📃 The First Sinhala Tripiṭakaya Translation: De Zoysa’s ‘Protestant’ Buddhist Project for Mass Literacy in Twentieth Century Sri Lanka

The First Sinhala Tripiṭakaya Translation: De Zoysa’s ‘Protestant’ Buddhist Project for Mass Literacy in Twentieth Century Sri Lanka, M. Deegalle Bath Spa University and University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

This article gives some excellent background on the Sinhala translations found here on SuttaCentral.net by AP deZoysa. It also discusses the general history of Tipiṭaka translation and publishing in Sri Lanka. The end of the article touches on the various controversies around the topic.

Below are some highlights.

Note: The Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā (aka BJT) is the complete Tipiṭaka sponsored by the SL government, separate from deZoysa’s. It includes Pali and Sinhala. One thing the article does not mention is that there are also serious criticisms of the BJT, namely that much of it is unreadable by most Sinhala speakers.

Until the printing of a complete set of the Tripiṭaka in English and Sinhala in the twentieth century, it is hard to substantiate that Theravāda Buddhists in mass-scale ever read the Tripiṭaka in Pāḷi in its entirety. Since a complete Sinhala translation of the Pāḷi Tripiṭaka was neither available earlier nor printed, it was not readily accessible or affordable for most.

De Zoysa single-handedly embarked on an ambitious project of translating the Pāḷi Tipiṭaka into the Sinhala language. He introduced his Tripiṭaka translation series as the Sinhala Tripiṭakaya. It had the objective of making Buddhist texts more understandable and accessible to many Sri Lankan Buddhists. By the Buddha Jayantī year in 1956, when the Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā just commenced (see Deegalle, 2021b), de Zoysa had almost completed the Sinhala translation of the Tripiṭaka.

Biography of de Zoysa:

Contextualizing the Tripiṭaka Translator In his adult life, de Zoysa served many causes (Figure 2 and Table 1). By training, de Zoysa was a twentieth-century Anthropologist of folk ritual studies of Ceylon, and by profession, a lawyer. Through dedication, commitment and constant practice, he became an effective Tripiṭaka translator.

After leaving Ceylon to Tasmania, Woodward became a prolific and competent translator earning praise from prominent Indologists such as Caroline Augusta Foley Rhys-Davids (1857–1942). Woodward translated into English 18 volumes of the Pāḷi canon (Jayetilleke 2007; Heyward 1990). The intellectual exposure to Woodward remained a crucial strength in de Zoysa’s contribution to Buddhism in producing Sinhala translations of the Tripiṭaka. In many ways, Woodward, as a prominent figure in Pāli studies in Sri Lanka, functioned as a mentor for de Zoysa.


Figure 2. The cover page of de Zoysa’s biography written by his daughter, Dr Kumari Jayawardena (b. 1931). The biography is now available both in English and Sinhala (Photo Credit: Mahinda Deegalle).

In 1939, de Zoysa purchased a printing press known as ‘Dharma Samaya’ located in Maradāna. The ‘Dharma Samaya Press’ activities were very much a “one-man show”, and the press was closed down after de Zoysa’s death in 1968 (Jayawardena, 2012, p. 210). With this newly-established Dharma Samaya Press, de Zoysa’s contribution to Buddhism and Sri Lankan literature emerged. From 1939 to 1949, de Zoysa began publishing a weekly Sinhala newspaper, the Dharma Samaya (1939–1949). The first issue of the weekly Dharma Samaya appeared on Friday, 9 June 1939. De Zoysa was the newspaper editor, and the subscription was available outside Ceylon in India, Burma and U.K.

With the experience of studying, living and working over thirteen years in London (March 1921–April 1934) and seeing the developments in the activities of the Pali Text Society and Buddhist activities of the London Buddhist Vihāra (f. 1928), de Zoysa was determined to reduce the gap between Sinhala readers and the Pāḷi Tipiṭaka (Deegalle, 2008, p. 227). His desire and actions were Protestant’ in spirit and inspiration, as a “zealous Buddhist”, as identified by P.V. Bapat (1956, p. 428). He was committed to promoting Buddhist literacy among Sri Lankans, facilitating and encouraging reading of the Tripiṭaka. Translating the Pāḷi Tipiṭaka into ‘simple’ yet ‘versatile’ Sinhala language was his intention, mission and dream. The prevalent wide communication gap between Buddhist ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ is bridged effectively by creating a new awareness of the Buddha’s teachings in the post-independent nation. In publishing Tripiṭaka texts, de Zoysa did not translate numerous repeated paragraphs because his primary motivation was to communicate the Buddha’s message effectively. Therefore, he simplified Sinhala language terminology and phrases to enable comfortable reading and understanding the Tripiṭaka’s content.

In addition to the 48 volumes of the Sinhala Tripiṭakaya containing the entire Tripiṭaka (vols. 1–38) and several Pāḷi commentaries (vols. 39–48), de Zoysa began producing abridged versions of the Tripiṭaka. Though he was keen and determined to take the Sinhala Tripiṭakaya further to ordinary Sinhala speaking public and attempted to create a concise edition of the Sinhala Tripiṭakaya, de Zoysa did not survive to complete that task. He was able to publish only two volumes of the Concise Sinhala Tripiṭakaya—the Dīgha Nikāya and the Majjhima Nikāya—out of the ten volumes he had initially planned. The Government of Sri Lanka took up de Zoysa’s idea of a concise edition of the Sinhala Tripiṭakaya to speed up reaching ordinary Sinhala speaking public. In 1990, when the Government of Sri Lanka established the new Ministry of Buddhasāsana, it undertook to produce abridged editions of the Tripiṭaka into simple Sinhala by appointing five advisors and nine editors. The Ministry of Buddhasāsana published the Majjhima Nikāya and the Saṃyutta Nikāya and the project has progressed for years with some tangible outcomes.

The Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā (1954–1989) is the distinguished contribution that Sri Lankan intellectuals of the twentieth century have made to the study of the Buddhavacana in the vernacular (Deegalle, 2021). No one has yet attempted to demonstrate the links of the Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā with de Zoysa’s Sinhala Tripiṭakaya. This is, indeed, an area for further in-depth research. However, tentatively, I propose that de Zoysa challenged the entire body Ceylonese intellectuals, both monks and lay persons, to become more rigorous in producing a reliable and authentic translation of the Buddhavacana for the benefit of many.

It is appropriate, in this instance, to discuss briefly the historical and religious contexts that led to the compilation of the Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā. In the history of producing Pāḷi Tipiṭaka editions in Ceylon, we must note the significant role that All Ceylon Buddhist Congress Tripiṭaka Series (1939–1967) played (Deegalle, 2002). It was primarily this ACBC Series that in the 1950s finally led to the formation of the Buddha Jayantī Tripiṭaka Granthamālā as a significant part of the celebration of the Buddha Jayantī in 1956.

As noted above, de Zoysa’s Sinhala Tripiṭakaya translation project was not without critics. However, Malalasekera (1970) commented that de Zoysa was unmoved by others’ criticisms:

“He [de Zoysa] was a man of rare integrity and great courage . . . He cared neither for praise nor for blame. He loved learning and remained a student to the end of his days. When he wanted to do something, no trouble was too great. His patience, perseverance and powers of endurance were almost limitless.” (Malalasekera, 1970).

9 Likes

Probably an essential quality for a translator. Assuming he meant that which comes from foolish people.

4 Likes

Thanks for that, it’s fascinating background.

It seems from the above that the descriptor “protestant” was not used by de Zoysa himself? I wonder if he thought of his work that way?

3 Likes

Yeah, I was going to comment on that in the title of the article. Don’t love it.

I think that people label all the efforts at Buddhist revival in the time of British occupation as “Protestant” because part of the movement involved people reading the texts.

It’s obviously a Eurocentric interpretation of Buddhists trying to encourage other Buddhists in the religion.

I’ve been accused of being a Protestant Buddhist because I encourage people to read suttas. It’s just strange.

5 Likes

Yeah, it’s from that one article by Schopen, whose point was that … people are influenced by their background?

1 Like