The heading "Tamils don't belong to Sri lanka, they should fight in Tamilnadu- Rathana thera" in lankaEnews website is a slight mistranslation from the Sinhalese.
The monk is implying that Tamils has their origins in Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka is the home land of Sinhalese. Check the star gallery link in the same site and you would understand the standards of the site.
I'm sorry, but I would delete comments with filthy insults.
ReplyDeleteI must admit, it still sounds quite illogical to me. Will leave it to someone else to explain.
ReplyDeleteyup, agree, i still cant make sense of it.
ReplyDelete... also, jhu's udaya gammanpila made a similar (if not the exact) statement at a lecture in colombo few months ago
Sri Lanka is the homeland of the Tamils and Sinahalese. This priest should not give statements that can give rise to ethnic tension. After all he should be under the Bo Tree meditating and not doing a press conference.
ReplyDeleteBo tree or not, he should be meditating than doing politics. I agree on that
ReplyDeletei'm left wondering. why do we see an influx of buddhist clergy in politics and why do we vote for them?
ReplyDeletesentiments of certain factions of the society that their view is not represented and hence represented thruogh them? lack of new / young blood in politics? what lessons can we learn from those like Bishop Belo of E Timor?
Mahasen failed to articulate the correct part of the monk's statement. The crux of it was this; if Tamil's want to wage a separatist war, they would be better served fighting that said war against India.
ReplyDelete"if Tamil's want to wage a separatist war, they would be better served fighting that said war against India." ???????
ReplyDeleteStill doesn't make sense.
Did the malays say that to the Tamils or chinese who are not indigenous to the land, and yet formed a separate state?
Hey Mahasen, your links lead to pages with some babes.
ReplyDeleteNot bad looking ones I must say, but not what I was expecting...
Yes jack point, it's the exact site that carry this misleading article. That's why I included the link. That's the standard of their "news"
ReplyDelete"I" - You are just clamouring for an argument. I didn't claim any position, so there’s no point trying to debate the issue with me. I merely elucidated the fundamental position of the original statement. I’m sure that there are those willing to argue the issue of where exactly ‘eelam’ exists (if it does exist), the location at which the war should be waged (if it should be waged), and even the semantics of the word war in context to the Sri Lankan experience. Have fun.
ReplyDeleteI must admit I like anon at 1:46pm's question.
ReplyDeleteCould anyone provide some insight into this?
Why unlike Tamil nationalism, is Sinhala nationalism so deeply rooted in religion? Could it be because Tamils were were less suspicious of Indian influences and may have been more easily influenced by Gandhi's vision of a secular India?
Sorry Tish, You misunderstood me, didn't mean you...meant the statement.
ReplyDeleteCan't understand why they don't know their facts.
It could also be that they know their facts better.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget the fact that Ven. Ellavala Medhananda Thero is a well renowned archaeologist.
I am just try to wrap my head around all this. Especially for a Buddhist priest who is supposed to be someone who has time to introspect etc.
ReplyDeleteWhy do the persist in making irresponsible statements? Is it due to the sort of training they get?
Thats what Im wondering...not if there is going to be eelam or not.
Ok Mahasen, I accept that then.
ReplyDeleteBut I am also thinking you can't base modern politics and constitutional reform purely on archeology.
Thats why I used Singapore as an example.
The debate of who came first and where they should go is well worn.
ReplyDeleteI prefer looking looking at modern democratic principles and values.
Have a look at comment number 66 for an interesting Tamil perspective under this link:
http://transcurrents.com/tamiliana/archives/319
Mahasen,
ReplyDeleteIf you look at comment number 87 (in Tamil) in that same link I provided, someone is telling DBS Jeyaraj, "in the same way you had problems with the LTTE in the past, be careful about Karuna."
L, would you please stop hogging all these discussions with your ignorant, uninformed, unconstructive drivel. Must you make the same point ad nauseum, ad inifinitum?
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you call a chat line or something if you don't have anyone to talk to?
Tamils are from the first Africans who left Africa. Sri Lanka was alos occupied by tamils. It ridiculous to assume that the sinhalese and tamils who are dark skinned in general are different.
ReplyDeleteThe few and the many influxs that came out time divided the people up.
If someone wants to see if there is any significant genetic differences between Tamils & Sinhalese they should round up a few people and participate in the genographic project.
ReplyDeletesee link here:
http://www.thepersonalgenome.com/2005/04/the_genographic.html
I invited Ranjit Dissanayake (of the Eksath sinhala Maha Saba) to participate through a letter in the newspapers a few years back- don't know if he did.
The subject of history is fascinating in its own right and its study serves a useful purpose in putting the present in context.
However, if solutions to the problems of the present are to be found, one needs to focus on the present and the future. Historical dispute is better left to the historians.
Well Said Jack Point. The solution should concentrate on present and future. But both the parties seem to be harping on the history. LTTE tries to brain wahs minds with a history which they believe/created. Govt/sinhala extremists try to say that Sinhalese own the country. Some even say that tamils belong to somewhere else. Its jsut different analysis and depends on way you look at it....
ReplyDeleteOnly thing we should agree to is to the fact that there exists a problem.
Whatever is the truth, there should be a solution to the bloodshed. And thats a peaceful solution, war didnt solve any ethinic problem.
Anon at 11:23pm
ReplyDeleteunconstructive-yes. Am very busy. Experimented by changing style yesterday, eg. cryptic and short statements. Doesn't work. Creates misunderstandings. Apologies.
"Must you make the same point ad nauseum, ad inifinitum?"
No. Have made my point. My last two links to the transcurrents website provide some new insight.
"ignorant, uninformed"
That is something I am interested in rectifying. If you have time, would appreciate if you could pick some points out and where you think this is evident. Will read it with interest. Will avoid replying or get into a discussion about it in case you are concerned. Nothing personal. Rather busy.
Jack Point:
ReplyDeleteAm trying to avoid the racial/Archaeological debate.
Since the question has been asked:
This research has been carried out before. I personally know two individuals who have done research on this.
Also someone recently provided me with a copy of this research paper.
Genetic affinities of Sri Lankan populations
Human Biology, Dec 1995 by Kshatriya, Gautam Kumar
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199512/ai_n8732666/pg_4
Conclusion: No difference
They also pointed out that to base racial origins on language is methodologically flawed. Eg. We speak English, but we are not of the Anglo Saxon race. Language and customs cross racial and geographical boundaries.
Surprised no one answered your query in the newspaper.
"Whatever is the truth, there should be a solution to the bloodshed. And thats a peaceful solution, war didnt solve any ethinic problem"
I agree Anon.
(Thats one thing I've said ad nauseum and ad finitum sorry :))
Anon at 9:55...
ReplyDeleteYou will probably agree that we should try and include justice and equity in there. That is a true and lasting peace.
Mahasen... Machang you missed few...
ReplyDeleteSri Lanka is the motherland of Sri Lankans...
Sri Lankans = Who is a citizen of Sri Lanka and think about its prosperity...
This includes Sinhalese, tamils, muslims and ….etc…
Sinhale is the motherland of Sinhalese….
We can not create a sinhale again (this exist prior to arrival of the Portuguese). If anyone wants to create it again, then we have to act like barbarians and kill others…
Sinhale was dominated by Sinhalese… there were tamils and muslims but they were there as either refugees (fled from India), as merchants (whom visit there on temporary basis) or else paid hired mercenaries… other than that they never had citizenship…
Time to time these paid mercenaries helped their kings (who lived in south India or in Burma) to capture this tiny land…
On the origins of WRITING there are only two undisputed instances when writing originated : once in the fertile crescent and once in meso-america. There are two other instances, once in China and once somewhere else (the place escapes me now) but these are not undisputed.
ReplyDeleteEverywhere else it spread by diffusion. Now writing and language are not necessarily the same thing, but it is writing that is important from the point of view of development or advancement of a society.
My point is that we are a lot more closely related than we realise.
I would recommend Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs & Steel" to anyone who has in interest in history.
see:
http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552
Must admit my view of historical perspectives is that they are limited by the artifacts that have survived over time and the ability and biases of people who interpret them.
ReplyDeleteThe Sinhalese get ridiculed for their surreal Mahavamsisms...but looking at the comment made under the transcurrents article...you can see the Tamils also have their share of myths.
The genetic profiling provides quite conclusive evidence, and confirms Jack Point's view that we are not just closely related, but the same in origins.
eg. the research paper from Human biology makes the following points:
"The Bengalis, the Tamils, and the Veddahs are considered parental populations for the Sinhalese. The Bengali contribution is 25.41%, the Tamil (India) contribution is 69.86%, and the Veddah contribution is only 4.73%."
"The contribution of the Sinhalese to the Sri Lankan Tamils is 55.20%. Similarly, the Bengali contribution is 28.17% and that of the Indian Tamils is 16.63%. The results indicate a predominant influence of the Sinhalese (who already have a high contribution from the Indian Tamils) and the Bengalis to a lesser extent."
Reading an anthropological study of the ethnic riots in 1983 centered around kandy etc (by Professor Valentine Daniel), a number of "sinhalese" people in the mobs, were unaware of the fact that they had Tamil parents or grandparents.
You could say in this war we are committing fratricide on the isle of serendib....how lovely!
P.S. Jack Point, I think someone gave me that book by Jarod Diamond must look for it. Some of the reviews suggest that it has a slightly eurocentric approach. Think they call it "orientalism"?
Regarding writing, the roman alphabet was adopted by european tribes such as the anglosaxons due to colonisation by romans. Now it is adopted in turn by the Malays and the Indonesians, due to colonisation by the europeans. The roman alphabet is not a very convenient and logical system in my opinion, compared to eg. the sinhalese and Tamil alphabets. The Arabic writing and language is another contemporary example of a language that has spread across boundaries. I think all of this is partly design, but also attributable to luck and coincidence.