The aspiration of the Sinhala Buddhists
Previous Part
by Nalin de Silva
(August 21, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Ceylonese identity of the Burghers had to be stillborn. The Burghers were mainly town dwellers who were confined to Colombo and a few other towns in the country, did not know the villagers nor the villages. They wanted a Ceylonese nation to be built and probably wanted to be on equal terms with the British on some matters. They would have followed the British model in particular and the western model in general in relation to government, education, culture, law etc. The ordinary Sinhalas and Tamils would not have had any place in their system though the elite Sinhalas and Tamils would have been recognized by them. When the Legislative Assembly was established, of the six unofficial members three were appointed to represent the Europeans, and one each to represent the Burghers, Tamils and the Sinhalas. This was the beginning of the problem after the Dutch had imported the Vellalas (Agricultural labourers) from present Tamil Nadu for the tobacco cultivation the former had introduced, to found a Tamil permanent community in Jaffna.
The British were concerned with the elite Burghers, Tamils and the Sinhalas only in that order. The English educated and those who had won favours from the British in professions, education, land ownership etc., were considered for these nominations to the Legislative assembly and they in turn represented only those who were similar to them and not the ordinary Sinhalas and the Tamils. As far as the British were concerned the Burghers were more important than the Tamils who in turn were more important than the Sinhalas. The British did not consider the history of the country nor the population percentages in appointing the three unofficial non European members of the Legislative Assembly. Had they considered and given due recognition to the population statistics, history and culture of the country they should have appointed more members to represent the Sinhala people. However, the due place to the Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists had never been given in this country under Portuguese, Dutch, and British nor since limited independence gained in 1948, and that has been the problem that the Sinhala Buddhists had wanted successive governments to solve. However, whenever this problem was raised the Sinhala Buddhists had been accused of Chauvinism, Sinhala supremacy, by the pundits of western Christian modernity and local "intellectuals" who have been trained by the said pundits and who can only boast of imitating and repeating what the masters and the mistresses have said and done, or in the language of the present day undergraduates "girava demeema" (parroting).
The Ceylonese identity of Burghers that is being appreciated by Mr. R. M. B. Senanayake denied the due place to the Sinhala Buddhists in the country, and one can understand why the former civil servant (a "service" detested by the ordinary people and had to be first replaced by the SLAS in late sixties and then "supplemented" by the political authority system of Mrs. Bandaranaike in early seventies, as the SLAS itself did not conform to the local management mechanisms we had in the country, eventually ruining the entire system due to ignorance of the fact that the Sinhala people cannot conform to the European administrative and political structures) and Classical scholar laments the death of this particular identity. What the Sinhala Buddhists want is not the acceptance of Sinhala Buddhist culture as the DOMINANT culture but the recognition of the fact that Sinhala Buddhist culture is the SIGNIFICANT culture in Sri Lanka and in a Sri Lankan identity. The aspiration of the Sinhala Buddhists is a Sri Lankan identity where the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture is recognized. They will never accept the Ceylonese identity of the Burghers and consequently of the Tamil leaders and finally of the anti Sinhala Buddhist Sinhala elite. The unique culture in Sri Lanka that cannot be found in any part of India or elsewhere was built by the Sinhala Buddhists, and it is distressing to note that the Ceylonese and their successor Sri Lankans are not prepared to accept even that. If somebody does not believe in what I have said, whether it is RMBS or anybody else, all that he/she has to do is to go round the country, of course with open eyes. However, there are some people who are congenitally culturally blind to these facts, and I am afraid as long as such people live we would be groping in the dark for a solution of the so-called ethnic problem. I can assure RMBS that no solution to the so called ethnic problem can be found unless due recognition is given to the Sinhala Buddhist culture. Before one calls this Sinhala supremacy one should not only study how in the west various Christian cultures are not only significant but dominant as well. It is not only in those countries that the western Christian (not the Catholic unfortunately for RMBS) is dominant but in our parts of the world as well. They dominate us through their knowledge which is neither objective nor absolute.
Apart from the "Nestorian Cross" which was supposed to be found in Anuradhapura and which has still not being explained as an artefact (nobody has come up with a good theory to explain what it was doing in ancient Anuradhapura, and a few kovils in Polonnaruwa built by conquerors, the rest of the historical and archeological artifacts in ancient Sri Lanka speak of a unique Sinhala Buddhist culture. The Sinhalas may have borrowed from other cultures but they absorbed what was borrowed into their culture. How many books have been written in ancient Sri Lanka in a language other than Sinhala or Pali? Almost all the books have been written in these two languages with one or two books written in Sanskrit. If there was any other culture in ancient Sri Lanka why there were no books written in a language relative to that culture. Then how many inscriptions have been found in a language other than Sinhala? What is the percentage of such inscriptions and how many of them had been written for sailors and others who came to Sri Lanka from other countries?
The anti Sinhala Buddhists in the country with support from the western countries as well as from India that has a grudge against Sri Lanka for protecting Theravada Buddhism consciously for more than one thousand five hundred years, and for not being able to make Sri Lanka one of their dependent countries, even Cholas could not capture whole of Sri Lanka, are determined not to recognize the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture in Sri Lanka. It was not long ago that some racist anti Sinhala Buddhist leaders wanted to have three national flags and two national anthems, in the name of plurality in cultures and ethnicities. In that case India should be having more than twenty national anthems and may be an equal number of national flags. Fortunately these anti Sinhala Buddhists have either died or decayed and the racist tendencies have died down.
The westerners always advise us to respect pluralism but they have become pleurisy in the lungs of the Sri Lanka. It is true that Sri Lanka is a plural country as there are ethnicities other than the Sinhalas. In that sense almost all the countries in the world are plural. However, it is only in Sri Lanka that we are advised to treat all the cultures equally, and not to recognize the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture. I have mentioned this umpteen tines but the anti Sinhala Buddhists neither counter the argument nor accept it. Unable to answer they are happy to ignore it. It is a case of neither learning nor not departing.
These anti Sinhala Buddhists shout from roof tops that all cultures should be treated on an equal footing meaning of course that the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture in Sri Lanka should not be recognized.
Now how do those western countries and India behave in this regard. They would claim to be secular and to respect plurality. Are all the cultures in Britain treated equally. How many national flags does Britain or UK have? What is the lingua franca in UK. It is certainly not Urdu though there is a substantial number of Urdu speaking people in that country. It is not even Scottish or Welsh or Irish. Yes it has to be English and the national anthem has to be sung in English requesting the Christian God to save the queen, though nobody has asked the question as to from whom she had to be saved. Why do not they ask Allah the God of the Islam people to save the Queen? Perhaps they can have a national anthem in Arabic requesting Allah to save the Prince of Wales just to have some balance. At least once in a while they can speak in Urdu or Arabic in the house of commons where the common and the only language is English. In the other western countries too it is the same story with a Christian culture dominating and one of the western languages being treated more equally than the other languages. Norway is not an exception with their Lutheranism dominating over the others. USA is no different and the Christian culture and (American) English dominating there. India though it pretends to be secular is a Hindu country with Hindi as at least the "lingua cinema". The leaders of India including Italian born Sonia Gandhi respect the Hindu culture which is obviously much more recognized than Islam, Buddhism or Jainism cultures.
RMBS has innocently referred to Obama the first black (or half black) to win the Democratic Party nominations for Presidency. What has happened in USA during the last fifty years or so? Have they become egalitarian? Are they treating the blacks as equals? Far from it. What has happened during the last few decades is that some blacks have now become Kalu Suddas in USA. The culture of the elite blacks and half blacks whether it is Condoleezza Rise or Obama is now nothing but western Christian to the core. The western Christian education they receive in colleges (universities) and elsewhere have turned them to be fine ladies and gentlemen meaning that they can hold wineglasses and wineglass shaped creatures respectively just like the white elite do. They have no traces of Muslim or other cultures in them, though some Republicans are still trying to find out whether the name Hussein in Obama is significant or not. What would have happened if Obama remained a Muslim? Obama and the elite blacks have become white in everything except the skin colour and Michael Jackson would teach Obama how to change the skin colour if necessary. These Kalu Suddas in USA are very similar to our Kalu Suddas in whom the British had utmost confidence. Remember that the British had so much confidence in our Kalu Suddas that they gave Sri Lanka universal franchise before any other country in Asia was given, knowing very well everything was safe in the hands of the top hat wearing gentlemen of Sri Lanka. The whites in USA have confidence in Obama who is a hundred percent western Christian who belongs to that culture and know that he would not upset the apple cart. Obama’s nomination is not a victory for the blacks but a victory for the American white culture that has been able to turn a black man into a good white Christian in culture who can be trusted to protect USA from the other cultures in the world. Incidentally it is reported in "The Island" of 18th of August that Obama campaign has accepted funds from pro LTTE donors, which Clinton had to refuse. Obama may do the same if sufficient pressure is applied. In any event this incident has shown that Obama is not different from Clinton, in even having some alliance with the LTTE supporters in USA. (To be concluded)
- Sri Lanka Guardian
by Nalin de Silva
(August 21, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Ceylonese identity of the Burghers had to be stillborn. The Burghers were mainly town dwellers who were confined to Colombo and a few other towns in the country, did not know the villagers nor the villages. They wanted a Ceylonese nation to be built and probably wanted to be on equal terms with the British on some matters. They would have followed the British model in particular and the western model in general in relation to government, education, culture, law etc. The ordinary Sinhalas and Tamils would not have had any place in their system though the elite Sinhalas and Tamils would have been recognized by them. When the Legislative Assembly was established, of the six unofficial members three were appointed to represent the Europeans, and one each to represent the Burghers, Tamils and the Sinhalas. This was the beginning of the problem after the Dutch had imported the Vellalas (Agricultural labourers) from present Tamil Nadu for the tobacco cultivation the former had introduced, to found a Tamil permanent community in Jaffna.
The British were concerned with the elite Burghers, Tamils and the Sinhalas only in that order. The English educated and those who had won favours from the British in professions, education, land ownership etc., were considered for these nominations to the Legislative assembly and they in turn represented only those who were similar to them and not the ordinary Sinhalas and the Tamils. As far as the British were concerned the Burghers were more important than the Tamils who in turn were more important than the Sinhalas. The British did not consider the history of the country nor the population percentages in appointing the three unofficial non European members of the Legislative Assembly. Had they considered and given due recognition to the population statistics, history and culture of the country they should have appointed more members to represent the Sinhala people. However, the due place to the Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists had never been given in this country under Portuguese, Dutch, and British nor since limited independence gained in 1948, and that has been the problem that the Sinhala Buddhists had wanted successive governments to solve. However, whenever this problem was raised the Sinhala Buddhists had been accused of Chauvinism, Sinhala supremacy, by the pundits of western Christian modernity and local "intellectuals" who have been trained by the said pundits and who can only boast of imitating and repeating what the masters and the mistresses have said and done, or in the language of the present day undergraduates "girava demeema" (parroting).
The Ceylonese identity of Burghers that is being appreciated by Mr. R. M. B. Senanayake denied the due place to the Sinhala Buddhists in the country, and one can understand why the former civil servant (a "service" detested by the ordinary people and had to be first replaced by the SLAS in late sixties and then "supplemented" by the political authority system of Mrs. Bandaranaike in early seventies, as the SLAS itself did not conform to the local management mechanisms we had in the country, eventually ruining the entire system due to ignorance of the fact that the Sinhala people cannot conform to the European administrative and political structures) and Classical scholar laments the death of this particular identity. What the Sinhala Buddhists want is not the acceptance of Sinhala Buddhist culture as the DOMINANT culture but the recognition of the fact that Sinhala Buddhist culture is the SIGNIFICANT culture in Sri Lanka and in a Sri Lankan identity. The aspiration of the Sinhala Buddhists is a Sri Lankan identity where the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture is recognized. They will never accept the Ceylonese identity of the Burghers and consequently of the Tamil leaders and finally of the anti Sinhala Buddhist Sinhala elite. The unique culture in Sri Lanka that cannot be found in any part of India or elsewhere was built by the Sinhala Buddhists, and it is distressing to note that the Ceylonese and their successor Sri Lankans are not prepared to accept even that. If somebody does not believe in what I have said, whether it is RMBS or anybody else, all that he/she has to do is to go round the country, of course with open eyes. However, there are some people who are congenitally culturally blind to these facts, and I am afraid as long as such people live we would be groping in the dark for a solution of the so-called ethnic problem. I can assure RMBS that no solution to the so called ethnic problem can be found unless due recognition is given to the Sinhala Buddhist culture. Before one calls this Sinhala supremacy one should not only study how in the west various Christian cultures are not only significant but dominant as well. It is not only in those countries that the western Christian (not the Catholic unfortunately for RMBS) is dominant but in our parts of the world as well. They dominate us through their knowledge which is neither objective nor absolute.
Apart from the "Nestorian Cross" which was supposed to be found in Anuradhapura and which has still not being explained as an artefact (nobody has come up with a good theory to explain what it was doing in ancient Anuradhapura, and a few kovils in Polonnaruwa built by conquerors, the rest of the historical and archeological artifacts in ancient Sri Lanka speak of a unique Sinhala Buddhist culture. The Sinhalas may have borrowed from other cultures but they absorbed what was borrowed into their culture. How many books have been written in ancient Sri Lanka in a language other than Sinhala or Pali? Almost all the books have been written in these two languages with one or two books written in Sanskrit. If there was any other culture in ancient Sri Lanka why there were no books written in a language relative to that culture. Then how many inscriptions have been found in a language other than Sinhala? What is the percentage of such inscriptions and how many of them had been written for sailors and others who came to Sri Lanka from other countries?
The anti Sinhala Buddhists in the country with support from the western countries as well as from India that has a grudge against Sri Lanka for protecting Theravada Buddhism consciously for more than one thousand five hundred years, and for not being able to make Sri Lanka one of their dependent countries, even Cholas could not capture whole of Sri Lanka, are determined not to recognize the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture in Sri Lanka. It was not long ago that some racist anti Sinhala Buddhist leaders wanted to have three national flags and two national anthems, in the name of plurality in cultures and ethnicities. In that case India should be having more than twenty national anthems and may be an equal number of national flags. Fortunately these anti Sinhala Buddhists have either died or decayed and the racist tendencies have died down.
The westerners always advise us to respect pluralism but they have become pleurisy in the lungs of the Sri Lanka. It is true that Sri Lanka is a plural country as there are ethnicities other than the Sinhalas. In that sense almost all the countries in the world are plural. However, it is only in Sri Lanka that we are advised to treat all the cultures equally, and not to recognize the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture. I have mentioned this umpteen tines but the anti Sinhala Buddhists neither counter the argument nor accept it. Unable to answer they are happy to ignore it. It is a case of neither learning nor not departing.
These anti Sinhala Buddhists shout from roof tops that all cultures should be treated on an equal footing meaning of course that the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture in Sri Lanka should not be recognized.
Now how do those western countries and India behave in this regard. They would claim to be secular and to respect plurality. Are all the cultures in Britain treated equally. How many national flags does Britain or UK have? What is the lingua franca in UK. It is certainly not Urdu though there is a substantial number of Urdu speaking people in that country. It is not even Scottish or Welsh or Irish. Yes it has to be English and the national anthem has to be sung in English requesting the Christian God to save the queen, though nobody has asked the question as to from whom she had to be saved. Why do not they ask Allah the God of the Islam people to save the Queen? Perhaps they can have a national anthem in Arabic requesting Allah to save the Prince of Wales just to have some balance. At least once in a while they can speak in Urdu or Arabic in the house of commons where the common and the only language is English. In the other western countries too it is the same story with a Christian culture dominating and one of the western languages being treated more equally than the other languages. Norway is not an exception with their Lutheranism dominating over the others. USA is no different and the Christian culture and (American) English dominating there. India though it pretends to be secular is a Hindu country with Hindi as at least the "lingua cinema". The leaders of India including Italian born Sonia Gandhi respect the Hindu culture which is obviously much more recognized than Islam, Buddhism or Jainism cultures.
RMBS has innocently referred to Obama the first black (or half black) to win the Democratic Party nominations for Presidency. What has happened in USA during the last fifty years or so? Have they become egalitarian? Are they treating the blacks as equals? Far from it. What has happened during the last few decades is that some blacks have now become Kalu Suddas in USA. The culture of the elite blacks and half blacks whether it is Condoleezza Rise or Obama is now nothing but western Christian to the core. The western Christian education they receive in colleges (universities) and elsewhere have turned them to be fine ladies and gentlemen meaning that they can hold wineglasses and wineglass shaped creatures respectively just like the white elite do. They have no traces of Muslim or other cultures in them, though some Republicans are still trying to find out whether the name Hussein in Obama is significant or not. What would have happened if Obama remained a Muslim? Obama and the elite blacks have become white in everything except the skin colour and Michael Jackson would teach Obama how to change the skin colour if necessary. These Kalu Suddas in USA are very similar to our Kalu Suddas in whom the British had utmost confidence. Remember that the British had so much confidence in our Kalu Suddas that they gave Sri Lanka universal franchise before any other country in Asia was given, knowing very well everything was safe in the hands of the top hat wearing gentlemen of Sri Lanka. The whites in USA have confidence in Obama who is a hundred percent western Christian who belongs to that culture and know that he would not upset the apple cart. Obama’s nomination is not a victory for the blacks but a victory for the American white culture that has been able to turn a black man into a good white Christian in culture who can be trusted to protect USA from the other cultures in the world. Incidentally it is reported in "The Island" of 18th of August that Obama campaign has accepted funds from pro LTTE donors, which Clinton had to refuse. Obama may do the same if sufficient pressure is applied. In any event this incident has shown that Obama is not different from Clinton, in even having some alliance with the LTTE supporters in USA. (To be concluded)
- Sri Lanka Guardian
 The Ceylonese identity ...){kind=link}
Post a Comment