By Izeth Hussain –
Izeth Hussain
I argued in my last article that the world is becoming a unit, and that what happens inside a country today carries with it an external dimension to a far greater extent than it did in 1983. I argued further that the Sri Lankan Muslims have no alternative to using that external dimension to safeguard their lives and legitimate interests. They have no alternative partly because the civil society is not yet effective enough to pressurize the Government into giving fair and equal treatment to the minorities. As for the only credible alternative to the present government, the UNP, it too is essentially an anti-Muslim racist party. That fact is being shown in an outrageous way at present. The Government’s strategy now is to make it out that the Muslims were responsible for igniting the Aluthgama/Beruwela horrors. It is a despicable strategy, but the UNP does not bother to establish the truth and use that for devastating attacks on the Government. The reason is obvious: the innate racism of the UNP which makes Sinhala supremacy its first priority.
So our Muslims cannot be blamed if they turn to that external dimension to safeguard themselves. In fact, if not for that external dimension – in the shape of an international community that can harm Sri Lanka in various and serious ways – the fate of the Muslims might today have been much worse. Quite possibly they may have already faced a genocidal pogrom together with an island-wide torching of their business premises. The fact that that has been evaded so far attests to the power of that external dimension. That power has been shown also in another and paradoxical way: the Muslims have to turn to the external dimension to safeguard themselves against a two-year long anti-Muslim campaign, but that campaign itself has its origin in that same external dimension. I refer to the theory that the anti-Muslim campaign is the result of a foreign conspiracy.
The main purpose of this article is to argue that there is a case for an enquiry into the possibility that the anti-Muslim campaign is the result of a foreign conspiracy. The idea of such a conspiracy seems to be very widespread today, but there is confusion about the reasons for that conspiracy. I must acknowledge that conspiracy theories usually abound among ill-informed and naïve persons, but in this case well-informed and responsible persons also share their views. For instance Ven. Uduwe Dhammaloka Thera, who entered Parliament in 2004, said in an interview (Island of July 24), “They are trying to destroy the national leader by destroying the bhikku first”. He dismissed the notion of “Muslim extremism” and argued that there had been an attempt to set up a conflict between the Bhikkus and the Muslims in order to alienate Muslim support for the Government in international fora. He went on to say, “So I repeat – this is definitely a conspiracy hatched by certain powerful countries. There is also an attempt to lay the blame for all this destruction at the feet of Gotbhaya Rajapakse”.
Ven. Baddegama Samitha Thera, who in 2002 was the first monk to enter Parliament, much esteemed in left-wing circles, and whom I hold in deep respect, expressed different views but was in concurrence about the conspiracy. Chandraprema, who also conducted the other interview, asked whether he was surprised that not just one but two or three Bikkhu organizations had popped up out of nowhere with a lot of resources and the ability to muster crowds. The bikkhus in those organizations were completely unknown before 2012. He replied, “Certainly this sudden emergence of these organizations is a cause for suspicion. With the war, we got close to countries like Israel. One part of the Israeli strategy has been to destabilize Muslim countries all over the world. We see suspicious international involvement. For example, the visit made by the Bodu Bala Sena monks to Norway is surprising because Norway is a very liberal country. It is still unclear why they were invited to Norway.” He had this to say about the lenient treatment of the BBS by the Government: “In no other country in the world would anybody have got off Scott free after behavior like this. Anywhere else, they would have been in jail”. He too dismissed the nonsense about “Islamic extremism”. The following is also noteworthy: “The mindset which says that no concessions at all should be given to the minorities has always existed in this country. This has today assumed very ugly proportions”.- (Island of July 17)
The Island of July 12 carried the statement of the National Shoora Council in response to the BBS’ call to ban it. The statement began by referring to the fully paid visit in October 2011 of BBS members to Norway, a country that almost succeeded in setting up Eelam, where they met members of the Tamil diaspora and Norwegian Islamophobes. It appeared most convincingly that the BBS had entered into a dubious contract to destabilize Sri Lanka through an anti-Muslim campaign through racial conflicts, which would be to the benefit of the Western powers at the UNHRC. The statement thought it significant that the first target of the BBS was the All Ceylon Jammiyathul Ulama, the President of which had gone to the UNHRC meeting in March 2012 to defend Sri Lanka. The BBS picked on the Halal issue even though the Chambers of Commerce could attest that the main beneficiaries of Halal certification were Sri Lanka’s non-Muslim exporters. The statement included the following important sentence: “Every one of the issues raised by the BBS against the Muslims was false, fabricated or exaggerated”.
I will not comment on the statements quoted above as my purpose has been only to show that eminent and Venerable monks and responsible organizations share the widespread notion that the anti-Muslim campaign is the consequence of a foreign conspiracy. I will now add some comments to strengthen the case for a full-scale investigation into the alleged conspiracy. The reason given for that cataclysmic visit to Norway – the reason given by the President, not the General Secretary of the BBS – was that it was in connection with a project to help the Tamils. That must raise a smile, given the present notoriety of the BBS. I must mention that a friend of mine, vastly successful in business, had a project to help the Tamils. It provoked the ire of expatriate Tamils who told him that the Tamils didn’t want his money because they were a wealthy community. What really was the purpose of that Norway visit?
Why was the halal issue chosen as the first salvo in the anti-Muslim campaign? If the BBS wanted to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment, it could have been done far more effectively through the issue of cattle slaughter. Hardly any Sri Lankan was aware of halal certification as a problem. What, after all, did it involve? Muslims are forbidden certain food items, which could figure as ingredients in certain synthetic foods, and therefore there was a need for halal certification. Furthermore exporters of food items to Islamic countries – among whom the Sinhalese were in a majority – also needed halal certification. I have seen a legal opinion by a leading lawyer according to which the ACJU did not exceed its authority in issuing halal certificates. There was nothing in all that that could not have been sorted out without too much difficulty, provided the Government had a will to do so. However, I believe, that halal certification has been an issue in some foreign countries. I wonder whether the choice of halal as the first salvo in the anti-Muslim campaign was made by foreigners who were Aware that halal could constitute a problem.
Likewise the main BBS charge against the Muslims, that of “Muslim extremism”, could have a Western provenance. Hardly any Sri Lankans – before the emergence of the BBS and apart from the JHU – were aware of “Muslim extremism” as a national problem. Among the public there was a vague consciousness of Wahabi extremism leading to a few, very few, conflicts among Muslims. But there have been no signs, none whatever, of Jehadi groups or “political Islam”. How, then, did “Muslim extremism” come to be projected by the BBS and the JHU as a mighty threat to the nation? I believe that the explanation is to be found in the fact that particularly after September 11, 2001, Western Islamophobes came to be obsessed by what a famous political scientist called “the myth of universal terrorism”. Was the choice of “Muslim extremism” as the main charge against the SL Muslims dictated by Western conspirators?
If the charge of a foreign conspiracy is to make sense, we have to be able to ascribe a rational motivation for it. I believe that the underlying factor of decisive importance is that India believes that a lasting solution to the Tamil ethnic problem will only be possible through the full implementation of 13A, while President Rajapakse is adamantly against it. The hidden purpose of the anti-Muslim campaign – of which the BBS may not be aware – is to destabilize Sri Lanka and to bring about the fall of the present Government. Even if one does not agree that that is the rationale for the foreign conspiracy, it remains that the prima facie case for a full scale investigation is very strong.
Amarasiri / August 2, 2014
Izeth Hussain –
“I argued further that the Sri Lankan Muslims have no alternative to using that external dimension to safeguard their lives and legitimate interests. They have no alternative partly because the civil society is not yet effective enough to pressurize the Government into giving fair and equal treatment to the minorities. As for the only credible alternative to the present government, the UNP, it too is essentially an anti-Muslim racist party. That fact is being shown in an outrageous way at present. The Government’s strategy now is to make it out that the Muslims were responsible for igniting the Aluthgama/Beruwela horrors. It is a despicable strategy, but the UNP does not bother to establish the truth and use that for devastating attacks on the Government. The reason is obvious: the innate racism of the UNP which makes Sinhala supremacy its first priority.”
1. Both The UPFA and UNP is counting on the Sinhala Buddhist Support to get elected.
2. Both Believe in the lies and imaginations of Monk Mahanama in the Mahawansa.
3. Sinhala Buddhism with monk Hegemony is being courted by Both UPFA and UNP.
4. Yes, but the Muslims need to work both Internally and externally. Expose, expose and expose. Get every Sri Lankan Muslim should have and E-mail account, Twitter account, Facebook account, U tube account and other Internet accounts that are FREE . They also should have phones with Video capabilities, that can be transmitted, on real time. They should be be able to find some time between the 5 daily prayer to get these shills. DO NOT THINK YOUR ULEMA WILL HELP YOU HERE.
5. However, the Sri Lanka Muslims have gone bonkers with Wahhabism and its Clones and their ideology. The Women want to cover from head to toe, not required in the Quran. The Idiots Ulema are now talking about changing the black color to pink. WHAT A JOKE.
Islam DOES NOT REQUIRE The Wahhabi or Arabian Dress to be worn by Muslims from Different Cultures. The Ulema are te curse of Muslims, just like the Sinhala Buddhist monks are the curse of Sinhala and Buddhists.
Al-Maʿarri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ma%CA%BFarri
His religious skepticism and positively anti-religious views are expressed in a poem which states, “The inhabitants of the earth are of two sorts: those with brains, but no religion, and those with religion, but no brains.”[1
He was a controversial rationalist of his time, attacking the dogmas of religion and rejecting the claim that Islam or any other religion possessed the truths they claimed and considered the speech of prophets as a lie (literally, “forgery”) and “impossible” to be true. He was equally sarcastic towards the religions of Muslims, Jews, and Christians. He was also a vegan who argued for animal rights.
In 2013, almost a thousand years after his death, a Jihadist group beheaded the statue of Al Ma’arri during the conflict in Syria.[1] Al Ma’arri remains widely cited among modern Arab atheists.[2]
/
Amarasiri / August 2, 2014
Izeth Hussain –
Einstein on God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEK6WtHxNfw
Uploaded on Dec 22, 2009
This video discusses the spiritual beliefs of Prof. Albert Einstein and how they have been a subject for debate in recent years.
Al-Maʿarri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ma%CA%BFarri His religious skepticism and positively anti-religious views are expressed in a poem which states, “The inhabitants of the earth are of two sorts: those with brains, but no religion, and those with religion, but no brains.”[1
/
Amarasiri / August 2, 2014
Dear Izeth Hussain,
RE: Sri Lanka Muslims At The Cross Roads – X
Introduction: Exposing Wahhabism Part 1
Let me first thank you for writing 10 articles on the Sri Lanka Muslims at the crossroads. All 10 articles are good, very informative of the current situation in Sri Lanka ,impacting Muslims internally and the external influences in the Muslim world, especially by Wahhabism and their Clones.
Amarasiri uses Wahhabism and Wahhabi, as a generic terms for the so-called Wahhabi “Muslims” who comprise the following. The Wahhabis, The Salafis, The Deobandis, The Talibans, The ISIS, The Al Queda, The Tauhidis , and others who generally follow the Devil, The Satan, The Shaitan.
Given below is support for the above assertion.
Muslims in general, and Sri Lankan Muslims in particular need to challenge the Wahhabi Ideology, based on the Quran and the Satan inspired practices of the Wahhabis using both the Quran, Hadith and the Sunnah, Traditions of the Prophet to discredit the Satan following Wahhabis who wants to destroy Muslims from within and impose the 7th Century Arabian Culture.
Like the house of wisdom in Baghdad and the great Islamic Philosophers like Avicenna, Avorres and others who put reason above revelation, if supported by evidence and facts, the Wahhabi Ideology need to be challenged. Sri Lankan Muslims have become victims of the Satanic ideology, and but the Sri Lankan Muslims as well the non-Muslims suffer because of the Satanic Saudi Wahhabi ideology. Sri Lanka Muslims and many Muslims are like sheep just following the Wahhabis and other Muslims blindly without questing them. The Muslims during the Golden age of Islam were more enlightened and informed than the current blindly following Muslims. Now the Ulema council in Lanka, the land of Native Veddah, want to change the abaya color to Pink from Black, What a joke. To begin with it was not needed. It is an edict of the Ulema., just like preventing Muslim women going to the mosques and riding horse or camels or driving cars, imposed by the Saudi Wahhabis,
So, the Muslims need a Muslim Martin Luther, with 99 theses to discredit the Wahhabi ideology and Nail the 99 Theses, to the doors of All Wahhabi Mosques. Can you find one or more Muslims intellectuals who can take on this project?
a) Hadith of Najd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_Najd
“A number of authors have claimed that the hadith refers to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the patronym of the Wahhabi movement. It is accounted that the origin of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab is from the modern day Najd region of Saudi Arabia,”
b) In the Index of the Meaning if The Holu Quran by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, the index contains multiple citations for Satan ( Sahitan, Devil),
Satan,
Cannot harm the Believers
Do not follow or obey worship
Enemy of man
Fails in his promise
Fears Allah
Has no authority over Allah’s servants
Makes sins fair-seeming
Misdeeds and deceives
Party of, will perish
Seek refuge from Allah from
Tempted Adam and Eve
Whisperer of evil
See also Iblis
Satan’s Handiwork
Iblis , refused to prostrate, see also Satan.
c) Satan’s Seven Strategies
SUHAIB WEBB | NOVEMBER 2, 2012 5:00 AM
According to Ibn Qayyim, Shaytan uses seven strategies to wipe you out, and they are ranked according to your ability to defend yourself. They are:
1. To make someone a kaafir (someone who is given the message and he rejects it).
2. To make someone commit al bid’ah (innovation).
3. To make someone commit major sins.
4. To make someone commit minor sins.
5. Wasting time doing things that are permissible.
6. To choose to do the lesser of two good deeds.
7. An all out attack.
d) Wahhabis and Satan agree, and believe the same.
Here is an interesting post that was on facebook written by someone else (I didn’t write this):
http://www.yanabi.com/index.php?/topic/426240-conversation-between-a-wahabisalafi-and-shaitan-satan/
“Wahabi: No. I follow Saudi announcement.
Satan: Me too.
Satan: I am shocked. We have the same beliefs. Why I am a Satan and you are still a Muslim?
Wahabi: I don’t know.
May Allah save Islam from the evil of Wahabism. Ameen. “
/
Amarasiri / August 3, 2014
Izeth Hussain –
Read: Campaign To Ban The Burka In Britain. The Wahhabis, The Devil Followers, in action.
By Dr Taj Hargey is the Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation and the Director of the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford
“Supporters of this garment like to pretend that it is a welcome symbol of our society’s multicultural diversity and philosophical tolerance. But such warped thinking is woefully misguided. In reality, the burka is an archaic tribal piece of cloth that is eagerly used by fundamentalist zealots to promote a toxic brand of extremist non-Koranic theology.”
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2014/08/03/campaign-to-ban-the-burka-in-britain/
Full Text.
The increasing fashion for young Muslim women in Britain to wear the burka (in contrast to their mothers, who do not) is one of most sinister developments of our times.
Supporters of this garment like to pretend that it is a welcome symbol of our society’s multicultural diversity and philosophical tolerance. But such warped thinking is woefully misguided. In reality, the burka is an archaic tribal piece of cloth that is eagerly used by fundamentalist zealots to promote a toxic brand of extremist non-Koranic theology.
Everyone in Britain, including Muslims, should oppose the insidious spread of this vile piece of clothing, which imprisons women, threatens social harmony, fuels distrust, has grave health implications and is a potent security risk.
Contrary to the claims of its advocates, it has nothing to do with Islam but is a cultural fad imported from Saudi Arabia and primitive parts of the Islamic world.
That is why this week, with the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford, I am launching a nationwide campaign to impose a ban on face masks in public spaces in Britain.
Such a nationwide prohibition would deal with all types of covering, including balaclavas, but there would be no exemption for the burka/niqab on any spurious, politically correct grounds of religious conscience.
One of the key purposes of this initiative is to persuade at least 100,000 people to sign a formal petition calling for the ban, thereby obliging Parliament to debate the issue.
Despite growing concern from the British public, our pusillanimous politicians have refused to address the burgeoning prevalence of the burka in our midst, as they fear accusations of Islamophobia from the militant fundamentalists and their PC allies.
Well, it is time to put the needs of British society before the manufactured grievances of the hardliners, whose aim is to replace our liberal democracy with a totalitarian theocracy, the burka serving as a weapon in this far-reaching cultural war.
In rejecting the ideology of the zealots, mainstream Muslims should be at the forefront of the campaign for a ban, not least because the burka so badly undermines the credibility and reputation of our faith.
There have, of course, been previous petitions and calls to outlaw face masks in public, but all came from the political Right and gained little traction.
This campaign is different. It is the first one led by Muslims, speaking for the moderate majority whose voice has been unheeded up to now. We invite both Muslims and our other fellow citizens to work together to rid Britain of this alien cultural monstrosity.
A key part of the impetus for this move came from the decision of the European Court of Human Rights this month to uphold the ban instituted by the French Government in 2010 on all face coverings in public. Supported by lawyers from Birmingham, a 24-year-old French woman of Pakistani origin took her well-funded case to the ECHR, claiming that the ban was a violation of her — and note the sequence — religious, cultural and personal rights.
On every level, this questionable appeal relied on distortions and untruths. Thankfully her case was thrown out, but her arguments illustrate the chronic weakness of any suggestion that we must allow the burka to be worn in public.
First, there is no religious requirement on Muslims to don the burka; second, the burka is not a feature of Pakistani culture, where 90 per cent of women do not wear it; third, there is no unqualified human right to wear whatever we want in public. In every developed society, personal freedoms have to take account of wider social mores.
The French ban has proved to be legally sound as well as sensible. I have long believed that the same measure should be introduced here in the UK to prevent community separatism and social apartheid. And, like the ECHR, I see no basis for the pretence that there is any religious sanction for the burka. The wearing of the face mask is a custom originating in ancient Persia and Byzantium, more than 1,000 years before the birth of Islam. It was upheld by male aristocrats because of social snobbery rather than religion, since they did not want their womenfolk — wives, daughters, sisters or mothers — to be seen by the peasantry.
Nor is there any evidence in the Koran to support the wearing of the burka. Indeed, the Holy Book stipulates that men ‘should lower their gaze’ when meeting women to avoid lecherous staring (verse 24, chapter 30). So logically, if women were fully covered up there would be no need for such an instruction.
Some Muslim clergy claim that the burka is religiously necessary. They assert this because the Prophet Muhammad’s wives allegedly hid their faces in public.
These puritanical clerics do not base their theological misrepresentations on the Koran but on the subsidiary and suspect hadith (a collection of books containing the reputed sayings of Muhammad, written 250 years after his death).
In any case, this is a wilful misreading of scripture. In fact, verse 32 of chapter 33 in the Koran explicitly states that ‘the Prophet’s wives are not like other women’. So there is no reason to emulate them.
Just as revealingly, it is forbidden for Muslim women going on pilgrimages to Mecca to cover their faces. So if such a pre-Islamic practice is banned in Islam’s holiest site, why on earth would it be required on the streets of Britain?
The truth is that there is no theological foundation for these separatist face masks, as most non-fundamentalists recognise. Only recently, Al-Azhar, the leading institution of Muslim theology in the Islamic world, declared that the burka has no spiritual authenticity.
Theology apart, there are many other compelling arguments against the burka. It badly undermines social cohesion by inhibiting effective interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims in the public realm. There can be no meaningful exchange with people if you cannot even see their faces.
Moreover, the burka is an affront to the concept of gender parity in the UK.
If I tried to wear a ski-mask on a bus or at a bank, I would quickly be told to remove the item or leave, or be arrested. Why should the same rules not apply to Muslim women?
The demand for equal rights has always been central to the feminist cause, and in this case feminists should be calling for men and women to be treated equally. Either everyone has the right to mask their face or no one has.
There are huge implications for security, after several cases of terrorists and criminals using the burka to evade detection — a particularly worrying development given the explicit, bloody threats of militant extremists. In our troubled world, there can be no absolute right to anonymity in public.
Another concern is the health risks, for full coverings mean a distinct lack of exposure to sunshine. One recent study of 203 burka-clad women in the United Arab Emirates revealed that all but four were deficient in Vitamin D. If that can happen in a land of blazing heat, how much worse will be the problems in often damp, dark Britain? Our society is already seeing rises in rickets and other bone-related diseases for the first time since World War II. Supporters of the burka talk about freedom of choice — yet it is not women who are being given that freedom, but men who are imposing their will. That is not empowerment but imprisonment.
The burka is just another weapon in the jihadist arsenal of misogyny, like forced marriage, female genital mutilation and sexist discrimination. It should have no part in British society, where women are supposed to be treated as equal citizens. By tolerating it, we are allowing a form of gender apartheid to grow in our midst.
All of us, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, have a duty to challenge the religious hardliners who have cynically exploited British traditions of tolerance and individual liberty to pursue their own twisted sectarian agenda imported wholesale from the Arab Middle East.
A start could be made by forcing our politicians to debate the issue by gathering sufficient signatures for our historic anti-burka petition.
We cannot continue to accept the creeping Arabisation of Islam in the UK and consequent destruction of our cherished British freedoms. A stand must be made now.
Dr Taj Hargey is the Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation and the Director of the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford
/
ela kolla / August 4, 2014
amASSiri the altar boy with his usual copy-paste crap
/
Amarasiri / August 4, 2014
Jim Softy, Leela, Sumanasekaea, Ell Kolla at al and avatars,
NO MAHAVAMSA, NO THERAVADA BUDDHISM
Posted on August 3rd, 2014
Nalin de Silva
THIS IS CRAP by Nalin de Silva. Amarasiri is giving Indigestion and constipation to lankaweb, who follow Para-Sinhala Buddhist double standards. No right is given to express alternate opinions.,.
http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2014/08/03/no-mahavamsa-no-theravada-buddhism/
1. Amarasiri Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 3rd, 2014 at 7:25 am
Dear Prof. Nalin de Silva,
RE: NO MAHAWANSA, NO THERAVEDA BUDDHISM
Interesting hypothesis. However, there are lots of errors in your writing. Let me point out a few. Remember, whatever the Church or the ancients said about the Sun and the Earth, the facts support a rotating Earth going around the Sun. However, the church could not make the Sun go around the Earth, and apologized to Galileo, 350 years later.
If you said, NO MAHAWANSA, NO SINHALA BUDDHISM, it would have been somewhat accurate.
1. Theravāda is the oldest surviving branch of Buddhism.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theravada
Origins
“The name Theravāda comes from the ancestral Sthāvirīya, one of the early Buddhist schools, from which the Theravadins claim descent. After unsuccessfully trying to modify the Vinaya, a small group of “elderly members,” i.e. sthaviras, broke away from the majority Mahāsāṃghika during the Second Buddhist council, giving rise to the Sthavira sect.[3] According to its own accounts, the Theravāda school is fundamentally derived from the Vibhajjavāda (or “doctrine of analysis”) grouping[4] which was a division of the Sthāvirīya.”
“Theravadin accounts of its own origins mention that it received the teachings that were agreed upon during the Third Buddhist Council under the patronage of the Indian Emperor Ashoka, around 250 BCE. These teachings were known as the Vibhajjavada.[5] The Vibhajjavādins in turn split into four groups: the Mahīśāsaka, Kāśyapīya, Dharmaguptaka, and the Tāmraparṇīya.”
“The Theravāda is descended from the Tāmraparṇīya sect, which means “the Sri Lankan lineage.” In the 7th century CE, Chinese pilgrims Xuanzang and Yijing refer to the Buddhist schools in Sri Lanka asShàngzuòbù (Ch. 上座部), corresponding to the Sanskrit “Sthavira Nikāya” and the Pali “Thera Nikāya.”[b][c] The school has been using the name Theravāda for itself in a written form since at least the 4th century, when the term appears in the Dīpavaṁsa.[d]”
2. So, the Theraveda Buddhism would have survived in India, whether or not, Lanka the Land of Native Veddah or Sinhala-Buddhism existed or not. The Tipitaka would have been written somewhere in India, instead of at Aluvihare Vihara or temple in Lanka.
3. The Title “Mahawansa” or “Mahawanso” which means literally the “Genealogy of the Great” properly belongs only to the first section of the work, extending from 543 B.C.E to 301 C.E ( Before Common Era, or B.C. Before Christ, A.D. Anno Domini are commonly referred to , as a reference point. There is consensus[9] among modern scholars that the historical year of the birth of Jesus was around 6–4 Before Christ.).
The Primary goal of Mahawansa was to record the genealogy of the Vijaya Invaders Dynasty. The others were called “Sulu-wanse” “lower race”
4. You Say “My story of Sinhala history does not agree completely with the story in Mahavamsa as I believe that Hela people were Buddhists even before the arrival of Arhant Mahinda Thera.”
This is incorrect, and your imagination only. The historical data does not support this assumption, including the claimed three visits of Buddha to Lanka and to Samanala Kanda or “ Adams Peak”.
I was checking with Ceylon, an account of the Island by Sir James Emerson Tennent, The Fifth edition, Printed March 2, 1860, before the contamination of Mahawansa with Sinhala Buddhist nationalism and Chauvinism in the 20th Century. The information is from Tennett.
5. Chapter II , The aboriginal inhabitants of Ceylon. Page 327.
“ To the question as to what particular race the inhabitants of Ceylon at that time belonged , ands whence or at what period the island was originally peopled , the Buddhist Chronicles furnish no reply.”
6. Page 329. “ Whatever momentary success may have attended the preaching of Buddha, no traces of his pious labors long survived him in Ceylon. The mass of its inhabitants were still aliens to his religion, when, on the day of his decease, B.C. 534, Wijayo, the discarded son of one of the petty sovereigns in the valley of Ganges, effected a landing with a handful of followers in the vicinity of the modern Puttalam”
7.
“There had been Arabs who were Muslims as well non Muslims who had come before the 13th Century but who were non aggressive in Sri Lanka and were involved in trade”
This is partially correct. Before Islam, there were Arabs, Persians, Greeks, Phoenicians, Indians and Romans who had known the Island and used as a trading post and transshipment point. It was the Arabs and Persian who converted to Islam and spread o Tamil Nadu and Kerala and later arrivals from there.
Reference: Tennent Chapters I, II, II, and V. Pages 549 to 643.
/
Amarasiri / August 5, 2014
Izeth Hussain –
The Wahhabi and their Clones such are Deobandis follow the Devil, Satan or Shaitan.
Pro-ISIS stir a disturbing trend in Valley: Separatists
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/39465595.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pro-isis-stir-a-disturbing-trend-in-valley-separatists/articleshow/39465595.cms
SRINAGAR/MUMBAI: The unexpected appearance of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS flags during recent anti-Israel protests in Srinagar has left government authorities, Sunni-Barelvi scholars and even Kashmiri separatists searching for answers.
Masked Kashmiri youngsters were seen carrying ISIS flags on at least two occasions: first outside the Jamia Masjid on July 11 and then on July 29, the day of Eid. The J&K police have so far been unable to round up the maske ..
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/39465595.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
/
Amarasiri / August 8, 2014
Dear Izeth Hussain,
RE: Sri Lanka Muslims At The Cross Roads – X
Introduction: Exposing Wahhabism Part 1
The Wahhabi Islamist Project
Published on Jul 8, 2013
Saudi Arabia – Enemy to Humanity. Followers of Satan, Devil.
Nick Griffin explains the Sunni Wahhabi terrorism conveyer belt causing the destruction of the secular, tolerant state of Syria, and the Muslim desire to conquer the west.
Visit our website at: http://www.bnp.org.uk
/
ramona therese fernando / August 5, 2014
Monk Mahanama was a good monk……..try the more recent one : ANAGARIK DHARMAPALA with the Nazi rhetoric (his 150th b’day is to be celebrated one of these days in Sri Lanka).
Not only did he hate the Islamic religion, he also hated the race of Islamic Lankans saying that they were South-Indian Muhammadians (and in the light of him saying that Sinhala-Buddhist were a pure Aryan race, that automatically made the Lankan Muslims Dravidian, and therefore in his eyes, of lower race). Buddha and Monk Mahanama specifically lived off the precept that all men were equal and of no hatred towards any race. And this is a person to be commemorated in Sri Lanka with Aluthgama and Beurewella going on!
I, having lived out most of my life, and as a recent Buddhist convert, could never fathom what was wrong with Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans. Till Now! Till I read all about ANAGARIKA DHARMAPALA!!!
Fair (obviously European–mixed Sinhalese) will say that they are highland Sinhalese. Darker Karava ones will insist that their father’s father’s father was Aryan, or Kashtryan. Sinhalese from all sides will ask one who their ancestors were, and put in a rejoinder about having goood Sinhalese ancestors themselves. Do I hear certain Sinhalese speaking with German accents (avu etc.) ? All Sinhalese in general will say that DNA was passed on by their Father’s father. Therefore, it was Vijaya who brought down the gene, and Sri Lanka was full of women- Vijaya and his band killed off all the men. And then there was a Lion also. Thamils, from the side-lines will miserably shout racial taunts and jibes angrily back.
Becoming a Buddhist recently for me has been one of a bit of humiliation amongst the Lankan community. For becoming a Buddhist (and also a Sri Lankan) is only supposed to be for pure Sinhalese-Aryans (never mind that the fellows look like fellow Thamils, or darker). Indeed, the hostility from Karava Catholics who also come to temples (of high educational merits), has been the most shaming, for while they will yet honor the Buddha, they will chagrin me – “we are not to be as presumptive as you, to dare enter the realms of the pure-Aryan–Sinhala-Buddhist,” it is implied.
Chandrika Bandaranayake recently and bravely spoke about this dreadful vortex Sri Lanka has been caught up with so long. It is hoped that present Gosl is attempting to break the racial-spell Sinhalese are hallucinating on, and are not getting any encouragement from Russian and Chinese in their bid to outdo the West, to further feed us into this Black-Hole.
/
Rajash / August 2, 2014
“Sri Lanka Muslims At The Cross Roads – X”
phew fin
Phew finally the series of articles has reahced the cross road “X”. Time to stop. You are not adding any new material or new thinking….
/
Backlash / August 3, 2014
“The main purpose of this article is to argue that there is a case for an enquiry into the possibility that the anti-Muslim campaign is the result of a foreign conspiracy..” I do not wish to re-ignite an issue that seems to have quietened down – to the relief of millions of Muslims in the country. However, men like Hussain must stop insulting the intelligence of the readership. Even many Muslims, including its
leadership, publicly admitted it was sections of the Muslim community that gave room to the rise of anti-Muslim feelings in the majority. More than one public apology was made, which seems to have escaped Mr. Hussain’s attention. He keeps blaming everyone else for Muslim shortcomings. It was only last week a medical man openly questioned Hussain (The Island) on his falsehood the religion is tolerant and encourages others faiths.
There were many other issues in this article of Mr. Hussain that are contentious and not in line with reality. I will let that pass but not
before asking Mr. Hussain to be more truthful in his future writings.
Backlash
/
Izeth Hussain / August 4, 2014
Backlash – I am writing a series of articles on the SL Muslims. In future articles I hope to cover aspects of Muslim behavior that have led to anti-Muslim sentiments.Those aspects could understandably lead to irritation. They cannot justify the anti-Muslim hate campaign and action that has been going on.
As for that letter in the Island by that eminent doctor,I sent in my reply almost two weeks ago. But to my vast surprise it has not been published despite two reminders to the editor.I am wondering what to do about it.
/
Backlash / August 6, 2014
Mr. Hussain – Much has been written about the full-face covered black Burqua, the justification of the noise at dawn disturbing others, Halal and so on. They (burqah) was quite unnecessary and never part of the Muslim dress here – until recently. In every one of these the vast majority of non-Muslims have been enraged. Now you write in trying to bring in the influence and the sympathy of the external factor (mostly Arab??) – that can add further fuel to the fire. And you want to continue to write in an inflamed atmosphere? They can, I am afraid, lead much more than “to irritation” There is an old wise saying “there is a time and place for everything” You are a senior, wise and learned man. You know when to write, what to write and where to write. I suggest you allow matters to calm down – as they seem to be right now.
Backlash
/
Rajash / August 7, 2014
Muslims of Sri Lanka were and continue to be at cross road. They try to be Sinhaleas and they are not. They tried NOT to be Tamils but they are.
Apparently Muslim women in Aluthgama were asking where is Prbakaran during the recent riots. But Muslims never shared the struggle with the rest of the Tamils.
/
Amarasiri / August 8, 2014
Izeth Hussain
The Wahhabi Islamist Project
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MCZ4QAV7A4
The best you can do to the Sri Lankan Muslims and world Muslims is to rescue them from the Wahhabis and Their clones, ans expose them, ideologically.
That is the core problem.
The Wahhabi follow the Devi, Satan.
/
Spring Koha / August 2, 2014
Case dismissed. Too much conjecture.
Don’t put it beyond our own Sri Lankan trouble makers to get going under their own steam.
If the worst comes to the worst, our puppet masters will order all foreigners out, close the doors, and finish of the job without witnesses.
It worked last time!
/
Kabi / August 2, 2014
After the cross roads, the Muslims will find only one Road that is to continue with this Government!
/
Thiru / August 2, 2014
[Edited out]
/
Bensen Burner / August 2, 2014
In discussing the external dimension,either by design or otherwise izeth appears to have left out the implications of the latest developments in the middle east and the role of the Rajapaksas therein, for example the recent committal of support to Israel as opposed to the Hamas and the continuing massacre of the Muslims by Israel. Events there appear to be overtaking what izeth is contemplating.Bensen
/
sundaram / August 2, 2014
so you have concluded that aluthgama attack emerged as a result of some foreign conspiracy.if it is so what should be the response of SL muslims to meet this challenge? pl. do your analysis carefully. you also have expressed some doubts about your foreign conspiracy theory.visit to norway by some unscrupulous monks is no proof. you are escaping from the other local factors and communal elements which instigated violence in order to satisfy their own mad anti-muslim objectives or you do not want to face it. so meet the challenge of foreign conspiracy to would like the victims to seek international intervention. why dont’ you make it more explicit. there is some wavering in your analysis. anyway your views should be taken seriously because they were coming from a well experienced diplomat. i still think that a super muslim think tank has to study the issue.
-sundaram
/
Sengodan. M / August 3, 2014
Izeth Hussain,
Well there could be some truth in this conspiracy theory. But the main question is are Gota and his loving brother MaRa so naive that they could not suspect this conspiracy theory so much so they would fondly take the BBS to their bosoms and continue to cuddle it? Doesn’t that sound too silly even for those too idiots?
Sengodan. M
/
MNZ / August 3, 2014
Izzeth Hussein has laboured over 10 commentaries on this issue and is now bordering on absolute boredom.
After all that hooing and haaing IH can only talk about protection from the international Muslim community, which has in fact been there from the very beginning, being vigorously pursued by Rauf Hakeem and other Muslim leaders.
While I am also inclined to believe that there is a broader programme to destabilise Islamic countries and to reduce the Muslim population world-wide that is orchestrated by a “foreign hand” (perhaps Israel’s Mossad), my question is if the government is behind all this anti-Muslim nonsense as alleged by IH, why are they in self-destruct mode? IH does not venture to provide an explanation.
While local and international politics are in the mix, it has become easy for BBS and its running dogs to muster support because of the misconceptions many people have about the Muslim community in Sri Lanka.
The false perception is that Muslims in SL have taken undue advantage, resulting in accrual of disproportionate benefits, position and wealth relative to their size especially in trade, commerce and industry. This is a myth which needs to be busted, as more than 50% of Muslims all over the country live below the poverty line!
In the urban centres, especially Colombo the Muslims are tri-lingual which gives them an edge in various professions, where they appear to hold disproportionate advantage. This is also a myth.
Morality, ethics and Rule of Law apart, BBS conveys the theory that it is their duty to now balance the equation.
In order to “balance the equation” throw in the Sinhala-Buddhist politics, and voila` we have a recipe for social instability, human rights abuses, and at worse extremism.
While the “foreign hand” theory should not be dismissed, the real agenda of the regime is to create a perceived threat and cause mental anxiety among the local Muslims. This regime wants the Muslim community to be always on the back foot.
MR, the master strategist, will never ever allow the situation to get out of hand as there is too much at stake. He will, as he has done in the past, allow matters to escalate and at the critical moment come forth as the Saviour and Great Protector of the Muslims who have been traditionally branded as UNP/SLMC supporters. This is all about vote-getting.
Muslims should therefore rest assured that by virtue of their strategic importance they will remain sacred cows in Sri Lanka, whatever government comes to power.
Without hurling abuse and name-calling at their perceived enemies, Muslims need to continuously attempt to engage with the powers-that-be to safeguard their personal security.
Muslims should not exacerbate problems by hurling racist abuse or by tit-for-tat reactions. Nor should they initiate “sanctions” against SL by Islamic countries. It will not help the cause
Firstly, the moderate Muslims should neutralise the radical elements in their own midst, and thereafter make a genuine effort to find solutions to the problems facing them.
While there may be international dimensions they need to resolve the issues locally. For that the Muslims(even with the help of “honest brokers”)should continue to reach out to their adversaries for peaceful and honest dialogue to enter into a Peace Accord.
Include the BBS, Defence Secretary, JHU, and other political leaders. Take on board moderates like Sobitha Thera and parties of standing for this dialogue to find a permanent solution.
Without such a peace accord, BBS and their running dogs will continue to be thorn on the side of the Muslims.
Izzeth Hussein, please wake up and smell the coffee!
/
Know All / August 3, 2014
I cannot agree with IH that “the Sri Lankan Muslims have no alternative to using that external dimension to safeguard their lives and legitimate interests.” Using that “external dimension” as IH calls it is to invite foreign interference in the internal affairs of the country – nothing less. Let’s make no bones about it. And looking to that “external dimension” demonstrates a certain disregard to the allegiance you owe to your own country. Can you blame those who suggest that the Muslims only see issues through their own narrow focus, never mind the interests of others? Whilst on this, I find the conduct of Minister Rauff Hakeem with his visits to the US Embassy and to Saudi Arabia to drum up support for his cause, while continuing to be a minister of the Rajapakse cabinet, quite untenable. Sadly, such is the unprincipled nature of current SL politics that MR will not sack Hakeem nor will the latter quit of his own.
It seems to me also somewhat curious that IH sees it is as acceptable for the SL Muslims to seek foreign assistance to safeguard their interests but seemingly does not approve of a foreign country, Norway, being friendly towards the BBS.
The good monks who have suggested a foreign hand behind the activities of the BBS are probably in a state of denial that some of their number could actually resort to the sort of conduct that the BBS is engaged in. As one of the monks is quoted as saying, “The mindset which says that no concessions at all should be given to the minorities has always existed in this country”. And it is idle to pretend that latent suspicion of non Buddhists does not continue to this day. And from time to time, interested parties will see fit to exploit these feelings. What we have also seen over the years is that governments of all persuasions have given extremists of the Buddhist clergy plenty of latitude to engage in disruptive and destructive conduct, and have been loath to prosecute them when they should have been.
Sri Lankans are notoriously fond of conspiracy theories, and it seems IH is not averse to them either. His call for an “an enquiry into the possibility that the anti-Muslim campaign is the result of a foreign conspiracy” simply has no merit. What good has any enquiry ever done? A conspiracy, by definition, is something hatched in secrecy and away from the open. So, how on earth is one going to prove it if there has in fact been a foreign conspiracy?
/
Nimal / August 3, 2014
Dr Taj Hargey, the Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation had this to say about the burqa. It applies equally to Sri Lanka.
The burka is just another weapon in the jihadist arsenal of misogyny, like forced marriage, female genital mutilation and sexist discrimination. It should have no part in British society, where women are supposed to be treated as equal citizens. By tolerating it, we are allowing a form of gender apartheid to grow in our midst.
All of us, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, have a duty to challenge the religious hardliners who have cynically exploited British traditions of tolerance and individual liberty to pursue their own twisted sectarian agenda imported wholesale from the Arab Middle East.
/
Izeth Hussain / August 4, 2014
I am in broad agreement with that excellent article.I hope to cover the subject of the burqa in Sri Lanka in a future article.
/
paul / August 4, 2014
Beauty of Islam…
Listening to this sermon is like pouring bee-honey into one’s ears…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAZD0ckLhD8
/