Brethren of a Single Nation

Continued from January 22

Professor A. D. T. E. Perera

From the earliest times the Pandya King of Madura in the Tamil country considered it a privilege to send his court princesses to the seraglio of the Sinhala monarch.

In fact the Pandya king of Madura looked upon the Sri Lankan monarch as a great patron and benefactor. Whenever this southern Tamil kingdom was threatened by any outside force it was from the Sinhala monarch of Anuradhapura that the Tamil king sought help.

When the Colas overran the Southern Tamil kingdom the Pandya king kept his regalia in the custody of the Sinhala monarch. The throne of the southern Tamil Kingdom was virtually an heirloom of the monarch of Sri Lanka. No one could usurp it without being subject to the wrath of the Sinhala monarch.

Such usurpers were removed from the throne by the Sinhalese generals sent by several Sinhalese kings including Parakramabahu the Great of Polonnaruwa. in fact the generals of Parakramabahu renamed the new Tamil king whom they installed as Parakrama Pandya as if to perpetuate the name of their own monarch in Sri Lanka.

Sinhala invasions

Nissankamalla, the ruler who succeeded. Parakramabahu the Great himself led his legions into the Tamil kingdom of South India to punish the rebellious Tamils. King Gajabahu I took severe measures to punish an unyielding Tamil ruler and brought back many thousands of prisoners of war from the Tamil country.

King Sena II was yet another Sri Lankan monarch who led his armies to sack Madura and killed its ruler Sri Mara Sri Vallabha. All the above quoted incidents are recorded not only in our chronicles but also on epigraph written on stone and discovered both from early sites in Sri Lanka and South India.

Even the mighty Emperor Asoka Maurya did not wish to send any Buddhist missionary to South India to propagate Buddhism there because he knew that such an act would be a transgression of the territorial sovereignty of the monarch of Sri Lanka with whom he had friendly ties.

I quote the above facts from history not to rouse the feelings of the Sinhalese in order to revive their claim to the Southern Tamil country in India, but to remind the Tamils of India and elsewhere that the Sinhalese also have an equally good claim over the southern part of the sub-continent if historical facts are to be taken as the sole criterion in solving present day problems.

Terrorist activities

Our present problem is associated with the grievances of the Tamil speaking minority community in Sri Lanka. This problem has been aggravated after the recent outburst of extremist terrorist activity of both the Tamils and the Sinhalese as well.

The root cause of the problem is that the Sri Lankans who live in Jaffna and Batticaloa areas and those who traditionally speak the Tamil Language as their mother tongue, are now recognised as the Tamil speaking minority community.

I do not see any logical reason as to why and how we should call our fellow citizens in Jaffna and other parts of Sri Lanka (and whose traditional home is Sri Lanka) by the ethnic term Tamils just because they were put to the unfortunate and miserable position of speaking the language of the South Indian Dravidas by certain historical events.

This I believe is due to a mistaken identity. I may not disagree with anyone who calls the estate Tamil (labourers who were brought down to Sri Lanka by the British planters in the previous century) by the ethnic term 'Tamils'. But I do disagree with anyone who tries to identify the Jaffna, Trincomalee and Batticaloa people who speak the Tamil language as 'Tamils'. As I have mentioned already it was purely a mistaken identity.

The people of Jaffna peninsula are primarily Sri Lankans. If anyone wishes to trace their ethnic type or ethnic origin he should look into our Island's history.

At first the people of Jaffna and many other parts of the Island's littoral were known as 'Nagas' (literally snakes, or those who took the snake emblem as their totem or worshipped snake gods). Nagadipa was the early name of Jaffna Peninsula - I think most of the people of Jaffna have a just claim to a Naga ancestry than to a South Indian Dravidian lineage.

Nagas comprised one of the primary ethnic groups in Sri Lanka during pre-historic and proto-historic times. Their presence gave rise to the generic name Sivhela (Four Helas of Yakkhas, Nagas, Raksasas and Devas) from which term the word Sihala (later Sinhala) would have been probably derived. Therefore the Jaffna people have an equally good claim to the Sinhalese ethnic community.

We have never called them by such derogatory names like 'Vanaras' 'Dasyus' or 'Anasikas' etc., as in the manner the Indo-Aryans called the Damilas (Tamils) of South India.

It is true that the Jaffna peninsula came under South Indian suzerainty during the dark years of Sinhalese withdrawal from the Rajarata (King's country). King Parakramabahu VI of Kotte Sri Jayawardhanapura managed to check the tide by sending his general Prince Sapumal who overran the Yapapatuna and became its ruler after killing the South Indian usurper.

Even during the time of the kings of Kandy the Jaffna Peninsula remained a provincial state of the Sinhala monarchs for the Prince of Orange, the ruler of Holland in 1609 to address the Sinhala kings as - "The illustrious and highborn Emperor of Ceylon king of Kandia, Trinquamalle, Jaffnapatam, Set Korale, Mannar, Chilaw, Cota, Batticaloa and Punte Galle, our worthy brother in arma."

However, after the collapse and with the arrival of European powers the South Indian war - lords again took possession of the Jaffna principality. There was no powerful Sinhala monarch to punish the South Indian intruder.

Kotte period

Apart from punishing the Tamil usurpers in Yapapatuna (Jaffna) the Sinhala monarchs from Kotte period onwards had to safeguard their own kingdoms from more formidable enemies from the West.

Therefore after the 16th century the people of Jaffna had been forced to accept Tamil customs and traditions.

The original Sinhala place names in Jaffna gradually despaired through Tamil pronunciation e.g. Valihena became Vallachenai similarly Jambukola-Sambuturai; Kadurugoda-Kantarodai; Valigama-Vallikamam; Yapapatuna-Yalpanam; Hunugama-Chunakkam, Malligama-Mallikamam.

There are scholars who have specialised in the field of linguistics and who can prove this matter better than I. What I wish to drive at is that it is a great error to call our brethren in Jaffna and other littoral areas like Batticaloa, Trincomalee, Mannar by the term 'Tamils' just because they speak the Tamil langauge and follow Tamil customs and religious practices.

The Colombo Chetty community has correctly observed this fact and has made a public declaration recently to rescind themselves from the Tamil ethnic group.

Tamil was the language thrust upon these people of Sri Lanka by the South Indian Tamil intruders during the medieval period of Sri Lanka's history. So was Hinduism. Somewhat analogous is the case of some of our people who speak English and follow the Christian religion. Are we prepared to call them Englishmen just because they follow the Christian faith and are better equipped with the English language than most of our village folk.

Our Jaffna brethren are not as lucky as many of the Sinhalese who came under the foreign yoke. The British rule was not lasting enough to expunge the ethnic identity of these Sinhalese who behaved like the British.

But the unfortunate Jaffna people have been submerged for several centuries continuously by the South Indian Tamil warlords. The difference was only the language. There was no colour distinction. Therefore, with much ease the change from Sinhala to Tamil ethnic group took place in Jaffna and its periphery.

It is now up to the Sinhalese to have sympathetic appraisal of the sorry plight of our own brethren in Jaffna areas and extend our hands to them whom we brand as 'Tamils' merely because they worship Hindu Gods and speak the Tamil language.

We cannot (and should not) ask them to change their language at our wish and insist on them to change their ethnic identity if they prefer to call themselves Tamils. But we can ask them to consider that Sri Lanka their motherland as she is to the Sinhalese.

South India - A Vassal of Sri Lanka

The Tamil country in South India was only a one time feudatory state of Sri Lanka and nothing more. We should be prepared to take the Tamil speaking people of Jaffna whom we call Tamils today as our own kith and kin.

Even the so-called estate labourers or plantation workers who have emigrated from the Tamil country and are de-facto Tamils could be taken as Sri Lankans as long as they remain as citizens of Sri Lanka and are prepared to get themselves absorbed into the Sri Lankan community.

Let us now be prepared to call them Sri Lankans or if they so desire - as Sinhala Tamils - that is the Tamil speaking people who belong to the Sinhala Community and not as Jaffna Tamils or Estate Tamils.

Such a recognition would enable those minority communities to gradually dilute themselves into the major Sri Lankan community without losing their religious or cultural identities. This I may consider as a short-term (or an immediate) solution to the present crisis. But this alone cannot solve the problem which has now become a deep rooted and multilateral one.

Sinhala-Tamils

Several are the solutions, short-term and long-term, prepared by people who have studied the problem and given much thought to it. Some others have tried to circumvent the problem by the use of parodoxes, absurdities, contradictions, negations and other devices not to mention long-marches. I wish I could add one more to this list of solutions. This particular one I may call a long-term solution.

I have referred already that the people of Jaffna are our brethren. They belong to the same stock of Sri Lankans (or Sinhalas) from very early times. They were part of the Hela community which formed the Sivhela (four Hela) or Sinhalese.

Jaffna peninsula (Nagadipa) was the traditional homeland of this group of Helas. The present day occupants of Jaffna are the descendants of this ancient Sinhala community. Therefore they have a right, a better right or a just claim than the Sinhalese of other parts of Sri Lanka to manage affairs of Yapa Patuna (or Yalpanam as the Tamil speaking Jaffna man pronounces).

If we look to Sri Lanka's history, we see that the people of Sri Lanka always wished to lead a politically free life. Wherever they live either in North, South, East, West or in the Hills, they enjoyed a great amount of political autonomy. The monarch of Sri Lanka had to admit and appreciate this penchant of the Sinhala community.

Therefore the country was governed although under a strong central rule, with due division of authority among the provincial principalities (or states). The provincial rulers especially those in the East and the South (Rohana) in the Hill Country (Malaya) in the North (Nagadipa or Yapapatuna) and in the Western territory (Mayarata) were allowed full autonomy of rule in regard to the internal affairs of these provincial States.

Love For Autonomy

Executive, judicial and financial matters pertaining to the internal administration of the subordinate kingdoms have been duly transferred to the provincial principalities by the Central Government of King in Council at Anuradhapura or Polonnaruwa (of the eponymousa Rajarata or King's domain) and later at Jayawardhanapura Kotte or in Kandy in still later centuries.

This transfer of administrative authority to three or more provincial states (according to the situation arisen) by the supreme monarch of Sri Lanka led to a healthy growth of liberal political institutions in Sri Lanka. I believe this was one of the reasons for the peaceful co-existence of independent kingdoms within a powerful monarchy which alone was responsible for extra-territorial jurisdiction.

The absence of such a political machinery today in Sri Lanka could be taken as a primary cause for the rise of factionalism (sometimes resulting in defeatist attitudes) that has led to and would lead to provincial insurgencies and uprisings against the Central Government.

Therefore as a long-term solution to many of the political crises that we face today and that might crop up in the future I wish to suggest the "Need to have four or five provincial states within Sri Lanka with full autonomy in regard to their internal administration".

By the above suggestion I do not intend by any means the Division of the Country. The country should be ruled by a strong Central Government through which the provincial states should derive authority to rule their respective territory.