Buddhadāsa
King of Ceylon for twenty nine years (between 362 and 409 A.C.) He was the son of Jetthatissa and led a very pious life. He was renowned as a great physician, and various miraculous cures are attributed to him, even snakes seeking his assistance. A jewel, which he received from a snake in gratitude for a cure, he placed in the stone image in the Abhayagiri vihāra.
A medical work, the Sāratthasangaha, in Sanskrit, is ascribed to him (but see Cv. Trs. 13, n. 7). It is said that he appointed a royal physician for every ten villages, and established hospitals for the crippled and for the dumb and also for animals. He appointed preachers to look after the people's spiritual welfare.
Among religious buildings erected by him was the Moraparivena. He extended his patronage to a holy monk, named Mahādhammakathī, who translated the suttas into Singhalese.
Buddhadāsa had eighty sons, named after the Buddha's eminent disciples, the eldest being Upatissa II. who succeeded him. Cv.xxxvii.105ff.
2. Buddhadāsa.-A pious man of Tundagāma. He drove away a Yakkha who had taken possession of a friend of his. Ras.i.46f.
Buddhadāsa
(1906-93)
Leading Thai Buddhist monk and reformer named after a former king of Sri Lanka (r. 362-409). Ordained at the age of 20, Buddhadāsa subsequently founded a centre for meditation in southern Thailand in 1932. His general approach, in contrast to the standard Burmese practice of insight meditation (vipaśyanā) was to teach insight through the attainment of trance (dhyāna). In his extensive writings he has offered revisionist interpretations of traditional teachings in an effort to make them consistent with scientific discoveries and more applicable to the problems of the modern world. He emphasized ethical conduct over metaphysical beliefs, and even cast doubt on the belief in rebirth. His views have provoked controversy, as has the manner of his death. After suffering several strokes he went into a coma and against his previously expressed wishes was admitted to Siriraj hospital in May 1993 for treatment. This incident caused a national debate about living wills, euthanasia, and medical intervention at the end of life.