|
|
Buddhist monks given training to ensure peaceful co-existence in Sri Lanka
Full News Article
shan
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2260
Member Profile
|
 27 Jul 2006 13:34:36 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Although I am busy I couldn't resist giving my opinion
Brand new hypothesis, I love it. No bloody His-Storian mentioned this before. Keep on entertain us.
A plunderer chola remains a plunderer chola while most of the so called Tamils of Lanka are Singhalas subjugated by the cholas !
These mongrels have a solid support base in the chola homeland across the Palk straits.
The number balance is in their favor but the Lankan civilization will always triumph over these petty racist plunderers.
Edited By - shan - 27 Jul 2006 13:41:35 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2358
Member Profile
|
 27 Jul 2006 13:55:35 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GamaRaala,
What is IMPORTANT for you to understand is, There was no Indendepnt Tamil Kingdoms or Indepdent Christian/Catholic Kingdoms in Sri Lanka prior to that. Get it?
OK, lets assume that, what you are saying is true, that the Tamils came into existence only after the 12th CAD (that?s almost a thousand years), and there were no Independent Tamil Kingdoms in Sri Lanka prior to that.
My question is,
1. How many centuries should a group of people live in a clearly demarcated land area, as a majority within their land to call themselves natives of that land?
2. How long will it take for a group of people comprising of various ethnic origins that has been naturalized with a distinct identity, land area, language, religion and culture to call themselves a nation? (PS: I have given the definitions of a nation at 24 Jan 2006 04:56:10 GMT).
3. Is it mandatory that a group of people living in a well demarcated land area, and a majority within that area should create a new language/culture to call themselves a nation?
What is the standard and who holds the yard stick?
The funniest part is, it is the Sinhala Buddhist chauvinists who have created a standard figure (2550) and they are having the yard stick to measure who is a native and who is a nation.
According to them, if the Sinhalese who lived in the NE got naturalised into the Tamil community (Tamilized), they become natives of Tamil Nadu and if the Tamils (even recent migrants) who lived in the South get naturalised into the Sinhala comunity (Sinhalized), they become natives of Sri Lanka. This logic is good for people like GonRaala.
We Sri Lankan (Eela) Tamils of NE are a unique race (a combination of Tamils, Malabars, Sinhalese and others) and a majority within our native land (NE) and as one of the two nations within the country, we cannot continue to let the other majority to decide our fate for ever just because the British made it into a unitary state (instead of federal) and handed over the entire country to the majority within the unitary state (Sinhalese).
All others what you have written is utter nonsense, not worth even reading, good for some Sinhala Buddhist fanatics. If you had read Prof Indrapala?s book, you will never write all those crap.
Edited By - LuLa - 27 Jul 2006 14:04:21 GMT |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
 27 Jul 2006 14:06:05 GMT Report for Abuse
|
The mythical kingdoms:
The History of Ceylon from the earliest of Times to 1600 A.D.
JOAO De BAROS
P37
[[..and going along the coast of the island toward the north above Batecalou is the kingdom of Triquinamale, which by the coast of upward comes to adjoins another called Jafanapatnam
P67
Tamil King of Jaffna - Sangili]]
The Kingdom of the Jafnapatam
Being an account of its ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION as derived from the PORTUGUESECHIVES
By P E PIERIS 1920
[[Chapter II p12
According to local customs which had descended from the time of the Tamil rulers, every cloth which was handled in the course of the trade within the Kingdom had to bear an official stamp.]]
CEYLON
An Account of the Island, 1859
Sir James Emerson Tennant
[
P394
Though known by the general epithlet of Malabars (or as they are designated in Pali Damilos, Tamils were also natives of places in India remote from that now known as Malabar.
P413
The Tamils have a tradition that prior to the Christian era, Jaffna was colonized by Malabars and that a Cholian prince assumed the Government, AD101 ? a date which corresponds closely with the second Malabar invasion recorded in the Mahavamsa]
P415
The language of the north of the island from Chilaw on the west coast to Batticaloa on the east is chiefly, and in the majority localities exclusively Tamil;
Occasionally, after long period of inaction, collisions took place; or the Sinhalese kings equipped expeditions against the north; but contest was unequal; and in spite of casual successes ? the kings of the Ceylonese Malabars? as he is styled in Rajavali, held his court at Jaffnapatam and collected tribute from both the high and the low countries.]
Ancient coins of SRI LANKAN TAMIL RULERS
Dr P Pushparatnam
[Page 54
Venkatasamy (1983:610 cites a schlar Mendis who opined that the fish marks of the coins denote the descendants of the Tamils who migrated to Sri Lanka from India and that they ruled indepenadntly and owed no allegiance to other Sri Lankan rulers.
P72
Many scholars held the view that there was no Tamil kingdom in Sri Lanka prior to the 13th century A.D and the Tamil rulers of the ancient times were migrants from their home country who like their counter parts Sinhalese did not issue any coins on their own. But in fact both the coins from Tamil Nadu and those issued by the Tamils in Sri Lanka are available.]
No one would disagree with the fact that without an independent kingdoms you cannot issue coins.
[P73
In North Lanka two more types of coins are were found with line drawings which were not found in Tamil Nadu.
The coins were found in North lanka at places like Pallikuda, Mannittalai, Virapandyamunai and Kandaraodai.
P96
Numismatic evidences support two different places of Tamil rule in northern Lanka at Katiramalai and Cinkai. Most historians identify the place Katiramalai, mentioned in Tamil literature with Kantarodai.The archeological evidence obtained from Kantarodai are placed in support of the hypothesis. Scholars identify Cinkai with either Vallipuram or Nallur ( Rasanayagam 1928, Indrapala 1972, and Vellupillai 1981)]
Ancient Jaffna
Mudaliyar Easanayagam 1926
[P251
From the time of Kulanakai to the conquest of Senapakap perumal or Sapumal Kumaraya, the Kings of Jaffna ruled independently without a break and ....
P297
Portuguese Historian de Quieroz says:
In process of time there came some Brahmin natives of Guzerat called Arus and with the favour of of the Nayak of Madhura got the temple Ramanacor, whence they came for trade and friendship with the kings of Jaffna and one of them married a daughter of that King and their descendants became the heirs of that kingdom.]]
Edited By - Kulakottan - 27 Jul 2006 14:17:15 GMT |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 14:29:04 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Prof Indrapala
The Evolution of an Ethnic Identity
p33
Main Conclusions
The two ethnic communities, Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, are ultimately descended from the Mesolithic people who occupied almost all part of the island in prehistoric times |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 505
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 14:53:08 GMT Report for Abuse
|
This Kingdom was UNITARY, legitimately ruled by a single Sinhalese King, whose authority wielded from Jaffnapatam to Mada Kalapuwa to Devundara! LOL! GamaRaala that is false! Unitary state is not the same as an united state! Yes the king ruled from all those parts, but it was not a unitary state! Unitary state was first introduced by the British in 1833, do you even know what the definition of an unitary state is? Medieval Sinhala society was (if it has to resembles any contemporary state system) federal in nature.
This is an interesting read:
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/slrv.htm
As for what was the situation 1000 years ago, that is irrelevant. The people of the North-East are as indigeneous as the people of the south. If your claim is for a culture that was present before another culture, or a people who were there before another group of people, then surely the Veddas must be the only true heirs of Sri Lanka. Under your logic, Pakistan and Afghanistan must be brought back to India as a untied Hindustan, simply because the people there were all once Hindus a 1000 years ago. You disregard the fact that the people have converted or evolved to another ethnic group. The fact is the SL Tamil people of the NE are distinct to both the Tamils of India and to the Sinhalese (both genetically and culturally, thought they share many similarities with both population groups), its a process that has taken many centuries. What you want to do is force them to assimilate and become Sinhalese overnight. This is cultural genocide. You can keep on screaming about Tamil Nadu, which has no relevance whats so ever to the SL Tamil situation. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2358
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 14:53:49 GMT Report for Abuse
|
BABA
Now you are talking like a grown up, that was a good message. Have you stopped wearing daipers now? (just kidding). |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 505
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 15:09:09 GMT Report for Abuse
|
then the Sinhalese will be fighting Bengalis and not Tamils. What the Sinhala bigots on this forum fail to realise is that the various dynastic struggles between the kingdoms of South India, East India and Sri Lanka had no racial connotations at all. The cholas fought the pandyas, the pallavas fought the cholas, the cheras fought the panydas, the lankan kingdom fought the cholas, the lankan kingdom formed alliances with the pandyas and even went to the aid of another south indian dynasty against another and inveded Tamil Nadu etc. All these kingodms including the Lankan one had 'Damela' mercenaries fighting for them from Kerala and Tamil Nadu. These bigots try to parallel these simple dynastic conflicts with a Tamil-Sinhala race war that has never ever happened. This brainless bigotry is made even more of a joke, when most of the ancestors of the modern day Sinhalas were from Tamil Nadu, and most of the ancestors of the SL Tamils are Sinhala.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?
In fact it was Magha of kalinga (An EAST INDIAN!! Not a Tamil) who invaded Lanka (with the help of Tamil mercenaries) and disrupted the rule of the Lankan kingdom. And why did he do it? Because he was related to the wife of the previous king of lanka who had just died, and therefore he claimed the throne. See? It was just a typical dynastic struggle evoked by a sucession crisis, something that happens in all kingdoms.
Hell, even some sinhalese accept this fact about their true origins:
http://www.chandrage.com/personal/sbarrkum/lanka.htm
(go to 'essays and correspondence')
At one stage a Tamil from south India led a defensive atatck against a South Indian invasion of Lanka, and was revered as a Sinhala hero!
Edited By - Muru - 27 Jul 2006 15:20:55 GMT |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 505
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 15:38:51 GMT Report for Abuse
|
There was no Indendepnt Tamil Kingdoms or Indepdent Christian/Catholic Kingdoms in Sri Lanka prior to that. Get it? GR the whole claim for federalism, autonomy and even separate state is not based on the existence of a separate Tamil kingdom that was present a few centuries ago! Its based on the fact that the North-East after independence (and even many centuries before that) was inhabited almost exclusively by Tamil speaking people who regard themselves as a distinct group. This group was completely divided from its primary parent population the sinhalese for a couple of centuries, this division was compounded by the linguistic difference which isolated the SL Tamils from the Sinhalese to a certain extent, hence why SL Tamils share 55% of a common gene pool and not 100%. |
Muru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 505
Member Profile
|
27 Jul 2006 15:42:08 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| Baba all Tamils will agree to united sri Lanka if you agree to put federalism in place. Its the only system that can prevent extermination of our distinct ethnic group and the mob rule of the people of the south forced on us. |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
28 Jul 2006 03:20:21 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Bunkerbuster,
The neo-chola Kulakottan's above posting shows the intellectual base of the war declared on Lanka by the racist LTTE mongrels.
I am one of the few who was still dreaming that Tamils can live within a united or an undivided Sri Lanka and had been critic of LTTE.
You have been trying very hard to prove me wrong and almost succeeding. Keep on trying.
BTW Thank you for the title 'neo-chola Kulakottan'.
You are right I might have been one of those neo-cholas who was born to Ilanaga and Damiladevi.
Kula
Edited By - Kulakottan - 28 Jul 2006 05:54:15 GMT |
|
Search All News and Discussions