      |
|||
|
|||
Religion
and Tamil separatism Let us begin with the observations of Jonathan Walters, in his essay titled “Multi-religion on the bus”. This appears in the book “Unmaking the nation”, (Social Scientists Association, 1995. p 25-54). Jonathan Walters was in Sri Lanka to study Pali, Sinhala and Buddhist history. He once went on a bus, and was obliged to engage in a fairly trivial conversation with another passenger. This passenger, probably a Christian, had criticised him for ‘forsaking your Christian heritage for the study of heathens” Walters apparently countered this by suggesting that the speaker was forsaking the Buddhist tradition for a western religion. Walters argues that this was very significant, “Something happened on that bus. A real meeting of religions took place at that moment. (p 28). The rest of this essay is no better. This essay begins with the phrase “This paper is about how humans meet their “Others”. He sees the bus encounter described above as an “encounter full of challenges, power plays, markings, decisions”. He argues that “the public space of the bus is charged in religious ways. It is what I call multireligious field” (p 29). “The bus in Sri Lanka is always charged multi-religiously”. Why the bus? Because it is used for pilgrimages, and because bus-travel in Sri Lanka, is very dangerous. Walters points out that between 1990-1991 upwards of twenty buses and vans fell off cliffs taking turns too quickly or crashing on to an oncoming vehicle. (p 45) He refers to the various shrines, such as the Getambe temple and the Kalutara Bodhi where passengers make offerings for a safe journey. Walters is interested in the interaction between the four religions found in Sri Lanka, namely Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. But he does not know how to set about it. The result is a superficial essay containing common or garden observations. Multi-religion He touches briefly on the influence of Hinduism and Christianity on modern Buddhism. He refers, to “Buddhicization” and “Buddhologists” (p 36) Christians were converted to Buddhism, Buddhists converted to Christianity. There were Christianised Buddhists and Buddhicised Christians. (p 36) He rehashes known views on the selective incorporation of Hindu deities into the Buddhist pantheon. He points out that Sri Pada and Kataragama are claimed by more than one religion. His notion of ‘multireligion’ includes religious shrines. “Single street corners in Colombo sport Hindu kovils, Buddhist temples, Christian churches and Muslim mosques” (p 48). He also sees the religious holidays as a ‘multireligious field’. (p 49) Walters gets one point right. That ‘loudspeaker religion’ including pirith chanting and Muslims calls to prayer can certainly be described as ‘charged multireligious fields’. (p 48) He totally misses the more subtle point of the need to modify ideas and views when interacting with persons of another religion. Christians are often defensive, while Buddhists try to be conciliatory. Muslims remain confident, Hindus generally indifferent to opinion as to their religion. The best section of this book is the part where he describes bus travel in Sri Lanka. “Strangers meet, share food and stories, personal details about family, home, employment, assets, purpose for travel, sleep on each others shoulders, take each others newspapers, all as a matter of course”. (p 26) We next look at the article titled “Religion, politics and the myth of reconquest’ by Donald E. Smith, published in “Modern Sri Lanka: a society in transition” edited by Tissa Fernando and R. N. Kearney. (Syracuse University, 1979). This article starts off with a blunder. It says ‘the conversion of King Devanampiyatissa to Buddhism in 250 BC marks the real beginning of Sinhala Buddhist civilization and from this point forward the chronicles provide essentially trustworthy dynastic history”. (p 83) Given this starting howler, one checks on the intention of the editors. The editors begin their introduction by saying: “Over a number of years, a small but hearty band of scholars concerned with Sri Lanka would regularly assemble at the Association for Asian Studies annual meetings and grumble about the paucity of up-to-date and conveniently accessible literature on the people, society and culture of contemporary Sri Lanka. From these ruminations blossomed the idea of assembling a volume of selections on the island’s culture and institutions, each prepared by an expert in the particular field and based on the author’s original research. The result, is this volume”. (p 111) . Non-Sri Lankan Donald Smith, as I will show, is neither an expert nor does he appear to have done any original research on Sri Lanka. Here are quotations from his essay: “The belief that Sri Lanka is a sacred isle, with a unique mission and destiny, to preserve Buddhism and make its light shine out in the world, developed in the context of military challenges from South India. It was the re-surgence of a militant Hinduism and precipitous decline of Buddhism on the mainland that set the stage for the conflicts of the next 2000 years. A Sinhala Buddhist Sri Lanka faced Tamil Hindu kingdoms in South India and the latter had overwhelming potential superiority” (p 84). The example Smith gives of this Tamil Hindu Kingdom, across the sea, was Elara. “The Tamil king Elara captured the capital of Anuradhaprua and pushed the Sinhalese forces in to the southern part of the island”. (p 84) “Duttagamini to this day is regarded as the greatest national hero of the Sinhala people, and his story embodies their national myth... Duttagamini’s Buddhist Reconquest, completed in 161 BC did not solve the problem for long. For thirty five years after his death the Tamil domination was re-established and another Sinhala hero rose up to lead the reconquest. There were always new Tamil invasions to be beaten back and this was the pattern of Sri Lanka’s history”. (p 85) After this strange potted history of ancient Sri Lanka, Smith, leaps, without warning to the British period of Sri Lanka’s history. He lands right in the middle of English based, Christian dominated, western education. Christianity, he says carried high ‘prestige’. English, he says was the ‘mother tongue’ of several generations of certain Sinhala families. (p 87) We know what he is trying to say, but his choice of words is most unfortunate - also laugh provoking. Smith continues “Over two millennia of invasions from South India had left a permanent Ceylon Tamil community, 11 percent of the population, the majority living in the Northern and Eastern provinces. In the new competitive situation created by Western rule, the Tamils were very effective, proportionally far more so than members of the Sinhala majority”. (p 870) Smith then leaps to independent Sri Lanka. He says that Independence was achieved by a conservative, westernised groups of individuals. This view is acceptable. After a few sentences, largely unintelligible to any one who did not already know about Sri Lanka, Smith settles on the next target — S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike. SWRD In 1951, D.S. met an All Ceylon Buddhist Congress deputation of venerable elders of the sangha and prominent laymen led by Dr. G. P. Malalasekera. The deputation specifically requested the appointment of an official commission to inquire into the grievances of the Buddhists. The prime minister pointedly asked the group whether, in addition to the Three refuges of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, they wanted to add a Fourth refuge - the Government. The commission of inquiry was not appointed”. (p 90) Bandaranaike we are told, ‘promised to make Sinhala the sole official language, and to restore Buddhism to its ‘rightful place’ in state and society. It was a populist appeal sacralised by reference to a glorious Buddhist past. His movement was a modern version of the Buddhist reconquest, directed now not against non-Buddhist invaders, but against the cultural transformation of society which they had produced”. (p 91) “Duttagamini’s Buddhist Reconquest was directed against a Hindu Tamil army of occupation. Twenty-two centuries later the Tamils were still there, both the permanent Ceylon Tamils with their greater concentration in the north and east, and the Indian Tamils”. (p 91) “King Duttagamani secured 500 monks to march with his army. The sight of the yellow robed ascetics encouraged his warriors, and the chanting of scriptures assured the Buddhist army of divine protection. Bandaranaike’s clerical support was no less important as the 1956 elections approached... The organised role of the bhikkus was a dramatic innovation in modern Ceylon Politics. The political monks proved to be the most aggressive advocates of Sinhala Only, opposed the search for compromises with the Tamils, and were a factor of some importance in the bloody Sinhala-Tamil clashes of 1958”. (p 93) Smith then moves onto the 1960’s. He refers to Maithripala Senanayake’s article titled “Our religion is the basis of our culture”. Smith says; “Religion of course, meant only Buddhism, and there was no recognition given to the very considerable cultural contribution made by Hinduism, to say nothing of Christianity and Western civilization”. (p 94) Smith has not even attempted to see whether the influence of Hinduism and Christianity was sufficient to warrant special recognition. Smith is not interested in exploring the relationship between religion and politics in Sri Lanka. He is interested in emphasising just one point, that Buddhism in Sri Lanka, whether in the ancient period (Dutugemunu) or the modern (SWRD) is intolerant and inimical towards other religions, and to those who follow other religions, notably Tamil Hindus. He has included the following concrete details in his piece: D. S. Senanayake was married to a Christian. (p 89) S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike converted to Buddhism after the Donoughmore reforms of 1936 for political reasons. Smith comments 'the term 'Donoughmore Buddhist' is well known in Ceylon politics'. (p 89, 90) N. Q. Dias was a 'prominent Buddhist militant' (p 93) Smith also points out, that 'after an abortive coup by high ranking army and police officers, mostly Roman Catholics, the government moved quickly to replace Governor General Sir Oliver Goonetilleke, an Anglican, with a Sinhala Buddhist. (P 97). Thereafter, the newly appointed Governor General, Sir William Gopallawa, 'placed a tray of jasmine flowers before an image of the Buddha installed for the first time at Queen's House, while monks chanted the Buddhist scriptures'. (p 97). This is not a scholarly piece and its inclusion in a work intended to introduce Sri Lanka to foreigners could be questioned. It is an early manifestation of an interesting scholarly phenomenon of the 1970's, 80's and 90's. That of foreign academics writing supposedly objective analyses of modern Sri Lanka, where Sinhala-Buddhism is dismissed summarily, and the relatively meagre Tamil-Hindu contribution, and the Christian invasion is given high recognition. It could be argued that Smith's article is in a sense an abuse of the social sciences. Social scientists are expected to be as objective as possible, and examine all aspects of an event, before commenting. It is a very serious matter for a foreign researcher to comment on a newly independent country, in a manner which disparages the majority community and sides with a relatively insignificant minority without giving just and sufficient reasons for doing so. Donald E. Smith says that the contribution made by Hinduism and Christianity to the culture of Sri Lanka has not been recognised. He evidently does not think that the Muslims of Sri Lanka made a cultural contribution. He ignores them totally. We see here one of the defining characteristics of social research supportive of Tamil separatism emphasis on the variables with which Tamils are connected. Tamils are both Hindus and Christians. Also the Comission of any reference to the Muslims. Let us first examine the contribution made by Hinduism to the Sri Lankan culture. Hinduism has influenced political and religious practices in medieval Sri Lanka, but was never able to supplant or displace Buddhism. It has always played a very secondary role in the culture of Sri Lanka. This is also evident in the current population distribution of Buddhists 69%, Hindus 15%, Christians 7% and Muslims 7%. (1981 Census). Around the 7 century AD a militant form of Hinduism developed in South India. This was hostile to both Buddhism and Jainism. Continued tomorrow Fate of Bihar Govt in the balance NEW DELHI, September 22: Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government today recommended to President Kocheril Raman Narayanan that Bihar Chief Minister Rabri Devi be dismissed. However, after debating the issue for over two hours here, the federal cabinet recommended that the northern Indian state’s legislative assembly be kept only in suspended animation, and not dissolved, under the controversial Article 356 of the constitution. The decision was promptly condemned by all the major opposition parties as undemocratic. This is the first time that the BJP government has sought to dismiss a state government under Article 356 since it came to office six months ago. In the process, it appears to have provided the disparate opposition parties a golden opportunity to gang up against the rickety BJP-led coalition government at the centre. In the past, the BJP had always opposed the use of Article 356 by the Congress Party regimes to get rid of inconvenient state governments. Last week, Bihar Governor Sunder Singh Bhandari had recommended to the centre that the state government be sacked and the assembly dissolved on the grounds of constitutional breakdown, financial mismanagement and failure of law and order. Shortly after the cabinet meeting, Vajpayee met Narayanan and conveyed its decisions to him. The prime minister was accompanied by Home Minister Lal Krishna Advani and Defence Minister George Fernandes. The president told Vajpayee that he will take a suitable decision after consulting legal and constitutional experts. Speaking to reporters after meeting the president, Advani explained that the cabinet had decided against dissolving the state assembly in the light of a Supreme Court judgment in a case involving the dismissal of SR Bommai as Karnataka chief minister some years ago. The Bihar assembly was elected in April 1995. Defending the decision, Advani quipped: “It’s not just a question of the breakdown of law and order. The state seems to have withered away in Bihar.” Predictably enough, Laloo Prasad Yadav, the Bihar chief minister’s husband and leader of the National Democratic Front (NDF), rushed to the capital and promptly condemned the union cabinet’s decision as “highly undemocratic and dictatorial.” An agitated Rabri Devi said in Patna she will challenge her dismissal in the Supreme Court and go on a hunger strike. The opposition Congress Party and the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPIM) also attacked the decision as undemocratic. A Congress delegation comprising, among others, Sharad Pawar and Dr Manmohan Singh leaders of the opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, respectively met the president tonight and conveyed their opposition to the misuse of Article 356 in Bihar. Pawar said the law and situation is equally bad in Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, large states ruled by the BJP and its ally Shiv Sena. They too should be dismissed if breakdown of law and order is the criteria for sacking the government in Bihar, he argued. Laloo Prasad Yadav and other NDF leaders such as Mulayam Singh Yadav will meet President Narayanan tomorrow to lodge their protest against the decision and to request him to take a judicious decision. The fact that the union cabinet has recommended that the Bihar assembly be kept in suspended animation suggests that attempts may now be made to form an alternative government by the BJP and the Samata Party, its principal ally in the state. There has been speculation that the BJP may hold fresh elections in the assembly. Advani said today that the centre is keen to do this as early as possible. It may be recalled that Laloo Yadav had reluctantly resigned as Bihar chief minister in July last year after he was implicated in a multi-billion-rupee fodder scandal and got his wife installed in that post. The NDF announced a general strike in Bihar tomorrow to protest against the cabinet decision to impose president’s rule (federal rule) in Bihar. The BJP government’s action comes barely a day after Rabri Devi won a vote of confidence in the state assembly. The NDF leaders branded Bhandari as “an agent and puppet” of the ruling party at the centre. They accused him of giving a “concocted” report against the state government to settle political scores on behalf of the BJP, and demanded his immediate recall from Patna. Stunned by the cabinet decision, the NDF leaders held an emergency meeting here to take stock of the situation, and passed a resolution condemning the governor as well as the union cabinet. They lambasted the BJP as a fascist and commu- nal outfit and declared that they will not allow it to “murder democracy,” and threatened to organise a nationwide agitation against the Bihar government’s dismissal. Meanwhile, the Congress Party’s Girija Vyas accused the BJP government of blatantly misusing Article 356 of the Indian Constitution to sack Rabri Devi, and hoped that President Narayanan will take the right decision in the interest of democracy. Former Prime Minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh joined the chorus of opposition criticism and opined that the dismissal of a state government should be decided only by parliament, a higher elected body, and not the government. Singh pointed out that, during the last 50 years, the draconi an Article 356 had always been used as a political weapon by all the ruling parties at the centre against state governments not under their control. He hoped that the president will set a good precedent by asking the government to draw a list of norms and criteria for invoking the controversial Article 356. Interestingly, Union Law and Justice Minister M Thambi Durai a nominee of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIA-DMK) – divulged to waiting reporters shortly after the cabinet meeting that he had strongly pleaded that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government of Chief Minister Muthuvel Karunanidhi be dismissed in Tamil Nadu by invoking Article 356.` From the book 'The Palm of His
Hand' by E.C.T. Candappa
Continued from yesterday Chapter 7 23 August, nine-thirty am. A dull, drizzly morning, Raj's white-clad figure bounded up the grey steps of the Clarion building. He was due in Parliament at ten, nine-forty five actually, in order to collect the Order Papers and be in the Chamber at the beginning of Question Time. It was a Wednes-day, Private Mem-bers’ Day. Pre-dicably, the House would adjourn at 8 pm, unless it lacked a quorum. But as he passed the Reception Desk, he was handed a note. It was from the Managing Director’s Secretary requiring him to see him immediately on arrival. “Lucky for him,” thought Raj. “I might have gone direct to Parliament.” But they would have found a way of reaching him there. When Raj was ushered in, the air-conditioning seized him like a clammy handshake. The room was cool, additionally, with the frost of calculated decisions. The Managing Director was, as usual, half-covered in piles of newspapers and magazines, with several liveried lackeys bustling about him. He had the kind of face and skin that made the lack of a moustache accentuate its effeminacy. He looked up and announced without any preliminaries: “The Prime Minister wants to see you...” “Sir, I’m covering Parliament today...” “Cancel it, cancel it.” That’s how much they knew, Raj thought, his eyes narrowing and lips tightening, “they” being all the administrators and bureaucrats and king-makers and policy-makers and decision-makers who tried to run newspapers without having done a day’s reporting in their lives. “There’s no one else,” he said. “What time’s the appointment?” The MD turned to the Secretary. “What time is the appointment for Raj with the PM?” The Secretary consulted a note book. “Eight thirty tonight, Sir.” Raj exhaled a long breath of relief. He was also amazed at the ways of king-makers. “That’s after Parliament. That’s probably why the PM gave that time. That’s easily done,” Raj said. “Very well. Ask any questions you want. Get everything straight. And take everything down.” It was dark and quiet down Rosmead Place when Raj pulled up his scooter outside the PM’s residence. Over the low wall surrounding the building, without a single shard of broken glass or a strand of barbed wire on it for security, Raj noted that the lights along the verandah had been doused and the lawn too was in darkness save for the light cast by the street lamps. From the main road came the muted sounds of traffic interspersed with the occasional bark of a dog. In the small pill box, a single constable kept sentry duty. He was seated on a cane chair with his single barrelled rifle resting on the side of the box. He did not stand or move very much when Raj went before him. Having asked whom he wished to see, and been told that he was a reporter from the newspaper, he made him sign a visitor’s book and signalled him on with a wag of his head. As far as he knew Raj could have been the devil himself he had let in. He then resumed shaking his legs together as an aid to idle thinking. When Raj rang the doorbell it was the Prime Minister himself who opened the door. The inevitable pipe was in his mouth. The comfortable aroma of tobacco filled the room. His spectacles reflected the warm glow of the pipe bowl. And behind the glasses his eyes were warm and friendly. He had divested the cloth and banian and was clad in a cream-coloured short-sleeved shirt, dark brown tweed trousers and leather sandals. On this occasion, he led Raj through the living room into his book-lined study. “Sit down, sit down” he said, waving a thin arm. Raj noted, however, that his hands were large and strong and thick-veined. “Yes,” he said seating himself in an easy chair. “Now, what’s this I hear about your requiring surgery?” Raj felt the blood drain away from his head. So Miguel had struck again. He revived fast. “Sir, it’s just a hernia. Nothing serious, nothing urgent. Just that I wanted to be totally fit for the assignment.” “Let me know if you require any assistance regarding a bed. This is State business, you know.” “No, sir. I have a bed reserved in Dr Juriansz’s Ward.” “Excellent man. One of the best, though I would have preferred Dr Anthonis. As it is I don’t need any kind of surgery.” He chuckled as though this thought amused him. “I am in capital condition. Capital condition.” That subject exhausted, and to Raj’s mind, laid to rest with Miguel routed for the moment, the Prime Minister got down to the real business directly. “I understand that you have been to the Foreign Office already. However, I am aware of the existence, shall we say, of different schools of thought in that establishment which, like everything else at the moment, is in a state of transition. Therefore I would like to get certain aspects of my...er, our foreign policy, that is to say, the fundamentals of our foreign policy quite clear. In other words without any distortion whatsoever. I am particularly interested that this should be so because your function will by no means be confined to reporting what I say. There will always be transcripts or copies of my speeches. The Government Information Department will also be issuing press releases from time to time. What is more important is that you should be well briefed while interviewing other delegates, other missions, or when, as is most likely, you will be called upon to explain our foreign policy to news agencies, radio and television stations.” Raj was greatly impressed. Now, here was a man who had a thorough grasp of how the media worked. And yet he had not done a day’s work as a reporter. It was the measure of the man’s width of vision. What a great novelist he could be, given the time. Or a great philosopher. Or a statesman outside the crippling trammels of sectarian politics. “What you have to grasp is the all-encompassing vision...” he paused and looked intently at Raj, “of our foreign policy,” he said, echoing Raj’s thoughts. It made Raj uneasy. It was as though he had read his thoughts. At that particular angle the bright light above glinted on his “Gandhi” glasses. “No country can evolve an intelligent foreign policy without, shall I say, situating it first in the context of its own, and of its neighbours’ history. To have a sense of history. “Truly can it be said of us that we are not an island. Others influence us even as much as we influence others. There was a time in our history, from antiquity until recently, when other States sought to conquer us for their own territorial and material gain. That sort of imperialism and colonialism has almost disappeared, save in a few countries, in a few pockets of decadence. But, and this is what I want you to note, such expansionism, such colonialism is now functioning under another and not-so-subtle form. We have the Super Powers, America and the Soviet Union, with lesser luminaries like Britain, no longer Great, and France, forming one group. We have the Super Powers, with several nations aligned to them. We have the USA on one side in deadly confrontation with the Soviet Union. They are locked together in a mortal ideological combat. It is not in our interest, and not in the interest of small nations, newly emerging from the shackles of imperialism and colonialism, to be aligned to either of these power blocs. We have our own destiny, our interrupted destiny, to realise.” He paused and relit his pipe which he had neglected during the soliloquy, as it really was. Raj felt immensely privileged to share the insights of an outstanding political thinker. He did concede that the man had grown in his estimation after personal contact. After all, what he had known of him had been almost entirely what his own group of newspapers had manipulated him, and millions of others, to think about him. “A country’s foreign policy is shaped by a range of complex issues,” he continued. “As a subject people we were pawns in the power game of the British. And even after the granting of Independence the British sought to use us to suit their own purposes. It was my belief, from the beginning, that we should refuse to do that and cut ourselves from our colonial past altogether.” A question rose at once to Raj’s lips. What about defence? Ceylon had been attractive to the Western conquerors because of the enormously strategic position she held on the globe. Those who controlled Ceylon controlled, or could control, the whole of the South East Asian region. That was why the British had their Far Eastern Com-mand Headquarters located in Ceylon during World War 2. It was yet possible that if not directly, the Super Powers would seek to make Ceylon subservient to their will. The Americans, the British and the Soviet Bloc still eyed Ceylon in a predatory fashion. If it was not in the form of crude, naked aggression, then it would be by subtle methods. But in the event of the Cold War breaking into open hostility Ceylon would certainly be caught not only in the crossfire. She would be a direct target of attack. Who then would defend her? Certainly not her local armed forces which lacked any of the sophisticated weaponry or trained manpower to do so. How realistic then was a foreign policy that chose this kind of total independence? But Raj was terrified of articulating the question. The Prime Minister had but recently terminated an agreement to offer an air base to the British in exchange for defence in the event of enemy attack. The Right Wing newspapers had been critical of the Prime Minister’s foreign policy on the ground that he was veering too much to the Left. They had criticised him, and so many aspects of his Government, for being guided by political expediency. He had been greatly helped by the leftists to come into power. In the Opposition now, they were pressurising him to practise the socialism that he professed to confess. “India is our most immediate and most powerful neighbour,” he said, “And it is to India that we must turn now that we are both free of the British yoke. The ancient historical 0enmities and squabbles must be laid to rest, and indeed, this can be done because we have at the helm in India Pandit Nehru for whom I have the warmest personal regard, and Mr Krishna Menon.” Raj had read in the course of research at the office library that his regard for Menon was even greater because Menon had beaten him at Oxford in the race to a First Class degree. (c) E. C. T. Candappa Continued tomorrow |
|||
 |
|||
