 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
shan
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1599
Member Profile
|
17 Nov 2006 14:28:55 GMT Report for Abuse
|
To Whom It May Concern:
SL Tamils speaking Elam Tamil language are living in Elam/ Sory Lanka is a fact and whole world knows about it. Only a fool will look for an inscription and deeds for a known fact and life evidence. The evolution of SL Tamils has been discussed in detail. It is not Lula 's duty to prove the above well known fact.
It is you motta ralas to tell the forum with evidence that your great emperor Mahinda or rambu or any donkey brought Tamils from south India in 11 or 12 AD and settled them in the NE and created a Tamil kingdom for them.
Carbon dated Chola incrptions can be found all over south East Asia. That doesn?t mean Tamil was the language of the areas. CLEAR.
Any decent guy has the guts to answer the simple question and close the case. |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 488
Member Profile
|
17 Nov 2006 15:09:08 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Out of interest is the Vallipuram inscription the only 'Sinhala' one found in the Jaffna penninsula, are there any other inscriptions or written records in Sinhala found there? If so, is this sufficient evidence to prove that 'Sinhala' was the sole and dominant language spoken there? Nagadeepa was a fiefdom ruled by a Sinhala king through a Naga chief - therefore as Shan pointed out is it that surprising to see a old 'Sinhala' inscription present? Were there other langauges spoken there? When did the Nagas' original language die out? How widespread was the use of Tamil in the North at the time? What is the significance of the Dravidian title that the EIA chief from Anaikoddai had?
However, it remains a fact that it was not the presence of a single *Dha-yanna* that made Vallipuram Inscription an ancient Sinhala one. No matte how much in denial you are, it remains a fact that words like *Bujameni*, *Amethi*, *Vihara*, *Karithe* etc are not only found in Vallipuram Gold Plate, but also in many others inscribed around that time.
Are those words ONLY found in Sinhala-Prakit? Are those words not also found throughout India in other Prakit inscriptions and writings?
Sidha Maharajhaha Vahayaka Rajehi amete
Isigiraya Nakadiva Bujameni
Badakara atanehi Piyaguka Tisa
Vihara Karite
More importantly, is this language Sinhala or is it Prakit?
Edited By - Muru - 17 Nov 2006 15:10:11 GMT |
shan
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1599
Member Profile
|
17 Nov 2006 20:25:53 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hi Muru
Out of interest is the Vallipuram inscription the only 'Sinhala' one found in the Jaffna penninsula, are there any other inscriptions or written records in Sinhala found there? If so, is this sufficient evidence to prove that 'Sinhala' was the sole and dominant language spoken there? Nagadeepa was a fiefdom ruled by a Sinhala king through a Naga chief - therefore as Shan pointed out is it that surprising to see a old 'Sinhala' inscription present? Were there other langauges spoken there? When did the Nagas' original language die out? How widespread was the use of Tamil in the North at the time? What is the significance of the Dravidian title that the EIA chief from Anaikoddai had?
Good points were raised here and I appreciate it. This is what I pointed out nearly one and half or two years ago with His Story Teller. We should discuss things in a professional way not like children. It is the people who lived in the N&E would have had Indian influence and the development of SL Tamils. Batti Tamil has slightly different dialect to jaffna tamil. My ancestor can be of naga or X, Y or Z. BUT they are the people who live in North now. Language changed religion changed dress changed who cares.
There were two distinct communities (even more) and obviously the reason being different languages.
See this
Nagadeepa was a fiefdom ruled by a Sinhala king through a Naga chief
Even at that time Sinhala king ruled Nagadeepa through Naga chief. Was that chief from SLMM or NGO or UN official imported by the Sinhala king to rule northern Sinhalese. These were all just stories passed through generations BUT it all points towards a distinct community lived in the northern part compare to south.
Evolution of SL Tamil identity in the then North (NE) had been explained in detail. So rala should bring truck load of evidences Sinhala king bringing people from India and also a chief.
If a person can talk Sinhala king ruled noman land nagadeepa via Naga chief, the same person should have had SHIP LOAD of evidences of Sinhala king bringing people from India and also a chief. And then there should be a history that the same people were rebelling against King who brought them here. Is it not the time to tell the UNTOLD story.
BTW The paper to tell the UNTOLD story is Island newspaper.
Enjoy the weekend .
Edited By - shan - 17 Nov 2006 20:30:02 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 06:15:36 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hello Shan,
I know that, moving house is not an easy affair. Hope you replaced your PC's video card. I used some of your thought provoking points in one of my previous posts, hope you have no objection.
I know it is frustrating but my advice is getting some enjoyment by bashing Parana and Co.
Actually, I do not enjoy bashing an archaeologist and epigraphist who spent his life time researching, exploring and excavating, but unfortunately it is true that Prof. Paranavitana was a biased researcher. All the assumptions what he made were only one sided.
Prof. K. Indrapala in his new book (pg.7), under the heading 'The Paranavitana factor' says a lot about him, even though he says, he does not believe that Prof. Paranavitana attempted to foist a hoax.
At one point he says, many researches, young and old, disagreed with several of his views and theories in private but were not willing to go public.
On the other hand, among the historians and archeologists at the Peradeniya University, Prof. Leslie Gunawardena is known as the leading light, an unbiased researcher and a leading Sri Lankan academic, well respected by the others in the same field of HISTORY. He is one of the very few Scholars who have done an extensive research on both Sri Lankan and Indian history and archaeology.
He also says that, after the ethnic conflict, Sri Lanka has thrown up a breed of pseudo-historians (his-story tellers), fringe archaeologists, and bogus scholars (charlatans) who are seriously undermining the traditions that the Peradeniya School has been seeking to establish.
According to 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. 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 just like the Sri Lankan Tamils. Before the 12th CAD, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty).
The best part is, the term sinhala is mentioned in the Mahavamsa only in the beginning chapters, after that, through out the Anuradapura and Polonnaruva kingdom/period the term Sinhala is not mentioned anywhere, only found in the Chulavamsa written after the 13th CAD. Not a single stone inscription found up to the 13th CAD has the term Sinhala race or Sinhala kingdom on it. It only says, Anuradapura or Polonnaruva kingdom which was always multi-ethnic ruled by either a Sinhala king (Tissa/Lambakarana) or a Tamil king or a Naga king.
When you point this out, they come up with some silly arguments and then will brand you as a Tamil racist.
Even Prof. K. Indrapala in his book (pg.30) says,
The Sinhalese are an ethnic identity that evolved in Sri Lanka through the assimilation of various segmentary/tribal and ethnic communities that occupied the island at the beginning of the EIA, about five or six centuries before the Common Era.
He also says that the Tamils of Sri Lanka evolved as a second ethnic group. Their evolution was parallel to that of the Sinhalese. The earliest inscriptions and the early Pali chronicles attest to the presence of the Tamils (Demedas/Damilas) in the EIA.
He further says that the evolution of the two identities as Sinhalese and Tamils, assimilating many small social and cultural groups, REACHED COMPLETION by 1200, although further assimilation, development and changes would continue in the later centuries. From about this time, there is a marked geographic division between the two identities.
Please read his first statement above very carefully and see how the Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinists are twisting what he said into a different form as follows,
The Sinhala identity emerged by the ** assimilation of various tribal, linguistic and ethnic communities ** about five to six centuries Before the Common Era (BCE).
See the big difference between his original statement (from his book, the first one above) with what the Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinists are trying to misinterpret as shown above. Where did he say that the Sinhala ethnic identity evolved five to six centuries Before the Common Era? He clearly says,the people who occupied the island five to six centuries Before the Common Era assimilated to form the Sinhala ethnic identity and reached completion only in 1200.
I felt that, I am simply wasting my time in continuing a good-for-nothing argument with people who are adamant. Even though they are well read, it is difficult to argue with people who have a closed mind, never to accept any other argument.
One of them who are supposed to be coming up with rock solid arguments is actually having rocks in his head, and that's why I ignore him. Only FOOLS keep repeating the same thing over and over even after giving the necessary information and also the source from where the rest can be found.
I could not write separately to MURU, even though he also brought in some valid points to support me. This is one of the threads where I saw almost all those who had lengthy debates earlier popped in at least to say they are also reading this.
Have a nice weekend.
Cheers,
LuLa
Edited By - LuLa - 18 Nov 2006 15:00:13 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 06:23:27 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
When you find the infamous truck, don't forget to unload evidence.
You boasted that Demadas' had (before 13 CAD)
1)their own language
2)their own culture
So, where are the proof for these, from the truckload? :-) :-)
Moreover, please explain how you 'clearly identify Tamil Ethnic prior to 13 CAD', when this 'ability of clearly identifying Tamil Ethnic' emerged only after 13 CAD.
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 just like the Sri Lankan Tamils. Before the 12th CAD, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty).
In one hand you claim you could 'clearly identity Tamil Ethnic' prior to the 13 CAD.
On the other hand, you praise Dr Leslie Gunawardena, forgetting it was the same Dr Leslie Gunawardena that said 'neither Tamil Ethnic nor Sinhala Ethnic could be identified prior to 13 CAD'. Mister, if you believe Dr Leslie G, how on earth you are talking about a 'clearly identifiable Tamil Ethnic' prior to 13 CAD? :-) :-) |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 06:38:23 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
There is a Sinhalese saying that goes like 'Gedara loku pothak etha -- Ekak wath mathaka netha' (There is a big book at home; Cannot recall anything from it!). This adage aptly describes your predicament.
Although you have seemingly bought KI's book for $14, you cannot recall what it says about the Sinhalese Identity.
Lula says:
Before the 12th CAD, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty)
Prof Karthigesu Indrapala says:
The Sinhala identity emerged by the ** assimilation of various tribal, linguistic and ethnic communities ** about five to six centuries Before the Common Era (BCE).
Read this thousand times until it gets to you memory. :-) Sinhalese Identity emerged by assimilation of various
1. tribal groups,
2. linguistic groups,
3. ethnic groups,
during 5-6 BCE!. It is utter nonsense to call this Sinhalese Identity a 'Dynasty'.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 18 Nov 2006 06:44:04 GMT |
Ariyalai_SB
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1131
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 15:57:16 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dear LuLa,
Your debating skills are admirable; second to none on these forums I have seen so far.
The chronic insecurity that the many Sinhalese feel make them blinkered. Mucha knows very well that the Sinhala language is a product of Indian languages with Tamil at the forefront. This is indisputable; recently, I was talking to two young North Indian academics, who had no hesitation in saying that both Sanskrit and Tamil were the basis of all Indian languages, and Sinhala no exception.
The Sinhalese do not need to fear Tamils; all they have to do is to accommodate them with absolute equality respecting their language and culture.
I think that Sinhalese have collectively lost the plot. In my view, the time is nearing for India to intervene once again; this time it will be decisive; con-federal option may be on the cards! |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 17:59:37 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hello Ariyalai_SB,
Thanks for appreciating my effort; Kula is an excellent debater although he is fed up arguing with people who are simply wasting our time.
It is absurd continuing a good-for-nothing argument with people who are adamant. Even though they are well read, it is difficult to argue with people who have a closed mind, never to accept any other argument.
As you said, the time is nearing for both parties to come to a settlement.
By grabbing the political/economic power to themselves without sharing it with the Tamils under a federal system within a united country, the Sinhalese have gained nothing, but only lost even what they had. The economy continues to shrink day by day. They have still not realized that the political system of the country needs a change. Both sides know that they cannot win this war; they are only bringing the country down. The Sinhalese should realize the fact that, peace for the Tamils will be peace for them as well. |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 23:43:06 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| It appears that there are so many porters hanging around here, but no one is dare to unload the truck ;-) |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
18 Nov 2006 23:43:33 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
Your debating skills are second to none (other third grade Tamil Elamists).
The below is an ample evidence.
First, Lula declares 'Anuradhapura Kingdom was Multi-ethnic, Multi-cultural, Multi-something Kingdom.
Then, Lula quotes Prof LG and contradicts himself;
He (Prof. Leslie Gunawardena) says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the ** Sinhala identity ** was associated primarily with the dynasty which ruled Anuradapura.
'Suicidal' must be a more suitable word to describe Lula's debating skills.
See (lack of) skills of those of like Ariyalai_SB, who says something naive like below;
Do you know that people, who speak Malayalam and Thelungu, can read most of the Sinhala writing; Sinhala scripts resemble those of Malayalam and Tamil. There is a claim that a Malayali without prior knowledge in Sinhala is able to read many words from a Sinhala daily
-http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2005/9/3766_8.html
Lula, can your friend Shakti aka the ANA-lyst inspect 'Malayali'/'Thelingu' with his 'O-L Sinhala D' and be an EYE Witness to Ariyalai_SB? :-)
However Lula, you have to settle something with Ariyalai_SB. :-)
Ariyalai_SB admitted on 7 Oct 2005 21:56:05
The Tamils of Sri Lankan do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India.
In fact, this is the same thing Doktor Anton Balasingham says, that SL Tamils are Ethnic Indians :-)
Edited By - GamaRaala - 18 Nov 2006 23:56:19 GMT |
|
Search All News and Discussions