Essays in Honour of Professor Lily de Silva. Published by Prof. Lily de Silva Felicitation Committee, Department of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, xxviii + 302 pp., Hardcover, 2001.

Professor Lily de Silva is undoubtedly one of the outstanding luminaries in the field of Pali and Buddhist studies in modern Sri Lanka. The Dãghanikàya-ñãkà (Lãnatthapakàsinà), a critical edition of the sub-commentary to the Dãgha-nikàya published by the Pali Text Society of London in 1970 immediately earned her the recognition of a worldclass savant of Buddhism. Her contribution to the understanding of Buddhism by way of scholarly articles and monographs is immeasurable. Pàli Primer (1994, 1995) and Key to Pàli Primer (1999), her recent publications, have been hailed as excellent guides for the learning of Pàli. They are user-friendly and are used by many beginners throughout the world. At a time when scholarship in the field of Pàli and Buddhist studies in Sri Lanka is said to be slowly declining, those who could receive her guidance and expertise in numerous ways during her long career spanning over thirty years as a university teacher at the University of Peredeniya are indeed fortunate ones.

The present volume contains fourteen scholarly articles, twelve in English and two in Sinhala, written by her friends, former colleagues and well-wishers, in addition to a comprehensive bibliography of Prof. Lily de Silva's writings. They are as follows: ßMapping Sà¤ci in a Whole Buddhist Worldû (Jonathan S. Walters), ßA Sinhala Buddhist Civitas: Kandy as a Precolonial Cityû (John Clifford Holt), ßThe Jhànas and the Lay Discipleû (Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi), ßIs Nirvàõa Ineffableû (Asanga Tilakaratne), ßOrigins of Gender Differentiation and Sexuality As Represented in the Buddhist and Christian Genesis Mythsû (P.D. Premasiri), ßMiracles in Early Buddhismû (David J. Kalupahana), ßSome Aspects in the Development of Early Buddhist Conception of Omniscience in Theravàda and in Early Mahàyàna Buddhismû (Tilak Kariyawasam), ßThe Transition of Buddhakàya Concept from Therevàda to Mahàyànaû (Ven. Bellanvila Wimalaratana), ßThe Myth in the Paritta Ritualû (C. Witanachchi), ßTextuality of the Jayamaïgala Gàthà and Its Liturgical Role in Modern Buddhist Marriage Ceremonyû (Ven. Deegalle Mahinda), ßReincarnation in Platoû (M. Peris), ßSri Lanka's Fauna and Flora as Known to
Greek and Latin Authorsû (D.P.M. Weerakkody), ßAn Introduction to Aggaññasuttaû (Ven. W. Pemaratana), and ßSupriyasàrthavàha Jàtakaya (R. Handurukanda).
Since making even a passing comment on every paper contained in the volume is an impossibility in this short review, and moreover not fair by the authors who have put so much research into their articles, the present reviewer likes to confine himself only to a few articles of his choice, with the hope that a full book review of this volume by a more competent reviewer will be done in the near future.

Prof. Jonathan S. Walters offers a very interesting analysis of how the Asoka-legend established Sa¤chi to be the landmark in the `world mapping' of the øunga empire (2nd - 1st centuries B.C.). He further contends that `Mahinda cult' in Sri Lanka also made this country another world map linked to the expansion policy of the øunga empire. To support his contention he draws evidence from the Pàli Vaüsa literature, particularly the Mahàvüsa [Mhv] whose original source called the Sãhaëaññhakathà-
mahàvaüsa [SMhv] (and the Poràõas), he believes, could easily go back to the 2nd century B.C. (p.9). In this regard, if the author's contention is based on his belief in SMhv being assigned to the 2nd century B.C., then his assumption itself may have to be reexamined in the following light: It is well known that the origin of the genre of literature called Sãhaëaññhakathà can date back to a period soon after Mahinda's arrival in Sri Lanka in the 3rd century B.C. If so, on what basis can the origin of SMhv be assigned to the 2nd century B.C.? In addition, the term `poràõà' (the ancients) which he seems to use as belonging to the same stratum as SMhv, signifies
some ancient authorities originated in India according to a study by Prof. S. Mori. It is therefore plausible that SMhv drew material, particularly that of Indian origin, from the Poràõà, but its major portions, one can easily surmise, were drawn from the Sri Lankan material for the simple reason that SMhv was a history of the Buddhist Saïgha in Sri Lanka. This fact brings us to another issue discussed by Prof. Walters. He says: ßThe øunga version of the A÷oka legend was not merely preserved in Sri Lanka; it established Sri Lanka as one of the satellites of the øunga empire.û (p.10) Further, he adds that Sri Lanka's stake in the empire was Arahant Mahinda (ibid). I believe, however, that `Mahinda cult' seen in literary works and inscriptions was a natural
corollary arising from the magnitude of his role in Sri Lanka, and that although the resemblance of ßearly Bràhmiû alphabet or even of some artifacts belonging to the øunga period supports the øunga cultural influence in Sri Lanka because of the
proximity in time and space between the two countries, the idea of making Sri Lanka a satellite of the øunga empire may be far-fetched. For, the importance of Mahinda's mission and his role in establishing Buddhism in Sri Lanka is emphasized more for the legendary prediction made by the Buddha himself that he would bring salvation to Laïkà (Mhv XIII, v 21), thereby legitimizing his status as the father of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, than for the fact that he was the son of King Asoka and hailed from Ujjenã.

Prof. John Clifford Holt examines in his article some patterns and qualities for Kandy to be qualified for inclusion in the category of `civitas, ' the Latin term whose definition is briefly referred to by the author (p.20). While examining different factors proposed by his predecessors, such as the Asala Perahara, the devaràja ideal, etc. (pp. 20-26) that contributed to the city of Kandy affirming the collective vicissitudes
and stratified layers of divinely sanctioned state power and social order, he adds to the list another factor; that is, the association of the bodhisattva ideal with Sinhala Buddhist kingship, which, according to him, was much influenced by Mahàyàna Buddhism (p.27). His focus in this connection is particularly on Avalokite÷vara Bodhisattva, who in Mahàyàna Buddhism is regarded as the personification of compassion. In this connection, a question may be raised whether or not the bodhisattva which term denotes only a Buddha-aspirant in the canonical and post-canonical Pàli Buddhism could accommodate his association with kingship which is much secular in nature. When the conservative attitude of the Theravàdins of the past and their unreserved faith in the preservation of scriptural (pariyatti) tradition are given due consideration, the acceptance of a Mahàyàna idea as it is without internalizing it within the Theravàda system of thought is most unlikely. This is exactly what the Theravàdins did to the Bodhisattva-concept to keep abreast with the developments taking place in the other Buddhist schools including Mahàyàna. The Theravàdins of
the commentarial period thus developed the Bodhisattva figure along with the other aspects of the Bodhisattva-concept in a manner uncharacteristic of the early tradition. While Buddhaghosa's commentaries also have a similar idea that blossomed into a later interpretation of the Bodhisattva-concept, it is Dhammapàla, the most junior of all the commentators, who classifies three kinds of Bodhisattvas, namely, those who become, 1) Buddhas (Buddhas-to-be, the traditional interpretation seen in Theravàda Buddhism), 2) Paccekabuddhas, and 3) Arahants. This classification is significant in that for the first time in the history of Theravàda Buddhism, it is argued that any Buddhist whose final goal in life is to attain Nibbàna can be a Bodhisattva, thus giving a theoretical foundation for the diversified interpretation of the Bodhisattva Ideal in Theravàda Buddhism. Further, the Dhammapada-aññhakathà, one of the most popular books for narration, states that all the great personages associated with the life of the Buddha, such as his mother, his chief disciples, ânanda, etc. practised the pàramità (perfections) in order to gain their respective positions. A theoretical foundation was thus laid down to the effect that the path of a Bodhisattva meant the aspiration for any of the three types of enlightenment whether as a Buddha, a Paccekabuddha or a disciple and that every Buddhist should practice the perfections towards this end. Such developments in Theravàda Buddhism would have surely helped accommodate even secular matters like kingship in a broader perspective. The shift in emphasis in the path to liberation from paññà, so characteristic of the older texts, to paññà coupled with karuõà as seen particularly in Dhammapà la's commentaries was also intended to pave the way to accommodate new developments taking place outside the Theravàda Buddhist circles. When these developments within the Theravàda tradition are viewed in relation to what followed in subsequent centuries, there is no surprise that the Bodhisattva cult centred particularly around the Bodhisattva Avalokite÷vara, or otherwise called Nàtha, became popular among the Buddhists in Sri Lanka.

Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi takes up the question whether or not the jhànas are necessary to win the first stage of awakening, known as `stream-entry' (sotàpatti). In this article he successfully argues for the thesis that the jhànas become an essential factor for those intent on advancing from the stage of once-returning to that of non-returner (p.38), rejecting the claim by the modern teachers of meditation that they are needed to attain
even `stream-entry'.

Prof. P.D. Premasiri examines the genesis myths in both Christianity and Buddhism in his paper (pp.84- 104) and by carefully comparing the oft-cited genesis myths in the Bible and the Aga¤¤a-sutta concludes that no parallel can be drawn from them. The thrust of his article is to repudiate the claim or reference often made in the West that ßThe Buddhist myth contained in it (the Aga¤¤a-sutta) performs the function of
denigration of women and deprecation of sexuality in much the same way as the Genesis in the Judaeo- Christian traditionû (p.84).

Prof. Tilak Kariyawasam clarifies the definition of`Omniscience' in the early canonical texts and concludes in his article (pp.135-151) that the Buddha never claimed to be omniscient. Buddhism in its long history within and outside the Indian subcontinent had
produced many different branches of Buddhist thought, which, it is claimed, had their origins in early Buddhist texts. In dealing with the question of Omniscience, apart from its canonical descriptions, the article seems to suggest implicitly that Mahàyàna
Buddhism even in its early stages of development as found in the Praj¤àparamità literature developed its concept to a considerable extent, which Theràvàda Buddhism is devoid of. Theravàda Buddhism also did not stop at the early conception of omniscience and in its own right developed it or furnished new interpretations for it as a matter of fact. Hence a discussion on five possible types of an omniscient one is made in the Saddhammappakàsini 3 [I, 58] and Saddhammapajjotikà [I, 386] and the type known as `¤àtasabba¤¤Ò' is accepted as the legitimate description of the omniscient one in the Theràvàda Buddhism of the commentarial period. Even the removal of the obstruction to what has to be known (j¤eyàvaraõa, ¤eyyàvaraõa), considered to be the province of a Buddha alone in Mahàyàna Buddhism, can be seen in the Udàna-aññhakathà [194]. This will demonstrate that some of the later developments in Theravàda Buddhism, including the Buddha-concept, cannot be
spoken of in isolation from Mahàyàna influence.

Ven. Prof. Bellanwila Wimalaratana's paper (pp.152- 157) discusses in a very brief manner the notion of Trikàya in Mahàyàna Buddhism. The existence of Buddha-fields in all directions is implied by the author of this article to be of Mahàyàna development (p.157). In this connection, attention may be invited to a similar idea in the Apadàna which refers to many Buddha-fields in the ten directions, implying that there are numerous Buddhas existing ubiquitously (Disà dasavidhà loke yàyato natthi antakaü; tasm¤ca disàbhàgamhi buddhakkhettà asaïkhiyà) (Ap I, 5). Though such references are very few in the Theravàda literature, we suspect that parallel developments in both Mahayàna and Theravàda Buddhism took place almost side by side with the passage of time.

The articles presented in this volume are of high academic standard and the publication committee must be congratulated on the excellent manner inwhich it was printed. I join all well-wishers in wholeheartedly wishing Prof. Lily de Silva good health and continued success in whatever undertaking she will make in future.

Dr. Toshiichi Endo