Sunday, 23 April 2023

Is Rajaraja Chola overhyped ?

Are Tamils overhyping Rajaraja Chola as one of the greatest emperors in world history? Before we try to answer this we should always remember that life, personalities and history do not operate in binaries. Beauty and brutality, generosity and selfishness, devotion and treachery, can and do exist in one person. That is what makes history and historical personalities so fascinating. It is true that Rajaraja's army unleashed a fierce attack on Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka. They reduced it to rubble in their attempts to recover the Pandyan crown jewels. It is true that he fought ruthless battles with thousands of casualties in Deccan. This was how history played itself out not just in Chola lands, but all over the world. Attributing a false sense of “fair play" to medieval politics diminishes them and our understanding of their world. Thinking about them as good guys and bad guys blinds us to history's messy reality. Imposing our modern ideas and attitudes on the rulers of over a thousand years ago makes no sense, and only distorts our understanding and perception of history.

Rajaraja didn't earn the title "Raja Raja" which means "King of Kings" because of his heroic actions on the battlefield. It was his personality that distinguished him from the rest of the emperors of his time. He turned out to be a remarkable architect, an efficient economist, a lover of art and literature, an eminent philosopher, and above all a supreme thinker. His sweeping administrative reform indicates an extraordinary level of genius. Power and the desire for the throne corrupt everyone. We see in Rajaraja a man who refused to accept the Chola throne when it was offered to him in 969 AD by the people upon the death of his elder brother who was the crown prince. 

Instead, he chose to step aside for his paternal uncle and let his uncle rule for 15 years until he died in 985 CE. He was never meant to be an emperor or groomed to be one as he was the youngest son. That gave him the freedom to develop many passions. He was a grandmaster in versatile fields with a burning passion for many things. To start off, he was a medieval feminist. He was deeply influenced by his elder sister and sought her advice on state matters. Women held privileged positions in his court and administration. Although he was a staunch Saivate, he still built temples for other Hindu sects and patronized them. He encouraged Buddhism and facilitated the construction of a Buddhist shrine at Nagapattinam and allocated the revenue of the entire village of Anairnangalam to administer the monastery. He also built Jain monasteries. Putting aside his personal beliefs, he acted like a modern secular ruler. 

He was one of those few rulers who really cared about people's happiness. He was an emperor for all his people in his empire, not just those in the Chola territories. He commissioned large-scale irrigation works that nourish agriculture to this day not just in Tamil Nadu but in the entire South India. It is said that 50% of rice production in Tamil Nadu is still done using irrigation schemes he founded 1000 years ago. He invested a lot in education and conducted large-scale land surveys throughout his empire to abolish unfair taxation and introduce progressive taxation. 

He reorganized his vast empire into administrative units called "Valanadus", where each village retained almost absolute autonomy, remnants of which survive only in a tragically diminished form in Tamil Nadu. He relegated his power and established self-governing local bodies in a period where every emperor wanted power for himself. He believed in data-driven decision-making and maintained copious records. Even at village and town councils, he introduced the audit bureau to organize general affairs and collect granular data. He was extremely detail-oriented - one sees this in his inscriptions, how he conducted his land survey and organization, how he administered his kingdom, and how he built and ran his magnum opus, the Brihadeeshwara temple. Everything was recorded meticulously.

He exhibited remarkable foresight, recognizing that global trade holds the key to the future. He understood that whoever controlled global trade would dominate the world. This philosophy is still valid today. Under his leadership, there was a phenomenal increase in inland and overseas trade networks. He even sent emissaries to China and secured exclusive trade deals with the Chinese. He understood the importance of creating a blue-water navy to dominate global trade. Having a keen eye for talent he brought in shipbuilders from around the world and commission them along with local shipbuilders to build ships to modernise the Chola navy. He invaded the Maldives as a pilot to test his newly formed navy's blue water capabilities. He laid the groundwork for Chola's dominance across the Indo-Pacific Ocean.

While all this was going on, he also had some time to rediscover all forgotten Tamil literature. He established institutions to revive Tamil music and dance traditions. He built the pyramid-shaped Brihadeeshwara temple which was the tallest building in the world with the utmost passion and brilliant architectural style. Due to its flawless construction, this temple survived 6 major earthquakes in the last 1000 years without damage. Not forgetting Chola Bronze casting an art so assiduously practised by Rajaraja himself in his own time. The majority of today's world-famous Chola bronzes were created during his reign.

Rajaraja had a clear vision and tireless energy in implementing his ideas and aspirations. He was also a political and organisational genius. His intellectual supremacy is evident in the way he implements his innovations and accomplishes any herculean task with remarkable foresight, along with a proper insight into resolving intricate problems both in the war field and in day-to-day administration. 

Let me tell you how I judge a person. There is a beautiful couplet written 2000 years ago by Tamil philospher-poet Valluvar which say "குணம்நாடிக் குற்றமும் நாடி அவற்றுள் மிகைநாடி மிக்க கொளல்". It means "weigh a man's merits and defects and see whichever weighs more." 

When Rajaraja Chola ascended the throne, the Tamil civilization entered centuries of grandeur. He was the architect who laid the foundation for a small Chola kingdom to become a multi-ethnic powerhouse in Asia. He left behind a stupendous legacy in art, architecture, religion and literature, which has not lost its sheen even after a thousand years. So he is undoubtedly a mastermind of his age whose activities ushered Asia into unprecedented cultural prosperity in the following centuries. That undoubtedly makes him the greatest emperor of his time in the world. He is indeed one of the greatest emperors in world history. So Rajaraja Chola was indeed rightfully called the "KING OF KINGS".

Understanding Sri Lankan Ethnic Crisis - Part V

In my whole life, I encountered only one or two Sinhalese who treated me poorly because I was Tamil. I have lived half of my life with the Sinhalese. Many of my closest friends are Sinhalese. An average Sinhala person is not racist. Sri Lanka's problem is state-sponsored institutional racism and some power-hungry politicians and Buddhist clergy who actively promote it. Generally speaking, an average Sinhala person respects fellow Tamils' individual rights and treats them as brothers. But 99.99% of the Sinhala people including those even in my closest friend circle have a problem with giving Tamils political rights. Almost all Sinhalese believe it is not fair that Tamils ask for power devolution since Tamils are here as permanent guests at their homes. Imagine what it would be like if unwelcome guests barged into your house and occupied a room? You forgot all that and still treated them like your family, but eventually, they decided the room was theirs since they stayed there for so long?

That is exactly how the average Sinhalese feels about any attempt to devolve power. They feel betrayed. They feel the Tamils take their generosity for granted. As a Tamil, I wouldn't blame them for saying so. A normal Sinhalese person has the same day-to-day problems as a normal Tamil person. They had to take care of their family, have relationship worries, financial concerns and etc. It is impossible for them to sit at home and read or contemplate the root causes of ethnic crises. They just trust what sources they think are credible. The narrative that Tamils are invaders who settled in Sri Lanka is what their government says to them, it is what their school history books imply, this is what their religious leaders say, this is what their so-called intellectuals say, this is what their media say. Do you really think they have another choice than to believe it?

Every government since Bandaranaike has actively propagated this narrative with full endorsement from the Buddhist clergy. Several pseudo-historians did nothing except read the "Mahavamsa" and proved this narrative with historical examples convenient to them. Most of the so-called Sinhala intellectuals and professors who write extensively about history have no academic background in history. Take Dr. Nalin De Silva, for instance. I will quote from an Introduction Dailymirror gave to his article, "Dr. Nalin De Silva has done extensive research and studies into history". I researched him. He is a professor of mathematics. But he is someone who continuously writes articles about ethnic tension. Did any Sinhalese media bother to bring Sinhalese who is internationally reputed in historical studies to discuss the issue?  There are several people like Gananath Obeysekera who is a Distinguished Professor of Anthropology at Princeton University, historian Emeritus Professor Chandra de Silva, etc. The media will not do it because government media had to just parrot what government wants and private media will not publish anything against popular sentiments since that would affect their profits. 

The latest genetic studies conducted under Emeritus Prof. Eric H. Karunanayake in 2017, based on the ‘Eve Gene’ or mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) conclusively debunked the traditional narrative about how ethnic groups arrived on this island. According to traditional thinking, an admixture of North Indians with Sri Lanka's original inhabitants established the Sinhalese ethnic group around 2,600 years ago. The Veddahs are thought to be remnants of the original inhabitants. Sri Lankan Tamils are descendants of successive invasions by South Indians centuries later. 

However, this study suggests that both Sinhalese and Tamils share very close maternal ancestors. Ethnicity is created by linguistic, religious and cultural differences, rather than genetic differences. The differences between the major ethnic groups are minimal except for the Veddahs who stand out as a separate cluster. There is considerable genetic admixture in contemporary ethnic groups in Sri Lanka — the Sinhalese are closely related to the Sri Lankan Tamils. The indisputable genetic findings make the call, 'We are all Sri Lankans’ louder and clearer. 

According to Prof. Gananath Obeysekera, "As a Sinhalese anthropologist myself, I can say with absolute certainty that Sinhalese identity nowadays is predicated on the assumption that since they speak the Indo-European language, they are of North Indian origin whereas the Dravidian tongue Tamils are from the South. The historical reality however is totally different. Except perhaps for the oldest stratum of settlers prior to 200 B.C., almost all subsequent settlers in Sri Lanka came from South India, mostly from Tamil Nadu, Orissa and Kerala and became Sinhalised. In fact, some of the most prominent anti­-Tamil castes among the Sinhalese were post-15th ­century migrants from South India." President Ranil even said the same a few weeks ago in a Harvard University discussion.

To my Tamil friends, I would suggest that blaming the entire Sinhalese community as racists will not help. Several of you have close Sinhalese friends. You can discuss those issues with them. I was at least able to change the mindset of at least some of my dear Sinhala friends because I talked to them about it constantly since 2019. To my Sinhala friends, I would suggest you talk to your close Tamil friends about ethnic tension. Ask them why Tamils want power sharing, and what is the defect in current governance in the north and east? These conversations can't happen between strangers. There should be trust between each other for an open conversation to happen. That is why I recommend talking to your friends about the matter. I would tell Tamils and Sinhalese this quote by French philosopher Voltaire: "When you believe in absurdities, you commit atrocities." Because of vote politics, changing a system from the top down is impossible in a democracy. We can only change the system from the bottom up. If we remain silent because our roof didn't burn today, one day it will spread and burn our roof too. We may not live long enough to see it burn but it is our children or our grandchildren or their generation after that who will suffer. I believe in Gandhi's words, "I wish to change their minds, not kill them for the weaknesses we all possess"

Tuesday, 18 April 2023

Understanding Sri Lankan Ethnic Crisis - Part IV

My aim is never to blame anyone for Sri Lanka's ethnic crisis. Instead, I want to get to the bottom of why everyone acts the way they do. As I always emphasize, there are multiple angles to any issue. I started writing about ethnic issues because I was fed up with superficial narratives. The more I think about it, the more angles become apparent. 

Today let's talk about some sections of the Buddhist clergy. When I refer to the Buddhist clergy, I am only referring to sections that are involved in politics, not to the entire Buddhist clergy in Sri Lanka. There are very virtuous Buddhist monks who follow Buddha's teachings to the fullest. My closest friends know that I'm also a practising Buddhist. As far as I can think there are three reasons why some Buddhist clergy behave the way they do in Sri Lanka. I must confess that the writings of Professor Chandra R. de Silva and Dr Brian Senewiratne shaped my understanding of this matter a lot. 

Let's begin with the first reason. When Christian missionaries arrived in Sri Lanka, they were welcomed by the Buddhist clergy with the spirit of Buddhist tolerance, believing that all religions are equally worthy. It was the Buddhist clergy who assisted in translating the Bible into Sinhala. The problem began when insensitive missionaries with colonial attitudes denounced Buddhism as paganism. Colonial governments offered selective educational and job opportunities to converts, almost forcing Lankans to abandon their native religion. In response to the promotion of Christianity at the expense of Buddhism and the active suppression of Buddhism, the Buddhist clergy developed an understandable hostile reaction to other religions.

The second reason was the British occupation of the whole island. Prior to colonialism, Buddhist clergy served as kingmakers and counsellors to royalty in Sri Lanka. Buddhist clergy continued to play a significant role in the Kingdom of Kandy's affairs during the Portuguese and Dutch occupations. As Buddhist kings were replaced by British and Christian converts were favoured in appointments, Buddhist clergy lost their role as kingmakers and counsellors. While Sri Lankan politicians struggled to get political freedom from British colonial rule, the clergy struggled to regain their lost influence in governance. 

In 1948, the British handed power over to the Sri Lankan elite in the United National Party. The new leaders were mostly Buddhists (and Sinhalese) but refused to interfere with inflammatory language and religious issues. There was a veteran Sinhalese politician in the UNP, Bandaranaike a Christian who became a Buddhist for political reasons. Having failed in his first attempt to wrest power from the UNP in 1952, he introduced ethnoreligious chauvinism into Sri Lankan politics to win popular support.

The Buddhist clergy recognized that he would restore their 'king-making abilities'. So in the election, thousands of Buddhist monks canvassed for Bandaranaike, who won an overwhelming majority. Once again the clergy regained their position as kingmakers. These power-hungry sections of the clergy will not allow a multiethnic and multicultural democracy to thrive in Sri Lanka since it would threaten their position as kingmakers. That is why they continue to push for measures that offer selective advantages to the Sinhalese and discriminate against minorities. This would take them towards their long-cherished goal of making Sri Lanka a Sinhalese­-Buddhist nation, making their position unassailable in governance. 

The third reason Buddhist clergy behave the way they do is the current "piriven" educational institutions used to train Buddhist monks. The syllabus used in the piriven education emphasizes Sri Lankan history as essentially that of the Sinhala Buddhists. For example, Professor Chandra R. de Silva says in the 193-page history text taught to novice monks only six pages deal with the Tamil kingdom of Jaffna. Of these six pages, two pages are devoted to its conquest by the ruler of Kotte, two more pages relate to its conquest by the Portuguese and the other two pages are mostly devoted to the lack of evidence of a Kingdom of Jaffna before the 14th century. Furthermore, the contribution made by the Muslim community in Sri Lanka is totally missing from the text. 

Buddhist monks were taught about other faiths in pre-colonial institutions like the Vijayabahu Pirivena in the fifteenth century, but they are not taught today. It is unfortunate because education at all levels should aim to increase tolerance by addressing stereotypes, socio-cultural biases, and historical prejudices. A reform of pirivena education would provide monks with more relevant knowledge. In this way, they could recognize ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity as part of the national heritage.

It is difficult to realistically hope for a reversal of Sinhala chauvinism unless we tackle Buddhist clergy involvement in politics. Without that, building a single undivided Sri Lanka is impossible. Sri Lanka belongs to and is the homeland of all its people. The question is whether or not the majority community in Sri Lanka accepts that. There is no indication that it does. Until it does, ethnic groups cannot co-exist in equality and dignity.

To put it in Dr. Brian Senewiratne's words "Until a Sinhalese leader is found who can stand up to these sections of Buddhist clergy and Sinhala extremists, the chaos will continue. Sri Lanka's problem is not Tamil terrorism but Sinhala extremism."

Buddhism in Sri Lanka today is Sinhala-Buddhism, which combines Theravada Buddhism (Tripitaka) with Mahavamsa. I would urge my Buddhist friends to listen carefully to monks who make political statements before buying their narratives. Are these Buddhist monks practising Ahimsa (non-violence), Karuna (compassion), Metta (affection), and Maithriya (loving-kindness) towards fellow humans (irrespective of race/religion) or are they promoting ethnoreligious chauvinism and hatred in the name of Buddhism?

It is my hope that Buddha's words will prevail. May his wisdom remove the darkness of ignorance, bigotry and hatred we feel towards each other. May it usher in an era of peace and enlightenment for Sri Lanka 🙏

Understanding Sri Lankan Ethnic Crisis - Part III

Here's the answer to how Sri Lanka's dangerous historicism took shape. As I said current construct of the racial identity of Sinhalese and Tamils started in the late 19th century. If you look at history, Sri Lanka has always accepted multiculturalism with open arms. Kings and people of Sri Lanka never discriminated against race or religion. For example, a palm-leaf manuscript "Mukkara Hatana" written in Sinhalese mentions Parakramabahu VI adopting Sapumal Kumaraya (Tamil: Cepaka Perumāḷ ) as his son after the death of Sapumal's father a Tamil Karaiyar chief "Manikka Thalaivan" who was killed in a battle. Sapumal conquered the Jaffna Kingdom for his adopted father and ruled the Kotte kingdom as Bhuvanaikabahu VI after his death despite being a Tamil himself.

Once the British took over they employed their divide-and-conquer strategy to rule Sri Lanka. There were no racial or religious riots in the country until the British came in. The first recorded such riots in Sri Lanka were the 1883 Kotahena riots, between Buddhist and Roman Catholics. Then the 1915 riots between Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Moors. In order to create a further divide between communities, they disproportionately employed Sri Lankan Tamils for government positions. In addition, Sinhalese lands in the central highlands were ceased and Tamils from India were colonised for plantation. So the majority of Sinhalese felt their survival had been threatened and banded together to ensure their rights. At that time Tamil leaders made a big historical blunder. 

Sinhalese leaders like Bandaranayake spoke with Tamil leaders to have a federal constitution so that Sinhalese would have a fair share according to the population. But Tamil leaders who enjoyed disproportionate power in the British government didn't want to give up their power. So they said no to federalism and asked for unfair 50-50 representation in the government. All this led to the anti-Tamil sentiment among Sinhalese immediately before independence. This is where the problem of interpreting Sri Lankan history started.

Historicism means explaining the current situation by studying the past. I'm sure many of you would think about what's wrong with this approach since it sounds logical. No, there is an inherent flaw in this approach. Researchers call this confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favour, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. So what happened in Sri Lanka was they put the anti-Tamil sentiment of that time in the past and interpreted it. As a result of cherry-picking and choosing events from history, they established a narrative. Tamils have always wanted to rule this country, and they always threaten Sinhalese's existence.

Historicism is like when you wear green sunglasses everything will start to appear green to you. It is for this reason that researchers nowadays prefer historicity. Historicism studies the past from the present. Historicity is a study of "past to present". It makes a big difference when you do this. You will find there is no pattern or narrative in history. There is no direct cause-and-effect relationship. Every event is the result of multiple socio-economic-political factors.

Through my readings, I can say with absolute confidence that there is no balanced and well-researched history of Sri Lanka even to this day. We still talk about historicism, not historicity. Only today's problems and prejudices have been inserted into history. Our historians only look at Sri Lanka's history in isolation from other parts of the region. Ancient South Indian sources have not been correlated and integrated. Foreign records provide a valuable source to reconstruct a balanced view of the history of the country. It is very critical to study the history and developments in the region, the geographical location of the country, its position on trade routes, etc.

Archaeological explorations and epigraphy are much more important than past records referring to events many centuries earlier. But in Sri Lanka, archaeology and epigraphy have not been given primacy as sources but interpreted in the light of the Mahavamsa, a chronicle written with a very narrow vision many centuries later.

There has never been a writer more influential in Sri Lankan history than Professor Paranavitana. In his capacity as Archaeological Commissioner and Professor of Archaeology at the University of Ceylon, he had been writing and publishing for more than 50 years. He considered the Mahavamsa to be almost like a bible for Christians, a book containing irrefutable truth. Instead of giving primacy to archaeology and epigraphy and supplementing his findings with material from the Mahavamsa, he attempted to interpret archaeology and epigraphy through the lens of the Mahavamsa.

Archaeology and old Brahmi inscriptions presented him with many problems that he could not explain from what he read in the Mahavamsa. Explorations in different parts of the country have revealed a number of megalithic cultures associated with Dravidian South India. In the absence of any clue in the Mahavamsa, he refused to give those findings their due value, since he had to accept that ancient South India and Lanka shared the same cultural complex.

Even though some Sinhala language and archaeology scholars like Prof Fernando have pointed out the closeness between south Indian Brahmi and early Lankan Brahmi, Paranavitana refused to accept the obvious to the end of his life. He himself admitted that he had rejected some portions of a Tamil contributor to the volume on the ancient period of Lankan history. This is because those portions didn’t fit into what he considered Lankan history.

So I am amused when some Sinhala chauvinists say that liberals and progressive voices advocating for a multiethnic and multicultural Sri Lanka are wrong because they don’t know Sri Lanka's history. It is Sinhala chauvinists who have been misled by a biased and distorted account of this island's history. Unless we come out of our past delusions, Sri Lanka cannot and will not move forward. 

After 30 years of war and now being a bankrupt country, we normally think our citizens and government have learned something. Nope!! We learned nothing. It was just a week ago that yet another monk accompanied by the ministerial security division attempted to encroach on land in the eastern province to construct a Buddhist temple. Local people who tried to intervene were threatened with pistols.  Tamil and Muslim MPs raised this issue in the parliament too. Due to persistent Buddhist clergy interference in political affairs, Sri Lanka's ethnic question continues to remain unresolved.

As long as Sinhalese nationalist groups perceive this militarization and Buddhistization of the North and East as a "reclamation and recreation of the glorious Sinhalese Buddhist past", Sri Lanka has no hope for the future. Prabhakaran liked the dominance of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalists in the Sri Lankan government for two reasons. First, it will allow him to tell the world that the Sri Lankan state will never allow Tamils to live peacefully. Secondly, he could unite Tamils despite their caste and religious differences by demonstrating that their existence is threatened. This will prevent Tamils from embracing the Sri Lankan identity. To achieve a Tamil state in Sri Lanka, he believes these two are essential. Today there is no Prabhakaran, but we still have these Sinhala-Buddhist nationalists who would never allow a united Sri Lanka. 

Understanding Sri Lankan Ethnic Crisis - Part II

A few Sinhala friends had further queries on my last post regarding Cholas and Tamil history in Sri Lanka. Here is the answer. To talk about history first, we need clarity on two concepts. One is historicism and the other is historicity. Historicism means compiling history in a particular way to construct a narrative. Marxism is one of the most famous examples of this approach. An extreme example of historicism is people claiming that the entire world is controlled by the Illuminati. If you talk to them they will give you ample historical evidence to back it up. People who talk and promote historicism want only power and it will only lead to a bloodbath. We saw how Marxism led to communism and a bloodbath. In the last 30 years, researchers have understood that history is very complex and can't be viewed in the same way as it was once. It is impossible to explain every event by a single narrative; it requires a multifaceted understanding. This is called "historicity". Today's research emphasises historicity not historicism. But we Sri Lankans are still stuck in outdated historicism and want a simple narrative for all our problems. This led to nothing but a bloodbath in Sri Lanka and will continue to lead to nothing but a bloodbath.

Now let's talk history. There is an old Soviet saying "The future is certain, it’s the past that keeps changing.” That is how history works. We believe history is already there intact and we found it. That is not how it works. We will have evidence here and there, but 99% of history is not there. Using those evidence, we create hypotheses. In historical research, the primary evidence is always archaeological. Literature can only be used to identify archaeological sites or collaborate on existing archaeological findings. Literary evidence alone is never considered because it may be influenced by its authors' imagination and bias. This is something both Sinhalese and Tamils don't understand. 

Literature can give us clues, but conclusions must be supported by other archaeological evidence. The majority of the objections I received were solely based on "Mahavamsa". So the first thing we need to understand is that something mentioned in a literary text called "Mahavamsa" or "Tamil Sangam Literature" alone doesn't make something true unless it is supported with other evidence. Mahavamsa's Buddhist bias has been well documented by researchers. The purpose of Mahavamsa was not to write the history of Sri Lanka but to establish that Sri Lanka is a country Buddha blessed for Buddhism to prosper. Mahavamsa's historical importance comes from the fact that it provides clues to probe our history, like "Tamil Sangam Literature". If everything in the Mahavamsa is true then we must conclude that human females and male lions could mate and reproduce human children. According to researchers three criteria should be considered when making hypotheses in historical contexts. 

First, the hypothesis should be consistent with the archaeological evidence present in the area. Second, the hypothesis should be aligned with the history of the region (for Sri Lanka, South Asia is the region considered), and third, the hypothesis should be aligned with the overall picture of humanity's history. In this way, history will change as newer and newer archaeological evidence is found, both locally and regionally. 

But the problem with Sri Lanka is that we have formed a historical narrative based on initial evidence available at independence. Then some power-hungry groups build politics around those narratives. So the power centres that benefit from those narratives will not allow them to change because it will endanger their grip on power.

As far as Sri Lanka is concerned until the 1960's there was no archaeological evidence of Tamil settlements predating the Chola invasion. Professor Indrapala who conducted research into Tamils in Sri Lanka in the late 1950's concluded there is no evidence of Tamils in Sri Lanka before Chola time. During 1966 and 1974, however, Prof. Indirapala explored the jungles of Northern, North Central, and Eastern provinces, discovering new Tamil inscriptions and Hindu temples.

With the discovery of pre-Christian era inscriptions in Tamil Nadu, regional history began to change too. He collaborated with all the evidence found in Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu. He established that there are enough archaeological evidence and collaborative literary evidence to prove Tamils live in Sri Lanka at least since 300 BC. He has written a book "The Evolution of an Ethnic Identity: The Tamils of Sri Lanka C. 300 BCE to C. 1200 CE". Feel free to read it. It is also possible to find an article on "Tamil inscriptions in Sri Lanka" on Wikipedia.

Yet by 1970, the ethnic conflict had already gotten out of hand. The narrative "Tamils are invaders who came with Cholas" put forward in 1950 stays the same today even with ample evidence against it. If you are interested in learning more about Tamil Buddhism in Sri Lanka feel free to read "Demala Baudhayo" by Professor Sunil Ariyaratne. I highly doubt you could find a copy because Prof. Sunil mentioned Sinhala nationalists pressured him not to bring new editions to his book now.

We must be open-minded when researching history. We can't pick and choose history to create a narrative. We should let history be history and let scholars do their job and not use that to do politics since history is subject to change. The pursuit of truth should be our goal, not the establishment of our version of the truth as history. But all I'm seeing in Sri Lanka are millions of ostriches burying their heads in the sand.

Another question a friend asked was "Sri Lanka did play a role in the maritime silk road trade and why do I believe Cholas didn't invade Sri Lanka for trade reasons". Scholarly opinion is divided on this matter. Some say trade played a part but others say it doesn't. However, I tend to lean on the side that it doesn't after long contemplation. If you look at history, the maritime silk route underwent significant changes in the 10th century. First, there was the decline of the Abbasid Caliphate and the rise of the pro-trade Fatimid Caliphate in the Middle East. In East Asia, the Song dynasty in China was undergoing an era of unprecedented economic prosperity. So sea trade boomed on an unprecedented scale during this time. The quantity of trade through Sri Lankan ports was insignificant compared to other Indian ports and ports in the Malay Archipelago in South East Asia. 

From a cost vs benefit standpoint, the Sri Lankan invasion is not economically beneficial for the Cholas. That is why they focused on invading the counties on the entire east coast of India and the entire countries in the Malay Archipelago once the Pandyas were crushed and the crown jewels were recovered from Sri Lanka.  Sri Lanka was struggling economically at that time. The Cholas never really consolidated their control over southern Sri Lanka, which lacked large and prosperous settlements to tempt long-term Chola occupation. If the Cholas wanted to undercut Sri Lanka's maritime trade they could promote free trade by reducing tolls in their ports instead of invading Sri Lanka. Remember the Cholas abolished tolls in their ports during Kulothunga Chola's time. So an invasion was not necessary to undermine Sri Lanka.

In 1070, the Chola empire was ravaged by a civil war and the Chola emperor was killed in the process. Sensing the opportunity Vijaybahu with the help of the Pandyans and Burmese retook the island. But soon a new emperor took over the Chola empire and normalcy returned. If there had been such an economic incentive, Cholas could have attempted to retake the island. The Cholas were very strong until the end of the 12th century. After Chola civil war was over they routed the combined offensive of the Kalinga-Chalukya armies and invaded the Kalinga twice and brought some parts of the eastern Chalukya empire under their banner. They even established a permanent military presence in the Malay Archipelago to project power during this time. That is why I highly doubt there was a big economic angle. But it doesn't matter whether there is an economic angle or not, my conclusions are not affected by them. As I explained before the Chola invasion was not racially motivated and both Tamils and Sinhalese fought against the Cholas.

Understanding Sri Lankan Ethnic Crisis - Part I

Sinhala nationalist's favourite chapter of Sri Lankan history is the Chola invasion of Sri Lanka. Two things are proved by that: first, Tamils are hostile to Sinhalese, and second, Tamils settled in SL only after the Chola invasion. Both claims are dumbfounding. As Sinhala nationalists portray, the Chola empire's invasion of Sri Lanka was not a Tamil invasion against the Sinhalese. 

It was a Chola invasion against the combined Tamil and Sinhalese Alliance of the Pandiya-Anuradhapura kingdoms. During the Chola invasion of the Pandyan Kingdom, the seeds of the Sri Lankan invasion were sown. As Tamil Pandya kings were allies of Sri Lankan rulers since prehistoric times, the Chola army fought with the combined Pandya-Sri Lankan army during their invasion of Pandya country. Pandya king Rajasimha fled to Anuradhapura with his crown jewels following his defeat. Wearing all three crowns of Tamil country was a matter of great pride for Tamil kings. The driving motive behind the Chola invasions of Sri Lanka was their desire to possess these royal treasures of the Pandyan kings. If you look at the invasion pattern of the Cholas from the 10th century they were only interested in conquering kingdoms in India and Southeast Asia that could pose threats to their supremacy over the maritime silk road trade. Sri Lanka played an insignificant part in this trade, so there is no huge economic incentive for them to conquer Sri Lanka.

It is also a historical fact that the Vijayabahu retook the island with Pandyan's help. In addition, even the Tamil Velaikkara armies fought for Vijayabahu. In the past, there was no Tamil or Sinhala racial identity, contrary to what Sinhala and Tamil nationalists say today. Sinhalese identity we speak of today is a construct of people like Anagarika Dharmapala. Sinhalese never saw them as one race before that.  

For example in 1927 Kandyan Sinhala leaders recommended to the British that their national constitution should have a federal arrangement of two units for Sinhalese (one each for Kandian and low-country Sinhalese) and one unit for Tamils. Today the distinction between the two groups of Sinhalese has almost disappeared. Similarly, the 19th-century Tamil movement constructed today's Tamil identity. This is how history work and culture evolves. 

History shows the Sri Lankan kings and the Tamil kings were both friends and enemies. The Royalty intermarried, and fought together and against each other. We have a shared history. Some Tamil kings invaded Sri Lanka and Sri Lankan kings invaded parts of Tamil country. 

Several famous Sri Lankan monarchs themselves are from the Tamil bloodline. There's a fun fact that Sinhala nationalists don't tell you. Do you remember the great Sri Lankan king Parakramabahu the Great who invaded parts of Burma twice and was hailed as the hero of the Sinhalese? His grandfather was a Tamil Pandyan prince. Vijayabahu I had given his sister Mitta's hand in marriage to a Tamil Pandyan prince. That Pandyan prince became the father of Manabharana, who in turn was the father of Parakramabahu the Great. One man's hero is another man's villain. Paramkramabahu is a villain for the Burmese people and a hero for the Sri Lankans. What Cholas or Paramkramabahu did 1000 years ago was just the way all kings behaved in ancient times. When you understand this all the hatred against them is meaningless. 

There is one more fun fact I want to share with you. The house of Kalinga from which famous Sri Lankan kings like Nissanka Malla came shares some Chola bloodline. Because Cholas conquered and married off their princesses to Kalinga kings. That is why the Kalinga dynasty of that time called themselves the "Chodaganga" dynasty. It refers to the union of the Eastern Ganga and Chola dynasties. Vijaybahu married a Kalinga princess and from her, the house of Kalinga began. As many of you may be aware after the death of Sri Vira Parakrama Narendra Singha in 1739 AD, the rest of the kings of the Kandyan kingdom were from South India. Tamil along with Sinhalese was the court language. 

The Sinhalese script itself is heavily influenced by the Tamil Grantha script of the Pallavas. That is why modern Sinhalese scripts resemble Dravidian scripts, unlike other Indo-Aryan scripts.

Even if you believe in the Mahavamsa myths about the origins of Sinhalese. Vijaya married a Tamil Pandya princess and the Pandyan king sent to Lanka his own daughter, 700 other women (additionally a hundred maidens of noble descent), craftsmen, and a thousand Tamil families of 18 guilds. So there are more Tamils colonizing this island than Vijaya and his followers according to Mahavamsa. 

No one in Sri Lanka including modern Tamils can talk about pure blood or pure race. Culture is constantly evolving as a result of mutual influence and intermixing. During the protohistoric period (1000-500 B.C.) Sri Lanka was culturally united with southern India and shared the same megalithic burials, pottery, iron technology, farming techniques and megalithic graffiti. This cultural complex spread from southern India along with Dravidian clans prior to the Prakrit speakers' migration. Archaeology gives us that picture. Most of today's Sri Lankans are a mix of these two groups along with the indigenous tribal population of Sri Lanka. 

As a result of increasing proximity to the Indian mainland and isolation from the rest of Sri Lanka due to the thick forest cover, the northern part of Sri Lanka has a continuous Dravidian influence. Naga tribes also assimilated into the Dravidian culture. Tamils still retain Naga heritage and add a Naga prefix to their names and city names. In southern parts, the mixing of Prakrit, Tamil, Sanskrit and local indigenous languages and then pali with the introduction of Buddhism resulted in the eventual evolution of modern Sinhalese people and language. So anyone who understands basic anthropology wouldn't say Sinhalese were the original inhabitants of the island or that the entire island belonged to Sinhalese. 

The only evidence the Sinhalese nationalists have to claim the entire island belongs to Sinhalese was the presence of Buddhist remains in the north. Again a stupid argument. Who said Tamils couldn't be Buddhist? Until the 8th century, most Tamils belonging to the merchant class were Buddhists. Nagapattinam (Note the name "Naga"-pattinam) in Tamilnadu was a Buddhist stronghold in South India since the 3rd century BCE. An inscription from Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka dated to the 2nd century BCE records Tamil merchants' association with Buddhist institutions. One of the five major ancient epics in Tamil is a Buddhist epic "Manimekalai" which is dated to roughly the 2nd century AD.

As you can see both Sinhalese and Tamils are so mixed up in Sri Lankan history. We have lived on this island since time immemorial. Racial identity was very flexible until recently. Tamil people became Sinhalese and Sinhalese people became Tamils. Do you know that two families who spread Sinhala nationalism in Sri Lanka, the Bandaranaike family and Jeyawardana family were both originally Tamils who got assimilated as Sinhalese? Google their family history if you want to know more about them. 

Don't make a false narrative about yesterday's history based on your present prejudices and constructs. Both Tamils and Sinhalese contributed sweat and blood to build Sri Lanka. If Sri Lanka is to emerge from its current abyss, its highly educated people need to look at who leads whom in what direction. Politicians will not say or do anything against popular sentiments. Moderate voices from the educated community are needed to speak out against this stupid gross simplification of history from a racist perspective and educate the masses. 

Being Proud of My Chola Heritage

There are several empires in the world. So why do historians call the Cholas "The world's most remarkable empire"? Because they were so ahead of their time. A thousand years ago, they conducted democratic local body elections, empowered women, and had the highest literacy rate in the world. Literature and the arts flourished under the Chola empire. In its heyday, it was one of the half-dozen greatest powers on Earth. The Imperial Chola empire covered more than a million square kilometres. It included India, Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Singapore, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, the Maldives and Bangladesh. 

Their blue water navy could only be compared to the influence of the modern US Navy. The entire Bay of Bengal Sea was once called "Chola Lake". In addition to having more than a million men, the Chola Navy was technologically ahead of its time. Due to deep hull innovations in their ships, the Chola navy could send soldiers on short notice to anywhere in Asia. Their navy operated in both the Indian and Pacific oceans and fought battles across 2,000 miles of ocean. The US and UK are the only superpowers in the world with similar capabilities today.

The Chola empire was a golden era for women in medieval history. Women also played a crucial role in the empire's administration. They were appointed as nobles and chief advisers. In addition to these, they were also considered good ambassadors and played a significant role in promoting peace between the empires. Breaking the stereotype that women are physically incompetent for combat, women were deployed in the army and navy in various capacities. Women warriors were revered in the Chola empire.

One of the major pillars of women's empowerment, financial independence was enjoyed by the women of the Chola kingdom. Although society was still largely patriarchal, women also had exclusive property rights. Husbands could not appropriate their wife's property without their permission. Chola Empire women enjoyed the right to choose their life partners.

The empire also increased local government's importance and institutionalisation. Each group of five to 10 villages had an elected district council. This council had endless subcommittees dealing with everything from land rights to irrigation, law and order to food storage. Every household in a district had the right to vote - and councils enjoyed considerable power. 

While the imperial Chola empire lasted for more than three centuries, they maintained a light hand. Local responsibility for local affairs was encouraged. Newly conquered rulers except in a few rare cases were generally allowed to keep their titles and lands under ultimate Chola control as tributary states. They redistributed the wealth back to people via donations and grants making everybody richer. 

Chola art and architecture are among the finest in the world. The Cholas built more temples than any other Indian kingdom. Each temple was a masterpiece. At the very centre of their empire, there are still 40 Chola temples in an area half the size of Greater London. The most spectacular structure is the 63m-high pyramid-shaped central shrine in Thanjavur, one of the wonders of the medieval world. 

In cast bronze sculpture and hard-stone sculpture, the Chola artistry and craftsmanship is unsurpassed. The Cholas not only nurtured an artistic boom; they also fostered massive education expansion. Political stability and imperial grants - both to the temples that ran education and to the students themselves - led to the expansion of local schools and elite colleges. Some estimates suggest that literacy rose to around 20% - the highest in the medieval world.

A consequence of this high level of education was an increase in the intellectual boom. One of the greatest Indian religious thinkers - the 11th-century philosopher Ramanuja - was a Chola product. In many ways, he founded Hindu monotheism. World-renowned Tamil poet "Kamban" also belonged to the Chola Empire. The greatest epic in the Tamil language was written by him. There were several Chola emperors who were also poets. It was under their leadership that all surviving Tamil literary works written from the start of the Tamil language were protected, compiled and taught. In the Chola era, Tamil classical music and dance flourished as well. 

As the Chola kings redistributed their massive wealth via large donations, and grants and heavily invested in agriculture and infrastructure, people became richer and better off. A civilizational golden age began in the Tamil heartland of the empire which then spread throughout Asia. Cholas had the greatest cultural influence on Asian history in areas like art, literature, education, and architecture.

For example, Cambodian king Suryavarman II who built the Angkor Wat temple was both an ally and tributary of the Chola empire since 1114. In 1145, when Suryavarman was in a venerable position against the rival Champa kingdom, Kulothunga Chola II even sent the entire Chola forces stationed to protect their vassal states in southeast Asia to conquer the Champa kingdom. Suryavarman's reign saw remarkable innovations in art and architecture due to Chola presence. The Angkor Wat complex, the largest temple complex in the world today and is one of the finest examples of Chola influence on Asian architecture. 

The model of the Angkor Wat and the architecture was that of the Cholas. The Cholas were the greatest temple builders of their time. The Brihadishvara Temple built in 1010 CE in Tanjore, Tamilnadu by the Cholas was the tallest building in the world at the time. Since the Cholas wanted to keep it that way, in Angkor Wat, the tower above the central shrine only rises to 65 m (213 ft) above the ground. This is just 1 meter shorter than Brihadishvara Temple which stands at 66 m (217 ft).

During the Chola period, Indian languages like Tamil, Sanskrit and Pali had a considerable long-term impact on the linguistic and intellectual cultures of South East Asia. For example, Sri Lumay Chola, a minor prince of the Chola dynasty was sent with a Chola expeditionary force to the Philippines to establish a forward base. The Philippine archipelago was strategically positioned in Southeast Asia and thus became part of ancient trade routes.  Sri Lumay Chola founded the Cebu kingdom in the Philippines. Cebuano language and culture, as well as religious practices and common vocabulary words derived from Chola influence. I can give you so many similar examples of cultural influence.  It is indeed true that the Chola empire was one of the most remarkable empires in the world in every respect. The Cholas left a lasting impression on human civilization.

So if you ask me whether I'm proud of my Chola heritage, yes I'm proud of that. I'm aware that the Cholas massacred more Tamils than any other race. The Cholas are responsible for rigid caste structures. But we need to understand that you can't sit in the 21st century and judge people who lived 1000 years ago using modern values. It is impossible to celebrate a single king or dynasty based on today's yardstick. Were the Cholas ruthless? Yes, they were ruthless and ambitious. In those days wealth was created through war and trade. Even to this day, trade and war complement each other. The most important thing to me is their overall contribution. They are more than just conquerors and plunderers. Labelling them conquerors and plunderers is like labelling the United States as just conquerors and plunderers.

I would say Tamil should look up to Cholas and be inspired. Tamils live in 180 countries around the world. Just like during the times of Cholas, we could have a similar soft influence on the world like the Jews have on the world today. There are more than 100,000 Tamils in 16 countries. There are more than 1 million Tamils in four countries. Tamils served as Prime Ministers or Presidents of 4 countries. Currently, the US vice president is half Tamil. Tamils have served in senior ministerial positions in 14 countries. There are many top CEOs globally like current Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who is Tamil. There are 3 Nobel laureates, 3 Oscar winners and 13 Tamil billionaires worldwide. The Tamil film Nayakan is on the Times' list of "Top 100 Greatest Films of All Time".

So I think Tamils should absorb the Chola spirit so that Tamils as a society could have a positive influence on the progression of human civilisation as a whole. I don't believe in narrow nationalism. I believe in internationalism. Tamil culture must be open to the world as it has always been for over 3000 years. 2000 years ago, a Tamil poet wrote "யாதும் ஊரே யாவரும் கேளிர்" which means "To us all countries are one, all the people are our relatives". I would like to keep it that way.

Monday, 3 April 2023

பிரிவெனும் பெருவலி



சின்னஞ்சிறு நிலவே
என்னைவிட்டு ஏனடி நீங்கினையோ?
ஒரு கொள்ளை புயலடித்தால் சகியே
செஞ்சுடர் தாங்கிடுமோ?
 
அத்தம் அழிந்ததடி அன்னமே
ரத்தமும் ஓய்ந்ததடி
ஒரு கொற்றமும் வீழ்ந்ததடி சகியே
யாதுமிக்கோள் யானே

யாங்குனை தேடுவனோ?
அன்னமே ஏது நீ செய்குவனோ?
ஓங்கூழானதடி அன்னமே
தீங்கிருள் சூழ்ந்ததடி

துள்ளும் நயனமெங்கே
வெல்லம் போல் சொல்லும் மொழிகள் எங்கே?
கன்னல் சிரிப்பும் எங்கே?
என்னைசேர் ஆரணமார்பும் எங்கே?
 
மஞ்சள்நிலங் குளிராய்
நெஞ்சிலே சேர்ந்திடும் கைகள் எங்கே?
கொஞ்சும் இளம் வெய்யிலாய்
என்னையே தேடிடும் பார்வை எங்கே?
 
கானகம் எரியுதடி
வஞ்சியே ஞாலமும் நழுவுதடி
வானம் உடைந்ததடி
அழகே பூமியும் சரிந்ததடி
 
கொள்ளை நெருப்பினிலே தள்ளியே
எப்படி நீங்கினையோ?
எப்படி குற்றமுற்றேன்?
பிரிவை சாபமாய் தந்தனையோ?

சின்னஞ்சிறு நிலவே
என்னைவிட்டு ஏனடி நீங்கினையோ?
ஒரு கொள்ளை புயலடித்தால் சகியே
செஞ்சுடர் தாங்கிடுமோ?
 
அத்தம் அழிந்ததடி அன்னமே
ரத்தமும் ஓய்ந்ததடி
ஒரு கொற்றமும் வீழ்ந்ததடி சகியே
யாதுமிக்கோள் யானே