According to the Mahavamsa, after King Sirinaga, the throne was succeeded by his son, Prince Voharika Tissa. However, the Dipavamsa presents a different version of this story. It states that King Sirinaga had two sons — Abhaya and Tissa. Among them, Prince Abhaya, being the elder son, ascended the throne after his father’s death. Later, his brother Tissa became king.

From these accounts, it is clear that there was some confusion or contradiction in the early sources regarding the order in which these two kings reigned. The Mahavamsa Tika too confirms this, saying:

“It should have been said that after the demise of Abhaya, King Mall Tissa ruled Lanka for eight years, yet it is said instead, ‘After Sirinaga’s passing...’ etc.”

Commenting on this, Professor Senarath Paranavitana noted that the Mahavamsa’s order — placing Voharika Tissa before Abhaya Naga — must have been based on an ancient and trustworthy source now lost to us. He further points out that the detailed description in the Mahavamsa of the intrigues by which Abhaya Naga deprived Prince Voharika Tissa of the throne also supports this chronology. Therefore, it is more appropriate to follow the Mahavamsa’s version.

The title “Vohara” (or “Voharika”) Tissa was given to this King Tissa because he established a system of law free from violence and cruelty — a Hinsha-mukta Vyavahara, or “righteous judicial code.” The Mahavamsa describes him as an expert in Dharmavyavahara, that is, in just and lawful conduct. This term is of special importance when studying the history of legal systems in Lanka.

In a Brahmi inscription dating to the first century A.D., the term vohara (or vohara) is used to refer to a person named Naka, meaning “one who practices law.” This term is comparable to the modern Sinhala vyavahara, meaning “jurisprudence” or “legal proceedings.” Hence, “Voharika Tissa” literally means “King Tissa the jurist.”

The Mahavamsa describes the deeds of King Voharika Tissa in thirteen stanzas, and the Dipavamsa in six. Their accounts do not greatly differ. Both begin with references to offerings made to the Thera Deva of Kambugama and the Thera Mahatissa of Anurarama. A notable act was a great almsgiving held at the port of Muchelapattana.

The Mahavamsa Tika elaborates that this offering took place near the great port of Mahatota (modern Mannar), where a large ship made of metal was stationed to serve as the venue for the almsgiving. Mahatota, known in chronicles as Mahatittha, was the principal port of ancient Sri Lanka, situated near present-day Mannar.

The name “Muchela” may correspond to the Sinhala Musali, or it may be a Prakrit adaptation of the Sinhala village name Musali. During the reigns of Kings Vasabha and Kanitthatissa, inscriptions found in monasteries in the region now known as Wilpattu refer to a city called Magana, which Ptolemy also mentions as a port town. This city lay near where the present Malwathu Oya (mistakenly referred to in some texts as Modaragam Aru) meets the sea.

In the Kokila Sandeshaya, composed during the Kotte period, the messenger bird, after crossing Modaragam Aru, sees “Musaliya Mudadura” — the mouth of the Musali River. Since the word Mudadura means “river mouth” or “place where a river meets the sea,” it is clear that Muchelapattana was located near the mouth of the Kal Aru, within this same region. On later maps, an area named Musali is indeed marked below the mouth of the Malwathu Oya. Thus, the city of Magana and the Musali river mouth were close to each other, and it appears that King Voharika Tissa’s ship used for almsgiving was stationed in this region, south of Mannar.

Among the king’s other religious works were the construction of boundary walls around the monasteries of Mirisaveti, Puttabhaga, Isurumuni, and Tissa Vihara in Nagadipa (modern Jaffna Peninsula).

During this period, Aryavamsa sermons had become popular, and the king also organized great almsgiving ceremonies at the places where these sermons were delivered. Two notable acts deserve special mention here:

First, the king spent three lakhs from the royal treasury to free monks who had fallen into debt. The reason why monks had become indebted is not explained.

Second, he suppressed the Vaitulya doctrine — a heretical sect — and re-established purity of the faith. This event is described in more detail in the Nikaya Sangrahaya, Saddharmaratnakaraya, and Rajarathnakaraya.

According to these accounts, monks of the Abhayagiri sect, led by a teacher named Dhammaruchi, introduced the Vaitulya Pitaka and claimed it to be the authentic teaching of the Buddha. The Theravada monks, upon comparing it with the Dhamma and Vinaya, declared it a false doctrine. Hearing this, King Voharika Tissa ordered his minister Kapila, learned in all sciences, to investigate. The Vaitulya texts were condemned and burned, and the monks who had accepted them were punished. Thus, the Buddha’s dispensation flourished once more.

The Dipavamsa refers to this movement as Vitandavada, while the Mahavamsa calls it Vaitulya-vada. This doctrine was in fact a form of Mahayana Buddhism that had arisen in India.

According to Buddhaghosa’s commentary on the Kathavatthu, the Mahayanists believed that the Buddha did not actually live in the human world, but resided in the Tusita heaven and sent forth an emanation to earth; that his teachings were delivered by the Venerable Ananda, and so on. Such ideas appear in Saddharmapundarika Sutra and Prajnaparamita Sutra, where the word Vaitulya is also used. Thus, Vaitulya-vada refers to the Mahayana doctrine, and this is the first historical reference to it in Sri Lanka, during the reign of King Voharika Tissa.

Although no definite inscriptions survive from his reign, a rock inscription found at Bowattegala in Ruhuna is thought to belong to him. It begins with the words “…ka Tissa Maharaja.” The initial letters before “ka” are damaged, but if reconstructed as “Vohari,” the name would read “Voharika Tissa Maharaja.”

The inscription records a donation made by Naka, son of the chief minister of Abhayagiri, and thus likely dates from the reign of the same king mentioned above. This suggests that during King Voharika Tissa’s reign, Ruhuna was under the administration of an Abhayagiri minister. Some scholars, however, believe it could belong to the time of King Bhathika Tissa.

King Voharika Tissa was a man devoted to law and righteousness. His brother, Prince Abhaya Naga, however, was not such a person. He developed a secret illicit relationship with the queen. When the king learned of this, the frightened prince fled to Bhallatthitha — a place believed to have been near the coast. Because of this act, the peaceful and righteous atmosphere that had prevailed in the country began to deteriorate.

Thus ended the reign of King Voharika Tissa — a just ruler who had banished violence from his kingdom — after two years.