The two paradigms
By Nalin de Silva
(June 24, Colombo, Sri Lnaka Guardian) I shall not deviate too much from my main theme to respond to Mr. K. Sivakumaran, who appears to think that I am anti-Tamil or do not have a "soft corner" for the Tamils in Sri Lanka. I have more than a "soft corner" for the Tamils as well as all the other ethnic communities in Sri Lanka and I respect them as citizens of the country.
However, I do not keep silent when people misrepresent "facts" especially in the interests of the British and the other westerners who are out to dominate not only the Sinhalas but the Tamils, Muslims and others as well. At present the Brits are supporting the Tamils simply because they think that can use the latter to weaken if not destroy the Sinhala Buddhist culture, but if they succeed then they (Brits) will train their guns on the Tamils. I have "facts" which are neither sacred nor independent of theories, concepts etc., as in the case of the "facts" of others as well, to show that Tamils in Sri Lanka do not have a continuous history going back to a date not before the thirteenth century but before the seventeenth century.
The Vellalas in Jaffna as well as in Natal, South Africa were brought to the respective districts by the Dutch, and could somebody explain how the former became the dominant cast in the Sri Lankan Tamil community surpassing the other castes if there were any Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka at the time the Dutch brought them. Why there is no dominant Brahmin caste among the Hindu Tamils in Sri Lanka, unlike in the case of Hindus all over India from North to South, from Nehrus to Jeyalalithas, is a related question that needs an answer. Then, of course, the close relationship between Tamil spoken in Jaffna and in Chennai or in Madurai for that matter has to be understood.
If Sri Lankan Tamils had come at a very early era then the languages spoken in the two regions could not have been that close. In any event, the artefacts found in ancient Sri Lanka or ancient Bharath or Dambadiva including those in Mohenjadaro or Harappa should not be identified as Dravidian. They could be identified as non-Aryan for want of a better term as the term indigenous with all the connotations that it has acquired over the years is inappropriate.
The Dravidians just as much the Aryans were not an ethnic group and it is agreed by the historians and the archaeologists that the Aryans had come to Dambadiva before the Dravidians. The non-Aryans included various tribes such as Naga, Deva and Yaksha, who had a Persian connection, and we have to remind ourselves that matrilineal society was not a prerogative of the Dravidians. The tendency to identify any matrilineal society in South Asia with Dravidians cannot be justified. It is based also on the assumption that that non-Aryan implies Dravidian and when writing the history of the Tamils these "facts" also should be taken into consideration.
Of course, I have no hesitation to state that the Sinhala Buddhist culture is the significant culture of the country, not the dominant culture as stated by Mr. Sivakumaran, and to demand that the Tamils and the other ethnic communities accept this "fact". It is the non acceptance of this "fact" that has led to the so-called ethnic problem of the country and even very recently I am told that at a certain function in the Northern Province the national anthem had been sung in Tamil in the presence of none other person than Mr. Basil Rajapaksa! I do not know whether Mr. Rajapaksa tolerated this nonsense in the name of reconciliation but there are certain things in governance that cannot be compromised even if one has a soft corner for ethnic minorities. Imagine singing the national anthem of Britain in Tamil in Wembley in London in the presence of David Miliband or the national anthem of Canada in Tamil in Scarborough in Toronto in the presence of Bob Rae. If the Tamil Sri Lankans living in the former white commonwealth can accept that various forms of Anglo Saxon Christian culture are the dominant just not the significant culture of the respective country why cannot they accept that the Sinhala Buddhist culture is the significant culture of Sri Lanka, while retaining their ethnic identity. The day all the communities, including some "enlightened" Sinhala Buddhists, in Sri Lanka accept this "fact" the so-called ethnic problem would be over.
When discussing the Tamil problem in Sri Lanka there are two paradigms that are involved. The first is the usual western Christian modernity paradigm based on which the most well known "story" is woven. It says the following among others: "The Sinhala people and the ‘Sinhala government’ have discriminated against the Tamils since 1956, and the injustices caused against the Tamils became their grievances.
SJV Chelvanayakam fought non violently against these injustices but the ‘Sinhala government’ instead of giving a sympathetic ear, crushed violently the peaceful movements of the Tamils led by Chelvanayakam. Chelvanayakam and the other leaders had no option but to demand and fight for a separate state in the northern and the eastern provinces. The youth led by Prabhakaran, Uma Maheswaran had resorted to violence when they realised that Chelvanayakam and the other Tamil leaders were not doing much to liberate the Tamils from the ‘yoke of the Sinhala government’." In 1976 the demand for a separate state was adopted as a resolution at Vadukodai and Prabhakaran grabbed leadership for that struggle, very often killing the other leaders who affectionately called him "thambi" and the terrorists as our boys initially. Thus the proponents of this "story" justify the taking up of arms by Prabhakaran and in a sense they, too, are responsible for the murders committed by the LTTE, even though it may be only indirectly.
There are several auxiliaries associated with this "story". It is said that the Tamils in Sri Lanka had been there from the days of Vijaya, if not from the days of Ravana, and the northern and eastern provinces have been the so-called homeland of Tamils. Yet another auxiliary is that the Tamils had been living in Sri Lanka from time immemorial, if not from sixth century BC, and that even the king Devanampiya Tissa or Thesam was a Tamil. After Buddhism was introduced, according to this auxiliary, some of the Tamils had become Buddhists and then Sinhalas by inventing the Sinhala language based on Pali (the mirror image of the "theory" of Kumarathumga Munidasa as far as the invention of Pali by the Bhikkus in Mahavira is concerned).
If this auxiliary is correct then the Tamils who had become Sinhalas had pushed the remaining Tamils to the northern and the eastern provinces. In any event these auxiliaries are essential to "establish" that there is a Tamil "homeland" in the northern and the eastern provinces, as without them a separate state in those two provinces could not be "justified".
However, the irony is that these two provinces were finally demarcated by the British only in 1889 and not during the days of Ravana or "Devanampiya Thesam".
Incidentally, how many Thesams could be found among the Tamil Sri Lankans at present and how many Thissas could be found among the Sinhalas even today. It appears that Thesams have given up the name of the "traitors" while the "traitors" had stuck to the name of the original "traitor" for more than two thousand years.
There are so many other contradictions in this ‘story’ and the auxiliaries which have been dealt previously and I am not interested in repeating them ad nauseam. The "homeland theory" can be easily demolished with data supplied by Prof. G. H. Peiris in his research papers. The "homeland theory" was also based on the Leghorn Minute which we discussed last week. The late Gamini Iriyagolla adequately dealt with the Leghorn Minute and some so-called historical ‘facts’ and it is a waste of time to repeat them here. Anybody interested is referred to the publications by the late Iriyagolla, who had also referred to an agreement between the Arya Chakravarthins and the Portuguese in Sinhala and Portuguese. We could say that this ‘fact, implies that for all purposes the "official language" in the Arya Chakravarthi kingdom was Sinhala.
(To be continued) -Sri Lanka Guardian
Home Unlabelled The solution –(Part III)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
While not wanting to get involved in the main argument of this article I would like to answer a question posed in it – “Could somebody explain how former [Vellalas] became the dominant caste in the Sri Lankan Tamil community......Why there is no dominant Brahmin caste among the Hindu Tamils in Sri Lanka.” – The answer is very simple to anyone who knows the most basic tenet of the caste system which is that caste is transmitted by birth. Only biological Brahmin can create another biological Brahmin. Then there was another problem that was the Brahmins were forbidden by their strict rules to travel by ship. The combination of these two factors makes it impossible to have large Brahmin communities outside India. What therefore happened was the adaptation of the caste system the essence of which was a hierarchy created by way of birth to different localities. As landlords were dominant in many parts of Asia a landlord caste was created the properties of which were kept within the caste by a strict rule of birth. The same principle applied to other castes, who too were confined to their position in life by birth. Therefore there is no difference in the way that the caste system was introduced to the Sinhalese as well as the Tamils in Sri Lanka. Govigama, the landlord caste became the dominant caste among Sinhalas the same way Vellalas become the dominant caste among Tamils. It is out of the same caste that traders also arose in the Sri Lankan context whereas the traders are a separate caste in India.
Here a word must also be said about the meaning of dominance. This is not the same as dominance meaning higher influence due to various forms of power as it is now. Dominance meant to be born into those who were at the top of the hierarchy. Dominance comes through the hierarchical structure not through acquired power. This also answers another question about how Buddhist monks acquired Brahmanical habits. Brahmins in India as the dominant caste declared that killing one of them is the highest crime. This became a ‘Buddhist’ tenet in Sri Lanka. Brahmins do not salute members of other castes to show equality with them. So do the Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka. It is possible to enumerate a large list of similarities between the Brahmins and the Buddhist monks of Sri Lanka. However, the Buddha’s creation of the monk was the opposite of the exploiting Brahmin. The concept of Sinhala Buddhism itself is culturally Brahmanical. Sinhala Buddhists worship Hindu gods. Shiva and Vishnu are brought to the 'Budugeya' itself with the same colours that any anthropologist would recognise but call Sariyuth and Mugalan. The mode of adaptation to Brahmanism in Sri Lanka will expose the fact that Sinhala Buddhism has very little to do with the original Buddhism of Gautama Buddha. (Brahmanism also made similar adaptations in Cambodia, Thailand and Burma).
More studies on Brahmanism would shed light that there isn't many differences between Sinhala Buddhism and the Hinduism of Tamils in Sri Lanka.
These sinahala chauvansistic fascist half baked authotors thinks their Mahavamsa chronicle is the supreme quoting half baked historians . It is a known fact that the international historians have dismissed the Mahavamsa as a misrepresented folklore the dates and facts are contradictory and do not corroborate with archaelogical evidence and linguistic evolution.
If these sinhala stupid morons question the tamil homeland, let the sinahala go back to the kalinga ; may be now it is some waste land of orissa if orissa govt is ready to take sinhalas; may be not as the sinhalas are the criminals supposedly the descendants of the Vijaya a criminal admonished from India; By the way the Sinhala Buddhists with clubs and knives are a shame to the great Buddha; Today if Buddha reincaranates would not step in the Stupas as Sinhala Buddhists and GOSL and army have blood stained hands of genocide for last 61 years.
The author of this article says, he is being told that at a certain function in the Northern Province the national anthem had been sung in Tamil.
Has he woken up from a long slumber?
Doesn’t he know that there is a Tamil version/translation of the National anthem?
The Sinhala language is alien to the Northern Province and a large part of the Eastern Province.
In the above provinces, for every functions (schools or any other) the National anthem was always sung in Tamil.
For the last 50 odd years, no one has ever sung the National anthem in Sinhala in the Northen Province.
My advice to those who read articles on history written by people like Dr. Nalin De Silva.
People like him can only speculate or come up with many assumptions, hypothesis, analogies, etc but they do not have any solid evidence to prove what they say. The ancient stone inscriptions and even the Mahavamsa do not support them.
If you want to know the history of Sri Lanka after all the scientific discoveries in the fields of archaeological, epigraphical and anthropological research made till now, you have to read what is written by people who are qualified in the field of history/archeology and not Math/physics.
For example, people such as Prof. Leslie Gunawardane, (professor in history and a former Vice Chancellor of University of Peradeniya), Dr. K Indrapala (former professor in history, University of Jaffna) and many other qualified historians have written articles and books on the history of Sri Lanka based on the latest findings.
What credibility does bogus pseudo-historians like Dr. Nalin De Silva who still rely on articles written by early (obsolete) historians have in commenting on history? They can only come up with hypotheses, assumptions and analogies and not the facts/truth. Twisting, turning, manipulating, and coming up with big fat conspiracy theories are their hallmark.
Dr. Nalin de Silva the rude/arrogant old man, the Math professor at the Kelaniya campus, writes nothing but rubbish and believes that he is an expert analyst/scholar.
I read one of his articles in the Island (utter nonsense) where he claims that western truth in particular is not relevant to us (and fogs it up with irrelevant allusions to quantum science and relativity), and claims that the only point of view applicable in SriLanka is the Sinhala-Buddhsit point of view.
This is a Math Professor who has FAILED to excel in math, but succeeded in CHEAP polemics. After obtaining the PhD what matters is not only the brains but peer recognition which is more important at that level but unfortunately he NEVER had it.
As one of the founding member of Vasudeva's and Wickramabahu's Troskite NSSP, Nalin De Silva was one of the first Sinhalese to endorse the right of Tamils for self determination in early 1980. Later he has taken a hundred and eighty degree turn and started talking utter rubbish about something he calls 'Jathika Chintahnaya'. This has made him very famous among Sinhala-Buddhist RACISTS, the recognition he always wanted but never got from university circle.
Reading the rubbish what he writes is a complete waste of time. Even his students at the Kelaniya University do not like him. In university circle, he is known as 'Nalin the Pissa'.
The danger with people like Prof. Nalin de Silva is what he speaks is very dangerous to the society. He brainwashes younger generation and creates racists. He has already created a young Sinhala-Buddhist Racist society. It was racists like him in the Tamil society who created the LTTE. His course of action is detrimental to the future of our country and should be stopped at any cost.
I am an Indian Dalit. I learned Buddihism from Dalit movement. Our great leader Ambedkar wanted outcastes and low caste to become Buddhist so that we can free ourselves from Brahmanism. We Dalits like, Gautama Buddha, because, he defeated Brahminism and made room for all of us.
I stayed in Sri Lanka several Months. I saw some very simple monks in villages, very good people. But, I learned that there are big monks, who do not go begging. They get food from richer people who bring it to them. I was told that temples have big properties. These monks are like our Brahmins who exploit the religion for a living. I do not know how poor people feel about it. I personally was shocked, because for people like me Buddhism means equality, simplicity, and kindness.
Bagavan Das-
It is sad to note that some of commentors have opted to cheap character attacks on Prof Nalin De Silva instead of providing something of value to the discussion. Important facts presented in the article were willingly ignored by them obviously to keep their fading 'ealam' dream going.
What I mean by the important facts are :
1) Dutch brought Vellalas here (just as they took tamils to South africa) and created a new caste and a population in north.
2) British extended this and tried to use that population to help them rule the masses.
3)Even Arya Chakrawarthi's have used Sinhala as their official language. (why would they otherwise use sinhala to sign an agreement with portugeese ?)
4) language in TN and jaffna is so similar. (come on, we all know how many people came here from TN and settled in during last 2 centuries) How many families are there in Jaffna today whose family roots do not go back to Tamil Nadu
in less than 5 generations ?
why not directly try to answer these instead of name callings ? Inability to face up to the reality has cost most ealamists dearly, an entire generation has suffered as a result. Do you really have to do this game forever .. Isn't it time to be bit open... ?
Thapan said,
*/Why there is no dominant Brahmin caste among the Hindu Tamils in Sri Lanka.” – The answer is very simple to anyone who knows the most basic tenet of the caste system which is that caste is transmitted by birth. Only biological Brahmin can create another biological Brahmin. Then there was another problem that was the Brahmins were forbidden by their strict rules to travel by ship. The combination of these two factors makes it impossible to have large Brahmin communities outside India/*
This clearly indicates Tamils are not origin from Sri Lanka. They have migrated from India to Sri Lanka. Tamil nadu is thier origin and Tamil nadu is thier Home Land.
Mani,
It dosn't seem like you have read anything in the article. This article give very factful analysys against the Home Land Fraud of Tamils. You don't need Mahawansa to understand the simple factual analysis based on present day basic evidents he is presenting. Read this and give facts against what is trying to prove rather than writing rubbish.
For those who believe what Dr. Nalin De Silva writes as gospel truth?
In my comments above, I have written very precisely that Dr. Nalin De Silva’s arguments are mostly based on the findings/writings of old (obsolete) historians. Most of those theories are not valid any more due to the latest scientific discoveries in the fields of archaeological, epigraphical and anthropological research made till now.
Secondly, most of is arguments are based on assumptions, hypothesis, analogies, etc. He never comes up with any solid evidence to prove what he says but simply quotes another author whose credibility is in question (either a racist like him without any *verifiable data* or some biased researchers with hypothetical assumptions/interpretations or un-authoritative/officially un-published, half baked historical work of some researchers completely neglecting the controversial nature of their research.).
For example, Dr. Nalin De Silva still comments on the thesis that the PhD student Mr. K. Indrapala wrote in 1965. After 30 years of research as a senior Archeologist/Historian Prof. K. Indrapala say he does not even have a copy of his dissertation which is completely out of date.
People can speculate or create anything and write glamorized articles to convince a few confused and misguided individuals but calling them FACTS is simply ridiculous.
Since one of the commenters above who seem to be a faithful follower of Dr. Nalin De Silva says they are *important facts* let me give him a very brief reply.
Dr. Nalin De Silva says there were no Tamils in Sri Lanka before the 12th Century AD. The Mahavamsa very clearly says that there were Tamils (Damilas) in Sri Lanka during the early historic period not as traders but the rulers. Even Dutugemunu had to conquer not just one Tamil king but 32 Tamil Chieftains around the Anuradhapura principality alone. How could there be 32 Tamil chieftains in the area of Anuradhapura alone, if there were no Tamils or Tamil settlements? Even the ancient stone inscriptions found so far also mentions the term Damilas (Tamils) during the ancient period. On the other hand, what evidence does he have to prove that Devanampiya Tissa or even DutuGemunu was a Sinhala?
Dr. Nalin De Silva speaks as if he had witnessed the Dutch bringing Vellalar to Jaffna. Vellalar is a caste of agricultural land owners. If the Dutch brought the Vellalar and created a new caste then I am sure the Dutch must have kept a record. What historical evidence does he have to prove his claim?
It is true that the Dutch brought slaves from South India and sold them to the Vellalar as laborers to grow Tobacco in their fields but those people lived in Jaffna until recently as low castes.
At the same time the Dutch also brought tens of thousands of slaves from South India to the South of Ceylon (Colombo, Galle and the entire South West). One of the main sources of income the Dutch had at that time was Cinnamon.
According to the Dutch writer Markus Vink, Let me quote straight from his report:
Quote: In 1694, the city of Colombo alone had a slave population of 1,761. See Knaap, 'Europeans, Mestizos and Slaves,' p. 88. In 1661, 10,000 slaves had been put to work by the company and by private individuals on the lands in southwestern Ceylon, including 2,000 company slaves. Unquote.
The Sinhala population from Colombo to Galle along the entire South West increased when these people assimilated with the Sinhalese? Ten thousand in 1694 must have multiplied into many lakhs. Today they are Sinhala Buddhists/Catholics who are claiming the ancient Sri Lankan civilization as their own heritage.
Let me also mention that, based on the writings of Markus Vink, Prof.Sinnappah Arasaratnam has written an article about the slaves settled in Jaffna to work in the Tobacco fields owned by the Vellalars.
Dr. Nalin De Silva also says that even AriyaChakravartis have used Sinhala as their official language because they have used sinhala to sign an agreement with Portuguese.
First of all who can prove that the AriyaChakravartis used Sinhala to sign an agreement with Portuguese? Is this document preserved anywhere or has any 17th centaury Portuguese writer mentioned it anywhere?
Suppose we say, yes the AriyaChakravartis used Sinhala to sign an agreement. Is that an evidence to say AriyaChakravartis have used Sinhala as their official language?
In the 1815 Kandyan Convention, the leading Kandyan Lords or Dissawas who are believed to be the top Sinhala aristocrats (Pilimatalawe Senior, Pilimatalawe Junior, Ehelepola, Ratwatte, and so on) signed their names in the Tamil Language.
There is no reason why they should learn to speak and write Tamil or rather sign an important treaty concerning the country and religion in the Tamil Language?
If we argue in similar manner like Dr. Nalin De Silva, we can also say that the mother tongue of these Kandyan Lords was Tamil or we can say that the Tamil Language was also an official Language of the Kandyan Kingdom.
Dr. Nalin De Silva says the Languages in Tamil Nadu and Jaffna are very similar.
Music, Drama and literature are very closely linked to the rich Tamil culture and due to the close proximity between Jaffna and Tamil Nadu, there is no reason why the Tamils of Jaffna have to create another language when everything is freely available. The neighboring states of Tamil Nadu adopted a slightly different language because they also had other neighbors. Similarly, the Sri Lankan Tamil has a few words (Sinhala) that the Tamils across the Palk Strait cannot understand.
Dr. Nalin De Silva is not an etymologist or a linguist and neither is he a Tamil scholar who has done research to find the similarities and differences between the Tamil language in Tamil Nadu and Jaffna.
All these are his creation or assumptions. It is sad to note that some of the commenters believe them as *important facts*.
There are enough of well qualified and renowned Historians/Archeologists out there but have any of them come up with any such issues/comments. The controversial articles on history written by bogus Pseudo-historians such as Math/Physics prof. Nalin De Silva can be dissected and nullified but mostly it goes unchallenged because no body likes to lose their dignity by engaging in CHEAP polemics especially with nasty, arrogant and sarcastic people like Dr. Nalin De Silva.
Post a Comment