SULU KARUNA OF ELANKESAN - II
Mr. Elankesan has replied to my column entitled "Sulu Karuna of Elankesan" and assumes that my reply would consist of two parts. It appears that he assumes many things when he reads articles by others. Nowhere in my column had I said it would consist only of two parts. To be continued does not imply that there would be only one more part and Mr. Elankesan whether he has training in western Mathematical Analysis and/or Theravada Vibhajjavada is only assuming, imagining, and jumping to conclusions without any proper analysis. In his so called reply on 10th May 2006, he has assumed so much that he replies to a non existent article. However, it is not my intention to reply to his second set of parusa vacana immediately as I have not finished with my reply to his letter to the editor that appeared on 17th April 2006. In that letter he had referred to an article he had written to some other newspaper and had drawn my attention to it.
He had said in that letter: "I would appeal to you to read and digest the contents of my letter to the editor of another daily recently, S under the title "Concept of Traditional Homeland of Tamils" dealing exhaustively with supporting historical evidence that the Sinhalas were the aliens in Sri Lanka and the Tamils were in Sri Lanka long before their arrival here". When I reply, unlike Mr. Elankesan I would quote so that the reader who could have forgotten the contents would not be mislead by my summarising of lengthy paragraphs. Mr. Elankesan instead of even summarising gives his own version "forcefully" with his assumptions and imaginations of what others have said. It is possible to spread "forcefully" the untruth when one without quoting attributes to others what they had not even thought of.
It was in this article to the other newspaper that Mr. Elankesan had referred to the "erudite scholar" Carlo Fonseka, who in my opinion is a mere ex Professor of Physiology, whom the former had glorified even in his latest set of parusa vacana, against me. Mr. Elankesan had written the article in the other newspaper in support of Prof. Carlo Fonseka. Of course, he had said that in that article that he held no brief for Prof. Carlo Fonseka. However, it was in a debate that Prof. Carlo Fonseka was engaged with some others like Messrs. D. M. Wijeyawardena, Mahinda de Silva and Malinda Seneviratne on the so called traditional homelands of the Tamils. Contrary to what Mr. Elankesan appears to assume or imagine it was not a debate with Mr. Narada Wickremage, who only asked a simple question from "erudite scholar" who "like Horatius, defending the bridge and stands, like the rock of Gibraltar, (who) is mount Meru amongst the human beings, more so in particular, amongst the educated elite". I am afraid that he is not even Mount Mary (in Dematagoda, closer to the Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo than Mount Meru wherever it is situated), and vanished into thin air the moment Mr. Wickremage asked a simple question. I will have to write more on Prof. Carlo Fonseka when I reply to the second instalment of parusa vacana of Mr. Elankesan, who has a habit of pouring parusa vacana on people whose positions he is not in agreement with.
For example he opens his article to the other newspaper with the following paragraph that clearly demonstrates that he entered this particular debate on the side of Prof. Fonseka in support of the latter. "I write with reference to the idiosyncracies blurted out by D. M. Wijeyawardena on the above titled (The concept of historical homeland") subject which was published in the Daily Mirror of March 21, 2006. He has amongst other incendiary matters, extended an open invitation to Prof. Carlo Fonseka and his aide (he does not need anyone) Dharmapala Senaratne to accept the challenge of the most Ven. Ellawala Medhananda Thera for a debate on the subject of "Traditional homeland".
Before I explain Tamil racism, Tamil racist, Tamil racist problem etc., may I request the Savaka of Buddha Dhamma to quote any instance where I have referred to the entire Tamil community as Tamil racists. This is another assumption that Mr. Elankesan has made and he seems to be very good at assuming or may be imagining things others had not written. Mr. Elankesan, the adherent of the Buddha Dhamma, but unfortunately who is not aware of Mahakaruna of Buddha (I will give references to Mahakaruna from Tripitaka in my reply to his article on 10th May 2006.) claims that in this article to the other newspaper he had dealt exhaustively with supporting historical evidence that the Tamils arrived in Sri Lanka before the Sinhalas arrived. Let us examine what he had to say in this other article. He refers to Mahavamsa by Douglas Bulls, pgs 37 and 119 Commentary. Page 119 quotation is as follows: "It seems most likely that Thera Mahanama's view was correct that the original Sinhalese people lived on the East coast near Visakapattanam where the ancient Kalinga Kingdom reached furthest South and the Sinhalese name originated in the Prince whose name was Vijay." The quotation from page 37 is as follows. "I (Mr. Elankesan) quote from the same source to establish, substantiate and buttress my view: 'Some Sri Lankan philologists trace the origins of the Sinhalese people to the Sind region via the change of the suffix SYA (in Pali CA) into the HER of the Sinhala due to its connection with the DARDIC PERSIA's HAY, transformed to SYA associated with the tribal name SINHALAS'HAY, transformed to SYA associated with the tribal name SINHALAS whose ancestors still exist in the Sind as the CHINGALA tribe, noted for its conjuring and potions. These few linguistic roots and suffixes add a whiff of scholarly support to the popular tradition that the CHINGULARS (Singhalas) were originally sorcerers, enchantresses and magicians whose homeland was PARQUEA (PERSIA).'" Having quoted those passages Mr. Elankesan with his sulu karuna to the Sinhalas say: "If the contention of DMW is to be accepted as an authoritative, authentic and unassailable historical fact relating to the concept to - the traditional homeland/historical homeland of Tamils is Tamil Nadu, then by the same token of his argument and his logical conclusion, it is an established fact, beyond any shadow of doubt, as cited by me as evidence from their own chronicle, Mahavamsa, that the Sinhalese are aliens and illegal immigrants to Sri Lanka. Hence, it is reasonable, just and fair for them to go back to their ancestral homeland of either, Bengali, Visakhapatanam, Sind, Persia or Afghanistan."
It is clear that the view that Mr. Elankesan wants to buttress is that the Sinhalas are immigrants. Although bulls favours the version that the Sinhalas came from Visakapattanam, he gives another version that the Sinhalas came from Persia. Mr. Elankesan is not sure from where the Sinhalas came from but he is certain that they had come from somewhere perhaps excluding present Tamil Nadu. We must thank Mr. Elankesan for his sulu karuna for the Sinhalas by not suggesting that the Sinhala illegal immigrants should jump to the sea. (Going by his "logic" Mr. Elankesan might come to the conclusion that I agree with his version that the Sinhalas are illegal immigrants, the way he thought that I agree with him on his evaluation of Prof. Carlo Fonseka.) However, there is a problem. If the Sinhalas decide to go back to anyone of those places Mr. Elankesan had mentioned, they would either have to take translators if they want to speak in Sinhala or speak in English or some other language. If at all there are only a very few people who could speak Sinhala in those places mentioned by Mr. Elankesan.
While I do not want a single Tamil Sri Lankan to leave this island, as I would like to see them working for the betterment of the country with others, I cannot ignore the fact that if the Tamil Sri Lankans go to Tamil Nadu they would not need to take translators with them. What does that mean? Though there may be a few differences in the languages spoken in Tamil Nadu and Jaffna they are not unintelligible across the Palk straits. The linguists are in a position to determine the difference of the languages in years and I am afraid that it would not run into even five hundred years, in the case of Tamil spoken on either side of the straits. Further the culture that the illegal Sinhala immigrants (No Mr. Elankesan I do not agree with your version!) have built in this country is so much different from the cultures of the people living in those areas where Mr. Elankesan has suggested that the Sinhalas should go, while the culture of the Sri Lankan Tamils is not very much different from that in Tamil Nadu. These are observations that most people could make and they certainly can be interpreted in a way Mr. Elankesan does not like. If there are more Malayalam words in Tamil spoken in Sri Lanka than in Tamil spoken in Tamil Nadu it could mean the influence of some Malayalam speaking people on the Sri Lankan Tamil. Then one cannot ignore the influence of Sinhala culture on the Tamil culture in Sri Lanka.
The absence of a dominant Brahmin caste among the Tamil Sri Lankans, unlike in Tamil Nadu is another fact that needs an explanation. What is needed is a consistent picture, interpretation, theory or story (all theories including the so called scientific theories are stories) of the "facts", though I would agree with Mr. Elankesan if he were to tell me that facts are not independent of theories. A consistent picture begins to emerge when one considers the present population of Jaffna to be descendants of Sinhala people who were living in Jaffna even during the Dutch period (the present Koviar cast etc.,) the Velakakaras who were brought by the Sinhala kings from Kerala and the farmers (Vellala) who were brought by the Dutch for their tobacco cultivation. The Vellalas became the dominant caste due to their numbers, economic strength and also the patronage given by the Dutch, and the population became one speaking Tamil with a culture very similar to, but not identical with, that in Tamil Nadu. Today we identify them as Jaffna Tamils irrespective of their origin, and I would say that Jaffna Tamils are a very important segment of the Sri Lankan population.
A mistake that some Archaeologists, Social Anthropologists and others make is to assume that anyone in this part of the world, who is not an Aryan (Indo Aryan), is a Dravida. This is clearly wrong and it is wrong to assume that all those who inhabited Bharat and Sri Lanka before the Aryans arrived were Dravidians. They could be called pre Vedics for want of a name, and the pre Vedic people had built a grand civilisation, having had their own Chinthanaya by the time the Aryans arrived in Bharat. It is reasonable to assume that the Vedic culture was created as a result of mixing of the Aryan culture and the pre Vedic culture, and gradually the Vedic culture propagated from the North West of Bharat to the East and the South.
Mahabharata and Ramayana essentially describe how the Vedic culture spread and became dominant over the years. However, the spread was not without opposition. It was not only the Ravanas who opposed the propagation of the Vedic culture. As could be expected the Vedic culture took some to spread to the East and during the period from ninth century BC to sixth century BC, the people in the Eastern Bharat were not fully under the influence of the Vedic culture. It is this culture, which we could call Ardha (half or in between) Vedic, into which not only Prince Siddhartha and Mahaveera were born but the early waves of "Aryans", which came to the shores of Lanka were born. As we know the Prince Siddhartha and Mahaveera essentially had views opposite to those of the Vedics. The Ardha Vedics who came to Lanka, after a series of wars and marriages with the pre Vedics who already lived in the country together built what is known as the Sinhala nation. In that sense Sinhalas are not immigrants but a nation formed by people already living in the country having absorbed certain elements of the culture of the Ardha Vedics.
(To be continued)
Professor Nalin de Silva
Mr. Sankiliyan Elankesan's articles
17th April 2006 "The Island" News Paper
10th May 2006 "The Island" News Paper
21st June 2006 "The Island" News Paper
>
>
>