17 June, 2019

Blog

Rāvanā & Sinhala Buddhism: A Strained Relationship Ridden With Contradictions

By Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya

Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya

Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya

Rāvanā, one of the principal characters in the Rāmāyana, emerges as a villain in the mainstream (Hindu) understandings of the text. Given the important position that Rama (Rāvanā’s opponent) who is believed to be a manifestation of Viśnu occupies in the Hindu religious tradition, Rāvanā becomes a symbol of evil in those readings of the text. Nevertheless, the conceptualizations of Rāvanā within the context of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism point to alternative perspectives on the character. One such perspective that has emerged in the post-2009 Sri Lankan context shows a tendency to idealize Rāvanā as a national hero. The present paper argues that the relationship between Rāvanā and Sinhala Buddhism that this conceptualization suggests is ridden with certain contradictions that Sinhala Buddhist nationalism fails to address successfully.

In the Rāmāyana, Rāvanā’s kingdom is called ‘Lankā,’ and this Lankā has widely been identified as present-day Sri Lanka. Due to this reason, Sri Lanka features prominently in the existing discourse on the text. Various places within Sri Lanka, mainly in the central and northern parts of the country, have been identified as key locations mentioned in the Rāmāyana narrative. There have, however, been scholarly attempts to problematize this perceived relationship between Rāvanā’s Lankā and present-day Sri Lanka and argue that the former was within what comes under the present-day Indian territory;[1] nevertheless, these attempts have not been able to successfully refute the established understanding, particularly in the mainstream Hindu readings of the epic, that Rāvanā’s Lankā was Sri Lanka.[2]

This association of Rāvanā’s Lankā with present-day Sri Lanka establishes Rāvanā as a past king of Sri Lanka. The main historical chronicles on the basis of which Sri Lanka’s history is understood/constructed do not mention a king by the name of Rāvanā, or, to say the least, these chronicles do not cover the ancient past in which Rāvanā is claimed to have ruled the country. Nevertheless, the idea of Rāvanā as an ancient king of the country is generally perceived as a historical truth. Certain publications on Rāvanā that have emerged over the past couple of years in Sri Lanka indicate an attempt at historicizing him.[3] They conceptualize Rāvanā not only as a ruler of the island whose power extended beyond the limits of the island but also as a leader of a highly advanced civilization with an advanced form of technology.[4] For this reason, Rāvanā has mainly functioned as a cultural icon and a symbol of pride for the most part of Sri Lankan history.

ramayanaThe post-war Sri Lankan context has seen the transformation of the concept of Rāvanā from a largely cultural icon to a political icon with specific meanings. In a context where the war had primarily been conceptualized as a civil war between the Sinhala and Tamil ethnic communities, the conclusion of the war in 2009 that saw the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of the Tamil Eelam (LTTE) at the hands of the Sri Lankan armed forces was largely represented as a victory of the Sinhala ethnic community over the Tamil ethnic community. The Dutugemunu-Elara analogy in terms of which the outcome of the war was commonly conceptualized contributed to solidifying the polarization of the said ethnic communities in the country. The Sinhala-versus-Tamil division, which the conclusion of the war had resulted in highlighting quickly developed into a division between Sinhala-Buddhists and Non-Sinhala-Buddhists. Along with this schematization, Rāvanā began to emerge as a key political icon in the Sinhala Buddhist camp. This “Sinhala-Buddhisization” of Rāvanā is most evident in the emergence of the pro-Sinhala Buddhist organization named Rāvanā Balaya, which literary means the Rāvanā Force.

The Sinhala-Buddhist spin that Rāvanā, like many other cultural icons and symbols, has acquired in the post-war context, however, embodies a fundamental contradiction. The association of Rāvanā with Sinhala Buddhism is problematic for the simple reason that Rāvanā predates both Buddhism and the Sinhala ethnicity as we know them today. Prince Vijaya who arrived in what is today known as Sri Lanka with a group of companions in the sixth century BC is widely seen as the founder of the Sinhala ethnic identity. The Mahāvamsa, which is the main historical chronicle of Sri Lanka, associates Vijaya with the Sinhala ethnic identity in such a way that he and his companions become the first generation of the Sinhala ethnic community.[5] Although this particular understanding of the origin of the Sinhala ethnic identity has been challenged and attempts have been made to place this point of origin centuries, if not millennia, back in time,[6] in a context where the authority of the Mahāvamsa largely remains unchallenged, especially in the eyes of the mainstream elements of the Sinhala community, the argument that Vijaya was the founder of the Sinhala identity continues to remain valid. At the same time, Buddhism, as we know it today, begins with the Gautama Buddha who is believed to have lived in the sixth century BC. Although, according to Theravada Buddhism, there have been twenty-seven Buddhas with their own traditions of Buddhism prior to the Gautama Buddha, the present tradition(s) of Buddhism, especially that found in Sri Lanka, is attributed solely to the Gautama Buddha. Accordingly, the furthest that the origins of the Sinhala ethnic identity and Buddhism, as we understand them, could be traced to is the sixth century BC, which is millennia away from the time of Rāvanā. In a context where the mainstream understandings regarding the two largely remain unchallenged, or at least, a discourse on the problematic nature of those understandings is absent, the proclaimed association between Rāvanā and Sinhala Buddhism is fundamentally contradictory.

Any attempt at giving this association an air of credibility would necessarily have to go beyond the established understandings about Buddhism and the Sinhala ethnicity. Such an attempt would have to find a way to somehow tie them to Rāvanā’s time and Rāvanā as a historical figure. The Buddhist discourse titled the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra [hereafter referred to as the LS] which is a key text in the Mahayana Buddhist tradition, enables one to draw a clear connection between Rāvanā and the idea of Buddhism. The LS is believed to have been preached by the Buddha[7] to Rāvanā who is described, in the text, as the “Overlord of the Yakshas”[8] who ruled “Laṅkā on Mount Malaya.”[9] It claims that its subject matter is “the Truth realisable by noble wisdom in one’s inmost self, which is beyond the reasoning knowledge of the philosophers as well as the state of consciousness of the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas,”[10] and it recognizes Rāvanā as one capable of understanding that Truth.[11] The apparent confirmation found in the LS that Rāvanā was the ruler of “Lanka” and the depiction of Rāvanā as an advanced individual whose mental capacities even surpassed those of philosophers and who was deemed by the Buddha himself as capable of grasping the ultimate Truth, one would argue, create a space in which Rāvanā could easily be associated with the idea of Buddhism.

Nevertheless, this potential of the LS remains virtually unexploited by those elements of the post-war Sri Lankan society that attempt to make a case for Rāvanā as one associated with Buddhism. Given that the LS is part of the Mahayana tradition, one could argue that this absence of attention is due to a lack of widespread awareness about the sūtra among Sri Lankan Buddhists. While this may be true to a certain extent, it is hard to believe that the concerned elements in the community have been unaware of the text to such an extent for this excellent piece of “evidence” to have remained unnoticed. The fact that this Mahayana discourse has been discussed by Ven. Walpola Rahula in his seminal work What the Buddha Taught (and its Sinhala version), which is widely seen as an authoritative text on Theravada Buddhism, shows that the LS has been part of the Sri Lankan discourse on Buddhism. Also, Pabalu Wijegoonewardane’s claim that his ballet titled Maha Ravana (2008) is based on the LS indicates that the text has been known even outside of strictly scholarly circles.[12] Therefore, one could safely conclude that this absence of attention to the LS on the part of the concerned mainstream elements of the Sri Lankan Sinhala Buddhist community is intentional.

This prevailing silence on the piece of “evidence” found in the LS could be understood in two ways. First, the LS is a fundamental text in the Mahayana tradition, and excessive attention to such a text and any claims made on the basis of such a text entail a certain endorsement of that tradition. Given Sri Lanka’s position as a Theravada stronghold, such an endorsement of the Mahayana tradition invariably translates into compromising the country’s unique identity in the broader Buddhist world. Second, the idea that Buddhism had existed in Sri Lanka before it was “properly” introduced to the country complicates the established historical narrative of the Sinhala community. This idea problematizes the importance that the mainstream historical narrative assigns to Vijaya, as the founder of the Sinhala civilization in the country, by blurring the established gap between the pre- and post-Vijaya eras of the country’s history. Given that the distinction between the two eras is central to the mainstream conceptualization of the Sinhala ethnic identity, any claim that downplays the importance assigned to Vijaya’s arrival in the island could have serious implications for the established understanding of that ethnic identity.

At the same time, certain established understandings regarding Viśnu, whom Rāma is primarily a manifestation of, also raise certain questions about the association of Rāvanā with Sinhala Buddhism. The Mahāvamsa points to an inextricable link between Viśnu and Sinhala Buddhism. According to the chronicle, Prince Vijaya, having been banished and deported by his father King Sinhabahu for his misconduct, arrives in Lanka on the same day that the Gautama Buddha prepares himself to enter into the state of nirvana. Having foreseen Lanka as the land where his dharma will be protected in the future, he requests Sakka, the king of gods, to protect Vijaya and his followers, saying “In Lanka, O lord of gods, will my religion be established, therefore carefully protect him with his followers.”[13] The god whom Sakka entrusts this task to is Viśnu. Since that moment, Viśnu has been seen as a protector god of Lanka, the Sinhala ethnic community, and Buddhism in the island. His position as one of the four protector gods of the island’s (Sinhala) nation to date indicates the sense of importance that he enjoys within the Sinhala Buddhist culture.

Another factor that problematizes the association between Rāvanā and Sinhala Buddhism is the established recognition, particularly in the South Indian (re)imaginings of the Rāmāyana, that Rāvanā is a Tamil king. Not only do the South Indian (re)imaginings of the text present Rāvanā as a Tamil king, they also depict him as a great tragic hero,[14] a depiction that contrasts with the Hindu-centric depictions of him primarily as a villain. M. S. Purnalingam Pillai advances this South Indian approach to Rāvanā when he claims, “The ten-faced and twenty-armed Ravana was apparently a very intelligent and valiant hero, a cultured and highly civilized ruler, knew the Vedas and was an expert musician. He took away Sita according to the Tamilian mode of warfare, had her in the Asoka woods companioned by his own niece, and would not touch her unless she consented.”[15] This conceptualization establishes Rāvanā first and foremost as a Tamil. The thesis, propagated by P. Sundaram Pillai, that “the Rāmāyana story [the mainstream North Indian version] was a travesty of truth, belittling Dravidian culture typified by Rāvana as well as proof of Aryan penetration and dominance in South India”[16] emphasizes the fundamentally Tamilian character of Rāvanā’s identity. Given the predominance of this understanding of Rāvanā, any serious attempt to associate him with the Sinhala ethnic identity would necessarily have to assume a close relationship between the Sinhala and Tamil ethnic identities. The fact that the Sinhala Buddhist nationalists in Sri Lanka do not even acknowledge this South Indian understanding of Rāvanā, in my view, points to their unwillingness to even consider the possibility of such a close relationship.

Accordingly, it is evident that the current conceptualizations of Rāvanā within the Sinhala Buddhist nationalist discourse are ridden with multiple contradictions. Any serious attempt at building a connection between Rāvanā and Sinhala Buddhism, in my view, invites a radical reevaluation of the established understandings regarding both Buddhism and the Sinhala ethnicity.

*Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya is a Lecturer attached to the Department of English at the University of Peradeniya, and currently reading for his PhD at Ohio University, USA.


[1] See U. P. Shah, “The Sālakaṭaṅkaṭas and Laṅkā,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 96, no. 1 (1976), 109-113; Malti Nagar and S. C. Nanda, “Ethnographic Evidence for the Location of Ravana’s Lanka,” Bulletin of the Deccan College Research Institute 45 (1986): 71-77.

[2] The resistance that the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project has faced from certain Hindu groups in India since the project was proposed in the late 1990’s could be seen as an affirmation of the important position that Sri Lanka occupies as Rāvanā’s kingdom in the mainstream Hindu understanding of the epic. These groups claimed that the project was going to damage what is called ‘Rama’s bridge’ or ‘Rama setu,’ which, according to the legend, was created by Rāma’s vānara (ape) army to enable Rāma to cross the sea into Rāvanā’s kingdom in order to liberate Sita.

[3] The books published by Mirando Obeysekera, such as Ravana – King of Lanka and Ravanawatha (2013), and a series of newspaper articles published in the Mawbima newspaper (late 2012 and early 2013) could be cited as certain key attempts at historicizing Rāvanā.

[4] One of the key technological advancements that is attributed to Rāvanā is his dandumonarayantraya or flying-machine.

[5] “But the king Sīhabāhu [Vijaya’s father, the king of the Vanga kingdom in India] since he had slain the lion (was called) Sīhala and, by reason of the ties between him and them, all those (followers of Vijaya) were also (called) Sīhala” [The Mahāvamsa, or the Great Chronicle of Ceylon, trans. Wilhelm Geiger (London: Pali Text Society, 1964), 58].

[6] Such attempts are mostly found in articles published in Sri Lankan newspapers from time to time.

[7] It is not clear who this Buddha was. While some sources attribute the LS to the Gautama Buddha, some others associate it with an earlier Buddha.

[8] Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, trans., The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra: A Mahāyāna Text (London: George Routledge and Sons and the Eastern Buddhist Society, 1932), 4.

[9] Ibid., 3.

[10] Ibid., 4.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Quoting Wijegoonewardane, Thiruni Kelegama writes, “The root of the Maha Ravana ballet, Pabalu says, can be found in the Lankavatara suthra, said to be preached to Ravana by Konagama Buddha (the Third Buddha in the Maha Bhadra Kalpa Era)” (“Ravana Regained,” The Sunday Times, May 25, 2008, accessed April 10, 2015, http://www.sundaytimes.lk/080525/Plus/plus000015.html).

[13] The Mahāvamsa 55.

[14] These (re)imaginings echo the conceptualization of Rāvanā in the Kamba Ramayana, which is a Tamil version of the epic composed in the twelfth century.

[15] Quoted in K. V. Zvelebil, “Rāvana the Great in Modern Tamil Fiction,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, no. 1 (1988): 126-134 (emphasis mine).

[16] Zvelebil 128.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 10
    5

    This is nothing new when people or the rulers when they are powerful they change the history according their will ! Ravanan is a Hindu Tamil devote of lord Siva !! Sinhala bhudist history start with the landing of vijajan !!

    • 9
      0

      Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya

      RE: Rāvanā & Sinhala Buddhism: A Strained Relationship Ridden With Contradictions

      “The Sinhala-versus-Tamil division, which the conclusion of the war had resulted in highlighting quickly developed into a division between Sinhala-Buddhists and Non-Sinhala-Buddhists. Along with this schematization, Rāvanā began to emerge as a key political icon in the Sinhala Buddhist camp. This “Sinhala-Buddhisization” of Rāvanā is most evident in the emergence of the pro-Sinhala Buddhist organization named Rāvanā Balaya, which literary means the Rāvanā Force.”

      “The Sinhala-Buddhist spin that Rāvanā, like many other cultural icons and symbols, has acquired in the post-war context, however, embodies a fundamental contradiction. The association of Rāvanā with Sinhala Buddhism is problematic for the simple reason that Rāvanā predates both Buddhism and the Sinhala ethnicity as we know them today.”

      Looks like Dipawansa and Mahawansa lost out on Ravana Imaginations, Along with the other Imaginations. when these two Chronicles were written for Lanka, the Land of Native Veddah Aethho. Did Buddha Visit Lanka 3 Times, and fly to the top of the Mountain to deposit his Giant Foot Print?

      Biologically, the Sinhala and Tamils are Paras, Paradeshes,

      They are Para-Sinhala ans Para-Tamils. Check their DNA with the Southern Indians.

      The Land belongs to Native Veddah Aethho. They Walked to claim the land Between 8,000 and 30,000 years ago when the sea levels were low.

      The Vedda Tribe

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f89NuukY32U

      Tamil-speaking Veddas of Vaharai await war recovery support

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeFCuZwexRw

    • 5
      0

      Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya –

      “Accordingly, it is evident that the current conceptualizations of Rāvanā within the Sinhala Buddhist nationalist discourse are ridden with multiple contradictions. Any serious attempt at building a connection between Rāvanā and Sinhala Buddhism, in my view, invites a radical reevaluation of the established understandings regarding both Buddhism and the Sinhala ethnicity.”

      Yes. It is very hard. It is like the Church trying to make the Sun go around the Earth because Joshua said so in the Bible.

      http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038%2Fjhg.2013.112

      Sinhalese and Tamils DO HAVE genetic connection to Indian mainland.

      Read the Summary: …Through a comparison with the mtDNA HVS-1 and Part HVS-2 of Indian database, both the Tamils and Sinhalese clusters were affiliated with Indian subcontinent populations than Veddah people who are believed to be the native population of Sri Lanka. In other words, both the Sinhalese and Tamils are Para-Sinhalese and Para- Tamils, and the Veddah people are the true natives of Lanka, the Land of Native Veddah Aethho.

  • 9
    2

    Thank you CT editors for publishing this article by Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya .
    The timing is good. It is pre-election period.
    Hope many Sri Lankan readers and particularly the Sin hales Buddhist readers will read this, think rationally and post their comments.

    Of course I would urge PhD holders like Dayan, Rajiva, Nalin De Silva , Gomyn to respond this article.
    It will be a shame on them if they chicken out.
    Simpleton like HLDM & others are also welcome to respond.

    By the way why many SriLankans have Laxman as their first name ? Was it Laxman who cut the nose of Ravana’s ugly dark skinned flat nosed sister, which started the imprisonment of Seetha which in turn started the war ?
    If Rama is an Aryan then Ravana must be a dark skinned Dravidian ? Why many Sinhalese are dark dark skinned yet the claim they are Ariya Sinhala ?

    • 7
      3

      Non PhD

      “If Rama is an Aryan then Ravana must be a dark skinned Dravidian ? Why many Sinhalese are dark dark skinned yet the claim they are Ariya Sinhala ? “

      The Sinhala and Tamil are Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamil. They are Dravidians from Southern India. The DNA in them is Proof. They are different from the Native Veddah Aethho.

      http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038%2Fjhg.2013.112

      They are Not Aryan, Pure. They are Pure Dravidians, Arya-Dravidians,

      http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/concepts/arya.asp

      The Kenyans and West Indians Speak English? Arew They Englishmen and of English Ethnicity?

      The Para-Sinhala are NOT Aryans. They are Dravidian Kallathonis, Hora Oru.

      • 3
        8

        This is an excerpt from the DNA study.

        All the island populations, except some subgroups of the Vedda, form close genetic affiliations among themselves and with majority of the groups from the mainland suggesting the origin of the majority of the island population on the Indian mainland.

        No definite association of the Sinhalese with any specific ethnic or linguistic groups of India was, however, detected in this study; thus, their exact origin on the mainland remains yet to be confirmed.

        All groups except Sinhala have genetic affiliations with the Indian mainland.

        So all are “Kallathnoni” except the Sinhala group isn’t it?

        • 8
          3

          Vibhushana

          “So all are “Kallathnoni” except the Sinhala group isn’t it?”

          The Sinhala consists of many groups from thew mainland,Tamils, Biharis, Oria, Bengali etc. including a few Native Veddah women who may have been raped, and therefore the gene pool is more diffuse. That is why the Sinhalese “Achharu”, Mix, cannot be traced to one specific ingredient.

          On the other hand, the Native Veddah Aethho are a specific group, though contaminated by the so-called Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamils.

          Read are link carefully. The Sinhala and Tamils, along with the Other Paras are all Paras in Lanka, the Land of native Veddah Aethho.

          They have 46 Chromosomes, just like their Para-brethren in Southern India.

          http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038%2Fjhg.2013.112

          • 4
            9

            Buddy Amare,

            I think you are overlooking your own document. Its about genetic connections in Indian mainland.

            Sinhala do not have any genetic connection to Indian mainland. So its impossible for them to have Tamils, Biharis, Oria, Bengali in them.

            • 8
              1

              Vibhushana

              http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038%2Fjhg.2013.112

              Sinhalese and Tamils DO HAVE genetic connection to Indian mainland.

              Read the Summary:

              …Through a comparison with the mtDNA HVS-1 and Part HVS-2 of Indian database, both the Tamils and Sinhalese clusters were affiliated with Indian subcontinent populations than Veddah people who are believed to be the native population of Sri Lanka.

              In other words, both the Sinhalese and Tamils are Para-Sinhalese and Para- Tamils, and the Veddah people are the true natives of Lanka, the Land of Native Veddah Aethho.

              • 5
                9

                Amare,

                The 3 haplogroups, M2, U2i and R5 is the Indian subcontinent mtDNA. This is common across the entire Indian sub-continent.

                Just like the Caucasians and Negro populations this is a biological trait that is present in the entire Indian population. The study reveals the Indian sub-continent had one race of people for 50 000–70 000 years.

                So a Gurarati fellow living in Colombo area will have the same biological traits as the Sinhala person. A Turk living in England will be a Caucasian just like an Englishman.

                Eventhough a Sinhala fellow has similar DNA with a Tamil – he would not claim Tamil Nadu as him homeland. A Sinhala guy with same biological traits will be a “Kallathoni” in Tamil Nadu.

                The post feudal world of homelands are mostly based on ethnicity and language. So within the Indian sub-continent you have an homeland for Tamils called Tamil Nadu and an homeland for Sinhalese called Sinhale or Sri Lanka.

                In a nutshell, a Turk and an Englishman are both Caucasian and biologically same. However, a Turk has no “homeland” in England.

                Similarly, a Tamil and Sinhala are from the Indian race of people and biologically the same. Although a Tamil has no “Homeland” in Ceylon. Tamil homeland is in Tamil Nadu.

                • 7
                  1

                  Vibhushana

                  The fact remains that

                  1. Sinhala, Sinhalese are Paras and Para-Dravidians

                  2. Tamils are Paras and Para-Dravidians

                  3. All other Ethinic groups are Paras, except Native Veddah Aethho.

                  The sprinkling of Sinhala and Tamil genes among the Native Veddah Aethho is primarily due to rape of Native Veddah Aethho women by the Paras, both Sinhala and Tamil.

                  The Vedda Tribe

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f89NuukY32U

                  It is also accurate to refer to Para-Sinhala as Para-Tamils and Para-Tamils as Para-Sinhala. Both Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamils have 46 Chromosomes as well, and can interbreed with no difficulty.

                  Read the Summary: …

                  Through a comparison with the mtDNA HVS-1 and Part HVS-2 of Indian database, both the Tamils and Sinhalese clusters were affiliated with Indian subcontinent populations than Veddah people who are believed to be the native population of Sri Lanka.

                  • 2
                    3

                    Hey This paper is just one out pf many.No person with good scientific background would make conclusion based on one paper. Sinhalese are a mix/ , bengali origin or Tamil origin are occlusion of most on these papers. So most of these studies contradict or inconclusive
                    Aryan and Dravidian are language classification NOT race. Some PESO-intellectuals may be use these words to show off but these have no values in real world anthropology. All most all indian people are caucasians with australoid admix.

                    Don’t spew racist lies Amarasiri.

                    • 3
                      1

                      lipwe

                      “Aryan and Dravidian are language classification NOT race.”

                      “All most all indian people are caucasians with australoid admix. Don’t spew racist lies Amarasiri.”

                      The fact remains that the Sinhala and Tamil are Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamil, based on scientific evidence. If the Sinhala and Tamil remained in South India, there was no need to call them Para, as they would be in their native land.

                      Let’s call a Spade, a Spade, and a Paradeshi, a Para in the Land of Native Veddah Aethho. Science, based on evidence tells what it is. Yes, Sinhala and Tamils, are Paras, Paradeshis or Parayas, in the Land of Native Veddah Aethho.

                      1. Aryan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

                      “Aryan” (/ˈɛəriən, ˈɛərjən, ˈær-/)[1] is an English language loanword derived from the Sanskrit ārya (‘noble’).[2][3][4] The term ārya was used as an ethnic self-designation by the Indo-Iranian speaking tribes in the ancient times. It was believed in the 19th century that it was also a self-designation used by all Proto-Indo-Europeans, a theory that has now been abandoned.[5]

                      In present-day academia, the term “Aryan” has been replaced in most cases by the terms “Indo-Iranian” and “Indo-European”, and “Aryan” is now mostly limited to its appearance in the term of the “Indo-Aryan languages” in South Asia.[3]

                      2. Why Are White People Called Caucasian? The DNA tells the truth. These were classification before biological sciences developed to the current level.

                      Do you know that you have 46 Chromosomes, and your Chromosome #2, was formed by the fusion of two of your ancestral ape chromosomes?

                      http://mentalfloss.com/article/50202/why-are-white-people-called-caucasian

                      So these guys, from the Caucasus, are Caucasian. Me, with my mixed Slavic and Baltic heritage, I’m also Caucasian. So are my friends whose families come from Italy, Ireland, Germany, and pretty much anywhere else in Europe. How did all these different white ethnic groups get lumped into “Caucasian?”

                      It goes back to German anthropologist Friedrich Blumenbach. In his work in the late 1700s and early 1800s, Blumenbach divided Homo sapiens into five distinct races based on their physical characteristics. There was the Mongolian, or “yellow,” race, the red American race, the brown Malayan race, the black Ethiopian race, and the white Caucasian race.

                      While he looked at a lot of physical traits to carve out his categories, Blumenbach thought characteristics of the skull—the size and angle of the forehead, jawbone, teeth, eye sockets, etc.—were especially important. He thought that the skulls of Georgians were exemplary of the characteristics of his white race and named the group after the Caucasus Mountain Range that runs along Georgia’s northern border.

                      All this makes Blumenbach sound like a forerunner of phrenology, and “scientific” attempts to justify discrimination, but while he categorized the races, Blumenbach didn’t put them in a hierarchy and protested any attempts to misuse his groupings to divide people or paint one group as inferior to another. “Blumenbach wrote forcefully of the kindredness of the human races…he opposed the stress on racial hierarchies of worth by more conservative colleagues in his own university and elsewhere in Europe,” historian Nell Irvin Painter writes. “Throughout his work, and especially in the definitive 1795 edition of De generis humani varietate nativa (On the Natural Variety of Mankind), Blumenbach rejected racial hierarchy and emphasized the unity of mankind.”

                      Blumenbach’s Caucasians weren’t even strictly white or European, as the term is commonly used today. He described this “variety” as “Colour white, cheeks rosy; hair brown or chestnut-colored; head subglobular; face oval, straight, its parts moderately defined, forehead smooth, nose narrow, slightly hooked, mouth small…To this first variety belong the inhabitants of Europe (except the Lapps and the remaining descendants of the Finns) and those of Eastern Asia, as far as the river Obi, the Caspian Sea and the Ganges; and lastly, those of Northern Africa.”

                      The synonymity of Caucasian and white, and the use of racial lines as discriminatory tools, came later and from other men. Painter specifically calls out “Dutch anatomist, Petrus Camper, whose ‘facial angles’ proves so useful to scientific racists’ so-called ‘Great Chain of Being’,” and his “racist elaborators (like Edward Tyson, Josiah Nott, G. R. Gliddon, and even Johann Caspar Lavater) [who] placed Negroes and Kalmucks as close to apes as to Europeans.”

                      Today “Caucasian” lacks any real scientific meaning (though its cousin “Caucasoid” is still used in some disciplines), but hangs on in common usage as a blanket term for white/European people.

        • 7
          1

          I am no expert. It maters not the least. But, I have heard it said that Karaves are Kauravas in the Mahabaratha story or so they say. The Salagamas are cinnamon peelers brought from Kerala. Then during their were Tamils brought as mercenaries to fight wars. There is no single Sinhalese race, if race is ever relevant. An identity was created later, perhaps. I must say this is all hearsay.

        • 0
          1

          This is an excerpt from the DNA study.
          your own DNA study

  • 11
    2

    A thoughtful essay explaining how myths are manufactured.

    The following is the reference to what I wrote on ‘Sinhalization of Ravana and the un-deification of Rama, a few years back:

    https://www.transcurrents.com/tamiliana/archives/383.

    Dr.Rajasingham Narendran

  • 6
    9

    Sinhalese are a mixed race. They have been created by immigrants mainly from south india , and the original people probably from west Asia who brought the Language of prakrit that is related to sinhalese language and irrigation technology not available in the south India. What ever in the latter era they have been mixed with south indians due to its proximity. To claim a connection to Ravana by the Sinhalese is not far fetched except that a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since the time of Ravana. The original sinhala nation post Ravana were buddhist. So the connection is quite acceptable.
    What is not acceptable is the continuous attempts at ridiculing the Sinhala buddhist inheritance by the anti sinhala buddhist elements in society. Sinhala Buddhists are the most abused community in SL. The myth that sinhala buddhist discriminate the rest of the population is a myth that needs questioning. The Sinhalese are ethnically economicaly cleansed from the major cities, They are the once slaving in the ME , they are the once that get killed if they protests as in Rathupaswala so they do not have any power to discriminate. It is time sinhala buddhist bashing stops.

    • 7
      0

      [Edited out] Please write instead of posting links – CT

      • 9
        1

        Vas,

        You say “Sinhalese are a mixed race. They have been created by immigrants mainly from south india “

        Yes, all the DNA evidence point to that and proves that Sinhala and Tamil are Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamil.

        Only native Veddah Aethho are Not para.

        Remember 1 in 4 Americans
        1 in 3 Europeans
        and 1 in 2 Sri Lankans

        believe that the Sun goes around the Earth.

  • 9
    0

    Altogether, how many ‘Buddhas’ did exist?
    Is there a timeline from the first to the last – which I assume is the one venerated by modern day Buddhists?
    Ramayana was an epic written first by Valmiki in sanscrit, and later by Kamban in tamil.
    In these, Ravana is portrayed as a devotee of Shiva, and as head of ‘asura clan’.
    Which particular Buddha existed during Ravana’s time?

    Will the author please give this information, which will fill in the gaps in his narrative?

  • 8
    0

    [The LS is believed to have been preached by the Buddha[7] to Rāvanā who is described, in the text, as the “Overlord of the Yakshas”[8] who ruled “Laṅkā on Mount Malaya]

    It is incorrect to use the word Malaya for the disuputed mountain.

    As per Tamil, Sanskrit literatures, Mount Malaya is located in Tamil Nadu only.

    मलयः malayaḥ [Sanskrit] 1 N. of a mountain range in the south of India, abounding in sandal trees; (poets usually repre- sent the breeze from the Malaya mountain as wafting the odour of sandal trees and other plants growing thereon, which peculiarly affects persons who are smit with love); स्तनाविव दिशस्तस्याः शैलौ मलयदर्दुरौ R.4.51; 9.25;13.2; विना मलयमन्यत्र चन्दनं न प्ररोहति Pt.1.41; मलये भिल्लपुरन्ध्री चन्दनतरुकाष्ठमिन्धनं कुरुते Subhāṣ. -2 N. of the country lying to the east of the Malaya range, Malabar. -3 A garden. -4 The garden of Indra. -5 The side of a mountain. -6 (In music) A kind of measure.

    மலயம் malayam [Tamil] n. Mount Potiyam near Cape Comorin; பொதியமலை. ஓங் குயர் மலயத் தருந்தவ னுரைப்ப (மணி. 1, 3).

    மலயக்கோ malaya-k-kō [Tamil] n. Pāṇḍya king; பாண்டியன். நிகரிலா மலயக்கோவே (திருவாலவா. 44, 2).

    மலயமுனி malaya-muṉi [Tamil] n. Sage Agastya, as living in Mt. Malaya; அகத்திய முனிவர்.

    Pl refer Sinhala dictionary.

    මලයMalaya (Sinhalese) s. mountain or mountainous range that runs along the western side of the peninsula of India, from which the country of Malayalam or Malabar takes its name; by modern writers
    the term is often erroneously applied to the whole country from Cape Comorin to Bombay,whereas it extends no farther than from the southern extremity of the peninsula to the river Chandra-giri in lat. 12″ 27 north; garden of Indra.

    As per Chapter [Sarga] 2,Book V : Sundara Kanda, Ramayana,

    1. saH = that Hanuma; mahaabalaH = one with great strength; atikramya = crossed; anaadhrishhyam = the insurmountable; saagaram = ocean; svasthaH = (stayed) healthy (without any physical tiredness); dadarsha ha = and viewed; laN^kaam = the city of Lanka; sthitaam = situated; trikuuTa sikhare = on the peak of Mount Trikuta.

    That Hanuma with great strength crossed the insurmountable ocean without becoming tired and viewed the city of Lanka located on the peak of Mount Trikuta.

    The extent(/location) of present day Lanka is not the one as mentioned in Ramayana.

    3. shriimaan = the glorious; kapiH = Hanuma; uttama vikramaH = with the best courage; tiirtvaapi = even though crossing; shatam = a hundred; yojanaanaam = yojanas; aniHshvan = was without a sigh; na adhigachhati = (and) did not obtain; glaanim = tiredness; tatra = there.

    The glorious Hanuma with the best courage, even though crossing a hundred yojanas, was without a sigh and did not obtain any tiredness.

    Comment : This verse and others clearly mention that Hanuma crossed an ocean of hundred yojanas. At the present time the shore to shore distance between southern tip of India and Northern tip of Sri Lanka is around sixty miles. Even with a measure of 2.5 miles per yojana, hundred yojanas translate to 250 miles.

    8. saH pavanaatmajaH = that Hanuma; tishhThan = stood; tasmin achale = on that mountain; dadarsha = and saw; vanaani = forests; upavanaani cha = and gardens; taam laN^kaam = (and also) that city of Lanka; nagaagre = situated on the top of a mountain.

    That son of God Vayu stood on a mountain and saw forests and gardens and also the city of Lanka situated on the top of a mountain.

    It is therefore not the one Malaya but may be Tirikuda/Trikuta/tikuta in the (ancient) Lanka.

    Same Ramayana chapter says

    30. chaturNaam eva hi = only four; mahaatmaanaam = great; vaanaraaNaam = vanaras; gatiH hi = (have) the possibility of coming (here); vaaliputrasya = for the son of Vali – Angada; niilasya = for Nila; mama = for me; dhiimataH raaNJnashcha = and for the wise king Sugriva.

    “Only four great Vanaras can come here – the son of Vali (Angada), Nila, myself and the wise king Sugriva”.

    Therefore so called Ramayana lanka is not the present day Lanka as claimed by racists.

    Therefore it is necessary to note the words “looking at Lanka” & “on Mount Malaya” in the following paragraph from Lankavatara Sutra (Mahayana)

    ….At that time, the Blessed One who had been preaching in the palace of the King of Sea-serpents came out at the expiration of seven days and was greeted by an innumerable host of Nagakanyas including Sakra and Brahma, and looking at Lanka on Mount Malaya smiled and said, `By the Tathagatas of the past, who were Arhats and Fully-Enlightened Ones, this Truth was made the subject of their discourse, at that castle of Lanka on the mountain-peak of Malaya, the Truth realisable by noble wisdom in one`s inmost self, which is beyond the reasoning knowledge of the philosophers as well as the state of consciousness of the Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas.1 I, too, would now for the sake of Ravana, Overlord of the Yakshas, discourse on this Truth.`

    Mount Malaya is not the one “Sri Paadaya”(Sivanolipadha Malai – சிவனொளி பாதமலை)” as claimed by Sinhalese. It is Potigai/Podhigai mount.

  • 3
    1

    These are fables like Noah’s Ark mythology of Christians, Adam and Eve etc which is also not true. These are fables and not based on science, evolution, observation, fact and hypotheses testing.

    • 0
      0

      Darwin’sghost

      “These are fables like Noah’s Ark mythology of Christians, Adam and Eve etc which is also not true. These are fables and not based on science, evolution, observation, fact and hypotheses testing.”

      Darwin’s ghost comes back as DNA and RNA to cause havoc in the mythology and the fables.

      Ken Miller on Human Evolution

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk&spfreload=1

      Uploaded on Feb 14, 2007

      Dr. Ken Miller talks about the relationship between Homo sapiens and the other primates. He discusses a recent finding of the Human Genome Project which identifies the exact point of fusion of two primate chromosomes that resulted in human chromosome #2.

  • 10
    1

    For all I know, Ravana is born again and is living in Thimbirigasyaya at the moment.

    • 9
      0

      Damn, these mad buggers have found me!

  • 1
    4

    So essentially there are 2 texts that say lord Buddha arrived in the island.

    The Tripitaka confirms Mahavamsa. That is good information to know. I shall preserve your article in my library.

    • 7
      0

      Vibhushana

      “The Tripitaka confirms Mahavamsa. That is good information to know. I shall preserve your article in my library.”

      The Tripitaka came well before the Mahawansna and its lies and imaginations by Monk Mahanama.

      A better book for your library is given below.

      http://special.lib.gla.ac.uk/exhibns/month/Mar2002.html

      The work describes a ship laden with fools setting sail for the “fool’s paradise” of Narragonia. The author identifies the many varying examples of folly separately, including the corrupt judge, the drunkard, and the untrained physician. Some of the condemned vices are more surprising than others. The modern reader might expect to see the usual suspects of lust and slothfulness, but the moral failure in unfinished buildings or “unprofytable bokes” is less obvious. This illustration depicts the foolishness of procrastination: “Of them that prolonge from day to day/to amende themselfe”.

      Remember 1 in 4 Americans 1 in 3 Europeans and 1 in 2 Sri Lankans believe that the Sun goes around the Earth.

      http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says

      75% of the Para-Sinhala Buddhists believe all the lies and imaginations written in the Mahawansa.

      It used to be that 99.9% of the people thought that the Sun goes around the Earth… until Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler Newton and Foucault weaned them out of it, but still the illusion is believed by the ignorant.

    • 10
      0

      Vibhushana

      “So essentially there are 2 texts that say lord Buddha arrived in the island.”
      “The Tripitaka confirms Mahavamsa. That is good information to know. I shall preserve your article in my library.”

      This is called Bullshit for Modayas, Para-Sinhala Buddhist Modayas. What happened to Para-Tamil Buddhists? Did the Para Sinhala Buddhists eat the Para-Tamil Buddhists?

      Sinhala Buddhism, is an Insult to Buddhism.

      Here is the Link.

      Mahavamsa- An Insult To The Buddha!December 21, 2013 |

      https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/mahavamsa-an-insult-to-the-buddha/

      By Sharmini Serasinghe –

      Caution- The following is more suitable for the broad-minded and the wise. Others are kindly advised to pass!

      Wonder if ours might have been a wiser, and a more ‘humane’ society, had our ‘ancient’ history, been based on Aesop’s Fables, instead of the Mahavamsa. For if not for the Mahavamsa, the Sinhalese may not have been endowed, with the reputation, of “Sinhalaya Modaya (The Sinhalese are Fools)”!

      In this “wonderland” called Sri Lanka, and in this day and age, one still comes across ‘academically’ educated, and supposedly intelligent ‘Buddhists’, but sadly lacking in wisdom, who reverently believe, that the Buddha walked out of his mother’s womb, and walked seven steps, while lotuses blossomed, under his feet!

      These very same supposedly educated, and intelligent ‘Buddhists’ also believe, that the enormous indentation, resembling a footprint on a boulder, at Adam’s Peak (Sri Pada to ‘Buddhists’), to be that of the Buddha. This would be in keeping with the conviction that the Buddha, was as tall, or perhaps even taller, than the Avukana Buddha statue, which stands above 40 feet (12 meters) in height!

      Then, there is the ‘Dalada Maligawe’ in Kandy; most Buddhists believe, the tooth relic housed within, belonged to the Buddha. Some adorn the ‘tooth casket’ with mounds of gold jewelry, fervently believing, that they would earn merit, to the value of the gold they offer. The thought of donating the value of this gold, to feed and help, the poor, sick and the needy, that would be far more meritorious, never cross their minds!

      There hangs a controversial question, over the authenticity of this ‘sacred tooth’. But then again, to those ‘educated and intelligent Buddhists’, devoid of wisdom, if the Buddha, was taller than the Avukana statue, and had a giant footprint, as on Adam’s Peak, then this ‘huge tooth’ could be his!

      However it does not matter, if the tooth is over-sized, belonged to the Buddha or not, because he the ‘wise one’ asserted, that his followers must not revere, nor worship, any part of his physical self, nor idolize him. Had the Buddha wanted otherwise, he would have left not just a tooth, but his entire skeleton, for his followers to worship.

      • 7
        0

        ” There hangs a controversial question, over the authenticity of this ‘sacred tooth’. But then again, to those ‘educated and intelligent Buddhists’, devoid of wisdom, if the Buddha, was taller than the Avukana statue, and had a giant footprint, as on Adam’s Peak, then this ‘huge tooth’ could be his! However it does not matter, if the tooth is over-sized, belonged to the Buddha or not, because he the ‘wise one’ asserted, that his followers must not revere, nor worship, any part of his physical self, nor idolize him. Had the Buddha wanted otherwise, he would have left not just a tooth, but his entire skeleton, for his followers to worship.”

        Now you’ve really done it, Amare. All the white vans in the country will be looking for you. I shall pray for you.

        • 2
          0

          old codger

          “Now you’ve really done it, Amare. All the white vans in the country will be looking for you. I shall pray for you.”

          Do you mean like the Christian Inquisition, the Sinhala Buddhist Inquisition? The Sinhala Buddhist Inquisition, headed by Monk Mahanma in the 5th Century has been active for some time, including the modern time against the Tamils, and even against the Mahayana Buddhists. ( Catholics vs. Protestants)

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

          The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Hussites (followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s, inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order, to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2] The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th century

          Giordano Bruno

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno

          Giordano Bruno (Italian: [dʒorˈdano ˈbruno]; Latin: Iordanus Brunus Nolanus; 1548 – 17 February 1600), born Filippo Bruno, was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician, poet, and astrologer.[3] He is celebrated for his cosmological theories, which went even further than the then-novel Copernican model. He proposed that the stars were just distant suns surrounded by their own exoplanets and raised the possibility that these planets could even foster life of their own (a philosophical position known as cosmic pluralism). He also insisted that the universe is in fact infinite and could have no celestial body at its “center”.

          Beginning in 1593, Bruno was tried for heresy by the Roman Inquisition on charges including denial of several core Catholic doctrines (including the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the virginity of Mary, and Transubstantiation). Bruno’s pantheism was also a matter of grave concern.[4] The Inquisition found him guilty, and in 1600 he was burned at the stake in Rome’s Campo de’ Fiori. After his death he gained considerable fame, being particularly celebrated by 19th- and early 20th-century commentators who regarded him as a martyr for science,[5] although historians have debated the extent to which his heresy trial was a response to his astronomical views or to other aspects of his philosophy and theology.[6][7][8][9][10] Bruno’s case is still considered a landmark in the history of free thought and the future of the emerging sciences.[11][12][13]

          In addition to cosmology, Bruno also wrote extensively on the art of memory, a loosely organized group of mnemonic techniques and principles. Historian Frances Yates argues that Bruno was deeply influenced by Arab astrology, Neoplatonism, Renaissance Hermeticism, and legends surrounding the Egyptian god Thoth.[14] Other studies of Bruno have focused on his qualitative approach to mathematics and his application of the spatial concepts of geometry to language.[15]

          • 2
            0

            Amarasiri
            You have questioned the very legitimacy of the Sri Lankan State.If the Tooth relic is fake, then so is the State.
            ” Do you mean like the Christian Inquisition, the Sinhala Buddhist Inquisition? The Sinhala Buddhist Inquisition, headed by Monk Mahanma in the 5th Century has been active for some time, including the modern time against the Tamils, and even against the Mahayana Buddhists. ( Catholics vs. Protestants) “

            The Sinhala Buddhist Inquisition is much more sophisticated.
            I remember an occasion when Ajith Samaranayaka , then editor of the Sunday Observer, had to say “this correspondence is now closed” when a discussion mentioned the size of the Sacred Tooth. I hope CT doesn’t do this.

            • 1
              0

              old codger

              “Sunday Observer, had to say “this correspondence is now closed” when a discussion mentioned the size of the Sacred Tooth. I hope CT doesn’t do this.”

              Yes. Unfortunately, there is the social media, the internet, twitter,FB etc. They can’t hide it.

              The Church tried to do that with the Heliocentric Model and failed, but still a good fraction of Americans, Europeans and others still believe that the Sun goes around the Earth, 400 odd years later.

              So the Sinhala Buddhists still believe…

              ” There hangs a controversial question, over the authenticity of this ‘sacred tooth’. But then again, to those ‘educated and intelligent Buddhists’, devoid of wisdom, if the Buddha, was taller than the Avukana statue, and had a giant footprint, as on Adam’s Peak, then this ‘huge tooth’ could be his! However it does not matter, if the tooth is over-sized, belonged to the Buddha or not, because he the ‘wise one’ asserted, that his followers must not revere, nor worship, any part of his physical self, nor idolize him. Had the Buddha wanted otherwise, he would have left not just a tooth, but his entire skeleton, for his followers to worship.”

  • 8
    2

    This article is a nonsense, as much as people that claim they had a connection with Ravana. Ravana story is a fable, a story, written to demonstrate the good and evil that exist within humans. Those people that bring these fictitious characters to life as once tangible people, are dreamers at best or lunatics at their worst. There is not a shred of evidence to support their beliefs, no matter how strong and committed they are to these beliefs. Then comparing such fiction with something that has been and is, real and live (Sinhala Buddhists),is like comparing totally unrelated and incompatible entities. It is as bad as the sort of vision some people have that Nibbana is a nice place to go to where one could live in bliss forever. Wake up people from your fantasies!

    • 1
      1

      Nibbana is not a place . It is a state. May be you misinterpret

      • 1
        0

        Lipwe, Please read my writing carefully. What is written is “….. the sort of VISION SOME PEOPLE HAVE ….is a nice place to go to..”. Thus:

        1. The vision is not mine, but of some people.
        2. What is the vision? The vision is “it is a nice place”; it is a vision for those people not good with abstract thinking,even though it may be a misconception.

        Happy now?

  • 3
    3

    Ravana is a mythical character.

  • 7
    1

    A very good analysis of the early history of Sri Lanka, however to get a clear understanding of the ethnicity of the origin of the Sinhala race, one must study the culture, language and pre Mughal period religious belief of the people in present day Bangladesh. Some of the common similarities of both the people’s are startling, the number of similar words in Bangla and Sinhala language , the names of the non Muslim people are very similar to the Sri Lankans, moreover the name Sinha is very common name in Bangladesh for non Muslims. Moreover the complexion and the features of the people are very similar.

    Another interesting fact is that prior to the arrival of the Mughals, the last dynasty was the Pala dynasty, and the last king was king Dham Pala.

    In my assumption, Vijaya came from this region and not South India, it would be interesting to do a DNA analysis of the present day Sinhalese to establish this fact, in my opinion the Sinhala race originated by the mixing of Vijaya and his people who arrived in this island (natives of present day Bangladeshis) and the Veddhas of Lanka. I am sure the DNA analysis will prove this.

    • 3
      4

      Bengalis certainly do not have similar facial characteristics to Sinhalese. They are slightly Mongoloid, which is reasonable considering the fact that if you move eastward (Assam and Nagaland), the people are even more Mongoloid.
      The Sinha apellation occurs even in UP ,and Singh in Punjab.
      It is much more reasonable to expect that the larger proportion of Sinhala progenitors came from nearby areas in South India. The people in India most similar to the Sinhalese (culture, food) are those in Kerala.
      There is a town in Tamil Nadu (it used to be in Kerala before independence) called Vickramasinghapuram .Isn’t that interesting?

  • 2
    7

    There you go…

    Our Sita snatching Yakko King, after all was a Dravidian from Madurai..

    Photos of Sita in Tamil Temples depict her as a real North Indian , fair skinned like the good looking women in the Diaspora lands in the West.

    No wonder our Yaksa king went all the way across the sea to rescue her from a fellow Yakko King in India.

    Or, was Rama a non Yaksa?…

    BTW, no wonder even English speaking Colombo Elite still call us Yakkos…

    • 3
      0

      KASmaalam K.A Sumanasekera

      “Photos of Sita in Tamil Temples depict her as a real North Indian ,”

      I wonder whether KASmaalam’s ancestors had had access to Digital Cameras some 5000 years ago. In any case Rama has been portrait as a blue bodied, black haired, no beard lad in almost all pictures available to humankind. Northern Aryans were supposed to look like western Jesus Christ with Blond Hair, Blue Eyes and Ginger Beard.

      Some north Indians believe that Ravana was another bad boy Rama helped to get rid of with the support of southerns monkey bridge builders. Rama concurred the island and purified it of hedonism, bad behaviour and the ancient Gota. Hence the North Hindians believe they own this island or this land belongs to them.

      “BTW, no wonder even English speaking Colombo Elite still call us Yakkos…”

      How dare they insult Yakkos?

      “No wonder our Yaksa king went all the way across the sea to rescue her from a fellow Yakko King in India.”

      By the way who rescued whose wife? You sound like typical Sinhala/Buddhists historian.

      • 0
        0

        Dear Native,

        I like it..

        So Alexander the Great and his Macedonians gave Gene Therapy to king Asokas Brahamin chicks in the North big time..

        That is why they turned out to be sweet and look like Western JC…

        No wonder we were taught that the Angels are white..

        So you reckon Rama was a Yakko too.

        But our Ravana was the badder Yakko.. Right..

        But then you say Rama was Blue all over.

        May be the Elite and The Vellalas then were SLFP and our Ravana and, the baddie were perhaps. UNP..How cool.

        BTW , Even your Sambnadan’s Vellala boys used to call us Grease Yakkos not that long ago….Right…

  • 8
    0

    According to all versions of Ramayana, Ravana was a worshipper of Shiva.
    Saivism or Shaivism is the predominant religion of the Southerners.
    In fact Saint Gnanasambandar who lived in the seventh century had glorified the holy ash Vibuthi as the one that was smeared on the body of Ravana.
    From the above facts, we should all know where Ravana belonged.

    Sengodan. M

  • 3
    3

    this author is confused with respect to what he is talking. bu discussing it, he had made a mess here.

    Ravana was not just one King. It was a dynasty. Probably, Ravana had lived during the Kasyapa buddha time.

    when Sinhala buddhists appear, Ravana was long gone.

    So, thr author is confused and he talks garbage without any meaning.

    Sinhala buddhists are from the Gauthama buddha time.

  • 0
    10

    In the present day political reality it is Ranil who is Ravana and my cute leader Dharmista Mahinda the Rama.

    • 5
      0

      How would Ravana kidnap his Sita? The aeroplane in which he kidnaps her will find it difficult to take off.

  • 0
    6

    One can tell a Tamil from a Mile.

    They all look the same from Mannar to Matara. Because they have an unadulterated Gene pool as same as in Tamil Nadu.

    Sinhalese in contrast come in all shapes and shades.

    Specially along the West coast from Matara to Mannar, although not many are in the latter thanks to Piraparan.

    It is obvious that they have a cocktail of genes acquired from Persians, to Romans, Alexander the great , Genghis Khan, Portugese, and Ditch who landed there for R & R.

    English even went further inland to give gene therapy to our Kandiyans and created those beautiful specimens sorry sub species ..

    So it is not only the Ravana genes .. Right.

    If Ravana was a Dravidian and came from Madras, how come there are no irrigation tanks, temples , palaces and even hospitals there, that we have in Anuradhapura,, Pollonanruwa and even Jaffna built by Ravana and Kuveni descendants..?.

    • 2
      0

      One look at the Sri Lanka cricket team shows they are all Sinhalese, “all blacks”, and certainly not Aryans.

  • 1
    2

    How long ago, Rama Ravana war happened ?,

    when was Vijaya’s arrival happened ?

    Ramayan is india’s oldest book. Even buddha paintings in Ajantha or Ellora are not Gauthama Budda, Because those paintings are older.

    Ramayan story lives even in other countries like what is called south or South -east asia too because, Ravana was an emperor. I think that is the Region of Thailand, Laos, burma that region and Cambodia.

  • 1
    1

    Make a visit to present day Bangladesh or Calcutta and study their culture and language, I am sure you can find out the origin of Sinhala race. Even the Bangla new year is exactly on the same day as the Sinhala new year celebrated in Sri Lanka

    • 3
      0

      Jeff
      Pay a visit to Kerala and you will see even more similarities.
      1. Write ‘Ganga” in either language and you will see they are identical.
      The letters “sha” “ga” and “ka” are identical.
      2.They have a major festival on the same day as the Sinhala new year.
      with very similar games such as pot-breaking. This festival is not celebrated in Tamilnadu.
      3. Kavun, Kokis, Aappa, Idiaappa are all common foods, unlike in TN. Do they have kavuns in Bangladesh?

  • 0
    0

    Don’t you think that Mahabartha was is a work of fiction like Superman or Batman of today.
    I see a whole lot of simsimilarities. They are both personifying ideas and concepts behind good and evil, selfish and selfless, kind and wicked, in the form of heros and villains.

    In as much Mahabartha could be pure fiction what is annoying is how the Sinhalese-Bhuddist try to piggyback on these tales and ride on them for propaganda. And whats worst is that majority blindly swallow whatever horse shit they are being dished, hook line and sinker.

    When we swallow this crap we forget one thing, the essence of the story in the first place and end up glorifying the villains.

    If I should put this

  • 2
    0

    Don’t you think that Mahabartha was is a work of fiction like Superman or Batman of today.
    I see a whole lot of simsimilarities. They are both personifying ideas and concepts behind good and evil, selfish and selfless, kind and wicked, in the form of heros and villains.

    In as much Mahabartha could be pure fiction what is annoying is how the Sinhalese-Bhuddist try to piggyback on these tales and ride on them for propaganda. And whats worst is that majority blindly swallow whatever horse shit they are being dished, hook line and sinker.

    When we swallow this crap we forget one thing, the essence of the story in the first place and end up glorifying the villains.

    If I should put this into perspective it will be something like this: lets say sometime in the future somehow Prabakaran is seen as a hero, our idiots in power will try to say that he was a sinhalese too, and get political mileage.

    Don’t you think thats possible?

  • 1
    0

    The Sita, Ramana, Ravana legend is nothing but a crib from the Story of Helen of Troy, just as much as the Vijayan legend is nothing but a crib from the Odessey and Kataragama is Skanda to Sikkander of Pakistan to Iskander (Iskandriya/Alexandria) of Egypt to Alexander of the Hellenic(Heladiva) Isles
    This country has no history – all cribbed from others.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.