SYMBOLS AND GRENADES
The police may or may not find out the person(s) responsible for throwing a grenade at the "Temptation 2004". However, it is clear that those who are responsible would not have done it if not for the Jathika Hela Urumaya. If the JHU had not taken steps to organise the so-called upavasaya no person or group would have thrown a grenade at this public performance by Sharukh Khan on the day before the first anniversary of the death of Ven. Soma Thera.The JHU cannot say that they did not make arrangements for an Upavasaya though they probably cancelled it at the last moment when they found that there were other Bhikkus who had taken the initiative from the JHU.
Who is leading (or behind ) the JHU? Apart from Rev. Ratana and Champika Ranawaka, is there a third person who has contacts with the NGOs, who is the third of a triumvirate that leads the JHU. Is the JHU, or rather the Janatha Mithuro faction of the JHU, genuine with respect to the interests of the Sinhalas and especially the Sinhala Buddhists? The upavasaya of some Bhikkus, and the other campaigns by the Janatha Mithuro led JHU did not help the interests of the Sinhala Buddhists of the country. Instead their activities have finally helped none other than the fascist murderer Prabhakaran.
In any event what was a private owned electronic media doing on the eleventh of December the day the Upavasaya and the musical show were held. Who owns this particular electronic media? Is this electronic media pro Sinhala Buddhist? When this electronic media was established some years ago we predicted that it would act against the interests of the Sinhala Buddhists. We did not have to wait for long to see the predictions becoming true. What made this electronic media that has been established in order to demean and belittle the Sinhala Buddhist culture to incite the very same Sinhala Buddhists against the musical show of Sharukh Khan claiming that the show fell on the first death anniversary of Ven. Soma Thera.
Then what was the connection that a UNF minister in the previous government, living not far away from Diyavanna Oya, had to the whole incident. Is he, a non Buddhist, genuinely interested in the affairs of the Sinhala Buddhists? All these questions lead to a conclusion that may not be to the liking of some Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists. The Sinhala people are still to find a genuine national movement based on a vision and also on a solid theory.
It is said that some twenty five thousand people had gathered at the former race course to enjoy an evening with Sharukh Khan. The vast majority of these people would have been Sinhala Buddhists and it is quite possible that some of them an year ago were waiting in queues to pay their last respects to Ven. Soma Thera. On the eleventh or twelfth of December the Sinhala Buddhists were engaged in various activities. Some of them were at Matara celebrating ten years of Chandrika Kumaratunga presidency in the country. Some others were involved with the Tour de Sri Lanka bicycle race. Some others including myself were at the Science Exhibition organised by the Faculty of Science of the University of Kelaniya.(Incidentally media did not give publicity to this event. They
give publicity only to fights among groups of students. When the students get together and organise an event such as an exhibition they ignore it completely) Many others would have been at cinemas and theaters not exactly paying their respects to Ven. Soma Thera. The JHU leaders did not request the people either to stay at home or to go to the temple on the eleventh and twelfth and not to engage in any other activity. Besides, except for the "performance" they wanted to stage parallel to that of Sharukh Kahn they did not organise a "pinkama" or even a meeting to commemorate Ven. Soma Thera. Perhaps the super performers in the JHU left all these mundane activities to the ordinary bhikkus and the lay people.
It is clear that the JHU was waiting for an issue. The "Temptation 2004" was a God sent opportunity to "do something" (monava hari karanna) for the cause of the Sinhala Buddhists. There were some Sinhalas who said that it was only the JHU or the Sihala Urumaya before that, which did something for the Sinhala cause. "Monava hari kireema", irrespective of the results, was what these Sinhalas wanted from organisations such as the JHU. Very often it was the "performances" by these organisations that attracted the Sinhalas. The JHU wanted to "perform" like Sharukh Kahn on the eleventh of December to attract people. The JHU after the recent split had wanted an issue to stage a "performance" and Sharukh Kahn's "Temptations 2004" wetted the temptation of the leaders of the JHU.
It had been known for months that Sharukh Kahn was to perform in Colombo on the eleventh of December. The JHU who claim to have picked up the flag of Ven. Soma Thera did not object at that time. Most probably they were not aware at that time that Ven. Soma Thera died on the twelfth of December. They themselves would have realised the "significance" of the day only after genuine people's organisations began to get ready to commemorate the death of Ven. Soma Thera. The moment the JHU was aware of the "significance" of the day they went ahead with making arrangements for a "performance" parallel to "Temptations". The opportunists in the JHU would not have missed such a God sent opportunity. Even before Janatha Mithuro was established they had been the opportunists par excellence, a fact that many Sinhalas ignored even after they were warned by some of us.
It is also clear that those who threw a grenade at the "Temptations 2004" were not interested in sabotaging the event. They waited till the last moment to throw the grenade. Had they wanted to sabotage the event they could have done so by throwing the grenade before the performance or at the beginning. They did not do so and all that they wanted was some dead bodies to discredit the Sinhala Buddhists. Whoever is responsible for the throwing of the grenade had only one intention and that was to show to India and to the world that the Sinhala Buddhists were murderers who did not respect the "rights" and views of the others. The feelings in India, especially among the Brahamins towards the Buddhists had not been very sympathetic from the ancient times and also in the recent past after the Ambedkar movement, and now they would be looking at the Sinhala Buddhists with those glasses tainted with all that history not to mention the memory of "barbaric" Ravana who is supposed to have ruled from Lanka. It was a case of killing more than one "bird" with a grenade.
As mentioned earlier, nobody would have thrown a grenade on that fateful day if not for the "activities" of the JHU. It does not mean that the JHU is held responsible for the grenade but without their "performance" nobody would have attempted to throw a grenade. The question has to be asked "whom is the JHU serving?" Is it the cause of the Sinhala Buddhists or that of somebody else? Who are the leaders of the JHU beside Rev. Ratana and Champika Ranawaka? What are the organisations that they serve? What are their connections with other organisations and individuals from the Janatha Mithuro days?
There are many Sinhalas, especially among those living in the western countries, who are plagued with the idea of "doing something" without considering the consequences. Some of them are looking for issues to do something and they become consciously or unconsciously the agents of the enemies of the Sinhalas. The politics of the Sinhala people in general, after the demise of Anagarika Dharmapala has been issue centred and "status seeking" without a vision and a theory. The Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists have failed to realise that they live in a Christian country as far as culture that includes education, politics and economics are concerned. Since about the latter part of the nineteenth century they have been looking to gain "status" for Sinhala Buddhists (Olcott Buddhists) as a reaction against Christian and Tamil domination in the above spheres. Anagarika Dharmapala would have probably understood the folly of this policy of the Olcott Buddhists who had decided to fight for status within an essentially Christian culture. Another person who would have realised the danger of the fighting for "status" was Mr. L. H. Mettananda. Very early in his life as a teacher, writing to "Sarasavi Sandaresa" he had criticised the "Buddhism" that was taught in the Buddhist English Schools. However, people like Anagarika Dharmapala and Mr. Mettananda were the most hated among the Sinhala Buddhists by the British Christian establishment and unfortunately the Sinhala Buddhists, rather the Olcott Buddhists, themselves did not listen to them in their hearts. The Olcott Buddhists were Christian in culture, and were status seekers within the Christian establishment who finally achieved very little.
The status seekers look for symbols and not for a theory or a vision. They despise those who look for a vision and theory as they are interested only in "doing something". It is true that Sinhala was made the official language after 1956. What have we achieved nearly fifty years after the event. English is still the de facto official language. The medium of instruction in the Universities would be English only, within a few years if the current trend is not terminated. If we continue to teach the syllabi of the westerners in the name of globalisation or whatever then naturally there would be a cry to teach in English. Making Sinhala the official language was only a symbol for status seekers. The Upavasaya against "Temptation 2004" sought another symbol. In this symbolic country many people do not realise that the tag "Sinhala Buddhist Country" itself is only a symbol that does not represent the actual status of the country. The symbol is being used only to tarnish the image of the Sinhala Buddhists as the grenade that was thrown at the "Temptation 2004" demonstrates.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>