In contrast, our cultural values and habits – speaking in Sinhala or Tamil is as much a habit as eating rice I’d guess – do not come with such “absolutes”. Of course, we pick these up from our childhood just as we do with our own religions. We remain attached to these habits mostly due to obvious practical reasons and/or relative advantages they present in the environments we live in. For example, I prefer to eat rice and curry because I have developed that eating habit since my childhood. Yet, I know that there’s nothing “absolute” about my habit. If I’m hungry enough, I have no problem having a sandwitch for my lunch, grudgingly though.

Same goes for all our cultural values and habits. But certainly not for our religious “absolutes”. Religious concepts and ideas are so strongly hard-wired in ourselves during the childhood that there is no chance that those who were brought up eating “religious rice” would find “religious sandwitches” abhorrent.

As pointed out by Chaminda, the religion is part of our composite culture. So, the question is: is it a good thing that culture and religion are closely intertwined?

Yes I agree the Buddha never did come to Sri Lanka. It is impossible, most historians believe that the person we refer to as the Buddha never really left the narrow strip of land of what is now the border between India and Nepal. This is quite understandable considering that he lived 2500 years ago!! Any journey to Sri Lanka would have taken years and would have been quite a risky endeavour. Furthermore, why would He ever want to visit this far away hardly populated almost mythical island where only some scattered groups of indigenous people lived? It is obvious that this is a part of our religious lore or mythology just like the resurrection of Christ or the splitting of the moon in Islam.

Furthermore, yes a true Buddhist Ascetic would leave all worldly attachments to pursue Nibhana or Nirvana. But most Buddhists around the world are not ascetics. They are normal lay people who try to follow the essence of Buddhism and use the philosophy as a code of conduct. This code of conduct can profoundly influence the way a society evolves which we can see in the richness of cultures around the world.

I do agree with you that may “Buddhists” in Sri Lanka identify themselves as such because they were taught to be so as children. Then a vast majority of us in the world are in a similar situation now aren’t they? There are many who argue that the ability to choose their religion is a fundamental right of the child. But then religion is but just a part of the composite culture we grow up with isn’t it? In Sri Lanka culture and religion are closely intertwined. For an example, Sinhala people celebrate the traditional New Year in April. It is an event that lasts for weeks and is steeped in symbolism, tradition and cultural nuance. It, in many ways, underpins the social structure and emphasises our beliefs. But the Sinhala people who converted Christianity do not celebrate this festival.

Can you answer me the question “Why are you a Buddhist?”. You probably are because you were accidentally born to “buddhist parents” instead of Christian or Hindu parents.

If you or the prelates are real Buddhists they would have denounced this world of political, economic, financial and materaial desires to attain “Nirvana”.