Opinion
Wayward journey of middle class: Some reflections
by Gunadasa Amarasekera
(A talk given by Gunadasa Amarasekera at the Royal Asiatic Society
(Continued from yesterday)
The net result of these debates was the production of a long essay by Piyadasa, to justify his view especially the existence of a civilisational consciousness in the people. In the first part of the essay, he tried to show how he acquired this civilisational consciousness in his childhood. How the Renaissance brought about by Weliwitiye Sangaraja Saranankara in the 18th century had filtered down to the South of the country resulting in the establishment of the two great institutes Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara and how it produced the national hero- Anagarika Dharmapala who had influenced his father.
The essay was published in the university journal which had attracted the attention of Prof. Peter Wolseley of the University of London who was in charge of a Centre devoted to the study of South Asian religious and nationalist movements taking place at the moment.
When Professor Wolsely contacted Piyadasa and invited him to come over and work at his Centre Piyadasa could not believe himself. It was the beginning of the period in his life which is depicted in the volume Dururataka Dukata Kiriyaka .
Living in London in a dingy hole on the fifth floor of a dilapidated house, huddled together with the Winter eating into their bones, rushing to the doctor with his sickly son, managing on a pittance given by the Centre, Piyadasa was reminded of the agonising struggle of the Buddha to attain enlightenment. Am I not in a similar situation? Can there be some sort of enlightenment in sight for me too? Piyadasa deliberated. Hence the title of this volume – Dukata Kiriyaka
In due course Piyadasa achieved something akin to enlightenment.
Piyadasa’s stay in London brought about a radical change in his outlook. It confirmed what he had felt for a long time but was not able to articulate. How we had become a nation of imitators-our life style, the values, the culture were products of a civilisation that is alien and far removed from us. Even the knowledge we were made to acquire was a product of that civilisation. We have tried to transplant those ideologies and the knowledge in an entirely different soil. If we are to solve our problems, and go forward, get out of the present predicament and go ahead it is essential to rediscover our civilisation and go back to it.
Apart from supplying the information that Wolseley wanted Piyadasa was to revise his essay to cover many unsolved aspects.
In the process of revision Piyadasa realised that he has missed out on a vital factor on which his thesis had been based. If the Theravada Buddhism in his country has no societal dimension as made out by the leading thinkers of the West, how could one present a model based on Buddhist Civilisational values? Authorities such as Max Weber, Durkheim, Toynbee have all claimed Buddhism as a way of individual liberation with no societal dimension.
The only evidence to support Piyadasa’s thesis was Trevor Ling’s book – Buddhist Ciivlization in India– where the author has spoken of an unbroken Buddhist civilisation existing up to the British Conquest of Ceylon. There was no other evidence available. Piyadasa had to look deeper to substantialise his thesis. Was Buddhism introduced into a vacuum in my country?
Wasn’t there a hydraulic civilisation with a powerful societal dimension in the country? Is it the confluence of these two civilisations and the influence of the hydro civilization that may have provided the societal dimension, if Theravada Buddhism itself has no such dimension as claimed by these authorities. Piyadasa was jubilant with his discovery.
But Peter Wolseley was not convinced much with it. He seemed clueless. When Piyadasa asked him to comment on his work he suggested sending it to Professor Richardson in US. Richardson was the head of his department and was in charge of all the centers in Asia and the Middle East.
It was when Piyadasa was getting ready to come back home, that he got a call from Professor Richarson asking him to visit his centre before going home.
Piyadasa’s first reaction was to refuse it. By then he had his own suspicions about the ‘bona fides’ of these centres. These suspicions were confirmed by the email he received from his friend Siripala in the US; ’do not lend your support to this treacherous campaign. These centres are there to provide the ammunition needed to destroy their new enemy- Nationalism as stated by the Israeli Prime Minister recently- Marxism is no longer our enemy. It is Nationalism’.
Piyadasa’s wife Sujatha prevailed upon him to accept the offer pointing out the realities they would have to face when they go back penniless. This period faced by Piyadasa is covered in the volume-Athara Maga.
Working in Richarson’s center, suffering from pangs of conscience- Fortune came in Piyadasa’s way most unexpectedly. Though unexpected it was the most desired thing for Piyadasa.Rupak Sirikansa had come to US for a series of lectures and visited Richardson’s center. Piyadasa was introduced to him.
Piyadasa had heard of Rupak Sirikansa. He was one of the leaders of the Buddhist Socialist Movement initiated by Ajan Buddhadasa. Recently Piyadasa had received a lot of literature about this movement and was yearning to be there as it had a great relevance to his own endeavour. Piyadasa gave Rupak his essay which was with Richardson.
About two days later Rupak invited Piyadasa to come over to his flat.
Piyadasa was overjoyed when Rupak invited him to come to their Centre in Bangkok on their way home. Rupak had been on the look- out for a Buddhist to translate Ajan Buddhadeva’s works into English
Sujatha too readily approved of Piyadasa’s proposal to visit Ajan Buddhadasa’s Centre in Bangkok. She has recently developed an interest in meditation after the traumatic experience she underwent.On arriving at the Buddhist Centre, they decided to stay on for a week or two. Ajan Buddhadeva was very happy to meet them and showed great interest in Piyadasa’s project.
After a month or two when Rupak Sirikansa suggested that the two of them stay in the experimental village run on Buddhist economics they readily agreed. Piyadasa thoroughly enjoyed the task of translating Ajan’s works into English. He found many insights derived from the Tripitaka, emphasising the societal dimensions of Theravada Buddhism which had escaped him. It is these insights that had stimulated Ajan Buddhadasa to initiate the Buddhist Socialist movement.
The small house on a hillock which was allocated to them was meant for foreigners visiting the Centre. It had no furniture other than the table and chair in the study. There were no beds. They had to eat and sleep on mats. The only communication with the outside world was the telephone.
After about three months both Sujatha and Piyadasa agreed that this was the happiest days of their married life.
But that happiness was short lived. These events are described in the last volume of Gamanaka Aga.
Sujatha had developed a breast cancer with deposits in the liver. She was aware that her death warrant has come and was keen to get back home to die. But Piyadasa insisted on going to Australia for further treatment and to be with the son. A nephew of Sujatha was a consultant surgeon working there.
After about two weeks of suffering Sujatha passed away.Piyadasa stayed on, on the insistence of the son. He was feeling that his mission too had come to an end. There was nothing to look forward to. His son Prasanna seeing the depressed state of his father suggested to his friend Sarath at the Australian High Commission to get him interested in the final days of the war against Prabhakaran. Sarath was jubilant about what was happening at home and looked forward
to getting Piyadasa interested in the final battles. Piyadasa who never believed in such a remedy did not show much interest. But wiping out terrorism, he realised, was a prerequisite for any economic or political change in the country.
After about three months Piyadasa and Prasanna decided to come back to the country. Piyadasa was rather interested in seeing the mood of the country after the eradication of terrorism.
The final chapter of the narrative Gamananthaya -the end of the journey- describes what Piyadasa witnessed on coming home.Piyadasa felt very dejected with what he saw. Nothing had changed. It was the same country that he had left.
If at all the neo-liberal gang seems to have got a new lease of life. He saw new models of limousines which he had not seen even in Australia plying the streets. Colombo was a concrete jungle with sky scrapers pointing to the skies.
The middle class seemed to have vanished with a handful going up the ladder and the vast majority falling off the ladder ending up in abject poverty. His nephew with whom he was staying was a good example. He could recall how his sister brought them up, living in poverty. He, now a Consultant Surgeon was living in a flat in Colombo 7 the like of which Piyadasa had not seen even in New York. He was quite jubilant about what had happened. Most others Piyadasa met were in the same mood.
In sheer desperation Piyadasa decided to meet his comrade in arms, Thilakasena to find out his views. It was with difficulty that Piyadasa found his where abouts.Thilakasena was living in Kadawatha. It was late evening when Piyadasa reached his house. Thilakasena was living alone. His wife had gone off to Nigeria to live with their daughter.
“I knew you had come but could not find out where you were staying. Otherwise, I would have come to see you,” said Thilakasena embracing Piyadasa.
“I came in sheer desperation”, Piyadasa replied. “Haven’t all our dreams got shattered? I felt like going back to Australia.”
“I am in the same position. I am of the same mind. I neither read the newspapers nor watch the television. Confined to the house I go through those episodes we went through together in those days”.
“Don’t you think this is the end of the Sinhala nation as well as the country?” Piyadasa asked.
“I too often think so. But I don’t think we should be so pessimistic. Our nation I believe, had gone through many a crisis of this type, in its long history”
“But the world had changed. We are no longer a sovereign nation. Our destiny is decided by foreign powers and not by us, this country will soon become a colony of india or America or of both!” Piyadasa replied.
“It may be so. But as long as Buddhism and the Buddhist Civilisation lasts in this country, our nation will remain intact”, Thilakasena replied.
“But do you think this is a Buddhist country any longer? I thought of going back to my ancestral home to spend the rest of my life. But that house has been sold to a foreigner who has made it into an Assembly of God belonging to the ‘Born Again’ sect. I see no Buddhist civilizational values any longer.”
“I agree. It is one of the great threats we are facing. If as you say, we are no longer a Buddhist country, this may very well be the end of our nation”.
It was almost midnight when Piyadasa left. He felt as depressed as when he came.
* * * *
I have made this feeble attempt to convey to you the gist of that long narration- the wayward journey of the Sinhala middle class.In doing so I have taken the liberty to leave out many a section covered by the narrative, introduced new material here and there by way of reflection, changed the sequence of events for the sake of making the narrative more intelligible and palatable to you.
I hope I have succeeded to some extent. It is a difficult task for a writer to elucidate his view objectively and comment and reflect on them.I am very much conscious of, and grateful for the honour bestowed on me by inviting me to this august institution, coming down from colonial times, and address this scholarly gathering.
Opinion
Protecting Sri Lanka’s natural heritage: The leadership we need for next 75 years
After nearly 77 years of wildlife conservation, Sri Lanka must strengthen the institutions, professional leadership and political will needed to safeguard its natural heritage for generations to come.
By Dilum Alagiyawanna
Sri Lanka has a long and proud history of protecting its natural heritage. Generations of wildlife officers, forest officers, scientists, researchers, field staff and conservationists have worked, often under difficult circumstances, to protect our forests, wildlife and ecosystems. Their contribution deserves recognition and respect.
One important milestone in this journey came in October 1949, when the Wildlife department was established as a separate institution, following the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance of 1937 and the expansion of the country’s wildlife reserves. The creation of a dedicated department reflected an important recognition of the time: wildlife conservation required specialised institutional attention.
Today, nearly 77 years after its establishment, Sri Lanka has an opportunity not simply to reflect on that institutional journey, but to consider what kind of institutions and leadership we need for the next 75 years.
This is not an argument about the individuals currently holding positions in our conservation institutions. Nor is it intended to question the commitment, professionalism or sacrifices of the many public servants who have served these institutions over the years.
It is a broader institutional question.
What kind of leadership does Sri Lanka need to protect its natural heritage in the 21st century?
The issue is not who occupies a particular position today. It is whether our system of identifying, developing and appointing leaders is designed to meet the conservation challenges of tomorrow
A Changing conservation landscape
When many of our major conservation institutions were established, the principal challenges were relatively straightforward: establish protected areas, prevent poaching, enforce wildlife legislation and protect forests and wildlife from direct exploitation.
Those responsibilities remain fundamental.
But conservation today is considerably more complex.
Habitat fragmentation, expanding infrastructure, human-elephant conflict, climate change, invasive species, pollution, wildlife disease, road mortality, unplanned tourism and competing demands for land and water are placing increasing pressures on ecosystems.
Conservation can no longer be treated as an isolated environmental concern.
A highway can fragment a wildlife habitat. An irrigation project can alter an ecosystem. Poorly planned tourism can degrade a protected landscape. Agricultural expansion can affect wildlife movement. Climate change can alter species distributions, water availability and ecosystem resilience.
Conservation therefore intersects with agriculture, irrigation, energy, transport, tourism, disaster management, climate policy, land-use planning and national economic development.
It has become a multidisciplinary national policy challenge.
Beyond administration: What conservation leadership requires
There is nothing inherently wrong with a career public service.
Sri Lanka needs a professional, impartial and experienced public administration. Administrative knowledge, institutional memory and an understanding of government procedures are indispensable to the functioning of the State.
The question is whether administrative experience and seniority alone should be the principal criteria for leading institutions entrusted with complex living ecosystems and irreplaceable natural capital.
I believe they should not.
Leadership of major natural-resource institutions should combine administrative competence with scientific and technical understanding, field experience, strategic thinking, integrity, sound judgement and a demonstrated commitment to conservation outcomes.
This is not an argument for automatically replacing administrators with scientists. Nor is personal passion for nature, by itself, sufficient.
What Sri Lanka needs is mission-driven professional leadership.
A person leading a conservation institution should understand not only how to administer a government department, but also why that institution exists, what ecological outcomes it is expected to achieve and what may happen if those outcomes are not achieved.
Dr P. E. P. Deraniyagala: A legacy of scientific leadership
Sri Lanka’s own history provides a remarkable example of what can happen when scientific expertise, intellectual curiosity and institutional leadership come together.
Dr P. E. P. Deraniyagala was a zoologist, palaeontologist and naturalist whose contribution to Sri Lanka’s natural heritage extended far beyond the formal responsibilities of a government position.
He was appointed Director of the Colombo Museum in 1939 and, following the reorganisation of the museums, became the first Director of the Department of National Museums, a position he held until his retirement in 1963. His scientific work ranged from Sri Lanka’s living fauna to fossil elephants and other extinct prehistoric mammals.
It lies in what he brought to that position.
He brought scientific curiosity, intellectual independence, research capability and a lifelong commitment to understanding Sri Lanka’s natural heritage.
He did not simply administer an institution concerned with heritage. He contributed to the body of knowledge upon which our understanding of that heritage depended.
That is an important lesson for today.
Our conservation institutions must not merely administer conservation programmes. They must increasingly become knowledge-driven institutions capable of generating, interpreting and applying scientific evidence to management decisions.
From institutional continuity to institutional renewal
After nearly 77 years of experience, the appropriate response is not to criticise or dismantle the institutions that have served the country.
It is to ask how we can make them stronger, more scientifically capable, technologically advanced and better equipped for the next 75 years.
The challenges of 2026 are vastly different from those of 1949.
Satellite remote sensing, GIS, GPS telemetry, camera trapping, drones, genetic analysis, artificial intelligence and ecological modelling can transform how wildlife and ecosystems are understood and managed.
But technology alone cannot transform conservation.
Institutions need the scientific capacity to interpret information, the field capacity to collect reliable data and, above all, leadership capable of turning evidence into timely decisions.
A capable leader, however, also needs an institution with adequate resources, professional autonomy, scientific capacity and the authority to act. Leadership reform therefore cannot be reduced simply to changing individuals. It must also strengthen the institutional environment in which those individuals operate.
From species management to ecosystem stewardship
Sri Lanka must also move beyond a narrow concept of wildlife management.
An elephant is not simply an animal to be managed when it enters a village.
A leopard is not simply a species to be protected when a conflict occurs.
A forest is not simply a designated area on a map.
Each exists within a larger ecological system.
Effective conservation therefore requires landscape-level thinking: protecting habitats, maintaining ecological connectivity, securing watersheds, managing human activity and ensuring that development decisions properly account for ecological consequences.
Conservation expertise must therefore be incorporated into national development planning before decisions are made, rather than being brought into the process after environmental conflicts have already emerged.
Preventing conservation conflicts before they reach the courts
There is another reality that cannot be ignored.
For decades, conservationists, environmental organisations, researchers, professionals and concerned citizens have repeatedly found themselves having to seek administrative, political and sometimes judicial intervention when environmental concerns have not been adequately resolved through normal institutional processes.
The courts have consequently become an important safeguard for environmental protection.
But this should make us ask a deeper question.
Why should citizens repeatedly have to go to court to protect a forest, wildlife habitat, wetland or other environmentally sensitive area when the State already has institutions, laws, scientists and regulatory mechanisms designed to address these matters?
Judicial intervention is an essential component of a democratic system and an important safeguard for the public interest. But courts should not have to become the primary mechanism through which conservation policy is resolved, case by case.
A judicial determination necessarily operates within the legal and evidentiary framework before the court. It cannot substitute for a scientifically informed conservation policy or a strong institutional mechanism capable of identifying and resolving environmental risks at an early stage.
The objective should therefore be to build institutions strong enough to prevent many of these disputes from reaching the courtroom in the first place.
Conservationists and environmental organisations should ideally be able to engage with government institutions early in the decision-making process, supported by credible scientific evidence and transparent procedures, rather than being forced into the role of permanent opponents of the State.
Leadership that gets decisions right
This is precisely why Sri Lanka needs conservation leadership with the knowledge, independence, judgement and courage to make the right decisions at the right time.
Good conservation leadership is not simply about enforcing the law after a conflict has emerged.
It is about anticipating problems, understanding ecological consequences, identifying risks early and taking scientifically sound decisions before an issue becomes a political, social or legal dispute.
Sometimes the right decision may require saying no.
Sometimes it may require proposing a better alternative.
And sometimes it may require bringing scientists, communities, development agencies and political decision-makers together early enough to find a solution that protects both the public interest and the environment.
This is not about confrontation with governments or development.
It is about preventing unnecessary confrontation by getting the decision right in the first place.
The right leader can prevent a conservation problem from becoming an administrative problem, an administrative problem from becoming a political problem, and a political problem from ultimately becoming a legal dispute.
The best conservation decision is often the one that prevents the conflict from arising in the first place.
Conservation requires political will
Strong professional leadership, however, is not enough.
Conservation also requires political leadership with the vision, commitment and political will to support the right decisions, particularly when they may be difficult or politically inconvenient.
India’s Project Tiger, launched in 1973, provides a compelling example. The Government of India established the programme in response to the serious decline of tiger populations, creating a national conservation initiative that combined scientific management, protected areas and strong political commitment.
Indira Gandhi’s interest in environmental protection and her government’s support helped create the political conditions for major conservation initiatives during that period.
The lesson is not that political leaders should run conservation institutions.
It is the opposite.
Political leadership must create the space, authority and support for professional conservation institutions to do their job properly.
A scientifically sound decision made by a conservation institution can achieve little if political leadership is unwilling to stand behind it. Conversely, political will, working together with scientific and professional leadership, can turn a good conservation idea into a transformative national programme.
Sri Lanka needs both sides of this equation:
professional conservation leadership capable of making the right decisions, and political leadership with the will to support those decisions in the national interest.
The ideal relationship is not political interference in conservation.
It is political commitment to evidence-based conservation.
Natural Heritage Is National Capital
Sri Lanka’s natural resources should also be recognised as national capital.
Forests support water security.
Wetlands provide natural flood protection.
Healthy watersheds support agriculture and hydropower.
Biodiversity supports tourism.
Marine ecosystems support fisheries.
Intact landscapes provide resilience against climate-related disasters.
When these systems are degraded, the country incurs an economic cost.
The question should therefore not simply be:
How much will conservation cost?
It should also be:
How much will it cost Sri Lanka if we fail to conserve its natural capital?
This is why conservation expertise must be integrated into national development decision-making from the beginning.
Choosing the leaders for tomorrow
Sri Lanka does not lack people with knowledge, experience and commitment.
Our universities, research institutions, wildlife and forest services, professional organisations and civil society contain scientists, researchers, field practitioners and conservationists with considerable expertise.
What is needed is a system that allows this expertise to contribute more effectively to institutional leadership.
Future appointments to senior positions in natural-resource institutions should therefore consider more than administrative seniority.
They should consider:
Scientific and technical competence
Conservation and field experience
Strategic leadership
Institutional management capability
Integrity and independence
Understanding of communities and stakeholders
A demonstrated record of achieving meaningful outcomes
Such a system would not weaken the public service.
It would strengthen it by bringing administrative excellence and conservation excellence together.
The Wildlife Department is a useful lens through which to examine this broader question, but the issue extends far beyond wildlife. It concerns every institution entrusted with Sri Lanka’s forests, biodiversity, wetlands, coastal ecosystems, marine resources and other forms of natural capital.
What should Sri Lanka’s conservation institutions look like for the next 75 years?
Sri Lanka should be proud of the conservation institutions it has built since the middle of the last century.
But institutional pride should never become institutional complacency.
The establishment of the Wildlife Department in 1949 was itself an example of institutional adaptation. The country recognised that wildlife conservation had become sufficiently important and specialised to require a dedicated institution.
The same principle applies today.
The conservation challenges of 2026 are vastly different from those of 1949.
The answer is not to abandon what was built.
It is to evolve it.
We need conservation institutions that are stronger, more scientific, more innovative and better equipped to influence national development decisions.
We need leadership selection systems that recognise conservation as a specialised professional responsibility.
We need a public service in which administrative excellence is complemented by scientific expertise, field experience and a genuine commitment to conservation outcomes.
And we need political leadership with the vision and will to recognise that protecting natural capital is not an obstacle to national development, but an essential condition for sustainable national prosperity.
This is not about replacing individuals.
It is about building a better system for the future.
It is not about weakening existing institutions.
It is about strengthening them for the challenges ahead.
And it is not about choosing between development and conservation.
It is about ensuring that development does not destroy the natural capital upon which Sri Lanka’s long-term prosperity depends.
After nearly 77 years of dedicated wildlife conservation, perhaps this is the right moment to ask a fundamental question:
What should Sri Lanka’s conservation institutions look like for the next 75 years?
The answer should not reject the past.
It should be an ambitious evolution of it.
Because when the next generation looks back at our time, they will not judge us simply by how well we administered the institutions we inherited.
They will judge us by what forests remained standing, what species survived, what ecosystems remained intact, and whether we had the wisdom and courage to pass on Sri Lanka’s extraordinary natural heritage in better condition than we received it.
Author: Dilum Alagiyawanna is a telecommunications engineer turned environmental and wildlife conservationist, citizen scientist and wildlife documentary filmmaker. His work bridges science, public policy and sustainable development, with particular emphasis on the long-term conservation of Sri Lanka’s elephants and other threatened species.
Opinion
The Concrete Road
On Monday 27 December 2021, according to a Flight Safety Foundation narrative, “Cessna 172L 4R-GAF (ex 4R-HDC) of Sakurai Aviation crash landed in a paddy field in Paththayam Watta, Kimbulapitiya, Negombo in the Gampaha district close to Bandaranaike International Airport (VCBI) after the aircraft suffered an engine RPM fluctuation and subsequent engine failure. Three of the four occupants were injured. The charter flight was on its way to Koggala Airport (VCCK) from Sigiriya Airport (VCCS) when the problems started to occur. It had initially taken off from Ratmalana Airport (VCCC) and was supposed to land there after departing Koggala Airport (VCCK). The flight was going to make an emergency landing at Bandaranaike International Airport (VCBI) but while the aircraft was descending the pilot in command informed the controller that he had no control over the engine power. During the final approach to runway 22 the pilot in command then declared a “MAYDAY” call and the aircraft crash landed soon after.”
The touchdown itself at the paddy field was safe but due to a concrete road, which was not visible from to air at low level and running across the field, the nose wheel hit it and broke off creating the destruction and injury.
With the economic recovery, the present government has started reconstructing the highways and expressways that were suspended in the recent past. In countries like the United States of America (USA) there are straight stretches of expressways and highways, at regular intervals, where light to medium size aircraft could safely land in an emergency unlike the accident described above. Not only that, that particular stretch of road is maintained by the local Regulating Authority like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the case of the USA.
A Safe Landing on an Expressway in India.
The Sri Lanka National Aviation Policy of 2017 also recommends that there should be helipads at regular intervals along the expressways/ highways to facilitate medical evacuation in case of motor accidents. It should be noted that the Minister in Charge of Aviation and Highways is one and the same
Will the Government spare a thought for safer multimodal transport especially when there is a push to make Domestic Aviation available for tourism? Or will it be just another pipe dream?
Capt. G A Fernando
Former member of the Accident Investigation Team, Civil Aviation Authority, Sri Lanka.(CAASL)
Immediate past President of Aircraft Owners and Operators Association, Sri Lanka. (AOAOA)
Opinion
Ginige Palitha Sirimal Harischandra de Silva Historian and Archivist
by Geedreck Uswatte-aratchi,
B.A.(Cey.), Ph.D. (Cantab.)
In my first year at Peradeniya, I lived in Room 54 on the ground floor of the first quadrangle of Ramanathan Hall. In room 55 lived the prize-winning short story writer Somapala Wijesinghe, in his second year. On the first night, I walked a bit late to dinner to avoid the fierce raggers. As my luck would have it, there was a short man who barked out, ‘You fresher, what school do you come from?’ ‘From Kuliyapitiya Central School’, said I, meekly. The short man laughed loud derisively, ‘Where the hell is that? You have no business to come to this hallowed place. You look starved. Go and eat, I will deal with you in time.’ I was scared and hungry. So did I meet my first and long-lasting friend in Peradeniya. Haris read history under Ray Chaudhry, Sinha, G. C. Mendis and Lakshman Perera. The brilliant historians of Peradeniya were yet to come. I read Economics in the Takaran Shed School on the embankment across the road from the Arts Building.
Haris had an irresistible impish sense of humour. It did not spare friend or foe. When he came to Peradeniya, he brought his decrepit bicycle by rail. It had no bell, no lights, front or tail and no breaks but he never hurt himself or another except once and that grievously when he was very young in Panadura; he lost one eye in a road accident. The offending party was not Haris. That in no way spoiled the fun he had on his bicycle in Peradeniya or later. He was wildly popular and much admired. There was hardly any student in Peradeniya who did not know Haris. Among other things, I learnt from him to wear my shoe, making a slipper of it by beating down the heel.
There were several student’s societies in Peradeniya. It was usual for some of these societies to organise a bus tour to some place of interest. Usually, they came back late at night having shouted themselves hoarse and dead tired. One of our mutual friends joined a trip that year. In the evening, after dinner, Haris came to my room glistening with mischief. We both went in to our friend’s room and systematically dismantled his bed, put the mattress atop the closet, undid the springs and left them all over the floor. Our friend came back eager to hit the pillow but there was no bed. We came solicitously to help him re-assemble his bed and dismount the mattress. Our friend was furious with us till next morning. He bided his time. I joined a trip to Mahiyangana, mainly to go down the 18 bends. I came back dog tired fearing the worst. There might be a bucket of water ready to drench me as I opened my door. There wasn’t but my mattress was atop the closest. Never mind, mi pan rai, as I learnt to say in Bangkok, much later.
Vernugopal, who played hockey and later was a Certified Public Accountant in New Jersey, Haris and I nearly fell into serious trouble in our second year. Norman, son of Weerasuriya, QC, came to see Peradeniya, where he was scheduled to come into residence next year. I did not see him but he had come in a Mercedes Benz and had worn an expensive warm jacket that he had bought in London, earlier in the year. Vernu, for one reason or another, had lifted it and given it to Haris for safe keeping. Ever out for mischief, Haris rushed it to my room and asked me to keep it with me and, the next morning, move it out of the Campus, unobserved. He pressed me the next morning and I complied and forgot about it all. Not for long. One day the Warden knocked on my door; very unusual, I thought. ‘Do you have in your possession an expensive jacket belonging to a visitor to our Hall?’, he asked. ‘I have a jacket but I don’t know whom it belongs to. I will have to consult Haris who gave it to me a few days ago.’ ‘No matter all that. I want the jacket in my quarters before 6, this evening.’. I learnt about the episode later. Nicholas Attygalle had succeeded Ivor Jennings as Vice Chancellor. Attygalle and Weerasurya (Snr.) were pals. We all would have been in trouble if the jacket went missing. I was mighty relieved when all was settled.
Harris had a long string of cousins who lived mostly along Galle Road. They were his mother’s siblings’ children. I lived in a boarding house in Bambalpitiya to go to work. One Saturday morning Haris and I set out in his car to go to Hikkaduva (not the Hikkaduva of today) for the weekend. We visited one cousin in Moratuva, several in Panadura, another in Kalutara and so on and reached Ambalangoda about four in the afternoon. I declined the offer to ride back with him and took the 3.15 next day afternoon train to the Fort.
Haris’ hobby was carpentry. He parked his car on the lawn and the garage turned into a workshop. He had a good collection of tools. Some of the furniture in his house was made by him. He insisted on repairing his roof. One morning someone called from his home that Haris had fallen from the roof and we rushed much concerned. The turf had received him gently and he was none the worse for the accident. He kept on mending his roof.
Hema was a fitting companion to Haris: joyful and a perfect host. Mali and I spent many happy days with them, especially after the two children were born. Haris did a tremendous job bringing up the two of them by himself to be distinguished and highly productive citizens of this country. One of them lived with her family in the father’s house and Haris took great pleasure as the grandchildren went to good universities and eventually took up interesting work.
A hallmark of Haris’ life was the simplicity in which he lived it. The lives of Haris and family were almost stoic. Their home, the furniture in it, the clothes they wore and the occasions in life that they celebrated were all lessons in simplicity. One of the children, who was in a learned profession, once worked in Polonnaruva. She came to her home in Colombo, when she could, by bus. She later worked in Panadura and similarly often came back to Colombo by bus. Among a people who notoriously exhibit wealth they do not fully possess (read the ratio of household debt to household income), here was an oasis of serenity and simplicity. I respected him and his family very much.
Haris came to Peradeniya with some familiarity with research work. At Ananada Sastralaya, Kotte where Haris studied to enter university, young Amaradasa Virasinghe was a teacher. Virasinhge had been much inspired by Professor M.D.Ratnasuriya, who came from London University. The world of English literature was rocked by F.R.Leavis’ journal Scrutiny. Gananath Obeysekere had graduated from the English Department which was headed by E.F.C. Ludowyk who had graduated from Cambridge and was familiar with that work. The two young graduates decided to publish a quarterly Sinhala literary review and the first issue of Samskrti appeared in 1953. Haris had a hand in putting the first issue together in Obeysekere’s home in Lauries Road in Bambalapitiya. Virasinghe and his colleagues published Samskrti for about 20 years when Virasinghe decided to go to Pennsylvania. Amaradasa Gunewardena (Sinhala, Ramanathan, 1954) heroically carried on the journal for several years irregularly, until when it ceased publication. Virasinghe came back in 2000 or so and wanted to revive samskrti. With time, much had changed. The original enthusiasts all had moved, except two: Susil Siriwardena from Oxford and Usvatte-aratchi, who had come back after 25 years overseas.. They revived the journal to survive till 2015. Although the university population had multiplied several-fold and the Sinhala readding public even more, publishable material was scarce. And the journal spurted on for a year or two and died.
When Haris joined the Department of Government Archives under Amaravamsa Devaraja, the Department was in Nuvara Eliya. It had been moved from Colombo when there was a risk that Japanese might bomb the capital and the archives might be lost. Further, the cooler and slightly drier climate in Nuvara Eliya was likely to preserve the documents at lower cost. Peradeniya which turned out to be a major user of Archives was in the neighbourhood. However, Colombo had many users who could not afford the delays and the cost of driving to Nuvara Eliya. As time went on three universities had sprung up in and near Colombo and there emerged many users. President Jayewardene himself was a keen reader of Sri Lanka’s history. And there was an excellent site in Independence Square. It fell to Haris who was Deputy Director then to take care of the project to put up the new building and equip it. They could not have found a better person, had they searched the world for years. His integrity in the management of funds was rock solid. He had the cheque ready the day before payment was due and the builder had his first day of surprise when he was so informed. With many young students of history, law, economics and anthropology, there was a heightened interest in Archives and they found an excellent archivist in Haris.
Haris himself enjoyed the work immensely. As time permitted, he wrote two well-researched and data rich valuable works, as I recollect. He never lost interest in history and archives and we regularly chatted about what we were reading, thinking or writing. I dared not make a mistake in history. Haris’ red pen would find employment.
Haris was the first friend I made in Peradeniya and he is the last to whom I bid adieu. You made history and history will treat you splendidly.
-
News7 days agoMissing doctor’s body found in Mahiyanganaya
-
News7 days agoAustralia declines to release Finance Secy Suriyapperuma’s citizenship details
-
News4 days agoEight politicians in drug kingpin probe
-
News7 days ago22A: BASL suggests CJ recuse himself from hearing petitions
-
Features2 days ago“Wrap Me Up in My Blazer”— A Gentlemanly Bradby Reminiscence
-
Business4 days agoSri Lanka opens up: A new season of direct connectivity
-
Features6 days agoInsights from Chieftains of Uva: Genealogy of two Kandyan Families – Part II
-
Features4 days agoRedefining ageing in Sri Lanka
