Pseudo-patriotism that claims this country belongs to Sinhala Buddhists
by Shanie
In a self-critique of the Muslim community. Nazeeya Faarooq has written a very thoughtful article lamenting the failure of moderate Muslims to speak out against the extremists within the community who are presenting a wrong picture of Muslims and Islam to the rest of the world. "What has replaced the moderate Muslim", says Faarooq, "is a pernicious breed of human beings who would like to be called the only true guardians of the faith.
This invasion by the extremists, vocal in their righteousness, target the moderate or modern Muslim as being un-Islamic, but are in fact the criminal hunters of ijtihad, thought, reason and rationale…. What we need are the moderate Muslims of Sri Lanka to speak out at every opportunity, give sermons at Friday jumma, write their opinions, and in short not be afraid to speak their minds. Intellectuals, artists, performers, housewives, professionals, students, activists, farmers, fishermen, carpenters, salespeople all have a role to play. There is no qualification in being a moderate Muslim other than in believing that Islam is more than terrorism, gender inequality, intolerance, violence, rigidity and judgmentalism."
[British High Commissioner H.E. Dr. Peter Hayes visited a historical mosque in Kalmunai and had a discussion with the community there about the problem face by Muslim community in January 2009-more pics]
Faarooq’s self-criticism, while being refreshing and welcome, however applies not only to the Muslim community but to Sri Lankan society as a whole. The moderates among the Sinhalese and Tamil communities have also been silenced by the extremists and ultra-nationalists within their own communities. Truth be told, there are outstanding voices of moderation among all the communities, the Muslims not excluded. But sadly, the dominant trend today is extremism of the most pernicious kind which is destroying the dignity not only of individual communities but of the country as a whole.
Faarooq goes on to define what Islam stands for and thereby what Muslims should stand for. "It is in short the aspiration for a society within a Muslim framework that will treat people with dignity and respect. Ijtihad, which is independent reasoning to articulate Islamic law is used to allow Islam predominant place while allowing the mind to experience freedom of thought. A moderate Muslim is one who while recognizing the importance and necessity of faith, cherishes reflective, self-critical, pro-democracy and pro-human rights contemplation. In fact the two are not an either/or option, but co-exist harmoniously complementing all aspects of life in a moderate Muslim."
Truly, this definition has equal validity for Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity and to what the adherents of all those great religions should be standing for. This is the tragedy of today’s Sri Lanka. The noble traditions and values of all our religions have been hijacked by vocal and violent extremists whose false propaganda threatens to undermine all religions and society as a whole. It is this that is leading to intolerance, hatred and vengeance against those who differ from their own narrow nationalism. It is this that creates a pseudo-patriotism that claims that this country belongs to the Sinhala Buddhists and the minority groups must accept this hegemony and the majority, in their graciousness, will give them ‘reasonable’ rights.
Sinister pseudo-patriotism
Nothing is more symbolic of this than a recent article by a well-known Sinhala nationalist. After arguing that the past Tamil political leadership had failed the Tamils and the present were only relics of the past, he suggests that the patriotic Sinhalese must support a Tamil political leadership (a la Karuna Amman?) that will emerge after the Tamils are integrated with the Sinhalese. "An integrated entrenched community will be less likely to seek disintegration."
This then was the time for the patriotic Sinhalese to address the legitimate grievances of the Tamils. "People admire the patriots who took them on the proper path and produced results. It is in them the public have trust and faith. They can carry Sinhala intelligentsia beyond the reach of the devalued politicians. The time has come for the patriotic forces to extend their frontiers to fight for the legitimate grievances of the Tamils to inculcate a truly Sri Lankan identity." He concludes with the statement, which on the face of it appears liberal, pluralistic and democratic: "The finest hour has arrived for the nationalistic leadership to display their commitment to the country by being in the forefront of the struggle to combine a divided nation where the minority rights are fulfilled and the majority rights are safeguarded."
Significantly, he does not spell the grievances which he, as a patriotic Sinhalaya, thinks are legitimate and how these grievances should be addressed and minority rights fulfilled. But a hint of what he has in mind is revealed when he states, "The patriotic Sinhala majority fought within the weapons of democracy to discard the infamous Package, saw to the liquidation of the Equal Opportunities Bill, abandonment of the Sudu Nelum and Tawalama the anti war mind cleansing operations, rejection of the 2000 Constitutional amendment, dismantling of Tsunami Structures, jettisoning of Peace Talks process, de merging the North East and easing from the CFA."
He began the article with the statement, "Will you put up your hand to elevate the Tamil people or the Tamil politicians? Sinhalese will raise both hands with sincerity in favour of the Tamil people. Not merely raise hands; they will clap with both the hands in support." So the patriotic Sinhalese fought off devolution and power-sharing proposals because those were presumably not legitimate grievances; presumably also those proposals would not have elevated the Tamil people.
He is silent as for what proposals the patriotic Sinhalese are going to raise their hands or clap with both hands. In different times, this would have been laughed off as the comic and convoluted mind-set of someone on the lunatic fringe of ethno-nationalism. But, today, in the mood of ethno-triumphalism and an upsurge of extremist nationalism, it is going to be touted as being gracious and magnanimous.
It is but a clever yet sinister attempt to further articulate the Defence Establishment view that this country belongs to the Sinhala Buddhists and that the minorities will be treated well provided that they did not make ‘unreasonable’ demands. Nazeeya Faarooq’s self-criticism applies with equal or even greater force to the extremists among the Sinhala and Tamil nationalists.
We still hear voices of sanity
But Faarooq need not feel despondent. Although many voices of moderation have been intimidated into silence, there still are courageous men and women from all communities who are willing to speak out, sometimes putting their own lives at risk. It will be embarrassing to mention names but the more discerning of readers will be able to identify Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim journalists, writers, human rights activists, academics, lawyers, religious and civil society leaders and a host of others who have and continue to speak out with great courage.
One such academic has been Dr Liyanage Amarakeerthi who represents the best of Sinhala Buddhist culture and intelligentsia. In a recent critical tribute to Dr Gunadasa Amarasekera on the latter’s eightieth birthday, Amarakeerthi pays a handsome tribute to Amarasekera as being an authentic intellectual. "There is none in the University whose stature as a public intellectual equals that of Amarasekera." But Amarakeerthi however faults Amarasekera for his inaccurate and indefensible promotion of a ‘National Thought’ (Jathika Chinthanya). Amarakeerthi’s critique is worth quoting at length because it is evidence that there are still courageous voices of sanity in our country.
"His (Amarasekera’s) Jathika Chinthanaya has ended up creating a kind of cultural relativism that easily translates into something like, "Humans in this country are only Sinhala Buddhists." That cultural relativism, instead of producing any Buddhist science or Buddhist theory of development, which takes the planet earth as our co-being rather than a bundle of nature to be mastered by modernity, has resulted in producing hypocritical middle class consumerists as social beings and racists as political beings. Consumerism and racism nicely synthesize in Sri Lanka’s new Buddhist.
There is another legacy of Amarasekara’s Jathika Chinthanaya: many children of 1956 turned their own inabilities into a form of Jathika Chinthanaya. For example, those who do not know any language other than Sinhala elevated their mono-lingualism into a form of being "Jathika." These days universities are full of those ‘national thinkers.’ Some others who are afraid of engaging with the most serious thinkers of our time argue that the Buddha has taught us everything we need. According to them, Jataka Pota is enough, and we do not need Derrida’s Grammatology or Foucault’s Archaeology of Knowledge, for example. The Jataka Pota, to be sure, is a very good book. But it is hardly enough. Those who claim that The Jataka Book is enough cannot read Derrida or Foucault and they cannot deal with such rigorous thought, so they disguise their inability as Jathika Chinthanaya.
One cannot begin to describe how the sublimation of mediocrity has destroyed this country. Thousands that surround Amarasekara are such "national thinkers." About Amarasekara’s voyage with these fellows I can only say this: "Good luck to you, Dr. Amarasekara".
Those who really can engage with Amarasekara are the ones who are called, of course by Amarasekara himself, "enemies of the nation", "agents of the West" and "imitators of the West". Over the years Amarasekara has successfully taught his followers such name-calling which shuts down any form of intellectual dialogue.
My Wittgenstein, of course he is Western, has taught me that conversation is the essence of humanity. An entire school of mediocre ‘thinkers,’ masquerading as national thinkers, (Jathika Chinthakayas) is constantly at work to rid our society of genuine conversation. In any institution; including the private sector, the people of average skills and knowledge are the most nationalist calling any innovative and energetic person "non-nationalist". For these disciples of the Jathika Chinthana school, being productive and creative means being Western.
Therefore, those who have done nothing substantial for the Sinhala nation are the most vocal defenders of it. Rajitha Dissanayake’s new play, "Apahu Herenna Bee", beautifully depicts certain qualities of these "friends" of the nation. I hope very much that Dr. Amarasekara will live long enough to see the destruction his theories have resulted in. And I hope the poet in him will still be honest on that day to regret his mistake." [courtesy: The Island]
11 Comments
Absolutely Brilliant. We too hope that Dr Amarasekara, brilliant as he is, will be able to see the destruction that is being caused. Further to that, the Rajapakse regime that is now riding the ultra-nationalist Tiger, and using the terminology of Jathika Chinthanaya is surely taking the country in a direction that will profoundly change its character. Thanks to this article that sounds a warning bell, but will it halt this juggernaut?
There is a form of xenophobic thinking originating from 1930s Buddhist revival era. A fear was created in Sinhala minds about not losing the only homeland available for them. The motive was not to drive away minorities, but to revive Sinhala culture from colonial influences.
Hindu Saiva nationalsm originating earlier than this proclaims Tamil is the mother of all languages, cradle of civilisation etc. They drive fear into Tamil minds unless there is an exclusive homeland the ancient Tamil language will be lost.
Nationalism thrives on fear. The level of depravity and self destruction is an indication how deep the fear has been on each respective side.
It is regrettable that Shanie has been a little les than intellectually honest, and has done Dr Liyanage Amarakeerthi as well as her readers a disservice, by editing out his critique, made in the same article she refers to, of Sri Lanka's Westernised peace lobby. His critique is not one dimensional. It is profoundly dialectical, and demarcates a space quite distinct from that occupied by the likes of Shanie. If I may quote a portion of his text which is representative of those of his critical ideas censored by Shanie:
“…But only a few of NGO operatives could be called authentic. Writing mainly in English, they could not really reach out to the monolingual masses. Therefore, some of them sound like highly paid parrots talking to themselves in an unknown tongue, living in comfortable cages. Only a few among those intellectuals could deeply respond to or engage with literature and art produced by Sinhala- speaking people- to focus on my own native language group. The bilingual intellectuals associated with NGOs are more or less ignorant or cynical of Sinhala literary and works of art…Without genuine and authentic connections with vernacular cultural life, some important work by NGO intellectuals had very little impact on the masses. In addition, their failure to produce a sustained critique of LTTE violence during the last three decades even created a certain resentment of them among the masses…"
The present crisis can be seen as a breakdown in core values of the majority community in this country. The lack of feeling for human life and the upsurge in Nationalistic sentiment indicates the breakdown of Buddhist Values.
As we all know religion is not limited by race , language or creed. The universal message of all major religons is the equality of man, compasssion and mercy. In time to come it will be realised as to who has destroyed Buddhism, not the followers of other faiths but the ultra nationalist Sinhala Buddhists themselves. Even now we hear daily of murders and abductions, sicknesses and pestilence daily in this Dhammadvipa. Abortions and killings abound. What price religous supremacy?
Srilanka as a whole,is a very friendly country to it's
neighbours,muslim countries,western world,eastern bloc
and other parts of the planet.This is undeniably a major contribution for the survival of successive govts
against LTTE oparations.All religions have helped this
country by coming under the umbrella of democracy.
The world is under some form of democracy that guides people to behave in a particular order which is believed to be benefitial to all human and other beings
So the behaviour of the world is largely under the governance of democracy which has allowed,tolerated
interfered,corrected,spied and even destroyed other forms of governance.It's purely under such conditions that religious,especially Islam should be looked at. Anybody can take islam into their hands say "look what islam says".Anybody means any major governing system.But islam in it's pure form, advocates one thing,and that is, believe in Allah,his messenger and the day of judgement.And translating the guidance into practice has gone into different thoughts of schools.This is natural under any democratic form
But what should not happen is,going to extremes.This extreme approach is gaining momentum in many religions but under different labels
I think, Shanie is highly confused or refuse to acknowledge the underlying pacts for some reason. So, he neglects the background of many things that he is talking.
In order to prove it, I had to cut past and paste some of his writings;
"This is the tragedy of today’s Sri Lanka. The noble traditions and values of all our religions have been hijacked by vocal and violent extremists whose false propaganda threatens to undermine all religions "
There is no religion called Hinduism except in the eyes of westerners who understood that at Hinduism and the Easterners who accepted that language without questioning it. So, different groups say that they are above the other Other than that, Buddhism never had any one or anything resembling to CRUSADERS, Conkistodors, Holy wars, Jihadis, Mughadeens.
Again shanie says "It is this that creates a pseudo-patriotism that claims that this country belongs to the Sinhala Buddhists and the minority groups must accept this hegemony and the majority, "
IT is the same record we are saying over and over again. Let's change the tune. Sinhala Buddhists never began any campaign again the existence of any minority wither religious or ethnic. It is the minorities who try to subjugate Buddhists in Sri lanka. Don't forget the well-known forceful expansionism of Judeo-Christian religions and it is known all over the world. If you try not to mention that then you have other interests in you. It is the Shanie who did not think about the other side of the story before writing this article. It is the Sinhala Buddhists who are cornered and not even the Sinhala Catholics/or Christians who are cornered. that is why some Sinhala christians/Catholics are supporting and continue to talk for Tamil - Tribalism. It is the Muslims who fooled a Sri Lankan President and tried to colonize Deeghavapi which is an ancient heritage site for Buddhists.
Compare that with the new world countries and the established in the world. What the citizens of all those countries have in common are desirable living conditions. All of them have one language. Most of those govts favours one religion.
What Shanie writing is let the minorities subjugate the majority while hiding behind some terminology. Why they can not accept that SRI LANKA IS THE ONLY COUNTRY THAT MAJORITY BUDDHISTS HAVE AND THAT IS WHERE THEY CAN ASK ANYTHING FOR THEMSELVES.
Dayan Jayatilleka accuses me of being less than intellectually honest by selectively quoting Dr Liyanage Amarakeerthi in my column in The Island last Saturday. In that column, I was responding to Nazeeya Faarooq’s lament that the Muslim moderate was an ‘endangered species’ in Sri Lanka. I stated that it was not only the Muslim moderate but the Sinhala moderate and the Tamil moderate also who had been intimidated into silence by loud-mouthed extremists within each community. But while the dominant trend today was nationalist extremism, there still were courageous men and women among all communities who were prepared to speak out against the forces of extremism within their own community. It is in that context that I quoted at length Amarakeerthi’s from critical tribute to Dr Gunadasa Amarasekera.
I was not paraphrasing Amarakeerthi’s whole article but only quoting the passage relevant to my thesis about the role of moderates and extremists in Sri Lanka today and citing Amarakeerthi as one among many courageous persons within each community who are prepared to look inwardly into their own community and take issue with those who by their extremist pseudo-nationalism were destroying not only their own community but the country as a whole. Dayan Jayatilleka is learned enough to know this difference but for reasons of his own, he chooses to distort and accuse me of having ‘censored’ and edited Amarakeerthi’s article.
For the record, I agree with the main thrust of Amarakeerthi’s whole article but paraphrasing the article in full would have been misplaced in that column. And Dayan Jayatilleka knows that.
Among the more urgent tools to build Sinhala-Tamil unity in the country moderates in the main communities should be enabled and encouraged to express their views in all
fora. I agree with Shanie there are many brilliant academics who can make valuable contributions but the fascistic culture both within players in the State and the more militant political entities on both sides of the divide have prevented this useful section of the population from making their inputs. The space for democtratic discussion and dissent has been mutilated. Globally, Islamic moderates have been silenced and the voice of Islam hijacked by extreme fundamentalists bringing to the wider Islamic followers much hardship when they have to function in non-islamic societies in the West and Australia. The Tamil plight is no less different.
ISS
The article is a good analysis and also tries to make the people aware of the past mistakes and the way forward. But how far will it work in today’s situation is some food for thought.
But as a optimistic it has to be taken for granted that the younger generation of the Sinhalese have started to think as Sri Lankans and NOT as Sinhalese, which is a positive step forward. Surely this attitude will be reciprocated by the Tamils.
There is not a single political leader (except some unpopular left politicians like Dr.Wickrababu Karunaratne) or for that matter any Sinhalese politician who put their hands and say that the Tamils and all other minorities are equal citizens of this country and so should be treated equally. UNEQUAL treatment of all citizens, for selfish reasons caused the situation we are facing today.
Now, one word, for those who are actually and sincerely interested in fostering a united country by supporting “devolution” as a means to achieve sustainable peace, please avoid thinking in terms of “devolution” and instead please try to think in terms of “sharing” of powers, rights, duties and responsibilities that cannot be taken back at any time by any government or individual by any method.
The best political solution would be to DILUTE the powers of all elected representatives by separating the powers of Parliament and empowering different sets of people’s representatives to administer the different sets of separated powers. It has to be devolution HORIZONTALLY where every set of representatives would be equal and NOT vertically where one set of representatives would be above the other which is the normal practice in this power-hungry world. It is because of “devolution” being done “vertically” we have all the trouble in the power-hungry world. So for sustainable peace it should not be “devolution” but “dilution of powers” or “sharing of powers” in such a way that no one - other than the common people - is superior. This system would eradicate injustice, discrimination, bribery and corruption and establish the “Rule of Law” and “Rule by ALL” for sustainable peace, tranquility and prosperity and a pleasant living with dignity and respect for all inhabitants in the country. Everyone must have “equal” powers,rights and most importantly duties and responsibilities.
The challenges the supremacist fraternity face in its self-destruction are manifold. The fact that you excoriated a fellow-supremacists of Dayan Jayatilleke makes come to their defence. Crucially, you occupy a distinct space from that of the supremacists and not that of the progressive forces of Sri Lanka. Dayan Jayatilleke has an uncanny ability to invoke Fidel Castro to defend Sinhala supremacists. It is in the interest of President Rajapakse and the SLFP to gradually distance from Sinhala supremacists and either let them change for the better, even if slowly and steadily, or die for the good of the island.
Correction:
"Crucially, you occupy a distinct space from that of the supremacists, but that of progressive forces of Sri Lanka." is what I meant to say. But, that particular sentence does not seem to have turned out properly.