family, suicide
Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah	restored, 2001-2008
dismissed the government, Feb. 1, 2005, assumed autocratic rule, alliance with China; Communist-Maoism insurgency, 1996-2005; monarchy abolished, 2008

On the southern slopes of the Himalayas are a chain of three states with similar and related histories. In order of size, they are Nepal, the largest, then Bhutan, and Sikkim. The size also gives the history of their degrees of sovereignty. Nepal, warring with Tibet, India, and Britain, was the least compromised in sovereignty and is now completely independent. Bhutan in turn became the vassal and protectorate of China, Britain, and modern India. Sikkim was more or less ruled by Britain as one of the Princely States of India. Although it did not join India in 1947 like other Princely States, eventually, in 1975, it was annexed to India. This was approved by popular vote, but India had great strategic interest in the place, since it fronts on Tibet, which was conquered by China in 1950. Since the Chinese subsequently attacked India and sought to resolve border disputes by force, this has remained a matter of concern for India.

Besides its size and independence, Nepal also has the longest history of the states. The Buddha supposed to have been born in its territory; and although about 76% Hindu, the country still contains a 20% Buddhist minority. Nepalese history begins with the Licchavi Dynasty, which may have been an offshoot of the Kushan rule of northern India. Unlike Bhutan and Sikkim, Nepal has been strong enough to retain territory down into the Gangetic plain. The official language of Nepal is Nepali, which is in the Pahari group of the Indic language family. This was brought to Nepal late in its history by the Gurkhas. There are surviving Tibeto-Burman languages in the country, and these now have influenced Nepali.

Under the Malla dynasty the country became fragmented. At the death of Jaya Yaksha Malla in 1482, a division was made between this sons. This resulted in separate states of Bhatgaon, Katmandu, & Patan. The rulers of Katmandu are in the main list at left. Those of Bhatgaon are listed separately below. This division weakened the country enough that control was lost over outer areas and further fragmentation occurred. By 1669, one of these new states, of the Gurkhas, brought the whole country together under its rule. This ushered in the modern era of Nepalese history.

Limitations of Nepalese sovereignty were due to clashes with Britain. A proper war with Britain in 1814-1816 ultimately led to a treaty in 1860. The British were impressed enough with Gurkha fighting that part of the treaty allowed them to recruit Gurkhas into the British Army, where they often distinguished themselves, as in Burma in World War II. This arragement continued long after the end of the British dominion in India. Gurkhas were still fighting for the British in the Falklands War of 1982.

Another ethnic group in Nepal are the Sherpas. Living in the mountains, where these are the highest mountains in the world, the Himalayas, the Sherpas are used to the terrain and the altitude. Thus, attempts on Mt. Everest, at 29,035 ft., relied on Sherpa guides. When Edmund Hillary (b.1919) first reached the peak of Everest on 29 May 1953, he was accomplanied by the Sherpa Tenzing Norgay (1914–1986). At the time, the Nepalese were only allowing one expedition up Everest a year. These days it has grown into a rather large business. In 1993, 129 people reached the summit of Everest; 8 died. In 1996, 98 reached the summit; and 15 died. More than 150 have died on the mountain, and 120 bodies of climbers remain there, freeze-dried by the wayside -- perhaps pour encourager les autres. Although Nepal was never a proper part of British India, Everest nevertheless was named, in 1865, after Sir George Everest, the British surveyor-general of India, 1830–1843. The mountain is Sagarmatha ("goddess of the sky") in Nepali and Chomolungma ("mother goddess of the universe") in Tibetan. George Everest himself argued that the mountain should be recognized by a local name. Of course, the locals did not know the height of the mountain, or its preeminence, until Everest's survey.

The power of the Nepalse monarchy came to be compromised by noble families, the Thapas and then the Ranas. This continued until 1950, when the Ranas were deposed and the power the monarchy reestablished. The monarchy, indeed, has often been an absolute one. Nepal, indeeed, has had great difficulties adjusting to modernity, both politically and economically. As of 2004, 81% of the work force was in agriculture, and literacy was only 45.2%. As with other politically backward and economically underdeveloped places, Nepal has been diverted by confused ideologies. Thus, governments have often included Communists, and since 1996 there has been a guerilla war carried on by Maoist rebels. In 2001, the King and other Royal family members were killed by the Crown Prince, who himself then (reportedly) died of suicide. The current King, his brother, dismissed the government in 2005, suspended civil rights, and assumed personal rule. This earned the displeasure of India and Western countries that gave aid to Nepal, and the King then turned to China. Since the Chinese seem to have gotten the Maoists to stand down, one wonders if the whole business may have been their doing in the first place. None of this does Nepalese life much good, where a growing population but traditional life has tended to deforest the mountains for firewood. Without enough of an economy to develop more modern sources of energy, conflict and poverty would seem to necessarily follow.

State of Bhatgaon/Bhaktpur, Malla Dynasty
Rayamalla	c.1482-c.1519
Pranamalla	c.1519-c.1547
Vishvamalla	c.1547-c.1560
Trailokyamalla	c.1560-c.1613
Jagatjyotimalla	c.1613-c.1637
Naresamalla	c.1637-c.1644
Jagatprakasamalla	c.1644-c.1673
Jitamitramalla	c.1673-c.1696
Bhupatiindramalla	c.1696-1722
Ranjitamalla	1722-1769
Annexed to Gurkha

The monarchy of Bhutan was founded by a Tibetan monk of the Drukpa subsect of the Kargyupa sect. This priest king of the country (an Indian Dharma Raja), like the ruling lamas of Tibet, was chosen as a child, supposedly the reincarnation of the previous king. Such a system made for very long minorities. The system of regents for minor kings soon grew into the equivalent of a secular monarchy (the Deb Raja). The table of sacred kings is thus followed by that of the regents.

Kingdom of Bhutan

Kings, Shabdrun Thuktrul
or Dharma Raja

Ngawang Namgyal 1616-1651

Pekar Jungney 1651-1680

? 1680-1698

Kunga Gyaltshen 1698-1712,
d.1713

Phyogla Namgyal 1712-1730,
d.1736

Jigme Norbu 1730-1735

Mipham Wangpo 1735-1738

Jigme Dragpa I 1738-1761

Choeki Gyaltshen 1762-1788

vacant

Jigme Dragpa II 1791-1830

Jigme Norbu 1831-1861

Jigme Chogyal 1862-1904

Jigme Dorji 1905-1931

no reincarnation found, end of line

Regents, Druk Desi or Deb Raja

Tenzin Drugyel 1651-1655

??

Gedun Chomphel 1695-1701

Ngawang Tshering 1701-1704

Umdze Peljor 1704-1707

Druk Rabgye 1707-1719,
d.c.1729

Ngawang Gyamtsho 1719-1729

Chinese suzerainty, 1720; British intervention, 1772–1773

Mipham Wangpo 1729-1736

Khuwo Peljor 1736-1739

Ngawang Gyaltshen 1739-1744

Sherab Wangchuk 1744-1763

Druk Phuntsho 1763-1765

Druk Tendzin I 1765-1768

Donam Lhundub 1768-1773

Kunga Rinchen 1773-1776

Jigme Singye 1776-1788

Druk Tendzin II 1788-1792

Tashi Namgyal 1792-1799,
1803-1805

Druk Namgyal 1799-1803

Sangye Tendzin 1805-1806

Umdze Parpop 1806-1808

Bop Choda 1807-1808

Tsulthrim Drayga 1809-1810,
d.1820

Jigme Dragpa II 1810-1811

Yeshey Gyaltshen 1811-1815,
d.1830

Tshaphu Dorji 1815

Sonam Drugyal 1815-1819

Tendzin Drugdra 1819-1823

Choki Gyaltshen 1823-1831,
1835-1838

Dorji Namgyal 1831-1832

Adap Thrinley 1832-1835

Dorji Norbu 1838-1847

Tashi Dorji 1847-1850

Wangchuk Gyalpo 1850

Jigme Norbu (at Thimphu) 1850-1852

Chagpa Sangye (at Punakha) 1851-1852

Damcho Lhundrup 1852-1856

Kunga Palden (at Punakha) 1856-1861

Sherab Tharchin (at Thimphu) 1856-1861

Phuntsho Namgyal 1861-1864

Tshewang Sithub 1864,
1864-1866

Tsulthrim Yonten 1864

Kagyu Wangchuk 1864

British intervention, 1864-1865

Tsondru Pekar 1866-1870

Jigme Namgyal 1870-1873,
1877-1878,
1880-1881

Kitsep Dorji Namgyal 1873-1877,
1878-1879

Chogyal Zangpo 1879-1880

Lam Tshewang 1881-1883

Gawa Zangpo 1883-1885

Sangye Dorji 1885-1901

vacant

Choley Yeshe Ngodub 1903-1905,
d.1917

By the 19th century, the regents were losing control of the countryside. Local governors (penlop) and military commanders (jungpen) were becoming autonomous. In 1907, the Penlop of Tongsa ended the old system and created secular monarchy. The last Dharma Raja then died in 1931.

Kingdom of Bhutan
Kings, Shabdrun Thuktrul or Dharma Raja
Ngawang Namgyal	1616-1651
Pekar Jungney	1651-1680
?	1680-1698
Kunga Gyaltshen	1698-1712, d.1713
Phyogla Namgyal	1712-1730, d.1736
Jigme Norbu	1730-1735
Mipham Wangpo	1735-1738
Jigme Dragpa I	1738-1761
Choeki Gyaltshen	1762-1788
vacant
Jigme Dragpa II	1791-1830
Jigme Norbu	1831-1861
Jigme Chogyal	1862-1904
Jigme Dorji	1905-1931
no reincarnation found, end of line

Regents, Druk Desi or Deb Raja
Tenzin Drugyel	1651-1655
??
Gedun Chomphel	1695-1701
Ngawang Tshering	1701-1704
Umdze Peljor	1704-1707
Druk Rabgye	1707-1719, d.c.1729
Ngawang Gyamtsho	1719-1729
Chinese suzerainty, 1720; British intervention, 1772–1773
Mipham Wangpo	1729-1736
Khuwo Peljor	1736-1739
Ngawang Gyaltshen	1739-1744
Sherab Wangchuk	1744-1763
Druk Phuntsho	1763-1765
Druk Tendzin I	1765-1768
Donam Lhundub	1768-1773
Kunga Rinchen	1773-1776
Jigme Singye	1776-1788
Druk Tendzin II	1788-1792
Tashi Namgyal	1792-1799, 1803-1805
Druk Namgyal	1799-1803
Sangye Tendzin	1805-1806
Umdze Parpop	1806-1808
Bop Choda	1807-1808
Tsulthrim Drayga	1809-1810, d.1820
Jigme Dragpa II	1810-1811
Yeshey Gyaltshen	1811-1815, d.1830
Tshaphu Dorji	1815
Sonam Drugyal	1815-1819
Tendzin Drugdra	1819-1823
Choki Gyaltshen	1823-1831, 1835-1838
Dorji Namgyal	1831-1832
Adap Thrinley	1832-1835
Dorji Norbu	1838-1847
Tashi Dorji	1847-1850
Wangchuk Gyalpo	1850
Jigme Norbu (at Thimphu)	1850-1852
Chagpa Sangye (at Punakha)	1851-1852
Damcho Lhundrup	1852-1856
Kunga Palden (at Punakha)	1856-1861
Sherab Tharchin (at Thimphu)	1856-1861
Phuntsho Namgyal	1861-1864
Tshewang Sithub	1864, 1864-1866
Tsulthrim Yonten	1864
Kagyu Wangchuk	1864
British intervention, 1864-1865
Tsondru Pekar	1866-1870
Jigme Namgyal	1870-1873, 1877-1878, 1880-1881
Kitsep Dorji Namgyal	1873-1877, 1878-1879
Chogyal Zangpo	1879-1880
Lam Tshewang	1881-1883
Gawa Zangpo	1883-1885
Sangye Dorji	1885-1901
vacant
Choley Yeshe Ngodub	1903-1905, d.1917

Bhutan remains 75% Tibetan Buddhist (officially -- this may be inflated for political reasons). Its official language, Dzongkha, is cognate to Tibetan.

Kingdom of Bhutan,
Tongsa Dynasty

Ugyen Wangchuck 1907-1926

British Protectorate, 1910

Jigme Wangchuck 1926-1952

Protectorate of India, 1949

Jigme Dorji Wangchuck 1952-1972

Jigme Singye Wangchuck 1972-2006

Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuk 2006-present

With the occupation (in 1950) and colonization of Tibet itself by China, Bhutan thus remains the purest example of an independent culturally, religiously, and linguistically Tibetan state. As it had been with the British, however, Bhutan is in many ways a Protectorate of India, especially for defense. Bhutan did join the United Nations in 1971. It has also experienced ethnic strife, with the Hindu Nepalese minority, over attempts to enforce Buddhism as a state religion. Many Nepalese have fled to Nepal, creating a point of friction between Bhutan and that country.

Kingdom of Bhutan, Tongsa Dynasty
Ugyen Wangchuck	1907-1926
British Protectorate, 1910
Jigme Wangchuck	1926-1952
Protectorate of India, 1949
Jigme Dorji Wangchuck	1952-1972
Jigme Singye Wangchuck	1972-2006
Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuk	2006-present

Sikkim, like Bhutan, was established by rulers from Tibet. The Namgyal Dynasty, however, does not seem to have originated from monks, and Sikkim was not a theocratic state like Tibet or Bhutan. Losing territory to Nepal, the position of Sikkim was restored by the British when they defeated Nepal in 1816.

Sikkim

Phuntsog Namgyal Chogyal,
1642-1670

Tensung Namgyal 1670-1686

Chador Namgyal 1686-1717

deposed by Bhutanese, 1700, restored by Tibetans, 1710

Gyurmed Namgyal 1717-1733

Namgyal Namgyal 1733-1780

Tenzing Namgyal 1780-1793

Tsugphud Namgyal 1793-1863

Sidkeong Namgyal I 1863-1874

Thutob Namgyal 1874-1914

Sidkeong Namgyal II 1914

Tashi Namgyal 1914-1963

Palden Thondup Namgyal 1963-1975

Annexed by India, 1975

But this also brought Sikkim under British protection. The Lowland parts of the country were annexed to British India in 1849. A treaty with Britain in 1861 effectively made Sikkim one of the Princely States of India, and Britain began handling its external relations. In 1890, Tibet agreed to a border and ceded to Britain any rights over Sikkim. A British resident was appointed, who, as in other Princely States, often seemed little less than the de facto Governor of the country.

Sikkim
Phuntsog Namgyal	Chogyal, 1642-1670
Tensung Namgyal	1670-1686
Chador Namgyal	1686-1717
deposed by Bhutanese, 1700, restored by Tibetans, 1710
Gyurmed Namgyal	1717-1733
Namgyal Namgyal	1733-1780
Tenzing Namgyal	1780-1793
Tsugphud Namgyal	1793-1863
Sidkeong Namgyal I	1863-1874
Thutob Namgyal	1874-1914
Sidkeong Namgyal II	1914
Tashi Namgyal	1914-1963
Palden Thondup Namgyal	1963-1975
Annexed by India, 1975

Although several languages are spoken in Sikkim, including Nepali, Hindi, and English, the one known as "Sikkimese" (or Bhutia or Dranjongke) is a cognate of Tibetan, like Dzongkha in Bhutan. However, two thirds of the population are Nepalese, and Hindu, which led to a fate for the realm that Bhutan evidently wants to avoid.

Unlike other Princely States of India, Sikkim retained its autonomy, by popular vote, when India became independent in 1947. However, the subordinate relationship to India continued, with India retaining also some supervision over Sikkimese government. This culminated in 1975, when a referendum assented to annexation by India and the end of the monarchy. India had already occupied the country, which thus became a State of India.

The tables here are derived almost completely from the invaluable Bruce R. Gordon's Regnal Chronologies, with some details from the Encyclopædia Britannica, Wikipedia, and some other internet and print sources.

Culmen Mundi

Philosophy of History

The Himalayan Realms, Nepal, Bhutan & Sikkim

Copyright (c) 2007, 2008, 2018 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved

Culmen Mundi et Via Serica,
the Roof of the World
and the Silk Road

Most people think of the Himalayas, on the border between Tibet and India and Nepal, as the "Roof of the World," since Mt. Everest, at 29,035 ft., is the highest mountain on the planet. There was no easy route across the Himalayas, however, so the term actually originates in Persian -- , Bām-e Donyā -- to refer to those ranges that were more familiar to travellers.

The بَامِ دُنْيَا, Bām-e Donyā, especially meant the Pamirs, which are very nearly the center from which the other ranges radiate, and the focus of overland travel between India and Central Asia, especially by way of the Tarim Basin:

The highest peak in the Pamirs, now in Tajikistan is Imeni Ismail Sumani Peak, formerly Communism Peak, formerly Stalin Peak (1933-1962), originally Garmo (Гармо, in Russian) Peak, 24,590 ft. This was the highest point in the old Soviet Union. A nearby peak is now called "Garmo," at 21,637 ft.
The highest peak in the Karakorum Range, on the border between Pakistani Kashmir and China, is K2 (Mount Godwin Austen), 28,250 ft. (second highest mountain in the world).
The highest peak in the Hindu Kush, هِنْدُوكُش, Persian Hendu Koš, in Pakistan, is Tirich Mir, تِرِخ مِير: at 25,230 ft. The Persian name first seems to be attested in ʾIbn Baṭṭūṭah, إِبْن بَطُّوطَة (1304-1368/69), or on a map from 1000 AD. The meaning of the second element is disputed, although the verb كُشْتَن, koštan, means "to kill," and the speculation is that the cold and altitude would kill Hindu slaves brought up from India.
The highest peak in the Kunlun Range, 崑崙山, Kūnlún Shān, in China, is Ulugh Muztagh, 烏魯木孜塔格, Wūlō Mùzītǎgé (Mu-tzu-t'a-Ko), at 25,340 ft. "Ulugh Muztagh" is itself a Uighur name, whose use will likely be suppressed by the Chinese. The "tagh" element is certainly "mountain," cognate to Turkish dağ, Ottoman دَاغ.
The highest peak in the Tien Shan, 天山, Tiān Shān, on the border between China and Kyrgyzstan, is Pobedy Peak (Jengish Chokusu), 24,406 ft.

"Roof of the World" would be nicely translated into Latin as Culmen Mundi, especially when culmen means not just "roof," but the "summit" or "ridge of the roof," from which we get a word like "culminate."

In Greek I don't know of anything quite the equivalent. We can say ἡ τοῦ κόσμου στέγη, literally "the roof of the world." A version of this with "peak of the roof" would probably not be helpful, although that phrase could be ἡ τῆς στέγης ἀκμή or ἡ τῆς στέγης κορυφή. The word ἀκμή, "point, edge; highest point; best," is the familiar "Acme" of Roadrunner cartoons, as the fictional maker of all that is "best" -- although it always fails Wile E. Coyote.

In Chinese, "Roof of the World" is now 世界屋脊, Shìjiè wūjǐ. This is a modern (Mandarin) translation, where 世界, "world," is a traditional Buddhist term, used as a translation of Sanskrit लोकधातु, lokadhātu. 屋脊 is simply "house ridgeline" or "spine."

However, another Chinese character, 極, jí (gi̿k in Cantonese), seems to perfectly translate culmen, as "ridgepole of a house, the utmost point, very, extremely." Also, the traditional, pre-Buddhist Chinese term for "world" would be 天下, tiānxià, "under heaven." Thus, it is tempting to combine these characters into the equivalent of Culmen Mundi, but it would not be understood. Google translate tends to render 極 with its "extreme" meaning.

極 occurs in an important expression in Buddhism. Thus, Pure Land Buddhism allows one to avoid falling into the Buddhist Hells, or experiencing other unfortunate rebirths, by invoking the power of the Vow of the Buddha Amitābha to be born in his Pure Land, the 極樂淨土, Jílè Jìngtǔ -- the "Pure Land," 淨土, of "Utmost Bliss," 極樂. Here 極 is definitely in its "utmost point" meaning, while 樂, "Bliss," is not actually the Bliss of Salvation, since residence in the Pure Land merely allows one the chance to work out proper Buddhist Salvation without the distractions of incarnation in the five (or six) Realms of Rebirth, which include the Hells.

Confucius uses 樂 to simply mean "delightful" in, "Having friends come from distant places" [Analects, I:1]. But then Confucius focuses on Earthly happiness, and we have no sense of Salvation or a Hereafter. So, while meeting old friends may be delightful, it is not often we might call it "bliss."

極 also occurs in an important expression in Taoism: The 太極, Tàijí, the "Great Ultimate." This is the harmony and source of the world, linking yīn and yáng, the five elements, and all the other features of Taoism, including the Martial Art of Tàijíquán, 太極拳, "Taiji fist" or "boxing," or Fēng Shuǐ, 風水, Chinese geomancy, which is to arrange buildings, rooms, furniture, etc. in ways that promote the flow of Taoist energy, i.e. 氣, Qì. Taiji seems to usually be done slowly, as exercise, but it is a martial art and can be done quickly, like karate or judō, and swords can be used.

The Silk Road -- a 19th century coinage in German, the Seidenstraße, by the traveler Ferdinand von Richthofen -- means the routes from the Middle East to China, which mainly went through the Tarim Basin, either on the north side, below the Tian Shan, or the south side, above the Kunlun. The center of the Basin, the Taklimakan Desert, is waterless, uninhabited, and, really, uninhabitable. There was also a route north of the Tian Shan. That was a bit further, but the Dzungaria Basin, which I've heard described as a "sage brush and jack rabbit desert," is not as lifeless as the Taklimakan.

Today, the through rail line and the larger cities (like Ürümqi) are on the north side on the Tian Shan. All this is now in the Chinese territory of Sinkiang [Xinjiang], whose imperial and colonial status, and the genocide of its inhabitants (like Tibet), is rarely an object of concern for people otherwise indignant over American "imperialism." Perhaps the most famous Silk Road site, the caves full of Buddhist art and manuscripts at Dunhuang, is just north of the Nanshan ranges, still in the Chinese province of Kansu [Gansu].

While is the Chinese for "Silk Road," the term originated in German, as noted; and so this is actually a translation into modern Chinese. Both the characters and can individually mean "silk," "silk goods," and some other things. Curiously, Mathews' Chinese Dictionary [Harvard University Press, 1972] does not list 絲綢 as a binome for either character, which means it does not occur as such in Classical Chinese literature. The binome is listed in the ABC Chinese-English Comprehensive Dictionary [John DeFrancis, Hawai'i, 2003] with the meaning "silk cloth, silk," but with an asterisk that means "used only in compounds," presumably such as 絲綢之路. This simply reinforces the novelty of the term in modern Chinese.

The expression also gets translated into other languages, but there is little point in the exercise when it does not inform us about contemporary usage. Thus, "Silk Road" in Latin would be Via Serica, which is a nice phrase, but, having not been used at the time, and with little modern Latin literature to feature it (I doubt it occurs in any Papal Bulls), there is an overtone of anachronism about it. However, a Greek translation is of interest just because of the development of sericulture in the Mediaeval Peloponnesus. Thus, the Greek word for "silk," μετάξα, is attested in the 6th century historian Procopius.

Wikipedia gives a Greek translation of "Silk Road" as δρόμος τοῦ μετάξιου, where we get a neuter diminutive, μετάξιον, without explanation -- although this may reflect the Modern Greek form of "silk," μετάξι.

An uncomplicated Classical version would be ὁ δρόμος τῆς μετάξης, or ὁ ὁδὸς τῆς μετάξης, "the way/road of silk." Silk worm larvae were brought across Asia to the Court of Justinian, whether the route was called the "Silk Road" or not.

The passes trough the Pamirs are so high, that familiar pack animals like horses and mules would simply die from the altitude. Only yaks are adapted to the thin air. But then yaks can't live at lower altitudes. Every caravan (from Perisan , kārvān), consequently, needed to begin down below with one kind of animal and then change over to yaks, and then back again once over the passes. Modern trucks may need to adjust their carburetors.

Following Central Asia, the Andes have the highest peaks in the world, culminating in Aconcagua at 22,834 ft. North America comes next, with Mt. McKinley at 20,320 ft -- President Obama, by Executive Order, changed the name of Mt. McKinley (for assassinated President McKinley) to the "native" name "Denali," despite the designation as "McKinley" resting on an Act of Congress. A court could reverse that at any time, just by following the law. Then Africa, with Mt. Kilimanjaro at 19,340 ft.

The Culmen Europae, the highest range in Europe, are the Caucasus mountains, whose highest peak is Mt. Elbrus (18,510 ft.). This is far from the population, historical, and cultural center of Europe -- but Stalin placed a statue of himself there, to match the highest peak with the "greatest man" of the age. The Germans briefly visited the site in 1942, during the Stalingrad offensive, but don't seem to have had the time to remove the statue.

The Culmen Franciae is in the Alps, whose highest peak is Mt. Blanc at 15,771 ft. This lay in the historic Kingdom of Burgundy, and later in the Country and Duchy of Savoy, but it is now on the border between France and Italy -- France because Savoy was ceded to France in 1860, Italy because the Dukes of Savoy eventually became the Kings of Italy. As such, the mountain is definitely in the population, historical, and cultural heart of Europe, with various routes passing around it to traverse the Alps between France, Italy, and Germany. Hannibal marched not far from here.

The "Roof of Francia" in Greek would be ἡ τῆς Φραγγίας στέγη, while the "Roof of Europe" would be ἡ τῆς Εὐρώπης στέγη. Note that Greek frequently uses definite articles with proper names like Francia and Europa.

Just to round things off, the highest peak in Antarctica is the Vinson Massif, at 16,864 ft. The highest peak in the remaining continent, Australia, is Mt. Kosciusko at only 7,310 ft. This is beat on two nearby islands, Mt. Jaya on New Guinea, at 16,500 ft., and Mt. Cook in New Zealand, at 12,349 ft.

However, the highest peak in Polynesia is Mauna Kea ("White Mountain" from the winter snowfalls at the summit) on the Big Island of Hawai'i, at 13,796 ft. Measured from base to summit, Mauna Kea is itself actually the tallest mountain in the world. Mt. Everest is at the edge of the 10,000 foot Tibetan Plateau, meaning that it only rises about 19,000 feet. Mauna Kea, however, rises directly from the sea floor, which is at least 15,000 feet (three miles) down. Base to summit, Mauna Kea is at least 5.6 miles, or 29,568 ft. high (or perhaps as much as 33,000 feet, depending on the reference depth -- sea level certainly makes this kind of thing easier).

Culmen Europae

Culmen Franciae

Return to Buddhism, Mahayana text

Philosophy of History

Kings of Lanka

VIJAYA, Tambapanni

Vijaya c.544-c.505 BC

Vijitapura

Upatissa regent, c.505-c.504

Panduvasdeva c.504-c.474

Abhaya c.474-c.454

Tissa regent, 454

Anuradhapura

Pandukabhaya c.437-c.367

Mutasiva c.367-c.307

Devanampiya Tissa 307-267,
250-210

converts to Buddhism

Uttiya 267-257?

Mahasiva 257-247?

Suratissa 247-237?

Tamils

Sena 237-215

Gutthika 237-215

Anuradhapura

Asela 215-205

Tamils

Elara 205-161

Ruhana

Dutthagamani 161-137

slaughters Damilas (Tamils)

Saddha Tissa 137-119

Thulatthana 119

Lanja Tissa 119-109

Khallata Naga 109-104/3

Vattagamani Abhaya 104/3, d.77

Five Dravidians

Pulahatta 104-100?

Bahiya 100-98?

Panya Mara 98-91

Pilaya Mara 91

Dathika 91-88

Anuradhapura

Vattagamani Abhaya, Valagambahu I restored, 89/88-77/76
Mahaculi Mahatissa 76-62

Coronaga 62-50

Tissa 50-47

Siva I 47

Vatuka 47

Darubhatika Tissa 47

Niliya 47

Anula 47-42

Kutakanna Tissa 41-19

Bhatika Abhaya 19 BC-9 AD

Mahadathika Mahanaga 9-21

Amanda-Gamani Abhiya 22-31

Kanirajanu Tissa 31-34

Culabhaya 34-35

Sivali 35

Ilanaga 35-44

Candamukha Siva 44-52

Yasalalaka Tissa 52-59

Sabha 59-65

Lambakanna

Vasabha 65-109

Vankanasika Tissa 109-112

Gajabāhu 112-134

Mahallaka Naga 134-140

Bhatika Tissa 140-164

Kanittha Tissa 164-192, or 164-183

Khujjanaga 192-194, or 194-195

Kunganaga, Kunchanaga 194-195, or 185-186

Sirinaga I 195-214, or 186-205

Voharika Tissa 214-236, or 205-227

Abhayanaga 236-244, or 227-235

Sirinaga II 244-246, or 235-237

Vijaya-Kumara 246-247, or 237

Samghatissa I 247-251, or 238-242

Srisamghabodhi 251-253, or 242-244

Gothabhaya 253-266, or 244-257

interregnum?, 257-267

Jettha Tissa I 266-276

Mahasena 276-303

Srimeghavanna 303-331

Jettha Tissa II 331-340

Buddhadasa 340-368

Upatissa I 368-410

Mahanama 410-432

Chattagahaka Jantu 432

Mittasena 432

Six Dravidians, of Pandya, 432-459

Pandu 428-432?

Parindu 433

Khudda Parinda 433-449

Tiritara 449

Dathiya 449-452

Pithiya 452

Moriya

Dhatusena 459-477

Kassapa I, Kasyapa the Usurper 477-495

Moggallana I 495-512

Kumara-Dhatusena 512-520

Kittisena 520-521

Siva II 521

Upatissa II 522

Silakala Ambosamanera 522-535

Dathappabhuti 535

Moggallana II 535-555

Kittisrimegha 555-573

Mahanaga 573-575

Aggabodhi I 575-608

Aggabodhi II 608-618

Samgha Tissa II 618

Moggallana III 618-623

Silameghavanna 623-632

Aggabodhi III Sirisanghabodhi 632, 633-643, 643

Jettha Tissa III 632-633

Dathopa Tissa I Hatthadpatha I 643, 643-650

Kassapa II 650-659

Dappula I 659

Dathopa Tissa II 659-667

Aggabodhi IV 667-683

Datta 683-684

Hatthadpatha II 684

Lambakanna

Manavamma 684-718

Aggabodhi V 718-724

Kassapa III 724-730

Mahinda I 730-733

Aggabodhi VI 733-772

Aggabodhi VII 772-777

Mahinda II Silamegha 777-797

Udaya I (Dappula II) 797-801

Mahinda III 801-804

Aggabodhi VIII 804-815

Dappula II (III) 815-831

Aggabodhi IX 831-833

Sena I 833-853

Sena II 853-887

Udaya II 887-898

Kassapa IV 898-914

Kassapa V 914-923

Dappula III (IV) 923-924

Dappula IV (V) 924-935

Udaya III (II) 935-938

Sena III 938-946

Udaya IV (III) 946-954

Sena IV 954-956

Mahinda IV 956-972

Sena V 972-982

Mahinda V 982-993,
Ruhana, 993-c.1007, d.1029

Tamils, Chola

Rajaraja I Chola 993-1012

Rajendra I Choladeva 1012-1044

Rajadiraja I Chola 1044-1054

Rajarata

Kassapa VI, Vikramabahu c.1019-c.1031

Mahalana Kitti c.1031-c.1034

Vikkama Pandu c.1034-c.1035

Jagatipala c.1035-c.1039

Pārakkama Pandu? c.1039

Loka c.1039-c.1045

Kassapa VII c.1045

Polonnaruwa

Vijayabāhu I 1055/1070-
1100

Jayabāhu I 1100-1111

Vikramabāhu I 1111-1132

Gajabāhu 1132-1153

Parākramabāhu I the Great 1153-1186

Vijayabāhu II 1186-1187

Mahinda 1187

Kalinga

Nissanka Malla 1187-1196

Vikramabāhu II 1196

Codaganga 1196-1197

Lilavati 1197-1200, 1209-1210, 1211-1212

Sahassamalla 1200-1202

Kalyanavati 1202-1208

Dharmashoka 1208

Anikanga Mahadipada 1209

Lokesvara 1210-1211

Pandya

Parakrama Pandu 1212-1215

Kalinga

Magha 1215-1232

Dambadeniya

Vijayabahu III 1220-1234, 1232-1236

Parākramabāhu II 1234-1267, 1236-1270

Vijayabāhu IV 1267-1270, 1270-1272

Yapahuwa

Bhuvanaikabāhu I 1272-1284

vacant, 1285-1286

Polonnaruwa

Parakramabāhu III 1287-1293

Kurunagala

Bhuvanaikabāhu II 1293-1302

Parakramabāhu IV 1302-1326

Bhuvanaikabāhu III 1326-1335

Vijayabāhu V 1335-1341

Bhuvanaikabāhu IV 1341-1351

Gambola, Dedigama

Parakramabāhu V 1344-1357

Gambola

Vikramabāhu III 1357-1374

Bhuvanaikabāhu V 1372-1408

Raigama

Vira Bāhu 1392-1397

Vira Alakeshvara 1397-1411

captured by Chinese Admiral
Zheng He, 1411

Kahavelageshvara 1418-1423

Kotte

Parakramabāhu VI 1408/1412-
1467

Jayabāhu II 1467-1469

Bhuvanaikabāhu VI Jaffna, 1450-1467

1470-1478

Parakramabāhu VII 1478-1484

Parakramabāhu VIII 1484-1508

Vijayabāhu VI 1508-1521

Bhuvanaikabāhu VII 1508-1551, 1521-1543

Dom Joaõ Dharmapala 1543/1551-
1557,
Portuguese client, 1557-1597

The island nation of Ceylon is now, since 1972, generally known as Sri Lanka. While both names are of Indian origin, the name change was a political decision that reflects the ethnic conflict that has convulsed the place since 1956. "Sri Lanka" is now generally used, retrospectively and anachronistically, by historians, apparently on the politically correct grounds, observed by many scholars of South Asia, that it is in the indigenous language of the island and the official name of the present state, regardless of the conflicts of language, religion, and history in which the name has a current, essentially hostile, even genocidal, political meaning.

Ceylon, Kings of Lanka & Kandy,
Portuguese, Dutch, & British Governors

Kings of Lanka
VIJAYA, Tambapanni
Vijaya	c.544-c.505 BC
Vijitapura
Upatissa	regent, c.505-c.504
Panduvasdeva	c.504-c.474
Abhaya	c.474-c.454
Tissa	regent, 454
Anuradhapura
Pandukabhaya	c.437-c.367
Mutasiva	c.367-c.307
Devanampiya Tissa	307-267, 250-210
converts to Buddhism
Uttiya	267-257?
Mahasiva	257-247?
Suratissa	247-237?
Tamils
Sena	237-215
Gutthika	237-215
Anuradhapura
Asela	215-205
Tamils
Elara	205-161
Ruhana
Dutthagamani	161-137
slaughters Damilas (Tamils)
Saddha Tissa	137-119
Thulatthana	119
Lanja Tissa	119-109
Khallata Naga	109-104/3
Vattagamani Abhaya	104/3, d.77
Five Dravidians
Pulahatta	104-100?
Bahiya	100-98?
Panya Mara	98-91
Pilaya Mara	91
Dathika	91-88
Anuradhapura
Vattagamani Abhaya, Valagambahu I	restored, 89/88-77/76
Mahaculi Mahatissa	76-62
Coronaga	62-50
Tissa	50-47
Siva I	47
Vatuka	47
Darubhatika Tissa	47
Niliya	47
Anula	47-42
Kutakanna Tissa	41-19
Bhatika Abhaya	19 BC-9 AD
Mahadathika Mahanaga	9-21
Amanda-Gamani Abhiya	22-31
Kanirajanu Tissa	31-34
Culabhaya	34-35
Sivali	35
Ilanaga	35-44
Candamukha Siva	44-52
Yasalalaka Tissa	52-59
Sabha	59-65
Lambakanna
Vasabha	65-109
Vankanasika Tissa	109-112
Gajabāhu	112-134
Mahallaka Naga	134-140
Bhatika Tissa	140-164
Kanittha Tissa	164-192, or 164-183
Khujjanaga	192-194, or 194-195
Kunganaga, Kunchanaga	194-195, or 185-186
Sirinaga I	195-214, or 186-205
Voharika Tissa	214-236, or 205-227
Abhayanaga	236-244, or 227-235
Sirinaga II	244-246, or 235-237
Vijaya-Kumara	246-247, or 237
Samghatissa I	247-251, or 238-242
Srisamghabodhi	251-253, or 242-244
Gothabhaya	253-266, or 244-257
interregnum?, 257-267
Jettha Tissa I	266-276
Mahasena	276-303
Srimeghavanna	303-331
Jettha Tissa II	331-340
Buddhadasa	340-368
Upatissa I	368-410
Mahanama	410-432
Chattagahaka Jantu	432
Mittasena	432
Six Dravidians, of Pandya, 432-459
Pandu	428-432?
Parindu	433
Khudda Parinda	433-449
Tiritara	449
Dathiya	449-452
Pithiya	452
Moriya
Dhatusena	459-477
Kassapa I, Kasyapa the Usurper	477-495
Moggallana I	495-512
Kumara-Dhatusena	512-520
Kittisena	520-521
Siva II	521
Upatissa II	522
Silakala Ambosamanera	522-535
Dathappabhuti	535
Moggallana II	535-555
Kittisrimegha	555-573
Mahanaga	573-575
Aggabodhi I	575-608
Aggabodhi II	608-618
Samgha Tissa II	618
Moggallana III	618-623
Silameghavanna	623-632
Aggabodhi III Sirisanghabodhi	632, 633-643, 643
Jettha Tissa III	632-633
Dathopa Tissa I Hatthadpatha I	643, 643-650
Kassapa II	650-659
Dappula I	659
Dathopa Tissa II	659-667
Aggabodhi IV	667-683
Datta	683-684
Hatthadpatha II	684
Lambakanna
Manavamma	684-718
Aggabodhi V	718-724
Kassapa III	724-730
Mahinda I	730-733
Aggabodhi VI	733-772
Aggabodhi VII	772-777
Mahinda II Silamegha	777-797
Udaya I (Dappula II)	797-801
Mahinda III	801-804
Aggabodhi VIII	804-815
Dappula II (III)	815-831
Aggabodhi IX	831-833
Sena I	833-853
Sena II	853-887
Udaya II	887-898
Kassapa IV	898-914
Kassapa V	914-923
Dappula III (IV)	923-924
Dappula IV (V)	924-935
Udaya III (II)	935-938
Sena III	938-946
Udaya IV (III)	946-954
Sena IV	954-956
Mahinda IV	956-972
Sena V	972-982
Mahinda V	982-993, Ruhana, 993-c.1007, d.1029
Tamils, Chola
Rajaraja I Chola	993-1012
Rajendra I Choladeva	1012-1044
Rajadiraja I Chola	1044-1054
Rajarata
Kassapa VI, Vikramabahu	c.1019-c.1031
Mahalana Kitti	c.1031-c.1034
Vikkama Pandu	c.1034-c.1035
Jagatipala	c.1035-c.1039
Pārakkama Pandu?	c.1039
Loka	c.1039-c.1045
Kassapa VII	c.1045
Polonnaruwa
Vijayabāhu I	1055/1070- 1100
Jayabāhu I	1100-1111
Vikramabāhu I	1111-1132
Gajabāhu	1132-1153
Parākramabāhu I the Great	1153-1186
Vijayabāhu II	1186-1187
Mahinda	1187
Kalinga
Nissanka Malla	1187-1196
Vikramabāhu II	1196
Codaganga	1196-1197
Lilavati	1197-1200, 1209-1210, 1211-1212
Sahassamalla	1200-1202
Kalyanavati	1202-1208
Dharmashoka	1208
Anikanga Mahadipada	1209
Lokesvara	1210-1211
Pandya
Parakrama Pandu	1212-1215
Kalinga
Magha	1215-1232
Dambadeniya
Vijayabahu III	1220-1234, 1232-1236
Parākramabāhu II	1234-1267, 1236-1270
Vijayabāhu IV	1267-1270, 1270-1272
Yapahuwa
Bhuvanaikabāhu I	1272-1284
vacant, 1285-1286
Polonnaruwa
Parakramabāhu III	1287-1293
Kurunagala
Bhuvanaikabāhu II	1293-1302
Parakramabāhu IV	1302-1326
Bhuvanaikabāhu III	1326-1335
Vijayabāhu V	1335-1341
Bhuvanaikabāhu IV	1341-1351
Gambola, Dedigama
Parakramabāhu V	1344-1357
Gambola
Vikramabāhu III	1357-1374
Bhuvanaikabāhu V	1372-1408
Raigama
Vira Bāhu	1392-1397
Vira Alakeshvara	1397-1411
captured by Chinese Admiral Zheng He, 1411
Kahavelageshvara	1418-1423
Kotte
Parakramabāhu VI	1408/1412- 1467
Jayabāhu II	1467-1469
Bhuvanaikabāhu VI	Jaffna, 1450-1467
1470-1478
Parakramabāhu VII	1478-1484
Parakramabāhu VIII	1484-1508
Vijayabāhu VI	1508-1521
Bhuvanaikabāhu VII	1508-1551, 1521-1543
Dom Joaõ Dharmapala	1543/1551- 1557,
Portuguese client, 1557-1597

In Sanskrit, the island is Simhala, , or Simhala-dvīpa, , i.e. the "island" of Simhala. This appears to be from the Sanksrit word for "lion," simha, (or singha, , from which Singhala, , is an alternative name for the island). The word is still used, as Sinhala, for the language, Sinhalese, and the identity of the historic and largest ethnic group on the island.

Simhala-dvīpa is apparently the origin of the words for the Ceylonese used by the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, Serandives, and for Ceylon by the Greek sailor Cosmas Indicopleustes, Σιελεδίβα, Sielediba. Since Greek doesn't have an intervocalic "h," it is not surprising that sound has disappeared in many of the derivatives. These words then look related to the Arabic word for Ceylon, , Sarandīb (Persian , Sarandip), which gets rendered into English as "Serendip" (e.g. "serendipity"). "Ceylon" itself, like Latin Selan and related words in European languages, looks to derive from either "Seran" or "Sielen."

Sri Lanka is also from Sanskrit, Śrī Lankā, , where śrī, , is simply an honorific prefix, while Lankā, , is the name of the island in the great epic, the Rāmāyaṇa, .

This is not entirely a positive association, since Lanka is ruled by the Rākṣasa () Demon (, asura) King Rāvaṇa, . Rāvaṇa kidnaps Sītā, , the wife of King Rāma, , an incarnation of the God Vishnu. Rāma leads an army, including monkeys led by Hanumān, , to Lanka, defeats the demons, kills Rāvaṇa, and recovers Sītā.

The demons, however, are not supposed to be the ancestors of modern Ceylonese. According to the Mahāvamsa chronicle, the island was conquered by the Aryan Vijaya, who called the place Tāmra-dvīpa ("Copper Island") or Tāmraparnī -- Tambapanni in Pāli: This name turns up in Greek as Ταπροβάνη, Taprobanê. Indeed, the Sinhalese language is an Indo-European language of Indic group, unrelated to the older languages of South India (the Dravidian) and Southeast Asia. This attests to its introduction from the North of India, and the assimilation, at least, of the original inhabitants of Ceylon. Vijaya, however, is not otherwise a historical figure, and its is likely that his story, and that of the continuation of the dynasty by his nephew Upatissgama, is largely legendary.

The first historical King of Ceylon would be Devanampiya Tissa, who converted to Buddhism. This conversion was effected by Mahinda and his sister Sanghamitta, children of the Maurya Emperor Aśoka, who are supposed to have flown to Ceylon on their mission. Although this should enable us to date Devanampiya Tissa with some precision, I nevertheless find conflicting dates for him, either 307-267 BC or 250-210. The latter looks more like it, since Aśoka is now dated to 269-232 BC. An earlier date for Aśoka runs into the problem that his grandfather Chandragupta apparently met Alexander the Great, who can be dated with certainty, and that we know of the Hellenistic contemporaries whose conversion to Buddhism was solicited by Aśoka.

The Buddhism of Lanka suggest a thought about Rāvaṇa and the demons. In Hinduism, the Buddha is regarded as an Avatar of Vishnu whose approach was to teach a false and destructive doctrine, Buddhism, to demons, in order to destroy them. The Rāmāyaṇa long postdates the Buddhism of Ceylon, and one might wonder if populating Lanka with demons is actually a comment on its Buddhist inhabitants. A nice touch in that respect is when Rāvaṇa objects to people calling Rāma, , Śrī Rāma, with the honorific prefix. To Rāvaṇa, he does not deserve the prefix. Well, modern Tamils might think that Śrī Lankā does not deserve its prefix, since for many years the Sinhalese indeed behaved like demons in the discrimination, oppression, and even massacre of the Tamils. Modern Lanka to Hindus is still the Lankā of the Rāmāyaṇa. Nor was massacre of Hindu Tamils unprecented, as we will see below.

The Chronicles of Lanka preserve some of the earliest information about Buddhism. Indeed, the life of the Buddha is usually dated using the Chronicle statement that 218 years had elapsed between the death of the Buddha and the reign of Aśoka. This is the source of the conventionally given dates for the life of the Buddha as 563-483 BC, though I get 487 for his death adding 218 to 269 BC -- we evidently have some small disagreements remaining about when Aśoka ascended the throne (I also see 274 as the date, which is even worse).

The Chronicle figure of 218 years, however, has been questioned. To cover 218 years the tradition only lists five kings and five masters of the Buddhist vinaya, the monastic discipline. This would imply reigns averaging 44 years each, which is not impossible but otherwise seems unlikely for the era (see the similar problem for Egypt's Dynasty II). As discussed by Hirakawa Akira (A History of Indian Buddhism, From Shākyamuni to Early Mahāyāna, translated by Paul Groner, U. of Hawaii Press, 1990, pp.22-23), northern traditions allow only 116 years from the Buddha to Aśoka. This requires only 23 years for the reigns and the masters, putting the life of the Buddha at 466-386 BC. This would seem generally more consistent with the evidence, such as it is, but the topic is one of endless dispute. That the earlier date is usually given is a tribute to the prestige of the Lanka tradition in Buddhist scholarship and history. This is understandable given the preservation of the Pāli Canon in Ceylon and the attention that this attracted from 19th century Buddhologists.

Following Devanampiya Tissa there is an obscure period, including a time of rule from the mainland of South India. This area was the Tamil homeland, grew into the later Chola empire, and was in different eras the source of conquest and migration to Ceylon.

Considering the recent history of ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, we certainly get off to a bad start when the Sinhalese King Dutthagamani emerges from the shadows of history. With a relic of the Buddha on his spear, Dutthagamani defeats and slaughters the Tamils. The King feels that he has sinned with such killing and says to the monks sent to reassure him, "How shall there be any comfort for me, O venerable sirs, since by me was caused the slaughter of a great host numbering millions?" The answer seems to be an extraordinary statement, coming from Buddhists (indeed, according to the text, actual Arhats, those who have achieved Enlightenment):

From this deed arises no hindrance in thy way to heaven. Only one and a half human beings have been slain here by thee, O lord of men. The one had come unto the (three) refuges, the other had taken on himself the five precepts. Unbelievers and men of evil life were the rest, not more to be esteemed than beasts. But as for thee, thou wilt bring glory to the doctrine of the Buddha in manifold ways; therefore cast away care from thy heart, O ruler of men! (from the Mahavamsa, Chapter XXV)

We thus discover that even Buddhists sometimes regarded Unbelievers as inhuman.

Over the next centuries, we get episodes of rule from the mainland. The Lambakanna dynasty, which begins in 65 AD, is overthrown by the Dravidian Pandyans in 432; but Sinhalese rule is restored by the Moriya dynasty in 459. The Tamils return in 993, briefly created the Chola empire that stretches to Indonesia. Vijayabāhu of the Polonnaruwa dynasty expells them in 1070. The Cholas had not gone undisputed, however, since most of their rule was contemporaneous with a line of kings at Rajarata. The Kalinga dynasty follows in 1187, but after Nissanka Malla (1187–1196), the state weakens and before long the country begins to fragment. One noteworthy fragment is Jaffna, a Tamil state, of the "Arya Chakravarthi" kings, in the north. I have not listed the kings, in part because I find two different lists which vary substantially in names and dates. One dates the beginning of Jaffna to 1210, the other to 1240. Either way, by 1461, the state is under the control of Portugal; and the line of kings ends, either in 1615 or 1620, replaced by direct Portuguese rule.

Curiously, the Portuguese were not the first voyagers to arrive from great distances in ocean going craft. The Chinese had beat them. The great expeditions of the Ming Dynasty, led by Cheng Ho, , called at Ceylon. The third expedition (1409-1411) had the greatest impact there. The ruler of Raigama, Vira Alakeshvara, was defeated, made a captive, and taken back to China. This was the strongest political and military intervention during any of the Chinese voyages. The Yung-lo Emperor (1402-1424), however, was not bent on conquest and returned Vira Alakesvara to Ceylon. It is not clear, however, if he was able to return to power.

The Chinese, as it happens, did not stay long. The last of the expeditions returned to China in 1433. The experience testifies to the position of Ceylon at a crossroads of the oceans. This was already evident in the embassy that king Bhuvanaika Bāhu I (1272-1284) had sent in 1283 to the Mamlūk Sultān of Egypt. Such relations are not surprising in that the Mamlūks controlled all the trade that passed from the Mediterranean world to India. Their monopoly is what motivated the Spanish and the Portuguese to look for alternate routes. Thus, in 1498 the Portuguese entered the Indian Ocean by rounding Africa, something that Herodotus said the Phoenicians had done in the reign of the Egyptian King Neko II. A Portuguese fleet, under Lourenço de Almeida, was blown into Colombo harbor in 1505. This led to friendly relations with the King of Kotte, Vira Parakrama Bāhu VIII. In 1518 the Portuguese were allowed to build a fort, marking the beginning of the Portuguese presence in Ceylon, which rapidly passed through phases of trade, conversion, and conquest. The last King of Kotte was converted to Christianity and in 1580 willed his kingdom to the Portuguese. They inherited at his death in 1597. With direct Portuguese rule, we start to get Governors, or Captains General, as in the following table.

Portuguese Captains General of Ceylon
Pedro Lopos de Sousa	1594
D. Jeronimo de Azevedo	1594-1613
D. Francisco de Meneses	1613-1614
Manuel Mascarenhas Homem	1614-1616
Nuno Alvares Pereira	1616-1618
Constantino de Sa e Noronha	1618-1622
Jorge de Albuquerque	1622-1623
Constantino de Sa e Noronha	1623-1630
D. Philippe Mascarenhas	1630-1631
D. Jorge de Almeida	1631-1633
Diego de Mello de Castro	1633-1635
D. Jorge de Almeida	1635-1636
Diogo de Mello de Castro	1636-1638
D. Antonio Mascarenhas	1638-1640
D. Philippe Mascarenhas	1640-1645
Manuel Mascarenhas Homem	1645-1653
Francisco de Mello de Castro	1653-1655
Antonio de Sousa Coutinho	1655-1656
Antonio de Amaral de Menezes	1656-1658, Jaffna

In the midst of the Portuguese conquest of Ceylon, we actually get the foundation of a new and durable Ceylonese kingdom, that of Kandy. The Portuguese unintentionally helped with this, installing their convert, Don Phillipe, as King. With Don Phillipe's death, however, a Sinhalese nobleman, Konnapuu Bandara, seized the throne, expelled the Portuguese, and created an independent Buddhist kingdom. The Portuguese were never able to recover, and Kandy remained independent until British conquest in 1815.

The flag of Kandy, representing the last independent kingdom in Ceylon, was revived for an independent Ceylon in 1948. Since the flag could be taken to represent the Sinhalese, stripes were added later to represent the Hindu Tamils (orange) and Muslims (green).

Kings of Kandy
Don Phillipe	1590-1591
Konnapuu Bandara, Vimala Dharma Surya I	1591-1604
Senarat	1604-1635
Rajasinha	1635-1687
Vimala Dharma Surya II	1687-1707
Narendra Sinha	1707-1739
Sri Vijaya Rajasinha	1739-1747
Kirti Sri Rajasinha	1747-1763, 1763-1782
Dutch occupation, 1763
Rajadhi Rajasinha	1782-1798
Sri Vikrama Rajasinha	1798-1815

While the Portuguese were occupying Ceylon, in 1580 the Kingdom of Portugal itself became a possession of Spain. This immediately put Portuguese colonies in peril from the Dutch, who were fighting their long war of independence (1568-1648) against Spain. Thus, the new King of Kandy welcomed Joris van Spilbergen, a Dutch representative, in 1602. Although joint action against the common enemy was soon in the works, things ended badly with the Dutch being killed instead. This was straightened out by 1612, when the new King, Senarat, concluded a treaty with the Dutch. Eventually the Portuguese were driven out, and the Dutch assumed their dominant place on the island. By then (1658), Portugal was independent again (1640), but it was too late for many of the prizes of their former empire.

Dutch Governors of Ceylon/Zeylan
William J. Coster	1640
Jan Thyszoon Payart	1640-1646
Joan Maatzuyker	1646-1650
Jacob van Kittensteyn	1650-1653
Adriaan van der Meyden	1653-1660, 1661-1663
Ryklof van Goens	1660-1661, 1663
Jacob Hustaart	1663-1664
Ryklof van Goons	1664-1675
Ryklof van Goens Jr	1675-1679
Laurens Pyl	1679-1692
Thomas van Rhee	1692-1697
Gerrit de Heere	1697-1702
Cornelis Jan Simons	1702-1706
Hendrik Becker	1706-1716
Isaac Augustin Rumpf	1716-1723
Johannes Hertenberg	1723-1726
Petrus Vuyst	1726-1729
Stephanus Versluys	1729-1732
Jacob Christian Pielat	1732-1734
Diederik van Domburg	1734-1736
Gustaaf Willem baron van Imhoff	1736-1739
Willem Maurits Bruyninck	1739-1742
Daniel Overbeek	1742-1743
Julius V.S. van Gollenesse	1743-1751
Gerard Joan Vreeland	1751-1752
Johan Gideon Loten	1752-1757
Jan Schreuder	1757-1762
L.J. Baron van Eck	1762-1765
Iman Willem Falck	1765-1785
Willem J. van de Graaff	1785-1794
J.G. van Angelbeek	1794-1796

After more than a century, Dutch rule finally ended because of a problem similar to the one that had undermined the Portuguese. In 1795 Revolutionary France deposed the Dutch monarchy and installed a friendly republican government. In 1806, Napoleon Bonaparte revived the monarchy, but with his own brother Louis as King of the Netherlands, and then simply annexed the country to France in 1810. None of this was agreeable to Britain, which became the principal enemy of France and of Napoleon. The British moved quickly to occupy Dutch colonies and prevent them from becoming French bases. Some of these would be returned to the Netherlands at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, but Ceylon (like the Cape Colony) would not. Ceylon thus became a kind of outlier of the growing British Indian Empire.

The British would rule Ceylon for a century and a half. After they absorbed Kandy in 1815, the island was completely unified for the first time in many years. To most in Britain, what "Ceylonese" came to mean was probably little more than tea.

An extraordinary development during the years of British rule was the interest of Westerners in Ceylonese Buddhism. Perhaps the most notable name in this was Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907). In New York in 1875, with Madame Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891) and some others, Olcott founded the Theosophical Society, which embodied their interests in spiritualism and Eastern religion. In 1878-1879, Olcott and Blavatsky travelled to India to create a new headquarters for the Society, presumably on soil more congenial to its values. However, in 1880 Olcott went on to Colombo and there converted to Buddhism. His enthusiasm for his new faith would have a lasting impact on Western perceptions of Buddhism, on Buddhist perceptions of Buddhism, and on the strength, it is often called a "revival," of Buddhism in Ceylon.

Although Britain had renounced any official policy of proselytism for Christianity, private Christian missionaries, of course, had a free hand.

British Governors of Ceylon

Frederick North, 5th Earl of Guilford 1798-1805

Sir Thomas Maitland 1805-1811

Sir Robert Brownrigg, 1st Baronet 1812-1820

Sir Edward Paget 1822

Sir Edward Barnes 1824-1831

Sir Robert Wilmot-Horton 1831-1837

James Alexander Stewart-Mackenzie 1837-1841

Major-General Sir Colin Campbell 1841-1847

George Byng, 7th Viscount Torrington 1847-1850

Sir G.W. Anderson 1850-1855

Sir Henry G. Ward 1855-1860

Sir Charles Justin MacCarthy 1860-1865

Sir Hercules G.R. Robinson, 1st Baron Rosmead 1865-1872

Sir William H. Gregory 1872-1877

Sir James R. Longdon 1877-1883

Sir Arthur Hamilton-Gordon, 1st Baron Stanmore 1883-1890

Sir Arthur B. Havelock 1890-1896

Sir J. West Ridgeway 1896-1903

Sir Henry Arthur Blake 1903-1907

Sir Henry B. McCallum 1907-1913

Sir Robert Chalmers 1913-1916

Sir John Anderson 1916-1918

Sir William H. Manning 1918-1925

Sir Hugh Clifford 19251-1927

Sir H.J. Stanley 1927-1931

Sir Grame Thompson 1931-1933

Sir Reginald Edward Stubbs 1933-1937

Sir Andrew Caldecott 1937-1944

Sir Henry Monck-Mason Moore 1944-1948

Christian schools in Ceylon had some success at winning converts, as they would long be successful in conveying modern Western learning. Olcott, in turn, wanted to help Buddhism meet Christian missionaries on their own terms. He formulated a catechism for Buddhism in 1881, wrote extensively promoting Buddhism, and even created a "Young Men's Buddhist Association" (YMBA). The result was influential in what has been called "Buddhist Modernism."

British Governors of Ceylon
Frederick North, 5th Earl of Guilford	1798-1805
Sir Thomas Maitland	1805-1811
Sir Robert Brownrigg, 1st Baronet	1812-1820
Sir Edward Paget	1822
Sir Edward Barnes	1824-1831
Sir Robert Wilmot-Horton	1831-1837
James Alexander Stewart-Mackenzie	1837-1841
Major-General Sir Colin Campbell	1841-1847
George Byng, 7th Viscount Torrington	1847-1850
Sir G.W. Anderson	1850-1855
Sir Henry G. Ward	1855-1860
Sir Charles Justin MacCarthy	1860-1865
Sir Hercules G.R. Robinson, 1st Baron Rosmead	1865-1872
Sir William H. Gregory	1872-1877
Sir James R. Longdon	1877-1883
Sir Arthur Hamilton-Gordon, 1st Baron Stanmore	1883-1890
Sir Arthur B. Havelock	1890-1896
Sir J. West Ridgeway	1896-1903
Sir Henry Arthur Blake	1903-1907
Sir Henry B. McCallum	1907-1913
Sir Robert Chalmers	1913-1916
Sir John Anderson	1916-1918
Sir William H. Manning	1918-1925
Sir Hugh Clifford	19251-1927
Sir H.J. Stanley	1927-1931
Sir Grame Thompson	1931-1933
Sir Reginald Edward Stubbs	1933-1937
Sir Andrew Caldecott	1937-1944
Sir Henry Monck-Mason Moore	1944-1948

Olcott did not believe that ritual and superstition were proper to Buddhism and promoted the idea, now quite common, that Buddhism is really a system of philosophy, or a kind of empirical spiritualism, in its own way rational and even scientific. What went along with this was a view that all Eastern religion was really, at root, like this, and that any differences between Buddhism and, say, Hinduism were only superficial.

This is a view that is now also quite common, to the extent that popular culture lumps together Indian, Chinese, and Japanese religion as all subscribing to the same esoteric truths. That this really has little to do with the traditional practice of such religions is obvious to scholars, and to anyone really familiar with the countries, is irrelevant, since an approach like Olcott's is normative and owes much more to the originally Western ideology of something like Theosophy than it does to anything intrinsic to Indian or Chinese religion. Where the one parts company with the other is the most conspicious when we come to the devotionistic sides of the religions. Thus, the most popular form of Buddhism in East Asia is the Pure Land sect of the Buddha Amitābha, who promises rebirth in his paradise even for the sinful. This sort of thing was altogether too much like Christianity for someone like Olcott, and we get the beginning of an attitude that most of Mahāyāna Buddhism is not really Buddhism (the only Mahāyāna sect eventually to pass muster would be Zen).

Thus, Olcott and those of similar predilections would find the Theravāda Buddhism of Ceylon more congenial, though even this would take some cleaning up, to return it to the Purity of the early Sangha. Such preferences were not without a tangible basis. Sinhalese Buddhism preserved the Pāli Canon, the oldest collection of the Buddhist Tripitaka. In 1881 the Pali Text Society was founded by Thomas William Rhys Davids (1843-1922), a member of the British Civil Service in Ceylon. Rhys Davids had no sympathy for Theosophy, but his project would provide a scholarly foundation for whatever appropriation anyone wanted to make of Theravāda Buddhism. A Pāli dictionary had already been published in 1874 by another Civil Servant in Ceylon, Robert Caesar Childers (1838-1876), and Edwin Arnold's (1832–1904) popular and influential The Light of Asia, a handsome and sympathetic presentation of the life of the Buddha, had already been published in 1879.

Considering the contemptuous and patronizing attitude of the Mahāyāna (and so of the Chinese, Japanese, etc.) for Theravāda Buddhism, calling it the Hinayāna, i.e. the "Lesser Vehicle," the esteem of Europeans for their own tradition would have been flattering to the Ceylonese. With a Protestant rigor, Olcott and others would have dismissed the Sutras of Mahāyāna Buddhism as apocryphal or fraudulent. I gather that the impression for many years was that Pāli was the language of the Buddha himself, and that the Pāli Canon thus preserves his actual words. For all their Buddhist revivalism, however, Western Neo-Buddhists in general were (and are) not much interested in the monasticism of Buddhism, a characteristic that was undeniable, not only in every Buddhist tradition, but something that could hardly be missed in the Pāli Canon itself, where a large part of the corpus concerns monastic discipline, the vinaya. It is hard not to see that disinterest as reflecting an originally Protestantizing attitude towards religion.

Why Buddhism Is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment, by Robert Wright

Governors General of
the Dominion of Ceylon

Sir Henry Monck-Mason Moore 1948-1949

Herwald Ramsbotham, 1st Viscount Soulbury 1949-1954

Sir Oliver Ernest Goonetilleke 1954-1962

William Gopallawa 1962-1972

President, 1972-1978

Ceylon becomes
the Republic of Sri Lanka

Ceylon became independent in 1948. Like India and Pakistan, this was in the form of a Dominion, with the King of England still the formal Head of State of the country and a Governor General as his representative. Ceylon, however, continued as a Dominion far longer than the others, for 24 years, until 1972. This casual pace of development would seem to bespeak the sort of leisurely nationalism and complacent good will that we find in some other former British possessions. We might be led to see the country as peaceful and happy, as indeed I would gather from my 1962 World Book Encyclopedia, which says that the Sinhalese are a people of "gentle habits" [Volume 3, p.277]. However, this would be a false impression. The spirit of Dutthagamani had already started to revive, and riots had begun in 1956 where Tamils were attacked and often killed by Sinhalese mobs. With "Buddhist Modernism" often celebrating the pacifism of Buddhism in general, and that of the Theravāda in particular, the ugly history that begins to unfold would be an anomaly and an embarrassment, if not a refutation, to its conceits. These developments are discussed with the recent history of Sri Lanka.

Governors General of the Dominion of Ceylon
Sir Henry Monck-Mason Moore	1948-1949
Herwald Ramsbotham, 1st Viscount Soulbury	1949-1954
Sir Oliver Ernest Goonetilleke	1954-1962
William Gopallawa	1962-1972
President, 1972-1978
Ceylon becomes the Republic of Sri Lanka

The list of rulers and governors here is combined from lists given by Bruce R. Gordon's Regnal Chronologies and a number of articles at Wikipedia. Other information is from the Encyclopædia Britannica and print sources like the above referenced book by Hirakawa Akira. The different lists sometimes give different dates or have other anomalies. I cannot always tell which versions represent the best scholarship, so I have tried to indicate the variations.

Prime Ministers of Ceylon/Sri Lanka

The Sun Never Set on the British Empire

Philosophy of History