Again the word “Wahabism” is being bandied about without realizing that it is a misnomer. If “Wahabism” connotes terrorism then the writer is barking up the wrong tree. The teachings of this Spiritual leader has nothing to do with religious extremism. It is his enemies (and he had many among the religious deviants, for teaching true Islam, as elucidated in his writings) that blackened his character.

The author needs a refresher on history. The Portuguese arrived only 500 years ago.

While condemning the despicable un-Buddhist behavious of my clergy (which I will join you in condemning) I also suggest you address the increasing wahhabism that is seen among Muslims. It takes two hands to clap and it is unfortunate that the Muslims are not condemning this.

While Dr Lorna Devaraja titled her book as a thousand years she only gives evidence from the Kandyan era. I challenge the author to prove otherwise. Don’t take her title and misrepresent her work.

What is religious fundamentalism? Is it not adherence to the fundamental tenets of ones religion? NoFrames has mixed religious extremism with fundamentalism. Why should one worry if anyone adheres to religious fundamentalism? It is the so called extremists who espouse violence that should be condemned. Hence noFrames seems to have had his wires crossed and is barking up the wrong tree. Again it would be educative if he can quote from the works of Sheik Abdul Wahab to prove that his teachings encouraged violence!

Thank you.

Two statements above need clarification:
The Portuguese arrived in 1505 (I should know being of Burgher origins).
The Kingdom of Kandy was established in the late 15th century.

Again, the author has failed to provide evidence to substantiate the millennium claim.

I am not disputing the fact that Muslim were close to power centers in both Kotte and Kandy. However, if one takes the claim of the author of a millennium, they would be placed in the Anuradhapura period and I am yet to see any evidence of that.

I do appreciate that you took the time to reply. In future, references to claims would make such publications academically sound !

As a matter of personal preference I do not engage in comment threads, largely because in many instances they end up fanning vitriol and I wish to play no hand in it.

I wish to however respond through you in this one instance, regarding the historical non-narrative that a reader mentions of Arab traders arriving on Sri Lankan shores in the 14th century. My first instinct was to not dignify this fallacy, but felt afterwards that responding would be in the best interests of those who can be misinformed by this comment.

To clarify any perceived historical inaccuracy, one could refer to the works of the esteemed Prof.Lorna Dewaraja, and particularly her book ‘The Muslims of Sri Lanka: One thousand years of ethnic harmony’, which clearly outlines the historical bearings of Sri Lankan Muslims.

Not to be facetious, but a simple study of the historical basis for the Sinhalese ‘Parangiya Kotte giya wagey’, would also establish the standing of the local Muslims and their proximity to centres of state power when the Portuguese first arrived on Lankan shores.

Many thanks,

Raashid Riza

During portugeuse regime muslims were killed and persecuted. Isnot enough to prove muslims were here. Further the Arabs were instrumental to introduce international trade to kings of those days. Malwana agreement where Kandian kings entered into with portugeuse resulted in handing over of Malayaali soldeirs who with the king. Portugeuse have assasinated all 10 malayalis who happened to be muslims At malwana u still find a thambigey waththa where these people were buried2

All of which brings me to the two comments on this page (one of them mine). The author made certain claims about historical facts, I am still waiting evidence of such claims as requested in my first comment.

Could the author provide some historical evidence for the claim of a millennium? This is something of recent origin that I see from Muslim writers that has puzzled me. We learnt from our textbooks that the Arab traders arrived around the 14th century. I would love to learn more.

Firstly it tries to paint that BBS is the instigator of the racial hatred. But infact Wahabists, with Arab oil money have been fundamentalizing the Sri Lankan Muslim community long before that. Niqabs and Burqas appeared among Muslim community, with Madrasas, religous schools, intersectoral riots and radicalization. The author turns a blind eye on these obvious facts. The zenith of this radicalization was obseved during last few months when SLTJ demonstrated that they should be allowed to marry under aged girls, mocking and ridiculing the country’s laws.

Secondly, author is has a certainty that the BBS is MR backed. Rather it’s the other way round and it is more likely to be UNP or an INGO backed. The Secretary of the BBS was a former World vision activists, would be an interesting fact for the doubters. BBS was used by INGOs to drive away Muslim votes from MR. Now they are using BBS to divert attention from budget or large scale scandals like that of Treasury bonds. Every time the UNP ministers or RW is in the focus of things, BBS shows up and divers attention. If the current government really needs to end it, they can easily Jain Gnanasaara, which they are reluctant to do. Who wants to jail their own pawn?