 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
|
24 Nov 2006 18:02:35 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Thanks Mucha for the reply.
But they should also not expect the others to treat their newly adopted culture in par with the one they abandoned. If you want, you can adopt the Jewish faith tomorrow abandoning your Hindu religion. But you should not expect the Sri Lankan government to declare Jewish New Year a National Holiday of Sri Lanka, arguing you are not a migrant, but someone sharing a common ancestor with those who currently enjoy a National Holiday on Maha Shiva Rathri.
The evolution of the Sri Lankan Tamil ethnic group can not be compared to people simply converting and abandoning their previous culture just like a Hindu converting to a Jew. It was a process that took many centuries and involved many ethnic groups not just the Ila people. In fact it was a process PARALLEL to the evolution of the Sinhala ethnic group. Was the Sinhala ethnic group fully evolved all across the island before the SL Tamil ethnic group started to evolve? Did the people of Jaffna regard themselves as Nagas or Ilas?
There would been a period of bilingualism before Tamil became the dominant language in the North-East. Likewise, Buddhism did not disappear over night in the North-East either, a few centuries after the 12th century, Buddhism was still practised by some Sri Lankan Tamils (especially strenghtened by the influence of Tamil Buddhists fleeing persecution in Tamil Nadu).
The patronage for Mahayanist Buddhism by the Tamil Pallava dynasty is seen right across the east coast of SL. Eventually however Buddhism disappeared as a religion among the Sri Lankan Tamils and Hinduism reigned supreme.
SL Tamils have been living as SL Tamils for approximately a millenium in the North-East, therefore they feel they should be able to have the right to carry on living like that for the forseeable future. In the centuries before the colonials came, the Sinhala masses had no problem with that whatsover. There is no evidence whatsoever of any enmity between the Tamils and the Sinhalas. When a Sinhala king ruled Tamil areas like in the east, he let the Tamils live the way they want and never threatened their distinct identity and existence. Now that is all changed.
Edited By - Muru - 24 Nov 2006 18:03:55 GMT |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
24 Nov 2006 21:14:58 GMT Report for Abuse
|
The concept of Caste system was 'formated' by the numerous invaders on the people who live(d) in the actual India , the ones who trust(ed) a religion which tragically was sythesized in a 'simple' religion named Hinduism by strangers to India.. In fact what was tragical is the fact that they simplified and explained the religion in fews notions..
It was tragical, because it brought an illusion about the philosophy of Hindus.. In the point that western scholars think that 'Philosphy' begam with the Greeks..
If we read the Thirukkural, writed by a 'shaiva' named Thiruvalluvar we can understand where the philosophy of Hindus can bring the soul, or the conscience.
[The most important features of Thirukkural are: 1) it is secular in nature, 2) it is universal and applicable to people living everywhere, 3) it is everlasting and its messages transcend time. This secular, universal and immortal nature of Thirukkural combined with its conciseness and literary charm has been the pride of Tamil people for the past many centuries.]
What is important to note is THE FACT that this modern caste system was FABRICATED by the numerous invaders.
The anciant and proud 'archeo-communism' caste system was like a jewel, it was FIRSTLY based on the equality !
It was an autocratic system where everyone had firstly his importance, and secondly where everyone had the same level of life than anyone. In this system your work selected your 'caste' or attitude to adopt towards the others. A soldier by example have not the same look about the society than a priest, or a worker.. It don't seem to be illogic..
There was no rich and poor.. There was a global class who lived harmonically and equitably.
Now compare India.. It is a failed 'democratic' corrupted capitalist society.. (In capitalism, equality is IMPOSSIBLE, if yes explain me how)
As explained many times, what changed from Anciant India and recent one, are the numerous destructive 'vectors' that pressed the wonderful country..
['And Hindu religion, Hindu teaching is nothing but inequality. ]
Haha, such comments are good to be ignored when they are said by an ignorant himself..
What the inequality are you talking about ? The bogus caste system ? Show the invaders by the finger, and do not insult the original and pure philosophy of 'Hindus'.
When we know that Vedas and other manuscripts in anciant Indian languages are vast as an ocean and this for a sole common literature, nobody can imagine the source of informations that they are.. Theology, Philosophy, and Sciences are the main constituent of this anciant literature..
And more surprising some of these literatures talks really about science-fictions or what is unbeliveable for a normal person (a passive and ignorant person by nature).
I believe only what i believe...
How anciant people could think very modern devices and vehicles ? Or electricity, magic metals effects, mechanical architecture contructions, 'vimana' in Sanskrit and 'vimanam' in Tamil, please quote here the root which are the same for the word in Sanskrit and Tamil, said to be belonging to two different families of language.. I strongly believe that the reality is other..
Shastra in Sanskrit Shastram in Tamil.. The same difference could be noted here.. A lot of other examples.. Veda or Vedam.. It is to much evident that they share a common domain of Knowledge, a same root vocabulary, and same philosophic-scientific techniques or generaly said to be the Sciences.
One of the truth said by the Vedas, is the fact that advanced civilizations existed before us.. That becomes a TRUTH in a presumed cyclic scaling time..Note that too..We introduce here that the birth is too cyclic, if we talk in a cyclic timing.
Thousand of years that western and middle-eastern people think that we live in a linear time.. While it is more than thousand years that people in the peninsula think that they live an in cyclic time. Trust only what you believe to be the Truth.. It is hard to trust something false when the response is already given.. And is sometime hard to believe but after the creation, the destruction follows INEVITABLY for a certain moment..
It is why the destructions masked the existence of great civilizations..
And finally let me say you what i think about conversions, if you think that your religion does not fit to you, it is your choice to change your way of thinking..
Let me you say that in my religion there is no need to adopt other religion's way of thinking to think what you want to think and how you want, there is no doctrine. Neither Monotheism pure neither Polytheism pure, or equivalently monotheism and polytheism together...
'Diversity in the unity'..
This results many other concepts like 'the atom is in the universe and the universe is in the atom'... Which certainly have for consequence new theories in Physics.
It's equivalent to say that this religion is as various as numerous are the molecules in the ocean of water..
P.S: Sorry to be arrogant or speculative for someone, i just want to share what i LEARNED.
Edited By - KURAL - 24 Nov 2006 23:39:45 GMT |
Ariyalai_SB
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1131
Member Profile
|
24 Nov 2006 22:10:04 GMT Report for Abuse
|
LuLa,
Thanks very much for the information about the books; I will place the order soon.
Thanks also for the information about Mahavamsa translation; I knew that you would give a precise answer. I purposefully asked that question; these fools centre their chauvinistic ideology, the Sinhala Buddhist Fundamentalism, on this ancient mytho-histrorical pali written document. This document was written in 6th century AD and was only translated in Sinhala in 1874; it is simply astonishing to say the least!
I said to Mucha previously that the Sinhala language was not mature enough at the time when the Mahavamsa was written, and still stand by that. The Sinhala language was still evolving and Buddhism played a major part in it; this is why the Sinhala language and Buddhism are intertwined in Sri Lanka.
I wrote the following to Mucha on 23 Oct 2005:
Was the Sinhala language in usage both in written and spoken form when the Mahavamsa was written in 6th century AD?
I am neither a historian nor an anthropologist; hence, I cannot categorically claim that the Sinhala language was not present when the Mahavamsa was written. However, in my view, it is very puzzling in the sense that the subject matter was about Sri Lanka, and understandably it was aimed at the Sinhala public at that time; hence it should have been written in Sinhala. Further more, Mucha was claiming that the Monk Mahanama was only just editing or updating the existing Sinhala accounts/chronicles; then why was not reproduced in Sinhala? So, am I to assert that the Sinhala language was not mature enough, or lack of vocabulary that may have limited the capability of expressing complex accounts?
It is also pertinent that at the time of the evolution of the Sinhala language, there was a significant Tamil presence in Sri Lanka; this fact is indisputable, as so many scholars who studied Sri Lankan matters, I have quoted a couple of them before on this forum, had pointed out that, though the origin of the Sinhala language was Pali/Sanskrit, the vocabulary, grammar, structure, and substance were heavily influenced by the Dravidian languages, particularly the Tamils language. The magnitude of the influence was such that some scholars concluded that the Sinhala language was a pure product of the Dravidian languages. So, one cannot dispute the fact that both Tamils and Sinhalese were cohabiting the island during the evolution of the Sinhala Language.
These people can twist the history, but cannot hide their language; basically, I can go as far as to say that the Sinhala language was enriched by Tamil. The Thirukural was written about 2,500 years ago; the maturity of the Tamil language was beautifully depicted in that marvellous piece of work. |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
24 Nov 2006 23:40:22 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
You wrote before:
Even today, if a Tamil comes from India, the Sri Lankans(Tamils) will call him as an Indian (Tamil) *just the way they called them Damilas* at that time.
Now you are disputing the above ground reality :-) This is the level some people twist their own words :-)
As seen above, 'Demala' is not an ethnic group, but a generic term used for outsiders, just like any white Westener was 'Suddha'.
The INDIANS of Kandyan tea estates are called 'Demala' -- but they have no historical relationship to the so called, self-proclaimed Native 'Demala' in N&E! :-) How naive to claim 'Demala' refers to native Tamils, when INDIANS are called 'Demala' even to this date :-) :-)
These Tamil Eelamists rely on Mahawanshaya to quote 'Demada', but they pretend as if they never saw that Mahawanshaya uses 'Demada' to refer to INDIAN INVADERS!.
A DAMILA of noble descent, named ELARA, who came hither from the CHOLA-COUNTRY to seize on the kingdom... http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap021.html
Heh heh heh :-) A DAMILA from Chola Country!
Now who are claiming 'Damilas from Chola Country' were a 'native Sri Lankan Ethnic'? :-) Lula, you are indeed committing suicide.
Another indisputable historical example is the 'Demala Maha saeya', built by Chola Conscripts taken from India -- not by natives.
These evidences themselves are more than sufficient to prove that 'Demada' was not used to refer to a native ethnic!
For Eelamists like Lula, these evidence are CYANIDE:-) No wonder readers think Lula committed suicide.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 25 Nov 2006 00:01:07 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
24 Nov 2006 23:53:22 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Nightfox,
GAMAYA..
your killing lula here ... leave him alone, let him be :-)
Unlike historians, Lula came up with his own bogus theory that 'Demadas were clearly identifiable Tamils due to their language and culture prior to 13 CAD'.
Since then, Lula was repeatedly challenged to quote the historians and unload conclusive evidence to support this bogus claim.
As there is indisputable evidence to dispute Lula's bogus claim, Lula had no other option than committing suicide, by practicing 'Yoga laugh' :-)
Edited By - GamaRaala - 25 Nov 2006 00:57:09 GMT |
tigeress19
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7555
Member Profile
|
25 Nov 2006 00:17:40 GMT Report for Abuse
|
thank you lula anna and sir ariyalai-SB. mahavamsa was written in sinhala in 1874???
LuLa,
Thanks very much for the information about the books; I will place the order soon.
Thanks also for the information about Mahavamsa translation; I knew that you would give a precise answer. I purposefully asked that question; these fools centre their chauvinistic ideology, the Sinhala Buddhist Fundamentalism, on this ancient mytho-histrorical pali written document. This document was written in 6th century AD and was only translated in Sinhala in 1874; it is simply astonishing to say the least!
I said to Mucha previously that the Sinhala language was not mature enough at the time when the Mahavamsa was written, and still stand by that. The Sinhala language was still evolving and Buddhism played a major part in it; this is why the Sinhala language and Buddhism are intertwined in Sri Lanka.
I wrote the following to Mucha on 23 Oct 2005:
Was the Sinhala language in usage both in written and spoken form when the Mahavamsa was written in 6th century AD?
I am neither a historian nor an anthropologist; hence, I cannot categorically claim that the Sinhala language was not present when the Mahavamsa was written. However, in my view, it is very puzzling in the sense that the subject matter was about Sri Lanka, and understandably it was aimed at the Sinhala public at that time; hence it should have been written in Sinhala. Further more, Mucha was claiming that the Monk Mahanama was only just editing or updating the existing Sinhala accounts/chronicles; then why was not reproduced in Sinhala? So, am I to assert that the Sinhala language was not mature enough, or lack of vocabulary that may have limited the capability of expressing complex accounts?
It is also pertinent that at the time of the evolution of the Sinhala language, there was a significant Tamil presence in Sri Lanka; this fact is indisputable, as so many scholars who studied Sri Lankan matters, I have quoted a couple of them before on this forum, had pointed out that, though the origin of the Sinhala language was Pali/Sanskrit, the vocabulary, grammar, structure, and substance were heavily influenced by the Dravidian languages, particularly the Tamils language. The magnitude of the influence was such that some scholars concluded that the Sinhala language was a pure product of the Dravidian languages. So, one cannot dispute the fact that both Tamils and Sinhalese were cohabiting the island during the evolution of the Sinhala Language.
These people can twist the history, but cannot hide their language; basically, I can go as far as to say that the Sinhala language was enriched by Tamil. The Thirukural was written about 2,500 years ago; the maturity of the Tamil language was beautifully depicted in that marvellous piece of work.
Edited By - tigeress19 - 25 Nov 2006 00:24:23 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
25 Nov 2006 02:56:13 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Nightfox,
Even today, if a Tamil comes from India, the Sri Lankans(Tamils) will call him as an Indian (Tamil) *just the way they called them Damilas* at that time.
The above was what Lula wrote to Muchalinda in one of the debates with him 10 months ago, but when Lula read Prof. Indrapala's book 5 months back, what he found was as follows,
*NOT LuLa but Prof. Indrapala says in his book*,
In the centuries before the Common Era, there were many ethnic groups in the island and one of them was the group known as the Damedas in the Prakrit inscriptions and Damilas in the Pali chronicles, identified without any controversy as the Tamils.
He also says, as per the earliest Brahmi inscriptions and the early Pali chronicles the Damedas/Damelas (Tamils) have been in the island of Sri Lanka since many centuries BCE (Before Common Era or AD). They need not be considered as outsiders. The idea that the Demela were foreign intruders and the Sinhala fought to liberate their people is nonsensical.
Edited By - LuLa - 25 Nov 2006 03:07:54 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
25 Nov 2006 03:15:35 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
Even today, if a Tamil comes from India, the Sri Lankans(Tamils) will call him as an Indian (Tamil) *just the way they called them Damilas* at that time.
The above was what Lula wrote to Muchalinda in one of the debates 10 months back, but when Lula read Prof. Indrapala?s book 5 months back, what he found was as follows,
Lula, whether you said the above 10 months back or not, and whether you read K Indrapala's book 5 months back or not, the above is the indisputable GROUND REALITY.
How on earth 'Demalas' in the Kandian tea states are a native Sri Lankan ethnic? :-) :-)
Lula, The material below is POISONOUS to you; read at your own risk ;-)
A * DAMILA * of noble descent, named Elara, who came hither from the * CHOLA-COUNTRY * to seize on the kingdom.
-an early Pali chronicle, 'Mahawanshaya'.
How on Earth a so called 'native Damila' came from India? :-)
Edited By - GamaRaala - 25 Nov 2006 03:36:15 GMT |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2582
Member Profile
|
25 Nov 2006 03:42:52 GMT Report for Abuse
|
The idea of looking upon the Demadas as aliens was not surely not prevalent in the EHP. The earliest chronicle of the island, namely the Dipavamsa, does not refer to the first Damila rulers of Anuradhapura in its list (Sena & Guttaka) as invaders. Nor does the Mahavamsa.
In the original Pali version edited by Geiger, it is stated as follows:
Assanaavikka puttaa dve Damila Sena-Guttikaa Suratissamahipaalam tam gahetvaa mahabbalaa dve dvaavisvassaani rajjam dhammena karaayum
In the English translation, however this was rendered as:
Two Damilas, Sena and Guttaka, sons of a freighter who bought horses hither, conquered the king Suratissa at the head of the great army and reigned(both) together twenty-two years justly
Unfortunately 'assanavika' literally meaning 'horse freighter', has been translated as 'a freighter who brought horses hither', allowing room for one to imply that he was a trader from overseas.
But 'assanaavika' refers to a freighter (in the sense of a ship or cargo owner) who dealt in horses. And yet present day historians have assumed that the two rulers were invaders from South India.This is an example of prejudice.
Source: p145
THE EVOLUTION OF AN ETHNIC IDENTITY
Prof. K. Indrapala
Edited By - Kulakottan - 25 Nov 2006 04:12:12 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
25 Nov 2006 03:52:27 GMT Report for Abuse
|
A * DAMILA * of noble descent, named Elara, who came hither from the * CHOLA-COUNTRY * to seize on the kingdom.
-an early Pali chronicle, 'Mahawanshaya'.
The multi ethnic communities that lived in the island (Anuradapura Kingdom) many centuries Before and after the Common Era (BCE), such as the Demadas (Demadas in Prakrit, Damilas in Pali, Demalas in Sinhala and Thamilar in Tamil, they all mean the same), Nagas, Yakkhas (Veddhas), Kabojas, Milakas and many others (NO Sinhalese, unfortunately) were ruled from time to time by the kings from either the Sinhala dynasty created in the island by Vijay (examples: Devanampiya Tissa, Dutta Gamini, etc) OR by the South Indian Damila Dynasties such as Cholas, Pandiyans, Cheras, and later Kalingas and Nayakkars, (examples: Elara, Magha, etc) OR by the Nagas (examples: Chora Naga, Ila Naga, etc) OR by the long standing native Damilas who lived in the island since antiquity (examples: Sena and Guttaka). |
|
Search All News and Discussions