Have a look through these Matrimonial adds for more confirmation.

http://www.tamilmatrimony.com/matrimonials/Religion/7/Buddhist.html

Heshan,

Hope you will find a good bride.
She /(He) might provide some support to your leaning …. and give it some stability.
Good Luck

“I believe that the following statement of yours is not accurate as I know of Tamils who are Buddhists.”

This is news to me; however, if that is the case, I am pleased that Buddhism is appealing to non-Sinhala in Sri Lanka. Thanks for pointing this out to me.

I believe that the following statement of yours is not accurate as I know of Tamils who are Buddhists.

“All Buddhists are Sinhala and a non-Sinhala to become a Buddhist is unthinkable;”

Buddhism is not owned by the Sinhalese though their are radicals who seem to think so. There are many who consider the term Sinhala Buddhist a slur. I definitely would not want to be called one.

We have no control over our ethnicity but we have control over our religious beliefs.

“I neglected to mention in my previous message that from the above, I believe that you understand my position (that I am looking for “balance,” a rather cogent term you used). Also, even though I do not agree with your last statement, I do not wish to trivialize it or imply that it is a marginal issue.”

I do understand that, the feeling of Insecurity is well entrenched among the Sinhala Buddhists; owing to this, eschewing such a constitutional protection of Buddhism will be chaotic and political suicide for those who attempt it! With this status-quo intact; striking a balance spiritually, politically, and communally will be troublesome. Personally I cannot see it workable unless the minorities have been completely subjugated. The Sri Lankans will be classed into Super-ordinates and Sub-ordinates; there will be sub divisions within. One can argue that there will be always divisions in any society. Yes, that is so, but such divisions are seen within social hierarchies. The state must position itself above all this; this is my point.

“How is there no religious freedom? What are Hindus, Christians, or Muslims forbidden from doing in SL?”

As I said before, the state and parliament must be supreme that purport to govern with absolute equality for all citizens of a nation. In Sri Lanka, Buddhism and Sinhala are inextricably linked. All Buddhists are Sinhala and a non-Sinhala to become a Buddhist is unthinkable; given such a situation, protection of Buddhism enshrined in the Constitution sends a signal to all none Buddhists that they are aliens of the nation. I have already highlighted that the planting of Buddha statue in Trinco; this will not be the last time this sort of thing will happen I can assure you that.

One has to ask, why there is constitutional protection for Buddhism? If, as you say that, Hindus, Christians, and Muslims and not forbidden to do anything; then what will Buddhism loose if there isn’t any constitutional protection exists? Is there a fundamental weakness in Buddhism that is not seen in other religions?

“Sanskrit on the other hand is not a language family but a specific language that appeared around the same time as prakrit. As Sony pointed out, Sanskrit was the intellectual language while prakrit was common man’s language.”

Yes, I completely agree; I need to find a different term to describe the so called Indo-Aryan family of languages! I do not subscribe to Indo-Aryan concept.

“I think the primary difference between us is that you are not religious, whereas I consider myself to be religious. Perhaps that is why I have a higher tolerance for religion in public places (as long as a particular religion is not excluded).”

“Anything of too much is good for nothing” I think that this is the case in Sri Lanka; everywhere one goes, one is smothered by prominence of religious symbols; I think that it is totally unnecessary.

“In this case, there wasn’t anyone else but the security forces to protect the non-Tamils from the LTTE.”

The LTTE had been blamed for all the ills in Sri Lanka; understandably so; however, I was living in Jaffna during the 1970s; there was no LTTE; the Tamils were as passive as one can be, but I witnessed atrocities committed by the police against the Tamils. Anyway, only time will tell how things will develop.

“I have heard the same stories, from Tamilnet. Until this adversely affects non-Buddhists, I will have a hard time taking this seriously.”

So, you do not deny that Buddha statues are being planted in North & East; whether they were adversely affecting the non-Buddhists is the question, right?

‘The “ethnic conflict” in SL arose not around religion but language. The Tamils were denied the right to have their language acknowledged in an equal way as the Sinhala language. I accept that and believe that this is the primary injustice to be rectified. On the other hand, I do not see how the religious freedoms of non-Buddhists were affected by the Constitution “protecting” Buddhism.”

I agree with you that the Sri Lankan conflict arose around language. But the Issue is that, all Buddhists are Sinhalese; both Sinhala and Buddhism have prominence in the Sri Lankan constitution, which implicates the Buddhist religion. One cannot separate Sinhala language and Buddhism, and the state is expected by the Constitution to protect Buddhism thus implied to protect the Sinhala Buddhists.

“You answered my question about a secular country where Buddhism has thrived, although you did not answer my point that Japanese individuals have enough wealth that they can support Buddhist institutions on their own without needing state patronage.”

I would like to do a little research on the Japanese GDP and per capita income immediately after the WW11. How it was beneficial to build a Japanese nation on the basis on Japanese identity rather than on Buddhist identity? Whether, Japanese per capita income rose significantly as a result of working together as Japanese rather than a fragmented Japanese society based on religions!

“There is another key difference- SL is the only Buddhist-majority country in S. Asia, whereas you cannot say the same about E. Asia.”

So it will remain a Buddhist-majority country come what may.

“In response to your opinion that Buddhism can survive in SL without state support, again most Buddhists will ask how it disappeared utterly in India where it originated- **why couldn’t the same thing happen in SL as in the neighboring country?**.”

My response to the above is based on my practical experience. I live in a village in England; once I asked one of the prominent villagers; would it bother him that there was a big development afoot in his neighbouring land, which would substantially devalue his property. He answered to me; life is all about changes; one cannot put a stop to changes taking place in the village. I sat up and took a note of that.

In my view, if changes were to occur, they would; once can put a stop to it for a while, which will only defer the change for a little while, but it will happen anyway. I am not saying that Buddhism will disappear from Sri Lanka; the future Sri Lankans would view this differently thus the current Sinhala Buddhist society is only deferring whatever changes may happen in the future. In my view, Buddhism in Sri Lanka is strong, and it will survive come what may, but Sri Lanka must not fail as country because of this!

Hybrid Histories of South India and Sri Lanka

by Rajan Philips

Thanks!

You have raised following queries in your last post.
______________
Earlier I asked how you could mathematically explain the similarities between Elu and Pali/Sanskrit. You did not reply. Therefore you have not convincingly disproved my argument that the root of Sinhala came from India, and not SL.

I have not come across a modern scholar claiming that Sinhala originated in SL independently from India. Some links that you have provided have supported my argument:
_______________

I think following part taken from the original essay of the given link will provide some answers. Please read.
_____________

Indrapala reiterates like others before him, including Senarat Paranavitana, that the main population source of the island was its original, Mesolithic inhabitants and not any massive population movement from elsewhere. He suggests that there is evidence of the Mesolithic peoples using different languages in the early phases. He notes the generally agreed beginning of the Tamil language before the Common (or Christian) Era (BCE) based on classical Tamil literature and contemporary inscriptions. The Sinhala language would emerge later in the Common Era, not from an immigrant population of Sinhala speakers but through a process of ‘language replacement’ involving transformation of one of the indigenous languages (presumably Elu) following its exposure to North Indian languages, Prakrit and Pali, as well as Tamil and even Munda, the Austroasiatic language from the Southeast Asian region. The emergence of the Malayalam, Kannada and Telugu languages in the SISL region went through a similar process.

http://transcurrents.com/

Thanks!

“I still do not know your own view on this as it appears that, you know that, Buddhism in Constitution is none negotiable and you have decided that some sort of balance should be found. As far as I am concerned, all Sri Lankans cannot be equal on this basis as the Constitution is the final stop.”

I neglected to mention in my previous message that from the above, I believe that you understand my position (that I am looking for “balance,” a rather cogent term you used). Also, even though I do not agree with your last statement, I do not wish to trivialize it or imply that it is a marginal issue.

“As it stands now, there will never be real religious freedom in Sri Lanka, can it?”

How is there no religious freedom? What are Hindus, Christians, or Muslims forbidden from doing in SL?

“I also believe that all Indic languages including the Sinhala originated primarily from two sources: Sanskrit and Dravidian. The Aryan theory I doubt very much”

“Dravidian” refers to a family of languages (like “Indo-Aryan”) including Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam, and Tulu. I use that term to also describe the language spoken before the above 5 languages appeared.

Sanskrit on the other hand is not a language family but a specific language that appeared around the same time as prakrit. As Sony pointed out, Sanskrit was the intellectual language while prakrit was common man’s language.

Frawley and other Hindu enthusiasts claim that Indo-Aryan (and Sanskrit) originated in India and migrated to other places. Whether or not this is true, this does not contradict my point that the ancestor of modern Sinhala came from India and not Sri Lanka.

“I do not like the Chariot Festival being paraded along a public road.”

Really? I would like to see it, even in places in the South where there are no Hindus!

I think the primary difference between us is that you are not religious, whereas I consider myself to be religious. Perhaps that is why I have a higher tolerance for religion in public places (as long as a particular religion is not excluded).

“Rallying call for the Sinhalese and Buddha statues go hand-in-hand! So that the Security forces protecting one community against the other!”

In this case, there wasn’t anyone else but the security forces to protect the non-Tamils from the LTTE.

“I hear stories about Buddha statues being planted along the A9 highway;”

I have heard the same stories, from Tamilnet. Until this adversely affects non-Buddhists, I will have a hard time taking this seriously.

“It should be based on a common Sri Lankan identity, and this is only possible with a secular and just constitution.”

The “ethnic conflict” in SL arose not around religion but language. The Tamils were denied the right to have their language acknowledged in an equal way as the Sinhala language. I accept that and believe that this is the primary injustice to be rectified. On the other hand, I do not see how the religious freedoms of non-Buddhists were affected by the Constitution “protecting” Buddhism.

“Why is it that, one only sees such things in third world countries?”

You clearly have never been to Middle America (although you could make a strong argument that it belongs to the 3rd world).

“the British signed this document with their tongue in cheek; they knew that they could not uphold such undertakings. Sri Lanka is no longer under a colonial power; why then, it is still required to have such a provision in the constitution?”

You are absolutely correct what you said about the British- they failed to honor that clause which led to the 1817-8 Uva uprising. Most Sinhala Buddhists believe that honoring Buddhism in the Constitution is the most telling sign that the colonial era is over.

You answered my question about a secular country where Buddhism has thrived, although you did not answer my point that Japanese individuals have enough wealth that they can support Buddhist institutions on their own without needing state patronage. There is another key difference- SL is the only Buddhist-majority country in S. Asia, whereas you cannot say the same about E. Asia.

In response to your opinion that Buddhism can survive in SL without state support, again most Buddhists will ask how it disappeared utterly in India where it originated- **why couldn’t the same thing happen in SL as in the neighboring country?**.

“As a Buddhist I do not agree on the placement of Buddha statues on roadsides where the respect due to a Great Teacher cannot be given to him.”

I agree with you fully on this. Why is it that, one only sees such things in third world countries? It seems that too much religious interferences and economic developments cannot go hand-in-hand!

“In interpreting the Kandyan Convention we cannot lose site of the fact that it extended and covered the totality of the East and the Sabaragamuwa in the West. Even the annexation of Sabaragamuwa by the British was rescinded.”

I broadly agree with the above; I have read somewhere that, the Sinhala version of the convention also included Hinduism; correct me if I am wrong.

“The convention transformed the British Government to be the protector of Buddhism and the custodian of the Tooth Relic and the Temple of the Tooth. This is the identicle possition that the British Govt was placed in within the UK with respect to Christianity.”

In Britain, it is to do with Church of England, the Anglicanism, it was due to Henry the eighth denouncing Catholism due to him divorcing and marring again and again. It was because of the rivalry between the churches and many battles fought, the English Monarch became the protector of that faith. Ever since the parliament became supreme, such responsibilities of the Monarch became a mere formality. There is no written constitution in Britain; even Prince Charles said some time back; he wish to be a defender of faiths and not a single faith!

We are have been talking about a convention that was signed in the year of 1815 at the fall of a small kingdom within the territory of Lanka; how significant that is to protect Buddhism! To conclude that the convention was binding the entire Ceylon considering the clearly demarcated boundaries of different kingdoms is preposterous.

“Since we are talking of a religion which knows no borders and not of things like land or marriage customs etc,. I have difficulty in reconciling how such a Govt, while being the protector that guarantees “Inviolability” within the Kandyan Kingdom could act otherwise outside it when the Populace is overwhelmingly Buddhist even in the North Central region.”

They did not have to include the clause 9! This was done to avoid any ambiguity I would say. However, how would you justify subjecting the entire Sri Lanka to Buddhism even though the North & East were principally populated by Hindus, Muslims, and Christians?

“The word “INVIOLATE” has deeper ramifications than what is now currently embedded within the Constitution.”

I do agree with you on the point that you are making. However, in all seriousness, the British signed this document with their tongue in cheek; they knew that they could not uphold such undertakings. Sri Lanka is no longer under a colonial power; why then, it is still required to have such a provision in the constitution?

“I do not consider David Frawley to be an authority of history to accept his pronouncement. In any case, I believe that Indo-Aryan (and Dravidian) was more of a language family than a particular race or civilization.”

I also believe that all Indic languages including the Sinhala originated primarily from two sources: Sanskrit and Dravidian. The Aryan theory I doubt very much; there are numerous materials about this theory in circulation; it is very difficult to conclude one way or the other!

“Then you must be pretty miserable during Christmas as it is celebrated in the West.”

 Please do not get me wrong; religious and traditional celebrations are very important. Though I am not religious, I recognise the importance of such events. I immensely enjoyed my childhood particularly during the Thaipongal, Devali, and National Day (14th of April) celebrations. It is a time when one gets together with family and friends. I always wanted to be in Kandy when the Kandyan Perahara takes place, which I have not managed yet.

Having said that; I do not like to be reminded of religious symbols on a daily basis. I loath religious events broadcast over loud speakers. I am a Hindu; born and bred around a popular Hindu Kovil in Jaffna; I do not like the Chariot Festival being paraded along a public road. There should be a place for everything; this is me.

“I do not feel the same way. If somebody constructed a Hindu Kovil in southern SL illegally, I probably would try to find a way to accommodate the Hindus in some way. Only if it greatly inconvenienced the locals would I tear it down, but then I would try to find a place nearby where it wouldn’t be an inconvenience.”

I am sorry Wijayapala; there are bylaws for a purpose, by which, one has to obtain permission before one can erect a temple or a structure. This is so, that, the authorities can assess the implications of such a request. If need be, the authorities can bring the communities together in a state of consensus for such a structure to be erected. It should not be left to individuals to make a judgement as it were.

“Similarly, I hope that there are no restrictions against Hindus cremating their dead as per their rites in SL. If there is a restriction, then I would support a court case to overturn it.”

Buddhists and Hindus have been living in Sri Lanka from pre-Christian era; the relevant customs have been practiced ever since. Open air cremation has been exercised throughout that period; thus a custom. By contrast, in the UK, it is not their custom. Moreover, there will be environmental issues in conjunction with rural and urban management issues. Hindus in the UK have been happily cremating their dead relatives for over half of a century; the Crematoriums around the country allow accommodation of Hindu ritual practices within the compounds. What else one wants? If one feels very strongly about open air cremation, one should actually live in a country where one can do such things.

“My understanding of the Buddha statue episode in Trincomalee was that it was a response to the LTTE’s growing control in that area, sort of a rallying call for the Sinhalese living there rather than anything having to do with religion.”

Rallying call for the Sinhalese and Buddha statues go hand-in-hand! So that the Security forces protecting one community against the other! How can one expect harmony amongst the peoples of Sri Lanka?

“Correct me if I’m wrong, but Buddha hasn’t been illegally planted in other places in the N-E since then, and especially since the destruction of the LTTE.”

I will come back to you on this; I hear stories about Buddha statues being planted along the A9 highway; I need credible information about it before writing on these forums.

“I don’t know, but if I were to guess I would say that political interference played a far greater role than the Constitution.”

There is no doubt that the Constitution played a part. If it not that important, the clause can be removed, but it is there for a purpose!

“Thank you for showing me the Japanese Constitution. When the average Sri Lankan has the equivalent GDP per capita as his Japanese counterpart, or when Buddhists comprise 90% of the 125 million population as in Japan, then it may be time to secularize the SL Constitution.”

Japanese Religious percentages:

Shintonism 83.9%
Buddhism 71.4%
Christianity 2%
Others 7.8%

The above is based on 2005 numbers

The total exceeds 100%; this is because many belong to both Shintonism and Buddhism. As per you, in Sri Lanka the Buddhists amount to 70%, and what is then preventing Sri Lanka becoming a true Secular country?

Sri Lanka could have achieved greater heights than Singapore, if a nation had been built based on 1948 constitution! I do not believe that, Sri Lanka can progress with emphasis being placed on super-ordination and sub-ordination. It should be based on a common Sri Lankan identity, and this is only possible with a secular and just constitution.