{"id":91051,"date":"2019-07-03T17:16:33","date_gmt":"2019-07-04T00:16:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=91051"},"modified":"2019-07-03T17:16:33","modified_gmt":"2019-07-04T00:16:33","slug":"first-stirrings-of-a-sinhala-buddhist-spring-i","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2019\/07\/03\/first-stirrings-of-a-sinhala-buddhist-spring-i\/","title":{"rendered":"First Stirrings of a Sinhala Buddhist Spring – I"},"content":{"rendered":"

By <\/span>Rohana R. Wasala<\/span><\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

Five hundred years of European\ncolonial occupation could not destroy the dominant Sinhalese Buddhist cultural\nidentity of Sri Lanka. The Sinhalese have a distinct language called Sinhala\nthat evolved entirely out of indigenous roots over thousands of years. It is\none of the few still extant oldest languages in the world. It got enriched in\ncontact with other languages of the world. They have what is accepted as the\npurest form of Buddhism, the Theravada Buddhism, which, according to the\nprevalent tradition, they got from North India about 2255 years ago. \n\u2018Tripitaka\u2019 in Pali (the Buddhist scriptures contained in \u2018Three Baskets\u2019)\nwhich had been passed down through oral tradition was committed to writing at\nAluvihara, Matale during the reign of King Valagamba in the first century BCE.\nCommissioned by King Dhatusena (455-473 CE), the Mahavamsa was composed in the\n5th century CE. Both these monumental literary tasks were done by Buddhist\nmonks at times like the present when the island state and its head and heart\nthe Buddhasasana were facing or had just overcome alien threats (military and\ndoctrinal\/ideological, respectively) to their survival. All the ancient place\nnames throughout the country are in Sinhala. Those in the North and East \nstill survive in the form of Tamilized versions. This shows that the Sinhalese\ninhabited the whole of the island. The feeling of proprietorship over the\nisland is in the Sinhalese DNA as it were. Of course, all communities need to\nthink of themselves as Sri Lankans, but it is doubtful whether non-Sinhalese\nfeel that way – the way the Sinhalese do – towards Sri Lanka, the geographical\nterritory, the land.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The statement of an\nunalterable historical fact like this should not be interpreted as an assertion\nof so-called Sinhalese supremacism. What is supremacism? The www.google.com<\/a>\ndefinition of \u2018supremacism\u2019 is that it is \u2018an ideology which holds that a\ncertain class of people is superior to others, and that they should dominate,\ncontrol, and subjugate others, or are entitled to do so\u2019.The same source\ndefines the adjective \u2018supremacist\u2019 as \u2018relating to or advocating the supremacy\nof a particular group\u2019. The majority Sinhalese do not want to \u2018dominate, control, and\nsubjugate others\u2019, and do not believe that they have a right to do so.\nConsidering the beleaguered state of  the Sinhalese )esp. Sinhalese\nBuddhists), both internally and externally, it looks as if they are obliged to\nshow cause for their survival as a distinct race, or as if they ought to\napologise for being what they are.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sinhalese are the oldest\ninhabitants of the island, no doubt coeval with the veddas, though the latter\nare identified as a separate aboriginal race by European anthropologists who\nused to faithfully copied by their local clones parroting their Eurocentric\nideas until recently. The Sinhalese have been the majority in the country for\ncountless millennia. No wonder the country used to be named after them. It is\nactually embarrassing for them to be talking so much about their racial\nidentity and their special relationship with the land, and their Buddhist\nculture that evolved over the last 2255 year phase of their dateless history.\nBut they are obliged to do so because of the racist discrimination \nagainst them by a handful of minority politicians who fear the legitimate\nself-assertion of the Sinhalese as a threat to them. The more accommodating the\nSinhalese are towards others, the less recognition of the fact seems to be\nforthcoming from the latter. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sinhalese Buddhist\nmajority are not racist, neither are they fanatical Buddhists. There\u2019s no need\nto prove that something is not there. It is up to those who say that the\nSinhalese Buddhists are this and that to produce evidence, it looks like they\ndon\u2019t have any. The term \u2018fanatical Buddhist\u2019 is self-contradictory. Fanaticism\nis possible only  with faith-based religions. Buddhism says \u2018ehi passiko\u2019\n\u2018come and see\u2019, if you don\u2019t agree, go your way in peace. It is not a political\nreligion unlike Christianity and Islam. The system of government that is most\ncompatible with the Buddhist philosophy is democracy. Democracy has a chance of\nflourishing in a Buddhist country. Buddhism cannot have any issue with\nsecularism, and vice versa. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

At least 70% of the population\nin Sri Lanka are Buddhist. Since Buddhism\u2019s tolerant attitude dominates in the\ncountry, the minorities are able to practice their  religions in perfect\nfreedom. The same sort of religious freedom can probably be found in some\nChritian countries like America and Britain. But, do the Christian and Buddhist\nminorities in  Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh respectively enjoy the same\nfreedom? Fundamentalist forms of Christianity and Islam (each of these\nreligions monopolizes \u2018God\u2019 and claims to be the only true religion) threaten\nthe very foundation of human civilization. A \u2018non-religious\u2019 spiritual moral\nphilosophy like Buddhism is little tolerated by fundamentalists. That is why\nthe few Buddhist majority countries there are – Thailand, Myanmar, and Sri\nLanka, for example – have begun to have problems with their Muslim minorities.\nSri Lanka had no religious problem because of its entrenched Sinhalese Buddhist\ncultural infrastructure. But the curse of Wahhabism has gradually been visited\non Sri Lanka over the past decade or so. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fundamentalist activity\nincreased in the past three or four decades behind the smokescreen of the civil\nwar. Its progress was facilitated largely by the passivity of the divided\nSangha and the Sinhala politicians\u2019 reluctance to take action against\nfundamentalists for fear that they\u2019d fail to get the minority vote. So they\nplay it safe, by taking refuge in the dishonest policy of political\ncorrectness. Patriotic individuals and groups who urged the Mahanayakes and the\nsuccessive governments to address this issue by making use of the available\nlegal mechanisms were often condemned as racists, tribalists and extremists and\nthey turned a blind eye to the cases of  physical destruction of\narchaeological sites by treasure hunters and political vandals, and a deaf ear\nto the pleas of the peaceful activists to intervene. Ven. Galaboda-aththe\nGnanasara who has been a fierce anti-fundamentalist for many years, and who,\nfor that reason,fell foul both of the authorities and fundamentalist\nsympathisers, is just coming in out of the cold.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ven. Gnanasara never raised\nhis voice to create communal unrest or foment violence targeting any community.\nHe raised his voice only to awaken the political authorities and the Ven.\nMahanayake Theras who were indifferent to his early warnings  and pleas\nabout the worsening danger of murderous religious extremism for their own\nselfish reasons. It is only the satanic propaganda that turned him into a hate\nfigure, particularly in the biased media eyes. It can be seriously suspected\nthat money plays a central role in it. Otherwise, how could the true situation\nin this regard be misrepresented in the press in the distorted manner it\nusually is?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fear that the release of\nVen. Gnanasara Thera from prison would cause a conflagration of racial or\nreligious conflict because of the alleged devilry on his part is entirely\nmisplaced. Contrary to such fears, it can be argued, Ven. Gnanasara, set free,\nhas become a symbol of hope for a nation unexpectedly betrayed barely five\nyears after its return to normalcy at the end of three decades of devastating\ncivil war in May 2009. He adopted a roughneck-like manner when demonstrating\nhis \u2018righteous anger\u2019 at the failure of politicians successively in power and\nthe leading Buddhist clergy to address the chronic problem of Christian and\nIslamic fundamentalist religious onslaught on Sri Lanka\u2019s Buddhist cultural\nspace. (The idea of righteous anger is alien to the Buddhist teaching; but even\nVen. Gnanasara is a patujjana, an ordinary human, a worldling). That strategic\nposturing must now be consigned to the past. He said his prison experience was\na kind of postgraduate education for him. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This fundamentalist\ninfringement on the ancient Buddhist cultural heritage of Sri Lanka  is\nsometimes done by brazenly crude methods (e.g., forced conversion of,\nparticularly, helpless impoverished Buddhists and Hindus in remote rural areas\nthrough blandishments, or by getting them to desecrate their religious symbols\nas a rite of passage, such as trampling on Buddha statuettes, and home visits\nby fanatical preachers on morality as taught in their religions, sometimes\naccompanied by gullible or simply mercenary uneducated Buddhist monks or monk\nimposters. There has been authentic video). Religious subversion is sometimes\ndone in more sophisticated ways in urban areas, something difficult to\ncriticize or condemn without arousing opposition both among the proselytizers\nand the potential proselytes. For example, there is the case of a Christian or\nCatholic Brother who preaches well on ethical matters that are superficially\nidentical between Christianity and Buddhism. He, having mesmerized a mixed\ncrowd by the manner of his preaching, suddenly exclaims \u2018Jesus is the\nSupremeTruth\u2019!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, no two religions agree\ntotally in terms of their metaphysics, nor in terms of their ethical\nprinciples. The differences between Theravada Buddhism preached\/practiced in\nSri Lanka and Catholicism professed by the majority of Sri Lanka\u2019s Christians\nare unbridgeable, as the first is based on the idea of Causality, and the\nsecond on Creationism. To ignore these differences is hypocrisy. The audiences\nin these programs consist not only of Christians, but Buddhists, Hindus, and\nprobably others as well. Even Buddhist monks are sometimes present on the stage\nwith this Catholic Father. If the Buddhists in the audience and the monks on\nthe stage have an iota of brains, they should realize that what the preacher is\nimplying is that Buddhists and others who are not Christians are spiritually\ndeluded, and that his intolerant, totalitarian assertion is not consonant with\nhis purported desire to generate goodwill among diverse religious communities.\nNo Buddhists will quarrel with Catholics or Muslims about their beliefs; nor\nwill they oppose conversion through conviction. But, they will object to them\ntrying to convert Buddhists by unethical means including force or deception.\n(If a courageous monk or layperson, hearing the proselytizing Father\u2019s\nassertion of his personal religious belief or conviction, had raised\nobjections, they\u2019d have been roundly condemned on all sides. Of course, what is\n\u2018unethical\u2019 in a multicultural context is problematic. So, it is best to avoid\nsuch situations in the interest of religious harmony among the people.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ven. Gnanasara Thera\u2019s is an\nunimaginably worse predicament than that hypothetical monk\u2019s or lay Buddhist\u2019s.\nWhat he exposed and challenged were infinitely greater and much more public and\neven violent instances of fundamentalist aggression. He endeavoured to do this\nin the calm and composed way characteristic of a Buddhist monk, without\nexpecting any reward (\u2018nissaranadyashayen\u2019  as he puts it); he has no\npolitical or other materialistic ambitions. For many years he tried to alert the\nlay Buddhist leaders (politicians in power and those out of power) to the\ndanger. In a few instances clashes between Buddhists and Muslims occurred for\nwhich only the former were blamed; Muslims were portrayed as the sole victims.\nThe true situation was otherwise. Buddhists never initiate any violent\nincident. Unruly elements from the Muslim side started the trouble. For\nexample, videos are still available in the social media that show how Muslim\nyouths threw stones from a mosque at a peaceful Buddhist procession at\nAluthgama and how this led to violence in 2014, which quickly spread to a\nnumber of other towns (including Panadura, Beruwala, Welipenna, etc) in\nsouth-western Sri Lanka. On that occasion, thousands of innocent Muslims and\nand similarly innocent Buddhists were affected and their shops, houses, and\nplaces of worship were attacked. Though the then government did its best to\nstop the violence and restore normalcy, the incidents were not adequately\ninvestigated, and not enough was done to clear the name of the BBS which was\nsolely blamed for all that happened. The leaders of both the present and\nprevious governments didn\u2019t take Ven. Gnanasara seriously enough, while\npretending to do so, because they thought that if they took any decisive action\nagainst the handful of powerful communalists among minority politicians\nallegedly responsible for questionable acts such as anti-Buddhist subversion,\nillegal felling of trees in the state forest reserve in Wilpattuwa, settling\nforeign illicit Muslim immigrants  there, encroaching on and even\nvandalizing historic Buddhist places of worship in the North and East, and so\non, they would lose the support of the mainstream Christian and Muslim\ncommunities, which being minorities, naturally tend to form themselves into\n\u2018block vote\u2019 bastions at the instance of opportunistic politicians. (But I\nbelieve that this is a misplaced fear on the part of Sinhalese politicians. The\nmajority of ordinary Muslims do not want to support racist politicians, but\nthey are often in the thrall of those politicians, because of the latter\u2019s\nability to \u2018deliver\u2019 whichever major party or alliance happens to be in power.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Rohana R. Wasala Five hundred years of European colonial occupation could not destroy the dominant Sinhalese Buddhist cultural identity of Sri Lanka. The Sinhalese have a distinct language called Sinhala that evolved entirely out of indigenous roots over thousands of years. It is one of the few still extant oldest languages in the world. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[91],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-91051","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rohana-r-wasala"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/91051","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=91051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/91051\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=91051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=91051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=91051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}