Comments on: Making Racism FUN for Kids

By: Veedhur

Veedhur — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 10:00:48 +0000

I read somewhere ( I think in a piece by RALH Gunawardena) that the ‘ethnic’ conciousness itself is of a much recent origin and that when we are looking through glasses tinted by current categorisations at the past which actually did not have those distinctions or even if it had the salient cleavages were certainly not ‘tamil’ and ‘sinhala’

Viyasn’s point is worth noting – and highlighting in the history books to make them real fun!

By: Plain Truth

Plain Truth — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 17:30:03 +0000

As a Sinhalese, I have nothing but fun memories associated with Tamils when I was growing up. I had Tamil neighbors and we learned some Tamil from their children. My relatives (mostly Buddhists) visited both Buddhist temples and Hindu kovils. In schools, we connected well with Tamil students.

I always describe the current situation as a bad marriage. We always do things to file for divorce (coexistence) than staying together (integration).

By: Plain Truth

Plain Truth — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 17:23:39 +0000

Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinism, give me a break.

A minority group can any given time use the Ã¢Â€Â˜Race CardÃ¢Â€Â™ whenever they see something they donÃ¢Â€Â™t like. My feeling is that in any society, the minority is more racist than the majority since they tend to stick together more so than the majority. This is a very natural human behavior since it is driven by the insecurity. Racism is a manifestation of fear and misunderstanding. The term racist or any other similar to it can be the weapon for the ignorant.

If anyone has visited Alamo (www Alamo dot org) in San Antonio, US, what you will see how they glorify a battle by white people against Mexicans. There are ton of Mexican Americans living in San Antonio. It is possible someone can claim these white people are either racists or chauvinists. Take for example US history? How demoralizing can that be for Native Americans?

I always say the term Sinhalese Buddhist Chuvenist has been invented to justify Tamil Terrorism. Racist people exists within both Sinhalese and Tamil community. Sri Lanka is learning to create racial and cultural awareness whenever they try to express the history. It is not fair to label people as chauvinists and shut them off completely.

By: Valavan

Valavan — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 08:31:10 +0000

Just stumbled on to this blog post. I am an Indian Tamil familiar with Tamil, Hindi and Sanskrit. I would like to make some comments on Sarath’s comments.
@Sarath : Yes, Sinhala is an Indo-European language but it may simply have evolved from Buddhist prakrit. It is a well-known fact that Prakrits such as Ardha-magadhi were the popular vehicle of choice for propogation of Buddhism both within India and abroad. Given that prakrits are vulgate descendants of Sanskrit, I am not at all surprised by the similarities between Sinhala and Hindi. However, the similarily can only be taken so far. Modern Hindi also has a significant persian and arabic influence and I doubt if a Sinhalese speaker can immediately relate or understand these words – zameen, asmaan, khoob, khana etc. There was a similar prakritisation of Tamil during the Buddhist era of Tamil ( btw, most people don’t seem to realize that Buddhism had a significant presence in Tamil lands as well and Buddhist authors have made significant contributions to Classical Tamil ). Besides, Language cannot be equated with “Race” ( albeit I don’t really subscribe to a notion of “Race” ). Turks ( in Turkey ) are racially caucasian but they speak a Central Asian language. Assamese ( in NE India ) is an Indo-European language but the Assamese people would be closer to Burmese than North Indians. Some scholars believe that Konkani may have been a dravidian language that was Sanskritized. Be that as it may, I believe that the Tamils and Sinhalese basically belong to the Souther Indian family although their respective ethnic identities emerged due to religion – the influence of Pali and Buddhism on the Sinahalese and the influence of Savitie bhakti movement on the Tamils. Recent anthropological research that I have read strongly indicates that the Sinhalese are of the same stock as most South Inidans ( btw, I don’t know why Dravidian is equated with dusky complexion – there are quite a few light-skinned dravidians and no, they all are not brahmins or migrants from the North ).
BTW, I sincerely wish that the Sinhalese and Tamils make peace and evolve a solution that is just and fair to all parties within an united Sri Lanka. I would love to visit your beautiful country.

By: suntzu

suntzu — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:58:11 +0000

Do our Politicians read the Funday Times?

By: Sanjayan

Sanjayan — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:47:55 +0000

I agree with HD, in that the point here is not that we should deny historical fact nor erase it. The point is whether we should be teaching young children (I don’t know the exact age of the kids who read the Funday Times, though I assume most of them are between 7 or 8 and 14, since the age-limit for competitions, etc., is 14), about historical Sinhala and Tamil rivalry. This question is especially important at a time when we need unity within our country.

There WILL be a time and place when they will, and in fact should, learn about our history. Is that time when they are young and impressionable, unable to (for the most part) critically analyse or think about what they are reading? I don’t believe it is.

By: HD

HD — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:46:42 +0000

The author is not denying historical fact nor is he saying to erase it. The point is simple. Every country has a sordid past, The Americans in Vietnam, the Japanese in China, Nazi Germany and the Sinhala Tamil rivalry in Sri Lanka. The facts must be taught but not to children who read FUNDAY. They are too young to know that this part of history should not be repeated.

Let’s keep the FUNDAY section free of violence and hate. Teach the more unfortunate elements of our history at the O-Levels when they are mature enough to digest the facts and take positive action.

By: groundviews

groundviews — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 02:14:56 +0000

Sarath,

Your last comment on the same lines contravened the guidelines by introducing a wholly unnecessary expletive to make your point, that you’ve done in a far better manner this time around. I am quite tired of pointing out to those who post and comment here that submissions not in line with the guidelines will not be published.

Best,

Sanjana

By: Sarath

Sarath — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:43:25 +0000

Why are my comments being censored? Please let this be. I cannot understand why it was taken off the above comment. Was there a reason?

I have studied both Hindi and Tamil and to me Hindi was a far more familiar and easy to learn language than Tamil. In my opinion, for someone whose mother tongue is Sinhala, Hindi is an incredibly easy language to learn. I started learning Tamil much earlier than I did Hindi, but Tamil appeared far more foreign to me, and I know more Hindi today than I do Tamil. It is amazing how similar Sinhala and Hindi are at the base level, considering that these are two languages separated by a thousand miles and more. Both, by the way, are Prakrit-origin languages although Hindi is a lot more recent that Sinhala. Sinhala is certainly not a Dravidian language. Its Indo-Aryan nature is plain to see when studies other sister Indo-Aryan languages. So I’m sorry I do certainly do not agree with your claims aadhavan.

By: Sarath

Sarath — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:02:50 +0000

Really aadhavan? So how did the Sinhalese come to speak an Indo-Aryan language? The two major southern Indo-Aryan languages are Sinhala and Divehi. There is another one – Konkani, spoken in Goa.

You say “doesnÃ¢Â€Â™t all modern scholarship suggest that the Sinhalese are Dravidians whose prototype Dravidian language was Sanscritised through Buddhism? ”

Can you please explain in detail about “all” these “modern scolarship”? What world are you living in?

Past and modern scholarship places the Sinhalese language in the Indo-Aryan group. It’s sister tongue is Divehi and not Tamil or any other Dravidian language. Howver, this doesn’t mean that Tamil has not influenced.

On a basic level, Just to start of with, the base words in Sinhala are of Prakrit origin such as names for body parts, sky, moon, river, water etc

Start with the numerals:

Sanskrit: ekah, dvau, tryah, catvarah, pancha, sat, sapta, ashta, nava
Hindi: ek, do, teen, chaar, panch, chaah, saat, aat, nau, das
Sinhala: eka, deka, tuna, hatara, paha (or pancha), haya, hata (or sapta), ata (or ashta), navaya, dahaya (or dasa)

If Sinhala was a Dravidian language, why would such a basic thing such as this be clearly of Prakrit origin? Look at the ordinals of any Dravidian language, even heavily Sanskritised ones such as Malayalam and you will see that they are clearly of Dravidian language. And for your information Sanskritisation of the Sinhalese language started quite late in the 13th century.

To eat
Hindi – Khanaa
Sinhala – kanawaa

To go
Hindi – jaanaa
Sinhala – yanawaa

To come
Hindi – aanaa
Sinhala – enawaa

To sing
Hindi – gaanaa
Sinhala – gaayanawa

“yes”
Hindi – ji haa, haa
Sinhala – haa, ow

“no”
Hindi – nahi
Sinhala – naha

“my”
Hindi – mera
Sinhala – mage

“me”
Hindi – mein
Sinhala – mama, mang, maa

“hand”
Hindi – haath
Sinhala – atha

“ear”
Hindi – kaan
Sinhala – kana

“mouth”
Hindi – muu
Sinhala – muwa

“nose”
Hindi – naakh
Sinhala – nahaya

“finger”
Hindi – ungli
Sinhala – engilla

“moon”
Hindi – chand
Sinhala – handa

“old”
Hindi – puraanaa
Sinhala – parana

“oil”
Hindi – tel
Sinhala – tel

“smell”
Hindi – gandha
Sinhala – ganda

“potato”
Hindi – aaloo
Sinhala – ala

“poison”
Hindi – vish
Sinhala – visa

“smoke”
Hindi – dhua
Sinhala – duma

“teeth”
Hindi – daanth
Sinhala -dat

“today”
Hindi – aaj
Sinhala – ada

“black”
Hindi – kaalaa
Sinhala – kalu

“blue”
Hindi – neelaa
Sinhala – nil

“brass”
Hindi – peethal
Sinhala – piththala

“cave”
Hindi – guhaa
Sinhala – guhaawa

“village”
Hindi – graam
Sinhala – gama

This is just a few off the top of my head. The list just goes on and on.

If Sinhala is a Dravidian language which was later “sanskritised” as you claim why are all these basic words of Prakrit origin?

By: Viyasan

Viyasan — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:59:05 +0000

The grandfather of Parakramabahu I was a Tamil prince of Pandiyan Kingdom (Cul. 59, 41 – 44) and his mother was a Tamil blooded princess, his Queen was a Tamil Ulakamahadevi alias Leelavathi, he didn’t have a son and he adopted a Tamil named Senpaka Perumal (Sappumala Kuamarya) as his Son.

Then what is the big connection between Sinhalese and Parakramabahu? Tamils have more connection to Parakramabahu than the mixed race of Sinhalese, WHY SHOULD WE CALL HIM AS A SINHALA KING?

Mitta, the sister of Vijayabahu I, was given in marriage to a Pandyan Prince. Manahbarana, Kitti Sri Megha and Sri Vallabha are the three sons by this union. Parakramabahu is the son of Manabharana and Ratnavali, daughter of Vijayabahu and his Tamil queen, Thilokasundari. Parakramabahu I thus coming of Tamil lineage, easily ingratiated himself to the Tamils of Jaffna. Sri Vallabha, the uncle of Parakramabahu, exercised authority in Jaffna in the name of the king.

By: aadhavan

aadhavan — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:30:05 +0000

I didn’t say that Tamils built the said monuments or that Parakramabahu never existed. Show some intellectual rigour in responding to a comment. Gananath Obeysekere of Princeton and Sudarshan Seneviratne of Peradeniya have debunked the Aryan Sinhala myth of the Mahavamsa through their research in the feilds of anthropology and archaeology. Check out some of their books- I heard there are some at Barefoot. Colombo uni library or even the Public ay have copies, though I’m not sure. Alternatively, you can order them off Amazon. I’m sorry to ruffle feathers and hit a sensitive spot with this one, but it’s just an academic point. There are plenty of Sinhalese I know who don’t subscribe to the Mahavamsa story. If you do believe it, I have no problem with that. There are people who believe in stranger things- just permit me to point out that modern scholarship completely debunks histroricty and accuracy of the Mahavamsa account of the supposed Aryan origins of the Sinhala people.

By: N

Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:25:06 +0000

Please point out your sources that discredit that Dutugemunu, Parakramabahu, etc existed. I would love to see that. Or in your world did the Tamils build Ruwanwelisaya, Parakrasamudra, etc?

Please don’t point out sources that illustrate teh fallacy of the so called ‘Aryan origins’ of the Sinhala as that is not something I believe in. What you are saying is the Mahvamsa is a work of fiction…so point me towards those sources.

By: aadhavan

aadhavan — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:17:04 +0000

These are not my idea’s N, they are the ideas of Sinhala archaeologists and anthropologists. They may or not be palatable to the Mahavamsa believer, but that’s just too bad don’t you think.

By: Bentzz

Bentzz — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:41:10 +0000

Please don’t use these kind of things for expressing political issues. By doing that you are also doing the same thing as the so called Sinhala patriots(Racists).They also use make a big deal out of the things which are not actually intended to do any harm.For god’s sake this is a mere children’s story that the sole purpose is to educate English speaking children about the history of this country.

“For those of you who may not know, the Cholas were a Tamil Dynasty that ruled Southern India and also annexed parts of Sri Lanka (IÃ¢Â€Â™m not going to say which partsÃ¢Â€Â”take a wild guess).”

In this story it never mentions about Tamils and i doubt even a 1 single child who reads this knows that Cholas were a Tamil dynasty.

“The soldiers in red sarongs seem to be getting the upper hand on the soldiers in blue sarongs (who seem to have duskier complexions)”

This is being really cheap i think. V is trying to burdon us with his very unrealistic assumptions in order to prove his point.

Finally i would like to say if u really want to stop racists among Sinhalese people you cant do it by acting like them. Publishing these kind of baseless critiques about children’s stories wont help the cause of GV.It s realy disappointing.

By: N

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:08:38 +0000

Fair point JM, I don’t put much credence in the whole Aryan angle of the Sinhala race either…however the original post was about historical events that occurred on the island and the racial slant on it. Well our history and indeed most of the world’s history is tribal, racial and split amongst religious lines, that’s just the truth of the matter. I’m just not sure what relevance aadhavan’s comment had to the issues raised in the post.

By: JM

JM — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:23:12 +0000

I think the majority of the present Sinhalese descend from pre-historic migrants from Southern India. We’re Dravidians in that sense. However, unlike the Tamils, whose culture traditionally supports inbreeding within castes, our gene pool is much more diverse. I have three Sinhalese friends with such different features that each of them could easily pass for a European, East-Asian, or an African.

The Aryan Sinhala myth, as you say, is a relatively new concept promoted by the likes of Anagarika Dharmapala and Piyadasa Sirisena with the intellectual backing of Mme Blavatsky’s “research”. Ariya Sinhalas have been here for long, and simply means civilised and noble Sinhalese, with no reference to the Aryan Invasion theory.

By: N

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:11:25 +0000

Funny that the starting point for peace should be an attack of the Sinhala history as a myth, while the Tamil ‘history’ should be ok. I’ve read the Mahavansa, etc…I consider it as part of my identity…but do I think it makes me better than a Tamil? Or indeed different from a Tamil? Well no…

I also find it amusing that while Roman/Greek/Egyptian history is not debunked that Tamils feel the need to debunk Sinhala history…must have been the leprechauns that built those tanks and daghobas.

Perhaps you are going to respond saying that its all myth, I’m a Sinhala chauvinist, Tamil history cannot be touched, etc, etc…but my point is by debunking the entire Sinhala history (which I don’t really see how you can do that)…you are not only alienating the Sinhala extremists but also the Sinhala moderates….after all we all like to think that we came from somewhere and our ancestors did something of value.

By: aadhavan

aadhavan — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:24:35 +0000

I really don’t know much about those two blokes and what they did or did not do. The Aryan Sinhala myth has been pretty much debunked completely though. We are after all the same people. I tend to think that’s a pretty good starting point for peace.

By: N

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:05:09 +0000

So Elara never invaded? Nor did Dutugemunu conquer him?