Dear Grandnephew, 

1. When I wrote my first letter to you I was extremely ill. I had a rare infection followed by a knee operation my knee was extremely painful and swollen and I was generally unwell. I could not walk or sit near a computer. Most of the day I spent in bed. In fact I had to dictate that letter I sent you and Samantha kindly typed it for me. I left out many issues, and perhaps, I could have argued some of the issues I raised in a more cogent manner. Nevertheless, I believe that I was able to get across the essential points I wanted to make. My letter and your response were published widely and there were a large number of comments about its contents. Your response demonstrated that you are a very responsible, intelligent and a compassionate young man and I must say that I am proud to have a grandnephew like you. In one website alone (This blog) there were some 138 responses to my letter. Most of those comments were quite positive but there were some peanut brains that even accused me of being an LTTE supporter. Since you know about my standpoint on the LTTE, my steadfast commitment to democracy, pluralism and human rights and my implacable opposition to militarism and recruitment and deployment of child soldiers, I do not think it is worth responding to such imbeciles. However there were other issues I would have liked to deal with in my first letter and hence my decision to write you this second letter. 

Lack of material 

2. It is unfortunate that today, most young people in Sri Lanka have little critical material to read and study about our history and culture. The net result is that there is a lot of misinformation that is peddled by the media. Ultra-nationalists-both Tamil and Sinhala-feed on this misinformation, myth and legend. Rarely are these misconceptions challenged. Take for example the concept of race. Often people in Sri Lanka believe that Tamils and Sinhalese are two different races. I can still remember the day I applied for my first passport. In the application form there was one section where you had to specify your race. Although I guessed the purpose of that question was to ascertain whether I was Sinhala or Tamil, I knew that neither were distinct racial groups. Therefore I filled in that section by writing `human`. The clerk, who took the passport application from me, hit the roof. He got hysterical and shouted at me and said what do you mean `human`? Are you Sinahlese or Tamil ? Although I tried to reason with him and explain that we are not distinct races, it fell on deaf ears. He took the form, deleted human and wrote `Sinhalese`. Such lack of scientific and critical outlook permeates all aspect of our society. 

DNA profiles 

3. Recently, in England, a researcher interviewed a number of people who believed that they were of pure English or of Caucasian origins. Thereafter he carried out DNA tests on them. Most of these people assumed that they were either from good Anglo-Saxon or Norman stock or at least had North European ancestry. Surprisingly, in most cases their DNA indicated that they were not from North Europe. They had Mongolian, Moroccan and Turkish DNA. You will probably find the same if we carry out DNA profiles of some of the most upbeat chauvinists of Sri Lanka in order to determine which part ofIndia or some other part of the globe his or her ancestors originated from. People in Sri Lanka are quite mixed. For instance the Karawas (caste) are descendants of South Indian mercenaries who were brought to our shores by Sri Lankan kings. They later settled on the western coastal belt. The same is true of Salagamas and the Durawas. They all have their origins in South India. If you think Kandyans are pure Sinhalese, you will be disappointed. A number of our later kings and queens were from South India. Although the King had an official wife (Queen) he could sleep with any woman he found attractive. That was his privilege. Those days there was no birth control and the illegitimate children of the king were called `Bandaras`. There are an awful lot of Bandaras about. That is not all. During the British period, a Kaffir Regiment was brought from South Africa. They gradually settled and married local people and became a part the population. Later on, Malays from Malaya (now Malaysia) settled in our country. There were also Malayalee Toddy tappers from Kerala who came and settled and inter-married the locals. We are also mixed with Portuguese, Dutch, British, etc. The same is true of Tamils. Amongst them is caste called the `Koviyars`. They were in fact Sinhalese prisoners (goviyars) captured in war and later became integrated into the Northern community. Moreover, the repression of the 1848 rebellion was quite ferocious. The British raj killed many people who rebelled against their rule. Thousands of others who escaped repression, fled to Wanni and settled there. Thus some of the people who later came to settle in the Wanni are most probably descendants of the Sinhalese who fled the 1848 repression. 

Buddhagosha was a Tamil 

4. It is equally stupid to argue that the existence of archaeological evidence of Buddhist temples in the North and East indicates that these areas were always inhabited by the Sinhalese. During those early years of our history, Buddhism was the religion of not only the Sinhalese but also the Tamils. For instance, one of the greatest Buddhist theoreticians, Buddhagosha, was a Tamil. 

5. Obviously, there are linguistic and some cultural differences between the Sinhala and Tamil. But here too we must not exaggerate. There are lot of words that are common to both languages. In reality Sinhalese and Tamils have many more common features than differences. Ultra-nationalist on both sides of the divide want to exaggerate these differences and does so for ulterior motives. That is why remarks of some people to the effect that `all Tamils are from South India and they should return there` are extremely stupid. And how would these charlatans treat Lord Buddha ? He was not a Sinhalese-He was from Varanasi in northern India. 

Sinhala Buddhism is a contradiction in terms 

6. Equally the concept of `Sinhala Buddhism` is a contradiction in terms. Buddhism is a universal philosophy and cannot be confined to a particular group of human beings. Buddha did not recognise a `chosen race` or a `chosen ethnic group`. To the extent one attempts to `Sinhalise` it, Buddhism loses its validity and its rationale. Such a tribal ideology has nothing in common with Buddhism. This corruption of Buddhism has not stopped there. It has further degenerated into a division along caste lines. Thus we have the Siyam Nikaya for the Goigamas, Ramnnaya Nikaya for the Salagamas and the Amaapura Nikaya for the Karawas. Such provincialism and tribalism has nothing in common with the tenets of this great philosophy. In Britain Christianity in the form of the Anglican Church became a tool of the rulers. Buddhism has also been corrupted as `Sinhala Buddhism` to serve the needs of the dominant ruling class and in doing so has robbed it of its core values. It is unnecessary dwell on these matters at length because you are conversant with my antipathy towards the parasites that live off hard working people in the land. Yet try to dictate to the world how we should behave and even what we should think. 

Denying the grievances of Tamils 

7. Hiding behind these erroneous and patently illogical concepts of race and religion, `Sinhala` Ultra-nationalists assert that the Tamils in Sri Lanka are aliens or recent immigrants and that their grievances all imaginary or concocted complaints to preserve their privileges. Like the holocaust deniers they try to minimise the impact of pogroms of 1977, 1981 and 1983, the widespread torture, murder and disappearances of Tamil youths between 1978 and 2009 and the repression and discrimination some of them have suffered on a daily basis. They ignore or minimise the impact of the Sinhala only policy, which Tamils perceived as an attempt to deprive them of their fundamental rights. 

Tamil nationalists also fail to see the reality 

8. On the other hand Tamil ultra-nationalists erroneously consider that it is only the Tamils in the North and East who have suffered repression, discrimination and marginalisation. They ignore the repression and exploitation the rural poor in Sri Lanka have had to endure over decades. For instance in 1988-89 over 60,000 mainly Sinhala youths were `disappeared` by thePremadasa government. (The irony is that one of the leading members of that government-Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe-is now one the most vociferous `defenders of human rights` ! However, to date he has not apologised or show any remorse for the vile and abominable crimes his government committed in 1988-89 ). Tamil nationalists fail to recognise that the majority of Sinhala villagers in Sri Lanka live in dire poverty and have much more restricted educational opportunities than most Tamils who live in Colombo or Jaffna. Tamil nationalists also ignore the numerous problems that Tamil plantation workers have to endure. It would not be an exaggeration to say that in fact, the most disadvantaged people in Sri Lanka are the plantation workers the rural poor (Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim) and women. They have always had a raw deal. 

In 1958, I went to Karandeniya Central School to teach. I was appalled by the fact that most teachers in this school felt that the children of this (so called low caste) locality should not be taught because if they get educated they will become uppity. Even today the situation is not very different in many rural areas. In Pussellawa there are Sinhala and Tamil children who do not go to school because they cannot afford to buy a pair of shoes. Recently the organisation I work with, gave some money to a local welfare organisation in Pussellawa to buy shoes and school bags for a few children in that area. ...