 Return to LNP
This News Site:
Lanka Newspapers is the largest Sri Lanka News forum online. Thousands of Sri Lankans from around the world gather here daily to discuss current news events of Sri Lanka. Join Today!
|
|
|
Hindus set to convert to Buddhism
Full News Article
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2582
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 14:13:40 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Muru,
Just to add to what you say, this what Dr. K.M.De Silva has written:
Thus Sri lanka has been from very early in its recorded history a multi-ethnic society in which a recognizable Dravidian component was present...
Ethnicity was not an importnat point of division in Society in Sri lanka in the period covered in this chapter, and it is would seem that neither Sinhalese nor the Tamils remained racially pure... |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2582
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 14:15:00 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Shakti,
Do you have access to Prof. Leslie Gunawardene's book???
Let me know where I can buy his book..
Thanks
Kula |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 15:30:13 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
Due to your other constraints, I do not want to take your time any further, but just one correction.
Lula, as said earlier, you may have some FUN believing such hypothetical situations, but remember, you will never be entitled to have a homeland on a hypothesis. Having said that, it may also be interesting for you to know the following said by one of the scholars you previously mentioned.
AMONG THE NAMES WAS **ANURADHA**, WHICH, COINCIDENTALLY OR OTHERWISE, IS STATED IN THE ANCIENT CHRONICLES TO HAVE BEEN THE NAME OF A MINISTER OF PRINCE VIJAYA, THE PURPORTED 'FOUNDER' LEADER OF THE SINHALESE, AT CA. 500 BC.
Once again you have misunderstood what I said. Let me repeat.
I am sure, some day in the future, our historians will come to a conclusion that there never was a Vijayan arrival from **NORTH INDIA**, it was only a MYTH created by Ven. Mahanama. (Emphasis added).
Of course, how can I forget that Vijayan who took his princes from Madurai in Pandiya Nadu.
ANURADHA, an Indian name common to the whole of India including the SOUTH. I hope you also know the meaning of ?COINCIDENTALLY? and ?PURPORTED?.
Due to certain constraints, I am not sure if I will ever be able to reply to the other post you published, if it ever carry anything worth replying.
I can fully understand your problem. Not to worry, we will meet again sometime later with the same old history with new additions, because the historians are still busy with their new discoveries. Just like Prof. K. Indrapala's PhD thesis became obsolete according to him, or Prof. Paranavitana's many assumptions were proved incorrect by the present day historians like Prof. Leslie Gunawardene, there will be many new additions in the future.
Anyways, thanks Mucha for having another healthy and cool debate with me, I really enjoyed the 'FUN'.
LuLa the Konde bendapu..... WHAT??? Ooh yes, 'Javanese'. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 16:43:22 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Tigress,
Here is another interesting point for you.
The ancient Sri Lankan Kingdom was multi-ethnic and always known as Anuradapura kingdom. NOT Sinhala kingdom, Tamil kingdom or Naga kingdom. It was ruled from time to time by kings from different dynasties such as Sinhala, Tamil, Chola/Pandiya, and Naga.
Unfortunately, and very sadly for the Sinhala racists, throughout the entire Anuradapura period (kingdom), for many centuries, there isn?t a single stone inscription (archaeological/epigraphical evidence) and nothing written in the Pali chronicle (Mahavamsa) to prove that Anuradapura was a Sinhala kingdom or there existed an ethnic group/race called Sinhala before the 12th CAD.
According to the present day historians such as Prof. Leslie Gunawardena, Sinhala was a name adopted by a ruling linage group for whose origin the lion myth had been created. He says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the Sinhala identity was associated primarily with the dynasty which ruled Anuradapura. Thus the name Sinhala would bear comparison with other south Asian dynastic names like Moriya, Gupta, Pallava, and Chola.
He believes that, the Sinhala/Tamil kingdom and the Sinhala/Tamil ethnic identity in Sri Lanka emerged only after the 12CAD.
Edited By - LuLa - 13 Nov 2006 17:12:32 GMT |
tigeress19
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7555
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 16:51:59 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dear lula
thanks for the info,
i learnt from you that the tamil was used in the whole island widely, but when the sinhala language was formed?
is it after the introduction of Buddhism? |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 17:42:26 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Shakti
I hope you will find a solution to the technical problem of accessing the site from office.
As you said, Prof. Leslie Gunawardena, Prof. G. C. Mendis and Prof. Gananatha Obeysekera are excellent historians who have totally changed those old beliefs and concepts.
Unfortunately, Mucha and Gamaya are still sticking on to the old PhD thesis of Prof. K. Indrapala which he himself says is obsolete and he has already discarded it. They also continue to quote Prof. Paranavitana's many assumptions which are proved incorrect by the present day historians like Prof. Leslie Gunawardene.
BTW, if you have not read the latest book written by Prof. K. Indrapala, ?The evolution of an ethnic identity?, try to find a copy and read it.
Believe me, it is really worth. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 17:52:44 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Shan
Thanks for all your advice and the valuable points you have raised here. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 18:02:47 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kula,
When Shan once commented on this thread that Kula must be really laughing, I did not realize it, but now I can see how you must have laughed when MottaRaalas come up with stupid and silly questions over and over. |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2582
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 23:01:42 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
Even though I was not contributing I was reading the thread and true to Shan's word I was laughing indeed!!
I am happy that you are dealing with the raala very well - just ignore!!! |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2619
Member Profile
|
13 Nov 2006 23:28:11 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dear LULA,
You should reply to this **ONLY** if you have enough time. In fact, I never expected you to abruptly leave this discussion like this (and I dont have a clue how SHAKTI would call something like that). However, given that I managed to find some time off and that I have truck loads of more FUN to offer to you, it is my duty to reply to your post (11 Nov 2006 22:29:26 GMT), which you may identify as our main topic of discussion.
He he he, its really funny, In the name of 'CRAP' I can see how you have tactfully avoided many points in my previous posts. Sakthi may call it a walkover
It is good if you can point out anything which I have not responded to, which you consider worth replying, so that I can comment on. As of what Shakti may call it, he can call it whatever he wants. Who cares (Amen!!).
* Challenge # 1
Before the 13th CAD, Tamils lived as Tamils (Demadas), not as Indian Tamils, not as Cholas, Pandiyans, or Cheras, and not as Eela Tamils. They lived under the multi-ethnic Anuradapura Kingdom, not under a Sinhala Kingdom, or a Tamil kingdom or a Naga kingdom. THEY WERE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AS DEMADAS (Tamils) due to their language and culture even though, not by their names and religion.
Lula, it is not clear if you are writing something you *believe* is the case OR something you can prove. If it is something you believe, please ignore this post. However, if latter is the case, may you please give some evidence to prove that there lived a group of people who were CLEARLY IDENTIFIED as DEMADAS in Anuradhapura Kigdom (yes, let it be multi-ethnic or whatever for the time being) with an identity NOT AS that of the groups you mentioned (I dont know what our ana-lyst SHAKTI may call this. But I call this a challenge (FUN)). Remember, what you need to prove is that there was a CLEARLY IDENTIFIED group of people called DEMADAS, different from Cholas and etc.
* About the biggest JOKE
This is the best JOKE out of all jokes. During the last 3 decades, if you read any Sinhala news paper or a political article, the Sinhala patriots keep on reminding the Sinhalese about the ancient Sinhala kingdom and they continue to glorify them. You will never miss the word SINHALA KINGDOM in any article on history, but unfortunately, and very sadly, throughout the entire Anuradapura period (kingdom), for many centuries, nobody bothered to remind even a single time that it was the Sinhala Kingdom. Oh, this is really funny, I just cannot stop laughing.
I sometimes feel sorry about you thinking how boring your life may be, given that that was the biggest joke you have ever heard. Lula, there are good Joke sites on the web. Go and register yourself there and they will send a joke every day. What you all need is an email address.
BTW, no matter whatever you say, you have failed to counter my point. People do not repeat norms. For example, Bikku Mahanma has neither mentioned that he is a Buddhist nor has mentioned that he is a Sinhala (now, if you want, you may say that Mahavansa is the story of Tamils). If there was any recent reason for those people to identify Anuradhapura as a Sinhala Kingdom, the reason is nothing but people like you. I would not find it surprised if people started calling those inscriptions Sinhala Inscriptions in the future, given the racist motives of Eelamists like you. What is evident, as good Professor Nalin De Silva always maintains, the problem in Sri Lanka is nothing but the hesitation of Racist Eelamist Tamils to give Sinhala Buddhists its due place in the island. European Colonialists first enticed and used Racist Tamil Elite to deprive Sinhala Buddhists assuming thier due place. Being good servants, those elite continued what their Masters taught, even after their withdrawal.
* Fairy Tales
Sihalaththakatha???
Oh, you mean those fairy tales of lion and man, what the grandmothers used to tell the Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinist petiyas to put them to sleep.
BTW Lula, in relation to the challenge I posed earlier (about the existence of a CLEARLY IDENTIFIED group of people called DEMADAS), it is good if you can avoid referencing any of the *fairy tale* Chronicles like, Sihalaththakatha, Mahavansaya (which I the edited version of the Sihalaththakatha), Chulavansaya (which is the second part of the edited version of Sihalaththakatha), Dipavansaya (which is another book referred by the editor of the fairy tale Sihalaththakatha, which therefore can also be a fairy tale) etc.
* Challenge # 1.1:
You also said,
Anuradapura kingdom was neither Sinhala nor Tamil or NAGA, it was multi ethnic.
It is also good if you can also prove from where you came to know about these NAGAs of Sri Lanka you addressed above. I hope it cannot be from a *fairy tale*.
* About your Multi-Ethnic Anuradhapura and Mono-Ethnic Kandy and Jaffna Kindoms:
Unlike the Anuradapura kingdom, the Kandyan and Kotte kingdoms were known as Sinhala kingdoms and the Jaffna kingdom was known as Tamil kingdom.
Now, let?s consider the Kandyan kingdom, the last four kings of Kandy were Tamils from the Nayakkar dynasty, but still the Kandyan kingdom was not multi-ethnic, it was only a Mono-Ethnic Kingdom of Sinhalese. Similarly, the Jaffna kingdom was also ruled once by a Sinhalese prince but still it was a Mono-Ethnic Kingdom of Tamils.
First of all, Jaffna Kingdom was never known as (or no where called) a Tamil Kingdom, but an Arya Chakrawarthi Kingdom. Fullstop.
Secondly, IT IS GOOD IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN WHAT DIFFERENCES ANURADHAPURA KINGDOM AND KANDYAN KINGDOM HAD FOR YOU TO CALL ONE A MULTI-ETHNIC KINGDOM, AND THE OTHER A SINHALA KINGDOM.
In both the Kingdoms Anuradhapura and Kandy, there lived people other than Sinhalas and both the kingdoms have been ruled by Kings other than Sinhalas.
* About Pali
Lula, I agree to the fact that there is a scholastic dispute over the origins of Pali, which to date is unresolved. I personally favour the opinion of Hinuber where Pali is a trade language of Asokan empire. No matter what these differences are, it remains a fact that Pali did not become a sacred language of Buddhism since its usage in canonical work, but the opposite, which is that Pali is used in cannons as it was considered a sacred language by Buddhists of Sri Lanka. Let this belief be authentic or not, it remains a fact that Sinhala Buddhists calling Pali as Magadhi itself shows that they treated it as the one Buddha spoke, thus a sacred language. It is on this ground where I still insist the following you said is wrong.
Pali became a sacred language of the Buddhists only after the original scriptures which were written and preserved in Prikrit were later translated into Pali.
Let me also remind you to reveal your thoughts about the presence of the syllable *Dha* on Vallipuram Gold Plate Inscription, if you ever are going to reply to this.
Cheers.
-Muchalinda
PS: NOTE: Lula, as said, reply to this ONLY if you have enough time. I am not naïve to call it a WALKOVER. I am also well aware of the fact that at some stage, one of us (both being working to pay their bills) will be forced to abandon this thread by factors beyond our control. As such, it will be completely alright with me if you cannot find some time to reply to this. I am also fine if you do not have enough counter arguments or evidence to counter what I say (people are not supposed to know everything). But do never come up with foolish excuses like *technical problems*.
.
Edited By - Mucha-linda - 13 Nov 2006 23:40:00 GM |
|
Search All News and Discussions