Opinion

Homage to Scholarly Excellence

Published

3 years ago

2021/09/22

Sahan Weerasooriya

Ananda Wickremaratne

by G. H. Peiris

Professor Ananda Wickremeratne ranked among our most brilliant scholars whose careers commenced in the Faculty of Arts of the University of Ceylon in the 1950s and the early ‘60s. From about the late 1960s, as our political turbulences and economic hardships intensified, many among them were induced to emigrate to countries where their qualifications and skills could be put into more rewarding use. When Ananda joined that exodus in 1979, belatedly and somewhat reluctantly, the prospects in the ‘West’ (especially the United States) for our graduates in Arts and Humanities were far more restricted than in earlier times.

The information on Ananda’s death following several years of deteriorating health reached us about a week ago. Death is such a non-event here that even the passing away of extraordinarily erudite scholars and professionals tends to remain ignored. That does not matter. But what does matter is that their legacies also remain forgotten or unknown. It is in this latter context that I am impelled to offer this homage to my friend Ananda in the form of a brief sketch of his academic achievements.

In what could be considered as the first phase of Ananda’s teaching career he remained in the university system of Sri Lanka – briefly at Jayawardenapura, and over a longer spell at Peradeniya – where, apart from being an extraordinarily popular teacher, he, with his colleagues like Kingsley de Silva, Michael Roberts, Gananath Obeyesekera and Ian Goonetileke, made an indelible contribution to a flourishing tide collaborative research in the Faculty of Arts. A greater part of his remaining university career was spent in the United States.

Ananda obtained the baccalaureate degree in History with honours in 1961. Soon thereafter he was recruited to the teaching staff of the Faculty of Arts. Having been awarded a Commonwealth Scholarship for post-graduate study in Britain, he gained admission to Oxford and undertook a programme of research at the successful completion of which he was awarded the doctoral degree. The in-depth inquiry into education and religious affairs during what could be considered the most vicissitudinous phase during the ‘Victorian Era’ of British dominance over the island – 1865 to 1885 – one finds in his thesis a much greater focus on the impact of the related social changes on the indigenous inhabitants of the island than in other detailed studies (except Ralph Pieris’ ‘Society in a Time of Troubles’ – a series published in the University of Ceylon Review) of spatial and temporal overlap.

It was probably the quality of Ananda’s doctoral dissertation in terms of detail anddepth, and refinement of presentation, that earned him a ‘Commonwealth Academic Staff Fellowship’, enabling him in the mid-1970s to enrich his earlier research at the archival sources in London, expanding the scope of his interests on the impact of the fluctuating fortunes of that 20-year period – social destabilisation caused by the process of dispossession of vast extents of land from Buddhist temples and shrines (vihāragam and dēvālagam) in the enforcement of the ‘Temple Lands Ordinance of 1856’, the accelerated growth of coffee plantations in the highlands followed by the spectacular collapse of the coffee enterprise from about the late 1870s, the advent of rail transport and intensification of the road network, the discriminatory educational reforms, and the changes in the modalities of taxation of the those engaged in paddy production.

Several of his publications during this period such as ‘Religion, Nationalism and Social Change in Ceylon’, ‘Rulers and the Ruled in British Ceylon’, and ‘Famine Conditions in Late-19th Century Ceylon’, considered collectively, convey the impression that they were a prelude to what turned out to become one of his major research concerns – viz. Buddhist revivalism and nationalism in Sri Lanka. It was while working on that subject with the thoroughness typical of his efforts that he contributed to the aforesaid collaborative research in the Faculty of Arts, the most significant outcome of which was the long delayed ‘University of Ceylon History of Ceylon, Volume III’ (1973) for which Ananda contributed four chapters and co-authored another with Michael Roberts. Yet another product of collective faculty effort of much wider scope – Sri Lanka: A Survey (1975) – also included a study by Ananda on ‘Peasant Agriculture’, in addition to those by Ediriweera Sarachchandra on the performing arts, and K. N. O. Dharmadasa on literature.

From the information given to me by Ananda himself, it was Professor S. J. Tambiah, the world-renowned Anthropologist at Harvard University, which made it possible for him to proceed to that university on fellowships granted by its Department of Anthropology and the Centre for the Study of World Religions. The Harvard offer represented the severance of Ananda’s formal links with the university at Peradeniya, but enhanced his opportunities to focus on the Buddha Sasana and the State in British Ceylon.

Following the completion of his assignments at Harvard, Ananda shifted to Chicago, with a Fellowship awarded by the Kern Foundation, a major contributor to the Theosophical Society of the United States. He also gained an Associate Professorship in the Department of Theology at the Loyola University.

From copies of Ananda’s publications which I have received as gifts I am aware that he has authored at least three major monographs since making Chicago his place of residence and the base of his academic pursuits – The Roots of Nationalism in Sri Lanka (several publishers including the Cambridge University Press); The Genesis of an Orientalist: Thomas William Rhys Davids and Buddhism in Sri Lanka (1985); and Buddhism and Ethnicity in Sri Lanka (1995). There is a common methodological feature that could be discerned in all these works which Professor Paul J. Griffiths has portrayed in his ‘Preface’ to the first monograph referred to above as follows:

The writing of history, like so many intellectual endeavours during the past several decades, is in danger of being crushed under the weight of debates about theory and method. The virtues of historiography based upon close study of documentary sources from the period being written about, and with the unpretentious goal of offering a narrative account of what happened and why, are now rarely visible. This is both sad and unnecessary; sad because such historiography still has much to teach, and unnecessary whatever the value of purely theoretical debates, there is no reason at all why they should make every other kind of historical writing suspect. It is therefore a pleasure for me to write a Preface to Ananda Wickremeratne’s new book, for it is an instance, and a good instance, of the endangered species I have mentioned”.

As an avid reader of historical research on Sri Lanka but with no claim whatever to expertise in the related epistemological perspectives, I am reluctantly compelled to mention that the feature highlighted by Professor Griffiths is not the only difference between Ananda’s writings referred to above and the majority of other works of research in the same field by expatriate Sri Lankan scholars. What ought to be stressed is that, in Ananda’s publications, “what happened and why” in the highly ramified interactions between Buddhism and the State in ‘British Ceylon’ are presented to the readership devoid of any denigration of Buddhism as practiced in Sri Lanka.

Ananda being selected by the US State Department as chaperone for a well-planned tour of that country offered in 1986 to the Venerable Maduluwave Sobitha Thera was an interesting episode that had an inspirational impact on Ananda. The tour, covering as it did many places of interest, received considerable media coverage. During their sojourn in Washington DC I had an opportunity of meeting the Thera, and to observe the intellectual rapport that had developed between them.

Living in the 32nd floor of an apartment complex located on the ‘South Lake Shore Drive’ bordering Lake Michigan could have created in Ananda’s mind a yearning for a return to his ancestral home overlooking Bogambara Lake and the Temple of the Sacred Tooth-Relic in Kandy. This was the impression I got during my three-day visit to their home in 2003 when, as usual, Ananda, Swarna and their daughter Ranmini made my stay one of the most pleasant I ever had. Yet, returning to Sri Lanka was not an attainable option for Ananda – certainly not, because he could not abandon his wife and the children to fulfil his own desire. Nor, with failing health, could he survive without Swarna’s care – a consideration which became starkly evident when he attempted, with the consent of his wife and the children, a few years ago, to live alone at his home in Kandy, helped by a hired caretaker and his brother’s family supplemented with an occasional visit by friends.

Sadly, Ananda’s long-cherished research objective of producing a seminal work on Anagārika Dharmapala had to remain unfinished. The few drafts which I was privileged to read conveyed the impression that, despite failing health, he will somehow achieve his goal of presenting new insights on that sage in the literary style of effortless elegance typical of his writings. Finally, when he became almost totally incapacitated, that failure must have added to the burden of his grief.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

LG polls, what a waste of money!

Published

2 days ago

2025/03/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

If the people of this country were asked whether they want elections to the local government, majority of them would say no! How many years have elapsed since the local councils became defunct? And did not the country function without these councils that were labelled as ‘white elephants’?

If the present government’s wish is to do the will of the people, they should reconsider having local government elections. This way the government will not only save a considerable amount of money on holding elections, but also save even a greater amount by not having to maintain these local councils, which have become a bane on the country’s economy.

One would hope that the country will be able to get rid of these local councils and revert back to the days of having competent Government Agents and a team of dedicated government officials been tasked with the responsibility of attending to the needs of the people in those areas.

M. Joseph A. Nihal Perera

Opinion

What not to do

Published

3 days ago

2025/03/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

Trump and Zelensky arguing in the White House

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!

Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.

Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.

Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.

Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera

Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.

The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!

Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.

Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!

Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!

Opinion

Ajahn Brahm to visit SL in May 2025

Published

4 days ago

2025/03/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

The Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka (ABSSL) is pleased to announce that Ajahn Brahm will be visiting Sri Lanka for a short stay in May this year. Many, both Buddhists and non-Buddhists, know him and have listened to his addresses made on earlier visits, including his 2023 public talk at the BMICH, which was attended by over 4,000 people.

Ajahn Brahmavamso, popularly known as Ajahn Brahm, is the Head Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery in Serpentine, Perth. He was a pupil of the famous Thai forest monk Ajahn Chah, considered the best Theravada meditation teacher in the last century. By his own choice, Ajahn Brahmavamso shortened his name and was extra pleased that the initials represent the major religions of the world. He is renowned world-wide as an outstanding meditation bhikkhu, teacher and instructor, guiding thousands of practitioners.

As in previous visits, Ajahn Brahm’s schedule will be packed with addresses, meetings with senior professionals, business leaders, and researchers. This year, a special session has been included for teenagers and young adults.

The agenda planned for him includes:

Public address at the BMICH to all irrespective of religion and age; then to a younger audience.

· Exclusive Leadership Forum for senior professionals and business leaders.

· Forum with academics engaged in research at the Centre for Meditation Research, University of Colombo.

· A week-long meditation retreat for the Ven Sangha and experienced lay meditators.

Public Addresses

The public addresses will be on Sunday, May 18, 2025, from 7:00 am to 11:00 am, at the BMICH Main Hall and Sirimavo Halls; Ajahn Brahm moving from one hall to another so the entire audience sees him. Each hall will be well equipped with audio and video presentation. The first address: The Art of Meaningful Living, is designed for all, age notwithstanding, offering wisdom and practical insights for a fulfilling life. The second: Coping with Life Transitions and Emotional Challenges, is a special session tailored for teens and young adults, addressing key challenges faced by them in today’s fast-paced, competitive world. Both talks will be in English, with concise translation to Sinhala by Ven Damita Thera.

Exclusive Forums

On Saturday, May 17, 2025, two exclusive forums will be held at the BMICH Committee Room, Jasmine Hall. The first such session will be with eighty invited Sri Lankan academics and scientists engaged in research on meditation at the Centre for Meditation Research of the University of Colombo. This will be followed in the evening by an interactive session for a hundred invited senior professionals and business leaders, featuring a talk on leadership followed by a Q&A session.

Meditation Retreat

The most significant item on Ajahn Brahm’s programme will be a week-long meditation retreat at the Barberyn Waves Ayurveda Resort in Weligama. Focus is intended to be on the fifty members of the Ven Sangha. A limited number of experienced lay meditators will also have the opportunity to participate.

Participation & Registration

Those interested in attending the public talks at the BMICH are kindly advised to register at to secure free passes. For further information, please contact the Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka at .