 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
Saervek
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 102
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 03:46:55 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Shelley,
Well the local King for the period (in Sri Lanka) was Devanampiya Tissa. For all intents and purposes he was probably independant, but what I recall is that somewhere in the rock edicts it mentioned a list of the Kings who controlled independant territories, but owed fealty to him (Asoka). I think Devanampiya Tissa and some of the Kings of deep South India were on that, and at a guess some of the territories on his (Asoka) other borders. |
shelley
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 98
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 03:52:14 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| Saervek, so then sri lanka was at one time a part of inida, b/c they owed to ashoka? in any case, it doesn't matter, for we're one family. we indians see you sri lankans as our strategic and economic partners, and our blood. |
Saervek
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 102
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 04:47:34 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Shelley,
Sure, but that's really a bit like saying that because the province of Britannia was part of the Roman Empire, England should be a part of Italy. And indeed, Britannia was kept as a Roman province for around 400 years, whereas even if Asoka was Devanampiya Tissa's suzerain, he generally left the ruling of country independent, and up to Devanampiya Tissa, and such a relationship would have ended either upon the death of the two sovereigns, or certainly after the collapse of the Maurya dynasty.
in any case, it doesn't matter, for we're one family. we indians see you sri lankans as our strategic and economic partners, and our blood.
Sure, generally Sri Lankans have no problem with Indians, its only some parts of the Indian political establishment that makes most Sri Lankans nervous. |
Ariyalai_SB
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1131
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 17:50:38 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
First of all it is good that you have sorted out your personal issues.
You have presented your answers beautifully with the usual flair, but as often the case that you skilfully avoided to admit your short comings. The issue of you misled the audience to score a cheap point still stands!
You said:
ARIYALAI, before making any false allegations, it is good if you can revisit the post I made on 8 Dec 2006 01:30:45 GMT (Page 65) to check if I have deliberately left anything un-quoted to give any false impression. I have vehemently quoted *your belief that Sinhalas too were originated from India*, no matter that is something I have already proved wrong.
You quoted me on this thread, as per below, on 7 Dec 2006 02:43:46 GMT, page 63:
The Tamils of Sri Lankan do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India. (7 Oct 2005 21:56:05)
It is astonishing that, a person of your calibre fails to see that quoting someone selectively (cherry Picking), just like you did, sends wrong meanings/perceptions as far as the audiences are concerned.
Please point me to the page where you said the following:
I have vehemently quoted *your belief that Sinhalas too were originated from India*
In fact you said:
Having said that it is also good if you can clarify whether Tamil are Natives of Sri Lanka or Migrants, because you have previously admitted,
The Tamils of Sri Lankan do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India. (7 Oct 2005 21:56:05)
I am sorry to repeat this: It is no good that you claim to follow a scholarly approach, and then stoop low to score cheap points.
I would like this point resolved first before I can engage with you on other points; especially about the Aryanisation process!
Edited By - Ariyalai_SB - 18 Dec 2006 17:52:20 GM |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 18:22:13 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Saervack,
In anycase, the subsolar point is not always going to be going to be on the equator, it varies with the location of the Earth on it's orbit, between the tropics.
=
In equator the sun's ray hit vertically, while in north the sun's ray don't hit vertically (It depends the season)!
Saervack,
What Francois Gautier think about the Vedic people ?
What Francois Gautier said about Indians ?
What Francois Gautier NEVER NEGATED ?
Ok let Francois Gautier and David Frawley, what about Alain Danielou and Konraad ?
Are they TOO Hindutva agents ?? Or What are the articles you freshly read on the net ?? Don't give me the links, thanks !
You are anti-Hindu , it's SURELY and certainly the reason why you paint Gautier and Frawley as 'Hindutva agents' !!
Edited By - KURAL - 18 Dec 2006 18:48:14 GMT |
shelley
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 98
Member Profile
|
18 Dec 2006 22:44:25 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| Saervek, what parts of the establishment make sri lankans nervous? why? we indians love the sri lankan people. |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2619
Member Profile
|
19 Dec 2006 00:53:25 GMT Report for Abuse
|
ARIYALAI,
You have presented your answers beautifully with the usual flair
Thanks for the *admiration*. In fact, you are not the first one to *appreciate* our debating skills. However, it is good if you all can understand that it is not essentially our skills, but the rock solid facts we provide, that is impenetrable.
Please point me to the page where you said the following:
I have vehemently quoted *your belief that Sinhalas too were originated from India*
This is where (and how) I quoted that.
Anyway my friend, I was waiting for you to come up with the following quote.
Let me talk about the concept of Tamils are 'native' to Sri Lanka; you thought that you scored a point on this, well mucha, you haven't; I have always said that the Tamils originated from India, and at the same time, *I HAVE ALSO BEEN SAYING THAT THE SINHALESE ALSO ORIGINATED FROM INDIA*. So, my point has been that it is ludicrous that the Tamils are not native to Sri Lanka while the Sinhalese are. What is so wrong in that? You can loudmouth all you want, but you cannot carry on claiming that the Sinhalese as a group of people did not originate from India. (Emphasis added)
http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2006/10/8918_65.html
at 8 Dec 2006 01:30:45 GMT (page 65)
Having said that my friend, it should also be noted that the origins of Sinhalas have no bearing on the contradiction you made about the origins of Tamils. You very clearly admitted that Tamils have originated in India. You also stated that Tamils are native to SL. This itslef is contradictory. Any sane person does not need to know your opinion on the nativeness of Sinhalas or Bantus or Eskimos to find that the above two statements are contradictive. This is common sense.
In the same way, you very clearly mentioned that I am a FOOL. And then said that I am NOT A FOOL but something else. This is again contradictive. And no fool needs to know your opinion abut your own-self to find that the above two statements are contradictive. Very simple logic.
Good luck.
-Muchalinda (The cherry picking calculated chauvinist fool who also wants to make the final word*)
* Source: Most Participents.
.
Edited By - Mucha-linda - 19 Dec 2006 00:53:57 GM |
Ariyalai_SB
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1131
Member Profile
|
19 Dec 2006 07:20:51 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
You quoted me on Page 63, 7 Dec 2006 02:43:46 GMT, on this thread:
The Tamils of Sri Lankan do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India. (7 Oct 2005 21:56:05)
My replay to the Readers to this was on Page 64, 7 Dec 2006 11:41:14 GMT, on the same thread:
He quoted me:
The Tamils of Sri Lankan do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India. (7 Oct 2005 21:56:05)
In fact, I said:
19 Oct 2005 19:51:40 GMT
Yes Mucha, the Tamils do not dispute that their ancestors originated from India, but you don't accept the fact that the Sinhalese originated from India. I am afraid you are wrong; both Tamils and Sinhalese originated from India; we have had extensive debates on this subject, and we have shown you that Sri lankan peoples, languages, religions, apart from Islam and Christianity, all originated from India; if you dispute this, you are not only an idiot, but also an educated fool. I further said:
22 Oct 2005 22:55:21 GMT
Let me talk about the concept of Tamils are 'native' to Sri Lanka; you thought that you scored a point on this, well mucha, you haven't; I have always said that the Tamils originated from India, and at the same time, I have also been saying that the Sinhalese also originated from India. So, my point has been that it is ludicrous that the Tamils are not native to Sri Lanka while the Sinhalese are. What is so wrong in that? You can loudmouth all you want, but you cannot carry on claiming that the Sinhalese as a group of people did not originate from India.
Mucha, you cannot get out of this with out admitting that you misled the audience to score a cheap point. Surely, you should have known the timing of my post; to use it in such a way, in the hope, to confuse me and others, is simply belittling oneself!
We can debate the subject of Native when we conclude on the above issue!
I repeat that you are not a fool, but a calculated chauvinist; hence foolish that recklessly not caring of the consequences of nurturing such mentality in a modern world. |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
19 Dec 2006 11:48:08 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ladies and Gentles,
Tamils are native to Sri lanka !
Demonstration :
Tamils are native to Sri lanka, as they are native to Kumari Kandam and as Sri lanka is a remain of Kumari Kandam !
More simple i (we) cannot !
(The 'proto-Sinhala' Pali litterature describes Viji's arrival in Sri lanka, like that , the Sangam Tamil Litterature describes Tamil Kingdoms in Kumari Kandam !)
And so consequently i do not understand the claim of Sinhalas who say that they are natives to Sri lanka , it's a 'calculated' chauvinism !
But i do not say to them to go back to India, like the racist Sinhalas who say to Tamils to go back to Tamil Nadu !
Edited By - KURAL - 19 Dec 2006 11:57:42 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 818
Member Profile
|
19 Dec 2006 12:36:18 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ariyalai_SB,
Ariyalai_SB mislead the audience in an attempt to score a cheap point by declaring 'Malayalis could read Sinhalese newspapers';
Have you ever been to (sic) Karalla? 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
So far, Ariyalai_SB failed to point out which Malayali and Telungu speakers, known to Ariyalai_SB, can read Sinhala without prior knowledge ;-)
Ariyalai_SB must have thought the audience was ready to swallow whatever the cheap lies that Ariyalai_SB vomits out in this forum.
The extent of the damage caused to Tamil society by the LTTE's terrorism is clearly depicted by the self-proclaimed intellectuals like Ariyalai_SB. When true Tamil intellectuals are being assassinated by the LTTE, the third grade cheap liars are the sole winners. These third grade products do not even have an iota of knowledge in any particular field, thus even duped into believing fantasies like 'Malayalis reading Sinhalese daily newspapers' and 'Man made bridges between India and SL'.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 19 Dec 2006 12:38:32 GMT |
|
Search All News and Discussions