Deepavali Dilemma: Reflections from the Diaspora
Every year, when Deepavali rolls around, I feel a twinge of sadness creeping up on me. I didn’t dwell on it because it seemed indulgent and pointless. It’s not like we celebrated Deepavali in a big way when I was growing up in Colombo. And my family, we were not a sentimental lot. We got on with it, and focused on what mattered – visas, educational degrees, jobs, marriages, family, and more family. Getting weepy over some abstract loss associated with Deepavali was a luxury we did not indulge in. But this year felt different. This year I found myself walking around with a barely suppressed sense of tragedy about it.
As I do every year since my oldest daughter started kindergarten, I arranged to do a program in each of my three kids’ classrooms to mark the occasion for us here in New York. Most years that was all we did. Sometimes accompanied by an Indian American parent, sometimes not, I would tell the class about Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights. About how it is like Christmas in India, and how it celebrated the return to Ayodhya of Lord Rama, Sita and Lakshmana after fourteen years of exile in the jungle. I showed them how to do rangolis, and told them about lighting diyas. Occasionally I would mention that I was from Sri Lanka and was part of a minority group of Tamil Hindus there, that we also celebrated Diwali but not nearly as elaborately as the Indians. And that was it.
And that is what I was sad about. I called myself a Tamil, told my children they were half Tamil (my husband is Chinese), and borrowed heavily from Indian Hindu mythology to build that part of their culture and identity. But I barely talk to them about what it was to be a Sri Lankan Tamil. I envied the Indians, who seemed to have so much pride and love for their country. I didn’t talk much about Sri Lanka to people I met along the way. It was complicated, and yes, I left because of the war. It was just there, the country where I grew up, where my wonderful sprawling family came from. I didn’t know quite what to cherish about my motherland anymore because it had hurt us all so much. So I withdrew emotionally. Over the years the numbness helped me cope with the horrors back home and I began to feel I had little love or loyalty left for Sri Lanka.
Yet, deep down, I knew it was not true. The truth, I knew, was that I had loved celebrating Deepavali in Colombo – lighting those clay lamps, drawing kolams on the ground, going to temple, eating and handing out lots of good food, wearing new clothes, lighting crackers, visiting family and friends. And I had loved lighting lanterns for Vesak, celebrating it with our Buddhist friends, and going around Colombo checking out the elaborate lit decorations all over the city. I remember the mouth-watering anticipation before that Ramadan feast delivered to our door by our Muslim friends (my mother’s vattalappam never matched up to theirs), and the thrill of the Christmas tree and the gifts we got when we went over to our neighbor’s for Christmas. Did my sense of anger and betrayal run so deep that I was willing to subsume myself into the Indian Hindu identity, with which I could barely find three things in common, rejecting my life in Sri Lanka?
I think for a time, it was easier to hide. It felt safer. And being a part of the Tamil Diaspora often meant having to choose sides, and I could never quite choose. I did feel betrayed by the state and am still shocked by all that hatred out there. I felt we owed much loyalty to the Tigers. But my loyalty to the LTTE, even when I felt it before they became monsters, was never from the heart. My love for Sri Lanka was rooted in my multi-ethnic life in Colombo, but that had begun to feel like a mirage I couldn’t base my faith in anymore.
And so this year, I finally confronted my gloom around Deepavali. For me, it is the one time of year when I truly mourn the loss of my life in Colombo. And this year I mourned the loss of our collective Tamil lives in Sri Lanka – it feels crushed beyond recognition and robbed of all spirit.
Next year, I will try to celebrate Deepavali at home. Draw a kolam, light some lamps, make some nice food, and invite the neighbors over. And when I go into the classroom, I will call it Deepavali, I will talk about how I celebrated it as a kid in Colombo, about all the other holidays in Sri Lanka that I also loved, and talk a little about our shameful political history. And when I tell them the story of the Ramayana, I will point out that the depiction of Sri Lanka as the land of Demons with Ravana as their evil king reflects regional prejudices of the time and has little to do with any reality. However tempted I may be to hint that there are still some demons back there today!
It probably won’t all help me feel any less sad, but it will be more honest.
306 Comments
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
Groundviews,
Thank You. Interesting reading.
“The truth, I knew, was that I had loved celebrating Deepavali in Colombo – lighting those clay lamps, drawing kolams on the ground, going to temple, eating and handing out lots of good food, wearing new clothes, lighting crackers, visiting family and friends. And I had loved lighting lanterns for Vesak, celebrating it with our Buddhist friends, and going around Colombo checking out the elaborate lit decorations all over the city. I remember the mouth-watering anticipation before that Ramadan feast delivered to our door by our Muslim friends (my mother’s vattalappam never matched up to theirs), and the thrill of the Christmas tree and the gifts we got when we went over to our neighbor’s for Christmas.”
- This is an accurate description of what Sri Lanka was like some years ago. But not now. An all encompassing Sinhala Buddhism has been around us for quite some time now.
I am a christian and I feel that there is much less of a christmas celebration now than there was in the 1980′s when I was in school. What we have lost in terms of multiculturalism will never come back even though the war is over. What we have now is a Sinhala Buddhist country.
“What we have now is a Sinhala Buddhist country.”
It was a Sinhala Buddhist country, it is a Sinhala Buddhist country and it will be a Sinhala Buddhist country in the future. What the big deal? Buddhism is not Sri Lanka’s official religion unlike in Norway, Denmark or some Scandinavian countries which adopt Anglican Christianity as their official religion. By saying the country is Sinhala-Buddhist it describes it’s prominent culture. It does not mean others cannot live there. The two words Sinhalese – Buddhist is vilified using above statement b y the Tamil chauvinists and the NGO gang who are singing slogans for the diaspora.
Niranjan what your problem. Isnt it not a majority buddhist country. What are you saying Christmas is celebrated less. How many pandols we used to see. Now many we can see. I think you are one those people who have minority complex. How you celebrate your festivals is upto each religious and racial groups. We suffered 30 years of war so naturally people will have less time to celebrate. We can talk about this after 5 years giving time people to get used to peace time. Though we do not have war still people are recovering. Given time society will decide on our cultural heritage.
Today, you have a better chance at recreating the celebrations you had back in the 80s in New York than in Colombo. As a Tamil, life in Sri Lanka is different now, and it’s not going to change very soon. If you miss the past, be happy that you are in NY, and not in Colombo.
Well written and you just clearly expressed what most liberal Tamils cherished and missed as a Srilankan. I only lived my first 10 years of life in Srilanka, Colombo and then on my life has only been going around the world to find place to live and trying hide my lankan roots.. Thanks a Lot for this article and I wish you the best in your life from now on (I do miss my younger days in colombo!!)
niranjan, ur talk remind me of the dog tick story… if the there any thing wrong.. its buddhisms fault… a man sneezes, [Edited out] -its buddhism’s fault…
i think over time, we can get to where we were… but to expect it to happen over night is unrelistic… 30 years war – give it 10% time to heal -say 3 more years… lets wait and see.
Why is it that sinhalese people seem to think that we all have minority complexes that seemed to have materialised for no apparent reason? However, if you ask a tamil person honestly, they just feel completely depressed and oppressed in this country. I’ve lost count of the number of times that happy sinhalese people will boldly state “there’s no racism in this country”. Why don’t you just wait and see how we reinvent this wonderful country, you stupid, over-sensitive tamil person. Wait and see? They’ve already failed to implement the one part of the constitution that could have given us rights and there is a buddha sitting right in the middle of the airport – stating: This island belongs to the buddhists, make no mistake about that.
I think tamil people should just adopt the Uncle Tom mentality, put on the black and white minstrel show and pretend to the laughing, happy majority that everything is fine and we love our cotton-picking life in the dusty camps, in the midst of the police raids of Wellawatte. As our young men are picked up by the police on flimsy charges. The hidden employment discrimination that no one wants to talk about. The fact we can’t read government documents in our own language like a Swiss french or german speaker could.
As long as we can serve the buddhist state and pretend that any complaints are part of the baseless “minority complex” – a total fabrication of our insane minds, apparently, they won’t have to face up to what this country is really about. We just have to keep smiling to hide the tears so that the masters don’t have to feel guilty.
Tharaka,
Yes, it is a majority Sinhala Buddhist country, but there are also minorities
inhabiting it. I perceive that over the years christmas celebrations have lessened. There maybe a number of reasons for this. One reason might be that christians have also left the country along with others. One example is the Burgher community most of whom live in Australia.
Karu,
Today, you have a better chance at recreating the celebrations you had back in the 80s in New York than in Colombo.-I am in agreement with you. New York is multicultural and very diverse in its people. Besides there is a sense of freedom and belonging. The same would apply to any big city in the west.
Sinhala-Buddhist or not, the *Christian* British were able to govern the country far better than the present lot of 113 proud Sinhala-Buddhists in the Cabinet, and their Sinhala-Buddhist headmaster. That is the ultimate irony; that if the British had actually stayed, we would not have known the meaning of civil war. In fact, this website would probably not exist. So much for the achievements of the Sinhala-Buddhist nation!
For the record, I am not implying that the British ought to have remained. I am just pointing out a rather interesting “what if” scenario, the validity of which can be objectively verified.
Migara,
“By saying the country is Sinhala-Buddhist it describes it’s prominent culture. – I agree that the majority religion is Buddhism and the majority of the people happen to belong to the Sinhala race. However, I disagree with Prominent culture ? Is Veddha, Tamil, Muslim, Burgher cultures not prominent in this country ? Are these cultures not conspicuous enough to be prominent ?
It does not mean others cannot live there.”- I fully agree with you. This is the best that I have heard from you.
The Constitution of Sri Lanka states that Buddhism shall be given the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana while ensuring to all religions the rights granted by articles 10 and 14(1) (e). -no problem with that. However, what is said in the Constitution and the feelings, thoughts, attitudes and behaviour of the public in general are two different things. Much of the public is not aware of what is said in the Constitution.
Heshan,
“That is the ultimate irony; that if the British had actually stayed, we would not have known the meaning of civil war. “- I agree with you. Look what the British have done to Hong Kong. The British brought it up to what it is now. Economically prosperous and no civil war.
Saman,
“niranjan, ur talk remind me of the dog tick story… if the there any thing wrong.. its buddhisms fault… a man sneezes, [Edited out] -its buddhism’s fault…”
What if the man who sneezes happens to be a Buddhist ? There are people who use Buddhism for wrong purposes as there are in other religions. That is what I object to.
3 years-you must be joking. It looks like never.
Alas, the Sri Lanka you lament for is no more! Today, moderation is not tolerated, as everyone believes it is his or her divine right to be racist, bigoted, and chauvinistic. Given that we will always remain a multi ethnic and multi religious country, it is hard to imagine going forwards among all the pulling to different sides. The future looks so bleak!
What if the man who sneezes happens to be a Buddhist ? There are people who use Buddhism for wrong purposes as there are in other religions. That is what I object to
he can be a buddhist, he can be a vegetarian, she can be famale, from up country.. married to a tamil, with english genes due to a grandparent being raped by a UK invader? whats the point in generalising?
you just take out one aspect and try to make a point… in that case all germans should be shot and killed -made extinct .. so much for schindler… , your are a racist who trys to put down buddhisam by generalising without digginf deep…
Saman,
Everybody sneezes irrespective of race and religion don’t you think.
I really think it’s pointless to argue if the country would have been better off under British rule. While the Anglo-Saxons may indeed have a certain gift for administration, there are still far too many variables involved for any reasonable person to come to the same ‘objectively verified’ conclusion that Heshan has.
Contrary to the romantic imaginings of some correspondents here, the British Empire was not all peace, love and prosperity. There was, for example, a fierce insurgency in Malaya throughout the 50s. The British response is worth noting. Here’s what wikipedia says:
“…one aspect…was the forced relocation of some 500,000 rural Malayans, including 400,000 Chinese, from squatter communities on the fringes of the forests into guarded camps called New Villages. These villages were newly constructed in most cases, and were surrounded by barbed wire, police posts and floodlit areas…”
Sound familiar?
Getting back to SL, I don’t think the Niranjans or Heshans of this world would ever quite understand the collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation faced by the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists during the colonial occupation. Not entirely dissimilar, it must be sadly said, to the Tamil predicament of today as so eloquently expressed by deeval.
By the way, my comments above are not, in any way, an attempt to excuse or justify the litany of misdeeds committed by the post-colonial Sri Lankan state, including the shameful and unconscionable detention of citizens in camps and elsewhere.
niranjan
if everyone sneezes -dont you think trashing the guys religon is useless jsut because the man sneezed?
are you paid to trash buddhism?
Niranjan,
At the begining of my comment in response to your article ” Sri Lanka: The waning of Liberalism”, I mentioned ” I can not understand what this writer has in mind?” After going through some more of your writings in the web, I noticed a sort of a pattern that forced me to think that you have a peculiar way of thinking.
Some of the things I have noticed are given below.
1. You firmly believe that what you believe is the best.
2. You have no hesitation to express your view.
3. You consider your knowledge base and the beliefs as the absolute bottom line.
4. Based on the above bottom line you cricise others views and beliefs.
5. You do not think that you should put forward facts ,reasons or examples in your arguments. You just express your opinions as if they are universal truths.
6. You have a tendancy to go against local values.
7. You consider west as the basic measuring unit to ascetain everything.
8. You consider west as superior.
9. You have a prejudice against buddhism.
10. Most of your answers are not relevent to the questions.
11. Rationality is lacking in your arguments.
12. You are trying to comment on everything, this act exibits tour lack of knowledge.
God bless you Niranjan. For some “Ignorance is bless” .
SlavetoFreedom,
Perhaps the future won’t look so bleak if you refrained from the use of such a silly and overused oxymoron.
“Getting back to SL, I don’t think the Niranjans or Heshans of this world would ever quite understand the collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation faced by the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists during the colonial occupation.”
Perhaps you are referring to how that venerable saint Anagarika Dharmapala may have felt. Or the proud Kandyans who refused to pluck tea. In any event, conditions have changed little for the vast majority of rural Sinhala-Buddhist fatmers since the departure of the British. Is it then presumptous to assume that they should feel a collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation? Or does the fact that one of the “sons of the soil”, is now reigning supreme, compel one to take a different approach?
Perhaps the easier solution is simply to take responsibility. Granted, the British could have done more to integrate certain segments of society, into the mainstream. However, in no way can we blame the British for the militarization of Sinhala society. Those who grossly exaggerate the ills of colonialism conveniently forget this point.
Who cares about sneezing, you are seriously missing the point completely. I am certainly not trashing Buddhism, it is a beautiful philosophy on paper and as practised by many peaceful, tolerant communities in the world. Look at the Dalai Lama and how he gracefully practices his religion as he tries to redress the oppression of the Chinese state which, similar to the Sinhalese state, does not want a culturally distinct minority to occupy and express themselves in a contiguous territory as it poses a threat to their primacy.
We are concerned about the majority who just happen to be Buddhist and how certain forces in this nation that belong to this majority are using it as a tool to brand and carve out the country; mark it as their own and exclude others. It is being used in this tribal one-overism, and is more about group domination, with the group being defined by it’s language and religion in this instance. In nazi germany language was not the issue – just some misplaced idea of race. See how the buddha is pasted everywhere in order to mark the territory of the majority: in the airport, in the centre of trinco, all over the country. It might as well be a swastika – it is totally divorced from the true meaning of buddhism at this point.
The fact that people even feel excluded should be a huge, flashing red light to the Samans and Miragas – do they even stop to ask themselves WHY tamils and muslims might feel like second class citizens? Instead of just jumping to the conclusion that they are impatient whingers who don’t seem to understand the divine purpose of one of the most murderous and intolerant regimes (second only to the LTTE itself) that seems to have graced this poor cursed country? .
I’m not quite sure how the experience of the Malayan Emergency is supposed to help us understand the “collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation faced by the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists during the colonial occupation”. Also, people with experience of cultural oppression and humiliation don’t go about imposing that same experience onto others–they know more than anyone else the injustice of it. They won’t import methods of oppression that their own colonizers used on other societies.
Let’s not blame the current situation on the suffering of the Sinhalese under the colonial regime. The blame has to be on the class that grabbed power and held on to it in the postcolonial period, their use of race and religion to do this, their refusal to bring the country into independence and democracy because it was not convenient for them. And the criminal violence that has been perpetrated in this most unjust cause.
deeval,
Agree with everything you said except that of the current state regime’s murderousness as being second to LTTE’s. And the regime’s evil triumphed over that of the LTTE, didn’t it? There was a chance for good to triumph over evil, but that did not happen in this case.
However, if now the SL people don’t want to recognise and name the evil of their state, then there will be no peace. That people are actually considering a military man Fonseka as an alternative to Rajapaksa should already tell us that SL is not yet ready to jump off the wheel of violence.
Well, indeed the question of who was more “evil” the LTTE or the Sri Lankan State is certainly an issue for debate. We could tally up their respective human rights abuses and death rates and come to a suitable conclusion, but how useful is that exercise?
Right now, the LTTE are really just a historical relic that are never likely to wield power again, so all of us should be more focused on understanding with more careful consideration, empathy and propaganda-free analysis, how this power hungry state is going to manage the country. Instead people are falling on foolish, empty statements about winning wars against terrorism and freeing the country with out taking the time to really think about what is happening around them.
Other than simply removing the power of a boorish rebel army faction only to replace it with our own, we have not won a war on anything good when people are too scared to talk, murders are being committed left right and centre, and racism and discrimination pervades the system.
Heshan/Niranjan
Buddhism has a become a headache to many, who want to have a hegomany over east. Western culture, other than Science does not have a sound footing to compete with eastern culture. Further more, science clashes with western culture, mainly with their religions. Buddhism has a sound philosophy, and no clashes reported with science. In this context, western ideology mainly has two transactions to be settled, one with (western) science and the other with some eastern philosophies such as buddhism. Since science is an intregal component of western culture (though developed later) western culture itself can not sustain without science. Therefore western culture now has abstained from clashing with Science, and it has raised a white flag to science. We know that western culture gave in to science, as it has no potential to compete with it. It challenged Galileo and Copernicus and proved to be miserable. Now the western ideology has signed a peace agreement with science and attacking its other enemy, eastern culture.
Surely, it has no sound base for literary arguments with buddhism. Therefore it uses all unethical means to attack it. It uses its mighty resource power robbed from other countries to subjugate Buddhism. Uses Poverty of the people of other countries to creep into their societies to unethically convert these people. Some henchmen chosen from these countties are indirectly bribed, trained and brainwashed in their countries, to bark at their own cultures. Such slaves believe, preach that being ruled by British colonialist is a bless. This is slave mentality.These slaves still like to lick the boots of british colonials. They do not know what a devastation has been done by these colonials to these con tries. All the males including small boys were odered to be killed in Wellassaby British colonialists. What a harm they have done to Sri Lanka and to Indian Tamil community by importing state workers against thier will. Long lasting impacts of these colonialist acts are still making a detrimental blows to our societies.
This is slave mentality. It is said that some slaves tend to love their chains used to tie them. It is convinient to use a wild tree to destroy a forrest. God, be mercy on these slaves1
Anjali Chen, instead of sulking why not come to Colombo? No one is stopping you. You left on your own accord. I think you probably wouldn’t want to leave the relative comforts behind in your migrated country.
You admit you’re ashamed of your Sri Lankan roots (since you envy the Indians and reluctantly mention you’re from SL). Isn’t it better in that case to fully assimilate fully into your host country with no looking back and 100% embrace it’s culture and values?
There are still people who celebrate Deepawali in Colombo and do all those things you just ranted about.
It was just convenient to leave it all behind “because of the war” because you could. But there are people who persevered through it all and earned the right to celebrate Deepawali in Sri Lanka. Not to be harsh, you won’t be missed!
Niranjan;
If Britain is such a good country, consisting all the good qualities you value so much, why are you wasting your precious life in this good for nothing country? Why don’t you go and settle down in Britain or in any other western utopia? Surely, your subconcious mind knows that you will only be a second class citizen there. Despite your mighty efforts to become a Britisher, they will never equate white with brown or black. Please be faithful to your country. Don’t say hurrah to ocean while drinking water from a river.
In your eyes there is no any good in Sri Lankan civilisation and society? Don’t be so extreme. Don’t throw malicious and vicious allegations. Please be sensible. Please try to think impartially. Please try to be constructive instead of destructive in criticism. Try to do some service in good faith, without trying to catch fish in muddy water. Please try to be a good boy!
Observer, I think you have totally missed the point. Also you have failed to grasp the nuances of what Anjali is trying to convey: that there is a difference in the way that minority cultures are being perceived and given a space to express themselves now. The move towards a mono-religious Sri Lankan identity can be seen in the pseudo-buddhist dogma of the ruling powers, who pepper their speeches with references to doing things the “buddhist way” which excludes other groups and doesn’t pay respect to a secular, democratic mode of governance that doesn’t force cultural values of only one group on the rest of its citizens in an extremely multi-ethnic country such as Sri Lanka.
Also, a lot of tamils decided to leave for a range of reasons: because opportunities were barred to them in Sri Lanka due to aggressive Sinhala language policies and discrimination in the workplace; they were traumatised by the riots; they had lost their homes and businesses; they may have been fleeing the oppression of the LTTE and the government in equal measure. They also left for economic reasons that had nothing to do with politics like many immigrants the world over. Much like the Sinhalese diaspora who are living abroad for economic reasons; there are many Sinhalese people enjoying “conveniences” abroad, such as Sarath Fonseka’s daughter (who also didn’t persevere through the war), for example. Even Gotabaya has embraced the convenience of American citizenship and Bollogama is an Australian citizen I believe.
Your selective understanding of “assimilation” as the only way to contribute to a country as a citizen could be broadened if you took some time to reflect meaningfully on ideas of what national identities actually mean in this modern age of multiculturalism and immigration. In Britain, there is a lot of controversy over the views of people such as you, as can be seen in the public lambasting of the head of the right wing British Nationalist Party. A city like London is actually a composite of all the cultures that compose it – it is now seen as a nonsense to attempt to get a multicultural community to capitulate and “assimilate” to an irrelevant idea of mono-culturalism that doesn’t even exist anymore.
The same can be said of New York, which reflects an ever evolving cultural composition whose very foundations were based on multi-faith, multi-race immigrants. Anjali as a hindu is just as legitimate a New Yorker as a Puerto Rican catholic or an east-european Jew. I think most New Yorkers would find your command for her to assimilate rather nonsensical.
We need to ditch these stupid ideas of what ethnic or religious character the citizens of a country must “assimilate” to and instead demand that all people’s faiths, languages and rights to live as equal citizens without fear of persecution are respected.
It seems that you feel everyone should be happy because the war is over and that the current system of treating minorities is without any flaws. However many people from minority communities feel very unhappy. There may be a very valid reason for this if you would take the time to think carefully from their perspective instead of assuming that these complaints are just plots to undermine the country. The only thing that is undermining the future of this country is its failure to change the way it is currently treating its citizens.
Dear yapa:
I disagree that there is a clash between Western culture and science. Science has always been an integral part of Western culture, since the time of the Greeks. The Catholic Church itself did not reject science – it simply accepted the Aristotelean view of science to the exclusion of all others. The Aristotelean view was used to justify the view that nature is essentially the construct of God. Even men like Newton came to believe in a “mechanical universe.” Newton himself, while believing in action-at-a-distance forces, had difficulty in philosophically justifying it, and so was inclined towards an ether-like theory. The problem with the Greeks is that they were theorists, not experimentalists. When people like Galileo started doing experiments, the flaws in the Greek method were unraveled one by one. Further discoveries in Western science, from evolution to thermodynamics to quantum mechanics, would show that nature is in fact a self-consistent entity, thereby leaving the dogma of the Catholic Church in the dust.
When you say that science is an integral part of western culture, that is correct. But it has more to do with the evolution of technology (essentially applied science and engineering). Technology is a big business here as it is an important driver of commerce, and also it is an integral part of national defense. The universities have also fallen prey; these days many scientists stake their living on receiving grants from doing projects supported by government subsidized institutions. There is a potential conflict of interest here, that scientists are not allowed to undertake research of their own choosing but must do “contract work” in order to receive grant money. So it is true that pure science does not enjoy the prestige it once used to. However, I don’t think religion plays much role here, as religion has little commercial value.
Dear Yapa – tamils and muslims are second class citizens here in Sri Lanka. Many of them would happily move abroad (as do scores of Sinhalese people I know who are trying to get their points to go to Australia or applying for residency in Canada). If the doors of the west were wide open, I think many more people would head there.
There is much that is good in Sri Lanka, but you need to open your eyes to some of the deep injustices. Being critical of the bad things doesn’t mean you hate everything about the country. But we have to change the bad things instead of sitting about, grinning like monkeys when things are falling apart around our ears.
yapa,
Western culture has no problem with Buddhism. You’re claiming that the West needs to overthrow Buddhism and that thus it has a cultural and political problem with Sri Lanka. Why do you think Buddhism poses a threat to Western culture? Right now, Buddhism is being happily used in the West to cement the contradictions and dissatisfactions with the way in which capitalism is working, its inequities. A new movement has been on the roll, trying to show people how to get in touch with their authentic self and their authentic source of ‘power’, their self awareness beyond the ego, and how Buddhist philosophy can bring them to a happier place of a re-defined ‘success’ and ‘meaning’ that they seek. It addresses issues of capitalism that their religion, Christianity, has been unable to address. Not that Christianity is on the wane, but it is being reconfigured by many new cultural forces, including that of the religions of the East. You only have to watch Oprah to know that.
You talk of Western culture as if it only comprises religion and science. Aren’t you forgetting that capitalism is an overwhelming aspect of Western culture, as is democracy? And what about postmodern culture? Neither Western cultures nor Eastern cultures are as simple as you think for you to want to make out that there is a “clash of ciivilizations”. Both cultures are plural and very often hybridised with each other’s influences. That was what colonialism did, and what globalisation is doing.
There’s no Western conspiracy against Eastern religions. They know very well how to make money out of Eastern religions.
There is however a political conspiracy within Sri Lanka to stop any critical approach being taken of the government’s criminal use of Buddhism to whip up Sinhalese chauvinism. Those of Sri Lankan origin who you claim to be criticising Buddhism could possibly be doing that out of genuine hurt and anger at how their religion is being misused and misquoted in their own country, at how its core principles are being betrayed, how it is being utilised to justify evil, cultural chauvinism, etc. Far from being ‘colonial’ slaves or handmaids of the West, they could be heroes standing up for their culture. Instead of accusing these people of cultural betrayal, would it not make more sense to consider whether their criticism is justified?
But we don’t want to go there, do we? That would be opening Pandora’s box. But any true Buddhist has to do that–to critically examine the current state of their religious culture, to touch base again with their sacred scriptures and decide whether or not they are keeping faith with its teachings. That would be a more ‘loyal’ response than to simply fling unpleasant names at critics.
Heshan;
You have not touched the main points I have raised in my article. However, you have said that you disagree that there is a clash between science and western culture. Though this was not what I wanted to reiterate, I would like to touch upon the the topic you raised, in support of opposite view.
As we both agree, science is an integral part of western culture. Cristianity and related religions are also much so. Contradictory ideas found in these two intregal parts, if exist, I presume represent a clash between western culture and science.
As you have correctly mentioned, scientific mrthodology has two main tools used to arrive at what it considers as realities, namely, rationality and experiments. Galileo is considered as the pioneer in the latter one to introduce it to science and make it a prominent part of scientific methodology. However, with the new scientific theories emerged in the 20th century; ie with Relativity and Quantum Theory; the prominace was again shifted to old aged Greek methodology. Albert Einstein, Max Plank and Heisenberg are theorists, not experimentalists.
Back to the topic, Now, what I am going to do is to see wheter there is a ontradiction between these integral parts, ie. of of science (which are integral parts of western culture, as you agrre) and western religions (which is also an integral part of western culture).
Darwin’s “Theory of Evolution” is one of the main theories that science has a big respect. It has earned this respect becauce it was able to substantiate this theory with many material facts through research and experiments to convince the scientific audiance.
According to the theory of Evolution, life began as a single cell and millions of years have been passed before it was shaped as a man (homo-sapien), and was not came to being as it is. If calculated accoding to the ‘Holy Bible’, man was created as it is , about 7000 years ago. (I suppose this as a controdiction bet ween western theology and science. Don’t you think so?)
Furthermore, many questions can be raised with regard to the existence of the god, creation, his supremacy, creation of rhe Devil, and many other things taken place during the process of the creation, based on rationality. Many of the theories of western theology can be questioned on “The First Principle” of western philosophy ( Non-Contradiction).
However, the main strategy used by the western culture to keep these two contradictory components together is to develop a stylish taboo called “Freedom to Faith”, which indicates anybody has a right to his or her religious faith whether it is true or not, and smartly barred to question its validity. Anyway, I am also going to stick into this policy for now, untill some inquisitive person wants me to do otherwise.
There is one more point I would like to mention in this instance for the attention of all. Popular expressions frequently heared in the vocabulary of western political theorists, such as “Freedom of Expression”, “Freedom to religious faith” etc… have their specific causes for origin in their societies as mentioned above. They have come up in response to the problems cropped up in their societies, and these ideas have a relative validity.. However, for our political parrots, who know only what they were taught by their masters and have no at least common sense, are trying to utter these ideas as universal truths. Really, social sciences such as Political Sicence do not have absolute principles, they have their limitations and short comings in different contexts. Thy have no universal validity or validity over time. Political thories come and go. When its cause for validity is no more in existence, it perishes. Marxcism, the political theory preached to us by the western educated people in early last century perished. Who can say with certainity that the Neo – Liberalalism or modern political theories preached by the new generation of western educated people has an absolute validity overtime in our society? Who can say with certinity it will notbe a non entity in the future as what happened to Marxcism.
We should not be assertive in our opinions. No one can say anything with certainity. That is what the “Uncertanity Principle” of “Heisenberg” teaches us and these swollen headded polititical theorists of today.
If we do not come out of this intelectual slavey, imitation of west witout any limitations,we will again and again have to praise the colonial rulers as our saviers.
Thanks!
deeval,
I disagree that there is a difference in the way that minority communities are given space to express them selves in Sri Lanka. We have public holidays for every religious occasion that it’s too much! Media covers every single religious event with appropriate material. In fact during xmas, it’s all movies about Santa Clause and Jesus on TV. There are schools for each religious background. All national events are blessed by leaders of main religions including the armed forces.
I absolutely agree that there is discrimination but that’s on par with how it is for minority communities throughout the world. Unfortunately that’s just human nature. Though in Sri Lanka it is probably more crudely put out than politically correct West. What I mean is that racism is expressed with manners. Just look at the whole deal with Assylum seekers in Australia. As the Australian PM calls it – “Tough yet humane action”?!? He is trying to look tough on the matter for the “concerend” electorate while also appealing to UN conventions. All over 75 refugees. I bet they get that many through their air ports daily. So what’s the big fuss? It’s the taboo of boat people. They’re on par with boogie men & zombies!
I mean who are you kidding with NY example. Are you saying it is not uncommon to hear the N word uttered by a White person in Brooklyn? Maybe not to the face because they don’t want to get punched but behind a Black person’s back? Or some one be called a effin Jew? In London, if you’re Brown, it’s not unusual to be called a effin Paki, even though you might be Indian or Sri Lankan. Can’t even differentiate. Not everyone but a prejudice few. It’s a universal phenomenon to get some bad Apples. So don’t get started on BS.
In this forum you see a piece about a Tamil youth getting bashed. As disgusting as it is, these things happen frequently in the US as well. I have heard of numerous police brutality cases (some with shocking videos) in the US targeting black people. Most recently a reputed Black professor was arrested after a neighbour calling the police on him due to racial motivations. All these cases were dealt with most likely because of the media attention. Sadly such is human behaviour sometimes.
I am of the opinion that racism is far less prevalent in Sri Lanka than in some Western countries.
“The move towards a mono-religious Sri Lankan identity can be seen in the pseudo-buddhist dogma of the ruling powers, who pepper their speeches with references to doing things the “buddhist way” which excludes other groups and doesn’t pay respect to a secular, democratic mode of governance that doesn’t force cultural values of only one group on the rest of its citizens in an extremely multi-ethnic country such as Sri Lanka.”
Can you point me to a speech made by the president that singled out Buddhism? A transcript or a recorded audio/video will do.
I don’t expect every single person to assimilate 100% into their host culture. In this case I only suggested that because her tone seemed to suggest that Sri Lanka did not mean much to her. In that case rather better to absorb into the host culture rather than becoming a cultural orphan.
There was a time that Tamils were treated brutally, but that was the past. You can either live in the past and sulk thinking it is still the same or you can have a second chance. From Anjali’s piece it is obvious she does not want to have a second go at the way she deep down wants to celebrate Deepawali. That’s why I said better off embracing the more “tolerant society” that she thinks she is living in now.
Thank you Anjali, for your soul searching and eloquent article. It is writing like yours that keep alive hope for peace and reconciliation in what is a very bleak present. It is regretful that many of the commentators have not appreciated the essence of what you have written. Having experienced life in both countries under discussion, I would like to share some of my thoughts.
Sri Lanka and the USA are both multi-cultural immigrant countries – as most countries in the world are, in fact, if you take into account centuries of migration of people on this planet. However, people prefer to forget that all our ancestors have been migrants at some point in the past and construct their identities within powerful ruling ideologies and structures. It is easier to construct monolithic identities because belonging to a group is a common human desire and the easiest way to do this is by “othering” people who live next to you and whom you wish to see as different.
Despite all of this, there are many people who manage to bridge these imposed differences and relate as human beings, in Sri Lanka, as elsewhere. It gave me joy that my children who grew up in Sri Lanka during all these years of terrible war did have a multi-cultural circle of friends and experienced very similar deevalis, vesaks, christmases and ramazans to what you described – with some limitations imposed by our modern lifestyle. They did that despite the conflict and bitterness that we were all surrounded by – because we managed to find spaces to keep that alive. My kids are in their late teens now and I’m proud of the thoughtful and tolerant human beings they have become.
Like you I’m often ashamed to be a Sri Lankan, if being Sri Lankan is identifying with what the governments of this country are doing (and have been doing). But Sri Lanka is also a place that some of us were born and have lived, and it is only an accident of history that some of us were born into one or the other ethnic group. Sri Lanka remains the place that good and bad things happened to us and will continue to happen. It is by rejecting the bad and valuing those precious things that we keep our indomitable human spirit alive. Therfore, I think you are right to celebrate Deepavali anew with your children in the way you have described.
  The US took a long time as a state to build multi-culturalism. This process is still fragile as the aftermath of the 9/11 and the dreadful repercussions on its Muslim citizens demonstrate. Even if the society/state promotes multi-culturalism, it takes time for all its citizens to accept it. Some 20 years ago I was stoned by youth in an Irish neighbourhood in Boston simply for looking different. However, I did not ascribe this to discrimination of Asians by all Americans or even all Irish Americans, and valued the company of Americans of all origins and my stay in that beautiful continent – despite what its governments might be doing in Iraq or Afganistan now, and what it did in Central and Latin America then.
It is a fact that the Sri Lankan state since independence from the British has been trying to impose a monolithic identity on its people. However, not all people accept that and painting everyone with the Sinhalese Buddhist hegemonic brush or defending the state’s right to do so as most commentators here are doing does not help us to foster other and better realities and processes. We defninitely need more Anjalis (part of the solution) if anything is to change in Sri Lanka (or the world for that matter). We all need to get out of this “victimhood past and present” and who was “more or less oppressed” mentality, and act with responsibility whether as citizens or as parents.
RajivaMV makes a point with the Malayan example. He merely shows how universal oppression and dicrimination against other groups are, rather than something specific to Sri Lanka. Contrary to Disgusted, it is a fact that the “natives” (Sinhalese and other groups) were oppressed by the British during the colonial period. It is also a fact that the Tamils and Muslims have been/are oppressed by the Sri Lankan state in the pursuit of Sinhalese Buddhist hegemony. Let us not forget oppression against low caste Sinhalese by this same state as well. Let us also not forget that some Sinhalese and Tamils did thrive under colonialism and that some inidividual British adminsitrators were thoughtful and humane people. The logic of Disgusted that the Sinhalese couldn’t have been oppressed because they possibly couldn’t treat Tamils the way they have done if that were the case, is entirely flawed. The Israeli state is the best example of this flawed reasoning. After all, the state that arose to protect the Jews, who were indeed an oppressed people in history (having experienced the Holocaust and concentration camps), has little qualms oppressing the Palestianian today.
Oppressing other human beings appears to be a universal human characteristic. But so is sharing the richness of our collective cultures, co-existence and cooperation. It is interesting that in this site, as elsewhere, it is mostly women who are committed to building bridges, while most of the male commentators are still stuck in their familiar adversarial paradigms. Thank you Anjali, for keeping that fragile Deepavali flame alive.
Humanist,
I was not denying that Sinhalese suffered under the colonial regime. My point was that you can’t use the Malayan colonial experience to understand the Sinhalese experience of colonialism. Also, it was being suggested that the current oppressive treatment of Tamils was due to Sinhalese’ experience of oppression during the colonial regime. I argued against that because people who have known oppression do not go about oppressing others. Rather I see the treatment of Tamils as being due to a privileged class of Sri Lankans wanting to hog power.
Disgusted,
“People who have known oppression do not go about oppressing others”. This is what I consider flawed logic. What else, after all, are terrorists or those who use violence to achieve their ends? Except people who have known oppression who go about oppressing others.
And if you think of oppression in a broader sense of not merely physical violence but violation of dignity or rights as human beings, everybody’s somebody’s oppressed. But does that justify demonizing some and not others?
Dear yapa:
You asked whether there is a contradiction between science and Western religion, e.g. Christianity. This contradiction existed from the time of Galileo up to Darwin’s time. Besides the status of the Catholic Church, there is another important reason: lack of free public education. How many people at that time knew what a cell was? Even Darwin did not know about DNA… so we have to consider the mindset of people at the time. These days everyone has basic biology; the genetic evidence to support evolution is very strong. If a new scientific idea was presented and the Catholic Church opposed, which side will the Public take? It is true that the “Bible” does not explain evolution and the birth of the Universe in the same terminology as science. However, any value judgement will depend on how one interprets the Bible. Whether one considers every word as true, or whether certain parts have only metaphorical meaning. Since interpretation is relative to the reader, one cannot automatically say there is a contradiction between the religion and the faith. I believe this is the trend in modern liberal Christianity; I am myself a Protestant, I do not know what approach Catholics or fundamentalist Christians take. In any event, I do not think it is wise to combine science and religion. Let us remember that modern science grew out of philosophy. Now modern science takes mathematics as its base; even though there are a few philosophical questions left unanswered, the mathematical foundation is much stronger than the philosophical one. As you have said, the basis of science is theory and experiment. If one goes on and on with theory, it will be easy for him to overlook a subtle mistake in logic. The theories of Einstein, Heisenberg, and Schrodinger have all been verified experimentally.
You have commented on freedom of expression. Well, I would say freedom of expression is very important to the progress of a society. It is true that the spread of ideas will be harmful to some people; however, for others, such ideas will prove to be a benefit. In the final case, all ideas should be examined, and people must be educated enough to tell the difference between right ones and wrong ones. The idea itself is not what causes harm; it is the person’s approach. Being able to choose the correct approach is what makes the person a “rational being.”
Humanist,
Terrorists do not go about oppressing others as an end in itself. Usually, they seek freedom from the oppression to which their community has been subjected. And of course they are not about to shy away from oppressing others to get their goals. Terrorists are purpose-driven, and the fight for freedom becomes terrifying and utterly inhuman.
On the other hand, a majority group denying a tiny minority their rights is oppression visited on others for its own sake. It is not done to stop the minority from attaining power or becoming dominant, because there is never any chance of that, given their small numbers. It is done purely to subjugate another group–simply because they can. That kind of pathological need to subjugate others for its own sake is not usually done by those who have experienced subjugation themselves–it is done by those who have never experienced subjugation, like the Rajapakses of this world. It is done purely for domination. Hitler’s racism was awakened by his reading–it was not a response to oppression.
Please go attend to your own flawed logic. If everybody is somebody’s oppressed, and all people who have known oppression go about visiting it on others, then on what basis do you talk about the universal characteristic of wanting to share our rich cultures, to co-exist and co-operate? Where in your narrative is there any space for this to happen?
Observer, thank you for pointing this out! You have pretty much voiced my opinoins. As the first of my Sri Lanka-Sinhalese family to be born in the west and raised in America, I totally agree with you. In Ireland, my friend’s cousin who is Sri Lankan had people pass her up in their car and they screamed ” GO BACK HOME, YOU DIRTY PAKI!” Hearing things like this is all too common in Britain. However, I disagree with you about your comments about America. Although it really is not ALL that relevant to this discussion, black people discriminate against white people FAR more often- I believe there is a stat showing that most racial crimes in America are black on white, rather than the other way. It’s pretty typical–what do you expect in a country(along with most of the west) that is so politically correct? Stories about minorities doing things to white are frequently downplayed in society, like newspapers and the media. I think that people–especially europeans–are always quick to judge americans as being racist, even though i’ve had pretty good experiences, for the most part.
“Contrary to Disgusted, it is a fact that the “natives” (Sinhalese and other groups) were oppressed by the British during the colonial period.”
Can you give direct examples of this? Certainly, they gave privileges to Christians (of all races and ethnicities) , but does that constitute “oppression?” Were not the early leaders of SL the products of the English-educated class created by the British, well up to the time of J.R. Jayawardene? I have read in Michael Ondaatje that “everyone hated the British” yet he never gave the reason as to why. Certainly, in none of his works does he speak of explicit racism… what we see in his anecdotes are all groups of people mixing.
On the other hand, Sinhalese were rioting against Muslims as early as 1915! I think that says quite a lot… the “Buddhist revival” was alive and well long before Independence.
Let’s lay the blame where it belongs. The MOTIVATIONS behind colonialism may have been wrong, but the idea that the natives suffered for 100′s of years is a myth.
“Although it really is not ALL that relevant to this discussion, black people discriminate against white people FAR more often- I believe there is a stat showing that most racial crimes in America are black on white, rather than the other way.”
I don’t think these sporadic incidents have much relevancy. What is of more concern is whether or not people have access to legal recourse. I am sure that if we took a vote, the majority communities of many, many Western countries would choose to send the immigrants all back home. However, the laws enshrined in the constitutions of those same nations stipulate the exact opposite. Suffice it to say, the justice system in SL does not protect the minorities (as admitted by Sarath Nanda himself). Whether it be the Constitution or the Prevention of Terrorism Act, the odds are stacked against the minorities again and again. This then, in my opinion, is the fundamental difference between East and West – it is not whether the collective mindset of a particular group of people is “racist” – but whether the laws serve to adequately constrain such people from acting out. After all, the law functions on the premise of enforcement of adequate punishment; the law is not there to instill values in people. But I like to think that the law by itself, properly enforced, can prevent many would-be-miscreants from acting out.
Dear Observer
I was not saying that there is no racism in NY/London but that the idea of cultural assimilation is a nonsense in these cases. As you were calling for Anjali to “assimilate 100%”. People of course still aspire to narrow minded cultural domination – e.g., the right wing nationalist parties in the UK. Some people in Sri Lanka also seem to think that assimilation is the key.
The space for muslims/hindus is certainly NOT the same. Every poya is a holiday. Have you seen the number of buddhas around colombo? DID YOU HEAR THE PRESIDENT’S VICTORY SPEECH????? With all those ridiculous references to Dutugemunu? He made overt references to Sri Lanka following the principles of Buddhism – this is NOT secular politics; it is race politics. In the wake of the defeat of terrorism; he turned it into the defeat and subjugation of a racial minority.
I think people have become blinded to the amount of subtle and even non-so-subtle cultural imperialism that the state has nurtured over the years. Our baseline is so warped that we are now seeing these things as normal. This is perhaps one of the hugest challenges this country faces: the fact that many in the majority do not even accept the levels of racism in this country as out of ordinary. This, coupled with the smoke screen of “security” appears to be paving the way for monstrous civil liberty violations, like the IDPs, military occupation of Jaffna and now the north-east.
This terribly dangerous argument: “hey racism happens everywhere, so let’s just chill and evolve together”. If racism happens we have to constantly fight it: society does not just transform itself without careful processes and effort. All of which are lacking in Sri Lanka right now and are being actively blocked: e.g., the failure to implement 13th Amendment in pandering to right wing “buddhist” political pressure from nationalist parties like the JHU who choose to define themselves by Buddhism – as insulting as that is to the philosophy.
Do you know the amount of effort anti-racist and equal opportunity lobbies put into keeping even the unacceptable level of racism of the west at the level it is? How many protests and critical articles are written in the western media of their own political systems? Here we can be disappeared for writing such things in the newspapers – or are told to shut up and enjoy the “peace” as it organically “evolves” around us by people such as Yapa. This is not the way to ensure equality.
There are different degrees of racism. You cannot just say let there be genocide in Sudan because it’s just an expression of our innate behaviour: I’m sure they’ll miraculously evolve through photosynthesis. It is not comparable to the New York fire department being dominated by whites; or even the prevalence of black people on death row. Even these problems in the USA are things that human rights activists are are always jumping up and down about. And they should tackle it – just as we need to stop sitting on our fat asses and congratulating ourselves for being as racist as everyone else.
Rape is also a universal phenomenon – are you suggesting we allow things to take their “natural course”. Rape, violence, racism are all culturally facilitated phenomena. If we don’t strive to identify and change the environment that allows negative behaviours that harm vulnerable groups to proliferate you will end up with frustration and more violence, or just the complete cultural annihilation of groups.
Accept what is happening and sort it out, don’t live in some semi-doped sense of denial. That is truly the road to ruin.
Huh,
You said: “Although it really is not ALL that relevant to this discussion, black people discriminate against white people FAR more often- I believe there is a stat showing that most racial crimes in America are black on white, rather than the other way.”
Was the Civil Rights movement one where American Whites fought against racism from the Blacks? Was the Ku Klux Klan Black? Were the Jim Crow laws made by Blacks against Whites? Was it the Blacks who went around lynching Whites? Was it Whites who had to ride at the back of the bus?
It is well known, and acknowledged by White activists and leaders (and by statistics too), that American police target Blacks, that there are many falsely accused Black people in American jails. Ever heard of the crime called Driving While Black?
America’s Affirmative Action policies are themselves an admission from the very top that racism operates against minorities, denying them access to equal opportunities.
If structural racism by Whites is acknowledged by Whites themselves, then, could it be that the stats show more racial crimes being committed by Blacks because the Blacks are the ones being more enthusiastically prosecuted for racial crimes?
Racism is not just about hate crimes but, more importantly, about lack of equal access to education, jobs, and other opportunities. It is also about unequal treatment of a group by the law and State policies. It would seem that for you, addressing minority rights is merely “political correctness”. I wonder where you would be as an Asian in America if not for America’s “political correctness”.
Observer,
You asked: “Can you point me to a speech made by the president that singled out Buddhism? A transcript or a recorded audio/video will do.”
Here’s the transcript of the President’s victory speech on 19 May 2009 where he refers exclusively to Buddhism:
“We must find a homegrown solution to this conflict. That solution should be acceptable to all the communities,” he said. “We have to find a solution based on the philosophy of Buddhism.”
http://www.chennaitvnews.com/2009/05/rajapakse-speaks.html
He has also made other speeches where governance is linked to Buddhism. Here is one of them:
http://www.nation.lk/2009/06/21/news5.htm
According to the Sri Lankan Constitution, Sri Lanka (Ceylon) is a “free, Sovereign, Independent and Democratic Socialist Republic”. Sovereignty “is in the people and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise.” The “legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, consisting of elected representatives of the People and by the People at a Referendum”.
Although it pledges to protect Buddhism, Sri Lanka is not a Buddhist state, and Buddhism is not its official religion. Rajapakse’s pledge to govern the country according to Buddhist principles was unconstitutional. On what basis did the President change the country from a free democratic nation to a Buddhist nation without consulting the people? Sovereignty lies in the people.
Observer,
You said: “I am of the opinion that racism is far less prevalent in Sri Lanka than in some Western countries.”
That is a joke, right? You were just trying to test whether people were sleeping on this forum, right?
If it was a joke, let me tell you that it is a deeply offensive one. No Western country in this day and age is incarcerating a quarter of a million of its own innocent citizens simply for belonging to a specific race. No Western country has been fighting for 60 years to stop a minority from getting equal rights. No Western country requires a specific group to have special passes and checks to travel through their own country. This country has been embroiled in an ethnic war for the last 30 years, preceded by state-sanctioned pogroms against a minority, by laws that denied equal opportunities in education to a specific race. More than 800,000 Sri Lankan Tamils had to flee the country to evade racial violence. And you think racism is less prevalent here than in Western countries?
OBSERVER – to answer your query with evidence.
On the proliferation of buddhist dogma in politics that should be secular; the celebration of Sinhalese domination in conquering other groups; and the refusal to recognise minority issues explicitly. All issues that signal a move towards securing the status of the current regime as primarily Sinhalese and Buddhist.
I present to you, straight from the horse’s mouth:
“President said he has a major responsibility to make the country an island of dharma once again like the ancient kings did while developing the country in parallel.”
http://www.colombopage.com/archive_091/Jun1245520090RA.html
“The president added that he plans to incorporate more Buddhist principles in the administration of the state..”
http://www.nation.lk/2009/06/21/news5.htm
From his victory speech:
“I believe that the solution that we who respect valued the qualities of Mettha (loving kindness) Karuna (Compassion) Muditha (Rejoicing in others’ joy) and Upeksha (Equanimity) based on the philosophy of Buddhism can present, can bring both relief and an example to the world.”
“We are a country with a long history where we saw the reign of 182 kings who rules with pride and honour for that extended more than 2,500 years. This is a country where kings such as Dutugemunu, Valagamba, Dhatusena and Vijayabahu defeated enemy invasions and ensured our freedom.”
“We have removed the word minorities from our vocabulary three years ago. No longer are the Tamils, Muslims, Burghers, Malays and any others minorities. There are only two peoples in this country. One is the people that love this country. The other comprises the small groups that have no love for the land of their birth. Those who do not love the country are now a lesser group.”
http://www.president.gov.lk/speech_New.asp?Id=74
ps:
“We need the support of other Buddhist countries”
http://www.nation.lk/2009/06/21/news5.htm
“other Buddhist countries” implying the president’s interpretation of Sri Lanka as a Buddhist country.
disgusted, i would like to clarify what I was trying to say. I was trying to say that TODAY–not in the sixties or the 1920′s but today–for the MOST PART, blacks are not unfairly discriminated against. What you’re saying:
” If structural racism by Whites is acknowledged by Whites themselves, then, could it be that the stats show more racial crimes being committed by Blacks because the Blacks are the ones being more enthusiastically prosecuted for racial crimes?”
No. Do you live in America? If you did, you would know that this is not true. Anytime a black person accuses anyone of racism in America, it gets TONS of coverage all over the news–the stories of whites being attacked by blacks are underplayed or ignored and there are many of them. In fact, I know many non-white people, including my Sri Lankan friend, who have been attacked/harassed by people who are black but have never been harassed once by people who are white and some these people go to colleges that are RURAL. I know an Indian college professor who was not allowed to fail a black woman in his class just because she was black(he was actually informed by the college that he wouldhave to let her retake his course because if she sued the school, he would definitely loose even though he did nothing wrong in failing her). Research the Duke Lacrosse case and see what I mean. Furthermore, in today’s society, I would argue that the one group of people working against blacks in America are there own bogus left-winged leaders and the ghetto culture that(For the worse, obviously) white liberals attribute to them. Also, you bring up affirmative action and yes, that was a result of the awful, but well-intentioned, sixties and was meant to address ” racism”(I put that in quotes because it did nothing of the sort). Although it started out as a way to guarantee that blacks were being treated fairly, it has done nothing of the sort.
Also, disgusted, you also say:
” Racism is not just about hate crimes but, more importantly, about lack of equal access to education, jobs, and other opportunities. It is also about unequal treatment of a group by the law and State policies.”
What laws that are in affect now in the united states unfairly discriminate against blacks or other minorities within the country, itself? Blacks do not have unequal opportunities to any of these things today. The primary inequality in America is between those who are truly in deep poverty and those who are not. American Blacks have the misfortune of being more susceptible to being born in single-parent households, dropping out of school and falling into drugs–those things aren’t created by laws. In fact, these things all became huge issues AFTER the civil rights era and were not as big of a problem for them before this time.
“It would seem that for you, addressing minority rights is merely “political correctness”. I wonder where you would be as an Asian in America if not for America’s “political correctness”.
Have any laws really been created in America to address my issues lol? If so, I’m quite unaware of them. What is good is addressing minorities rights–it’s quite another to be passive towards their behavior all in the name of them having experienced slavery and segregation(arguments that I have actually heard and things many blacks today have never experienced). America’s poltical correctness may have done good things originally, but like almost all of the civil rights era, it has left a mostly negative impact on America.
However, my point in bringing all this up was to show that minorities AND majorities all experience racism in varying degrees by various groups, and minorities certainly do discriminate against others. However, I have found that I agree with Heshan and Deevalmore on this one–what is important is implementing laws that(regardless of how racist people’s mentalities are) so that nobody is a victim. When we all stop tot hink, it is really irrelevant whether racism happens in other countries or not–what is important is how we do things to stop them here and now. We can throw out any excuse we like, but it doesn’t do anything. I feel that Sri Lanka has suffered to much from this diffusion of blame(on both Tamil and Sinhalese sides). The most dangerous thing we can do is just let people get away with things with a laissez faire attitude we create ourselves(I believe that leads to a breakdown in the rule of law). Sri Lanka needs to implement laws that guarantee that all of its minorities are equally treated in society, by strictly enforcing laws against racism and making sure that Tamil as an official language is respected and that there are more tamils in the public sector.
P.S. Sorry Disgusted if what I typed seems like a rant(initially)lol.
Yapa,
Some of the things I have noticed are given below.
1. You firmly believe that what you believe is the best.
2. You have no hesitation to express your view.
3. You consider your knowledge base and the beliefs as the absolute bottom line.
4. Based on the above bottom line you cricise others views and beliefs.
5. You do not think that you should put forward facts ,reasons or examples in your arguments. You just express your opinions as if they are universal truths.
6. You have a tendancy to go against local values.
7. You consider west as the basic measuring unit to ascetain everything.
8. You consider west as superior.
9. You have a prejudice against buddhism.
10. Most of your answers are not relevent to the questions.
11. Rationality is lacking in your arguments.
12. You are trying to comment on everything, this act exibits tour lack of knowledge.
God bless you Niranjan. For some “Ignorance is bless” .
1. You firmly believe that what you believe is the best.
2. You have no hesitation to express your view.
3. You consider your knowledge base and the beliefs as the absolute bottom line.
4. Based on the above bottom line you cricise others views and beliefs.
I am of the opinion that the above applies to you as well.
“You are trying to comment on everything, this act exibits tour lack of knowledge.’- How come commenting on everything leads to a lack knowledge ? Besides is it wrong to comment ? This is a public forum.
“You have a tendancy to go against local values.”- If I consider them to be illeberal and inhuman why should I not go against them. I repeat “I consider the publication of photographs of women who act in pornographic movies for identification purposes to be inhuman and uncivilised.
I also oppose the ban on Tobacco and Alcohol advertising- People can make their own decisions. We do not need a nanny state.
Saman,
It is not Buddhism I am thrashing but people who use Buddhism in the wrong way for their own ends. I am especially refering to politicians who use it to win votes. In a multi ethnic country religion is a dangereous weapon.
By the way I am not paid to thrash Buddhism.
Yapa,
“Surely, your subconcious mind knows that you will only be a second class citizen there.”-I have lived in Britain as a student and was never treated as a second class citizen. I was treated as an equal.
“Despite your mighty efforts to become a Britisher, they will never equate white with brown or black.”- The majority of British people do not look down on Brown or Black. Racism is a dirty word in the UK and there is race relations legislation in place. In fact some people have called for similar legislation to be adopted here now that the war is over. The UK is multicultural at least in its cities.
“Please be faithful to your country.”- I have citizenship in this country and I was born here but I have the right to criticise certain value systems and political actions that I think are wrong. I have the legal right to be Sri Lankan and yet criticise what I see as wrong in this society. Everyone has that right including you. Just because I criticise certain political and value systems in this country does not make me “unfaithful” to the country. Even in the UK citizens have the choice of criticising what they perceive to be wrong in their society and yet be faithful to the UK. For example many UK people are against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have opposed the war by demonstrations and in other ways but they remain faithful to the country.
“In your eyes there is no any good in Sri Lankan civilisation and society?”- What about the involuntary murder of a Sri Lankan citizen who took place on bambalapitya beach recently. Is it not a reflection of the sad state of affairs in this country ? The public stood by watching because they were scared to approach the men who were beating that man. Is this not a case of shaming and humiliating a person in public ? So where is the good in Sri Lankan society ? I do know there are decent people in this society. The bigger question is where have they gone ? Perhaps they have left the country or have chosen to remain silent.
Heshan,
The British, as you yourself have pointed out, practiced religious discrimination in SL. They instituted language discrimination. They appropriated vast tracts of land. And they killed thousands of people. Here’s an account of the aftermath of the Uva rebellion taken from wikipedia:
“It is a pity that there is no evidence left behind to show the exact situation in Uva in terms of population or agriculture development after the rebellion… there is no trace of evidence left behind… the havoc caused is unlimited. In short the people have lost their lives and all other valuable belongings. It is doubtful whether Uva has at least now recovered from the catastrophe.”
In short, the British committed many of the same crimes against the Sinhala Buddhists that the latter are now accused of committing against the Tamils. And yet you see one as oppression and the other as a ‘myth’.
Perhaps the colonial era was a paradise for Christian English-speakers, but it most certainly wasn’t for the rest. I can now hear you say, well, everybody could have learnt English and converted to Christianity, so it’s their own fault. But if someone were to suggest, well, the Tamils could have learnt Sinhala and converted to Buddhism, you would be overcome with righteous rage. And rightfully so, let me quickly add. But your blindness, hypocrisy and prejudice would have been laid bare.
Where I agree with you completely is that our current woes cannot blamed on the British, and nowhere have I said such a thing. I was writing to contest your contention that we would have been better off under the British rule. Like I said before, you will probably never understand.
Disgusted,
I think you are far too quick to leap into disgust. Please read my post carefully, and understand the context.
“I was not denying that Sinhalese suffered under the colonial regime. My point was that you can’t use the Malayan colonial experience to understand the Sinhalese experience of colonialism.”
I was not using the Malayan example for any such purpose. I brought it up to refute some earlier comments that the British Empire was noble in character and impeccable in manners, and was selflessly turning barbarian societies into Hong Kongs until rudely interrupted.
“Also, it was being suggested that the current oppressive treatment of Tamils was due to Sinhalese’ experience of oppression during the colonial regime.”
Where oh where do you find such a suggestion in my post? I was in no way justifying such treatment of Tamils, but in fact pointing out a sad irony in the situation.
“…people who have known oppression do not go about oppressing others.”
If only that were so. Even a cursory examination of history and current events would reveal that this is simply not the case. It does not mean there’s no hope. People learn their lessons excrutiatingly slowly, but I believe that eventually they do.
“Rather I see the treatment of Tamils as being due to a privileged class of Sri Lankans wanting to hog power”
There is certainly some truth to this. But the LTTE and its supporters have to take their fair share of responsibility for a lot of the misery the Tamils have been through over the years, and indeed for essentially putting Mahinda Rajapakse in power.
deeval,
“The space for muslims/hindus is certainly NOT the same. Every poya is a holiday. Have you seen the number of buddhas around colombo? DID YOU HEAR THE PRESIDENT’S VICTORY SPEECH????? With all those ridiculous references to Dutugemunu?”
I don’t agree with every Poya being a holiday. That’s just too much.
Have you seen the number of Churches in Western countries? They are predominantly Christian countries. So don’t be surprised that in a predominantly Buddhist country Buddhist temples out weigh Kovils. It’s demand and supply. There are Temples that are even combined with Kovils in some cases.
So what if you refer to Dutugamunu? It’s Sri Lankan history! It is common in speeches to make reference to great moments in history. So does that mean politicians can’t make references to people like Napoleon, James Cook, etc? The joke really is that UK still bows to their highness. Let’s see one day the US president take the oath without saying “so god (Jesus) help me”, “god (Jesus) bless America”. But if a Sri Lankan says “Theruwan Saranai” in a speech that’s it, slaughter of a secular society (which they don’t)! I don’t dig that! Secular as a society maybe there are some aspects that are too traditional that will remain. So get over it.
Do you know how much subsidies and benefit Churches get in Western countries? It’s RIDICULOUS! Buddy I don’t live in a semi-doped condition. If you really think that, you’re fool to respond to what I said. I generally ignore kites.. haha
Disgusted, I don’t see any issue there. Buddhist philosophy (not religion – be careful) says that treat everyone with loving kindness. So are you against a solution to the ethnic problem that is based on loving kindness? Would you rather have a crusade type or jihadi type solution? Please tell me.
Disgusted, there’s a stark difference between a Buddhist country and a predominantly Buddhist country. Don’t mix the 2 in your confused state. I have been to Temples, Churches and Kovils in Sri Lanka. I never got to go to a Mosque but I will get around to that. Over 90% living in Sri Lanka has gone to all of the above or most religious worship places regardless of their religious background. I don’t understand what you’re getting at.
Just have to add this, despite all the arguments back and forth what I see in Sri Lanka is Economic Racism. Discrimination based on wealth which I strongly oppose. This doesn’t mean I want socialist parties to come into power rather I’d like to see a party that will truly fight corruption and provide more opportunities for the disadvantaged. Feels like the impossible sometimes.
The society I mingle in doesn’t judge on the race or creed. It purely judges on the wealth which is very unfortunate.
btw, i just listened to 40 odd minutes of the president’s victory speech now on Youtube but I failed to find that quote from the Chennai news paper. Maybe because I am tired. Maybe it was lost in translation. I will listen later and see. Because I’d remember such a remark normally.
niranjan
you say look at the murder or a tamil youth killed in bamba. and then you go on to blast SL to kingdom cum….. . USA has so many serial killers… so i guess USA also joins the club… a student was gang raped in USA
“A 15-year-old female California high school student was gang raped for two and a half hours while 15 others stood around, watching the assault-
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=109763§ionid=3510203”
well look at the austrian who had childeren with his own child… then than country is also bad as SL.. so i guess SL< USA and AUstria are bad while your own UK – would be heaven on earth….
Disgusted,
Oppression is not something black or white – it is a continuum. It varies from the parent oppressing his/her child (or the opposite), the husband oppressing his wife to the terrorist killing his brethen in his quest for power and the state torturing “innocent” and “not-so-innocent” citizens in detention cells – all, of course, in the name of somebody’s rights.
Thus, you are misquoting me. Just because everyone is oppressed by somebody, it does not mean the converse is true – that everybody goes around oppressing somebody. The difference between an ethical/considerate person and an oppressor is that an ethical person strives to do no harm and refrains from violating someone else to the best of his/her abilities. That is why we can have empathy and sharing of our common human experiences in this world.
Thus, I don’t buy your “end justifies the means” argument. Someone who kills his/her fellow human beings to get what he or she wants (and what does he want most often? more power for himself or a state to continue to oppress other people) is an oppressor in my book.
Heshan,
I’m taking you in good faith when you say you have seen no evidence for British oppression in the colonial period in Sri Lanka. You can, of course, contest the sources, as you always do, but for whatever it is worth, here are a couple of references: Davy, J. (1821) “An Account of the interior of Ceylon and its inhabitants with travels in that island” (one chapter describes the devastation in the aftermath of the Uva rebellion; and if it matters to you at all, it is from a humane British perspective); Bandrage, A. (1984) Colonialism in Sri Lanka: The political economy of the Kandyan Highlands 1833-1866 (she is a Yale PhD if that helps since you think the US is the most superior nation in the world).
And you are right – not all “natives” suffered under the British. In fact some benefitted a whole lot. While you are at it , you could also read, Jayawardena, K. “From nobodies to somebodies” on a history of the people who thrived under colonialism. And I’m not saying that colonialism was entirely bad either – like all forms of power it was a mixed bag. As I’ve already made clear, I don’t see the world in black and white. Grey is a pretty decent colour for reality.
Humanist,
Please stop preaching at me. I am not some youngster for you to teach me what life is all about.
When did I say that “the end justifies the means”? When did I say that it was okay to demonize some but not others? I am really tired of you attacking me for things I never said. I try to clarify, but then you dream up something else to get at me with.
Maybe your life experience tells you that some people don’t oppress others even though they’ve been oppressed themselves because they have some ethical standards. My life experience tells me that people who experience oppression are the ones who will most likely resist visiting it on someone else. Whenever someone starts up with violence, something else has kicked in other than their experience of oppression.
If I misquoted you, it was because of your own expression. You said: ‘And if you think of oppression in a broader sense of not merely physical violence but violation of dignity or rights as human beings, everybody’s somebody’s oppressed. But does that justify demonizing some and not others?”
I took that last question of yours to mean that you thought that everybody was equally or similarly oppressing others since you were implying that all should be demonized, or all shouldn’t be. At any rate, I am not interested in demonizing anyone except people who are elected into office and who betray the trust of the people who voted for them.
Observer
You are clearly desensitised to issues of how religion and race should be expressed in a pluralistic society (especially one where the minorities already feel there is huge injustice against them), and serve an example of how the majority of Sri Lankans have allowed racism and oppression to proliferate in this country due to their elastic powers of “interpretation”.
You asked me where references to buddhism were being used to brand the country in favour of the ruling majority; and I showed you. But you are bent on not accepting that this is a problem. So, even in the face of facts, if you are unwilling to consider that this might be an issue, there is no point continuing this conversation.
I would like to note that to have a huge buddha placed without any reference to other religions in the country’s airport to state who runs this place is not the same as seeing churches in Europe. If you are just going to jump to the nearest nonsensical analogy to try to confirm what you have already decided to believe there is not much point in talking to you.
Signing out
d
rajivmw,
“What has happened to Britains model colony(Ceylon) ?” This was a question put to me by my IR lecturer when I was a student at University in the UK.
How is it that during the colonial period there was peace between the communities in the island which had an English speaking administration ? There were a few uprisings against the British time and again(e.g Uva Wellasa) and there were Sinhala-Muslim clashes e.g 1915 riots as well but overall the country was peaceful.
It is our post independance history which was a disaster. e.g disenfranchising Tamil estate workers, the Sinhala Only Bill, Land Reform Law of 1972 which fragmented estates and ruined mainly the Sinhala business class, the 1971 JVP insurrection, the 1983 Riots, the second JVP insurrection of 1989, terrorism in the North for a very long period, migration of professional and non-professional people of all racial groups etc. All this within the space of about 60 years. This country is the loser.
Can we blame the British for all the above or do we need to look at our own politicians and their conduct after independance ? Was it not Churchill who said that Indians will be unable to rule themselves. It looks like the Indians have been able to rule themselves while we in little Sri Lanka which was considered one of Britains model colonies have not been able to rule ourselves.
Then again at the Sri Lanka administrative service today. Is it not in a bad way ? We had an efficient administrative service in British times. The British times had its faults but things are much worse now. Corruption is endemic and good Governance is sparse.
As for Hong Kong which was granted independance by Britain in 1997 don’t you think it was Britain that brought it upto what it is now ? I mean in terms of politics, administration and economics.
China helped of course with the trade and economic part of it.
“Getting back to SL, I don’t think the Niranjans or Heshans of this world would ever quite understand the collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation faced by the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists during the colonial occupation.”- I have doubts about this one. I do not think the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists had a sense of cultural oppression and humilaition. Some would have but not the vast majority.
Saman,
You have given good examples. But does that mean we in Sri Lanka should turn a blind eye to what is going on around us. In the UK if a thing like Bamba Beach incident did happen there would have been a huge public outcry and the authorities concerned will have had to take notice. This happened when a Brazilian man was shot by the police in London some years ago. The public outcry in this country has been limited.
Dear Humanist:
The examples you give which allege discrimination do not make a convincing case. Why? Because they are sporadic incidents, at best. They do not establish a consistent pattern. Apartheid in South Africa, for example, or state-sponsored colonization of Tamil lands in Sri Lanka – phenomena that occurred over decades – shows a deliberate intention to discriminate on the basis of race/ethnicity. In the case of the Uva Rebellion, the British merely reacted – but in reacting, did so once and only once. You cannot use a one-time reaction to make the case that 300 years of colonialism was oppressive to the natives. Furthermore, it was not merely in Sri Lanka that the British punished insurrection violently: Scotland, Ireland,and India come to mind. Let us also keep in mind that punishment during this time was generally harsh, in Britain itself: thieves were hung for stealing bread, as were pirates. I am not sure of what relevance the “political economy of the Kandyan Highlands” can possibly be. What is clear is that the Kandyans did their utmost NOT to integrate… to the extent that (as we all know) the British were forced to import labor from India to pluck the tea. If that constitutes discrimination (against the Kandyans), so be it.
Yes, I have read “Nobodies to Somebodies” (I happen to own that book). What this book shows is that colonialism was the pre-cursor to capitalism in the island. Of course, this transition was not perfect, and remnants of the feudal mindset that existed before and during colonialism are still alive today. Nevertheless, the advantages of colonialism outweigh by far the disadvantages. Free education, modern technology, modern systems of government and economy… let us not deceive ourselves that the caste (in the Sinhalese case class) conscious natives were making progress on these fronts. Democracy is essentially a Western ideal… from a historical point of view, it makes sense that democracy would spread from West to East, and not vice-versa. Democracy, as you would agree, works best with a free-market economy. Colonialism was an attempt to spread the free-market economy to the East. Unfortunately, Social Darwinism was also an underlying motivation, which is why this process did not work seamlessly. In any event, what is evident that is not colonialism was not simply an attempt by Westerners to subjugate the natives and ruthlessly exploit all the resources of their land.
rajivmv,
I will take your points one by one.
“The British, as you yourself have pointed out, practiced religious discrimination in SL.”
On the other hand, religious discrimination did not favor any particular race or ethnicity.
“They instituted language discrimination.”
Once again, language discrimination did not favor any particular race or ethnicity.
“They appropriated vast tracts of land.”
I am not sure exactly what you mean by that… to the best of my knowledge, the British did not chase Tamils or Sinhalese out of villages and resettle the places with Britishers. It would be helpful if you were more specific.
“And they killed thousands of people. Here’s an account of the aftermath of the Uva rebellion taken from wikipedia”
The Uva rebellion was a one-time incident. The British were in possession of part or all of the island for nearly 300 years. If this is the only incident you can come up with, whereby the British deliberately massacred thousands of natives, then your argument is sorely lacking.
“In short, the British committed many of the same crimes against the Sinhala Buddhists that the latter are now accused of committing against the Tamils. And yet you see one as oppression and the other as a ‘myth’.”
One of the peculiarities of Anglo-Saxon administration is its efficiency. I would go so far as to say that this desire to administer efficiently is what prevented the British from adversely exploiting the natives and the natural resources of the island. Instead of turning all the natives into slaves and importing British overseers to watch over them, the British actually tried to incorporate the natives into a Western model of civil administration. The British realized that maximum efficiency could only be achieved if the natives had some degree of control over their own affairs. On the other hand, to ensure that that control did not exceed particular boundaries, they (British) sought to create a class of Christian, English-educated natives. If we discount the religion, the rest of it makes sense. The British themselves had no incentive to learn the native languages, since their numbers were small in proportion to the native population.
Whereas British colonialism was centered around achieving efficient administration, Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism is a different beast altogether. There is really no comparison. Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism is closer to fascism than anything else.
“Perhaps the colonial era was a paradise for Christian English-speakers, but it most certainly wasn’t for the rest. I can now hear you say, well, everybody could have learnt English and converted to Christianity, so it’s their own fault. But if someone were to suggest, well, the Tamils could have learnt Sinhala and converted to Buddhism, you would be overcome with righteous rage. And rightfully so, let me quickly add. But your blindness, hypocrisy and prejudice would have been laid bare.”
I have addressed this point elsewhere. There is no incentive for anyone to learn Sinhala (or Tamil) up and over English. It is good that the British introduced English, for obvious reasons.
Typo: *200 years, not 300
deval, George W Bush vetoed stem cell research because he didn’t want to tick off his Christian base. Ridiculous! And there was all that brouhaha over placing the 10 commandments in front of US courts. Luckily it did not happen! Just the other day they revoked gay marriage in some state. Western governments hugely subsidise Christian activities. They don’t have to build statues.
Picking on how the President referred to basic human qualities as described in Buddhist philosophy is unfair and deceitful. People lean on respective faiths in the aftermath of disasters. When things like Hurricanes, earth quakes, accidents, terrorist attacks like 9/11 happen that shake a nation, the President or the PM only goes to the Church and lights candles. They don’t go to a Mosque or a Jewish Synagogue. They may say or Lord do have mercy on us. These are secular states.
I’ll leave issues of how religion and race should be expressed in a pluralistic society right there..
I also understand we have fundamental disagreements. That’s fine. Let’s stop here.
“Observer,
You said: “I am of the opinion that racism is far less prevalent in Sri Lanka than in some Western countries.”
That is a joke, right? You were just trying to test whether people were sleeping on this forum, right?
Disgusted, I did not see your post or deval’s one that follows when I posted earlier. I think they weren’t moderated at the time.
I am not joking. It’s just how I see it. No it is NOT offensive at all! If reality offends you, it’s too bad. Cry me a river…
“No Western country in this day and age is incarcerating a quarter of a million of its own innocent citizens simply for belonging to a specific race.”
WOW you really said that! Yeah invading the whole freaking country is so much better. Dropping all sorts of sorties, stripping them of their dignity, crashing into their homes and arresting moms, dads, sisters, brother on suspicion, then they take them to place like Gunatanamo where they get handily bastardised. Man oh man I can write a book here but you catch my drift where I am going with this.
Peace, Disgusted… I didn’t intend to preach – my apologies if that is how it came out. I certainly don’t sit around dreaming up things to get at you with. On the contrary, we understand each other better than you might imagine. You are a worthy discussant; hence I engaged with your views.
evening folks. want something to drink? so much arguing must be tiring.
saman, ” USA has so many serial killers… so i guess USA also joins the club… a student was gang raped in USA”- the difference is that it wasnt done by the state authorities- far as corruption goes: true is not an indicator of racism, just the lack of accountability. my simple attempt at logic below attempts to prove (!) apathy…
Neverthless, can an admisnistration that destroyed an international terrorits organisation not fight corruption in its own ranks, if it wanted to? will it take more time than it takes to fight a war? does economic policy and the state sector and evils of governments past really stop independent commisions being put in to place? Do governments not listen to their voters and put these commisions in? Do voters not get what they really wantt? (if they don’t, and there is election rigging, does the opposition weild more power than the government?) if the government in power is not the people’s choice, why not wide spread dissent? if the government in power is the people’s choice, why hasn’t the government done what te people wanted- wipe out corruption and extra judicial killings? Could it be that corruption is all wiped out? but if its going on, why is the government so popular? coudl it be that the corruption doesn’t hurt vast majority of the government’s voters?
in regards to yapa’s quote on christianity “Uses Poverty of the people of other countries to creep into their societies to unethically convert these people”
I would graciously ask those who claim christians are unethically converting people, to kindly quote incidents (place and date, for collective verification) these could then be evaluated.
what is a conversion, and when is it unethical, and how much of it takes place?
i also found tis article on google, which anyone interested in the conversion “issue?:” might find “relevant?” http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:6vWmCPrSR9kJ:www.oslocoalition.org/documents/mhr_srilanka.doc+unethical+conversion+meaning&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=lk
We need actual facts, and dialogue, not heresay, or as buddhists and christians both we would be violating our religions. The part that talks about talking bad about others without first finding out. i know its in te dhammapadha i dont know where.
rajivmw,
Thank you for clarifying your meaning. I can see now that you did not intend to equate the Malayan and Sri Lankan experiences of colonialism, nor to suggest that the current oppressive treatment of Tamils was due to Sinhalese’ experience of colonial oppression. In fact, you signal at the end of the original post that your comments above are “not an attempt to excuse or justify the litany of misdeeds committed by the post-colonial Sri Lankan state.” Nevertheless, there was some room for people to read it in that manner and that’s why I responded.
You made the comment “I don’t think the Niranjans or Heshans of this world would ever quite understand the collective sense of cultural oppression and humiliation faced by the vast majority of Sinhala Buddhists during the colonial occupation.” You followed that up immediately by saying “Not entirely dissimilar, it must be sadly said, to the Tamil predicament of today as so eloquently expressed by deeval.”
That certainly can be read as a comment on the sad irony of the situation. But it can also be read as history repeating itself–with the implication that the Sinhalese are oppressing the Tamils cos it was done to them by the colonizers.
Also, while you stated that Sinhalese Buddhists experienced cultural oppression and humiliation under the colonial regime/s, you never gave any illustration or elaboration from the SL historical context. The only example given of colonial evil-doing, that “the British Empire was not all peace, love and prosperity”, was of Malaya. People could have felt encouraged to generalise about the two societies’ experience of colonialism.
Not that I contest that there was cultural oppression in Sri Lanka by the colonial regime, but there’s a danger in thinking that it was of the same sort as happened in Malaya and to grasp Sinhalese nationalism as similar. Malay nationalism had to contend with the displacement of local Malay people and culture by relatively recent non-Malay immigrants (who were drawn there by colonial enterprise), whereas Sri Lanka had multiple local populations, each with a long history of pre-colonial settlement. You mention Sinhalese cultural oppression and humiliation, but you don’t mention that it would have happened to the Tamils too and other groups. Anyway, that was why I was concerned about any implied comparison.
As for my statement that people who have been oppressed do not go about oppressing others, history and current events may show a coincidence in their occurrence. And just as many times where they don’t coincide. Are they causally connected then? It’s a popular idea but I don’t buy it.
I think the LTTE has taken responsibility for what they did. They died, didn’t they, along with their families, and some were tortured before, no? As for their supporters, if you mean the Tamil diaspora, let’s not forget that they were forced to leave their homeland and flee to strange countries as refugees. Is that humiliating enough for everyone? What choice did the Tamils have? Do as deeval suggests, “adopt the Uncle Tom mentality, put on the black and white minstrel show and pretend to the laughing, happy majority that everything is fine and we love our cotton-picking life in the dusty camps”?
Huh,
I agree totally with what you said about the Sri Lankan situation. However I do see the American race-relations issue quite differently from you. I don’t live there though and try to visit as little as possible (cos I’m not too comfortable in places where people are allowed to carry guns).
Anyway, my point about bringing up the Ku Klux Klan, the lynchings, the Jim Crow laws, etc, was not about the past versus the present, but rather that these instances point to the presence of large-scale structural racism, against which the Civil Rights movement arose. Has this structural racism simply vanished overnight? There’s still racial profiling by the police. Out of about 430 in the House of Reps, only 40 are Blacks. There’s only one Black in the Senate. The President is Black, but gets into trouble every time he speaks up for Blacks. American movies and TV shows still depict Blacks only in subsidiary roles. Fox Channel’s racism against minorities still draws the largest number of viewers.
This too is racism, even if it doesn’t involve fists and blows. And it’s more far-reaching in its effects. You depict Blacks as committing acts of racial violence against Whites. They’re probably killing more of their own community in the inner cities than Whites. How do you know Whites are being attacked by Blacks in large numbers if the media ignores them, as you claim? And why would the Whites need to beat up Blacks anyway since they’re the group in power?
I’m a bit confused. You say the Affirmation Action programme started out as a way to guarantee that blacks were being treated fairly, but that it has done nothing of the sort. So, are Blacks being treated fairly or unfairly?
You also say American Blacks are more susceptible to being born in single-parent households, dropping out of school and falling into drugs. Yes, those things aren’t created by laws. And you say that these became huge issues AFTER the civil rights era and were not as big of a problem for them before this time.
You’re right–prior to the Civil Rights era, they didn’t have single parent households. That was because they didn’t have much freedom of movement, the kind that allows men to run away from women that they’ve made pregnant. They had to huddle together to avoid being lynched. They didn’t have access to drugs, either, then. Now where did they get those drugs from after the Civil Rights era? Could it be that they attained freedom suddenly without the infrastructural, economic, and other support required to lead a ‘normal’ life?
I know slavery happened nearly two centuries ago, but it wasn’t strong on encouraging the formation of families and family values among the Blacks. Their children were taken away from them and sold, men were separated from their partners through transfers elsewhere. That would have skewed their culture in certain directions. Notice that they do have a strong ‘sisterhood’ culture–where Black women support each other. That too developed from their slave culture.
Family culture becomes strong with the development of the middle class. Aren’t they only just beginning to develop one? Look at Colin Powell who remembers how, even as a Vietnam War veteran, he had to collect his order of burghers from the back of the store. That’s just one lifetime. You can’t expect them to grow into their new shoes overnight. The Whites took centuries (and a lot of stealing of the wealth of other people around the globe) to get their culture to this stage.
I am quite startled that you see the Civil Rights era as having a largely negative impact. If it hadn’t happened, Blacks would still be being lynched, having to ride at the back of buses, apologising for the colour of their skin.
Observer,
You said: “WOW you really said that! Yeah invading the whole freaking country is so much better. Dropping all sorts of sorties, stripping them of their dignity, crashing into their homes and arresting moms, dads, sisters, brother on suspicion, then they take them to place like Gunatanamo where they get handily bastardised. Man oh man I can write a book here but you catch my drift where I am going with this.”
I assumed you were talking about domestic levels of racism. If you want to talk international affairs, of course, the West wins hands down. But only because they have the power. Give another race a chance, and they’ll give us a good show too.
“Give another race a chance, and they’ll give us a good show too.”
Precisely. Look at what China did to Tibet (that was an invasion!)… look at China’s take-over of Hong Kong, and look at how it constantly threatens Taiwan. What about Saddam Hussein? Did he not spend 7 years trying to invade Iran? My favorite example happens to be Japan, which tried to take over practically all of Asia during WWII. The US invasion of Afghanistan (which was justified by the way) and the invasion of Iraq pale by comparison.
Observer complains about Guantanamo Bay… first of all, only prisoners of war from Afghanistan are taken to Guantanamo Bay. All of these prisoners are men – there are no women and children. Secondly, Guantanamo Bay cost $32 million USD to build. No one in Gauntanamo Bay is waiting with a water bucket or standing in line to take a leak. It is a modern prison complete with all amenities. The Red Cross has complete access. Some inmates have been released. The only remaining difficulty is that some prisoners have been held without charge for an excessive period of time. The Obama administration has acknowledged this fact; there are plans underway to transfer them to maximum security prisons in the USA.
Conclusion: there is no comparison between Guantanamo Bay and Menik Farm. Let the Sri Lankan Government tell us what happened to those 10,000 LTTE who voluntarily surrendered. Then we can talk.
Dear Niranjan, Heshan, Disgusted ;
You all have responded to my writings in the discussion and opposed (or indicated so) to my view that western culture clashes with science. However, I think you accept that I have proved my proposition beyond any doubt using an accepted methodology. I showed the two contradicting views of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and that of Holy Bible with regard to the origin of man (homo sapien). I think Heshan has accepted this position, though unwillingly. (Please see his response “It is true that the “Bible” does not explain evolution and the birth of the Universe in the same terminology as science. However, any value judgement will depend on how one interprets the Bible. Whether one considers every word as true, or whether certain parts have only metaphorical meaning.”)
Howevr, I would like to tell Heshan that none has ever interprited this idea of the Holy Bible in a different way and also no one will ever be able to do so. Please do it if you can for the benefit of all, Heshan, ).
I think Digusted had responded to my former comment , before reading my last post. So, I hope the latter will answer many of his questions too.
However, Disgusted has said that “Western culture has no problem with Buddhism.” Niranjan’s ideas also has implications to this end. He suggests that Liberal ideas have no ‘friction’ in Sri Lankan society and equally applicable as in Britain or any other western country. (Please see Niranjan say “If I consider them to be illeberal and inhuman why should I not go against them.”
However, after this comment you will see that Liberalism has emerged from an entirely different and contradictory footing to Buddhism and also that so called Universal Liberalism, as considered by Niranjans,- is like a squre peg in a round hole for societies like Sri Lanka. ).
As per “Wikipedia”- Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, “of freedom; worthy of a free man, gentlemanlike, courteous, generous”[1]) is the belief in the importance of individual freedom.
There are so many philosophers contributed to develop this political ideology, however, John Locke is considerd to be the father of Liberalism. ((There were many precursors to liberalism, including certain aspects of the Magna Carta, which reduced the power of the English monarch,[15] and medieval Islamic ethics, which allowed some freedom of religion.[16][17] But most histories of modern liberal thought begin with John Locke (1632 – 1704).-Wikipedia)
In the 17th Century, liberal ideas began to influence governments in Europe, in nations such as The Netherlands, Switzerland, England and Poland, but they were strongly opposed, often by armed might, by those who favored absolute monarchy and established religion. In the 18th Century, in America, the first modern liberal state was founded, without a monarch or a hereditary aristocracy.[4] The American Declaration of Independence includes the words (which echo Locke) “all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”[5] -(Wikipedia)
Please see the words included in the American Declaration of Independence which echo the father of liberalism. According to this foundation idea of liberalism,
1. (all) Men are creaded.
2. They are equal (at the instance of creation-at least)
3. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights,
Clearly this is an indication that Liberalism has emerged from western theology which is a prominent component of western culture. However, Sri Lankan society, mainly nourished from buddhist value sysem (at least that section of Sri Lankan society which comprise about 69% of the population) does not fundamentally believe above mentioned three propositions.
Buddhism or buddhist society does not believe men are created by god. It has a more profund theory according to my opinion even encompassing the modern science view on the subject.
Buddhism does not believe that all men are equal at birth( “birth”- because buddism does not have the concept of “creation”) . According to Buddhism, men (not only men – all beings) are born un- equal, in accordance with their Karmic forces.
According to the Buddhism, most of the things of men are endowed by Kamma, not by any ceator, as mentioned in the third proposition.
Does’nt this show that the fundamentals of liberalism have opposing views of fundamentals of buddhism. Doesn’t it imply that liberal ideas have opposing views to Sri Lankan society. Can they be equally make relevent to Sri Lankan society, as in western societies which are based on “god fearing religions”. Can Ranjans say Liberalism is Sri Lanka like his favourite Britain or any other western country. Can he say “If I consider them to be illeberal and inhuman why should I not go against them.” ?
Mr. Niranjan, Don’t only look at similarities. Please have common sense to see diffences in them too. Please be sensible. Please try to develop some independent thinking to stream line what you have learnt(epecially abroad).
Thanks!
P.S.:- Further I would like to point out that liberal societies are not secular, even in practice as most people think. Liberals make a big noise in countries like Sri Lanka to keep religions out of politics.However, even today, the head of the first liberal nation and “the most powerful nation”: the USA; gives his oath in the name of the “god”, placing his hand on the Bible.
Practise before you preach!
Heshan/ Niranjan;
You seem to justify Brish occupation in Sri Lankawhich used to be the traditional lands of Sri Lankans(then Ceylonese). In the same argument do you justify the invasion of Traditional Tamil Lands ( if exists, as some people suggest) by Sinhalese Buddhist Chauvinists( as some people call them)?
Time For Action,
I have never said that
christianity “Uses Poverty of the people of other countries to creep into their societies to unethically convert these people”
This word christianity to the above was added by you.
If cap fits ware it. Oherwise look around.
” Anyway, my point about bringing up the Ku Klux Klan, the lynchings, the Jim Crow laws, etc, was not about the past versus the present, but rather that these instances point to the presence of large-scale structural racism, against which the Civil Rights movement arose. Has this structural racism simply vanished overnight? There’s still racial profiling by the police. Out of about 430 in the House of Reps, only 40 are Blacks. There’s only one Black in the Senate. The President is Black, but gets into trouble every time he speaks up for Blacks. American movies and TV shows still depict Blacks only in subsidiary roles. Fox Channel’s racism against minorities still draws the largest number of viewers.”
You are right, the Civil Rights movement was necessary–I am not denying that. It did have a FEW good benefits(mostly for blacks). However, I am confused to what you mean when you say Obama gets into trouble every time he speaks for blacks. You are also correct that blacks and minorities in general often only have subsidiary roles in tv and movies, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the government/law system of America, which was really my main target. The reason that is, is because those movies and tv shows are largely made by white, urban, northern liberals who have been marginalizing blacks for a LONG time in popular culture due to the race relations in the north. If you go to the south–an area stereotyped by northern liberals as ” racist”–it is a completely different situation. In the south, you are either white or black and it is MUCH more integrated than the north. The northern liberals who make those movies and tv shows come from areas like new york and chicago where there is little integration between blacks and whites and they(like most americans)assume that their experience is the experience of all Americans and they exhibit this in the tv shows/movies they create. However, that is NOT racism caused by the government/political system, that is racism caused by people in the media(truly their own different beast).
The fact that there are few blacks in congress/senate does not mean that the “white” senate itself is racist towards blacks–don’t forget that African Americans are only about 10% of America’s population. I think what is worth mentioning is the fact that, despite its racist reputation, the majority of first black mayors/governors, etc. all came from the south! Washington D.C.’s current mayor is black. If the supposedly most racist part of the country has been appointing black officials all along(and has the wealthiest blacks in the country, btw), then doesn’t that say something about how far this country has progressed? You are right–no country can completely eliminate its racist scars overnight. It is FOR the most part, though, a minority of American people who are racist, and not the overall political system.
” How do you know Whites are being attacked by Blacks in large numbers if the media ignores them, as you claim? And why would the Whites need to beat up Blacks anyway since they’re the group in power?”
–The American media frequently downplays documents statistics or exaggerates statistics that are faulty. And being ” the group in power” has nothing to do with being attacked by people. I have seen situations where blacks have started fights with whites for no reason–verbal and physical. It has nothing to do with ” racism” blakcsexperience. Of course, certain numbers of whites, blacks, Asians do this same exact thing. What is different with black people in America, though, is how political correctness often works favorably in defense of their behavior–i.e., ” they are black, so I guess they have an excuse.”
” I’m a bit confused. You say the Affirmation Action programme started out as a way to guarantee that blacks were being treated fairly, but that it has done nothing of the sort. So, are Blacks being treated fairly or unfairly?”
-Affirmative Action was an affirmation that blacks were being discriminated against in terms of things like college admissions–in the 1960′s. Much has changed since then. Most colleges now do not discriminate blacks. I say affirmative action is bs because the biggest winners from affirmative action have been shown to be white women, not black people. Blacks WERE heavily discriminated against in all realms of American life–I am not denying that. However, what I am saying is that most of the discrimination that existed in the public sector no longer exists today. And MOST of the non-black American people do not have problems with blacks. In fact, most derogatory comments I hear about american blacks come from foreigners who come here and visit this country.
” I am quite startled that you see the Civil Rights era as having a largely negative impact. If it hadn’t happened, Blacks would still be being lynched, having to ride at the back of buses, apologising for the colour of their skin.”
–It did have a largely negative impact. It had a few positive(and very significant)ones like you mention. However, what is probably irreversible is the damage it caused to black americans by white liberals.
I know what I am saying probably seems shocking to someone who probably has learned the mythologized. version of the civil rights era and the black-and-white rendering of post civil war America, etc. I strongly suggest you read Thomas Sowell’s ” Black Rednecks and White Liberals”. It is a very detailed account of many of the things I mentioned and the history that causes me to make the claims I do. The book is written by Thomas Sowell, a leading African American libertarian intellectual.
Also, you say that after slavery, blacks would have had a hard time being adjusted to their new free life. Again, this is untrue. In the north, immediately after the civil war, northern american cities were very well integrated and filled with many wealthy African Americans and whites living side by side. The blacks who lived in these cities had as strong family values as there white northern neighbors. It is in the south, though, where you see blacks more likely to have decrepit family values ALONG with their white southern neighbors who they shared a cultural link with. You really should read the book, it is eye-opening in showing us how much of what we ” know” about slavery, colonial america, andcivil rights America and the lives of black people has been covered up.
and i would like to clarify something I said in reference to your statement about the marginilization of blacks in the media. The people making these shows/movies are often northern, urban, affluent whites who have limited blacks. In the north, you can live your whole life without interacting with black person and having one as a friend-what you are seeing in the media is a reflection of what these people presume is everyone’s America. It isn’t really racism though(contrary to what I said before), it is more like ignorance or elitism–afterall, if you asked a person in southern sri lanka(i.e. Galle) to make a billboard of what they consider to be ” sri lanka”, how many of them do you think would include tamils in the billboard? There are, what, about 1,000 tamils in the entire southern province? Can this really be called racism? Really, I think a better thing to call this is ignorance and it is a reflection of the fact that there are few tamils in that area, not because they necessarily hate tamils. It is a similar situation with these movie/tv directors.
Dear Yapa >>
I agree that not all western notions need to be necessarily lapped up like mana from heaven. At the same time, we should not fail to identify the positive notions in western society and adopt those whenever possible either. I would, for example, point to the universal declaration of human rights, which can be considered to be primarily of western origin. I’m sure you will agree that it was a huge moral victory that so many countries accepted it (even if only in letter and not in spirit). Note however, that certain Islamic countries refused to do so since it was based on “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition”. Thus, the more backward and medieval system of Shariah law was adopted instead, so that things could be more “compatible” with their societies. How about changing the society to be more “compatible” with modern notions of science and morality instead? So I’m merely observing that there are two sides to this coin and we should not necessarily reject a notion because it disagrees with a locally held tradition for example, if the notion in question is a more progressive and fair one. I hope you’ll agree?
“According to Buddhism, men (not only men – all beings) are born un- equal, in accordance with their Karmic forces”
I don’t want to sidetrack this discussion but I will note that I’ve heard this view quite a few times recently and I must say that, in my mind, this is an extremely counter-productive interpretation of Buddhism and Karma. If you follow the logic in this statement to its ultimate conclusion, you’ll see that whenever we see an atrocity around us, we can simply blame it on “karma”, feel better about it and get on with our lives. It’s just a way of rationalizing the sad plight of someone else and I would hope that that’s not the way the Buddha intended it to be interpreted.
Regardless, I feel you’re mixing up “Janaka karma” with the notion of individual liberty and equality. Nowhere in Buddhism does it say that people do not have equal rights. Karma merely states that you may be born in unequal circumstances. What the notion of equality states is that regardless of those circumstances, all human beings have certain inalienable rights. In my understanding, Buddhism recognizes this too, although I’m a bit sketchy on the details, having long abandoned religion as the primary means of understanding life. Even if it didn’t, I would personally think it’s the society/Buddhism that needs to change to adopt a more “fair” system.
” Further I would like to point out that liberal societies are not secular, even in practice as most people think”
True. Certainly, I understand your intention in pointing this out, which is to make people more understanding and less condemning/holier-than-thou of the status quo. But I think we can both agree that pointing to the mistakes of others do not justify our own mistakes. Religion must get the hell out of politics in Sri Lanka.
Dear Niranjan >>
“What has happened to Britains model colony(Ceylon) ?”
Please read the “Brown Sahib (revisited)” by Tarzie Vittachi, which is an extremely witty and engaging answer to a significant part of this question. Sadly, the book is out of print, but you may be able to find a copy in the library or if you’re lucky, Ebay.
As rajivmw mentioned, the British didn’t come over to Sri Lanka because they were moved to tears by the plight of the natives clamouring loudly for a western way of life. They destroyed the local, self-sufficient agrarian economy and “improved” it with a lop-sided, dependent one which revolved around exporting primary goods.
They did not see it fit to stage an industrial revolution for us, deciding instead that perhaps tea factories, would serve these natives best. Of course, these kinds of “factories” needed proper management too, so installing layer upon layer of bureaucracies to handle the bits and pieces of incomprehensible humanity sweating away in them was a pressing concern.
Since it was no easy task to find sufficient quantities of British officials to do such management while simultaneously redeeming the natives from barbarism, they had to invent a new layer, a buffer class of sorts, out of the more “civilized” (i.e. English educated) natives instead. To quote an extract from the writing of a British official in 1835, which leaves no doubt that this was deliberate British policy: “We must at present do our best to form a class who many be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and in intellect”
And thus, the “Brown Sahibs” were born, and their attitudes and opinions persist to this day: kowtowing to the west while looking down at their less “sophisticated” countrymen with great disdain.
And this is without even getting into their subtle but well-known divide-and-conquer policies, which is where the whole racial/ethnic identity thing started to solidify itself.
So therein lies at least a part of the answer as to why many former British colonies are in such great disarray and smaller countries like Sri Lanka, where their efforts to “colonize the mind” was a wild success, even more so.
Please do not misunderstand. I don’t intend to say that we must simply blame the British and be exonerated of all blame. What’s the point? Once they left, what was done was entirely our own responsibility. But we cannot understand this situation bereft of historical context. Most colonized countries wanted the British to leave because they knew they were being exploited.
So we chose to manage our own destiny instead. That destiny had as companions colonially inherited mental baggage, bureuacracies designed for empire management and worse, ethnic identities solidified through empire policy. All the while, we were heading into a new world order while having no experience in being self-sufficient for a few hundred years. So should we really scratch ours heads in puzzlement over why we are “unable to govern ourselves”? We need to extricate ourselves from these messes little by little. Sadly, it’s taking more blood, sweat and tears than we deserve.
Yapa,
If Buddhism and Liberalism are antithetical, then Sri Lanka (as a predominantly Buddhist nation) should not have adopted the democratic system of government, no? Seems like Sri Lanka wants to have its cake and eat it too–follow a democratic model, but use Buddhism as your excuse for undemocratic action.
Liberalism does not so much believe or ‘know’ (as in a religious narrative) that people are created equal, but rather makes equality among people the presumption of action concerning governance. In fact, liberals know there is all visible evidence that people are not created the same–some are smarter than others, for eg–but Liberalism makes the decision that it will give all the same rights that it deems ‘inalienable’, treating them as equal beings. You say equality at birth is not a Buddhist belief because of Karma. I think you are confusing sameness with equality. People may be born differently, but don’t they have equal access to the path to Nirvana? Buddhism advocates a movement towards egolessness. It is the human ego that insists that one deserves more than others, that one is superior to others–not Karma. As for Liberalism’s commitment to people’s liberties and their quest for happiness, isn’t Buddhism about human beings seeking freedom from desire and freedom from suffering? Doesn’t Liberalism seek to help people along that path?
If Buddhism had to come up with a system of governance, I believe it would be most like democracy. It certainly wouldn’t be monarchy or some form of dictatorship because leadership would be based on military capability rather than on selecting those closest to enlightenment. It’s all very well to complain about people blindly following the West when one hasn’t come up with viable indigenous solutions, when one is nicely ensconsed in capitalism, the most Western of all ideologies, when one’s right to speak is given by democracy.
As for secularism and the American President having to take the oath of office upon the Bible, that is merely a mechanism to signify the person’s legal culpability to keep to his word and, in court, to tell the truth. Even declared atheists are required to take the oath, and are bound by it. Their lack of belief in a God is irrelevant. And they can use a different sacred text to signify the legal nature of their commitment. So the oath-taking is not linked to a specific religion. Secularism is about keeping the name of religion out of the making of laws, government policies and decisions. Oath-taking does not fall under this descriptor. Gay marriage, for eg, may be banned, but the rationale on which this is done cannot be based on religious beliefs, such as what is said in Leviticus, etc. The rationale has to be public opinion.
Yapa,
“Please have common sense to see diffences in them too.” – There are differences and commonalities.
For example is publishing pictures of women who act in in Pornographic movies and the involuntary murder of a man on Bamba beach fall into the category of common sense? To me that is simply inhuman whatever your religious persuasion is.
“Doesn’t it imply that liberal ideas have opposing views to Sri Lankan society.”-Not all Sri Lankan society. However, in the minds of ultra conservatives I guess it would be.
“If I consider them to be illeberal and inhuman why should I not go against them.” ? – I will write against things that I consider to be illeberal and inhuman culture or not.
“Can Ranjans say Liberalism is Sri Lanka like his favourite Britain or any other western country.”- I certainly do not have a problem with Britain or its culture, but I live in Sri Lanka. However, I will not accept cultural values which are inhuman.
“However, even today, the head of the first liberal nation and “the most powerful nation”: the USA; gives his oath in the name of the “god”, placing his hand on the Bible.”-In practise there is separation between the church and the State. In Sri Lanka there is very little separation between the church and the state in practise or otherwise. That is the difference.
P.S
You need to get out of this frog in the well mentality and develop independent thinking yourself. There are other countries and cultures on earth which you seem to have little awareness of or do not want to show that you have.
There are human values which are universal and not bound by culture.
Yapa,
“In the same argument do you justify the invasion of Traditional Tamil Lands ( if exists, as some people suggest) by Sinhalese Buddhist Chauvinists( as some people call them)?”- can you give an example please ? Which period in history are you refering to ?
Dear yapa:
Interpretation is very important to the understanding of the Bible. The Bible is a historical artifact, which means that it was subject to various external influences peculiar to a specific time and place. Professional Bible scholars do not study “King James.” They must learn Hebrew and Greek (original languages of the Bible) and study the “Bible”, actually the Old and New Testaments in those languages. As I said, interpretation is very difficult. First of all there is the language issue. Secondly, one must decide which approach to take towards interpretation. As this website shows, there are four main ways of interpreting:
Introduction to Bible interpretation
Method 1. Interpreting passages of the Bible literally as the Word of God
Method 2. Interpreting passages of the Bible as a historical document
Method 3. Interpreting passages of the Bible as midrash
Method 4. Interpreting passages of the Bible as folklore
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_inte.htm
As you can see, professional Bible scholars do not always interpret the Bible literally. If they did, there would not be a need for 4 different approaches.
I think you are trying to show that Buddhism is the most compatible religion with science. I have already addressed this point when I said no religion is fully compatible with science. For instance, the whole point of Theravada Buddhism is to escape suffering and so escape rebirth. In science, there is no such thing as rebirth. Therefore, there is no need to escape suffering. In general, science has nothing to do with ethics. Science is the attempt of man to explain the Universe but the Universe is not “compassionate.” Without any semblance for compassion – which is essentially regard for fellow man – ethics lacks any basis. Does such a system work? Yes. It is the basis of capitalism. Even though people are essentially selfish, the “invisible hand” will always ensure the market reaches a favorable equilibrium. In my opinion, it is these two systems – science and capitalism – that have made the West powerful. You hear the word “secular” – that is a nice way of saying religion is NOT important. Because it is not important for the overall growth and well-being of a society. Even within religion itself, there is the belief that every man must discover the truths for himself. Essentially, religion is best left as personal experience. When it becomes a group effort, that is when the hypocrites come out to play.
Now, I hope you understand that there is no incentive for the West to adopt Buddhism. There may be some scientific merit to Buddhism, but it is not compatible with Capitalism.
Observer complains about Guantanamo Bay… first of all, only prisoners of war from Afghanistan are taken to Guantanamo Bay.
So are they not human beings? These insurgent fighters are very difficult to categorise or identify. Civilian one day, combatant next day. I bet none of these people were in a specific uniform when they got “nabbed”. Even POWs have rights and are covered by Geneva conventions. I’m very sure what was seen in those photos are not sanctioned!
All of these prisoners are men – there are no women and children.
Thank god!
Secondly, Guantanamo Bay cost $32 million USD to build.
Yeah it was spent securing the place. High tech security stuff and top class information extractors aka. torturers – the best in the business. Money wasn’t spent putting in water beds for the inmates comforts. They got water boards instead!
No one in Gauntanamo Bay is waiting with a water bucket or standing in line to take a leak. It is a modern prison complete with all amenities.
You have no authority to make these statements. Have you been there by any chance? It is a top secret highly restricted facility that only select few is granted access. And most of them if not all, are linked to military and intelligence. Surely the condition reports that trickle down from them cannot be taken independently.
The Red Cross has complete access.
Omg are you saying they were complicit in what happened there? Please don’t insult the Red cross in your USA white washing statements. They had very very limited access!
Some inmates have been released. The only remaining difficulty is that some prisoners have been held without charge for an excessive period of time.
Which violates basic human rights! Some of them were incorrectly put in this facility purely on suspicion and no evidence! They are just holding them indefinitely because they have no evidence against them. Some even had to be released after hellish experiences there admitting they were innocent.
The Obama administration has acknowledged this fact; there are plans underway to transfer them to maximum security prisons in the USA.
Still waiting!!! Change comes very slow it seems.
Of course you cant even think of comparing Guantanamo and Menik farm. Manik farm is a refugee camp which has conditions better than the ones US is responsible for in the SWAT valley.
Gunatanamo was only better than a slaughter house.
Simple wow Heshan, simply wow!
Look, Menik farm is not perfect in all the aspects. Granted and expected. It is a temporary make do place, until people get settled. At least 1/3rd of the refugees are now sent back to their homes, contrary to all the dooms day soothsayers here who said they were going to be held there forever! Rest will also be settled as demining and rebuilding of homes continue. There are no Wizards to make things happen over night. Everything is redone from scratch after all the destruction that happened. Patience is a virtue no matter how difficult it is.
We’re not a rich country but we’re taking a damn good effort to make things as good as it can be under circumstances. There are difficulties that are common to most refugee, IDP camps all over the world.
Let’s not forget how Hurricane Katrina victims got treated when they were moved to temporary accomodation soon after the disaster. I remember some rape cases, lack of food and medicine etc. This is in the developed world! Just do some of your own research on how the refugee camps in the SWAT valley are. They are much much worse than in Sri Lanka. This is due to a proxy war carried out by Pakistan against Taliban, at the US’s request. Therefore these refugees are US’s responsibility much as Pakistan’s!
You can shout about standing for water with a bucket at a line. But let me tell you that;s better than being strapped to a board and having water poured on to your face by a bucket! Inducing a sensation of drowning. Which everyone knows that happened in Gunatanamo and US has admitted to it!
“Let the Sri Lankan Government tell us what happened to those 10,000 LTTE who voluntarily surrendered. Then we can talk.”
Despite all the amnesties offered to the LTTE at various points during the conflict and the ones leading up to their total annihilation, even 24 hours before, LTTE never surrendered. It is well known fact and people in EU knows all about it as even they were pleading for LTTE to surrender asking to let go of human hostages. Shame they had to take that senseless path.
I assumed you were talking about domestic levels of racism. If you want to talk international affairs, of course, the West wins hands down. But only because they have the power. Give another race a chance, and they’ll give us a good show too.
Domestic????? Citizenship shouldn’t override values of humanity!
But only because they have the power????
Those who can’t use power responsibly to maintain peace should not have it. It displays weak moral and ethical conviction.
Give another race a chance. and they’ll give us a good show too.
Hahaha.. not so! Those morally sound folk will never come to such heights of power. You and I both know why. And that’s just the way it is….
Observer,
Nobody uses power responsibly, neither politicians nor bosses–if they can help it. With most political and organisational systems, it seems you must be morally unsound or else you’ll never get to the top. I don’t believe in placing trust on individuals, no matter how heroic and clean they appear. The responsible use of power can only be guaranteed by the system itself, a system where power is never allowed to be distributed to only one person or group, but is distributed multiple ways. Canada seems a good example to me. Their civil society is really strong.
I hope when you’re talking of morally sound folk, you’re not talking about SL. Cos surely that must be the bottom of the heap. Even without power, they cause so much damage.
Dear Heshan;
I am not going to dispute what you say about interpretation of Bible. But what I have quoted/ deduced from the Bible in my essay is limited to two simple combined ideas ” man was created as it is , about 7000 years ago.”
Not diagreeing with my propositions, you offered me to gain some knowledge about interpreting the Bible. I consider it as an unproductive and wasteful way to assertain such two simple ideas. There is no logic or sense in complicating a simple thing in order to understand it. Instead, please be kind enough to show me any different interpretations if available to negate my propositions. Further, I suppose it is your responsibility of finding facts to negate my proposion.
Again,you have said that I was trying to show that buddhism is the most compatible religion with science.
Can you tell me how you derived the above statement (conclusion?) from my writing? I am sure I havn’t implied it. I put to you that you have jumped into an irrational conclsion. (Anybody who has a basic knowledge of principles of logic would understand it.) Furthermore, what advantages do I get to my arguments doing so?
You also say that there is no any religion fully compatible with science. Fully agree, I too have no any interest to make any religion fully compatible with science. Further, I too believe it is not possible.
Then you are trying to show some differences in science and buddhism. Obviously they have differeces? So, what? Does this make any harm to my arguments?
Again you say science has nothing to do with ethics. I think quite agreeable.
M..m..m…, I think all you have said are agreeable.
Anyway have you said anything to disprove me?
Niranjan;
“In the same argument do you justify the invasion of Traditional Tamil Lands ( if exists, as some people suggest) by Sinhalese Buddhist Chauvinists( as some people call them)?”- can you give an example please ? Which period in history are you refering to ?
I am referring to two periods
Britishes period in Sri Lanka and Eelam War IV period obviously. Those are the periods, Britishes invaded the Traditional land of Ceylonese and according to some of us Sinhalese chavinist Army invaded the traditional lands of Tamils in north and east.
I have seen you people (You and Heshan or Disgusted I suppose) appriciating the British colonial period here. In the same way can not the second invation; that is of Sinhalese Chauvinist Army; be benefitial to Tamilsin north and east? In both the cases thousands of people were killed by these invaders, I must mention to you for your convienience to arrive at the answer.
Yapa:
If you are referring to the Creation story in Genesis, it is an accepted fact among scholars that this is a Babylonian myth which the Israelites adopted to explain the creation of the Earth. Some fundamentalist Christians may believe the Earth was created in 6 days, but Bible scholars (those who study the Bible in Greek and Hebrew) will not say that. Just like some Sinhala-Buddhists believe that when Buddha was dying he saw Lanka but people who study Buddhism in depth will not believe such nonsense. Remember that it is easier to explain things to most people in simple terms; that is why Jesus told parables. Even in the Tripitaka you find such stories. They are not meant to be true, but to prove a moral point of some kind. Unfortunately some people hear such things and believe it is 100% true… this is the essential problem with religion. It tries to make servants out of the masses. There is no competition, but from an evolutionary point of view, a society must have competition to progress. Like one philosopher Nietzsche correctly said, religion kills the natural impulse.
@Observer:
You’re trying very hard to push this Guantanamo Bay… this is what the inside of a cell in Gauntanamo looks like:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2008/dec/04/guantanamo-bay?picture=341715608
Only 775 prisoners were brought to Guantanamo… it would have been much easier to put up a few tents and beg the United Nations to feed the inmates. Why spend $32 million of your own dollars to build facilities for 775 people? Because you and I know the USA is not cheap like S. Lanka. No one is going to starve to death or swim in urine and feces at Guantanamo Bay. No standing in line for water, no standing in line for bread, no standing in line to take a leak. Every one of the Guantanamo Bay detainees has a lawyer. You are complaining about torture. What is waterboarding compared to the Sri Lankan helicopter treatment???
You have not accounted for the 10,000 LTTE who voluntarily surrendered. They voluntarily surrendered because the Sri Lanka Army says they voluntarily surrendered. Where are these people being held? Why don’t they have lawyers? 420 inmates have been released without charge from Guantanamo. Only 225 are left. This is why the whole world is not complaining about Guantanamo. If 200,000 were being held there, you would see big protests.
This is the correct link for the Guantanamo picture: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2008/dec/04/guantanamo-bay?picture=340338265
Dear Deeval;
Re. your comment on my views, I have a few questions for you.
1. You have said ” tamils and muslims are second class citizens here in Sri Lanka.”
On what parameters you came to this very subtle inference ?Please let me also know the methodology you used to arrive at such a fine conclusion.
2. You also say
“Many of them would happily move abroad (as do scores of Sinhalese people I know who are trying to get their points to go to Australia or applying for residency in Canada). If the doors of the west were wide open, I think many more people would head there.”
Do you attribute Tamil & Muslim migration to Canada and Australia, to the “fact” they are second class citizens in Sri Lanka or deep injustices prevailing in Sri Lanka? The can you then explain why “privileged” Sinhalese are also moving into those countries? Why some people call such migrations as moving for “greener pastures?”
3. OK! will assume for the moment there is deep injustices previling in Sri Lankan society as you have suggested. Then how do you attribute it only to a certain sections of our society? How do you exempt tamils and muslims from the responsibilty? How did you differentiate these two categories so finely?
Please explain. (I also would like to learn so sublte socio-analitical methodologies.)
I put to you that these are only baseless,bias and vulgar arguments fabricated against sinhalese community.
It is very easy to throw illogocal and vulgar arguments, but I don’t think defending them would be that easy.
Dear Deeval, please defend your arguments.
In my case, I would like to declare that I take the all the responsibility for each and every word I have said in my writing in this website.
Thanks!
Yapa,
The British invaded and occupied Sri Lanka for over 100 years. First the coastal areas of the country and then the Kandyan Kingdom was occupied by them.
Countries can and have invaded other countries. The most recent examples are Iraq and Afghanistan.
The British invasion and subsequent occupation gave this country the following:
a united country in terms of ethnicity, a superb civil service(ruined by our very own politicians after independance), a modern plantation economy based on tea, rubber and cocunut, financial services with the outside world, some democratic institutions, english language by which we can communicate with the world, a school system, a university system, a health system, roads, bridges, ports, towns, Colombo city and more.
Do you think our very own monarchs could have given us all that if they had ruled after 1815 ?
I think not.
The biggest mistake we made after independance was our failure to capitalise on what the British gave this country during their rule. Our very own politicians are to blame for that.
The Sri Lanka army fought a terrorist group called the LTTE from the 1970′s upto May 2009 and finally won the war. What the Sri Lanka army fought was the LTTE a known terrorist group which comprised of a section of Tamil people. Not all Tamils are LTTE. Not all Sinhalese were JVP during the insurrections either.
The North(majority Tamil) and East (mix of ethnicities) is a part of this country under the Constitution. There is devolution of power to these areas under the PC’s. Therefore, the point I am trying to make is how can the army have invaded the North and the East. In other words how can an army invade its own country? An army cannot invade its own country. but what it can do is fight separatism within it if and when the need arises.
Well said, niranjan. What the British did is bring the island out of feudalism, although not completely. As I have explained in some depth in an earlier post, colonialism was the pre-cursor to capitalism on the island and by extension democracy. This makes sense because both capitalism and democracy are Western ideas (originally). Somehow they had to move from West to East. Colonialism was the way (although not the best way, obviously).
Dear Niranjan;
You are again going round the bush, as usual. The details you have given, I can learn from any school boy. Giving unnecessary and irrelevant details and word twisting won’t do any help to counter the question I asked.
Why are you running away from questions. As I have said it is not easy to defend an incorrect argument, when questioned(especially by the correct people). Now time has come to stop breaking pots in abandoned houses. Your dream mansions are being shattered. Uttering borrowed glossary words and subjective concepts from western ideologies will not be able to save you.You can expect more. Please be ready. Face the realities or perish. Only a few people of the category of Heshan will help you with his back scratching theory.
My advice again to you is try to learn to build up a sound argument. “Yanne koheda , malle pol” (where are you going, coconuts in the bag) type answers won’t do any good to you.
Thanks!
Heshan, you’re brainwashed. Except you everyone else have seen evidence of what a jolly good place Gitmo is. According to you Gitmo detainees got daily ice cream and pampering because it was run by USA. I guess every time they put a bag over their head, then strap them in chains into a wheely cart they were transporting them to the ice cream tent. The most awesomest, greatest, super coolest, richest, sexiest, saint like country could not do anything else. Please stop wasting your time. You know what I don’t even have to mention these things because deep down people know what happened there. Countless media articles, some too graphical out there if you have the courage to look at them. If they weren’t leaked who knows what would happened to those people. I admire the folk who had the courage to expose such brutality and save humanity’s dignity even for a small group of people. I’m sure most people don’t enjoy a batton up their rear cavity no matter how AWESOME USA is. I still can’t look at even one of them photos for longer than a quick glance because it makes me want to throw up. Yes Heshan, Gitmo puts the Hilton to shame. Thank you so much for enlightening me.
This is not in Sri Lanka btw,
http://english.people.com.cn/200509/04/eng20050904_206415.html
This is how a very AWESOME country managed a disaster that significantly affected a “minority community”. Btw this is after one flood. Not a CIVIL WAR that spanned decades!
Do you think they have the slightest right to critisise a relief effort after 30 years of destruction, with 100 times more people being displaced, and also having the handicap of being a not so AWESOME, SUPER DUPER country?
Yeah, I knew you were still gonna say it – god damn Sri Lanka!
Dear Heshan,
I know building up an argument or a counter argument is not an easy thing as as many people think. Talking to point is another hard thing many people come across. Talking nonsense is an effective way some people use to divert attention from the focal point in arguments when they have no proper answers to counter arguments. I find it is justifiable to run away from the argument , when cornered. Both you and Niranjan are in the same corner. I think it is unnecessary anymore to continue this debate with you two. You need to develop a scholarly analytical skills before falling into a quality discussion.
Bye Heshan! Bye Niranjan
Yapa,
“In the same way can not the second invation; that is of Sinhalese Chauvinist Army; be benefitial to Tamilsin north and east?”- In the first place this is not an invasion. The SL army did not invade the North and East. How can the Sri Lankan army invade its own country? You can invade another country but not your own. The North and East is territorially a part of Sri Lanka. So there is no question of an invasion. Wording is important.
“that is of Sinhalese Chauvinist Army;” – It is you who has implied that the SL army is chauvinist. I do not think it is.
” is it beneficial to Tamils in the North and East ?” I think you should ask that question from the Tamils who live in those areas. They can answer that question best after all the SL army has liberated them from the clutches of the LTTE.
Can you compare the British invasion of Sri Lanka with the Sri Lankan army crushing the LTTE ? No you cannot. These are two separate issues.
“Uttering borrowed glossary words and subjective concepts from western ideologies will not be able to save you.”- It is my western ideology that has saved me.
Yapa are your concepts objective?-far from it I should think.
“type answers won’t do any good to you.”-they are designed to break your arguments.
“Face the realities or perish.”- What are the realities? perish?-childish language.
By the way the British have done a lot of good to this country as I have mentioned in an earlier post.
Dear Niranjan,
“By the way the British have done a lot of good to this country as I have mentioned in an earlier post.”
I’ve given several counter arguments in my previous post to you as to why this is not necessarily the case, I hope you saw them. Your gratitude is akin to thanking the thief for leaving an omelet after stealing your chicken.
That’s quite a lot of “buddhist” titles handed out by the monks:
“Since the war ended, Rajapaksa and his allies have launched a campaign projecting him as “Sri Lanka’s Savior”, with billboards depicting him as a Buddhist deity visible across the island. The powerful Buddhist clergy has also participated in the glorification, with various chapters conferring on him titles such as Universally Glorious Overlord of the Sinhalese, Heroic Warrior Overlord of Lanka and Monarchical Emperor of the Glorious Land of Buddhism. ”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KK13Df04.html
If you still think this guy isn’t pushing the buddhism angle you have to be living in a dreamland. Yeah, if I was a muslim sri lankan I’d be like “there’s MY prez, he’s looking out for my interests, don’t you know?” Monarchical Emperor of whaaaa?
Dear SomeWhatDisgusted,
“..thanking the thief for leaving an omelet after stealing your chicken..”
Probably, Niranjan is talking in relative terms. Niranjan would have thought that the “Chicken thief” is far better than our own politicians who were ruling this land from the day when “Chicken thief” deserted.
@Observer:
” Except you everyone else have seen evidence of what a jolly good place Gitmo is. ”
That’s the idea. As long as people can see what’s going on there, it remains a “jolly good place.” Ban Ki Moon does not have to visit. Navi Pillai can focus on other things.
“According to you Gitmo detainees got daily ice cream and pampering because it was run by USA.”
I would not be surprised. Even in prisons in the USA, they have it pretty good (except for the homosexual aspects). Fitness center, continuing education, television, etc. The standard of living is higher in a US prison than a rural Sri Lankan village, how whacky is that?
“I guess every time they put a bag over their head, then strap them in chains into a wheely cart they were transporting them to the ice cream tent. ”
I agree, the transportation is a bit unfortunate.
“The most awesomest, greatest, super coolest, richest, sexiest, saint like country could not do anything else. ”
I agree they did way too much. Spending $32 million to build a prison for 775 Islamic fanatics ready to die to kill any American infidel… they should have just done it the Lankan way. Kill all the POW’s and if anyone objects, tell em’ they’re part of an international conspiracy to destabilize the “most awesomest, greatest, super coolest, richest, sexiest, saint like country.”
“You know what I don’t even have to mention these things because deep down people know what happened there. ”
This must be the Lankan way of providing “evidence.” Just go with the gut feeling. Would explain the high suicide rate!
“Countless media articles, some too graphical out there if you have the courage to look at them. ”
You mean media articles put out by the SL Ministry of Defense. Those guys are still struggling with English; I would hate to have to take history lessons from them.
“If they weren’t leaked who knows what would happened to those people. I admire the folk who had the courage to expose such brutality and save humanity’s dignity even for a small group of people.”
How do you know the leak is not part of an international conspiracy to destabilize the “most awesomest, greatest, super coolest, richest, sexiest, saint like country?”
“I’m sure most people don’t enjoy a batton up their rear cavity no matter how AWESOME USA is. I still can’t look at even one of them photos for longer than a quick glance because it makes me want to throw up. ”
I’ve seen quite a few good horror films myself. David Hess is the classic.
“Thank you so much for enlightening me.”
If you want further enlightenment, I suggest directly contacting the 420 who were released. The 225 still in custody are rather busy eating ice cream and enjoying the old baton in the rear.
“..thanking the thief for leaving an omelet after stealing your chicken..”
Except that the thief left a little more than an omelet behind… more like a banquet!
“This is how a very AWESOME country managed a disaster that significantly affected a “minority community”. Btw this is after one flood. Not a CIVIL WAR that spanned decades!”
Actually the most AWESOME aspect of that particular disaster management is that those people survived the flood were resettled very quickly. Maybe the US Government should have held them hostage and claimed that the flood water was unsafe to drink. Then rich Western nations could have “donated” millions of dollars and the guys at the top could have pocketed the cash.
Dear Someone >>
“Niranjan would have thought that the “Chicken thief” is far better than our own politicians who were ruling this land from the day when “Chicken thief” deserted.”
Such an analysis ignores the “other” legacy left by the thief’s transgression, such as the mental trauma, damage to livelihood and worse, the never-ending fight between the husband and wife.
Which is why it’s pointless to speculate on what would have been better. Perhaps, without all the internal bickering resulting from colonization, we may have been able to reap the fruits of industrialization by studying the west and come out of feudalism on our own. Is someone suggesting that it’s a necessary precondition that we be colonized in order to be “developed”? Strange isn’t it though, that the entire world has come out of feudalism but not all have been colonized?
Perhaps never being invaded in the first place would never have instilled in Heshan this slavish mentality of genuflecting to the west. Such gratitude is more indicative of how colonized the mind of an individual is, rather than how “base” the mindsets of the “natives” are.
After all, has Sri Lanka not had an advanced civilization in the past, indicative of our ability to govern ourselves? Yes, that civilization was on the decline, but there is no “inherent” inability to govern ourselves. That’s a “mindset” inherited from the colonial practice of “doffing one’s shoulder shawl and stepping deferentially into the gutter as the white sahib rode by on his high horse”, to paraphrase Vittachi.
My point is, who knows? Perhaps our troubles would have been worse, yes. Maybe the British were indeed a blessing in disguise. But what’s the point in such idle speculation? We can’t predict the weather, let alone what an alternate future would look like.
Dear Someone >>
I should clarify. I don’t necessarily disagree with “Niranjan would have thought that the “Chicken thief” is far better than our own politicians who were ruling this land from the day when “Chicken thief” deserted.”. Yes, looking at the way things are right now, it’s reasonable to feel that letting the “Chicken thief” carry on with his agenda and hoping for better omelettes might have been easier than undoing the damage done.
But Niranjan’s initial contention was: ““By the way the British have done a lot of good to this country as I have mentioned in an earlier post.”” That’s the mindset I disagree with. We don’t need to be grateful!
somewhat disgusted,
“The British invasion and subsequent occupation gave this country the following:
a united country in terms of ethnicity, a superb civil service(ruined by our very own politicians after independance), a modern plantation economy based on tea, rubber and cocunut, financial services with the outside world, some democratic institutions, english language by which we can communicate with the world, a school system, a university system, a health system, roads, bridges, ports, towns, Colombo city and more.”
My first question to you is did not the British colonialists do the above things for this country? If you think they did not please give reasons why you think so.
My second question to you is could we have under our own monarchs have done what the British did for this country in terms of modernising its economic, political, administrative structures?
My third question is why be ungrateful to a foreign power colonial or otherwise who helped this country to modernise its economic, political, administrative institutions?
I think I’ve stated my position pretty well. The primary one is that democracy is a Western concept, not an Eastern one. Of all the ancient civilizations, the only one that had a true democracy was Athens (Ancient Greece). Even if we look at the modern-day East Asian economic giants, democracy hardly came naturally: in Japan, the occupying USA had to redraw a Constitution, effectively relegating the Emperor to the backburner, Singapore is not a democracy (although it is extremely successful), half of Korea is under the spell of Marxism, India was nothing more than a series of princely fiefdoms until the British united it for administrative purposes, and China, of course, is still Communist, despite having embraced limited free-market reforms. It was the same story in ancient times. The rest of Asia is not even worth considering.
I am not saying Asians are incapable of embracing democracy. It just doesn’t seem to be ingrained into their “culture”, for some reasons. I am not a sociologist, by any means (my background is technical). Nevertheless, I think it is a valid observation. Asian cultures seem to possess certain inhibitions that prevent them from taking that “jump”… whereas real democracy is about embracing the free individual, not over-burdening him with regulation after regulation to ensure his blind obedience to the State does not waver.
On the other hand, I would have thought that with the advent of globalization, such differences would be easy to abolish. Instead they have been skewed. There is really no shift towards a common theme of universal democracy. If people want to experience democracy, they must emigrate to the West. Those who emigrate West hardly go back East, which truly demonstrates the cultural differences. Of course culture cannot be the only difference. On the other hand, I don’t know how to account for these other differences.
Heshan,
“Those who emigrate West hardly go back East, which truly demonstrates the cultural differences.”- An interesting point. Flowing from this do you think that the Sinhalese professionals and others who have emigrated to the West are going to come back to Sri Lanka anytime soon ?
I read somehwere that Mahinda Rajapakse had invited them to come back here now that the war is over. I know that the Tamil people settled abroad will not come back even though some came back during the CFA and bought property in Wellawatte etc. Most of them went back to the West after the war started. D
Another point I wish to raise is that during the CFA there was greater interaction and trust between the Sinhalese and Tamils. That is missing now even though the war is over. How would you account for that ?
Dear Niranjan >>
Many of the questions you’ve asked, I’ve already covered in my previous posts. Nevertheless, I shall attempt to answer your more pointed questions since I believe it’s possible to have a rational discussion with you, which is not a compliment I can give certain others.
“My first question to you is did not the British colonialists do the above things for this country? If you think they did not please give reasons why you think so.”
I’ll take each point in turn.
a united country in terms of ethnicity – As I said earlier, I disagree. Note, for example, that before the arrival of the British, the last Kandyan king was Tamil. We had Hindu Kovils scattered about and integrated with Sinhalese belief systems. Evidently, the Sinhalese had ample capacity to live with Tamils then. What changed? Please read Pradeep J’s succinct analysis of the issue here: http://www.pjeganathan.org/south-paw/2009/5/4/sri-lankas-conflict-an-interview-with-pact-part-i.html
a superb civil service – A superb civil service designed to siphon money into the British empire, a civil service which was only accessible to those with an impressive command of English, leaving the vast majority of the population of Sri Lanka second class citizens in their own country, and further entrenching a culture whereby the ruling elites would look down upon those not aping British “sophistication” with contempt, while simultaneously confusing their own prosperity with the overall prosperity of the country. Please read Vittachi for his fiery analysis. His engaging and witty style is a rare treat to read. You should also read Pradeep J’s opinions on his website.
a modern plantation economy based on tea, rubber and cocunut – As I said earlier, this is a lopsided economy designed to serve British interests, which destroyed our agrarian economy. Why did they not see it fit to stage an industrial revolution for us? What country has elevated itself from poverty purely through exporting primary goods?
financial services with the outside world – Is this running on the assumption that we did not trade with the outside world before this? Sri Lanka was a hub of trade, thanks to its geographical position, since earliest recorded history.
some democratic institutions – I agree. But again, it seems to rest on the assumption that it was necessary to colonize us before we could learn to establish democratic institutions ourselves? As I mentioned earlier, not every country has been colonized, but they’ve all elevated themselves beyond Feudalism. One of the few countries which still has a symbolic death grip on their old feudal customs, is ironically, the British. (all that grovelling around the royal family anyone?).
english language by which we can communicate with the world – The English language become the language of communication of the world entirely *because* of colonization. Mind you, it should be painfully obvious that the English language is logically inferior to most oriental languages. It’s not even phonetic for god’s sake, never mind all its idiosyncratic rules of spelling and grammar, designed to scuttle communication than to enable it. By that logic, more’s the pity that the entire world wasn’t colonized by a country possessing a less confusing language, such as maybe Hindi, Tamil, Sinhalese or whatever. Would have made life a lot easier, don’t you think?
a school system, a university system, a health system, roads, bridges, ports, towns, Colombo city – A big yes. But all of these again rest on the assumption that as the world as a whole elevated itself from the feudal age, colonized countries alone would not have been able to do so, if not for British “benevolence”. But I would agree that it probably accelerated the process globally.
My second question to you is could we have under our own monarchs have done what the British did for this country in terms of modernising its economic, political, administrative structures?
This is unfortunately, asking someone to predict an entirely different future. As I said earlier, we can’t predict the weather, let alone an entirely different chain of events. If I asked you, what would the world be like today if Hitler hadn’t been born or Marx was a painter, is there any logical answer to it?
My third question is why be ungrateful to a foreign power colonial or otherwise who helped this country to modernise its economic, political, administrative institutions?
Why should anyone have a burning desire to be grateful or ungrateful for the way history played itself out? I see no need whatsoever to be grateful to an invader which came here with a gun in one hand and a bible in the other. What weakened the civilization already on this island were the continuous invasions for over 400 years by various colonizers. How come these same colonizers weren’t benevolent enough to “redeem us from barbarism” without invading us? Then I would certainly consider being very grateful. I think we can be pretty sure they came here for their own gain, not out of pity for us. By that logic, the Iraqi’s should be grateful for Operation Iraqi Liberation (code named O.I.L) and the rest of us should all eagerly await invasion from the closest super-power. It would also appear that a necessary pre-condition for development is invasion by a more “advanced” civilization?
Don’t get me wrong. It’s just the way history played itself out. I have nothing against the British. Their civilization has given much to this world. In fact, I think they’re jolly good chaps and have moved along from their violent past thanks to their moral awakening, to become a country worthy of emulation. Many of the people I admire a great deal are British scholars, from Darwin to Dawkins. Unfortunately, the violent past of the British has left an indelible impression on our own psyches. Their invasion has left a legacy of mixed blessings. You concentrate only on the positive aspects, but seem to ignore the more insidious aspects, which I’ve highlighted in a previous post. Again, Vittachi and Pradeep J. have better stories to tell.
Dear Niranjan,
Sri Lanka has been a Sinhala Buddhist country for over two millennia. Long before Jesus Christ was even born. Buddhism was the state religion from that time until colonisation actively destroyed that position. The colonisers even destroyed Hinduism which came to Sri Lanka before Christianity. They used extreme means such as putting to death non Christians and giving reprieves if they converted to Christianity.
The Ancient Sinhalese were skilled engineers and had in depth knowledge of Trigonometry and Hydraulics Engineering. The Sinhalese constructed the largest man made reservoirs in the world and invented the Valve Pit “Biso Kotuwa” to regulate water out of these reservoirs. They designed intricate irrigation networks to connect these large reservoirs and some of them had ONLY ONE embankment instead of the usual two. This underlines the perfect understanding the ancients had of contouring.
The “Yoda Ela” has a gradient of just 6 inches to the mile in some sections and this canal is 54 miles long. The bottom of the canal is not paved. The water flows over ordinary ground. It takes water along a contour with one embankment instead of two. In this way, they reduced the cost by half. Another advantage was that during a sudden influx of water the water spreads on the upper side and releases the pressure so that there is no danger to the bund. This shows that in the “FIRST CENTURY” that Sinhalese had developed a high degree of instrumental accuracy in contouring and leveling and had achieved success in building permanent stone dams across large rivers.
In the construction field, the 110 metre Jethavanarama Dagoba, is said to be the tallest brick construction in the world even today.
The artificial canals taken from the main rivers e.g. Mahaweli Ganga, Amban Ganga and Kala Oya etc., constructed by the ancient Sinhala engineers is about 506 miles in length. The capacity in acre-feet of these three major tanks is as follows: Giant s Tank: 26,596, Kantale Tank: 37,124, Kala Weva: 72,687. These statistics of the tanks and canals that were functioning in the 10th Century should convey to anyone the magnitude of the achievements of the ancient Sinhalese engineers in the sphere of irrigation. There is nothing to compare with this achievement in irrigation anywhere in the world. This is just a sample, study SL’s history to learn more.
The final achievements were highlighted by Sir Henry Ward, Governor of Sri Lanka In: Collected Minutes of Brohier (1934): It is possible, that in no other part of the world are there to be found within the same space, the remains of so many works of irrigation, which are, at the same time, of such great antiquity, and of such vast magnitude as Ceylon. Probably no other country can exhibit works so numerous, and at the same time so ancient and extensive, within the same limited area, as this Island.
The National Archives of the Netherlands has this entry which shows how far the Sinhala Kingdom extended. Note the reference to the “border”
Extract
During the 17th century the Company was engaged in a war of attrition with the king of Kandy, who had close ties with Ceylon’s Buddhist population. There was a narrow tongue of land at Elephant Pass a fort was built to guard the border with the king’s territory. Elephants captured on Ceylon were herded past here to Jaffna to be sold in India, hence the name Elephant Pass. (http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/AMH/detail.aspx?page=dpost&lang=en&id=682#tab2 )
The question therefore is how far Sri Lanka’s indigenous Technology would have placed itself in the world order with over two millennia of development taking place from the time colonisation disrupted our development.
Are we to be thankful for this destruction?
Regarding governance please read this extract from the US Library of Congress
Extract
The monarch theoretically held absolute powers but was nevertheless expected to conform to the rules of dharma, or universal laws governing human existence and conduct.
Note the reference to the universal laws governing human existence and conduct.
Early Settlements (Source: U.S. Library of Congress)
The first extensive Sinhalese settlements were along rivers in the dry northern zone of the island. Because early agricultural activity– primarily the cultivation of wet rice– was dependent on unreliable monsoon rains, the Sinhalese constructed canals, channels, water-storage tanks, and reservoirs to provide an elaborate irrigation system to counter the risks posed by periodic drought. Such early attempts at engineering reveal the brilliant understanding these ancient people had of hydraulic principles and trigonometry. The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago. By the first century A.D, several large-scale irrigation works had been completed.
The mastery of hydraulic engineering and irrigated agriculture facilitated the concentration of large numbers of people in the northern dry zone, where early settlements appeared to be under the control of semi-independent rulers. In time, the mechanisms for political control became more refined, and the city-state of Anuradhapura emerged and attempted to gain sovereignty over the entire island. The state-sponsored flowering of Buddhist art and architecture and the construction of complex and extensive hydraulic works exemplify what is known as Sri Lanka’s classical age, which roughly parallels the period between the rise and fall of Anuradhapura (from ca. 200 B.C. to ca. A.D. 993).
The Sinhalese kingdom at Anuradhapura was in many ways typical of other ancient hydraulic societies because it lacked a rigid, authoritarian and heavily bureaucratic structure. Theorists have attributed Anuradhapura’s decentralized character to its feudal basis, which was, however, a feudalism unlike that found in Europe. The institution of caste formed the basis of social stratification in ancient Sinhalese society and determined a person’s social obligation, and position within the hierarchy.
The caste system in Sri Lanka developed its own characteristics. Although it shared an occupational role with its Indian prototype, caste in Sri Lanka developed neither the exclusive Brahmanical social hierarchy nor, to any significant degree, the concept of defilement by contact with impure persons or substances that was central to the Indian caste system. The claims of the Kshatriya (warrior caste) to royalty were a moderating influence on caste, but more profound was the influence of Buddhism, which lessened the severity of the institution. The monarch theoretically held absolute powers but was nevertheless expected to conform to the rules of dharma, or universal laws governing human existence and conduct.
The king was traditionally entitled to land revenue equivalent to one-sixth of the produce in his domain. Furthermore, his subjects owed him a kind of caste-based compulsory labor (rajakariya in Sinhala) as a condition for holding land and were required to provide labor for road construction, irrigation projects, and other public works. During the later colonial period, the Europeans exploited the institution of rajakariya, which was destined to become an important moral and economic issue in the nineteenth century.
Social divisions arose over the centuries between those engaged in agriculture and those engaged in non agricultural occupations. The Govi (cultivators) belonged to the highest Sinhalese caste (Goyigama) and remained so in the late twentieth century. All Sri Lankan heads of state have, since independence, belonged to the Goyigama caste, as do about half of all Sinhalese. The importance of cultivation on the island is also reflected in the caste structure of the Hindu Tamils, among whom the Vellala (cultivator) is the highest caste.
Conversion (Wiki)
While attempting to control their newly-won lands in Asia, the Portuguese were also actively encouraging Hindu Tamils to convert to Catholicism. Force conversion was also practiced. In 1618(??), following some serious Tamil revolts, the Council of the Jesuit Society had resolved that those Tamils who converted to Christianity would be spared of death.
Dear somewhatdisgusted;
Thank you for your somewhat moderate analysis. As you have said, I am not indifferent in your view that we should adopt positive notions in western society. Not only that, I honestly believe many negative aspects found in our society also should be pulled up. No person with some commonsense will turn down such a sensible venture. But my analysis came as a response to an opposite notion; i.e. against irrational and unjustifiable criticism and condemnation of local values and against frantic moves to thrust upon western ideologies on our heads.
If you carefully go through my posts began initially as a response to ” Sri Lanka: the waning Liberalism” and subsequent comments under different discussions in the web, you will understand the core objective of my writing. I persuaded to believe that there is an organized (may be informally) effort in place to undermine local values, mainly Buddhism and its culture. I noticed many people with different religious identities making second rate criticisms against Buddhism and its followers, quoting a piece or two of verses from Buddhist philosophy (eg:- In Defense of Buddhism). I firmly believe that one should have some respect to other’s sentiments. I also found that some people who are ardent advocates of Liberalism justifying and appreciating British invasion in Sri Lanka as a rare fortune, despite obvious facts available and presented. I don’t know how anybody could justify a forcible occupation of a country against the will of their people. For some writers liberalism is a faultless divine principle to judge everything. I think such things are against basic ethical principles.I think this is cynicism. One must be sensible about the consequences of their writing. They not only should advocate “freedom of expression” but also should advocate the “responsibility of expression”. In this background only my writing came into being.
Further, my original intension in the first post was to advise the critics mentioned as above to abstain from unethical and unreasonable criticisms over local culture and its value system. I wanted to tell them that western ideologies can not directly be applied to other societies, as they are not perfect theories, which are true only in certain contexts. To show this relative nature I said that western idiologies has a clash with science. If they had a courtesy to pay a little bit heed, not to hurt others feelings by criticising others’ religions I wolud never have touched a religion in a public forum. That is how my original intension diverted to this end. However, with the querries arisen afterwords, I suppose I have to continue in the same line for some time.
In your post you have tried to express your oppositions in a fairly reasonable way to some of my propositions.
One of the points you have disputed was concept of karma. You have objected that the concept of karma as mentioned in my post as an extremely counter-productive interpretation of Buddhism and Karma. If the logic of the statement followed to its ultimate conclusion you say it could be used to justify atrocities around us.
The concept of karma in Buddhism is a complex multifaceted concept that needs a deep and lengthy discussion. However, in Buddhism this concept does not follow the logical sequence you have mentioned,to reah the ultimate conclusion you reffered. In a way, it produces the opposite effect. In Buddhism “karma” is wilful action and it has its cosequences. If you do bad kamma you are sure to face bad consequences, and therefoe buddhism advocates to abstain from bad deeds and to develop wholesome deeds. Therefore, something unwholesome like justifying atrocities can not be deduced as the ultimate conclusion of karma.
Further, karma is not limited to human beings, and the logic follows, that all being are not equal at birth which is a undisputable truth. Further, even in the case of humans, how can one justify the unequal heritage of welth in a liberal society in terms of the concept of equal rights at birth. To me, equal rights at birth seems as an ideal or more favourable concept, however one reasonably can not prefer ideals over realities. However, I agree with you, discrimination, if possible, totally eliminated from any society.
Again I totally agree with your notion that pointing to the mistakes of others do not justify our own mistakes. However, I am apologetic to you to disagree to your last sentence which I consider as a hasty conclusion.
“Religion must get the hell out of politics in Sri Lanka”.
We know many political idielogies born in west does not approve the presence of religion in politics. It has justifable reasons.
1. Western political ideologies are developed with the influence of theology and basic religious beliefs are embodied in their political theories. As such seperate introduction of religions to them are unnecessary.
2. In Europe there was a bitter struggle between the church and the elites for power. When the church was defeated in the struggle, sush a notion is beneficial for the victors.
However, unlike western societies, Sri Lankan society has been a holistic one. It has the charactistic of eastern societies which did’nt divide society into diffent components. It did not have a seperate component as Biology. It didn’t have a component as Physics, sociology, politics or mathematics. All those were there, but woven together as a whole. They were there only in the proportionate quantums to sustain society in harmony. We didn’t have a need to develop one component independent of others with some different intensions. In the case of west it had to give priority to technolog to compete with other nations in the race for wealth. They had to invest in science to get an edge over others in the race. Therefore some components of the western society developed unproprtionatel and hence developed as different entities. In contrast our society is not a collection of many parts but single one. Therefore in our societies you can not keep one component aside as in the west. For us religion and politics are not two but one.
Thanks!
@niranjan:
“Flowing from this do you think that the Sinhalese professionals and others who have emigrated to the West are going to come back to Sri Lanka anytime soon ?
I read somehwere that Mahinda Rajapakse had invited them to come back here now that the war is over. ”
They will not come back. Not even the ones that supported the war effort. The 2nd generation in particular has assimilated extremely well into their respective Western societies. Another interesting point is that the degree of nationalism among Sinhalese simply lessens the farther and farther you move away from SL. Most are simply too preoccupied with their occupations to bother with a war that is half a world away. They have also had exposure to “real democracy”, so to speak – living in a multicultural society and interacting with folks from all walks of life on a near daily basis will soften the hearts of all but the most die-hard racists. Of course there are the fanatics who demand Tamil blood, but at least in the West they are in the minority. In general, this sort of trend is a reflection of the extent of militarization of Sinhala-Buddhist society in Southern SL. It makes clear how deeply entrenched nationalism and racist ideology have become in that society.
“I know that the Tamil people settled abroad will not come back even though some came back during the CFA and bought property in Wellawatte etc. Most of them went back to the West after the war started. D Another point I wish to raise is that during the CFA there was greater interaction and trust between the Sinhalese and Tamils. That is missing now even though the war is over. How would you account for that ? ”
The CFA was an amazing time. I happened to visit during that period; I can remember everyone traveling East. My relatives (in Colombo) were making plans to visit Jaffna for a spell. Of course, there was much going on behind the scenes that would soon dispel such a festive atmosphere. Ranil simply did not appeal to the average Sinhalese nationalist. As for the public, more and more sophisticated media propaganda over the years has dehumanized the LTTE to the point where diplomacy with them is a no-no. The very genuine peace process that Ranil engaged in was unprecedented in the post-independence history of the island… revolutionary to the extent that it was doomed from the beginning. In any case, what is interesting is that all parties concerned (extremists of both ethnicities, plus moderates, plus the IC) could see that Ranil was committed to this process. Regardless of whether people knew that the CFA was a sham or not, they were determined to make the most out of the temporary lapse in hostilities. Ironically, while MR has seemingly put a permanent end to the war, it seems as if the methods he used to achieve such an end have completely backfired.
Dear Yapa >>
Thank you for your detailed reply. I understand the overall aim in your posts so far, which you’ve clarified. Too many generalizations are being presented, as absolute truths, without any consideration of alternative explanations. Heshan stands as the quintessential example (i just saw his latest post), repeating prejudiced assumptions in the hope of making the gullible believe in them – argumentum as nauseum . I therefore welcome all attempts to infuse a bit of colour into such discussions.
Reading your posts, I also see that we probably have differences in perception on certain fundamental issues. I don’t think they are necessarily irreconcilable, merely that they are at present, very different. But before we get into those, let me address a few issues you’ve raised.
“Therefore, something unwholesome like justifying atrocities can not be deduced as the ultimate conclusion of karma.”
I understand your perspective and this is my interpretation of it also. But my protest was against people using karma to “rationalize” atrocities, that the suffering people undergo is what they “deserve” because of their karma. I’ve heard such statements from certain Buddhists, and I’ve always strongly disagreed. It is well within our power to correct many of the issues around us. Saying it’s just someone’s “karma” is an easy way out to not feel bad about it. (it also ignores the fact that Buddhism defines various types of karma)
“To me, equal rights at birth seems as an ideal or more favourable concept, however one reasonably can not prefer ideals over realities.”
This whole discussion on “equal rights” probably stems from a misunderstanding than an actual disagreement. I don’t think anyone disagrees that the world is, by nature, very unfair and the privileges you inherit at birth can confer an unfair advantage on individuals. However, what “equal rights” defines is a *minimal* set of inalienable rights that each human being should be entitled to, regardless of one’s station at birth. Are we really in any disagreement over that? Yes, sometimes it only remains an ideal but certainly an ideal worth striving for?
“In Europe there was a bitter struggle between the church and the elites for power. When the church was defeated in the struggle, sush a notion is beneficial for the victors.”
I feel your take on why the church lost is vastly different from mine. Yes, certain kings for example, were unhappy with the totalitarian power wielded by the church, which resulted in them working to undermine that power. But I believe a significant reason is being ignored. The gradual intellectual awakening in the west during the renaissance and the tremendous scientific progress along with the development of the scientific method itself, made the silly position of the church no longer *morally* defensible. They could no longer issue violent edicts against those who defied the church, as the concept of “freedom of expression” for example, took root. They simply did not have a moral argument to refute it. They could not defend the assertions in the bible from the sustained assault from scientific discoveries that disproved those assertions. Much to the good fortune of the entire world, logic and reason triumphed over superstition and dogma.
I believe this is also one of the key reasons that the British had to leave their colonies. We never chased them out with military might. A major reason for them to leave was also because they couldn’t *morally* defend their continued occupation any longer. (I agree there were other reasons also, but this is a very important reason)
Now we come to where our fundamental disagreements are likely to lie.
First of all, I should probably explain my world view. In my understanding, the discovery and embracement of the scientific method is the greatest realization that has dawned on mankind. It has given us a *systematic* was of understanding the world around us and discovering the truth. Prior to this, many attempts have been made to understand the world and nature around us, religion being one of them, but clearly, we can see that the scientific method has given us a logically unassailable way of doing so.
The scientific method itself primarily hinges on evidence based reasoning. We know that it is possible to make any arbitrary claim, but without that claim being empirically demonstrable, it has little or no validity.
Therefore, any claim which does not fall within this boundary, does not fall within a scientific world view. You will therefore probably understand why I do not subscribe to Karma. There is no evidence whatsoever to support such a notion. Believing in Karma is in essence no different to believing “god did it”, as there is no proof for either conjecture.
Don’t get me wrong.This does in any way means I reject all the teachings of Buddhism. I believe that the Buddha was one of the greatest inviduals to ever have lived and has made a great contribution to mankind. I myself, having grown up a Buddhist, have benefited greatly from his teachings. But as the Buddha himself said, “There is no need to accept what I say blindly, you may choose to accept it only if it makes sense to you.” Karma is a thing which makes no sense to me due to the afore mentioned reasons. (I should say, I believe in the wisdom of “you reap what you sow”, which is essentially “ditta dhamma vedaniya karma”, but for different reasons, not because of some mysterious/unknown book-keeping mechanism called Karma). I doubt that we will be able to resolve these differences in belief easily on a forum such as this. But at least, perhaps it will be possible to understand different perspectives.
In any case, all of the above is not very relevant to this thread. But what is relevant is your last point.
Therefore in our societies you can not keep one component aside as in the west. For us religion and politics are not two but one.
I think it’s immoral to force one’s system of belief, in this case Buddhism, on others. I do not see how religion and politics are one. Would you like it if all of a sudden, militant Islam became the dominant religion in Sri Lanka, and forced us all to wear hijabs and issued fatwas for questioning the Koran? Why is it not possible for people to privately follow their religions if they consider it necessary and for the rule of law in the country to give people the freedom to do so? Why does religion have to get involved in politics? The Buddha never tried to force his belief system by law on others. In my view, it is a perversion of Buddhist values to get Buddhism mixed up with politics, it’s a personal decision to follow a religion and as I explained earlier, not necessarily a scientific or logical one.
I know you are not advocating forcing anyone to believe in Buddhism. But if you mix politics up with religion, any religion, what’s the difference? Aren’t you essentially doing that in a roundabout way?
“Too many generalizations are being presented, as absolute truths, without any consideration of alternative explanations.”
It is a fact that Sinhala-Buddhist society has become militarized. I will soon be quoting verbatim from “Buddhism Betrayed” by Stanley Tambiah, a Harvard scholar. Unsurprisingly, this book is banned in SL. In any case, while that book is still in the mail, the much esteemed Angarika Dharmapala has left us with his wonderful musings. I quote:
“From the day the foreign white man stepped in this country, the industries, habits, and customs of the Sinhalese began to disappear and now the Sinhalese are obliged to fall at the feet of the Coast Moors and Tamils.”
“The Muhammadans, an alien people who in the early part of the nineteenth century were common traders, by Shylockian methods became prosperous like the Jews. The Sinhalese, sons of the soil, whose ancestors for 2,358 years had shed rivers of blood to keep the country from alien invaders, . . . today . . . are in the eyes of the British only vagabonds…. The alien South Indian Muhammadan comes to Ceylon, sees the neglected, illiterate villagers, without any experience in trade, without any knowledge of any kind of technical industry, and isolated from the whole of Asia on account of his language, religion, and race, and the result is that the Muhammadan thrives and the sons of the soil go to the wall.”
http://www.tamilnation.org/books/Eelam/buddhismbetrayed.htm
Clearly Dharmapala felt highly insecure in regards to colonialism. What is astonishing is that I can detect many of the same insecurities in numerous posters, on this very same website. As vociferous as it is, Sinhala-Buddhism nationalism is not difficult to decipher. For example, it always begins with the “sons of the soil” dictum. The “sons of the soil” were supposedly great engineers (as Off the Cuff has described in length). This “great” civilization constructed by the “sons of the soil” was subject to invasions by “outsiders” – guess who? Tamils!
I am slowly beginning to believe that what really rocks the boat of the “sons of the soil” is that the British treated all the indigenous natives alike. Nearly 100 years after Dharmapala, they are still unable to treat the Tamils (and also Muslims) as equals.
Dear SomewhatDisgusted / Yapa,
Both of you raise valid questions and each gives valid arguments in support of your stand. However Sri Lankan law does not force Buddhism on anybody, rather it gives the foremost place and state protection to it while ensuring religious freedom for all others.
9. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).
10. Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
14. (1) Every citizen is entitled to –
(e) the freedom, either by himself or in association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice or teaching;
Buddhism was introduced to SL in 250 BCE, 236 years after Vijeya became the ruler. Since its introduction it had royal patronage and was the guiding principle of the monarchy. Thus Buddhist philosophy became intimately intertwined with politics. This fact is acknowledged even in literature of the US Library of Congress (please see my previous post)
The current constitution restored what was lost but ensured that other religions had complete freedom.
SL is not unique in the modern world in this regard. Leaving aside the Muslim world where most governments even adopt the law of the Koran, several governments in the West give some form of State recognition to Christianity. This does not mean that religious freedom is absent in those countries.
UK – The Monarch has to be a Christian and the National Anthem is a prayer to God. Oaths end in the words “so help me God”
USA – The Currency advertises Christianity and Oaths end in the words “so help me God”
Vatican – The Head of State is the Pope
Norway – The Monarch is the Head of the Church and the Evangelican Lutheran Church is still established and administered through a Government department. The state also supports religious aid organisations such as Norwegian Church Aid financially. Bishops are formally nominated by the Norwegian Monarch
@ Heshan
“Sinhala-Buddhist or not, the *Christian* British were able to govern the country far better than the present lot of 113 proud Sinhala-Buddhists in the Cabinet, and their Sinhala-Buddhist headmaster”
And it turns out to be only 70% out of them are Sinhalese, and even lesser number Buddhists. Heshan should have his numbers right.
Off the Cuff,
The Veddhas occupied this country before the Sinhala Buddhists. The Sinhalese were not the original inhabitants of this country.
The Sri Lankan Constitution recognises all religions and ethnicities in this country not only that of Sinhala Buddhism. What ever the Sinhalese might have done in the ancient past in terms of engineering, building wewas etc other ethnic groups who live in this country have also worked towards the betterment of this country. We need to acknowledge that after all we are a multicultural country(Tamils, Muslims, Burghers and others) and not an exclusive Sinhala Buddhist country.
“All Sri Lankan heads of state have, since independence, belonged to the Goyigama caste,”- Did President Ranasinghe Premadasa belong to this category?
@ HEshan
“Let’s lay the blame where it belongs. The MOTIVATIONS behind colonialism may have been wrong, but the idea that the natives suffered for 100′s of years is a myth.”
Absolute BS. British killed nearly 100,000 during the colonial era. They rendered modern day Uva province devoid of inhabitants by killing and burning crops systematically. And when you consider that total population was about 3.7m – 5m during that time, the magnitude of genocide can be roughly estimated. This is without the amount they robbed from the country. If we can have what was robbed by British back, and give away everything we got from them, SL would be classified as a developed country.
“tamils and muslims are second class citizens here in Sri Lanka. Many of them would happily move abroad”
And continue to live as third class citizens.
Now why do you think that Tamils and Muslims are treated as second class citizens? I would say Sinhalese are treated the same way in Jaffna.
@ Migara:
Can you back up your claim that the British intentionally killed 100,000 inhabitants? It seems like many here are getting the Portugese mixed up with the British. The Portugese (Catholic) were the ones who engaged in forced conversion. If you know what the Inquisition is, there was never one in England. The British were pretty mild rulers, except when it came to suppressing rebellion. I am not sure what you mean by the British robbed the economy… the tea that they introduced to the island generates $1 billion USD annually for Sri Lanka (it was $1.23 billion in 2008). Ironically, the British also introduced the labor source – Indian Tamils.
Your argument that Sri Lanka would be a developed country if the British didn’t rob it would only make sense if the same logic held true for every country that the British colonized, including the USA. You cannot take a single case and draw a universal conclusion.
“so help me God”
What matters is not an oath, but what is enshrined in the Constitution. Those who came up with the American constitution made crystal clear the separation between Church and State. Those who oppose the use of the word “god” in public discourse are not non-Christians like Buddhists, Muslims or Hindus. They are atheists! These silly atheists get upset when children in primary schools say the words “so help me God.” Those who came up with the Constitution probably didn’t anticipate such people, but even if they did, who cares? Most of the people in the world believe in God; even if they don’t, saying the word “God” will not cause their brains to evaporate. Atheists need to get a life.
These silly atheists get upset when children in primary schools say the words “so help me God.”
Actually the correct words are, “one nation under God.” On the other hand, since the name of the God is not specified, no one takes issue (except atheists).
Yapa,
“There is no doubt that Sri Lanka is governed now under a state ideology, unambiguously called a ‘chintanaya’, which draws on at least two older discourses: that of ethno-religious Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism, and an anti-Western, culturally relativist, and leftish State-centric worldview redolent of and perhaps unconsciously nostalgic for the political, economic and foreign policy shibboleths of ‘Third World’ countries in the era of decolonisation. This is why liberal principles are seen to be representing foreign values, and worse, instruments of something called ‘neo-colonialism’. Both discourses are ineluctably antithetical to the liberal political principles of individual liberty and autonomy, tolerance and diversity, the freedom of choice, the rule of law, limited government, and the free market, and so both lead inexorably to tyranny.”
The above is a quote from a Groundviews article by Publius. I suggest you read it because you obviously do not see the wrongs in Sinhala culture.
@ Migara:
whatever the British may have done, they did leave Sri Lanka in an alright position economically. Have you forgotten that Sri Lanka was once in a better position than Singapore? Sri Lanka’s developing country status has been sustained through post-colonial poor governance.
so the British killed 100,000 people during their 137 year rule? & how many have been killed by the GoSL during the last 60 years ?
Supposedly? Did someone actually say supposedly in the face of overwhelming evidence?
To the Pukkha Sahibs even irrefutable proof of engineering skills that existed two millennia ago is questionable and when nothing else is available to dispute the facts phrases such as “were supposedly great engineers” is used to cast doubt.
The problem for these Pukkha Sahibs is that the edifices built 2000+ years ago are still existing, functioning and available for inspection and measurement by any interested party. Denial is like denying the existence of Pyramids of Egypt.
First they try to spread the false notion that the Sinhalese are not industrious. Then that they are imbeciles who have to be beholden to the West (just because they have such a subservient mentality). When faced with IRREFUTABLE facts they use innuendo.
Here is a quote from Heshan “…were supposedly great engineers (as Off the Cuff has described in length).”
Facts required Heshan not innuendo.
Surprised to find that the Sinhalese INDEED had a GREAT CIVILIZATION over 2000 years ago that encompassed the entirety of the Vanni? The Vanni that is claimed as the “Traditional Homeland of the Tamils”?
Still doubt what I have stated? You can verify it by measurement as the structures are still in existence.
As SomewhatDisgusted so eloquently put it “Heshan stands as the quintessential example (i just saw his latest post), repeating prejudiced assumptions in the hope of making the gullible believe in them – argumentum ad nauseum.”
Here is what the “SUPPOSEDLY great engineers achieved”
A gradient of 1.14 THOUSANDS of an inch per foot maintained for miles in an UNPAVED Canal of 54 miles in length where the maximum gradient never exceeds 2.28 thousands of an inch over the full length (this is literally paper thin as even a newspaper page is more than double in thickness 3.35 thousands of an inch) is not proof of Engineering Skill and knowledge?
Compare with the resources (instrumentation & equipment) required today to achieve such a feat.
The discovery and successful implementation of the Principal of the Valve Tower, the modern day Surge chamber is not evidence of scientific research and Engineering Skill? When did the West start to use the same principle?
The building of the largest brick structure that stands as the tallest in the world even today is not evidence of an understanding of structural engineering and materials strengths?
The building of the largest man made reservoirs in the world of that age is not evidence of scientific knowledge and engineering prowess?
Any idea how problems of seepage were solved? How the shape of the Dam structure was decided to withstand pressure and shock caused by floating debris? How the location for impounding was decided? How wave erosion was contained? How contours were mapped? How water pressure was tamed in order to draw it out for irrigation? How such widely spread reservoirs were interconnected?
A question was asked by someone where we would be without the input from the West. The real question is where would 2000+ years of development have taken us from where we were in 200 BC, if we were able to grow without Western destruction?
Dear Niranjan,
My post is a reply to yours of November 13, 2009 @ 10:32 am
In the above post you state that
“The British invasion and subsequent occupation gave this country the following:
a united country in terms of ethnicity, a superb civil service(ruined by our very own politicians after independance), a modern plantation economy based on tea, rubber and cocunut, financial services with the outside world, some democratic institutions, english language by which we can communicate with the world, a school system, a university system, a health system, roads, bridges, ports, towns, Colombo city and more.”
“My second question to you is could we have under our own monarchs have done what the British did for this country in terms of modernising its economic, political, administrative structures?”
“My third question is why be ungrateful to a foreign power colonial or otherwise who helped this country to modernise its economic, political, administrative institutions?”
Unquote
You apparently have insufficient knowledge of the Sinhala Civilization that existed in 200 BC, even before Christ was born. Without such knowledge you cannot postulate what advancement that such a civilization would achieve with a FURTHER 2200 years of development.
The quoted statements of yours show that you obviously underestimate the capacity of the Sinhalese. My post was intended to enlighten you and others who think like you that the Sinhala Civilization was one of the most advanced that existed at that point of time in the World not just in the region.
You base your ill informed comments on the assumption that our Monarchs did not govern with an even hand. Even literature found in the US Library of Congress state as follows
Extract
The claims of the Kshatriya (warrior caste) to royalty were a moderating influence on caste, but more profound was the influence of Buddhism, which lessened the severity of the institution. The monarch theoretically held absolute powers but was nevertheless expected to conform to the rules of dharma, or universal laws governing human existence and conduct.
End extract
Notice the words “….but more profound was the influence of Buddhism” and the words “The monarch theoretically held absolute powers but was nevertheless expected to conform to the rules of dharma, or universal laws governing human existence and conduct”
The Rules of dharma is referred to as the “universal laws governing human existence and conduct” in other words fundamental Human rights!!!!!
Niranjan you need to read the post carefully before asking questions.
The reference to the Goigama cast and the rulers is not made by me they form part of an extract taken from the US Library of Congress and I have made that clear at the commencement of the extract. I have used relevant parts of that extract within my posts to prove my points and have not used the complete extract.
No Sinhalese will ever deny that the Veddahs were in SL before Vijeya and his followers set foot on it. In fact Vijeya married Kuveni the ruler of the Veddhas (as you call them). It’s recorded in the chronicle Mahawansa. The Sinhalese were not Buddhist at that time. Their religion was something else. Buddhism came to SL very much later. What did you want to prove by stating such an obvious fact?
As I have pointed out in my earlier posts the Sinhala Kingdom encompassed the ENTIRE VANNI region. The region that is falsely claimed as the “Traditional Tamil Homeland”
Glad that you accept that the SL constitution recognizes every religion. I have posted the relevant section in my post of ( http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/comment-page-3/#comment-10843 )
This being the case, do you have any problem about the religious freedom guaranteed by the constitution?
The Sinhalese have no problem in sharing SL as equals with all other communities. The problem comes when INEQUITABLE demands are made such as the Traditional homeland concept and its attendant inequalities.
When Sinhalese are settled in land developed agriculturally by using Govt funds whose major contributor is the majority community some shout about changes in demography but is completely silent about the change in demography of the hill country which was changed by settling Indian Tamils there when NOT A SINGLE TAMIL lived in it for millennia. If the Sinhalese can accept that why can’t the Northern Tamils accept Sinhalese in the North?
Please put aside all this BS about Sinhala Buddhists and create constructive dialogue aimed at sharing SL’s resources proportionately. You can’t do that by attacking the overwhelming majority of the SL population by propagating canards and blaming all ills on them.
@ Heshan
“Can you back up your claim that the British intentionally killed 100,000 inhabitants? It seems like many here are getting the Portugese mixed up with the British”
The number of villages that they destroyed gives a hint. Go through independent sources describing the era of 1815 – 1850, and it describes the massacre. And massacred were not only Sinhalese, Tamils were also in the receiving end.
“I am not sure what you mean by the British robbed the economy… the tea that they introduced to the island generates $1 billion USD annually for Sri Lanka (it was $1.23 billion in 2008). Ironically, the British also introduced the labor source – Indian Tamils.”
The amount of gold, gems and precious items they robbed from elite is jaw dropping. You talk so highly of tea, and just see the environmental disaster they brought with tea. Rivers dried up and water sources became limited and soil erosion made highlands forest areas in to Patana grasslands. And add the value of animals they killed. More than 5000 elephants! Then add the value of slavery from Indian Tamils and local inhabitants. The number will add up to multiple of ten billions in pounds.
@ Ayshya
“Have you forgotten that Sri Lanka was once in a better position than Singapore?”
And have you forgotten that 600 years before Sri Lanka was one of the most developed countries in the world?
Quote
Those who oppose the use of the word “god” in public discourse are not non-Christians like Buddhists, Muslims or Hindus. They are atheists!
Unquote
Wow what a conclusion !!!!
What can you expect from someone who is Omnipotent and Omniscient. If he were Omnipresent would have rivaled God himself.
Hers is a new definition of democracy by “Him” who is just a step below God
“…. but even if they did, who cares? Most of the people in the world believe in God;”
So if the majority believes in something don’t care about the others just go ahead and do what the majority wants …….and this from a guy writing volumes about minority rights.
Warped thinking?
The aim of my post of http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/comment-page-3/#comment-10843 has been completely distorted by this tangential remark
According to “HIM” the God is unnamed, hence USA, UK, Norway, the Vatican and others are referring to the Muslim / Hindu and other Gods
What an intellectual!!
Dear Niranjan;
“I will write against things that I consider to be illeberal and inhuman culture or not.”
This sentence is from one of your comments.
Dr. Dutugemunu also is doing the same thing as you. What ever he thinks good, he does. Whatever he think bad, he attacks.
He also must be a liberal of your calibre!
Thanks Niranjan.
Niranjan:
Have you ever read Charles Dickens or Thomas Hardy? Anyone familiar with the writings of these Victorian novelists will think twice before extolling the greatness of Britain. In their portrayal of abject poverty, child neglect/slavery and entrenched class divisions in English society, these Victorian novelists expose British society for what it was. I suppose the British gave us all the goodies while they subjected their own people to a life of misery, eh? Perhaps they loved us more than their own people.
Hope you are aware that at this very moment, the “forgotten children” of Britain (some as small as 2yrs old) that were sent to Australia, New Zealand and Canada between 1618-1967 are going to receive a formal “apology” from the Australian government for the horrendous abuse inflicted on them for years.
Most of you don’t seem to have even a rudimentary knowledge of British history. Speaking of Britain’s “stellar” past, have you at least read Hardy’s “Jude the Obscure”? Hardy reveals the underbelly of the King of Civilization by depicting social inequities that even led to child suicide. Interestingly, English Literature will give you a deeper and more balanced understanding of English society than the propaganda which is just a boring repetition about tea estates. The English poor at that period in time were more abused and poverty stricken than the people their rulers were out to “civilize”. Even now, there is widespread poverty in England with class disparity still very much a reality.
Corruption is still rampant in that country – MPs who steal public money to purchase trinkets and pornographic movies is yet another example of why the English are losing faith in their own leaders.
I suppose for you all there is no “Namo Namo” only “God Save the Queen”!
Off the Cuff:
You are grossly exaggerating the engineering achievements of ancient SL… practically every ancient civilization had some form of irrigation. Furthermore, SL is surrounded by water and also these ancient civilizations were built on flat land. Now what about
Tenochtitlán, the ancient capital of the Aztecs. This was an entire city built at an elevation of 2350 m (7700 ft) in a dry valley. SL people think Sigiriya was great… the Aztecs (and Mayans and Incans) had a hundred thousand such Sigiriya’s… here a few images:
http://www.arqueometro.info/Tenochtitlan1.jpg
http://faqinfosite.com/ancientculturegodsartreligion/Images/aztecpyraztecpicturesgodsartculture.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3373/3298822452_544b67aef5.jpg
Tenochtitlan didn’t have one or two canals, it had several dozen:
Tenochtitlán was the center of the Aztec world. The marvels of the island city were described at length by the Spanish conquistadors (conquerors), who called it the “Venice of the New World” (in reference to Venice, Italy) because of its many canals. At its height, the city had a population of about 200,000, according to modern estimates, making it one of the most populous cities in the ancient world.
“Tenochtitlán was connected to the mainland by three well-traveled causeways, or raised roads. During the rainy season, when the lake waters rose, the causeways served as protective dikes. Stone aqueducts brought fresh drinking water into the city from the mainland. Tenochtitlán’s canals served as thoroughfares and were often crowded with canoes made from hollowed logs. The canoes were used to carry produce to the public market in the city’s main plaza.”
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:PAULINU3-4oJ:encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/refarttextonly.aspx%3Fprint%3D13%26refid%3D761593151+tenochtitlan,+canal&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
“Compare with the resources (instrumentation & equipment) required today to achieve such a feat.”
Hahahaha.. you have obviously never heard of the Panama Canal then. Thousands of miles of marshes and swamps had to be cleared to build that (modern technology was not around then). Malaria was big problem. The canals built in SL were built in dry zones… at constant flat elevation; construction would involve very few obstacles and take very little time.
Largest man-made reservoirs of the time? How do you know they are the largest man-made reservoirs? Have you had access to every ancient civilization? Or do you just blindly follow Mahavamsa? Most of the ruins of the Ancient World still lie hidden.
Dam construction is nothing. As I said, every ancient civilization achieved this feat.
“Babylonians, and Persians built dams between 700 and 250 bc for water supply and irrigation. Contemporary with these was the earthen Maʾrib Dam in the southern Arabian Peninsula, which was more than 15 metres (50 feet) high and nearly 600 metres (1,970 feet) long…”
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/365003/Marib-dam
Besides, people like the Incans built entire tombs in the sides of tall mountains:
http://www.travelblog.org/Photos/Popped/2403316
As I said, a hundred thousand Sigiriya’s.
“The number of villages that they destroyed gives a hint. Go through independent sources describing the era of 1815 – 1850, and it describes the massacre. And massacred were not only Sinhalese, Tamils were also in the receiving end.”
I have never heard of such a sustained massacre. Did Dharmapala dream it up? Why don’t you list a few of these “independent” sources… let me guess, they are all Sinhala-Buddhists? So much for independence!
“The amount of gold, gems and precious items they robbed from elite is jaw dropping.”
Yes, no doubt… with the primitive mining technology that existed back then, the amount of precious jewels they “stole” is simply mind-boggling. Did you say “elite”? Let me guess… these elite are all Sinhala-Buddhists? LoL. And I suppose you also have a database complete with the names and addresses of the so-called elite from whom this “mind-boggling” amount of precious jewels was stolen… and I also presume you have personally verified and traced these 19th century precious jewels all the way to London… and since SL is absolutely the only place from where such precious jewels could emanate, we can presume that after the British left, the jewelry trade simply collapsed? LOL.
“You talk so highly of tea, and just see the environmental disaster they brought with tea. Rivers dried up and water sources became limited and soil erosion made highlands forest areas in to Patana grasslands. ”
LOL. Rivers dried up? Which rivers were these? As far as I can see, the Mahaveli still flows through Kandy and beyond. As for environmental disaster, why have the levels of tea production INCREASED practically every year? Obviously if the crop yield is GOOD for more than 100 years, that doesn’t say much for damage done to the surrounding environment.
“And add the value of animals they killed. More than 5000 elephants! Then add the value of slavery from Indian Tamils and local inhabitants. The number will add up to multiple of ten billions in pounds.”
LOL. Now you are worried about elephants… as for Indian Tamils (tea-estate Tamils), consecutive Sinhalese governments have done zilch to improve their living conditions. These people earn close to nothing, and yet they are producing one of the most valuable export commodities.
“Anyone familiar with the writings of these Victorian novelists will think twice before extolling the greatness of Britain. In their portrayal of abject poverty, child neglect/slavery and entrenched class divisions in English society, these Victorian novelists expose British society for what it was. I suppose the British gave us all the goodies while they subjected their own people to a life of misery, eh? Perhaps they loved us more than their own people.”
This just proves that the British were not as racist as some people like to claim. They were concerned with efficiency more than anything else. They treated their own peasant people in England like dirt; they would have treated the sarong-clad villager in SL in a similar manner.
Dear Off the Cuff,
“This being the case, do you have any problem about the religious freedom guaranteed by the constitution?”- I have no problem with that, but the problem is whether Sri Lankan society accepts the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution? or are they aware of such freedoms?
The Sinhalese have no problem in sharing SL as equals with all other communities.-I agree, but there is a segment of Sinhalese who have a problem in sharing SL with other communities. That segment maybe small but they are very vocal.
Yapa,
If you do not see anything wrong in the society you inhabit then either you are blind or think that those wrongs in your view are correct.
Liberals have to disagree with illeberal views/actions. Obviously we need to challenge views/actions we find disagreeable in society?
You should read Publius article on Groundviews.
Dear Niranjan,
Thank you, now we are getting somewhere
Sri Lankan society has always been tolerant of Religion as long as that tolerance was not misused. The number of religious edifices of various denominations in a 70+ % Buddhist majority country stands testimony to that.
Developing awareness of the fundamental right of religious freedom as well as other fundamental rights is the best way to ensure that those rights will be upheld. Rather than just complaining, aggrieved parties that have a strong case should be encouraged to present their case to the Supreme Court. If the rights of a minority are encroached upon the Legal fraternity of that community should provide its services free to win back its rights as they would not only be fighting for the individual but would be fighting for the rights of the Community.
Recently a disabled doctor moved the Supreme Court to win the right of access to public buildings for the disabled. He used the Primary Law in his petition. Even before the Court ruled on the petition changes started to take place in Public Buildings such as Banks and Post offices etc. The Supreme Court held with the petitioner’s rights and now anyone not complying with that order will leave themselves open for damages claims.
Using the legal framework to enforce the existing Primary Law within the Constitution would ultimately prove to be more effective than any other method to ensure that the Constitutional Rights of all citizens’ are respected through the length and breadth of Sri Lanka.
As I pointed out before “inequitable demands” is the wind behind the sails of these very vocal minority of Sinhalese that protest. Take away the “wind” and the protests will die a natural death. There are such vocal groups within every community but the question is should we allow them to stop us from moving forward?
Off the Cuff,
The vocal minority of ultra nationalist Sinhalese is a part of the state machinery now. How they got in there is another question. The main thing is not to give in.
Dear Niranjan;
You are senseless as ever my dear friend.
Please see whether there is any sensible substance in what you say.
“Liberals have to disagree with illeberal views/actions. Obviously we need to challenge views/actions we find disagreeable in society?”
Just see whether there is any differnce if a dog says “Dogs have to disagree with non dog views/actions , with your first sentence above. Another example ” Dictators have to disagree with non dictator views/actions”. Same way a fool can say “Fools have to disagree with non fool views/actions”.
Do you think meanings of these statements are self justifiable. Are these sensible statements my dear friend?
As I have said earlier, you need to learn reasoning my dear friend. No logic, no argument, no rationality in many of what you say. Even parrots can talk. But what is important is some sense in your expressions.
I don’t know whether I am correct , I am getting the feeling that you are an enemy of liberalism in diguise. If what you are saying is liberalism, I am sure many follwers of liberalism will give up it soon.
If you challenge, it is not so, I shall logically prove it. However, as ever I think you will never understand or answer what I say. You will say “Malle Pol”.
Learn before preach.
Thanks my dear friend!
Dear Niranjan,
True, that’s why I advocate the use of the legal system.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law and the Supreme Court is the best forum to fight discrimination when the Law’s exist and the law does exist.
Dear Off-the-cuff,
“However Sri Lankan law does not force Buddhism on anybody, rather it gives the foremost place and state protection to it while ensuring religious freedom for all others”
That’s a fairly innocuous clause and I don’t think there’s a huge issue with religious freedom in Sri Lanka. The only thing I am worried about is the handful of politicized Buddhist monks running amok rabble-rousing in areas that are no business of theirs, giving Buddhism a bad name in the process.
“The real question is where would 2000+ years of development have taken us from where we were in 200 BC, if we were able to grow without Western destruction?”
I’m afraid I don’t quite agree with this. The point I was trying to impress upon Niranjan also was that anything we imagine is likely to be idle speculation. We currently don’t know of any way to predict a complex future that never happened. What we can realistically do is to understand what happened in the past and the impact it’s had on our societies. Not as a blame-sharing exercise of course, but with the aim of determining how best to move forward while dealing with such a complex historical legacy.
Dear Off-the-cuff,
“So if the majority believes in something don’t care about the others just go ahead and do what the majority wants …….and this from a guy writing volumes about minority rights.”
Thank you for pointing out Heshan’s latest howler. Not that any of this will inflict so much as a scratch on his carapace, and I’m sure he will continue to inundate this forum with his misbegotten convictions, but certainly, some admiration is due for his irrepressible zeal in persevering with scatter-shot criticism on all imaginable subjects.
“According to “HIM” the God is unnamed, hence USA, UK, Norway, the Vatican and others are referring to the Muslim / Hindu and other Gods”
The people who have FILED cases in court against the Pledge of Allegiance – because it uses the word “God” are all atheists. No Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist has filed any case in court on such a basis. The God is indeed unnamed because it is indeed one and the same God. It is a difficult proposition for some Sinhala-Buddhist ignoramus educated in Mahavamsa mythology to grasp; nevertheless, it is true.
The following verses from the Upanishads refer to the Concept of God:
1.
“Ekam evadvitiyam”
“He is One only without a second.”
[Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]1
2.
“Na casya kascij janita na cadhipah.”
“Of Him there are neither parents nor lord.”
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]2
3.
“Na tasya pratima asti”
“There is no likeness of Him.”
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19]3
4.
The following verses from the Upanishad allude to the inability of man to imagine God in a particular form:
“Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam.”
“His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye.”
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20]4
Buddhists are not really atheists. They pretend to be, but the karma concept they subscribe to can easily be associated with God-related concepts. For example, in the Vishnu Sahasranama, the thousand names of Vishnu refer to the power of God in controlling karma. The 135th name of Vishnu, Dharmadhyaksha means, “One who directly sees the merits (Dharma) and demerits (Adharma), of beings by bestowing their due rewards on them.”
Even Buddha believed in gods. I have found references in the Tripitaka. Of course we all know about Kataragama.
“So if the majority believes in something don’t care about the others just go ahead and do what the majority wants …….and this from a guy writing volumes about minority rights.”
There is a difference between the majority being 2/3 of the world and the majority being Sinhala-Buddhists (less than 0.1% of the world population). You must be a product of standardization; the same great “brain” that thinks building a canal in a dry zone is a monumental task.
“and I’m sure he will continue to inundate this forum with his misbegotten convictions, but certainly, some admiration is due for his irrepressible zeal in persevering with scatter-shot criticism on all imaginable subjects.”
I suppose when you and your ilk try to defend a failed state like Sri Lanka, you will end up sounding ridiculous no matter what. If the British had not stolen jewels from the “elite” people and killed 5000 elephants, would 250,000 Tamils be in IDP camps today? Whoever can answer surely deserves a Nobel Prize.
Heshan,
You said, “This just proves that the British were not as racist as some people like to claim. They were concerned with efficiency more than anything else. They treated their own peasant people in England like dirt; they would have treated the sarong-clad villager in SL in a similar manner”.
Before you utter another word, please go read a book – not self-help books or Harlequin Romances, okay?
Tell me, why do you look down on your own sarong/loin cloth clad ancestors? So, you approve of your ancestors being treated worse than dogs by the English? Ah! I guess it’s okay; anything from the English is fine and dandy!
Would you dare enter English society, let’s say, Cambridge or Oxford and sing praises to the “colonizer” as you do on GroundViews? They will be bewildered into thinking: “My God, why on earth is a Black man trying so hard to be a skinhead”? I say, Johnny, some people are trying to be more royal than the King!
Heshan, you cannot help it that you were born in Sri-Lanka to non-white parents. By the way, certain sarong/loin cloth clad men and sari wearing women could not be conquered by the British because of their strength of spirit and self-assurance. Only those who fought over the white man’s leftovers still happily step off the side-walk every time a white man walks by. Ha! Ha!
I suppose mistreating people – whether it is the English peasantry/working class or our very own sarong clad villagers – is a sign of “efficiency” to you.
As the song goes:
All in all, it’s just a
Nother brick in the wall
All in all, you’re just a
Nother brick in the wall (Pink Floyd)
Certain sarong/loin cloth clad men and sari wearing women refused to be just that -another “brick in the wall”!
Tell me, are you just another brick in the wall?
Yapa,
You really shouldn’t quarrel with Niranjan on the basis of logic—logic is not your strong suit. You invited Niranjan to compare his statement “Liberals have to disagree with illeberal views/actions” with grammatically similar statements such as “Dogs have to disagree with non dog views/actions “, or ” Dictators have to disagree with non dictator views/actions” and “Fools have to disagree with non fool views/actions”. Niranjan’s statement can’t be judged as illogical on the reasoning that it is grammatically similar to these other silly statements.
Grammar has its own logic, but it is not the total basis of argumentative logic. if grammatic logic and argumentative logic were the same then the following two statements should make equal sense: 1. The cat is on the mat and 2.The spirit is on the mat.
What you ignore are the semantic or referential values of language. Dictators don’t have to disagree with non dictator views–because, by definition of dictatorship, they can always jail or kill their dissenters, and even suppress such views from ever appearing in public. Fools would also be, by definition, unable to distinguish between ‘fool views’ and ‘non fool views’ in order to disagree with the latter, and so that statement is nonsensical too. As for your example of dogs, dogs do in fact disagree with non dog views and actions all the time—never seen them going after cats and birds? Of course they disagree with dog views too, and attack each other.
Liberals do have to disagree with illiberal views. If they do not, they can no longer be called liberals. For example, if a government is suppressing media freedom, then liberals must speak up. Their speaking out against it constitutes them as liberals. Those who don’t express their dissatisfaction with such a situation cannot be defined as liberals. It’s a retrospective creation of meaning—one becomes or is ‘ordained’ a liberal only after one has expressed disagreement with illiberal actions and views. If you have liberal thoughts in your head but don’t express them, how does one verify that the person is actually a liberal? A person becomes a liberal by standing up for liberal views and disagreeing with illiberal ones. Needless to say liberal expression must not involve violence.
There is nothing illogical about Niranjan’s statement.
Heshan >>
“If the British had not stolen jewels from the “elite” people and killed 5000 elephants, would 250,000 Tamils be in IDP camps today? “
As usual, your prejudice is only eclipsed by your Intellectual dishonesty . I never said anything of that nature, so you are putting words in my mouth in order to salvage your non-existent dignity.
Yapa,
““Liberals have to disagree with illeberal views/actions. Obviously we need to challenge views/actions we find disagreeable in society?”-
This is logical. Why should liberals/others not question what they find to be disagreeable in society?
“Just see whether there is any differnce if a dog says “Dogs have to disagree with non dog views/actions , with your first sentence above. Another example ” Dictators have to disagree with non dictator views/actions”.”- The analogies you use are unrelated to the question. Please answer the question without beating about the bush with references to dogs and dictators. The question is once again “Why should liberals/others not question what they find to be disagreeable in society? ”
As an example of an act of inhumanity bordering on sadism I found in this society and I have touched on in my article on Groundviews titled “Is liberalism on the wane in Sri Lanka?” is the order to publish pictures of local women who act in pornographic films in the newspapers for identification purposes. Such crude methods of identification should not be a part of any civilised society.
I think Atheist put our resident Anglo Saxon White Boy in his forgotten Sarong. He’s tripping on a lot of things, colonialism and it’s impact, concept of god. I guess a law education leaves a lot lacking.
Logically gifted people come to a life changing realisation at a very young stage in their lives. It is that God is nothing but a veil for Hope. In the face of unimaginable adversary, desperation, devastation, hopelessness, our ancestors not having the benefit of science to explain the universe, and the randomness built into the universe from a string level, gave life to God – a humanisation of the pinnacle of Hope.
No matter how far science will advance, human mind will always have certain stumbling blocks in understanding nature. Therefore God will always exist among us – among human frailty. So stop trippin, your god is safe!
Anyway there’s no point preaching to the Resident Brown Anglo Saxon, he’s already decided to reject anything but his own views. Let him float in his bubble. It will burst one day. We’re better off minding our own business, living our sorry lives in this failed state instead.
Dear Niranjan, Yapa,
Such crude methods of identification should not be a part of any civilised society.
Niranjan, I agree with that individual point myself. I’ve written a more detailed answer (http://www.groundviews.org/2009/10/28/sri-lanka-the-waning-of-liberalism/comment-page-1/#comment-10920) but posted it under your original article where it is more likely to be relevant.
“Now, I hope you understand that there is no incentive for the West to adopt Buddhism. ”
You might be wrong there. Perhaps on a political level there is no incentive for the west to adopt Buddhism, but there are plenty of westerners who are adopting Buddhism. In Australia for example, Buddhism is the fastest growing religion. It has reached deep into “white Australia” with organisations such as the Buddhist Society of Western Australia [ http://bswa.org/ ] . Then in England there are groups like Amaravati [ http://tinyurl.com/ygmkvlt ] . In addition, Buddhism has got awesome PR in the west, and that doesn’t seem like it’s going to change anytime soon. Buddhist imagery and iconography are quite visible in communities that are overwhelmingly “Christian” (nominal or otherwise).
Dear disgusted, somewhatdisgusted;
Once a cat caught a rat and started playing with it joyfully. It threw the rat up, got hold of it before it hit the ground. Then the cat bit the tail of the rat and gave out a joyful sound. However, to his astonishment the cat noticed that the rat was grinning,snarling and not helping to continue the game. Then the cat asked the rat ” Why are you not helping me to play this game. Then the rat answered ” It may be a matter of game for you. But it is a matter of life for me.
Moral:- You can not expect rats to behave in the same manner as cats.
Thanks!
Dear Yapa,
“Moral:- You can not expect rats to behave in the same manner as cats.”
I wasn’t really able to draw the connection to the current discussion. Can you clarify?
Yapa,
Why do you need to disguise your thoughts with a parable? Why not just say what you mean? If the difference between our perspectives is that one of us is a fat cat and the other is facing a threat to life, do please share how your seemingly more desperate position demands that you be cynical about liberal values. I’m not being facetious–I really would like to understand that.
@Somewhat Disgusted:
Relax. I quoted Off the Cuff, not you. Read between the lines. Enjoy the sarcasm.
“Logically gifted people come to a life changing realisation at a very young stage in their lives. ”
SL is full of such logically gifted people… half of them eating 2 meals a day and glossing over 14th century hydraulic engineering….
Soon this nation of the gifted is going to have an election between two war criminals – surely, the height of all intelligence (Atila the Hun would blush).
If only the British had opened their eyes and seen the potential lying around. Add a few monks to the Parliament.. add 100 to the Cabinet… replace “constitution” with “Chinthanaya”… & if anyone complains, let the white van do its job. This is democracy, Mahavamsa style! The whole world needs to adapt it! If they have doubts, let them cast eyes upon the stupas, dagobas, and other *invisible* glories of the Sinhala kings who reigned for a 10000000 years until evil South Indian yakkas pushed the “sons of the soil” away. I am sure after climbing Sigiriya, even Hillary Clinton will sing a different tune…
Jaya Shri!
“You might be wrong there. Perhaps on a political level there is no incentive for the west to adopt Buddhism, but there are plenty of westerners who are adopting Buddhism.”
Haha. I know what you’re talking about; the local gym holds a yoga class, people join up, and some of them think they’re full-fledged “Buddhists” or “Hindus.” My point, however, is that Buddhism is incompatible with capitalism. Capitalism promotes materialism, but even more importantly, competition. Competition, incidentally, leads to inequality. On the other hand, competition has always been a big driver of Western civilization, whether it be colonies, science, or technology. Competition, to put it bluntly, is brutal. Someone always loses and loses hard (yesterday it was the Red Indians, today its the small family-owned business). To be honest, I can’t say that such a system has any sound ethical basis. I would say, the reason why it (capitalism) works is threefold: (I) the superior allocation of resources, and (II) strong political systems (corruption is a big no-no), and (III) empowerment of the individual, as opposed to the group.
Like Adam Smith said, it is a self-contained system.
“Pure” Buddhism, on the other hand, is what… essentially detachment. If you were a farmer, you would not buy the latest farm equipment because if you did your less fortunate neighbor would go out of business. If you were the CEO, you would not take that extra multi-million dollar bonus while the janitor guy is surviving on minimum wage. One of my colleagues, a man from Thailand, started a successful business in his country. However, he felt morally uncomfortable with his inability to help those on the lower end of the corporate ladder, and so quit the business altogether. This was the Japanese Business Model, but even that was apparently incompatible with the Buddhist morals of this person.
As I said earlier in this thread, the problem with religion is that it too easily becomes a group dynamic. When that happens, other unwanted things also occur. Therefore, it is in the interests of the State to remain secular.
Dear Heshan,
You have done it again.
Remember the Sinhala proverb that says “Gale Reepu Balla Waage”
In case you have forgotten your Sinhalese (which you profess to be) it translates as “Like a dog who defecated on a stone”. The proverb applies to a situation when a person commits a colossal blunder that cannot be covered up, the same predicament that the proverbial dog found itself in.
Leaving aside your postulations that the references to God in the West such as the slogan “In God we trust” on US currency, references to God within the western legal system, the requirement that the Monarch should be a Christian, National Anthems that pray to (the Christian) God etc were inspired not by Christianity but by Islam and Hinduism and that their was no pillaging by the colonizers of the countries they colonized and that the massacres that occurred never did happen and the Human smuggling of small kids as young as 2 years from UK to Australia was done for their own good and that such is proof of even handedness of the British and some more like burning at the stake in UK, The use of torture machines by UK etc for which you will probably find some way to justify with science as you seem to be Omnipotent and Omniscient, lets have a look at more important postulations of yours
Heshan said,
November 17, 2009 @ 10:38 pm
“So if the majority believes in something don’t care about the others just go ahead and do what the majority wants …….and this from a guy writing volumes about minority rights.”
There is a difference between the majority being 2/3 of the world and the majority being Sinhala-Buddhists (less than 0.1% of the world population). You must be a product of standardization; the same great “brain” that thinks building a canal in a dry zone is a monumental task.
That’s your complete post in reply to my comments (within the quotes), reproduced in case you make a mistake as to which post I am referring to (the reader could look up Heshan’s previous posts)
So according to this NEW THEORY of yours, If a 2/3 MAJORITY of the world believes in something then it is Gospel?
At one time the WHOLE WORLD believed the Earth was FLAT.
Is it FLAT?
AT one time the WHOLE WORLD believed the Sun and other Heavenly bodies revolved around the Earth.
Is that what you believe?
When Christianity was fresh in the minds of the Theologians of the day, they believed that the Earth was Flat and that the Sun and the heavenly bodies revolved around the Earth as God created it that way.
From the pulpit of the Basilica of Santa Maria Novella, Father Tommaso Caccini (1574–1648) denounced Galileo’s opinions on the motion of the Earth, judging them dangerous and close to heresy. Following a papal trial in which he was found vehemently suspect of heresy, Galileo was placed under house arrest and his movements restricted by the Pope. From 1634 onward he stayed at his country house at Arcetri, outside of Florence. He went completely blind in 1638.
None of it made Galileo wrong in spite of what the Church and the WHOLE Christian world believed
Fortunately for the Tamils in Sri Lanka the Sinhala Buddhists don’t think like you. Thank your God for it.
How funny to find you trying so painfully to justify your unjustifiable position about the West and the Governmental support for Christianity by quoting “Upanishads”. Could not find anything from the West?
You are trying to project yourself as an authority on the Buddhist text the “Thripitaka” too. Is there anything that you don’t know?
Buddhists don’t believe in a Creator God that’s the basic difference between Buddhist Philosophy and other religions. From what I see of your intellect it will be pointless to engage you on ANY subject let alone Buddhist Philosophy.
I have detailed the Sinhala Engineering in a separate post as I do not want to dignify a reply to you by a discussion on a serious subject except to mention TWO strange facts.
You could not find ANYTHING in your BELOVED WESTERN WORLD that rivals the SINHALA CIVILISATION that dates back to the same period, viz 200 BC.
You had to rely on the Aztec’s Tenochtitlan that was started in 1325 and reached its peak in the 15 th CENTURY, Over 1500 YEARS LATER. Probably the next time, you will give the example of the Aswan High Dam !!!!!!
What BRILLIANCE !!!!
What INTELLECT !!!!
As the Sinhala villager would say, don’t go out without a protective head gear, the dew is not good for your brain.
The Intellectual and Man of Science that you believe yourself to be (once you stated that you work for a University); I hope for your sake, that your employer or your colleagues will never come across GV and your posts.
The Sinhalese Hydraulics Engineering
Dr. D. H. Lewitt in a textbook (Hydraulics, Page 294.) says, “another method of overcoming the inertia effect of the water column in the supply pipe is to fit a vertical pipe and tank known as the Surge Tank on the supply pipe as neat to the turbine as possible.”
This is the principle of the Valve Tower or “Bisokotuwa”
The hydraulic surge chamber was used by European science in the 20th century, but the Bisokotuwa was invented by the Sinhalese over 2200 years ago.
If not for this invention of the “Bisokotuwa” (Valve Tower) it would not have been possible to construct the vast reservoirs at such an early age in our History as drawing water from such reservoirs required some means of taming the high water pressure at the outlet.
The two quotes below leaves no room to doubt the Engineering Superiority that Sri Lanka possessed 300 years before Christ.
Here is an Extract from the Wiki
The irrigation works of ancient Sri Lanka, the earliest dating from about 300 BCE, in the reign of King Pandukabhaya and under continuous development for the next thousand years, were one of the most complex irrigation systems of the ancient world. In addition to underground canals, the Sinhalese were the first to build completely artificial reservoirs to store water. Due to their engineering superiority in this sector, they were often called ‘masters of irrigation’. Most of these irrigation systems still exist undamaged up to now, in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa, because of the advanced and precise engineering. The system was extensively restored and further extended during the reign of King Parakrama Bahu (1153 – 1186 CE)
End Extract
This is an extract from the book The Rice Economy of Asia by By Randolph Barker, Robert W. Herdt, Beth Rose. It refers to an Era in 300 BC
Sinhala society began the development of a system of large tanks to irrigate portions of the fertile dry zone. The construction of this irrigation system required an AMAZINGLY HIGH LEVEL OF ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE. The ASTOUNDING COMPLEXITY of the Sri Lankan tank system is described by RL Brohier
Most of the irrigation schemes are confined to tracts of land which when estimated by the eye appear to all purposes quite flat. yet we KNOW from such evidence that remain that channels were traced mile upon mile on GRADIENTS THAT WOULD CALL INTO USE THE MOST PRECISE INSTRUMENTS OF THE MODERN AGE TO ESTABLISH, that BAFFLING INGENUITY which cannot be SURPASSED by any conceivable means AVAILABLE AT THE PRESENT DAY traced out the bunds and the contours of the large tanks.
End Extract
Notice that the language used in the book which clearly expresses awe at the Engineering Skill displayed.
Dr. R. L Brohier who is quoted in the book is of French (Huguenot) descent. He rose to the position of Superintendent of Surveys. His book “The Ancient Irrigation Works of Ceylon” is considered the “bible” of hydrology in Sri Lanka.
Are we to be beholden to those who destroyed such a civilization?
Dear disgusted/somewhatdisgusted;
It was non of you I was referring as cats in the parable. I apologise if I hurt your feelings. But still I believe there are senseless cats.
With regard to your earlier comment, disgusted, I do not think that anyboy has unlimited freedom to say or whatever he thinks correct. That is one of the facts in my view, that pushed the country to the unfortunate situation we faced during the last 30years. Sinhalese tried to prove all their points and Tamils too did the same thing. See, what happened to our society.
Diverse views are fantastic for a healty socity, provided they are just and fair. Otherwise, I feel, it can be counter productve.
When words fail war begins!
Dear SomewhatDisgusted,
Ref your post of November 18, 2009 @ 10:32 am
This Guy, with a mind like a tangled ball of thread, doesn’t know whether he is coming or going. When you take him to task about something you never wrote he says he is having a dig at me.
Unfortunately for him I have not written what he claims that I had either.
To be intellectually dishonest he should have intellect in the first place otherwise who will make a claim such as this? http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/#comment-10875
He is just plain dishonest
Dear Off-the-cuff,
Let’s face it, this forum would be a rather dull place without Heshan. I’ve personally grown quite fond of his irrelevant diatribes which inevitably lead to one amusing non sequitur or the other. The real fun begins when he then tries to justify such reasoning with even stranger bits of illogic
All in all though, I suspect that Heshan has the last laugh by derailing these conversations from their original topics onto the only topic that seems to be foremost on his mind – that of the churlishness of the horrible Sinhala Buddhists whose entire existence is geared towards nothing but persecuting Tamils – a simpleton’s world view which he attempts to pass off, through repetition and misdirection, as an authoritative observation on the Sri Lankan condition. Not quite unlike that proverbial story of the “boy and the flea” (“à¶à¶½à·Šà¶¸à·„à·à¶œà·™ ඇඟේ නම් මà·à¶šà·Šà¶šà·œ නෑ. à·„à·à¶¶à·à¶ºà·’ බà·à¶»à·’ වෙලà·à·€à¶à·Š මà·à¶šà·Šà¶šà·™à¶šà·Š හිටියොà¶à·Š….”)
All in good fun Heshan! Soldier on my man
Slight error: it is “Migara” who wrote about the British stealing jewels from the “elite” and killing 5000 elephants.
Dear SomewhatDsgusted;
I owe you not only a clarification regarding my parable appeared yesterday, but also a respond for your comment dated 15th. I think the issues you raised in the post of 15th, contained convincing points for a worthy and lengthy discussion. However, I think it is propper to deal with urgent isses first,
My parable came about mainly as a response to the comment by Disgusted on 18th, which started as “You really shouldn’t quarrel with Niranjan on the basis …..”. My parable is reproduced below for the clarification purposes.
“Once a cat caught a rat and started playing with it joyfully. It threw the rat up, got hold of it before it hit the ground. Then the cat bit the tail of the rat and gave out a joyful sound. However, to his astonishment the cat noticed that the rat was grinning,snarling and not helping to continue the game. Then the cat asked the rat ” Why are you not helping me to play this game. Then the rat answered ” It may be a matter of game for you. But it is a matter of life for me.
Moral:- You can not expect rats to behave in the same manner as cats.”
We all have things which we consider as valuable for us. One’s own house,car and house hold items are some of the material valubles. Our children, spouse, siblins, relatives and friends are dear to us, may be on the emotional basis. For a community or for a nation too there are much valuble things, sometimes they consider as worth more than their lives. I think culture, heritage, value system….etc are revered worth as life in our society. I think these are included in the “sphere of automony” of a nation, which considered unethical to be tampered with for simple reasons. Savage attacks inflicted on these treasured things of our society may be a matter of play or a game for some people like Niranjans and Heshans. But it is a matter of life for us. So we can not utter a joyful purr….purr…. to them in repond to their games. They don’t understand that language. They deserve different treatments!
Now I suppose the connection of the parable to the presnt discussion is clear to you.
Thanks!
” This is the principle of the Valve Tower or “Bisokotuwa” ”
The “Bisokotuwa” is in fact nothing more than the hydraulic ram pump. It was used to build the Great Pyramid of Giza:
The Pharaoh’s Pump Foundation and the book Pharaoh’s Pump maintain that these passages cut into solid bedrock are a colossal and enormous hydraulic ram pump! This hydraulic ram pump is built on a gigantic scale never duplicated in the ancient or modern world. Massive amounts of pumped water was used to supply a series of water locks, up to the Great Pyramid, transporting barges with stones to the building site. With its own pumped water and a series of water locks as a lifting medium, the Great Pyramid supplied its own water power to build itself!
Before the Great Pyramid’s construction, the site was not flat but a granite outcropping. The shape and size of this outcropping is unknown. In the finished pyramid the granite outcropping protrudes up to a height near the bottom of the Grand Gallery. The site is on a gradual sloping hillside. Uphill from the Great Pyramid is the Libyan Desert.
Almost all agree that the two subterranean shafts and the subterranean room were excavated before the pyramid was built. Herodotus, the famous Greek historian, tells us ten years were spent in preparation. The subterranean excavations at the construction site were the preparatory work needed before construction started.
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Article/How_the_Great_Pyramid_Was_Built.html
On the other hand, taking advantage of the potential energy difference to pump water to higher elevation was known to practically every civilization. For example, the Archimedean Screw, still in use today.
“Diodorus Siculus (c. first century BC), Bibliotheke, Book V, 37.3-4
. . . and what is the most surprising thing of all, they [Roman slaves] draw out the water of the streams they encounter [in Spanish mines] by means of what is called by men the Egyptian screw, which was invented by Archimedes of Syracuse at the time of his visit to Egypt; and by the use of such screws they carry the water in successive lifts as far as the entrance, drying up in this way the spot where they are digging and making it well suited to the furtherance of their operations. Since this machine is an exceptionally ingenious device, an enormous amount of water is thrown out, to one’s astonishment, by means of a trifling amount of labour, and all the water from such rivers is brought up easily and from the depths and poured out on the surface. And a man may well marvel at the inventiveness of the craftsman [Archimedes], in connection not only with this invention but with many other greater ones as well, the fame of which has encompassed the entire inhabited world . . .
(Translation by C. H. Oldfather in Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, Volume III, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1939.
Diagram from R. E. Palmer, “Notes on Some Ancient Mine Equipments and Systems,” Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, Volume 36, Pages 299-336, 1926.)
On the other hand, Off the Cuff’s claim that the West was lagging behind in inventions at this time is ridiculous. Here is a brief list of Greek inventions that concern water:
1. The bent Siphon
2. Concentric or inclosed Siphon
3. Uniform discharge Siphon
4. Siphon which is capable of discharging a greater or less quantity of Liquid with uniformity
5. A Vessel for withdrawing Air from a Siphon
6. A Vessel for retaining or discharging a Liquid at pleasure.
7. A Vessel for discharging Liquids of different temperatures at pleasure
8. A Vessel for discharging Liquids in varying proportions
9. A Water Jet produced by mechanically compressed Air
10. A Valve for a Pump
11. Libations on an Altar produced by Fire
12. A Vessel from which the contents flow when filled to a certain height
13. Two Vessels from which the contents flow, by a Liquid being poured into one only
14. A Bird made to whistle by flowing Water
15. Birds made to sing and he silent alternately by flowing Water
16. Trumpets sounded by flowing Water
17. Sounds produced on the opening of a Temple Door
18. Drinking horn from which either Wine or Water will flow
19. A Vessel containing a Liquid of uniform height, although a Stream flows from it
20. A Vessel which remains full, although Water be drawn from it
21. Sacrificial Vessel which flows only when Money is introduced
22. A Vessel from which a variety of Liquids may be made to flow through one Pipe
23. A Flow of Wine from one Vessel, produced by Water being poured into another
24. A Pipe from which flows Wine and Water in varying proportions
25. A Vessel from which Wine flows in proportion as Water is withdrawn
26. A Vessel from which Wine flows in proportion as Water is poured into another
27. The Fire-Engine
28. An Automaton which drinks at certain times only, on a Liquid being presented to it
29. An Automaton which may be made to drink at any time, on a Liquid being presented to it
30. An Automaton which will drink any quantity that may he presented to it
31. A wheel in a Temple, which, on being turned liberates purifying Water
32. A Vessel containing different Wines, any one of which may be liberated by placing a certain Weight in a Cup
33. A self-trimming Lamp
34. A Vessel from which Liquid may be made to flow, on any portion of Water being poured into it
35. A Vessel which will hold a certain quantity of Liquid when the supply is continuous, will only receive a portion of such Liquid if the supply is intermittent
36. A Satyr pouring Water from a Wine-skin into a full Washing-Basin, without making the contents overflow
37. Temple Doors opened by Fire on an Altar
38. Other intermediate means of opening Temple Doors by Fire on an Altar
39. Wine flowing from a Vessel may be arrested on the Introduction of Water, but, when the Supply of Water ceases, the Wine flows again
40. On an Apple being lifted, Hercules shoots a Dragon which then hisses
41. A Vessel from which uniform Quantities only of Liquid can be poured
42. A Water-Jet actuated by compressed Air from the Lungs
43. Notes from a Bird produced at intervals by an intermittent Stream of Water
44. Notes produced from several Birds in succession, by a Stream of Water
45. A Jet of Steam supporting a Sphere
46. The World represented in the Centre of the Universe
47. A Fountain which trickles by the Action of the Sun’s Rays
48. A Thyrsus made to whistle by being submerged in Water
49. A Trumpet, in the hands of an Automaton, sounded by compressed Air
50. The Steam-Engine
51. A Vessel from which flowing Water may be stopped at pleasure
52. A Drinking-Horn in which a peculiarly formed Siphon is fixed
53. A Vessel in which Water and Air ascend and descend alternately
54. Water driven from the Mouth of a Wine-skin in the Hands of a Satyr, by means of compressed Air
55. A Vessel, out of which Water flows as it is poured in but if the supply is with-held, Water will not flow again, until the Vessel is half filled and on the supply being again stopped, it will not then flow until the Vessel is filled
56. A Cupping-Glass, to which is attached, an Air exhausted Compartment
57. Description of a Syringe
58. A Vessel from which a Flow of Wine can be stopped, by pouring into it a small Measure of Water
59. A Vessel from which Wine or Water may be made to flow, separately or mixed
60. Libations poured on an Altar, and a Serpent made to hiss, by the Action of Fire
61. Water flowing from a Siphon ceases on surrounding the End of its longer Side with Water
62. A Vessel which emits a Sound when a Liquor is poured from it
63. A Water-Clock, made to govern the quantities of Liquid flowing from a Vessel
64. A Drinking-Horn from which a mixture of Wine and Water, or pure Water may be made to flow alternately or together, at pleasure
65. A Vessel from which Wine or Water may be made to flow separately or mixed
66. Wine discharged into a Cup in any required quantity
67. A Goblet into which as much Wine flows as is taken out
68. A Shrine over which a Bird may be made to revolve and sing by Worshippers turning a Wheel
69. A Siphon fixed in a Vessel from which the Discharge shall cease at will
70. Figures made to dance by Fire on an Altar
71. A Lamp in which the Oil can be raised by Water contained within its Stand
72. A Lamp in which the Oil is raised by blowing Air into it
73. A Lamp in which the Oil is raised by Water as required
74. A Steam-Boiler from which a hot-Air blast, or hot-Air mixed with Steam is blown into the Fire, and from which hot Water flows on the introduction of cold
75. A Steam-Boiler from which either a hot Blast may be driven into the Fire, a Blackbird made to sing, or a Triton to blow a horn
76. An Altar Organ blown by manual Labour
77. An Altar Organ blown by the agency of a Wind-mill
78. An Automaton, the head of which continues attached to the body, after a knife has entered the neck at one side, passed completely through it, and out at the other; which animal will drink immediately after the operation
From the above list of inventions, one can see that the Ancient Greek civilization was far more advanced than the Sinhalese one. It is only a *partial* list of inventions. I have not even listed the contributions made to geometry, philosophy, astronomy, etc. But what is probably most astounding about the Greek civilization is that they had so many original ideas, as the above list shows. Some of these ideas were wrong, obviously… on the other hand, 2500 years later, the achievements of this civilization would still serve as the foundation of Western civilization. Those who came up with the United States Constitution (Founding Fathers) were well-versed in the classics. In less than 100 years, the USA would become a superpower. 200 years later, it would defeat its greatest opponent – the Soviet Union – delivering a deafening deathblow to the Marxists forever – and proving that the Athenian notion of democracy is perhaps the most superior political construct ever conceived by man.
To be fair, other civilizations were also accomplished – the Chinese were great builders, astronomers, mathematicians, etc.
On the other hand, if the only thing that stands out from Sinhalese civilization are a few hydraulic inventions, one cannot say it was the most advanced civilization of its time.
Those who claim that the Buddha did not believe in God – have obviously thave never heard of Mahayana or Tantric Buddhism, where bodhisattvas are prevalent. On the other hand, it is only a few Therevada Buddhists with little in-depth knowledge of the sutras, who make such a claim. In fact, the Tripitaka says otherwise. In the passage below, Buddha acknowledges the existence of Mara, of devas, and also says that union with Brahma is possible:
“Vasettha, a Tathagata arises in the world, an Arahant, a fully-enlightened Buddha, endowed with wisdom and conduct, Well-Farer, Knower of the worlds, incomparable Trainer of men to be tamed, Teacher of Gods and humans, enlightened and blessed. He, having realised it by his own super-knowledge, proclaims this world with its Devas, Maras and Brahmas, its princes and people. He preaches the Dhamma which is lovely in its beginning, lovely in its middle, lovely in its ending, in the spirit and in the letter, and displays the fully perfected and purified holy life. A disciple goes forth, practises the moralities, attains the first jhana (as Digha Nikaya 2, verses 43-75).”
“Then, with his heart filled with loving-kindness, he dwells suffusing one quarter, the second, the third, the fourth. Thus he dwells suffusing the whole world, upwards, downwards, across, everywhere, always with a heart filled with loving-kindness, abundant, unbounded 6 without hate or ill-will.
“Just as if a mighty trumpeter were with little difficulty to make a proclamation to the four quarters, so by this meditation, Vasettha, by this liberation of the heart through loving kindness he leaves nothing untouched, nothing unaffected in the sensuous sphere.7 This, Vasettha, is the way to union with Brahma.”
“Then with his heart filled with compassion, … with sympathetic joy, with equanimity he dwells suffusing one quarter, the second, the third, the fourth. Thus he dwells suffusing the whole world, upwards, downwards, across, everywhere, always with a heart filled with equanimity, abundant, unbounded, without hate or ill-will.”
“Just as if a mighty trumpeter were with little difficulty to make a proclamation to the four quarters, so by this meditation, Vasettha, by this liberation of the heart through cornpassion, …through sympathetic joy, … through equanimity, he leaves nothing untouched, nothing unaffected in the sensuous sphere. This, Vasettha, is the way to union with Brahma.”
“What do you think, Vasettha? Is a monk dwelling thus encumbered with wives and wealth or unencumbered?” “Unencumbered, Reverend Gotama.” “He is without hate …, without ill-will …, pure and disciplined, Reverend Gotama.”
“Then, Vasettha, the monk is unencumbered, and Brahma is unencumbered. Has that unencumbered monk anything in common with the unencumbered Brahma?” “Yes indeed, Reverend Gotama.”
“That is right, Vasettha. Then that an unencumbered monk, after death, at the breaking-up of the body, should attain to union with the unencumbered Brahma – that is possible. Likewise a monk without hate …, without ill~will …, pure …, disciplined … Then that a disciplined monk, after death, at the breaking-up of the body, should attain to union with Brahma – that is possible.”
http://www.dhammaweb.net/Tipitaka/read.php?id=13
Of course, he does not say that union with Brahma is necessary – he says it is possible. Either the Buddha is a liar, a fool, or is simply telling the truth. Being a rationalist, he would not tell people to believe in something that is non-existent. Obviously, there are many paths to so-called “liberation,” and belief in a god or gods is one of them.
Yapa,
“Savage attacks inflicted on these treasured things of our society may be a matter of play or a game for some people like Niranjans and Heshans. But it is a matter of life for us.”-
It is not a game. I am also talking about matters of life and death. It is you who has launched “savage attacks” on others who have disagreed with your illogical views. It is you who is illeberal my dear.
“I think these are included in the “sphere of automony” of a nation, which considered unethical to be tampered with for simple reasons.”- Are bad practices the “sphere of autonomy” of a nation? Are you saying that ileberal practices is within the “sphere of autonomy” of Sri Lanka?
There are good and bad practices in any Society. As liberals or otherwise bad practices that exist in our society must be questioned.
Yapa,
According to our Constitution “Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion etc”- Therefore, I am entitled to my thoughts and my writings as much as you are.
“I do not think that anyboy has unlimited freedom to say or whatever he thinks correct.”-In a liberal democracy people have the right to express their opinions on matters of public concern. Therefore, I disagree with your notion of “unlimited freedom.” What maybe “unlimited freedom” to you may not be “unlimited freedom” to others.
Limiting the freedom to express ones opinions is illeberal. Groundviews is a public forum.
Dear Heshan,
Your comment of November 20, 2009 @ 3:53 am refers
You have an “Incomparable” knowledge of Engineering.
I hope you will take it upon yourself to convince the US Congress to remove the erroneous literature that they carry in their Library about the Sinhalese Engineering Prowess.
Especially the following
“The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago.”
Hope you understand sufficient “ENGLISH” to decipher the meaning. I mean the REAL meaning
“The discovery of the principle of the valve tower” = an INVENTION
Invention = a new device, method, or process developed from study and experimentation: e.g. the phonograph, an invention attributed to Thomas Edison.
Dr RL Brohier states
“channels were traced mile upon mile on gradients that would call into use the most precise instruments of the modern age to establish, that baffling ingenuity which cannot be surpassed by any conceivable means available at the present day”
What he refers to still exists, so why don’t you do a research with your colleagues at your “University” and disprove the above by measuring these gradients WITHOUT the use of precise instruments of the modern age and publish your findings… You might even earn a Doctorate from your “University”
Did you ever wonder why no one else is challenging the references given in my posts?
“The Pharaoh’s Pump” indeed …..
Are these the type of Web Sites you spend your time on to obtain information to write? No wonder you get into situations like that proverbial dog.
Unless you are as Cuckoo as the guy who runs that site, quote respectable references such as the Britannica or Wiki or a Standard text book or similar
You are surely having a problem, just like the proverbial Dog I mentioned in a previous post. Aztec’s to Greeks and what next? How about Britain for a change? Or do you think they were uncivilized in 300 BC?
The Pharaoh’s Pump …… indeed …..ha ha ha …
Pharaoh’s Pump………. 
he he he
You never fail to entertain all of us who read GV.
Dear Heshan,
Your post of November 20, 2009 @ 4:50 am
This is what I stated in answer to your contentions about Buddhist beliefs.
“Buddhists don’t believe in a Creator God that’s the basic difference between Buddhist Philosophy and other religions”.
Apparently you have not understood the English clearly.
I loath to get into a discussion about religion in a public forum but you don’t leave me with an alternative. However I will try to limit it to show the difference between a Creator God and super natural beings referred to as gods in Buddhist philosophy.
The Buddhist philosophy recognizes many living species. Some below the level of humans and some above. You can physically see animals, microbes etc who are below the level of a human but you can’t normally see those that exist at a higher level than humans. Buddhist philosophy recognizes the existence of several worlds that support life within the universe and what is named as gods (notice the plural) in Buddhist philosophy is not a Creator but supernatural beings. This is why after every meritorious deed a Buddhist offers merit to those below the plane of a human and those above that of a human.
What you call God is singular, is the Creator of all things animate and inanimate, no such thing exists in Buddhist Philosophy.
Buddhist philosophy is different to other religions as Buddha requested everyone to question every aspect of what he taught before accepting it.
In the case of religions that depend on a CREATOR GOD concept, such examination is taboo. Especially, the hardest question of all that defies a logical answer is prohibited. This is the question “Who created God”? Since no logical answer is possible you are asked to “BELIEVE” it without question.
BTW SL has Therawada Buddhism not Mahayana or any other school of thought. I observe the Buddhist teachings existing in SL and that too after questioning it not by blind FAITH.
“The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water”
As I have already pointed out, regulating the escape of water was well-known by practically every civilization. I am not sure what is significant about the so-called “biskotuwa.” I have already explained canals; they were a dime-a-dozen in the ancient world. As I said, every civilization knew how to control the flow of water:
“The world’s oldes stepped spillway is presumably the overflow stepped weir in Akarnia, Greece, build around 1300 B.C. The weir is an earthfill embankment, 10.5 m high with a 25 m long crest. The downstream slople is stepped with masonry rubbles set in mortar. The mean slope is about 45 degrees, varying from 30 degrees down to 73 degrees and the step height ranges from 0.6 to 0.9 m. The dam is still standing. Other ancient stepped spillways are those of the two Khosr River dams (or Ajilah dams) in Iraq, build around 694 B.C. by the Assyrian King Sennacherib.”
http://books.google.com/books?id=eSUnKqw4jPgC&pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=ancient+dams,+greece&source=bl&ots=N-ZrlJ1Uma&sig=huE1SSAdFiI4hHoOi4VfWFl47pc&hl=en&ei=xPcGS-XlBcmsngfarb3MCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=ancient%20dams%2C%20greece&f=true
In other words, the West (Greeks) knew how to control water.
By the way, I am suspicious as to the “ingenuity” of this so called valve tower.
valve tower
A tower built up within a reservoir to house the control valves of supply
pipes drawing off water at different levels. Hammond
On the other hand, a weir does the same thing:
“The criterion of the design is that the flow pattern or shape can be changed into forms which can be useful or convenient to store water and to convey water. With the design, this can be done in such a way that there is no significant alteration of the water level upstream and downstream of the structure.
For example the level of the bed of the flow can be lifted by a structure to any chosen height below a fixed flood level. When the flow rises to this fixed flood level the flow will pass over the structure without any rise upstream or downstream of the structure above that, that there would have been if raising had not been made. For this flow and any flow in excess of this flow there will be no alteration in the direction of the flood flow beyond the structure, since the level remains the same. When the flow diminishes or ceases, useful storage is provided upstream of the structure to the level of the chosen height of the structure.”
This structure can be described as a weir, dam or barrage.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3593527.html
So that is why the Greeks, Chinese, etc. did not use “valve towers” and why it did not appear in the West till the 1700′s. Remember this? “The world’s oldes stepped spillway is presumably the overflow stepped weir…”
They had other methods just as efficient for controlling the flow of water.
“Haha. I know what you’re talking about; the local gym holds a yoga class, people join up, and some of them think they’re full-fledged “Buddhists” or “Hindus.” ”
Not really. I’m talking about actual Buddhist centres, with white monks and white dayakayas. I don’t think Yoga has much to do with Buddhism at all. If you visited the links I provided you might have noted that many of the monks and nuns of European background come from diverse walks of life. At Amaravati there are several Portuguese monks [ see http://tinyurl.com/yd75wms ] – the very same people who were busy pushing Catholicism on the island some time back.
The influence of Buddhism is far in excess of it’s actual ‘size’ in the west. Checkout the following article for instance:
“Even for the specialist in the field of American Buddhism, the numbers Wuthnow and Cadge came up with will prove surprising. Based on their survey conducted in 2002-2003, they found that one out of every seven Americans has had at least a fair level of contact with Buddhism, and that one out of eight Americans reported that Buddhism had influenced their religious life. Those are staggeringly high numbers. To put it in perspective, there are about four million Americans who actively identify as Buddhists. But if we ask how many Americans include Buddhist elements ‘a little or a lot’ in their personal spiritual lives, the number appears to be about 12.5% of the population: that’s 26,125,000 adults. The number who say the Buddhist influence has been significant is almost the same: at 12%, that’s 25,080,000. Clearly Buddhism is exerting an influence far beyond the relatively small number of people who claim Buddhism as their primary religious identity.
Extrapolating further, a scenario of ever-increasing Buddhist influence within American religious life can be discerned. Even a casual observer will quickly concede that the amount of Buddhist materials available to the public is far higher today than ever before, and growing steadily every year. Buddhist temples continue to be founded across the country, and Buddhist elements in movies, television, books, and online are becoming more common. And since Buddhism appears to exert an influence on virtually everyone who comes in contact with it (and a positive one at that), the widespread penetration of Buddhism into American religion and culture appears to be a coming certainty.”
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,774,0,0,1,0
Dear Heshan,
Like I said, please try and get all these false documents that the US Congress carries in its library expunged.
The more you elaborate about Hydraulics the more you display your “Unparalleled” knowledge about the subject and precision measurement.
You have a one of a kind intellect …..just like your “Pharaoh’s Pump”
Of course the Europeans did not exist in the Americas at that age. Could not get anywhere close to the Sinhalese civilization of 300 BC with your Brits?
BTW in the presence of the following illustrious people and more, your opinion is as significant as the dust under their shoes
1. Sir Henry Ward, Governor of Sri Lanka
2. Dr R. L. Brohier, the eighth recipient of the Royal Asiatic Society’s Gold Medal. Act Deputy Surveyor General 1947 -1949. First Sri Lankan to act as Assistant Surveyor General under colonial rule1938/1946
3. Dr. D.H. Lewit Author of a University Text book on Hydraulics
4. Authors Randolph Barker, Robert W. Herdt & Beth Rose
5. The Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, USA
Just as the proverbial dog could not cover what it did, your attempts at cover up just leaves more uncovered
Dear Heshan,
Unfortunately for you, the following sources I quoted carry more weight than your opinion which of course is insignificant as the dust under their shoes
1. Sir Henry Ward, Governor of Sri Lanka
2. Dr R. L. Brohier, the eighth recipient of the Royal Asiatic Society’s Gold Medal. Act Deputy Surveyor General 1947 -1949. First Sri Lankan to act as Assistant Surveyor General under colonial rule1938/1946
3. Dr. D.H. Lewit Author of a University Text book on Hydraulics
4. Authors Randolph Barker, Robert W. Herdt & Beth Rose
5. The Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, USA
The more you elaborate the more you display your “Unparalleled” knowledge about the subjects of Hydraulics and precision measurement.
Of course the Europeans did not exist in the Americas at that age. Could not get anywhere close to the Sinhalese civilization of 300 BC with the British that you pay homage to?
Dear Niranjan;
I have never said that I am a liberal. I never want to be a liberal of your description either. I would rather like to be called as a person who has no firm faith on any political ideology but respect to ideas and concepts found in many of them, I perceive as good. I respect humane quality found in Communism, concept of Rule of Law in Democracy. I also was delighted by the concept of “Philosopher King”, of Plato in his “Republic”. Again I was delighted by the political ideas of Kautilya, political ideas implied in “Panchathantraya” of Vishnu Sherman and also by the undifferentiated political ideas found in the doctrines of Buddha. Further, I believe there are so many political ideologies which have not even been identified or named yet. Do you think that the Red Indian leader Seattle didn’t have a sound political ideology to rule his clan properly? Do you think King Parakramabahu’s era was not prosperous lack of so called modern political theories? So, I can not give my whole heart to one political ideology. I do not believe in a perfect political ideology which can govern the world faultlessly.
Further, I also believe that the political ideologies found in the west are facing challenges and need changes. Plato’s political ideas were rejected by Aristotle. Democracy based on Aristotle’s ideas was rejected by Communism. Communist ideas also were rejected. Now Liberalism has become a slogan in the west.
Even most modern political theories of the west are based Judeo-Christian tradition and ideology. Though they have absorbed some scientific thinking after the renaissance, it is still lagging behind even the Newtonian outlook of the world. Now even the Newtonian outlook is outdated and the modern outlook of the western science is based on Quantum Theory and the Theory of Relativity. Modern outlook is a total paradigm shift. Newtonian worldview has totally been shattered by this modern outlook. Any Social Science including Political Science has no slightest knowledge about this sea change in world outlook. Still, liberals, whose political theory is based on an ideology even much older than the Newtonian era, are very bold to boast and insult a person calling “You are an illiberal”. What a pity! Many don’t know anything more than what they are taught! Ignorance is bliss!
Off the Cuff:
The sources you quote except for the last one, “The Federal Research Division” are outdated. You also seem to be unaware that Greece is a part of Europe (I suggest you look at a map). Ancient Greece is considered part of Western Civilization; therefore any achievement of Ancient Greece is an achievement by Western Civilization. On the issue of hydraulics, if your main contention is that the “bisikotuwa” is significant, I would suggest you give a more detailed explanation of the exact role in plays in any water-management system, the NECESSITY of such an invention in the MODERN engineering sphere, the LIMITATIONS, and LIST ALL THE ALTERNATIVES TO THE BISIKOTUWA… and explain HOW these alternatives rate in comparison. So far all you have done here is merely mention that it was “invented” using “precise instrumentation” and that such claims are “indisputable” because they are made by some scholar of the 1930′s and referenced in “The Federal Research Division.”
I have already mentioned that water-control was well-known in the Ancient World. I have suggested the use of the weir and postulated that it makes any use of the “bisikotuwa” unnecessary, because the exact same level of efficiency is achieved.
I suggest you limit your argument to these points.
Just Someone:
The influence that Eastern philosophy has had on Western philosophers and scientists is indeed fascinating. Personally, I find this relationship more interesting, if not significant, than any sudden trend by a tiny segment of the general public. What I would ask you then, is, is Buddhism compatible with the Western mind… one way to examine that is to evaluate it in the context of Western philosophy. For example, the great philosopher Friedrich Nietzscehe, thought highly of Buddhism. In fact, he rated it higher than Christianity. On the other hand, he did not think it was a cure for the ills of Western civilization. As one author puts it, Nietzsche was of the opinion that “the Buddha failed by creating a new religion that simply helped man adjust to nihilism. ” Let me put the above in context. In “The Antichrist”, Nietzsche writes this:
“We should not deck out and embellish Christianity: it has waged a war to the death against this higher type of man, it has put all the deepest instincts of this type under its ban, it has developed its concept of evil, of the Evil One himself, out of these instincts–the strong man as the typical reprobate, the “outcast among men.” Christianity has taken the part of all the weak, the low, the botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism to all the self-preservative instincts of sound life; it has corrupted even the faculties of those natures that are intellectually most vigorous, by representing the highest intellectual values as sinful, as misleading, as full of temptation. The most lamentable example: the corruption of Pascal, who believed that his intellect had been destroyed by original sin, whereas it was actually destroyed by Christianity!–”
On the other hand, while Buddhism does not exploit suffering to take advantage of the weak, it is too nihilistic for Nietzsches taste:
“Buddhism, I repeat, is a hundred times more austere, more honest, more objective. It no longer has to justify its pains, its susceptibility to suffering, by interpreting these things in terms of sin–it simply says, as it simply thinks, “I suffer.” To the barbarian, however, suffering in itself is scarcely understandable: what he needs, first of all, is an explanation as to why he suffers.”
This is how another author interprets it: “Although Nietzsche viewed Buddhism as superior to Christianity, and went so far as to call eternal recurrence “the European form of Buddhism”, he considered both religions nihilistic. Buddhism, which fights ressentiment, was a convenient whip for Christianity born out of ressentiment. Inasmuch as Buddhism attempts to view the world as it is, without the distortions of metaphysics, Nietzsche believed that it offers no moral interpretation of the suffering that necessarily attends the human condition: no one is responsible for that suffering. Yet this did not amount to a recommendation, for Buddhism is nonetheless a religion for the end and fatigue of a civilization, the consolation of weary spirits longing for a dreamless sleep.[2] Sakyamuni Buddha was not an Ubermensch.”
What is your opinion of this conflict? I would be interested in knowing.
Cheers.
Dear Heshan,
Before you try to limit the scope of my arguments read my posts to which you responded
The references I gave are “OUTDATED” ?
Are we not discussing History amongst other things here?
Trying to squirm out of the stone that you are so fond of?
The Canals that Dr R.L Brohier, Sir Henry Ward (Governor of SL), Authors Randolph Barker, Robert W. Herdt & Beth Rose and The Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, USA speaks of, still physically exist and are functioning
The gradient of Yoda Ela (canal) is 1.14 THOUSANDS of an inch per foot maintained for miles in an UNPAVED Canal of 54 miles in length traced on a contour with just one embankment where the maximum gradient never exceeds 2.28 thousands of an inch over the full length
You try to belittle it but unfortunately for you it can’t be done. There are millions out there who know the difficulty of achieving such precision even today, let alone 2200 years ago.
Just goes to prove to GV readers that you have absolutely no knowledge of Engineering.
Let alone a distance of 54 miles, try duplicating that to scale on the perimeter of a Football field without the use of Modern Surveying equipment!!!! We are discussing a period of history of 200 BC !!!
You are trying to discredit the first four references by calling them outdated but you accept the “The Federal Research Division” of the USA.
You have done it again Heshan. Just like the proverbial dog. “Gale Reepu Balla Wage”. You must be having a sadistic pleasure in wallowing in the stuff
Where do you think the following statement came from? The moon?
The Federal Research Division of the USA states as follows in documents maintained in the US Library of Congress
“the Sinhalese constructed canals, channels, water-storage tanks, and reservoirs to provide an elaborate irrigation system to counter the risks posed by periodic drought. Such early attempts at engineering reveal the brilliant understanding these ancient people had of hydraulic principles and trigonometry. The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago”
My purpose in writing to GV is not to educate you on Hydraulics and Civil Engineering but to disprove the absolute canards ingrates like you (after getting a free education from Primary to University at the expense of the SL tax payer) spread on the Internet and counter the attempts at perpetuating divisions between the Ethnic communities living in SL
By now everyone who has any Engineering Knowledge would be aware that you are incapable of facing up to the truth.
BTW you decided to challenge me about the boundary of the Kandyan kingdom and my reply is here http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/19/if-you-don%e2%80%99t-mind-my-asking-what-is-your-race/#comment-11094. As evidenced by documents in the National Archives of the Dutch it did extend up to Elephant Pass. This means it included the WHOLE of VANNI http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/AMH/detail.aspx?page=dpost&lang=en&id=682#tab2
Off the Cuff:
So do you admit you have no actual knowledge about the limitations of the Biso Kotuwa. You admit that you cannot suggest any alternatives and assess the differences in utility. You admit that your only “evidence” is secondary and circumstantial (e.g. so-and-so said this & that).
Case closed.
Off the Cuff, you should also inform people to read the book “Separatist Ideology in Sri Lanka: a Historical Appraisal-the “Traditional Homelands” of the Tamils ” by Sri Lanks’ foremost historian, K.M. De Silva. This book is also debunks the myth of the ” tamil homelands”–something that wasn’t even spoken about by Tamil politicians until the period before independence. This entire claim is based on the Cleghorn Minute, which is possibly one of the most bogus documents ever made, a document made by a historian who didn’t know much about Sri Lankan history(this is just an example of the bogus nature of this document–it claims that the Sinhalese people originate from Siam,i.e. modern day Thailand. I think this says it all).
What is most interesting about the Cleghorn minute is the fact that although Cleghorn claims that Sri Lanka is a land of ” two different nations.” he himself says in the document(made in 1799), ” The inhabitants of Jaffna consist of a collection of various races. The greatest number are of Moorish extraction and are divided into several tribes known by the names of Lubbhas, Mopleys, Chittys and Choliars. They are distinguished by wearing little round caps on their close shaven heads. There are also a race of Malabars found here somewhat different from those of the continent.” The fact that he says ” there are also a race of Malabars” indicates that Tamils were not a majority in Jaffna, rather, Muslims were.
Dear Heshan,
What is there for me to admit when I am reproducing statements made by your beloved US Government?
You can’t comprehend simple English and you want me to get involved with you in a complicated Hydraulics discussion ? Read the Extract I have provided from the Library of Congress of the USA or get someone who knows English to explain it’s meaning to you !!!
If you don’t agree with what the researchers of the “The Federal Research Division” of the USA does, you should take it up with the Library of Congress management and get those false documents expunged and the writers disciplined. You have the right to do that as a US citizen (or are you) right?
Discussing anything involving Engineering with you will be like trying to explain the colour white to a person blind from birth. I hope that at least you know that story
You must be having a sadistic pleasure to emulate the proverbial dog over and over again
Sorry quote I just posted is from Cleghorn’s book(made just a few years after the cleghorn minute) called ” An Account of the Island of Ceylon.”
crap, one more correction, the author of the book was Captain Robert Percival. His quote about the majority group in Jaffna(muslims) makes any claims that Cleghorn makes seem erroneous.
Dear Huh,
We have to work towards reconciliation in order to win the Peace in Sri Lanka.
One of the major impediments to reconciliation is the concept of a “Traditional Tamil Homeland” propagated by divisive elements within the Tamil community. This concept is an inequitable concept and hardens the positions of both communities. Hence we must work towards dismantling the FALSE “Traditional Tamil Homeland” concept.
One of the best “Evidences” available online is the records held in the National Archives of the Netherlands that I quoted, as disputing it becomes very difficult. There are also some maps in this site that may be of interest to some. (http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/AMH/detail.aspx?page=dpost&lang=en&id=682#tab2 ) The statement found therein reads thus
“During the 17th century the Company was engaged in a war of attrition with the king of Kandy, who had close ties with Ceylon’s Buddhist population. There was a narrow tongue of land at Elephant Pass a fort was built to guard the border with the king’s territory. Elephants captured on Ceylon were herded past here to Jaffna to be sold in India, hence the name Elephant Pass.”
It is not widely known and my intention is to propagate this knowledge as widely as possible.
It clearly states that in the 17 th century AD the border of the Sinhala Kingdom of Kandy with the Dutch was at “Elephant Pass”
A document carried in the US Library of Congress states as follows
The Kingdom of Sitawake put up the most vigorous opposition to Western imperialism in the island’s history. For the seventy- three-year period of its existence, Sitawake (1521-94) rose to become the predominant power on the island, with only the Tamil kingdom at Jaffna and the Portuguese fort at Colombo beyond its control
It also carries the following
The Portuguese fiercely resisted the Dutch and the Kandyans and were expelled only gradually from their strongholds. The Dutch captured the eastern ports of Trincomalee and Batticaloa in 1639 and restored them to the Sinhalese.
There are other evidences of the existence of Sinhalese even in the North. In between Jaffna and India is the Islet of Nagadeepa. It contains an Amman temple and a Buddhist shrine. Legend says Lord Hanuman was tested by Suraksha devi the mother of naga’s for his valor and intelligence in Nagadeepa
The most important thing for man is water and it has been the Sinhalese that had developed the water resources from the East to the West.
There is also a reference in the Mahabaratha to the attendance of a Sinhala King in the conclave of kings present in Pandava king Yudhisthira’s Rajasuya sacrifice
What you say about K.M. De Silva is absolutely true. He is an acknowledged historian of repute even in documents found in the Library of Congress USA, but he being a Sinhalese, will give ammunition to the divisive elements to cast doubt on what he says.
I am thankful for your information as I myself has not read “Separatist Ideology in Sri Lanka: a Historical Appraisal-the “Traditional Homelands” of K.M. de Silva I will do so at the earliest opportunity.
The available evidence is many and should be used to dismantle this INEQUITABLE and DIVISIVE concept of Traditional Tamil Homeland and all vestiges of INEQUITABLE Laws.
Sri Lanka belongs to ALL her citizen’s there cannot be Traditional Ethnic Enclaves within it conferring special rights to any ethnic group.
Off the Cuff:
I don’t think it requires much knowledge to say which structures compare to the “Biso Kotuwa.” [Edited out].
Thanks.
- Heshan
*Should just admit
Heshan,
Everyone who reads your posts know for certain who that Idiot is.
As I said, trying to talk about Hydraulics to you is like trying to teach a person Blind from birth, what Colour is like.
You keep on taking about the Bisokotuwa when you don’t even have a basic understanding of pressure in a liquid.
It’s much easier for you to accept what your beloved Americans and British say about it unless of course you know even more than them
As I said before, READ what the The Federal Research Division of the US Congress has to say about it ….that is, if you have the capability to understand English properly. Else get somebody to explain it to you …..You said you are working at a University ….approach a “Student” in the Hydraulics or Civil Engineering Department to explain things ….you don’t need a University Don for that. In Sri Lanka any High School Student will know the principles involved.
You may need a bath to wash away all that muck you are wallowing in
Thank you, Off the Cuff. I think everyone should read ” The Separatist Conflict in Sri Lanka” by Asoka Bandarage. She is a Sri Lankan professor at Georgetown University. Her book is possibly THE most comprehensive book on the ” ethnic” conflict made so far. It was released near the end of the war. I was certainly impressed by the information she reveals. Everyone should be reading this book, as far as I am concerned.
“Biskotuwa is a device used by ancient engineers to control the outflow of water from wewa with considerable heights (10-15m). As shown in figure 7, the Bisokotuwa consists of a rectangular tank connected to the sluice; in almost all the cases the longer side of the rectangle is kept parallel to the bund. Water comes from one side and leaves from the other side. Wooden sheets were placed inside to regulate the flow.”
Wooden sheets were used to regulate the flow? Hahahaha. Complex my ass! In the event of a tsunami, how long would such wooden sheets last?
15 m is a considerable height? 15 m is 50 ft… here is a picture of what 50 ft looks like: http://www.hort.wisc.edu/mastergardener/features/woodies/abmaple/abmaplesummer.jpg.
Or this: http://www.aflag.com/images/gallery/50%20ft%20x%208%20inch%20Independence%20model%20clear%20anodized%20with%2010%20x%2015%20Nyl-Glo%20flag.jpg
What great engineering! Not!
Off the Cuff, with his limited knowledge, does not understand the “bisokotuwa” was used to irrigate the paddy fields. The modern-day equivalent would be the water tower, used to supply water to homes and businesses.
Water Tower – A water tower is an incredibly simple device. Although water towers come in all shapes and sizes, they all do the same thing: A water tower is simply a large, elevated tank of water. Water is placed in a closed tank (similar to this picture below) for storage. As the city needs water, water is allowed to flow from the water tower through pipes to homes and businesses in the community.
http://www.bgmukids.com/water_gallery.htm
An incredibly simple device? No no… surely not! Water flowing from a tank through pipes is an EXTREMELY complex device. Don’t ask me anymore, refer to the US Library of Congress!
Heshan,
You are a Great Engineer
Go and play with your Building Blocks ….Ha ha ha ha 
thank you for keeping us entertained, Water Tower indeed and a Kids site as reference !!!
You are making a great display of your intellect because you don’t realize you cant change Historical facts.
BTW what do you do at the University of yours …you can’t be in the academic staff
You say Quote Complex my ass! unquote
I don’t know about its complexity but you are using it to do what that proverbial dog did on the stone ….. good luck with cleaning it up ….
Yapa,
thank you for reminding me that you are a learned man with theoritical knowledge who does not want to question the culture or the society that you live in.
You have said that “you respect “humane quality” found in communism.”
But yet you see nothing wrong in “publishing the pictures of women who act in pornographic movies in the newspapers for identification purposes.” -So where is your humanity? I suppose communist humanity is different to general humanity?
Basically you seem to see nothing wrong in banning tobacco and alcohol advertising. But I disagree with you. The people of this country can decide for themselves.
We do not need the state to tell us how to live our lives.
Dear Niranjan;
I suspect as somebody has earler said you are suffering from ” Tick/ Malle pol” Syndrome. For you there is a tick on every fish.
We were talking about “your phonographic movies” and “your alcohols” long ago. Now we are in a different stage of the discussion. Please try to identify the main points I am trying to make in my post and try to answer accodinly if you don’t mind.
Really, are you not in a position to talk anything, out of your syllbus taught in your british university?
By the way, if you don’t mind would you tell me what your university is? (You have said you are from St. Thomas College , I suppose)
Dear Niranjan;
Before questioning the culture and society you live in, please question yourself. Please evaluate yourself. Do a SWOT analysis about yourself. If you do not know what a SWOT analysis is, just give me a ring.
I love you to be a good boy. Don’t be naughty. Thanks my dear. Tata!
“One of the major impediments to reconciliation is the concept of a “Traditional Tamil Homeland” propagated by divisive elements within the Tamil community. This concept is an inequitable concept and hardens the positions of both communities. Hence we must work towards dismantling the FALSE “Traditional Tamil Homeland” concept.
The major impediment to reconciliation in Sri Lanka is Sinhalese chauvinism and stupidity–a stupidity that has lasted at least the last 60 years, when they have preferred to focus on depriving a minority group of their rights rather than bringing their country into modernity and prosperity. Being too dumb to figure out how to help their poor, they concentrated on the only thing they knew how to do—use their numbers to bully small groups of people.
Now here is this fella who comes along claiming that Sri Lanka’s destiny lies in the hands of a minority community, who for the most part are languishing in the country, homeless and shell-shocked. Now when will all that glorious Sinhalese brainpower come to save them?
“It is not widely known and my intention is to propagate this knowledge as widely as possible. It clearly states that in the 17 th century AD the border of the Sinhala Kingdom of Kandy with the Dutch was at “Elephant Pass”.
Whoohoo! And folks, history begun and ended in the 17th century! Nothing came before it, and nothing came after it. Colonialism? Phish, what’s that? Portuguese, Dutch and English conquered this fabulous kingdom one after the other? No, let’s not remember that–cos where would Sinhala chauvinism be without its convenient amnesias.
“The Kingdom of Sitawake put up the most vigorous opposition to Western imperialism in the island’s history. For the seventy- three-year period of its existence, Sitawake (1521-94) rose to become the predominant power on the island, with only the Tamil kingdom at Jaffna and the Portuguese fort at Colombo beyond its control.”
All hail before this kingdom that lasted for 73 years, one person’s lifetime. The Cholas controlled the island for two centuries? No kidding! But 73 years is much more impressive.
“There is also a reference in the Mahabaratha to the attendance of a Sinhala King in the conclave of kings present in Pandava king Yudhisthira’s Rajasuya sacrifice.”
Yes, and now we look for historical evidence in a text that bumped around orally for 600 years before it was finally written down.
“The most important thing for man is water and it has been the Sinhalese that had developed the water resources from the East to the West.”
Yes, well, when there’s nothing to boast about in the present, one needs to turn desperately to the past, I guess. Now there’s an inferiority complex for you.
I wonder what these chauvinists will do when it suddenly hits them like a ton of bricks that they have Tamil blood running in their veins, given that even some of their kings were Tamil, and that Tamils have been proven to be the Sri Lankan group that is genetically closest to the Sinhalese?
Just utter stupidity. And don’t bet on it going away either.
Off the Cuff:
If you are not sure whether a water tower is an incredibly simple device, I suggest you consult with your friends at the US Library of Congress. Perhaps you are upset that Mahavamsa logic can be understood by small children, but that is the unfortunate reality.
Cheers.
Heshan,
One gaff after another
You are absolutely clueless about liquid pressure so you confuse a Water tower with a Valve tower. It has the word Tower in common bot nothing else.
This confusion of yours explains only one thing – your ignorance. As you said small children can understand a lot but unfortunately you dont
I am not the Brown Sahib who pretends to be more American than the American’s or More British than the Brits, its you.
Educated FREE at the expense of the Sri Lankan Tax payer you have proved that you are an absolute INGRATE.
We have also seen your Dishonesty
Now faced with an analysis written by the American Govt and the Britishers recognizing the achievements of the Sinhalese and not knowing how to reject that analysis you have been floundering
I am sure of what I wrote, The American Govt is sure of it. The British are sure of it and you are barking at the moon and emulating that proverbial Dog over and over again
Disgusted,
Afraid of History?
Your tirade does not alter it.
The Traditional Homeland concept depends on distorted history, the type people like you try to propagate.
Dismantling it requires historical proof which I have supplied
Are you challenging the evidence contained in the National Archives of the Netherlands?
Disgusted, have Tamil politicians ever done anything for the greater good of the country? Have they ever spoken for the poor people of the country? Let’s be honest–Sri Lankan politicians are sri lankan politicians, regardless of their ethnicity. The Tamil politicians are no innocent sheep themselves. You are correct that Sinhalese people do have blood in their veins–I think that is common sense. However, there are studies that have contradicted that genetic study you are referring to(the one that says that Sinhalese people are mostly Tamil in genetics). Chauvinism on both sides–and yes, Tamils can be chauvinistic to–needs to stop. Who gives a shi- who came first, honestly? Debating this is not going to do anything for the future. Let’s be even more honest, now–it will probably take many many years for the majority of Sri Lankan politicians to realize this simple fact.
Yapa,
Did you not know that SWOT Analysis is a strategic planning method used to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats involved in a project or in a business venture? So how can this be applied to an individual?
So where is the logic in what you say?
I will question the culture that I live in irrespective of your comments. There are many wrongs in this culture that need to be put right.
Yapa,
Since you seem to be knowledgeable on Buddhism tell me was Lord Buddha not a liberal humanist?
The problem with this culture is that a section of pseudo Buddhists go around preaching morality to others. They are a part of this Government also.
Disgusted,
<>
No, I’m not afraid of History. But people do have reason to fear History placed in the hands of the stupid and the chauvinistic. History has shown us it leads to mindless violence.
<>
My problem is that for you, other people’s Traditional Homeland concept rests on distorted history, but supposedly YOUR Traditional Homeland concept is perfectly legitimate. Maybe you fancy yourself a historian, but real historians know better than to seek the truth of the past from three lines from one source, another two lines from another, etc, all chosen on the basis of how much it supports fantasies of power emanating from your head.
<>
Historical proof from trawling through the Internet? We could all be historians then.
<>
Unlike you, I don’t pretend that I am a historian. I have no reason to believe or to disbelieve this statement. Lots of other statements were made which contradict this, for eg by Robert Knox, and Cleghorn.
But don’t present interpretation as fact. That the Kandyan kingdom stretched to Elephant Pass in the 17th century when the Dutch came does not mean that Tamils weren’t living in the area. Kingdoms in those days were not necessarily monocultural.
Huh, you said:
“Disgusted, have Tamil politicians ever done anything for the greater good of the country? Have they ever spoken for the poor people of the country?”
They were never in a position to do anything for the greater good of the country given that they had zero political power. I believe they were busy trying to keep themselves alive through one government pogrom after another, and then the LTTE landed on them.
Speak for the poor people of the country? When their own lives were under threat?
Of course, the Tamil politicians are no innocent sheep themselves. The sincere ones got killled by the LTTE and the Sinhalese government. So what you get now are the the co-opted ones.
“Chauvinism on both sides–and yes, Tamils can be chauvinistic to–needs to stop.”
I will guarantee you that when Sinhalese chauvinism ends, Tamil chauvinism will stop automatically. There is a huge difference between the chauvinism of a majority community and the so-called chauvinism of a minority group. The latter had to make claims of traditional Tamil homelands to survive the chauvinism of the former.
“However, there are studies that have contradicted that genetic study you are referring to(the one that says that Sinhalese people are mostly Tamil in genetics).”
Let’s go with common sense. Let’s go with our knowledge of what happened between settled communities elsewhere in the ancient world. The Sinhalese themselves are mixed with the original Hela people of Sri Lanka. Culturally, Tamils and Sinhalese are very similar. Some kings of the Sinhalese kingdoms were Tamils–how could that have happened if they weren’t living among them? Why do SL Buddhist temples have Hindu shrines in them? Despite only a short history of Portuguese and Dutch colonialism, we have the creation of the Burgers, and European influences in Sinhalese cuisine. So, two groups lived side by side for more than a millenia, and never mixed?
Disgusted, I never said they didn’t mix. If you read what I said, I said that it common sense that they did mix, however, I believe that you said that Sinhalese get MOST of their genetics from the tamil people(correct me if I’m wrong), based on a genetic study. However, I am just saying there are genetic studies that contradict what you are saying, most notably a study by Oxford professor Dr. Ogg, who found that Sinhalese people did have a few genetic similarities with the dravidians of southern india, but nevertheless, their genetics still were far more closely representative of the people of northern india, not the dravidians. You also say that “the latter had to make traditional claims of tamil homelands to survive the chauvinism of the former”, but how can that be, if these claims started right around the time of independence?
Disgusted,
Again you resort to verbal diarrhoea to cloud the issue
If you or anybody else cannot disprove the statement found in the National Archives of the Netherlands PROVING that the BOUNDARY of the Sinhalese Kingdom of KANDY and that of the Dutch was at Elephant Pass, Neither you nor anybody else can claim that the Sinhalese were not in occupation of the WHOLE OF THE VANNI.
The divisive “Traditional Tamil Homeland” concept breaks down as the foundation of that claim becomes a FRAUDULENT one.
Sri Lanka is the HOME of ALL her citizens, Tamils, Muslims, Malays, Eurasians Sinhalese and whatever. EVERYONE OF US has an equal right to live, own property and work anywhere we please. There cannot be Thesawalami laws or exclusive ethnic enclaves, all these divisive elements must be removed. That means NO exclusive Ethnic Homelands within SL, period.
It also means that ANY Govt development scheme (which is proportionately spent for by ALL the communities) must be shared EQUALLY by ALL. Any settlement EITHER in the North or the SOUTH must benefit the population as per their ethnic proportions
I do not know what your interest is, in trying to propagate this fraud that is a major factor in the ethnic strife.
The personal attacks you level is a SURE sign of your Bankruptcy. Whatever your protestations and your self extolled virtues are, your real problem is coming to terms with this UNASSAILABLE historical FACT that you probably thought never existed.
I am a Sri Lankan and this country is blessed with many rich resources that few other countries can boast about. I want a Sri Lanka where all her citizens have EQUITABLE rights. This is what I work towards so that our children can enjoy a country free of ethnic strife. Your virulent attacks wont stop me from working towards it but you are welcome to continue to do so.
Off the Cuff:
“You are absolutely clueless about liquid pressure so you confuse a Water tower with a Valve tower. It has the word Tower in common bot nothing else.”
The only difference between the two is that the valve tower also contains a scour pipe to remove silt from the reservoir. As for “liquid pressure”, it is no coincidence that both the “water tower” and the “valve tower” are built at high elevations. Did they teach you about potential energy at Buddhist Sunday School?
Cheers.
Off the Cuff,
History is not proven by one person’s say so, even if it is in the National Archives of the Netherlands. The contradictory claims are also in that same National Archives.
Traditional Tamil Homelands refers to where a people lived for a very long time. Details of occupation are irrelevant to that.
“It also means that ANY Govt development scheme (which is proportionately spent for by ALL the communities) must be shared EQUALLY by ALL. Any settlement EITHER in the North or the SOUTH must benefit the population as per their ethnic proportions”
So settlements must all reflect the fact that Tamils are a minority population by representing their ethnic proportions? Yet, you say that there should be equal rights. Which is it: proportionate rights or equal rights? The two are not the same.
You say that people should settle wherever they please. That is fine by me. No Sinhalese in their right mind would choose to settle in the Tamil areas because they are the most arid in the country. For you to fight for Sinhalese to live in Tamil areas shows your motives—it is not about freedom to live where one chooses, but about making sure that Tamils never get what they want, and must always be given what they don’t want.
It is well known that the government has, since the end of the War, been giving loads of money to Sinhalese military families to settle in Tamil areas. That’s why the Tamils had to be kept in the camps–to allow that re-settlement to take place. Without the incentive of the money, Sinhalese would never choose to live in the worst areas in the country. The IDPs themselves are being given piss to re-build their homes, to gather their lives together once again. That’s what your equal rights means: colonization.
It’s a good move, ain’t it, to make sure that Tamils are never allowed to concentrate anywhere? That way, they can always be harrassed wherever they live by the infamous Sinhala mobs, known the world over for their fine ‘Buddhist’ principles.
I am sure I am not the only one who can see through that FAKE democratic talk you offer, to the REAL CHAUVINISM lying underneath. Tamil ethnic enclaves are unacceptable, but Sinhalese ethnic enclaves are fine by you.
You throw words like EQUALITY and EQUITY around, and every single time, it means the opposite –it means that Tamils must be deprived their freedom so that they will always only enjoy 18% of the rights they are entitled to as citizens.
What are the chances that when people choose where they want to settle, that it will reflect the ethnic proportions? It can only do so with government intervention.
There are two ways that Sri Lanka can enjoy peace after this—one way is to give minorities their full and equal rights. The other way is to suppress the minorities so that they never get a chance to disturb the peace of the community that has colonized them. Your politics is very clearly about the latter. That you are doing it on behalf of “children” doesn’t make you look noble but shows everyone how morally nauseous Sinhalese chauvinism is, that it devours even the innocent to get what it wants.
The UNASSAILABLE FACT that you don’t know is that getting rid of Tamils will not solve the Sinhalese problem, and it won’t bring peace to Sri Lanka. All it means is that afterwards, Sinhalese will start to fight and kill each other. The stage is already being set now for that.
The Tamils were never the problem–they were the solution. The only way that successive governments have been able to unite Singhalese is by mobilizing all to fight against imagined Tamil chauvinism. Now they won’t have that solution anymore. It’s because of this that the Sinhalese power brokers keep desperately trying to fan talk of the LTTE re-forming, to keep that antagonism against Tamils going. Otherwise, the dreadful fight, which is coming, will be between the Sinhalese people.
Huh,
Ah, that old Nazi Aryan fantasy. If that’s what Sinhalese want to claim, that’s fine. Good luck with trying to prove that they are the original settlers of Sri Lanka then, because Sri Lanka is situated in Dravidian area, and was even physically connected to South India.
Did you know that race genes constitute less than one percent of our total gene pool? You may be interested in trying to figure out which genes the Sinhalese have the most of—I am not. My mind doesn’t go where Hitler’s went.
“You also say that ‘the latter had to make traditional claims of tamil homelands to survive the chauvinism of the former’, but how can that be, if these claims started right around the time of independence?”
Around the time of independence was when the Tamils had to start fighting for their survival against Sinhalese chauvinism. Those claims were made within the context of wanting equal political rights—not for a Tamil Eelam. The Tamil Eelam cause came 4 decades after, with the even further hardening of violent Sinhala chauvinism, with pogroms after pogroms being inflicted on Tamils.
Heshan,
Have a good look at what you just wrote
Quote
The only difference between the two is that the valve tower also contains a scour pipe to remove silt from the reservoir. As for “liquid pressure”, it is no coincidence that both the “water tower” and the “valve tower” are built at high elevations. Did they teach you about potential energy at Buddhist Sunday School?
Unquote
Compare it to what the Researchers at the US Library of Congress has to say
Quote
Such early attempts at engineering reveal the brilliant understanding these ancient people had of hydraulic principles and trigonometry. The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago. By the first century A.D, several large-scale irrigation works had been completed.
The mastery of hydraulic engineering and irrigated agriculture
Unquote
Ask yourself why your views are so divergent from theirs. Do you think that you know more than them? What do you do at the “UNIVERSITY” that you said you work for? With the INTELLECT that you put on display it cannot be anything to do with Educating others.
Are these researchers doing research for the USA LAWMAKERS imbeciles in your opinion? If that is so the US Lawmakers must be incomparable fools to retain them to do their research.
Why are these researchers overawed by a Sinhala invention of the “Valve Pit” 2 millennia ago if as you so Pontifically declare is just a simple case like a domestic water tank?
These statements do nothing but UNDERLINE your ignorance
You never stop to think probably that is not your FORTE.
Write more in the same vein and make a bigger fool of yourself than what you have so clearly shown the GV readership
Your strong point seems to be the “Removal” of silt than anything else.
That proverbial dog would have at least learnt after his first mistake that defecating on a stone won’t allow him to cover up his indiscretion. You on the other hand will never learn despite the Sunday schools, formal schools or Universities that you “CLAIM” to be associated with. Your LEWD remarks will just come to haunt you so go ahead and make some more
So who has more intellect that proverbial dog or you?
“History is not proven by one person’s say so, even if it is in the National Archives of the Netherlands. The contradictory claims are also in that same National Archives.”
Well said, Disgusted. There is no substitute for common sense (so long as we are not referring to the subatomic world). At the end of the day, one cannot say with certainty that Tamils were on the island first, or Sinhalese were on the island first. One can only give “persuasive” as opposed to “definitive” arguments. On the other hand, common sense can go quite far even where persuasion is the driving force. One such common sense argument has to do with the geographic proximity of South India to the Northern tip of the Jaffna Peninsula. One can surmise that fishermen from Tamil Nadu, having plied their trade from time immemorial, would easily have chanced upon Sri Lanka, long before Vijaya sailed from Orissa. There is a little more to this argument; the one put forth by the Cambridge historian Paul Peiris. Nevertheless, it is a very good one.
Disgusted, you are going way overboard. I really don’t care if Sinhalese people are aryan–I am just saying there are genetic studies that contradict the one you brought up. You are correct though that it really doesn’t matter what genes we have–we are all humans afterall. I just find genetics interesting, which is why I brought it up. And I never even said that Sinhalese people were the first settlers there-even the sinhalese people i know who are pretty ‘ chauvinistic” do not think that. Balangoda man and the Veddahs are the original inhabitants.
Disgusted,
Interesting statement from you
Quote
History is not proven by one person’s say so, even if it is in the National Archives of the Netherlands. The contradictory claims are also in that same National Archives.
Unquote
I did not manufacture what is written in the Dutch Archives the people who governed Jaffna made a statement of fact. Notice that they mention the “border” with only ONE Kingdom and that is the Sinhala Kingdom not a Tamil Kingdom. I only pointed it out to the GV readership which apparently you found it hard to stomach as evidenced by your earlier tirade.
Can we have the URL for the contradictory evidence in the Dutch National Archives like I provided for the supporting evidence?
Of course I know what a traditional homeland means but if your intention is to carry out your deception to carve one out, for the Tamils of your ilk, who don’t know what Equitable sharing is, then, you cant do that in SL, as no matter how far in history you go you will find that the Sinhalese had been there before the Tamils and this may include Jaffna as well. Please read “Ancient Jaffna” by the Tamil historian, Rasanayagam. He says “Jaffna was occupied by Sinhalese earlier than by Tamils, is seen, not only in the place names but also in some of the habits and customs of the people.”
The Sinhalese has accepted the descendants of Indian Tamils (they now form the majority within the Tamil Polity in SL) who were imported by the British in 1815, to live in the hill country amongst the Sinhalese. The hill country was EXCLUSIVELY populated by the Sinhalese for millennia up to that time. I cannot see why the Tamils are incapable of doing the same and seek exclusive enclaves!!!
Regarding settlements the LOGIC is completely different to your Myopic racist view of it. When a Govt develops land for resettlement it uses funds that will ultimately be paid for by her citizens. There is therefore a per capita contribution from each citizen. Hence each community should get its just share, no more no less. What I wrote applies to Govt spending not to private spending.
The following is an extract from an article written in February this year by Deepal Trivedi an Indian in the Decan Chronical about Singapore. He is an AJF fellow at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. What he says is very relevant, more so as you are a Singaporean yourself.
Extract
From the government’s end, it maintains vigil through its housing and education policies which are aimed towards promoting integration. Since nearly 84 per cent Singaporeans reside in government HDB (Housing and Development Board) flats, the ethnic quota in the housing policy makes sense. It unglamorously “balances” the ethnic mix.
End Extract
So what EXACTLY is the Govt Housing Policy in Singapore? Are the Tamils who are a minority there allowed to build ethnic enclaves?
Quote from your post
You say that people should settle wherever they please. That is fine by me. No Sinhalese in their right mind would choose to settle in the Tamil areas because they are the most arid in the country.
Unquote
Glad that you accept the principle that ALL Sri Lankans have a right to settle anywhere in SL, which has of course gone counter to your protectionist “Traditional Tamil Homeland” Theory. As long as you continue to be “FAITHFUL” to what you have declared above, we have no argument about it. This also means that the Thesawalami Law must go. Whether it is Arid or not leave the decision to the SL Citizenry, without trying to decide for them. Remember, the Sinhalese turned the Arid Zone into a fertile zone with an abundance of water by their ingenuity at water management.
Your post is full of contradictions there are no Tamil Areas, Sinhalese Areas. Muslim Areas etc in SL, it is one country with one people who are all Sri Lankan. You may be having a problem with that but for the majority of people living here that’s what we want and we will get there eventually, not withstanding the racists, who try to meddle with it, to satisfy their racist whims, as they successfully did, in the past.
I advocate EQUITABILITY, I am not sure what you do.
Why do people fight for social reform? Is it just for immediate selfish gratification or to make sure that the future generation is assured of their rights? How can this be nauseous as you put it? Are you writing all these angry tirades to satisfy your selfish needs? Is that your main concern?
Use of children to hide behind is not the Sinhalese way. It may be yours as was seen when the Canadian Expressway was blocked or when the Vanni Tamils including children were used to hide behind. Were you silent then or as vociferous as now?
To deny that the LTTE is reforming is to be blind as a bat. Not heard about TNC read it in Dr Pradeep Jeganathan’s blog. Here is an extract
“Consider this quote from a long article on transCurrencts & Tamilweek.com, that is a manifesto for some thing called the Tamil National Congress (TNC), which is seeks to replace the LTTE, and work as a Tamil government in exile.”
End extract
Who is paying Bruce Fein? What is his retainer? Is it just a few hundred or several million US Dollars? Ever read the petition filed by former Attorney General of Sri Lanka Siva Pasupathy (who as the AG, could not be given orders even by the SL President) with the Australian Govt to block the IMF loan to Sri Lanka? Is not Adele Balasingham still living and free to organize, plan and execute terror activities?
You have touched upon the impending Presidential election. Yes, it is an unfortunate development but won’t be a disaster for SL whoever wins. Who knows, we may get a better man than even Lee Kuan Yew. What ever it is that is for the SL population to decide isn’t it?
Off the Cuff,
For someone who doesn’t believe in traditional ethnic homelands, you sure spend a lot of time trying to prove the existence of the Sinhalese homeland.
You said: “Regarding settlements the LOGIC is completely different to your Myopic racist view of it. When a Govt develops land for resettlement it uses funds that will ultimately be paid for by her citizens. There is therefore a per capita contribution from each citizen. Hence each community should get its just share, no more no less. What I wrote applies to Govt spending not to private spending.”
The per capita contribution is from each citizen. So why should each community get its just share? So each Sinhalese citizen gets 72% of a chance, and a minority citizen gets 18% or even a smaller chance? Why? All citizens paid the same, didn’t they? Why must ethnicity be brought into play when you say SL is not for Sinhalese, Tamils or Muslims but for all? Why not draw lots or allocate according to a first-come-first-serve basis?/
Whose logic is racist here?
As for Sri Lanka getting an even better person than Lee Kuan Yew, don’t make me laugh. A society can only surface someone that is compatible with its values. Even if SL did get a Lee Kuan Yew, they would never vote for him. They only vote for chauvinists.
Dear Niranjan;
Thanks for the complement, though I am not a knowledgeble man on Buddhism. I am just a “layman”(not a “Chauvinist Buddhist Monk”- as per some people’s definition.). However, to your question my answer is given below.
Question:- Was Lord Buddha a liberal humanist?
Answer:- I accept that there are some very good qualities in the Liberalism that go along with Buddhism. (I think you accept that I have never said liberalism is a good for nothing political theory). According to my understanding, the Buddha was very kind to human kind. In that line of thinking I could say “yes! Lord Buddha was a liberal humanist.
Now suppose a loyal of communism ask me the question “Was Lord Buddha a Communist humanist?”. Considering the good humane qualities found in communism, I think my answer will have to be “yes! Lord Buddha was a communist humanist.
Now take these two sesults together, i.e.
1. Lord Buddha is a liberal humanist.
2. Lord Buddha is a communist humanist.
But we know that liberalism and communism are two opposing political ideologies. Therefore, if one is a liberal, at the same time he cannot be a communist. Therefore, a doubt is created as to whether the Loard Buddha was a liberal humanist.
Therefore the ultimate result of this argument is ” Lord Buddha was a liberal humanist with some shade of doubt.
Did you get my point?
If I say in plain words, the Buddha is a liberal human in general, but he was not a liberal humanist in in particular. Or the answer is both “yes” and “no” at the same time.
Puzzeled?
This puzzle is due to the limitations found in western (Aristotalian) logic which is the main foundation of western system of knowledge. It is called two ended logic(dwikotika tharkaya). It has no in between solutions, other than two opposite ends. Need further clarification?
Take this example. The opposite of the statement “The cow is black” is “The cow is not black”. You see both these statements cannot be true for a same cow at the same time. That is this cow cannot be “black” and at the same time “not black”. It is either black or not black. It can not have an inbetween answer. That is, the answer in this case is two sided. That is dwikotika.
I am sure you must have heard of “Four ended Logic” or “Chathurkotika Tharkaya” which has been a foundation of eastern knowledge system. According to this four ended logic, inbetween answers to a qoestion is possible. That is why the answer for your original question was both “yes” and “no” (at the same time).
Want more? Please respect western culture too and explore it.
Dear Niranjan;
Re: SWOT analysis
Do you think I did not know that SWOT Analysis is a strategic planning method used to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats involved in a project or in a business venture?
But I am sure at least in this case, I know a bit more than what you know.
SWOT ANALYSIS CAN BE APPLIED TO EVALUATE AN INDIVIDUAL!
Want to know how? Just give me a ring.
Bye!
Niranjan;
Correction to my previous post (post 1 above).
Want more? Please respect eastern culture too and explore it.
Belle,
You sure have got the cart before the horse.
The intent is to DISPROVE the “Traditional Tamil Homeland” claim. This divisive concept is the biggest stumbling block for reconciliation.
The proponents of a Traditional Tamil Homeland do so by claiming that the Tamils were the main occupiers of the Land claimed as the “Traditional Homeland”
Now please tell me how that claim can be shown to be Fraudulent and thwarted, other than by showing that NON TAMIL SPEAKING people were also occupying or were probably the only occupants of the same land?
Who would that non Tamil speaking people be?
Regarding your suggestion of drawing lots I agree that it can also be a solution. I provided the solution which came to my mind as an equitable one.
However since drawing lots leaves things to chance the mathematical probability of the majority community getting more allocations will always be present. This may lead to dissension in the long term.
The point I wanted to make is that a Govt funded project should not be exclusive to or favoring any community, just because the project is sited in a predominantly Sinhalese area or Muslim area or Tamil area.
Now how can that be racist?
Let me pose a few question for you to answer
The Sinhalese has accepted the descendants of Indian Tamils who live in the hill country and who are now probably the Tamil majority in SL. Before the British imported them in 1815, the hill country was EXCLUSIVELY populated by the Sinhalese for millennia.
Over 50% of the Tamils of Sri Lanka live in the Sinhalese majority South which again did not have Tamils when Tamil Kings ruled Jaffna. Why can’t the Tamils reciprocate? Why look for ethnic enclaves? Why be divisive?
No one thought that high caliber leaders who can take on the LTTE and withstand unprecedented International pressure to eventually defeat the LTTE will ever come from within the Govt or the Forces but it did. Skepticism about a future that cannot be foreseen may turn out to be as poor a judgment as the LTTE’s
Yapa,
Your answer to my question Is Lord Buddha a liberal humanist? is a comprehensive one.
The problem with eastern culture as I find in Sri Lanka is that people do not question the wrongs in society. In western culture they do. Civil society is strong. That is the difference. Sri Lanka does not have a strong civil society. Never did. In western culture there is a separation of state, politics and religion. That makes it easier for people to question the wrongs in society. Most people in Britain do not bring up religion when they question wrongs in society.
In Sri Lanka Buddhism is pushed forward by politicians and sections of the public to show that there is nothing wrong in our society. e.g Dharmishta Samajaya of JRJ.
There are certain western political theories/practices like liberalism which I find to be humane. Not all western theories are humane though. Most political theories originated in the west and all religions in non-western countries.
Quite apart from political theories and religions I find certain cultural practices in Sri Lanka to be oppressive. Certainly not all, but some. That is why I am opposed to the ban on Alcohol and Tobbaco advertising and the publication of the pictures of local women who act in porn movies in the newspapers for identification purposes. These acts may have been the actions of a minority who have enormous influence within the state right now. Perhaps the majority of people might not agree with these illeberal actions(in my view), but the majority have chosen to keep quiet. That is disconcerting.
Dear Niranjan / Yapa,
I read your posts with interest. Though heated at times both of you showed an excellent sense of maturity. It was very informative. Thank you both.
Niranjan, here are a few of my observations on your latest post.
“In western culture there is a separation of state, politics and religion.”
This is not as clear cut as people like to believe. In the past almost all western govts were very closely intertwined with religion. So much so that torture and murder was practiced in the name of religion. Vestiges of such attachment still remain, though not to the same extent as in the past. Though they are moving towards separation of State and Religion they are not there yet.
Ban on Alcohol and Tobacco advertising
There is a logic in such a ban though it cant be classed as liberal
The type of health risk caused by smoking is beyond question. Alcohol does lower a person’s inhibitions whilst posing a health risk.
Almost all advertising campaigns for these two products target the young. The image these campaigns project is that of being Macho and Trendy to have a smoke or a drink. It is because such campaigns achieves the objective of reaching the young that these companies spend large sums of money on such campaigns
Advertising carried out through Public Media has no control of the age of the viewing public. Targeting the Teenager does not leave out the child. The same message gets implanted in the child’s mind as well, preparing the child to be an easy target for the advertising when the child is outside parental control.
Sri Lanka is a poor country but it has a free health care system that is unparalleled in the developing world. The high life expectancy and low infant deaths, eradication of Polio etc stand testimony to it (recently it has been plagued by mismanagement which I hope will be corrected due to immense civic pressure).
The cost of treating illnesses directly or indirectly attributable to Tobacco and Alcohol is not a burden that the free health care system can carry. Hence the logical thing to do is to stop it at the source. The underlying reasons may not wholly be religious beliefs but hard economic realities.
Off the Cuff:
“Ask yourself why your views are so divergent from theirs.”
There is no divergence. They *obviously* do not go into any detailed descriptions of the Bisikotuwa or other engineering structures. If you bother to READ what you keep copying and pasting over and over again, you will see that all it says is that the Sinhalese had an “understanding” and a “mastery” of hydraulics. And then it says they invented a valve tower.
Maybe your profession is tabloid journalism, but let me tell you that in REAL engineering, if you don’t clearly state the LIMITATIONS of your design, your proposal (and job) will end up in the dustbin. Since you are either unwilling (or unable) to provide such information, I have done so myself.
Off-the-Cuff,
“In the past almost all western govts were very closely intertwined with religion. So much so that torture and murder was practiced in the name of religion.”- I am in agreement with you. But that was the past.
“Vestiges of such attachment still remain, though not to the same extent as in the past.”- I agree with you to an extent. But since the end of the second world war the UK has changed dramatically in all ways. It has become more liberal and secular. Today most people in the UK(anglicans) do not go to church on Sundays. Some churches have closed down. Perhaps there are more anglicans going to church in SL today than in the UK even though the anglican community is quite small in this country. There is more open religion in Sri Lanka than there is in the UK if you take into account the numbers who go to Buddhist temples and churches in this country.
“Though they are moving towards separation of State and Religion they are not there yet.”- I think the UK has achieved more separation of state, politics and religion in practise than we have. We are still far off. The bigger question is do Sri Lankans want to separate state, politics and religion? I get the feeling that we do not. It is easier for poiticians to manipulate the public if there is no separation.
“The underlying reasons may not wholly be religious beliefs but hard economic realities.’- You have a good point there. However, the authorities concerned should have made it clear to the public at the beginning as to why they banned the advertising of those so called harmful products. The authorities concerned did not make a clear cut case for the reasons for the ban neither did they seek the views of the public as far as I am aware.
Thank you for your reasoned comments.
Dear Off the Cuffs;
Thanks for your encouraging comments!
Dear Niranjan;
Following is taken from one of your comments to one of my posts.
“I will question the culture that I live in irrespective of your comments. There are many wrongs in this culture that need to be put right”
Would you please tell me how you differentiate “right” from “wrong”?. Or how do you identify “Rights” and “wrongs”?
I think you will not consider this as an insignificant question.
Bye Niranjan!
Heshan
Read again Heshan Read again
Here is a repeat of what the Researchers of the US Library of Congress say (BTW
it is a copy & paste)
Quote
Such early attempts at engineering reveal the brilliant understanding these ancient people had of hydraulic principles and trigonometry. The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago. By the first century A.D, several large-scale irrigation works had been completed.
The mastery of hydraulic engineering and irrigated agriculture
Unquote
Here is your version
Sinhalese had an “understanding” and a “mastery” of hydraulics.
unquote
Notice any difference? I know you wont but the GV Readers will
YOU say “understanding”
THEY say “brilliant understanding”
The full sentence that the US researchers use is “such early attempts at engineering reveal the brilliant understanding these ancient people had of hydraulic principles and trigonometry.”
That just goes to show what a deceitful moron you are
Again this is what YOU say “And then it says they invented a valve tower. ”
This is what THEY say “The discovery of the principle of the valve tower, or valve pit, for regulating the escape of water is credited to Sinhalese ingenuity more than 2,000 years ago.
A water tower is nothing but an elevated vessel and you believe that the US Feds are such ignorant mutts to use adjectives such as Brilliant, Ingenuity and Mastery to describe a water tower do you? Are you such a simpleton?
Where did you learn your English?
This continued denial of yours only exposes your nudity, dishonesty and ignorance. If that is what you want please carry on ad nauseum
That proverbial dog would have had more intelligence as it would have learned its mistake ofter the initial indiscretion
“Today most people in the UK(anglicans) do not go to church on Sundays. ”
That is true anywhere in the West, except Eastern Europe. Those who try to paint the West as a bastion of religious fundamentalism don’t realize that Christianity is the fastest growing religion in Asia and Africa, not Europe or North America. It’s heyday in the West is long over.
Off the Cuff:
We can play these semantic games forever.
Whether one “understands” or one “brilliantly” understands, the point is that one still “understands” and therefore is “able.” However, to measure the extent of that understanding it is necessary to examine the application. You are still to examine the application, my friend; instead you are indulging in semantic nonsense. Adjectives did not build Rome.
The bisikotuwa was also part of an elevated vessel that was used to store water. Every time water is stored at a high elevation, there is a common principle involved. Do you really need Mahavamsa to tell you this?
Yapa,
How do you differentiate between right and wrong?
Differentiation depends mostly on your perspective, experiences and situation. The State and culture that you live in also plays a part. Your parents, priests, police, teachers, lawyers, judges, books, rulers, doctors, etc. All those people with social authority, traditions, influences may define right and wrong.
Individual perceptions also matter. What is wrong for one person maybe right for another. What is right for one person maybe wrong for another.
However, there is a common humanity in every individual irrespective of the religion, political theory,culture that he/she may hold.
As an example that humanity is transgressed when the state in the form of a Magisterate gives an order to the police to publish pictures of women who act in porn films in the newspapers for identification purposes.
I suggest you read an article titled “Bigotry in the hunt for porn women” by Ranga Jayasuriya in the Lakbimanews somewhere in September. It is a well researched article.(you can find it on the Lakbimanews archives)
Other examples of illeberalism in this culture include- the beating and drowning of a man in the sea in Bamba, police assaults on prisoners to get confessions, etc. All these illeberal acts have been carried out by officers belonging to the state. The ban on alcohol and tobbaco advertising was also carried out by state authorities.
It is becoming increasingly clear that it is the state and perhaps a minority that is deciding for the people as to what is right and wrong.
Heshan,
This is what you just wrote
Quote
The bisikotuwa was also part of an elevated vessel that was used to store water. Every time water is stored at a high elevation, there is a common principle involved. Do you really need Mahavamsa to tell you this?
Unquote
This is exactly why you literally put your foot in the mouth every time.
My friend if you stop to think you will save yourself much embarrassment.
You should have wondered why Even the Learned US Govt Researchers employed by the Feds use adjectives such as BRILLIANT and INGENUITY to describe Sinhalese Hydraulic Engineering. I believe that those researchers are more qualified to make a qualitative judgment than you, unless of course you think that you are SUPERIOR even to those US Govt researchers !!!
The BISOKOTUWA or the “Valve Pit” as the Researchers of the US Library of Congress refers to it, is UNDER THE WATER. Did you UNDERSTAND what you just read?
The Bisokotuwa is an UNDERWATER device !!!!!!
Didn’t you just write that it was at a HIGH ELEVATION?
Your English like your engineering knowledge is also wanting, since you did not OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTAND the word “PIT”
Semantics apart my friend, why are you eternally behaving like that proverbial dog which found to its dismay, that it can’t cover it’s feces after defecating on a stone?
Next time my friend, STOP to THINK before putting your brand of wisdom on Public Display
@Off the Cuff:
Bisikotuwa is part of a tank.
Here is a bisikotuwa, attached to a tank:
http://amazinglanka.com/tanks/tissa_anu/images/p1010034.jpg
The tank is obviously at high enough elevation for gravity to affect significantly the water pressure.
“Biskotuwa is a device used by ancient engineers to control the outflow of water from wewa with considerable heights (10-15m).”
http://mahavamsa.org/2008/05/king-pandukabhaya-437-bc-367-bc/
I suggest you take a reading class.
Dear Niranjan;
Thanks for the response for my question in the last post, i.e., “Would you please tell me how you differentiate “right” from “wrong”?. Or how do you identify “Rights” and “wrongs”?”
However, rather than starting a new discussion in this line, I would like to switch back to my previous topic as I feel the discussion on Two Ended Logic and Four Ended Logic (Dwikotikaya & Chaturkotikaya) has some more potential to continue. However I assure you that I will not forget to come back .
According to Two Ended Logic an answer can have only two values(two alternative answers). Therefore sometimes this logic is also known as Two Valued Logic and in the same way, Four Ended Logic is known as Four Valued Logic. We also have mentioned that the main base of western knowledge system is the former one and the eastern system of knowledge had the latter one as its main base.
If symbolically denoted Dwikotika Logic has following alternative answers.
1. A
2. Not A
Chaturkotika Logic has four alternatives
1. A
2. Not A
3. A and Not A
4. Not(A) and Not (Not A)
Here the occurances of the third and forth alternatives are not very frequent.
In both cases a question can have only one alternative. In my previous post on this topic, I gave the example of 1.The cow is black and 2. The cow is not black as two possible alternatives for Dwikotika.
Niranjan, can you remember the question you posed to me for my answer?
“Was Lord Buddha a liberal humanist?”
Using the Chaturkotika Tharkaya I arrived at the answer ” Lord Buddha was a liberal humanist and Lord Buddha was not a liberal humanist” which is equivalent to the third alternative of the above. (3. A and Not A). (Niranjan, you accepted my answer as a comprehensive one to your question, OK?)
Now will try to answer Niranjan’s question using the Dwikotika Tharkaya.
As Dwikotika tharka method doesn’t have the third or forth alternative as in the case of Chaturkotikaya, the answer I could have given would have to be either 1. Lord Buddha was a liberal humanist OR 2. Lord Buddha was not a liberal humanist
I couldn’t have reached at my answer (Lord Buddha was a liberal humanist and Lord Buddha was not a liberal humanist) if I used western Aristotralian Logic, that is Dwikotika tharkaya.
Can you remember I was telling “Western culture, other than Science does not have a sound footing to compete with eastern culture” on my post on the 7th November, for which many of you guys opposed?
I have come round to my starting point.
TO BE CONTINUED…………..
Heshan,
You have a very short memory when you are caught with your pants down. My comment is in relation to what you said, which is
Quote
The bisikotuwa was also part of an elevated vessel that was used to store water. Every time water is stored at a high elevation, there is a common principle involved. Do you really need Mahavamsa to tell you this?
Unquote
Notice the words “bisikotuwa was also part of an elevated vessel”?
Before it was an elevated vessel now it has transformed itself in to a “…. part of a tank”
How did this Bisokotuwa that you said was an “elevated vessel that was used to store water” suddenly become just a part of a tank? What is its purpose? Is it ELEVATED or NOT?
This exchange began when you decided to challenge that the Sinhalese were not great Hydraulics engineers
This is the complete reference from the site you referred to
Bisokotuwa:
“It was this invention alone which permitted the Sinhalese to proceed boldly with the construction of reservoirs that still rank among the finest and greatest works of the kind in the world. Without some efficient means of regulating the discharge of the water through the sluices, the provision of reservoirs for storing water could never have extended beyond
the minor tanks”.
(Ref: H. Parker, Ancient Ceylon)
Biskotuwa is a device used by ancient engineers to control the outflow of water from wewa with considerable heights (10-15m). As shown in figure 7, the Bisokotuwa consists of a rectangular tank connected to the sluice; in almost all the cases the longer side of the rectangle is kept parallel to the bund. Water comes from one side and leaves from the other side. Wooden sheets were placed inside to regulate the flow.
Notice what H. Parker states in your own reference?
“……. permitted the Sinhalese to proceed boldly with the construction of reservoirs that still rank among the finest and greatest works of the kind in the world.”
Note the words “finest and greatest …in the World.
These statements are not made by Sinhalese but by Westerners who were impressed by these still standing and working monuments of Engineering. Trying to argue the converse in the face of an overwhelming number of foreigners who believe otherwise just proves your idiocy and nothing else.
I don’t know what your ancestry is but if you are a Sinhalese as you try to convey by your name then you are an Ingrate and probably the world’s best. Judging from the number of futile attempts that you continue to make to run down the Sinhalese I do not believe that you are Sinhalese and by now probably the GV readership would also be thinking likewise.
Every time you write rubbish you give me another opportunity to explain to the GV readership in more detail who the Sinhalese really are and expose you for what you are.
I will not explain how the Bisokotuwa works just yet (giving you more rope so to speak
) Do more research to find out.
But here are a few pointers
Without some efficient means of regulating the discharge of the water through the sluices, the provision of reservoirs for storing water could never have extended beyond the minor tanks”
…the “Valve Pit” as the Researchers of the US Library of Congress refers to it, is UNDER THE WATER
You should learn not to POSE as an expert in areas that you are totally clueless in.
My friend, why are you eternally behaving like that proverbial dog which found to its dismay, that it can’t cover it’s feces after defecating on a stone? Reading lessons indeed
Off the Cuff:
How did this Bisokotuwa that you said was an “elevated vessel that was used to store water” suddenly become just a part of a tank? What is its purpose? Is it ELEVATED or NOT?
The Bisikotuwa consists of a tank attached to a sluice:
“As shown in figure 6, the Bisokotuwa consists of a rectangular tank connected to the sluice; ”
This is what you said:
“The Bisokotuwa is an UNDERWATER device !!!!!!”
SO according to you, the tank is an underwater device??? Hahaha. You have just proved that you have no knowledge of how the thing works.
I am correct that this is little more than a water tower. The larger tank attached to the reservoir is at a high elevation. Just like water flows from the water tower to businesses and homes via pipes, water flows from the larger tank to smaller tanks to paddy fields. Water regulation is achieved via smaller tanks and by sluices in the bisikotuwa itself.
I maintain that this is not a great invention.
(1) It was only used to irrigate paddy fields. It did not provide water to houses or palaces
(2) Each paddy field got the same amount of water – there was no way for one paddy to get more water than the other
(3) This technology was used for 2100 years with little improvement.
(4) It was not adopted by other cultures
@ Heshan
““As shown in figure 6, the Bisokotuwa consists of a rectangular tank connected to the sluice; ”
Actually the Bisokotuwa starts as a tower and runs through the dam in to the outlet of the tank. So part of it is UNDERWATER.
“(1) It was only used to irrigate paddy fields. It did not provide water to houses or palaces”
It’s obvious isn’t it? The royal and the VIPs will be sitting ducks for teh enemies then if they could poison the water up stream
“(2) Each paddy field got the same amount of water – there was no way for one paddy to get more water than the other”
You have never visited these places. There are multiple outlets with multiple channels with multiple bisokutuwas to control amount of water flowing. Very same principal used in modern hydraulics as well.
“(3) This technology was used for 2100 years with little improvement.”
Paper was invented 3500 years ago. Still our most important documents are printed on paper. OMG, no improvement!
(4) It was not adopted by other cultures
They were simply not able to do it for various reasons, or never wanted to build reservoirs
“It’s obvious isn’t it? The royal and the VIPs will be sitting ducks for teh enemies then if they could poison the water up stream”
I am not sure what you mean by that. The Romans had aqueducts as early as 312 B.C, which made possible running water, indoor plumbing AND a sewer system (pretty much what we have today, minus the water heater).
“You have never visited these places. There are multiple outlets with multiple channels with multiple bisokutuwas to control amount of water flowing. Very same principal used in modern hydraulics as well.”
Well obviously… you want the water to go a certain way, connect a pipe there. Pipe or bisikotuwa, the principle is the same, as I have *tried* to explain to your comrade here. The only difficult part is finding a way to regulate the flow of water. Using elevation (e.g. gravity) is the obvious solution; I don’t think it would take a genius to figure that out. I don’t know how flow control is achieved in modern hydraulics, as I have never studied fluid dynamics.
“Paper was invented 3500 years ago. Still our most important documents are printed on paper. OMG, no improvement!”
The quality of paper has been vastly improved. The printing press has itself undergone massive innovations.
“They were simply not able to do it for various reasons, or never wanted to build reservoirs”
They had other ways of harnessing energy from dams for the purposes of irrigation and what not.
CONTINUATION FROM THE POST OF 28th………
Generation of knowledge in west is based on Two Value Logic, which has only two alternatives and the base of Eastern Knowledge System has two more alternatives. Even though these extra alternatives have less frequent occurrences, in such cases the Two Value Logic is not in a position to arrive at that answer (conclusion) and hence the Western System of Knowledge cannot acquire the knowledge generated in two latter alternative of the Four Value System. Hence the Western Knowledge System has a deficiency compared to the eastern system. Therefore some of the concepts found in the east is alien to west and the west has no capacity to understand them.
So, I am not surprised, Niranjans and Heshans, who have acquired their knowledge through western knowledge sytem, cannot understand culture, heritage, traditions and value system of our country.
Niranjan, Heshan, SomewhatDisgusted, Off the Cuffs, disgusted
Your comments are appreciated.
Migara,
Heshan is an expert at everything.
He is such an expert that he can deduce the third dimension in a two dimensional drawing. He looks at a plan and is capable of deducing the vertical dimensions. That’s how much engineering he knows!!!!!!!
He thinks “Pits” are elevated with reference to the ground. So he claims that the “Bisokotuwa” is an elevated Vessel. He sees the word “Tower” and thinks it is the same as a water Tower.
He believes that maintaining a gradient of 1.14 THOUSANDS of an inch per foot for 17 miles in an UNPAVED Canal of 54 miles in length where the maximum gradient never exceeds 2.28 thousands of an inch per foot over the 54 miles is a simple task when even with today’s technology it is no mean feat. Quite a display of engineering knowledge by Heshan
This is how the the Bisokotuwa evolved with Heshan
November 20, 2009 -: The “Bisokotuwa” is in fact nothing more than the hydraulic ram pump.
November 21, 2009
valve tower A tower built up within a reservoir to house the control valves of supply pipes drawing off water at different levels. Hammond
November 21, 2009
have suggested the use of the weir and postulated that it makes any use of the “bisikotuwa” unnecessary, because the exact same level of efficiency is achieved.
November 23, 2009
bisokotuwa” …The modern-day equivalent would be the water tower, used to supply water to homes and businesses. A water tower is simply a large, elevated tank of water
November 25, 2009
it is no coincidence that both the “water tower” and the “valve tower” are built at high elevations.
November 27, 2009
The bisikotuwa was also part of an elevated vessel that was used to store water.
November 28, 2009
Bisikotuwa is part of a tank. The tank is obviously at high enough elevation for gravity to affect significantly the water pressure.
Even with ALL his “UNIVERSITY” research he remained clueless up until now that the Bisokotuwa’s purpose was to tame the high water pressure before leading it out of a reservoir, the reason why it is situated under water. Something the west understood only in the 19th (or 20th century) but which was employed 2 millenia before that by the Sinhalese
The metamorphosis of the Bisokotuwa within Heshan’s brain tells a story
A story like his Pharaoh’s Pump.
What the man cannot stand is that his favorite Gods of civilization the British were living in forests and caves while the white Americans did not even exist at that point of time.
Unfortunately, Heshan has to denounce US Federal Researchers, British Governors of SL, People with Doctorates in Hydraulics Engineering, High officials of the Survey Dept, British writers and a whole heap of learned men and women in order to deny the facts.
What ever the guy says the Sun wont rise from the west
Unfortunately Mr. Observer did not attend his geometry class. When it’s a well-established fact that a tank is in the shape of a rectangular trough, we need not speculate much on whether its 2 or 3 dimensions as we know automatically know the trough has volume. In fact, we automatically know that anything with volume is 3-D. However, I want to know if Mr.Observers brain is actually 3-D, since there seems to be nothing inside it. I would like to know how such a brain has managed to *expand* over any significant period of time, since it seems to be *permanently* void of any actual substance.
Now it seems that Mr. Observer has carefully read all of my previous posts and understood NOTHING, consistent with my hypothesis that his brain is an empty hollow vessel (perhaps useful for beating during a parade).
Can Mr. Observer explain how the Great Pyramid of Giza was built? I doubt it, since the principles involved probably exceed his brain power by an exponential factor larger than the age of the universe. Since this is the case, he should probably not speculate on whether a hydraulic ram pump was used in its construction. FYI, the hydraulic ram pump is an actual device: http://www.clemson.edu/irrig/Equip/ram.htm
Mr. Observer has completely misunderstood the point of the bisikotuwa. Which is why after drooling out some of my conclusions in copy and paste format, he began vomiting out astonishing measurements on the width of canals. Of course the actual width of such canals has never been independently verified for the SOLE reason that no unbroken canal with such dimensions dating from that period exists. Mr. Observer conveniently forgets to mention that the real source of info for this “astonishing” canal width is none other than the Mavahamsa and Sinhala-Buddhist historians like K.L.M Silva. We can assess the *credibility* of such historians by noting their racist homeland theories. Of course, if Mr. Observer really thinks that *actual* distinguished scholars from the likes of Oxford and Cambridge have done painstaking assessments of canal widths in some dry zone in S. Lanka, he should list the papers which reference such studies.
Heshan, you’re really losing it. I’m sure in your last post you were referring to someone else? At least I hope so for your well being sake.
Before you embark on your agro trips, take a deep breath, and let some steam out before you make a fool out of your self!
Funny thing is you referred to my handle fair few times w/o realising the mistake – really reflects your mentality, i wasn’t too far off.
Observer:
Above post was meant for Off the Cuff. I apologize for the discrepancy.
Cheers.
Observer,
Without a doubt Heshan is off his rocker.
He does not know whether he is coming or going.
Your advice would be analogous to pouring water on a ducks back
He has a sadistic desire of making a fool of himself.
He has done that so often that I believe it is his Hobby.
Now he has a very Revolutionary Engineering Process that he has developed.
A TWO dimensional Plan drawing that can be used to engineer any THREE dimensional object.
This will of course take WESTERN technology forward by leaps and bounds, just by eliminating the need for detailing the third dimension
Hopefully he will stay where he is
Heshan,
Of course I know what a Hydraulic Ram Pump is. Please refer the reference I gave for some time ago “3. Dr. D.H. Lewit Author of a University Text book on Hydraulics”
It is a 18 th Century invention, what has that got to do with either the “Bisokotuwa” which predates it by over 2000 years or the Giza pyramid which predates it by over 4000 years? Could you explain how you link the Ram Pump with either of these?
Now could you please enlighten us on how your theories of the “Bisokotuwa” keep changing day by day?
What is this Revolutionary Engineering Process that you have developed?
A TWO dimensional Plan drawing that can be used to engineer any THREE dimensional object. Hope you have patented that “FANTASTIC” idea
Just a quote from you latest post
“Mr. Observer has completely misunderstood the point of the bisikotuwa. Which is why after drooling out some of my conclusions in copy and paste format, he began vomiting out astonishing measurements on the width of canals. Of course the actual width of such canals has never been independently verified for the SOLE reason that no unbroken canal with such dimensions dating from that period exists.”
Unquote
What conclusions of yours are you talking about? The ones that kept rapidly changing day by day?
So when did you start measuring the “WIDTH” in “THOUSANDS OF AN INCH PER FOOT” ? Is that how you do it in your “UNIVERSITY”? If this is the case, how do you measure GRADIENT at your University?
Gradient and Width are two entirely different things, they are not interchangeable
[Edited out] You say Quote “…actual width of such canals has never been independently verified for the SOLE reason that no unbroken canal with such dimensions dating from that period exists.” unquote
This Canal is called the Jaya Ganga (or Yoda Ela). It still exists and still works. It has been measured by scholars of Engineering and can be measured at any time.
From the statement you just made, this must be the ONLY such canal of that period which is still in working order. Hence even your “UNIVERSITY” might be interested in investigating such a Unique historical Engineering Monument.
[Edited out]
I have proved my point sufficiently well and consider any further debate unnecessary. I am not here to tutor to Off the Cuff on the difference in dimensions between a rectangle (on a piece of paper) and a rectangular trough (in practice). In any event, the last point which I wish to reaffirm is that the aqueduct system set up by the Romans was far more complex than anything produced by Sinhalese hydraulics. By complex, I don’t mean because the US Federal Research Library says so, or some deceased Governor of the 1940′s says so, or Mahavamsa says so, or any website says so. But because you can actually SEE with your own eyes that such a system is EXACTLY what we have today (minus the water heater). Whether or not Off the Cuff and the Mahavamsa fanatics consider Rome to be part of Western civilization is also irrelevant; I am not here to teach history.
As the saying goes, let the foolish wallow in their own ignorance!
Dear Yapa,
“”Therefore some of the concepts found in the east is alien to west and the west has no capacity to understand them.”
I am unfortunately no logician, but I find it hard to agree with any statement that suggests that westerners are fundamentally unable to grasp certain things that easterners are capable of. That would suggest that our brains are somehow wired differently, don’t you think? Would you be able to provide any examples of this?
Yes, Aristotelean logic had flaws, but how many people use Aristotelean logic in day to day thinking? Still, it’s true that Aristotelian patterns of thinking dominated the western landscape. That this caused some people to forcibly adopt binary thinking patterns may be valid criticism (although I see no evidence to back such a generalization), whereas those used to a more eastern style of thinking may more commonly think in shades of grey. Is that what you are trying to mean? Still, this is just an assertion based on apparent cultural differences with nothing more than anecdotal evidence to support the claim. It certainly does not indicate a fundamental inability to understand each other.
Also, keep in mind that Aristotelian logic itself has since been superseded by modern logic which is provable to be correct in my understanding.
My feeling is that this is more of a notion spread by logicians desiring to assert that the east is somehow “different” in its own right and that the west “just doesn’t get it”. Each culture may have its strengths and weaknesses and it makes sense to adopt the best of both worlds. In any case, whether you’re from the west or the east, the truth doesn’t change at a fundamental level, especially not when it’s backed by evidence. And there is no fundamental difference in the mental capacity of human beings either, except for some minor differences in average IQ levels. However, intra-region IQ variations can be so high that such averages are mostly useless. So to say that the west has no capacity to understand the east seems a self-evident falsehood.
Heshan,
You think too highly of yourself …..Ha ha … You cant Tutor anybody on Engineering and from the Logic you put on public display any subject seems beyond your intellectual capacity, if one can even call it intellectual !!!!
Quote from your last comment
I am not here to tutor to Off the Cuff on the difference in dimensions between a rectangle (on a piece of paper) and a rectangular trough (in practice).
Unquote
To show the Third Dimension on a two dimensional drawing you need to use either a simple 3D drawing or in Engineering Terms, use an elevation drawing along with the Plan drawing. Using one without the other to manufacture and object as in Actual Practice is not possible.
Using one without the other to maintain silly arguments is to live in a Fool’s Paradise.
Here is another quote from you
he began vomiting out astonishing measurements on the width of canals. Of course the actual width of such canals has never
been independently verified for the SOLE reason that no unbroken canal with such dimensions dating from that period exists.
Unquote
Notice your OWN words …. “ASTONISHING Measurements” and “no unbroken canal with such dimensions dating from that period exists”
Hence by your OWN admission the Jaya Ganga becomes the ONLY such canal in the WORLD that is still functioning as it did over 2000 years ago
Not only can you see but you can also MEASURE and VERIFY with your own eyes the ASTONISHING GRADIENT that was created in 200 BC WITHOUT the Use of Laser Assisted Technology or High Power Optical Theodolites and ancillary equipment that is required to measure it today.
Here is another quote from your latest post
But because you can actually SEE with your own eyes
Unquote
Jaya Ganga (Yoda Ela) exists so “You can actually SEE it with your own eyes” (unless you are physically blind in addition to your intellectual blindness).
It still conveys water from One great Reservoir to another over a distance of 54 Miles (86.9 Kilo Meter). In the first 27.5 Kilo meters the gradient is less than 1:10000 and the subsequent 59.4 Kilo meters it is less than 1:5000
The difference in elevation between the two reservoirs is ONLY 3.8 feet. This is verifiable by anybody who is interested and who is not intellectually dishonest
Finally since GV does not like the use of that oft used proverb about man’s best friend, I will use your own statements
“As the saying goes, let the foolish wallow in their own ignorance!”
Mirror Mirror on the Wall ………..
Yapa,
Your comments are also appreciated on my part. It was an interesting debate.
Dear SomewhatDisgusted;
Thanks for the comment. I can well understand your dislike towards my conclusion of the last post, i.e., “Therefore some of the concepts found in the east is alien to west and the west has no capacity to understand them”. A person with some concern over the welfare of the mankind is reasonable to hold such a view, as this conclusion could be misinterpreted to discriminate people on an unreasonable ground. Hitler did it, on the ground that Germans are a Superior race and justified killing of inferior races, to avoid the superior nation getting spoiled by mixing with the inferiors. Result was the Second World War and the killing of millions of innocent people. It is said that Nietzsche was the philosophical culprit, who “spoiled” Hitler with this unbecoming ideology.
SomewhatDisgusted; It is proper you opposed the above notion. I salute you in the name of humankind. However, let me explain the reasons for me to differ from your humane point of view.
Let me postpone the proof of faultlessness of my conclusion, until we get rid of your honest fear/suspicion of my conclusion. Until then let me assume my conclusion as a correct one.
My view is people all over the world are not homogeneous and they have various differences and Hitler too have identified this notion correctly.In my opinion what went wrong was, that Hitler wrongly attributed these differences to genetic nature of the people. He thought Germans are genetically different from Jews and others, which is not true. Once I can remember great humanitarian Dr. E.W.Adikaram, saying there is no difference between Sinhalese and Tamils as there is no difference between the blood of Tamils and Sinhalese. We must respect his good intention towards the mankind, but we should not sway away with emotional the idea that Tamils and Sinhalese have no differences.
They have differences, but not genital!
Man is not just a genetic animal. According to Aristotle, man is a political animal. He is also a cultural and social animal according to my belief. People changes on the above factors too. However, according to my belief the main factor contributed to the differences in people is their world outlook. Germans were different from Jews not on their material difference, but on their differences in mental factors; the way they perceive the world. Material world view of then West did not identify this fact and attributed it as a (material) racial difference. Result was the destruction.
Just because some idea could be misinterpreted, are we to throw away that idea ,in spite of its accuracy. Are we to build up our theories on emotionally good fallacies?
According to my view what we should do is to uncover “naked truths’ and ensure their proper interpretations, without swaying away with emotionally pleasant ideas. India did it. India has correctly perceived the differences in their people and their motto of the governance is “Unity in Diversity!”
OK! now to my “selfish objective”: to argue for my conclusion.
If you look at my whole argument, to so conclude you will realize that the methodology I used in this process is “Deductive Inference”. Please see what theory says about Deductive Inference.
“When an argument claims that the truth of its premises generate the truth of its conclusion it is said to include deductive inference”.
Further, a conclusion to be correct the promises of the arguments should be true and the arguments should be valid. I don’t see any flaws in either of them in my argument. I don’t know, I might have mistakes I have not noticed, if such a mistake is pointed out I accept my conclusion as fallacy. Until then I think I have the right to hold the view that my conclusion is true.
Further, in support of my view I would like to draw your kind attention to ” Ways of Thinking of Eastern Peoples: India – China – Tibet – Japan by Hajime Nakamura. Sinhala Translation by Professor P.B.Meegaskumbura is also available.
Further, I have two or three more post to write in the line of my main discussion. Your critical support in these articles too is expected. Your feed back on this comment too is appreciated.Thank you again.
Dear SomewhatDisgusted;
Hajime Nakamura’s book is also available online.
Dear Yapa,
Thank you for the clarification. I am not objecting to your argument because I would feel emotionally better by doing so. That should not matter, because the truth is not something that necessarily makes you feel good.
Instead, I would like to point out several possible flaws in your reasoning. You’ve asserted that people are fundamentally different based on world outlook. That assertion itself is clearly problematic. There are a great deal of factors which unify humanity, starting with our basic biology. I think you’ll agree that most people have the same basic feelings regardless of race. So how exactly have differences in world outlook changed these fundamental biological features? Are we not motivated by the same basic human emotions? Are they really that different?
Secondly, culture and outlook continuously change and merge. For example, the culture we have in Sri Lanka now has been influenced by western culture. American culture (through TV) continues to influence us. Our world view is changing every day. The reverse process also happens as people mix us more. So what is this world outlook? It changes every day. So to assert that we are fundamentally different based on world outlook is again falsified by such change.
Finally, based on that assertion, you’ve also drawn the incorrect conclusion that person with outlook A cannot understand person with outlook B, which is a non sequitur. Having differences in word outlook does not necessarily mean that we are incapable of understanding a different world outlook.
So my critique was based on those points.
“Hitler did it, on the ground that Germans are a Superior race and justified killing of inferior races, to avoid the superior nation getting spoiled by mixing with the inferiors.”
Actually Anti-Semitism was around in Europe for several hundred years. Hitler did not do anything entirely new.
“Result was the Second World War and the killing of millions of innocent people.”
6 million Jews died in the concentration camps, but 1053829 people died in the Soviet Gulag’s. Unfortunately, most people are not aware of this. For example, we find individuals like Dayan Jayatillake waxing eloquent about Stalin even on this forum.
“It is said that Nietzsche was the philosophical culprit, who “spoiled” Hitler with this unbecoming ideology.”
The Nazis borrowed only one concept from Nietzsche: the Ubermensch. Nietzsche did not provide any other ideological support; in fact, if you read him, he was anti-German. He despised all of the classical German philosophers, preferring instead Greek philosophy. He was not an anti-Semite either, despite what is written in the “Anti-Christ.” For Nietzsche, European culture was decadent and in need of a classical revival. For Hitler, as he wrote in Mein Kamp, European culture was the dominant (superior one). There was no need of a revival, only to conquer and subjugate all other races to serve the Nordic one.
Other than this, the Nazis had their own Nazi-specific philosophers, like Walter Darre.
Yapa,
I followed your last few posts and can’t help but put in my two cents worth.
You said: “Generation of knowledge in west is based on Two Value Logic, which has only two alternatives and the base of Eastern Knowledge System has two more alternatives. Even though these extra alternatives have less frequent occurrences, in such cases the Two Value Logic is not in a position to arrive at that answer (conclusion) and hence the Western System of Knowledge cannot acquire the knowledge generated in two latter alternative of the Four Value System. Hence the Western Knowledge System has a deficiency compared to the eastern system. Therefore some of the concepts found in the east is alien to west and the west has no capacity to understand them.”
Your premise here is that the greater the number of logical alternatives, the more superior the knowledge system. It is from this premise that you generate knowledge that Western epistemology is deficient (according to deductive inference). Firstly, I am not sure that is a valid premise, and hence your conclusion of Western epistemological deficiency, derived from deductive inference as you say, could be equally invalid. If the Western knowledge system was deficient, then colonialism would not have happened. Or it would have happened the other way around, with the East colonizing the West. The West did very well during colonialism using their binaristic knowledge system to produce knowledge that othered Eastern natives. Edward Said’s book “Orientalism” is all about how they did that. If Eastern thinking was superior, then surely the natives would have been able to rely on their own knowledge system to ward off the race ideologies of the West. That did not happen. The East started taking on the Western ideas instead, feeling themselves to be inferior, etc. In the end, in de-colonizing, the East used Western concepts of freedom to liberate themselves. Gauri Viswanathan talks about this in her book “Masks of Conquest”. That’s why in all the colonies, it was the British educated who led the freedom movement and became the first leaders of these new nations.
I also need to add that Western epistemology is not limited to two-ended logic. That is your other premise that is not valid. The notion of the “paradox” is all about exploring and going beyond the limits of two-ended logic, and European/English poetry was always about giving expression to paradoxical thought.
In addition, a lot of new knowledge about history and culture is being generated from Western post-structuralist, post-modern critical systems, which are precisely about moving behind binaristic or two-ended logic. Psychoanalysis is one example. Our words may have an intended conscious meaning, but quite a different, sometimes opposite, unconscious meaning. Marxist criticism allowed us to see relationships and connections between the material and the ideological instead of seeing them in binaristic terms as mind vs matter. Postmodern thought is very interested in deconstructing A or not A binaries. What about the West’s Chaos Theory which asserts that events are determined, but yet they cannot be predicted?
As for what you consider to be Western vs Eastern systems of thought, Michel Foucault in his book “The Order of Things: The Archaeology of the Human Sciences” speaks of this in terms of “epistemes” that dominate in any culture at any point of time. Yes, people who use different epistemes may have problems communicating with each other. But epistemes change over time, especially with contact with other cultures and their epistemes. Given globalization, and the history of east-west intellectual and cultural contact through colonialism, you can’t say that East and West operates on entirely different epistemes. Sri Lanka’s mode of thought today is not the same as what it was in pre-modern times, or in ancient times. Both Sinhala nationalists and the LTTE and their supporters could not get out of the grip of binaristic thinking. What happened to their Chaturkotika Logic?
I am not saying that Western epistemology is superior to Eastern epistemology. I am saying rather that you cannot talk of West and East as having different epistemologies in that essentialistic way. History has shown that they are able to contact and influence each other.
You say that Hitler was in a sense right, not that Jews were racially different but that their mode of thought was different. You’re saying that Hitler killed Jews because he mistook mental outlook for genetic differences. But if, as you claim, people with different mental outlooks cannot communicate with each other, and that mental outlooks are fixed for all time, then Hitler’s conclusion must still be the same–kill the Jews because their mental outlook will still continue to be a threat to Germans. Whether the cause is considered to be racial difference or mental outlook, the action to be taken to eradicate the cause will still be the same, i.e. destruction, genocide. On the other hand, if modes of thought were considered to be always evolving and changing, then there would have been no reason to kill Jews because time, history, education and cultural contact with Germans would have changed their outlook.
I hope you get what I am saying. Your claim that mental outlooks of different cultures are fixed and that they are not capable of understanding and hence influencing each other, will promote war and genocide. This kind of thought is no less dangerous than belief in racial ideologies.
Of course, Tamils and Sinhalese have differences in terms of their modes of thought. But they also have similarities because history has taken them on the same paths. Religious philosophy is not the only thing that determines mode of thought. And I believe that both are intrinsically capable of understanding differences in the other’s mode of thought, and intrinsically capable of respecting each other’s ways of thinking. When they do that, cultural fusion and change in modes of thinking, new ideas, will be inevitable.
I am surprised that with your belief in Chaturkotika Logic, that you want to go on a quest for “naked truths” and “proper” interpretations. What happened to your own inalienable Eastern mode of thought, where two opposite things can be true at the same time? If A and not A can be simultaneously true, then on what basis can interpretations be judged as “proper” and improper? You seem bound by Dwikotika Logic, which you say is Western.
I’m afraid I can only agree with one statement that you make, that Tamils and Sinhalese “have differences, but not genital!”
I realise that is a typo error, that you meant to say “genetic”, but I couldn’t resist being naughty.
Dear Disgusted;
I love you naughty fellow! I know you don’t kill people for mistakes! Thanks for the detailed challenging comment. Challenge is a respect. Thanks. However, give me a little bit of time for a response, as I am a bit busy as a “dog” these days. (You know what I mean, ” Ballata ethi wedakuth ne, hemin gamanakuth ne”)
Thank you again!
0Dear Disgusted (naughty Fellow);
As promised I am back to answer your long challenging question paper. First your questions is mentioned and the answer follows.
Q1. Your premise here is that the greater the number of logical alternatives, the more superior the knowledge system.
Answer:- No, I don’t say so. What I said was
“in such cases the Two Value Logic is not in a position to arrive at that answer (conclusion) and hence the Western System of Knowledge cannot acquire the knowledge generated in two latter alternative of the Four Value System”.
Please do not draw invalid inferences from what I said and criticise them as if what I said. My conclusion above does not act as a premise to arrive at your above conclusion.
To clarify my point,
The statement, “four valued system is superior the two valued system” doesn’t necessarily imply that “the greater the number of logical alternatives, the more superior the knowledge system”. It is possible that the first statement is true while the second is false.
Hence the negation of your conclusion does not imply the negation of my conclusion (or your premise).
Hence your subsequent arguments & conclusions based on this conclusion have no cause to occur.
(This answer is with regard to the part of your comment ended up with “……..you say, could be equally invalid”.)
Q2. Your next two sentences:
If the Western knowledge system was deficient, then colonialism would not have happened. Or it would have happened the other way around, with the East colonizing the West.
Here your premise is
“”If “the Western knowledge system was deficient” “”
and
the conclusions are
“colonialism would not have happened. Or it would have happened the other way around, with the East colonizing the West”.
Can you please explain me on what valid argument you deduced the conclusions from the above premise. I am 100% sure that even “Mahabrahma” can not do it. ( In my view, this is a “yanne koheda, malle pol” conclusion).
Q3. Next three sentences are just explanations/examples, not arguments and hence I suppose I do not need to comment on them.
Q4. Your next argument:
“If Eastern thinking was superior, then surely the natives would have been able to rely on their own knowledge system to ward off the race ideologies of the West
Answer:-Yes, we were self reliant on our own knowledge until we were colonized by the west. Our people managed their things by their own; politics, defence,architecture, irrigation, agriculture, legal system, health care system, education system, trade, industries, literature, art , (what not) … etc. were in place to suffice the needs (needs as then they perceived) of the people. Needs of the people were changed with the forced colonisation and “needs” were replaced by “wants”.
After the colonisation, our minds also were colonized. Really that was the worst part of colonisation. (Some people are boastful of good thing that colonials have done to us. That itself is a example of colonisation of their minds and also is an evidence that the people with western outlook cannot perceive the eastern realities. A tragedy of the country, they see as a blessing.)
If we are to ward off the race ideologies, we have to uncover our own world outlook which is based on Four Valued Logic + Something. (Please note + Something). Global warming, depletion of the Ozone layer are some of the heralds that bring the bad omens of the future which is built on the western outlook. Think what will happen to the “great civilisation”, when the world is run out of fossil fuels.
However, I don’t say all the western ideologies should be warded off, as you already know that the two valued logic is sufficient to generate some of the knowledge. Fault occurs only when we use the two valued system to derive conclusions when the four valued logic system is essential.
Therefore, now it must be clear to you that we don’t have to ward off all the knowledge in western knowledge system.
Further, doesn’t colonisation itself is a deficiency of western knowledge system. Can anybody with some common sense say that colonisation is a good concept? It is a bad concept originated in a deficient knowledge system.
Q5.I also need to add that Western epistemology is not limited to two-ended logic. That is your other premise that is not valid.
Answer:- Please note what I have said
“This puzzle is due to the limitations found in western (Aristotelian) logic which is the main foundation of western system of knowledge”. (post of November 25, 2009 @ 8:07 pm)
Please note the word “main” in my sentence.
Q6:-In addition, a lot of new knowledge about history and culture is being generated from Western post-structuralist, post-modern critical systems, which are precisely about moving behind binaristic or two-ended logic.
Answer:- I also accept that in some cases four valued system has disadvantages if used in a place where two valued logic is sufficient. It could create confusion. (This must be the reason why Somewhat Disgusted said “That this caused some people to forcibly adopt binary thinking patterns may be valid criticism (although I see no evidence to back such a generalization), whereas those used to a more eastern style of thinking may more commonly think in shades of grey.” in his post of 1st December, 2009.
In such a place it is true that two valued system is more efficient. Employment of four valued system in such cases is unnecessary.( Sending a bicycle to bring a kilogramme of sugar is more efficient than sending a lorry for the purpose. However, just because of this, no one would say a bicycle is more precious than a lorry.)
I think this has no contradiction with my proposition.
Q7.As for what you consider to be Western vs Eastern systems of thought, Michel Foucault in his book “The Order of Things: The Archaeology of the Human Sciences” speaks of this in terms of “epistemes” that dominate in any culture at any point of time. Yes, people who use different epistemes may have problems communicating with each other. But epistemes change over time, especially with contact with other cultures and their epistemes. Given globalization, and the history of east-west intellectual and cultural contact through colonialism, you can’t say that East and West operates on entirely different epistemes. Sri Lanka’s mode of thought today is not the same as what it was in pre-modern times, or in ancient times. Both Sinhala nationalists and the LTTE and their supporters could not get out of the grip of binaristic thinking. What happened to their Chaturkotika Logic?
Answer:-”Yes, people who use different epistemes may have problems communicating with each other.”
This is confirmation of my position by you.
Further, I haven’t said that East and West operates on entirely two different systems. It is common knowledge that these systems get the influence of each other.
Q8.Your claim that mental outlooks of different cultures are fixed and that they are not capable of understanding and hence influencing each other, will promote war and genocide. This kind of thought is no less dangerous than belief in racial ideologies.
Answer:- Really, this may be one of the reasons why west invaded other countries.and east did not invade west ( You are suggesting a new theory about imperialism). Really western imperialist did not understand eastern people. They considered easterners as animals and killed them in thousands as animals. They enslaved thousands of people for their benefit. They came to civilize the people with thousands of years of civilisation with the Bible in one hand and a sword in the other hand. Do you think colonialists of two ended logic understood the east?
Further, please note that I have not said that “mental outlooks of different cultures are fixed.
Furthermore, according to my logic there is no obstacle for eastern people to understand the west. It is natural to think that even western people can understand the east after the influence of eastern outlook., as, with that they also adapt to the eastern outlook too.
Q8.You say that Hitler was in a sense right, not that Jews were racially different but that their mode of thought was different.
Answer:- Yes! Don’t you think every war is a struggle between two point of views? Do you think the misunderstanding between Sinhalese and Tamils are due to their genetic differences? Is it not due to their differences in point of views or outlooks? You must have heard the saying “every war began in the minds of people”.
Q9.On the other hand, if modes of thought were considered to be always evolving and changing, then there would have been no reason to kill Jews because time, history, education and cultural contact with Germans would have changed their outlook.
Answer:- Yes! Now it has happened. Germans have changed their outlook and they are not planning to kill Jews now.
Q10.Of course, Tamils and Sinhalese have differences in terms of their modes of thought. But they also have similarities because history has taken them on the same paths. Religious philosophy is not the only thing that determines mode of thought.
Answer:- Completely agreed.
Q11.And I believe that both are intrinsically capable of understanding differences in the other’s mode of thought, and intrinsically capable of respecting each other’s ways of thinking.
Answer:- I am not in full agreement of this? If they are intrinsically capable, why do we have to take this much of effort to take them into a common understanding? I accept we must do it, but it will never happen automatically. It needs good people’s endeavour.
Q12.I am surprised that with your belief in Chaturkotika Logic, that you want to go on a quest for “naked truths” and “proper” interpretations. What happened to your own inalienable Eastern mode of thought, where two opposite things can be true at the same time? If A and not A can be simultaneously true, then on what basis can interpretations be judged as “proper” and improper? You seem bound by Dwikotika Logic, which you say is Western.
Answer:- This misunderstanding of yours is due to the lack of knowledge of Chaturkotika Logic or your liking to not understand it, as it is advantageous for you to unduly criticise my position. I have already said that the third and forth alternatives of this logic are less frequent to occur. In the case of choosing proper and improper, third and forth alternatives do not occur and one from the first and second should have to be chosen. Two valued Logic is a sub set of four Valued Logic.
You could learn a little bit more on this in my future posts. However, one can take a horse to the water, but he cannot make him drink!
Thanks guy!
Yapa,
With all due respect, your premise is indeed that the greater the number of logical alternatives, the more superior the system. As you note, the four-ended logical system gives two more alternatives to generate knowledge, which you claim the West does not have. That implies that the more logical alternatives one has, the greater the capacity to generate knowledge. You raised the issue of there being “two more” alternatives possible; you spoke about numbers. How else would you view two-ended logic as a subset of four-ended logic but by assuming that quality depended on quantity. It is on that basis that you come to your conclusion that the Western knowledge system is deficient. Your analogy of two-ended logic as being like a bicycle vs four-ended logic being like a lorry again shows your obsession with numbers, the two-wheeler vs the four- wheeler. Is there some radical difference between the engineering involved between the two?
I know you don’t specifically state it, but most people do not state the premises of their argument–which are often the most problematic aspects of arguments. They hope nobody will notice the iffy ground on which they have built their argument.
if you had elaborated on Chaturkotika Logic, shown how it could be applied, and also given examples of how it had been utilised in the past to generate knowledge, especially valuable knowledge, then I would have said that the premise of your argument about the superiority of Chaturkotika Logic over Dwikotika Logic lay in a claim about the superiority of the system of logic itself, how the many logical alternatives worked together, and not in the greater number of logical alternatives it had. However, you did not do that at all.
The claim of the superiority of any knowledge system must be based on the knowledge created through it. If it was just present, and there were no or few occasions where it came in handy, then how can it be superior? It’s just a white elephant, no? That in fact is what you say now: “I have already said that the third and forth alternatives of this logic are less frequent to occur”.
I gave colonialism as an example to disrupt your claim that Eastern knowledge system is superior but it was not because I considered it to be something good or ethical. You say that colonisation itself is a bad concept, resulting from the deficiency of western knowledge system. It was indeed bad for the East, but the West attained a great deal of advantage from it for themselves. They still continue to gain from it, despite it being the postcolonial era. It is like the gift that keeps on giving.
Yes, the Eastern people’s minds were colonized. But why did that happen if their system of knowledge was superior to that of the West? (Again, I am not saying the West is superior to the East, but rather than Eastern intellectual superiority to the West is untenable. It’s an ‘A not A’ position!)
You have this impression that colonialism was generated by the West’s two-ended, binaristic logic about race. That is not true at all—colonialism happened to further the West’s economic development and enrichment; it was a product of the capitalist system and industrialization. The West needed to conquer other countries to extend their hold on resources and to expand markets. The race ideologies then arose to support that economic purpose. It is significant that race ideologies and racialist science developed during the height of colonialism, not before. They didn’t invade the East because they thought the people were inferior. Rather, they made themselves think the Eastern people were inferior in order to justify their invasion. The invasions came first; the racial justifications came later. Their Christian beliefs demanded race ideologies because otherwise, how could they accept the killing and forceful displacement of people from their own land? Hence was born the ideology of the “white man’s burden”, his so-called “responsibility” to “civilize the native” that would seem to have been placed on them by God. That was why colonialism worked together with the Christian missions and with race ideologies of Eastern inferiority–to whitewash their evil project.
The same with Hitler. It was economic and political forces that drove Hitler to seek the death of the Jews. He obtained power by distracting Germans from their economic realities, by placing in them the fantasy that if only Jews and others were killed off, the Germans could economically rise to great heights. If the Jews had not been an economically successful community, Hitler would not have needed to think of something else to attain power. The race ideologies of Jews as treacherous, unpatriotic, cheaters, etc, rose up to justify this political and economic purpose.
You can extend this to Sri Lanka, to Rwanda, to any place with ethnic conflict. It’s always about economics and power, not about race—race is used to disguise the economic and political motivation of war.
This is where you show that you are more prone to applying two-ended logic, while singing the praises of four-ended logic. Race relations and conflict are shadow theatre. You need to apply Chaturkotika Logic to understand it. However, Western post-structuralist knowledge systems have also been able to grasp their shadowy nature.
I am sure you yourself are aware of your own contradictory claims. In your earlier post, you said the West cannot understand the East–because apparently there is something radically different between the two systems of logic. Now you say that they can because they have been in contact with the East. Make up your mind. Maybe Chaturkotika Logic can be used to ‘smoke’ your lies.
Aaah…. it appears that “Disgusted” has multiple-personality disorder. I suppose “Belle” is supposed to the more pleasant/less aggressive alter-ego? Interesting indeed!
Dear Disgusted aka Belle;
Are you ok? Water? Painful? Please! please!! I didn’t mean it.
Ok, At last he is coming round. No, ambulance not necessary.
Dera SomewhatDisgusted;
He is not either Belle or Disgusted, he is DISGUISED!
SomewhatDisgusted,
No, Belle is the female version, which actually was the more aggressive one. But Belle had to go underground for a while because she got into a few scrapes. In particular, the female-gendered pseudonym made her views susceptible to being tagged as ‘feminist’ and dismissed on that account. She found her views taken more seriously when she took on a gender-ambiguous name.
On the other hand, there were people like you who were more polite to Belle than to Disgusted, even though they held the same views. I found that very interesting indeed.
Are they different personalities? Compare their views–they’re exactly the same. Even their national origins are the same. There are no multiple personality disorders, just multiple names. And multiple prejudices.
Yapa,
My being both Belle and Disgusted doesn’t mean that my argument against your quack ideas of Eastern and Western logic is invalid. Don’t use that to distract from the issue.
What is so painful about having one’s dual identity exposed? I don’t cry that easily. Just have to come up with more names, right?
Dear Disgusted;
You say
“My being both Belle and Disgusted doesn’t mean that my argument against your quack ideas of Eastern and Western logic is invalid. Don’t use that to distract from the issue. ”
You and I should not decide who is better ot whose arguments are more profound. Let the audience decide. You must have heard about the PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.
“ONE SHOULD NOT BE THE JUDGE OF HIS OWN CASE.”
Bye! See you again!
Interesting debate between Yapa and Belle/Disgusted.
I would point a few things:
(1) Two-ended (binary) logic was (and is still is) sufficient to create all the advanced electronic technology that ever existed. What has four-ended logic created that bares any possible comparison?
(2) The notion that the Westerners used two-ended logic to invade the East is laughable. First of all, the Westerners did not only invade the East. They invaded all 7 seven continents (yes, there are people who live in Antarctica year-round). What about the moon? Was that also “invaded”? Secondly, the East also invaded the East. What about Japan trying to take over all of Asia during WWII? Lets go back even further… what about all the ancient civilizations that practiced slavery? Babylonia, Ancient Egypt, Persia, Assyria, China, etc. What about people like Genghis Khan and Atila the Hun? How do you imagine they treated the people whom they captured? That’s right, they ENSLAVED them.
(3) The notion that the Westerners invaded to spread Christianity is not entirely true. It is partially true if you are talking about the Spanish and Portugese. However, the general motive of all of these people was treasure for the “Empire.” There was competition with other European nations to find the gold/silver etc, and plunder it first.
*Point out
Dear Heshan;
I agree with your statement “(1) Two-ended (binary) logic was (and is still is) .sufficient to create all the advanced electronic technology that ever existed”.
Not only that two ended logic is the most appropriate one in this case. If the four ended logic was used in the case of electronic technology, there would have been an unnecessary confusion. Logic Gates in Electronics is essentially based on binary numbers. Anyway this doesn’t affect my argument. I have already said that two valued logic is a sub set of four ended logic, and the complicated four ended logic is unnecessary where two valued logic is sufficient.
However, I think you will agree that Technology is the application part of Pure Science and Technology stays very much behind Pure Science. Technologies based on modern scientific theories such as Relativity and Quantum Theory are very minimal. Further, you may know that these two modern theories in some cases contradict with each other.
Do you know what modern scientists/philosophers suggest to resolve this problem? They suggest to use Four Valued Logic in Quantum Theory and Relativity. They think the problems in most modern scientific theories could be solved with the help of Four Valued Logic.
I also agree with (3).
With regard to (2). I partially agree with reservations. Here the answer, if I say in terms of my topic, the answer is the third alternative of Four Valued Logic, i.e.,both “yes” and “no”.
Thanks Heshan! I will soon continue with my main discussion. Critical views appriciated.
“Do you know what modern scientists/philosophers suggest to resolve this problem? They suggest to use Four Valued Logic in Quantum Theory and Relativity. They think the problems in most modern scientific theories could be solved with the help of Four Valued Logic.”
Which modern scientists are you referring to? I am only aware of developments in physics and mathematics. Recently a 150-yr old problem called the Poincare Conjecture was solved in mathematics. Physics has not made any progress for the last 30 years. There is a debate over a particular theory called “String Theory”, which has not yielded any experimentally verifiable result since its inception. Coincidentally, it is the most mathematically sophisticated scientific theory. Which raises an issue – logic alone is insufficient to meet the needs of science. There must be an experimental basis. Even quantum theory and relativity are backed by experimental data.
“In particular, the female-gendered pseudonym made her views susceptible to being tagged as ‘feminist’ and dismissed on that account.”
Really? Atheist seems to be holding her ground remarkably well. Is there any valid evidence for this?
“On the other hand, there were people like you who were more polite to Belle than to Disgusted, even though they held the same views. I found that very interesting indeed.”
Oh so I’m the one caught with my pants down now? Nice attempt to turn the tables but no dice. And furthermore, I didn’t see “Belle” making the same kind of odiously condemning generalizations that “Disgusted” made.
” What is so painful about having one’s dual identity exposed? I don’t cry that easily. Just have to come up with more names, right?”
Yeah. I can suggest a new nom-de-plume for you: how about “Dishonest”?
But here’s the reason that propagandists like you, who don’t come here to converse or to build bridges (you don’t need multiple identities to do that right?), but to forward your petty racial agenda, fail.
It’s precisely *because* it’s a racial agenda that it fails. Your rhetoric might have impressed those stuck in a 16th century zeitgeist, but nowadays, it doesn’t really fly, and people will sooner or later see through it for what it is – a racial agenda under the guise of “emancipation for Tamils”. The really “disgusting” part is using a humanitarian tragedy to forward and sanctify such an agenda.
Think of it as “reaping what you sow” or “Karma” or whatever your poison is.
Somewhat Disgusted;
Can you remember I was telling
” I persuaded to believe that there is an organized (may be informally) effort in place to undermine local values, mainly Buddhism and its culture.” in my post of November 15, 2009 @ 12:08 am .
I was smelling something fishy from the beginning. Now it is proved that there is a formal organized effort in place. It is a purposeful one. We should encounter this unjustifiable and baseless propaganda with an evil intention. We should not let them deceive everybody forever.
SomewhatDisgusted,
Your mode of thinking shows itself very well in the way you have responded to my having two pseudonyms.
It is dishonest to have two pseudonyms, but honest to have just one? Isn’t a pseudonym meant to hide one’s identity? Is there some rule book in your head that honest people must have only one pseudonym, and everyone has to abide by that? Groundviews doesn’t abide by that, considering that it has allowed me to do so. So who are you to bar me from that?
A person can have 10 pseudonyms here or more, if they want to.
Can you please tell me how having more pseudonyms makes me a propagandist? This is how I differentiate between people who have strong views and those who are propagandists. Propagandists make a job of their interventions–they participate in each and every thread that is relevant to their purpose. Even using two pseudonyms, my participation in groundviews has been minimal and selective. Propagandists don’t allow others to have different opinions from themselves–they hunt them down and won’t let them go until the other person gives up and their view predominates. I have very often given up on debates because I felt that they were getting repetitive or because I had stated my position and was willing to let it go at that, without feeling the need to ‘win’ the argument—in the end, other groundviews readers must decide which views they accept. Propagandists will also be the first to accuse others of spreading propaganda—because that is a tactic that can be used to undermine the other person’s credibility, and thus ‘win’ the debate. I have never done that even though I can see that some post-ers here do have a formalised agenda and are quite likely to be government propagandists. Propagandists hassle and harass others, demanding that the other person engage with them, demanding that they answer their questions. I don’t do that either.
How is your viewpoint not propaganda, but mine is?
My viewpoint has always been the same, whichever pseudonym I use. I even use the same language in expressing my views, and you can easily check up on this. I allowed those similarities precisely because there was no intention to deceive but to give myself space to avoid gender-prejudiced responses to my posts. As for evidence about whether I was hunted down for my ‘feminist’ views, you can look that up yourself. I don’t have any responsibility to answer to you. As far as I know, nobody died and made you king. That insistence you show that I answer to having two pseudonyms should already show people the kind of person you are, your intolerance of multiple views and positions, and that sense you have of your own moral superiority.
You are coming after me simply because I was careless in switching identities. That carelessness itself should show you that I am not that invested in protecting my identity. Would a propagandist be so careless? Wouldn’t a propagandist use different accounts for different identities? I didn’t and that was how I made the mistake.
Do you honestly believe that there is no one else in groundviews with multiple pseudonyms? Why don’t you go after them? Or is it a case of your looking for anything you can to discredit me? Why are you so invested in that? Can’t I be allowed to have my own opinions? You’re not a propagandist, are you?
As for my being a racist, if standing up for the equal rights of Tamils and other minority communities is racist, then, yes, I am racist. Instead of trying to undermine my views, you would be better served to keep up with your readings of multiculturalism theory and democratic rights.
Dear Yapa / SomewhatDisgusted / Huh
I am here to thwart false propaganda that is being carried out over the Internet that hinders reconciliation, to the best of my ability. Probably you are here on a similar mission.
The discussions we carry out here are read by many and if we have been successful in getting people to think independently and weigh the arguments and counter arguments to form their own judgments we would have succeeded in our endeavor.
When I provided a Link to “Huh” in my post in this thread of November 23, 2009 @ 2:35 am
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/#comment-11111
from the Dutch National Archives that shows that the Sinhala Kandyan Kingdom’s border with the Dutch was at “Elephant Pass” in the 17 th Century (16xx) disproving the “Exclusive Traditional Homeland theory” of divisive Tamils, Disgusted came down on me like a Ton of Bricks in her(his) post of November 23, 2009 @ 10:01 pm.
Replies from Disgusted abruptly stopped and Belle took over on a different line of attack asking me whether I am racist, with her post of November 25, 2009 @ 7:10 pm. When I replied, she too went silent, probably realizing that what I stated was not racist after all.
Anyway though Belle / Disgusted has a right to use multiple Pseudonyms to convey that the opinions expressed are from different persons its not exactly honest is it?
“Can you please tell me how having more pseudonyms makes me a propagandist?”
It doesn’t make you a propagandist. These people (Yapa/Off the Cuff/Somewhat Disgusted) are incapable of making any coherent argument. So they attack your character instead. It’s not too different from blaming the West/colonialism for “supporting” the LTTE. “Ad hominem” should become the official motto of the island (ought to transcribe it write across the fabric of that ugly colored excuse of a flag).
*right
Here come the propagandists, swooping in for the kill—full of delight that they can disrupt someone’s views without going through the effort of using argument and logic (which they significantly lack).
Off the Cuff, I changed from “Disgusted” to “Belle”, not to give others the impression that there was more than one person holding that view, but because you unfailingly harass “Disgusted” about Singapore’s housing policies every time the argument doesn’t go your way. You have even demanded that I answer the question of Singapore’s housing policies across threads. When I didn’t answer the question in one thread, you imported it into another thread and demanded an answer again. Not that I have anything against talking about Singapore’s housing policies, with which I disagree, but I had already spoken at great length about it, and also saw no reason to give in to your harassment. So as soon as you brought up that Singapore housing policy issue again, I changed pseudonyms as a means of avoiding that talk while continuing to dismantle your chauvinism.
After that, I went silent because I had made my points and didn’t need any follow up. Don’t flatter yourself that it was because I realized that you weren’t being racist at all. When someone claims that the only way to disprove the existence of Tamil Traditional Homelands is to show that a Sinhalese kingdom existed there in the 17th century, you know what their racial politics is, and also you know that this person has no respect for logic and rationality and historical knowledge, but will abuse all three to get their way. For some reason, the 17th century occupation of some of the North by a Sinhalese kingdom has more relevance to the issue of the existence of Tamil Traditional Homelands than say actual archaelogical evidence of Tamil civilization in those areas, or the fact that Tamil kingdoms had indeed held sway in those areas and further south at other times in the long history of Sri Lankan settlement, that Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka were actually geographically connected at one point in time and that therefore it is more likely that Tamils settled there earlier than a community that is said to have come all the way from the north. And for some strange reason, we are invited to assume that when there is a Sinhalese kingdom in control of a place, that the inhabitants must necessarily be Sinhalese too. (Just a caveat here to say that I am not arguing for Tamil predominance but that both Sinhalese and Tamils have had a long history of settlement in SL, both of which claims need to be equally respected.)
So, Off the Cuff, generally, I keep engagement with you to a minimum because I know I can’t expect rational argument from you. I make my point/s and then get out, and leave it to others to decide which arguments are more compelling.
I find it ironic that you of all people should presume to talk about honesty and about spreading “false propaganda”, given your habit of hijacking discussion in most threads so that everyone ends up forgetting the important progressive views expressed by those who write articles for groundviews and are forced instead to engage with your irrational drivel.
Dear Belle, Disgusted, or whatever it is,
“Your mode of thinking shows itself very well in the way you have responded to my having two pseudonyms.”
I sincerely hope so. I’ve taken great pains to explain my ideas and the logic behind them.
“It is dishonest to have two pseudonyms, but honest to have just one?”
Clearly, you cannot even fathom where the dishonesty lies, which is rather disturbing really. I have no objection to anyone using a pseudonym. How could I? I’m using one myself.
The dishonesty lies in wasting other people’s time and effort when you clearly knew my position on the matter and there was simply no need to argue at length about it, as if you were a babe in the woods. As I said, if your interest is in bridge-building and frank discussion, what is the necessity for multiple simultaneous pseudonyms? If, as you say, the same position was clearly conveyed by both characters, why have two at the same time? At least stick to one at a time. And furthermore, why revert back to your old pseudonym, which you supposedly had to ditch on account of it being discriminated against due to gender? Kind of makes the whole argument [banal], doesn’t it?
“your intolerance of multiple views and positions, and that sense you have of your own moral superiority.”
It’s actually amusing to hear this come from you. I was never the one making sweeping generalizations against entire swathes of people.
“Instead of trying to undermine my views, you would be better served to keep up with your readings of multiculturalism theory and democratic rights.”
Scrambling for respectability behind a veil of academic sophistry does not make your view any more valid. I’ve clearly indicated the logical flaws in your argument, which in a nutshell, is that racialism of any kind leads to an inconsistent, illogical world view. You have not shown me how your world view leads to consistency, since all it would imply is that every individual must segregate themselves racially in order to preserve their identities (not to mention religiously, by skin colour or other kinds of divisions, all of which would be justifiable by such logic).
I’m surprised this needs to be explained to you at such great length, but clearly, you prefer elaborate rationalizations for your racialism, which stems from a fear of identity loss, over actual consideration of the humane and logical thing to do. That racialism is unjustifiable by 21st century moral standards is not a view I invented. Read any respectable scientist or moral philosopher and they’ll have the same thing to say.
Anyway, I don’t intend to argue with you at length. One cannot teach an old dog new tricks nor logic to those who prefer rationalization instead. Soldier away my friend, ignore reasons. Never acknowledge a valid point someone else makes and keep dreaming of your racial utopia. The rest of us will try to do what we can to make people live together in a plural society as best as we can. You can, in the meantime, comment on the sanctimonious smugness of my reply and promptly dismiss the argument. Just a tip to help you minimize any cognitive dissonance really!
Heshan,
Thanks for the heads up. Reason never seems to factor into their arguments. Despite knowing that I have declared both “Belle” and “Disgusted” to be Singaporean and Tamil, and that I have even cited similar incidents in talking about Tamil experiences over the past 30 years, thereby encouraging any alert person to see that “Belle” and “Disgusted” could be the same person, they insist that my purpose was deception.
I reckon there are many people here who adopt multiple pseudonyms for no reason other than to avoid being harassed by some post-ers who follow them from thread to thread and try to dredge up the history of previous discussions in a bid to deny them the right to talk. SomewhatDisgusted does that regularly to me, and now he/she wants to know why I adopt more than one pseudonym!
SomewhatDisgusted,
This is what you do all the time–come into one thread and dredge up the discussion that has taken place in another. The dishonesty of it lies in you use people’s lack of familiarity with my argument on the original thread to get away with misrepresenting and distorting my reasoning. I have said very clearly, on numerous occasions, that I think Tamil Eelam is not a good idea, but you strive here to make me out to be some Tamil Eelamist who wants ethnic enclaves. To say that people have the right to live in ethnic enclaves if they so want to, especially if they are a minority community, is not the same as saying that they “should” and “must” live in ethnic enclaves.
What is “academic sophistry”? Anything that you can’t understand? Anything that doesn’t agree with your rigid viewpoint? If you would only bother to keep up with developments of ideas with regard to equal rights and multicultural democracy, you would be able to recognise that my views come from that tradition of thought, and not from racialism. Your ethnicity-blind liberalism has already been proven to be caught up in racialism and in facilitating the perpetuation of majoritarian power. You think that your logic is flawless only because you don’t know any better.
You are so wilfully prejudiced that you didn’t even realise that there are many shared points in our worldview until you came across my viewpoint under a different pseudonym. I did not change the pseudonym to Belle to trap you but to indicate to an SL Tamil woman diasporic writer that I too was a woman from the SL Tamil diaspora, and that I shared her perspective and feelings. It was you who voluntarily joined that argument, and who now feels shamefaced because your lack of understanding of the complexity of my perspective has now been inadvertently exposed.
By the way, with regard to my “making sweeping generalizations against entire swathes of people,” if you would only step out of your fixed, no-evolution mindset and prejudice, you would realise that I had in fact changed my mind on that, and that I have actually publicly said so. Unlike you, I do change my mind. I keep it open to other perspectives, and I allow other people to change or develop my perspective.
There is no honesty, none at all, in misrepresenting people’s viewpoint to others and trying to silence post-ers by harassing them from thread to thread.
Dear Disgusted/Belle;
Don’t get angry my dear fellow. There is a simple way to resolve this dispute. No need to waste that much of energy.Please try to accept the mistakes taken place from your part . It is simple as that. What a simple plan!
You might remember once I recommended Niranjan to do a SWOT analysis on himself. I can assure very good results. If you don’t like that treatment there is an alternative. HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY!
[Edited out]
Thanks!
Dear Heshan;
You say;
“These people (Yapa/Off the Cuff/Somewhat Disgusted) are incapable of making any coherent argument. So they attack your character instead.
Heshan, you really know what is truth and what is untruth here. You really know whose arguments are coherent and whose are not. You really know who can build up sound arguments and who cannot. Still you support a person with scores of fallacies in his arguments. According to my knowledge he has know fair knowledge of logic and he writes some good sentences , I suppose though his experience. You know well what happened to Disgusted when I answered his questions logically. He forgot his name, remember. He lost his manhood, remember. You don’t see his audacity, his duality, duplicity and dishonesty.
You praise untruth instead of truth, you praise audacity instead of honesty. You are much more dishonest than Disgusted. You displayed this in many places. In the long debate with Off the Cuff, it was once exibited. When you feel you are loosing the ground, you always switched your topic. Really you are no match to Off the Cuff, but you took him in a ride using your foul tactics. When I offered you to come forward to do some service , shelving our differences, what you did was indicating refusal, on the basis that I had not answered your questions, and then, when I gave comprehensive answers to all of them, you slowly tried to shift the attention asking a series of irrelevent questions, to which was not a pray.
Can you remember, you querrid my position about Science and Western Culture. When the proper answer was given you tried take me to learn Bible interpretations that attempt also was defuted. Many times I can remember SomewhatDisgusted and many are referring you and cunning.
Heshan; Do you know the difference between wiseman and culprit? Both are intellegent and capable men. What is lacking and what is in abundance in the culprit? YOU ARE HAVING THEM ALL IN YOUR CORE!
Thanks!
[Editors note: Dear Yapa, Heshan et al., with regard to your comments please refrain from issuing personal attacks or even highlighting the supposed inadequacies of commentators. This kind of banal discourse reduces the value of discussion and debate that is encouraged on Groundviews with the relevant topic of the forum. We note the previous constructive debates that you have engaged in and urge you to continue on in that style. Thank you.]
Dear Yapa:
Actually you are correct in the sense that I should not have grouped you in the same category as your *colleague* here. As you know, I have (in general) had a high opinion of you. Unfortunately, I do not know why you choose to take sides in the manner that you, as you often do. For the sake of argumentation, I do not take sides out of any loyalty. You will note that on this very thread I posted some rather anti-Christian material by one philosopher, Nietzsche, in reference to my argument as to why Buddhism is not compatible with Western culture. Anyway, I hope this clears up any misunderstandings.
Dear Groundviews;
Thanks! Your advice is appriciated.
Dear Heshan;
I am also not very happy about my hot temper. However, I let my honest emotions purge out. It gave me a relief. (You know this concept known as Catharsis was first introduced by Aristotle.). But I know that there is no ultimate gain quarreling. However, I am not worried about your grouping me with SomewhatDisdusted and Off the Cuff. It is a respect. It is an honour.
SomewhatDisgusted is a thorough gentleman with a very organized and vast knowledge, according to my understanding. He has exhibited this quality throughout his discussions consistantly.
Off the Cuff is a very clever person whose capabilities could be rarely matched.
The problem lies not with the grouping, but where you put the group. I cannot agree with what you say. Honestly tell me can you? This is what you said.
“Actually you are correct in the sense that I should not have grouped you in the same category as your *colleague* here.”
Further, I also must tell that Disdusted is also not an extremist like many of the writers in the web. He is also a capable person who contributed in may discussions very well, however I believe that he should have admitted his mistake rather than weeping and quarrelling over it.
In the case of you, I must admit that you are a person I should place in the category of Off the Cuff. Also I should tell, I am of opinion that his views are more objective than yours.
Thanks Heshans! No hard feelings.
Sorry Heshan what I meant to take from your comment is this
“These people (Yapa/Off the Cuff/Somewhat Disgusted) are incapable of making any coherent argument. So they attack your character instead.”
NOT
“Actually you are correct in the sense that I should not have grouped you in the same category as your *colleague* here.”
Dear Yapa:
I have not debated enough with SomewhatDisgusted to make an accurate judgment of his abilities. However, it is extremely silly to go after someone for using multiple pseudonyms. Attacking that person for using multiple id’s is considered a logical fallacy, e.g. ad hominem. Therefore, I can only limit any judgment of said person to their use of such arguments. On the other hand, I have debated extensively with your colleague Cuff here and can say without doubt the man does not possess an iota of intelligence. I am not the type to denigrate people because they are lacking knowledge. However, those who are incompetent but still try to pass themselves off as competent – I have no respect for such people!
If you choose to side with such people, I suppose that is your choice. In a way I understand where you’re coming off. You have lived in SL for a very long time; therefore it is rather difficult for you to consider alternative viewpoints. Once upon a time I was the same way. I read “Daily News” and believed 60 Tamil terrorists were dying everyday. Luckily I had the luxury to move away from SL. I was able to experience what life is like in a real democracy. Where leaders are held accountable. Where the majority reaches out to the minority. Where people have a real chance to improve their lives and careers, without recourse to “connections” and waiting lists.
Can SL achieve these things? Yes. But only if everyone is given their own space. It is difficult to see this in a place in SL, but it is how a real democracy works. It is not the group that triumphs, but the individual. The SL mentality is still suck in the “group” way of thinking. Let us judge individuals for their own *merits*, not because they are part of this or that group. If the rights of the individual are respected, then the rights of the group are also respected automatically. And then the distinctions between groups also become less and less important.
“And then the distinctions between groups also become less and less important.”
As a result of which, there is no need to take sides for the sake of taking sides, if you follow what I mean. This business of needlessly taking sides is a real abomination; it is not conducive to proper reasoning and sound judgment. On the other hand, it is the common mode of thinking in SL, since group behavior is still emphasized above and beyond the development of the individual.
Dear Heshan,
“Attacking that person for using multiple id’s is considered a logical fallacy, e.g. ad hominem”
If you read my post, I never attacked the act of using multiple ids. How could I? I’ve used different ones before myself. In fact, “Disgusted” was a pseudonym I used initially, before I switched over to “SomewhatDisgusted”, and the earlier pseudonym was subsequently taken over by Belle. What I did attack was the bad faith act of wasting mine and others time engaging in debate over ground already covered. That in no way invalidates Belle’s arguments I agree. But it does call into question the integrity of the position represented by Belle, if she needs to hide behind multiple pseudonyms to express it.
Dear Yapa,
Thank you for the kind comment, even if I’m not deserving of it.
I should also say that I have no issue with anyone holding contrary views to mine, indeed, as the saying goes, if everyone thinks the same, then no one is thinking much at all. In fact, I believe that the two of us differ on many issues also, such as with regard to the role of religion in society, western vs. eastern logic systems etc.
However, I have the impression that if a matter is reasoned out with you and logically discussed, it will be possible to come to an honest consensus. I might say the same thing about Off-the-cuff. There is a direct impression of good-faith and honesty and a willingness to understand others and/or change one’s own point of view. I very sincerely hope that I represent such a position also and would be glad to have it pointed out to me if I don’t. Unfortunately, this same compliment I cannot necessarily pay to Belle or Heshan.
Dear Belle,
“To say that people have the right to live in ethnic enclaves if they so want to,
especially if they are a minority community, is not the same as saying that they “should” and “must” live in ethnic enclaves.”
This is a clear misrepresentation of my position and a whitewashing of your own. The issue was never about natural human tendencies to form ethnic ghettos. Indeed that is a well understood sociological phenomenon in terms of in-group, out-group dynamics. I’ve clearly stated on several occasions that people should have the freedom to live where they please, and if that is within an ethnic ghetto, it is a personal choice and does not concern me in anyway.
My objection has always been against constitutionalization of such divisions. I
distinctly recall you saying that free movement of Sinhalese into Tamil areas must be legally prevented as it would “dilute Tamil presence”. So that is not equivalent to forcing people to live in ethnic ghettos? Why are you moving the goalposts? You must either defend your position rationally or change your mind. Doing neither is the very definition of bigotry.
“What is “academic sophistry”? Anything that you can’t understand?”
I am in academia myself, so I have some understanding of how the system works. My objection was against simply alluding to hidden knowledge without clearly stating logical reasons in support of your position. Using the good name of academia to give an air of respectability to unjustified opinion is what I object to. I have clearly stated my position and the reasons for holding it as well as how your own position leads to a position of inconsistency. You are welcome to rebut it factually and give better reasons to shift to your standpoint. Making indications of possessing vast reserves of knowledge which others are “unable to grasp” on account of them all being mysteriously mentally handicapped does not impress anyone.
“Anything that doesn’t agree with your rigid viewpoint? “
There is no dishonour in changing one’s mind when faced with clear evidence and logical reasons for doing so. Indeed, it is the hallmark of scientific integrity and consequently, anyone subscribing to a scientific world view. I am more than happy to change my mind on presentation of a clear logical reasoning process in support of your position.
As I recall, it was you who said “No, there is no chance I will change my mind” so to accuse me of rigidity is rich indeed. That may be your prerogative, but please don’t act offended when someone calls you out on it. You have also not sought to resolve any of the inconsistencies that I’ve pointed out but nevertheless make bilious bleatings on being held to account on them.
“If you would only bother to keep up with developments of ideas with regard to equal rights and multicultural democracy, you would be able to recognize that my views come from that tradition of thought, and not from racialism.”
So it’s only incidental that the end result of your version of a multi-cultural democracy is virtually indistinguishable from the end result of racialism? I must be out-of-date indeed!
As for my “difference-blind liberalism”, here’s a dilemma facing liberals these days which Richard Dawkins highlighted.
1. The supreme court was asked to rule in 1972, when some Amish parents in Wisconsin withdrew their children from high scool. The very idea of education beyond a certain age was contrary to Amish values. The state of Wisconsin took the parents to court, claiming that the children were being deprived of their right to an education.
2. Female genital mutilation is practiced by certain communities within Britain today. One half of decent liberal minds are aghast at the practice and want to abolish it. The other half however, “respects” ethnic cultures and feel that we should not interfere if “they” want to mutilate “their” girls.
Certainly very extreme examples. The children in the above cases are denied their rights to education or being tortured. So what, you might ask, is the connection? Well, at what point does a liberal say, cultural values be damned, you cannot undermine humanity in the pursuit of backward, illogical ideals?
This is where my so-called “difference-blind” liberalism stems from. I will not stand by idly while others actively seek to undermine our common humanity and constitutionalize racism, taking us back by another hundred years, so that we may blindly “respect” multi-culturalism based on inconsistent logic. Forgive me for failing to summon adequate respect for it and please don’t say it is without reason. I have clearly highlighted the reasons. Feel free to refute them.
“Your ethnicity-blind liberalism has already been proven to be caught up in racialism and in facilitating the perpetuation of majoritarian power.”
So I’m a racialist for asking that our constitution embody the notions of pluralism but you are not a racialist for asking for race based demarcations of the country?
As for perpetuating majoritarian power, I’ve stated on many occasions that I am against this. Legislation must be present to ensure equal rights to all citizens and checks and balances must be introduced, as in any other multi-cultural nation. Clearly, that is something I would have no issue with exploring solutions for. But the problem you have is that it is the very existence of the majority which offends you. Your solution is being a majority in your own right so you can oppress the minorities within your own little enclave and the “other” (Sinhala) majority can continue to oppress minorities in theirs. Very logical indeed.
“You think that your logic is flawless only because you don’t know any better.”
Feel free to enlighten me and others without alluding to mystical knowledge that one can neither hope to rebut nor understand.
There is no honesty, none at all, in misrepresenting people’s viewpoint to others and trying to silence post-ers by harassing them from thread to thread.
I have no real capability nor desire to misrepresent you (you are free to post a rebuttal and others are free to read and verify. At best, I will damage my own credibility). Nor do I have any capability to silence you. (The GV editors might have that ability, I certainly don’t)
Accusing me of hounding you from thread to thread is again disingenuous. I have only asked on one other thread somewhat hopefully, when your post suggested a change in position, whether you had actually changed your mind. You answered in the negative. I accept responsibility for having brought it up unnecessarily that one time and confess to the crime of being somewhat hopeful over being somewhat disgusted.
However, unbeknownst to me, subsequent conversations were with your alter ego so I’m not sure whether I’m supposed to count those too?
I carefully refrained from engaging you on this thread till the point where I noticed that your two pseudonyms in fact veiled a single person and merely noted it. At that point, it was you who felt compelled to go on the defensive, digging up the past and mentioning how I was polite to Belle but not to Disgusted, alluding to some form of sexism. Therefore, I too was forced to dig up the past to offer justification. But it appears I must take the fall for that one too?
My suggestion is, please don’t confuse yourself on account of having multiple personalities and if you proceed to be aggressive to others on account of your own mistakes, don’t bleat in a plaintive fashion when others prove capable of defending themselves just as aggressively.
I may be forceful in my argumentation, as you are in yours, but that does not mean I’m trying to harass you nor does it render arguments either of us make invalid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_over_substance_fallacy). I am willing to discuss things with you calmly and in a civilized fashion if you will do the same.
SomewhatDisgusted,
You have your position and I have mine. Both of us have in the past clearly elaborated our positions and our arguments. Whoever was interested in the discussion would have taken what they wanted from it. I would like to leave it there rather than re-hash it–I don’t want to waste my life and time going over and over old ground in the bid that someone can be declared the winner and someone the loser, especially according to juvenile parameters such as who has more evidence, who is able to “rebut on facts”, etc. Doesn’t the quality of one’s theorization count at all? Are you sure that you’re an academic? The terms of your discourse sound more like ‘freshman’s comp’ or ‘varsity debate’ talk to me.
But if you are indeed an academic, then surely you ought to know that a whole lot more of careful citation and documentation needs to be made in representing another person’s position and criticising an argument that has been made in another location. Accusations such as my moving my goalposts, that I have not sought to resolve any inconsistencies, etc, cannot be just flung about according to your pleasure–they need to be painstakingly evidenced. Otherwise, it is just slander.
I don’t claim to possess “vast reserves of knowledge” which others can’t grasp because of their alleged mental deficiency. That too is a misrepresentation of what I said. I do think it is only appropriate that when one is discussing a specific issue, here multiculturalism and equal rights, and claiming to be the one with all the ‘correct’ views on these matters, that one should have a minimum knowledge of developments in the field. For eg, you raise the issue of female genital mutilation–is that all there is to that, i.e. the irreconcilable claim of human rights vs that of ethnic cultural rights, i.e the politics of universalism vs the politics of difference? No ways that have been offered of getting around this; no other complicating factors in the issue?
And no, my version of multicultural democracy is not at all similar to racialism—but you would think so because you have only one model of pluralism in mind, and anything outside it is consigned to racism and racialism.
Do not demand that I engage in discussion with you. I am tired of having my views and position deformed and twisted by the limiting prism of your perspectives and prejudice. Why should I have to repeatedly defend my views and position just because someone else keeps misinterpreting them?
Given your moral superiority, the great integrity of your character, I am sure you won’t have trouble respecting someone’s wishes not to engage with you.
Otherwise, I shall just have to metamorphose into yet another pseudonym…
Dear Belle (Disgusted),
That’s fine by me. I was re-reading this thread and realized that kinder gentler souls such as Humanist have politely retreated in the face of your bellicose invective, rajivmw and huh got a taste of some acid-tongued vituperation for comments they never made and I recall from a previous thread that “undergroundview” too was accused of bad faith when he/she gently pointed out the flaws in your arguments. Off-the-cuff, Yapa and Observer too may have suffered similar fates, but I honestly stopped reading half way through. Therefore, I consider myself to be in esteemed company to be “chastized” by you.
There is no need to metamorphose into different identities, some self-analysis will do. Myself, I am slightly ashamed of my own pugnacity (but not too much) but more so for having devalued the discussion on this forum for others. I won’t seek to pursue the matter further, but don’t expect a get-out-of-jail-free card to continue unchallenged in spreading bigoted views.
Dear Belle:
Using pseudonyms is a brilliant idea. It will completely derail the one-track thinking of you-know-who. In particular, their “conspiracy theories” will not hold up well. The resulting psychosis will be amusing to watch.
Cheers.
Dear Ms Belle (aka Disgusted)
Due to the length, which causes a problem with the GV server this post is in three parts
Part 1
My first post on the thread delusions-of-power-devolution-searching-post–prapa-possibilities was
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/09/17/delusions-of-power-devolution-searching-post%E2%80%93prapa-possibilities/#comment-9817
It also happens to be the last post to date on that thread.
This is what I said there
The discussion on this thread is one of the best I have seen on groundviews so far. I wish that such discussions will overwhelm the slang matches that usually take place on most threads.
Smoulderingjin, somewhatdisgusted and undergroundview please keep it up. I hope that Dr. Pradeep Jeganathan will continue to provide his perspective on what is being discussed.
However Suren Raghavan is very conspicuous by his absence in a thread started by himself.
Unquote
I omitted the name of Disgusted as My opinion of his views expressed on that thread appeared to be Dogmatic and was not inflexible and he/she admitted as such as the following quote shows
“There isn’t a chance that I will re-consider my position.”
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/09/17/delusions-of-power-devolution-searching-post%E2%80%93prapa-possibilities/#comment-9817
Unquote
This proved to me that Disgusted was not writing on GV with an “Open Mind” but was doing propaganda to disseminate preconceived dogma aimed at polarising that SL communities which was detrimental to any sort of reconciliation within communities in Sri Lanka
I also recognised that Disgusted was espousing the concept of “Traditional Tamil Homelands” which in my view is the most divisive element standing in the way of reconciliation. Disgusted should have known better as the Govt of Singapore does not allow such ethnic conclaves in order to prevent ethnic problems developing in Singapore so why was he (she) espousing it in SL?
Was he (she) against SL achieving the same ethnic harmony that Singapore achieved?
As you will find later this seems to be Disgusted’s Achilles heel. The moment this point is raised Disgusted goes into hiding and out comes Belle.
Disgusted says
Sinhalese are not only a dominant community in SL, they are an overwhelming majority. So to allow them to settle everywhere without placing any ethnic limits would mean that they will in actuality be forming Sinhalese ghettos all over the country, and getting all the benefits of that (support from the community, the ability to dominate and dictate district needs) while the minorities will get no chance to do so.
Unquote
Disgusted also goes on to compare Singapore to Sri Lanka, by saying
In Singapore, for example, the government dismantled the kampongs where the Malays lived and forced them to live all over the country. That meant in effect that they could no longer exist as a community. In terms of ethnic-based businesses such as running food stalls and running sundry shops, the Malays cannot run viable businesses because there isn’t a large enough market, a critical mass, for them in any location, whereas the Chinese can set up shop anywhere and thrive because they are always surrounded by their community. The end of the kampongs led to the disappearance of much of Malay culture from the Singapore landscape. They now had to assimilate to survive. The Chinese lost none of their ethnic culture. Thankfully, they have ethnic-based organisations through which they can mobilise for their needs, but presumably, in your vision, you would not even allow that.
Unquote
What struck me was that Disgusted who lives in Singapore is unable to criticise the Singapore policy in as strong terms in Singapore (in the controlled media of that country) while denying the right of a SL citizen to live anywhere within our country IF that person is a Sinhalese. Where as Tamils can live wherever they please. The existence of the Thesawalami Law in Sri Lanka which gives Tamils special rights in the North while excluding ALL other communities is conveniently forgotten.
This struck me as double talk and I requested from Disgusted the following information
Continued in Part 2
Dear Belle,
This is part 2
As a person living in a state that has apparently successfully integrated a multitude of races into a cohesive problem free society could you enlighten us on the policies adopted in Singapore as Disgusted was the person that opened the discussion in this direction by comparing Singapore to SL.
1) Land
2) Housing, State & Private (with special reference to any govt funded schemes)
3) Language
4) Judicial review process
5) Education (Govt as well as Private)
6) Equality
7) Power sharing
8 ) Access to free Medical Care
9) Media Freedom
The opening for these questions were made by Disgusted (him/herself) by bringing out the Singapore comparisons.
There was no reply and I assumed I joined the thread too late
Then came the Second thread imagining-the-immediate-impossibilities by Suren Raguvan http://www.groundviews.org/2009/10/12/imagining-the-immediate-impossibilities/
I had the distinct feeling that under the guise of Academia veiled attacks on the Sinhalese and Buddhism were being made by the writer of that article Suren Raghavan
My first posting on that thread was http://www.groundviews.org/2009/10/12/imagining-the-immediate-impossibilities/#comment-9875
Those interested can follow the exchange between Suren Raghavan and Myself in that thread.
It referred to my compliments on the previous thread (which excluded Disgusted) and added the following A writer who avoids discussion and fails to take responsibility for what he/she writes would not be any better than a Troll or a Rabble Rouser that unfortunately infests the web discussions.
Unquote
Referring to my statement below
I have noticed that with the exception of Dr Devanasan Nesiah, Dayan Jayatilleka and probably a few others the majority of writers shy away from discussing their own articles. This brings to question the motive behind what they write.
Unquote
Suren Responded with a vicious attack on Dr J.
Was it because Dr.J was a Sinhalese while the first named was a Tamil that he overlooked Dr Nesaiah and took on Dr. J ?
Why?
Continued in Part 3
Dear Belle,
Part 3 ….. More parts t follow
For some reason the GV servers keep refusing my post and I am compelled to break it down to shorter posts than expected
When a reply from Suren Raghavan was pending in comes Disgusted in his defence and states
“Again, look at the attempts to demolish you as a person, as an academic, while accusing you of being personal.”
Unquote
This again opened the questions that remained unanswered by Disgusted in the previous thread and I re-posted it for a response from Disgusted, assuming that as my post was the last on the other thread it was not seen by Disgusted
Disgusted’s response was explosive and unexpected
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/10/12/imagining-the-immediate-impossibilities/#comment-9998
However the answer for this explosive reaction came from Disgusted himself when he stated that
“At any rate, I don’t appear on your list of those who you felt contributed to productive discussion on the other thread, so I am “perplexed” that you would want to seek my contributions, and even import a posting from the other thread to this one. It seems somewhat distracting.”
Unquote
There is no wrath like that of a woman scorned although I never knew that I was dealing with a woman at that time.
Continued in Post 4
Dear Belle,
Post 4 …more to follow
Coming to the current thread I posted a comment addressed to “Huh” on November 23, 2009 @ 2:35 am http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/comment-page-6/#comment-11111
It contained a link to the National Archives of the Netherlands stating that the Dutch constructed a Fort to protect the BORDER with the Sinhala Kingdom of KANDY at “Elephant Pass”. Strangely there was no mention of a “Tamil Kingdom” (http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/AMH/detail.aspx?page=dpost&lang=en&id=682#tab2 )
This Document which cannot be refuted as its in the Dutch National Archives and is Dutch property, gives the date as 17th Century (year 16xx) and COMPLETELY destroys the “Traditional Tamil Homeland Concept” as it PREDATES the “Cleghorn minutes of 1799″ which is in the 18th Century by nearly a CENTURY !!!!
This was too much for Disgusted and out he (she) came with all guns blazing and shooting from the hip. Those interested can follow the discussion with Disgusted and me on this thread.
Continued in post 5
Dear Belle,
Post 5 ….more to follow
Again when the Singapore housing policy was raised by reference to an article written by an Indian who lives and studies in Singapore Disgusted went underground.
Out comes “Belle” November 25, 2009 @ 7:10 pm http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/comment-page-6/#comment-11241 and she raises a very pertinent point which I reproduce below
“The per capita contribution is from each citizen. So why should each community get its just share? So each Sinhalese citizen gets 72% of a chance, and a minority citizen gets 18% or even a smaller chance? Why? All citizens paid the same, didn’t they? Why must ethnicity be brought into play when you say SL is not for Sinhalese, Tamils or Muslims but for all? Why not draw lots or allocate according to a first-come-first-serve basis?/
Whose logic is racist here? “
Unquote
A part of my response to her was as follows
“Belle,
You sure have got the cart before the horse.
The intent is to DISPROVE the “Traditional Tamil Homeland” claim.
This divisive concept is the biggest stumbling block for reconciliation.
The proponents of a Traditional Tamil Homeland do so by claiming that the Tamils were the main occupiers of the Land claimed as the “Traditional Homeland”
Now please tell me how that claim can be shown to be Fraudulent and thwarted, other than by showing that NON TAMIL SPEAKING people were also occupying or were probably the only occupants of the same land?
Who would that non Tamil speaking people be?
Regarding your suggestion of drawing lots I agree that it can also be a solution. I provided the solution which came to my mind as an equitable one.
However since drawing lots leaves things to chance the mathematical probability of the majority community getting more allocations will always be present. This may lead to dissension in the long term.
The point I wanted to make is that a Govt funded project should not be exclusive to or favouring any community, just because the project is sited in a predominantly Sinhalese area or Muslim area or Tamil area.
Now how can that be racist?
Unquote
The complete reply is available here http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/05/deepavali-dilemma-reflections-from-the-diaspora/comment-page-6/#comment-11256
There were some more questions directed at her in that same post but she too went underground.
Continued in Post 6
Dear Belle,
This is post 6 and is the final part
The FIRST time I knew that Disgusted had a Dual ID and was actually a Female was when I saw the post be SomewhatDisgusted December 8, 2009 @ 2:13 pm
Whether the counter arguments made are without coherent logic will be judged by the reading public
My personal view is that ANY WRITER posting on a PUBLIC FORUM like GV should be able to Justify what they write by providing factual evidence. Unless the writer has the INTEGRITY to answer questions posed by readers in a straight forward fashion that writer is attempting to degenerate GV to the level of a propaganda tool to suit their narrow objectives.
Some use an elastic measure and others argue ad infinitum to prove that black is really white
There are many on GV who have the courage to challenge false and divisive propaganda some written by so called academics couched in academic language but when challenged they withdraw into a shell and when they do not have a factual footing, flaunt qualifications to try and break arguments.
Truth is sometimes unpalatable but has to be faced in order to move forward towards reconciliation.
Dogmatic and frozen views will not help anyone in Sri Lanka to build a just society.
I would like to invite anyone to discuss the current Constitution of Sri Lanka and point to areas that DOES NOT GRANT EQUAL RIGHTS to all Citizens of this country.
Thank you
Off the Cuff
To GV Readers,
In order to clarify some of the points that I have raised such as GV contributors not taking responsibility please look at the following links
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/09/17/the-internment-%e2%80%93-a-collective-punishment/comment-page-1/#comment-9725
http://www.groundviews.org/2009/11/15/gsp-sovereignty-double-standards-and-terrorist-traitors/#comment-10865
There are others who stop replying when difficult questions are posed