Talk:Mahāvaṃsa

message: See this edit and edit summary.  See the main article on Sin for the Buddhist perspective.
At first, I put the dubious tag up. Then I just decided simply to re-word the paragraph. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhist sins? Dubious. 

message: There are recent TV programs (NatGeo, Discovery) that dispute incidents and figures like The Exodus,  Noah's Ark,  David,  Goliath and Abraham and many more Bible stories and figures happened or existed.  These science based programs mention that there are no other evidence apart from the Bible.  
Similarly apart from  Mahavamsa, is there any other item that indicate that Elara (monarch) is a foreign king ? He may have been born and brought up in Sri Lanka. In fact everything that is mentioned in the Mahavamsa should be checked and verified as it is written by few people possibly to promote their own political and religious interest.  
I guess as times passes, the technology develops, Sri Lanka and India become richer, people become wiser and not-narrow minded, it is possible that one day truth will come out on all that is mentioned in the Mahavamsa.
Can a comment be added to wikipedia article on the basis that is in Mahavamsa ?
-Iross1000 (talk) 02:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usurper 

message: The article contained the following claims with no citations: "The Ruvanwelisaya was the tallest edifice in the world in that age. The engineering works of King Parakramabahu were the greatest hydraulic works in the world in those times." I added a request for citations a month ago, and then today decided to investigate. The claim that Ruvanwelisaya was the tallest edifice at that time is demonstrably untrue: its height was 92 meters, whereas the Great Pyramid of Giza was 146 meters. Given that the claim about the height of Ruvanwelisaya was simply made up and easily proven to be false, I've removed both that claim and the other one about hydraulic works. Interlingua 13:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed statements about Ruvanwelisaya

message: Was not the first part of the Culavamsa authored by a Tamil monk Dhammakitthi? Is it not inaccurate therefore to state that only Sinhala Buddhist monks were involved in its authorship? Nagadeepa (talk) 13:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Not all authors of the Culavamsa were Sinhala

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: I must protest the apparent Sinhalization of Mahavamsa. The work was given in Pali, not in Sinhalese. In those days all of India was Buddhist (with Pali language), not just the Sinhalese population. Furthermore there was a language called Sinhala Prakrit which is not the same as Pali.--213.47.76.227 (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sinhalese nationalism in this article 

message: There is a good source to learn about the history of Mahawamsa.
http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariyaratnecol (talk • contribs) 16:04, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Mahawamsa

message: In the historical accuracy section of this article, it says that 
"Moreover, the genealogy of the Buddha recorded in the Mahavamsa describes him as being the product of four cross cousin marriages. Cross-cousin marriage is associated historically with the Dravidian people of southern India- both Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhala practiced cross-cousin marriage historically- but exogamous marriage was the norm in the regions of northern India associated with the life of the Buddha.[20]"
While it is true that Brahmins do not practice cross cousin marriage, the Buddha was not a Brahmin, he was a member of the Shakya clan. Hindu Puranas considered Buddha (Siddhartha Shakya) as a Kshatriya and not a Brahmin. 
Levman writes: 
"Non-Aryan customs are most apparent in the marriage customs of the Sakyas and 
related eastern ethnic groups. The Sakyan princes who marry their own sisters is 
a distinctly non-Aryan custom, as incest is strictly forbidden in the Vedic śāstras."
He further writes
"These so-called ‘incest mar-
riages’ (by IA and Semitic standards) are a sure sign of a matrilinear culture where 
endogamy, even between parents and children and siblings was common."
Levman, Bryan Geoffrey. "Cultural Remnants of the Indigenous Peoples in the Buddhist Scriptures." Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (online) 1747-9681.
I am writing all of this to point out that the part of the Mahavamsa that says that the Buddha is the product of cousin marriage may actually be true, because the Shakya clan is not brahmin, and did practice incest.
Dillmon (talk) 15:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an interesting point, but Levman's article isn't discussing the Mahavamsa so I think it would be getting into WP:OR to cite him. His source regarding Sakya marriage customs seems to be the Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, which is relating stories from the Theravada commentaries- which themselves were also written down and probably composed in Sri Lanka. In that sense, the stories that Levman is discussing aren't really independent of the ones discussed in the other articles and the same analysis would apply- they may have been written down in Sri Lanka in imitation of local practices, rather than reflecting Sakya practices during the Buddha's era. --Spasemunki (talk) 04:44, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The part of the Mahavamsa that says that the Buddha is the product of cousin marriage may actually be true