Connect with us

Features

Business of funerals, and demise of commonsense

Published

2 months ago

on

“Aniccâ vata sankhârâ” (impermanent, alas, are all conditioned formations) — Pali stanza often recited at times of death.

“Funeral pomp is more for the vanity of the living than for the honour of the dead.”—

Francois de La Rochefoucauld

Paying one’s last respects to the departed at funerals is a matter of societal obligation. The problem of being a sociologist, however, is that there is a tendency to take mental notes of what goes on around us as a matter of routine. I have done this over many years with regard to funerals and death, including in my own immediate family. My maternal grandfather had written a letter to my mother detailing what should and should not be done at his funeral: no expensive coffin, no cremation, no tomb and no alms to monks but to the destitute if the living wanted to do so. My father asked that he be cremated within 24 hours. I obliged his wishes. These were minimalists in a society where people complicate death just as much as they complicate life.

In recent decades, I cannot but help realise how death and its aftermath, particularly the funeral ceremonies and associated mourning rituals have become an extravaganza of sorts, an elaborate, exorbitant and time-consuming production many in these difficult contemporary times can barely afford. But the pressure of societal practices and the associated social status signaling are so strong that not even the ill prospects of getting into debt make rationality prevail. I vividly remember from my youth, poorer relatives who asked to borrow money from my parents to offer alms to monks. My parents, while always obliging despite their own limited means, invariably lectured such people on the futility of borrowing money to offer alms, hoping their next life would be better. But my family also engaged in such rituals when it was possible in terms of time and when it was affordable, but always on a small scale. This was being rational while also not losing touch with faith. Given my Buddhist background, much of my thoughts in this essay will be based on contemporary Buddhist funeral practices and their cost implications.

Sri Lanka’s four major religions mark death in different ways. Long before the present ethno-religious communities in the country came into existence, the prehistoric societies of the island appear to have believed in some sort of an afterlife. This assumption is based on the fact that personal items were buried with the dead. More importantly, these unknown people practiced burial to dispose of corpses as indicated in excavated megalithic burial sites in places like Ibbankatuwa near Dambulla and Pomparippu near Wilpattu National Park.

In the precolonial past, the Sinhalas – Buddhists rather – disposed of their dead – the corpse wrapped in a white cloth and a woven mat (pedura) – deep in the jungles after basic religious observances in a practice known as kale gahanawa. It literally means dumping in the jungle. This practice, which was common up to the 1920s, went completely out of fashion by the early 1950s most likely under the influence of colonial rule and its cultural practices. As described by M.B. Ariyapala in his Society in Mediaeval Ceylon (1956), corpses were also disposed of in designated places called amu sohona in a practice very similar to kale gahanawa.

Even so, the more affluent in these times cremated their dead in wooden pyres similar to what is still often the practice for Buddhist monks and some laity, while the less affluent simply burnt the bodies in a stack of wood while burials were also practiced. The take-away here is, there was no mandated practice of cremation among Buddhists as is practiced today which is popularly and falsely believed to be religiously mandated. Given Buddhism’s strong focus on impermanence, it stands to reason that its doctrinal positions or practices would not have mandated any sort of lingering around death as has become the norm today.

The same contemporary cremation practices apply to Tamil Hindus too followed by different religious observances, even though in many upcountry areas people from the same religious background opt for burials. I can only fathom this variation from a cost perspective. Christians, since colonial times, have buried the dead which continues to date. But the kind of lingering that is typical today among many people applies to them too, except under exceptional conditions, depending on family and personal perceptions. Muslims, in contrast to all other ethno-religious groups in the country follow a set of burial practices that are brief, and marked by simplicity, respect and includes – in terms of ritual practices – the washing of the body, covering it in a white cloth, communal prayer and finally burial without a coffin. Therefore, Muslim death rituals and funeral rites appear to be the most minimalist, rational and cost effective.

Comparatively, other practices have become complicated, consumerist, time consuming and extremely expensive. Death and its aftermath have become fodder for organised business that have expanded since colonial times but more so in the past 30 years. We know that funeral businesses are now located in many towns and cities of reasonable size. Buddhists, Christians and Hindus have embraced these practices notwithstanding the costs and seem to perceive the indulgence as symbolic of their social milieu. This is particularly apparent when costlier ‘VIP’ funeral parlours and amenities have replaced homes, community cooking for mourners has given way to catering and religious observances are facilitated for a fee by funeral service providers. Spaces and services offered vary considerably depending on the budget. These practices however also do offer convenience given the dwindling home sizes particularly in urban settings, outward migration of family members and other factors that can impact the ways in which funerals were conducted in the past.

While this aspect of life and its end in our society have not yet been properly studied, general observations paint a picture replete with contradictions. What I have also seen in India, in addition to global Muslim funeral practices also practiced in that country, was that Hindus, Sikhs and even Buddhists carried out somewhat brief rites via cremation that did not involve coffins or time. In some cases, particularly among middle classes, memorial activities were conducted in temples or secular locations.

There was a spark of rationality in Sri Lanka during the Covid 19 pandemic, when the Dehiwala – Mount Lavinia Municipality reportedly created a cardboard coffin for easy disposal of corpses given the complications Covid deaths implicated. It cost only about LKR 4, 500.00. I was hopeful this practice could be popularised, but this appears not to have happened after the end of the pandemic. I find it unfortunate that in a society like ours, with its high literacy, we still have not been able to work out how the end of our lives could be marked rationally, with respect and giving due place to emotion but without incurring needless costs and without leaving bodies un-cremated or un-buried for days.

There is much one can learn from people and cultures whose funeral practices are minimalist but marked with respect. It is incorrect to assume that lingering around a corpse over a period of days helps to emotionally deal with death. It is for this reason that all religions do have ritual practices that help commit the diseased to the memory of the living. The Buddhist offering of alms seven days, three months, one year after a person’s death and thereafter annually or when possible is one of many such example from different religious communities in our country. Rationalising funeral rituals cannot be mandated by law. But it would be good if there was a discourse on it at the popular level that may allow some of our citizens to deal with the end of life more quickly, rationally and with respect while investing the money that may be saved for the betterment of the living.


Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines

Published

6 hours ago

on

2026/03/13

By

Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.

Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.

Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.

Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.

The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.

The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:

=Joint planning across operational divisions

=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making

=Continuous cross-functional consultation

=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates

Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.

Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.

By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Why Pi Day?

Published

6 hours ago

on

2026/03/13

By

International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow

The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.

Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.

Archimedes

It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.

Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.

Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.

π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)

The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.

π = 9801/(1103 √8)

For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.

It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.

This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.

Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.

Happy Pi Day!

The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.

by R N A de Silva

Continue Reading

Features

Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink

Published

1 day ago

on

2026/03/12

By

A combined US-Israel attack on Iran.(BBC)

The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.

As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.

It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.

Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.

Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.

Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.

The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.

While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.

On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.

Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.

Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.

Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.

Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.

Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.

However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.

Continue Reading

Trending