 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
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 488
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 12:51:32 GMT Report for Abuse
|
We all know that this good Professor has also wrote another book recently on the Ethnic Identities, in which, according to some, he has discarded all his previous findings. He has not discarded all his previous findings, he has simply revised them with the information we have available now (e.g. new interpretations).
Can someone please quote this good Professor from his new book where he has argued that the above findings he has made in 1965 were wrong. It is also good if anyone can point out any of the new findings since 1965 in the region that might have made this good Professor to change his opinion. Please be specific and do not come up with open ended statements There is a truckload of new information that Indrapala has in his new book that contradicts some of his earlier statements. Copying it all would be a laborious task. I know Lula has been quoting from it extensively, so why don't you just save time and read it for yourself. Mucha-linda you being one with so much interest in SL history, I am surprised you still have not read Indrapala's new book! It is a must read for anyone with even a passing interest in SL history (both SL Tamil and Sinhala). For example, it mentions the non-Aryan/non-Dravdian elements of the Sinhala language - something you were talking about before and traces them to a possible austric source. It also mentions a lot of facts that most historians on SL fail to mention for whatever reasons. Shakthi, Gamarala etc all of you seem to have not read this book - why don't you all get hold of it! It can only be found in SL therefore its price is very cheap (a bargain).
As for the Nagas of SL only being mentioned in 'fairy tales', there existence was noted down by not only the Pali chronicles of SL, but also the Tamil literature of South India (e.g. the Sangam literature, Manimekalai) and even Greek literature (e.g. Ptolemy). Again READ Indrapala's new book for more info. I will say it again, its the most authoritative book ever written on the NE of SL, and perhaps the most authoritative on SL as a whole regarding the prehistoric eras. |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 488
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 13:07:30 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| About the modern day Sinhala script - it never evolved directly in a linear fashion from the Brahmi script of Prakit seen in the Vallipuram inscription. The Pallava Grantha script from Tamil Nadu had a huge influence on the evolving Sinhala script (as well as Tamil), so much so that it interupted and changed many of the old 'Sinhala' chracteristics seen in the old Sinhala-Prakit script (the script is called Sinhala Prakit, NOT because its Sinhala language but because its the version of Prakit that went on to help form the Sinhala language). Also many Sinhala-Prakit inscriptions in Brahmi have been found in Tamil Nadu. Mahadevan the leading epigraphist in TN has shown how the Sinhala-Prakit Brahmi script also had a great influence on the evolving Tamil Brahmi script. The influences and new ideas in the SISL region were not always going in one direction it should be remembered. Again if you want to find out more read THAT book. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 16:36:37 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
It is good if you can point out anything which I have not responded to, which you consider worth replying
Silence denotes acceptance, I already assumed that you have no counter arguments for those.
* Challenge # 1
please give some evidence to prove that there lived a group of people who were CLEARLY IDENTIFIED as DEMADAS in Anuradhapura Kigdom with an identity NOT AS that of the groups you mentioned. Remember, what you need to prove is that there was a CLEARLY IDENTIFIED group of people called DEMADAS, different from Cholas and etc.
Prof. K. Indrapala?s book, ?The evolution of an ethnic identity? is entirely based on the group of people called DEMADAS (the Tamils in Sri Lanka from C.300 BCE to C.1200 CE). He has provided a truck load of evidence.
I suggest that you better try and find a copy of his book, I am sure it must be available in Aus, because it is published for the South Asian studies centre, SYDNEY.
Lula, there are good Joke sites on the web.
The jokes I read in LNP from people like Muchalinda are more than enough to make my day.
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.
Prof. Leslie Gunawardena says, 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. He goes even further by saying that, not only the Sinhala kingdom but also the Sinhala ethnic identity (race) in Sri Lanka emerged only after the 12CAD.
I do not know from when Prof. Leslie Gunawardena, a leading professor in History started having racist motives of Eelamists (like me).
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.
The truth is actually the opposite of the above; it is the Sinhala Buddhist racists who do not want to give the Tamils their due place in the island.
It was in the nineteenth century, under the British rule, that the British officials adopted a keen interest in the history of the island. The European discovery of the Pali and Sinhala chronicles, the publication of early translations of the Mahavamsa and the acquisition of information relating to the ancient ruins lead to the first serious British attempt to write the early history of Sri Lanka in the middle of the nineteenth century.
It was in these early colonial writings, largely based on the uncritical acceptance of the local chronicles, that a new perspective of the ancient history of the island began to develop.
The view that the Sinhalese were the 'proper inhabitants' of the island in ancient times and that the Tamils were invaders came to dominate colonial historical writings.
Before long, the Sinhalese were identified with the 'Aryans' and the Tamils with the 'Dravidians'.
In recent years, several anthropologists and historians have shown how this perspective came to be developed in the colonial writings.
From a very young age, the innocent Sinhala Buddhist children who attend the Daham Paasela (Sunday school) in the Buddhist temples are brainwashed by engraving the Sinhala Buddhist racism into their sub-conscious minds.
They are taught to believe that Sri Lanka is a Sinhala-Buddhist country, and the entire history of the Island is Sinhala history, the Tamils are invaders, they don't belong to Sri Lanka, all the Tamils should be chased away to Tamil Nadu, the Sinhala country, Sinhala race and Sinhala religion (Buddhism) should be protected from the Tamils.
If this mentality which the majority adopted after the colonial rule continues, what ever solution they arrive at, the Sinhalese and Tamils can never live together in Peace. It is neither the lack of resources nor the lack of good brains, or because nature was cruel to us, it is this behavior of the majority that has made Sri Lanka, which is more than 2500 years old with a rich past, to become so poor and miserable. Countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand with very short history are well developed, rich and flourishing because they do not have an attitude problem or ego, since they have nothing to talk about a rich past, they concentrate on the present & the future.
Countries like Singapore and Malaysia have learned from our mistakes and become rich and developed societies, where as our majority is not willing to change their primitive attitude, at least for the betterment of the country.
European Colonialists first enticed and used Racist Tamil Elite to deprive Sinhala Buddhists assuming their due place. Being good servants, those elite continued what their Masters taught, even after their withdrawal.
Yes, they were the culprits, they not only subdued the separate Tamil kingdom, but they also took away the federal rights of the Tamils by uniting the whole country into one unit and later handing over the whole country to their other good servants. Those elites (Senanayakes, Bandaranayakes, Jayawardanas, Wijewardhanas, Kothalawalas, and others) who became the ruling class (thanks to their colonial masters), not only grabbed the whole economic and political powers to themselves (without sharing) but also started dominating the minorities.
It is also good if you can also prove from where you came to know about these NAGAs of Sri Lanka you addressed above.
Other than the members of the royal dynasty (Sinhala) began by Vijaya, there were also Damilas and Nagas on the throne of Anuradapura. Of course, like many other ethnic groups in Sri Lanka, they later assimilated into the two main ethnic identities that evolved namely the Sinhalese and the Tamils. Like some Damilas who intermarried with the Vijaya Dynasty (Sinhalese), even the Nagas had relatives in the Vijaya Dynasty.
I have already mentioned the names of all those Naga kings who ruled the Anuradapura kingdom in one of my previous debates.
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.
What I referred to as fairy tales was the first few chapters of the Mahavamsa regarding those myths and legends, the union of man with a beast, the 3 visits of Buddha and so on.
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.
If you can read both Indrapala and Leslie Gunawardena?s latest writings, you will get to know the difference.
Sinhala Buddhists calling Pali as Magadhi itself shows that they treated it as the one Buddha spoke, thus a sacred language .
Even though Buddha spoke Magadhi (Pali did not exist during Buddha?s period), the Sinhala-Buddhists in Sri Lanka believe that Buddha spoke Pali (calling Pali as Magadhi), thus a sacred language.
I am not surprised because this is just one of the MANY what the Sinhala Buddhists wrongly believe. |
tigeress19
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7555
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 19:36:02 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula
have you not *SKINED* the *HIS-STORY* telling *BOGUS* *CAT* yet?
Edited By - tigeress19 - 14 Nov 2006 21:25:56 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 20:20:33 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
Prof. Leslie Gunawardena says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the **Sinhala identity** was associated primarily with the **dynasty which ruled Anuradapura.**
So, Anuradhapura Kings were not multi-something nor Demada nor Damila, but of Sinhalese Identity? ;-) :-) |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 20:28:49 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Countries like Singapore and ** Malaysia ** have learned from our mistakes and become rich and developed societies, where as our majority is not willing to change their primitive attitude
Hmm..we should change primitive attitudes like Malaysians did and make 'Bhasa Sinhala' mandatory for everyone including Tamils. Then, we may be able to become rich and developed.
Malaysian Tamils have no problem in learning and working in 'Bhasa Malaysia'.
Sri Lankan Tamils HAVE TO change their primitive attitudes and learn 'Bhasa Sinhala'.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 14 Nov 2006 20:46:11 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
14 Nov 2006 20:40:52 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
Prof. K. Indrapala?s book, ?The evolution of an ethnic identity? is entirely based on the group of people called DEMADAS. ** He has provided a truck load of evidence **
This is cheap cannard.
K Indrapala NEVER said 'DEMADA' was a clearly identified Ethnic. The very fact DEMADA's could not be identified as an Ethnic make indrapala rule that Tamils were not clearly identified prior to 13 CAD, hence Tamils did not have an Ethnic Identity prior to 13 CAD.
'Demada' was a term taken from Mahawansha, and 'Demada' is used for any outsiders, including for Portuguese.
TAKE THIS AS A CHALLENGE. Quote from K Indrapala where he says 'Tamils Ethnic Identity existed prior to 13 CAD'. :-) :-) Have a lot of FUN!
The same good professor said Sinhalese Identity emerged as early as 5-6 BCE. That seems to hurt Lula's ego ;-)
Edited By - GamaRaala - 15 Nov 2006 00:13:05 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
15 Nov 2006 00:35:20 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Neither Mucha nor GamaRaala talks about a 'Sinhalese Ethnic' prior to 5-6 BCE. For instance, we don't argue that 'Balangoda Manawaya' or 'Naagas' or 'Yaksha' were 'Sinhalese', eventhough Naagas and Yaksha may have most probably assimilated into Sinhala Ethnic later.
Similarly, some of 'Demadas' may have been assimilated into SL Tamil Ethnic Identity that emerged after 13 CAD; but it is only a JOKE, a BIG-FAT JOKE, to claim that 'Tamil Ethnic' existed even before the Tamil Ethnic Identity emerged in 13 CAD. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
15 Nov 2006 02:05:17 GMT Report for Abuse
|
LuLa do not have time to feed punnakku to a Gon Raala, but anything from others welcome.
JOKE # 1
So, Anuradhapura Kings were not multi-something nor Demada nor Damila, but of Sinhalese Identity?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, He, he, he, he, he, Hu, hu, hu, hu, hu, Hooo, hoo, ho, ho, ho.
JOKE # 2
Sri Lankan Tamils HAVE TO change their primitive attitudes and learn 'Bhasa Sinhala'.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, He, he, he, he, he, Hu, hu, hu, hu, hu, Hooo, hoo, ho, ho, ho.
JOKE # 3
TAKE THIS AS A CHALLENGE. Quote from K Indrapala where he says 'Tamils Ethnic Identity existed prior to 13 CAD'. :-) :-) Have a lot of FUN!
The same good professor said Sinhalese Identity emerged as early as 5-6 BCE.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, He, he, he, he, he, Hu, hu, hu, hu, hu, Hooo, hoo, ho, ho, ho.
JOKE # 4
Similarly, some of 'Demadas' may have been assimilated into SL Tamil Ethnic Identity that emerged after 13 CAD; but it is only a JOKE, a BIG-FAT JOKE, to claim that 'Tamil Ethnic' existed even before the Tamil Ethnic Identity emerged in 13 CAD.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, He, he, he, he, he, Hu, hu, hu, hu, hu, Hooo, hoo, ho, ho, ho. |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2619
Member Profile
|
15 Nov 2006 03:03:00 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GAMAYA,
Some people consider 'being silent' as a way of accepting something. I reckon we should also consider 'being laughing' too as a way of accepting something. No matter how much LULA trys to discard the validity of those points you raised by making Jokes out of those, the BOLD and UNDENIABLE TRUTH is he has no answers to those rock solid arguments.
BTW, is Tamilselvan a Vellalar?..just trying to figure out if laughing has anything to do with genetics.
-Muchalinda
. |
|
Search All News and Discussions