Features
BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?
The killing of a Prime Minister
by Sanjiva Senanayake
(PART I)
Many people ‘know’ the conventional tale about the assassination of the Prime Minister of Ceylon, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, 62 years ago. However, they each have a slightly different take and theory about the facts, the reasons, the conspiracy theories and who ‘actually’ did it. Those then unborn or too young to have been aware of it at the time, have heard about it from older people. We have to assume that the intrinsic Lankan sense of rumour would have spiced up the details as time went by.
There is a common belief that the standards of general governance, integrity and legal processes were much higher back then, in Ceylon, than now. Bolstering this justifiable belief, adjudication was done by the Supreme Court (SC), the verdict was confirmed in the Court of Criminal Appeal and accepted by the Privy Council in London. Therefore, the predominant view continues to be that justice was served objectively and impartially.
However, there were many controversial interpretations and theories that circulated before, during and after the Bandaranaike trials. There were several aspects of the conduct of the trial and the actual evidence presented that raised questions about the guilt of the alleged assassin and, as a consequence, the guilt of the others.
Articles about those traumatic events of long ago have been published periodically, but they have progressively reverted to recounting and sometimes sensationalizing the standard version, and have not adequately addressed the many controversial questions.
This article focuses specifically on the alleged murderer and the most critical of the controversies, based on the ‘eye-witness’ evidence led at the SC trial – was Somarama proved to be the assassin beyond reasonable doubt? If there is any doubt, it opens up the possibility of a different, politically motivated conspiracy, especially since Bandaranaike was the Prime Minister during turbulent times.
THE STORY IN SUMMARY
The PM was shot several times with a revolver at his residence ‘Tintagel’ – 65, Rosmead Place – at around 10 am on September 25, 1959. Despite appearing to recover somewhat by evening following surgery, and even dictating a message to the nation from hospital, he died the next morning. The only thing Bandaranaike said about the identity of the gunman was that he was “a foolish man dressed in the robes of a monk”. This was the first major targeted political assassination in post-independence Ceylon, one that changed the future course of the country.
A Buddhist monk, Talduwe Somarama, was immediately arrested in the house, with a gun in hand, on suspicion of being the assailant. He was a hitherto low-profile Buddhist monk who was an eye specialist at the College of Indigenous Medicine in Rajagiriya.
After several days another monk, the politically powerful Mapitigama Buddharakkitha, was arrested in addition to several other individuals alleged to have assisted Buddharakkitha as part of a year-long conspiracy to kill Bandaranaike using Somarama as the assassin. Buddharakkitha, although only 38-years old, was the chief monk of the important Kelaniya Temple and, as the head of the Eksath Bhikkhu Peramuna (EBP), the most politically powerful monk in the country at the time. He was also headstrong, impulsive and confrontational – certainly not a pious monk. Although the EBP helped bring Bandaranaike to power in 1956, by 1959 Buddharakkitha was antagonistic toward the PM for being too ‘soft’ in pushing a more aggressive Sinhala Buddhist agenda. Buddharakkitha was aligned with the right-wing of the government and his antagonism toward the leftists (and vice versa) in the government was public knowledge.
After exhaustive investigations and a long trial in the SC, a special jury found both monks and H.P. Jayawardena, a close associate of Buddharakkitha, guilty of the conspiracy, and Somarama guilty of committing the murder, and all three were sentenced to death. The convictions were upheld in the Court of Criminal Appeal, but due to an inadvertent omission in intervening legislative change, Buddharakkitha and Jayawardena were sentenced to life in prison for conspiring to commit murder. An appeal to the Privy Council in London failed, and Somarama was subsequently executed.
There the matter rested and most people forgot about the details of the case with the passage of time. Other dramatic political events followed thereafter leading to an attempted coup d’etat on January 27, 1962 to overthrow the government of Bandaranaike’s widow. Resort to violence for political purposes became more prevalent from the 1970s, and targeted assassinations of political leaders more frequent.
Only two books have been written in English about the assassination; one by the late Justice A.C. Alles and the other by the late Lucian Weeramantry, who was Somarama’s counsel in the trial. It is surprising that more books and academic studies do not seem to have been published specifically about the assassination, an important event in our post-Independence history.
Justice Alles’ book provides a lot of relevant background material but, judging by assertions made and conclusions drawn, it appears to have been written on the assumption that the conspiracy allegedly planned by Buddharakkitha was true and the verdicts just, although he does refer to some questionable issues.
Weeramantry restricts himself to the procedures followed, the evidence led and the submissions made in the SC, to demonstrate that there was more than ‘reasonable doubt’ about the convictions. He argues that the prosecution of the case was politically influenced and not neutral.
It is a fascinating case with many twists and turns as well as contradictions. A critical reading of the above books is recommended to anyone who is interested in digging further into the unusual events specifically pertinent to the murder and trial. A deeper understanding of contemporary political and social developments also helps.
BACKGROUND IN BRIEF
Bandaranaike left the United National Party (UNP) in 1951 and formed the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). His party lost badly at the next general election in March 1952 and it appeared that his political career was doomed. In the meantime, political pressures by Sinhalese and Buddhist groups for affirmative action had been intensifying since Independence to redress what was perceived as historical discrimination against them from colonial times. The UNP was rather indifferent to these forces but Bandaranaike decided to channel them and was supported strongly by the ‘pancha maha balavegaya’ consisting of Buddhist monks, Ayurveda practitioners, vernacular teachers, peasants and workers.
The SLFP then formed a coalition called the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP) with a leftist party headed by Philip Gunawardena and a small party
led by W. Dahanayake, to contest the general election of April 1956. A key election slogan was ‘Sinhala-Only in 24 hours’, a potent rallying cry that meant different things to different people. The UNP too adopted the slogan prior to the election when it realised its electoral potential, but its late volte-face lacked credibility and the MEP won by a landslide.
However, the very next year, Bandaranaike initiated discussions with Tamil political leaders to provide devolution of some powers through the establishment of Regional Councils and the so-called Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact was signed in July 1957. It was a compromise on both sides, which the PM likened to the Buddha’s Middle Way, but most of the politicians of the time were focused on short-term gains and not inclined to compromise for stability and longer-term progress. There were opposition and agitation from both sides and some avoidable incidents occurred in the process. Eventually, the pact was abrogated under severe pressure in April 1958, with the EBP too playing a major role.
The antagonistic posturing did not cease and this led to one week of intense conflict at the end of May, the so-called Sinhala-Tamil riots that left long-lasting social scars. The PM’s rule was seen as weak and indecisive in bringing the riots under control and the Governor General, Sir Oliver Goonetilleke, played a major role in quelling it.
Despite all this, Bandaranaike introduced the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No. 28 of 1958 less than three months later in August 1958 as a compromise measure to accommodate Tamil demands regarding matters such as education, public service entrance examinations and the administration of the north and east. This too was criticized by extremists on both sides.
Ceylon in 1959, a decade after Independence but still looking for direction, was a hotbed of political turmoil. Agitations and strikes were rampant, with the constant interplay of all the emotion-rousing political forces of the time – urban vs. rural; westernized vs. nationalist; capitalist vs. socialist; Buddhist vs. Catholic; Sinhala vs. Tamil; rich vs. poor – trying to quickly carve pieces out of the emerging national pie. The old order was dying and a new one was being born.
In April 1959, Bandaranaike had a difference of opinion with the Inspector General of Police, Osmund de Silva and decided to replace him. The PM had been previously warned by various Buddhist leaders and MEP coalition partners in Parliament about a right-wing conspiracy to topple his administration with the involvement of the police and armed forces. Although Osmund de Silva was a Buddhist, all the senior Police officers next in line were not and, despite protests from within the Police, Bandaranaike decided to appoint M.W.F Abeykoon, an administrative officer from outside the Police service, angering several senior officers.
That was not all. The urban elites, more inclined to western lifestyles, accustomed to calling the shots politically and economically, and linguistically quite alienated from the masses, were becoming increasingly alarmed at the turn of events since the debacle in 1956 of their preferred political party, the UNP. The growing influence of more aggressive Sinhalese and Buddhist groups was causing concern among the established organizations and social groups.
There was an international dimension too. Despite the intense Cold War then raging, the Bandaranaike government had established diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union in December 1956 and signed an economic and technical cooperation agreement in 1958. The previous UNP government had recognized the People’s Republic of China in January 1950, supported China’s entry to the United Nations and entered into the historic Rubber-Rice barter agreement in 1952. The Bandaranaike government established full diplomatic relations with China in 1957.
The government’s plans to nationalize State-assisted private schools and foreign businesses such as the oil companies, and its decision in October 1957 to abrogate the Defence Pact with Britain and take back control of Trincomalee harbour and the RAF airbase at Katunayake, were all loud alarm bells.
By the latter half of 1959 the PM was into the fourth year of his five-year term, and already the coalition was fraying. The leftist faction, led by Philip Gunawardena, resigned from the government in April 1959 due to pressure from the coalition’s right wing regarding socialist measures such as the Paddy Lands Act, which included land reform. Strikes became more frequent and intense.
In this milieu, there were many disparate groups that could have had reasons to eliminate Bandaranaike, and perhaps get a bonus by pinning the blame on Buddharakkitha to neutralize a powerful, antagonistic group such as the EBP and the growing direct involvement of Buddhist monks in politics.
THE SHOOTING
Unlike today, firearms were not easily available and targeted political killings were extremely rare. The level of security considered necessary was quite basic and Bandaranaike himself was not keen on too many guards. Access to his residence was freely available during the morning to all and sundry. The shooting at close quarters happened on the verandah of the PM’s private residence with at least 30 people in the immediate vicinity.
Somarama was seated at one end of the outside verandah. There was another monk (Niwanthidiye Ananda) seated about 10 feet away from Somarama and more to the centre of the verandah, near the entrance to the corridor that led from the front porch into the interior of the house. Several others were standing around including a teacher named Gunaratne who was opposite Ananda.
The PM first spoke with Ananda and gave him some instructions. He then moved along the verandah toward Somarama and, as he bent and worshipped him in greeting, a gunshot was heard. Bandaranaike cried out in pain, turned and tried to run back into the house. Further shots were heard, and the PM was hit in the chest and abdomen. Altogether he was hit by four bullets, the first one glancing his left wrist and three entering his torso as he staggered into the house. Gunaratne, who should have had a clear view of the shooting, was also shot in the neck area by a fifth bullet as Bandaranaike stumbled past him to escape into the house along the central corridor.
In the utter confusion that followed, Somarama followed the PM into the house carrying a revolver and was then assaulted by several people who came from other parts of the house before he could say anything. In the melee the revolver went off once, the last bullet, but no one was hurt. The World War I vintage revolver, in rather poor condition, that had been used was recovered by the police.
Somarama’s version was that someone dressed in robes shot repeatedly at the PM from the garden just below the verandah, threw the revolver on to the verandah and then ran off toward the road. He then involuntarily picked up the gun and followed the PM into the house to hand it over to someone responsible.
In the meantime, PC Samarakoon, who was the sentry at the main gate, rushed to the house and shot at Somarama, injuring him in the thigh and groin area. The PM was sent to hospital by car and, soon after that, DIG Sidney de Zoysa, who had a prior appointment to meet the PM, arrived and took control of the chaotic situation. In fact, de Zoysa passed the PM’s car going toward the hospital on his way to the house, but didn’t realise the injured PM was in it. Some time after de Zoysa’s arrival, a bleeding Somarama in obvious pain was, for some inexplicable reason, despatched to the Harbour Police station on the other side of the city and detained there for around two hours before being taken to hospital where he underwent an operation to remove one of his testicles.
The firing of the first five bullets was rapid and probably took less than 10 seconds, since the PM was also moving away. The despatch of the PM by car and the arrival of Sidney de Zoysa would probably have happened within 10-15 minutes thereafter.
It seems, at first glance, to be a straightforward case. The alleged assailant, the weapon, the victim and witnesses were all readily available, and it happened in the heart of Colombo, in a narrow space, in broad daylight. On the face of it, only the motive and the possible involvement of others had to be discerned. But in political murders things are not always what they seem.
THE LEGAL PROCESS
Buddharakkitha and Jayawardena were arrested on October 14, 1959 and held in remand custody, along with Somarama. Following intensive investigations by the police, the magisterial inquiry started on December 14, 1959, less than three months after the murder, and went on until July 27, 1960. At the end of the almost seven month-long hearings, five people were named to stand trial in the SC.
1. Mapitigama Buddharakkitha thero
2. H.P. Jayawardena
3. Anura de Silva
4. Talduwe Somarama thero
5. Newton Perera
All the accused were to be charged with conspiracy to murder the PM, and the fourth with murder as well. The indictment read as follows:
That between the 25th of August, 1958, and the 26th of September, 1959, at Kelaniya, Wellampitiya, Rajagiriya, Colombo and other places within the jurisdiction of this Court, you did agree to commit or abet or act together with the common purpose of committing or abetting an offence, to wit, the murder of Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike, and that you are thereby guilty of the offence of conspiracy to commit or abet the said offence of murder, in consequence of which conspiracy the said offence of murder was committed, and that you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 296 read with sections 113B and 102 of the Penal Code.
It specifically mentioned a date 13 months earlier (August 25, 1958) as the origin of the conspiracy. This was the date on which the PM, on the advice of senior technocrats of the Ministry of Finance, decided not to award a shipping contract to a company in which Buddharakkitha’s brother had a significant interest. The direct implication is that Buddharakkitha’s resentment due to this act was the trigger for a year-long conspiracy that led to the assassination.
The defence counsel made a request for a Special Jury at the start of the SC trial due to the highly politically-charged nature of the case. They requested that government employees should be excluded but, in the end, the Foreman of the English-speaking jury was a public servant. As a matter of interest, six members were Christians and the seventh was a Buddhist, and all were from Colombo. However, the integrity of the members of the jury was never questioned.
During the SC trial it became apparent that the third accused was an insignificant character and he was finally acquitted unanimously. It was not clear why he was charged at all, or placed ahead of the alleged murderer Somarama, if there was indisputable evidence against Somarama.
Newton Perera, a police officer, allegedly procured the revolver and ammunition used in the killing. He was also accused of training Somarama to shoot, but this was not established. He was subsequently found not guilty in the SC with the jury divided five to two.
The SC trial commenced seven months later, on February 22, 1961 before Justice T.S. Fernando, and went on till May 12, 1961. The government retained George Chitty QC, a prominent criminal defence lawyer from the private Bar, to lead the prosecution in the SC, by-passing the Attorney General’s Department. The Deputy Solicitor General, A.C.M. Ameer, who was the prosecutor in the Magistrate’s Court, resigned in protest.
There were criticisms that the prosecutor for the State focused more on getting judgements against the accused who were charged, rather than seeking the truth via a broader inquiry to get to the bottom of who actually killed the PM of the country, and why. Some of the defence counsel, including Phineas Quass QC, who came over from the UK to defend Buddharakkitha and Jayawardena, also alluded to this during the trial.
The prosecution did not call Gunaratne who was in a perfect position to see the shooting at close quarters. Neither did the prosecution call key witnesses DIG Sidney de Zoysa or any of the senior (Gazetted) police officers who investigated the case. De Zoysa was called instead by Weeramantry, Somarama’s counsel. There was a lot of evidence led by the prosecution that did not appear to have relevance. The government even paid to bring down a ‘witness’ from the UK (Bruno Perera), who only served to distract attention. He was reprimanded and fined by the Judge at the end of the trial.
The seven members of the Special Jury were the final arbiters of the judgement rather than the Judge. They would have had a tedious task in assessing the oral evidence, unravelling the many counsel’s interventions and addresses, absorbing the Judge’s directions on points of law, and then arriving at a decision in a short while. In those non-computerized days, the jury had to rely only on what they heard in the courts almost every day for 55 days and make a decision on a matter of life and death, without the advantage of printed transcripts of evidence. A total of 97 witnesses testified and the typed record of the proceedings ran into 3,536 pages.
(Note: typed transcripts of the day’s proceedings were, however, made available to the Judge and counsel the following day)
TO BE CONTINUED …..
Features
Timely theatrical exploration of Middle East conflict
In what amounted to a refreshing change for the politically-conscious of Sri Lanka and the world, the Longsuffering of the peoples of the Middle East was made to come alive on stage recently through two short plays. The venue for the engaging pieces of drama, staged on November 8th, was the ‘Kolombo Kamatha’ theatre at the BMICH and the organizer of the notable experience was the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies (BCIS), Colombo.
The BCIS is in the process of celebrating the 50th anniversary of its establishment in 1974 through a series of events and projects of an educational and artistic nature throughout November and the plays were part of this wider commemorative enterprise. The relevant programs are being conducted by the BCIS staff under the guidance of the institution’s Executive Director Ms. Priyanthi Fernando.
Directed by Ruwanthi de Chikera and staged in association with the Stages Theatre Group, the plays of one hour’s duration each were titled, ‘Patterns of our Genocides’ and ‘Children of the Little Olive Park’.
The casts consisted of entirely young persons and this was an exceptional feature of the dramatizations. The latter play, which was staged first, cogently highlighted the inhumanity and brutality characteristic of the Middle East conflict. Although the victimization of the Palestinian people came to be highlighted in the main, this columnist believes that the point was driven home as well that political violence brutalizes both the victim and the aggressor in conflicts featuring contested land, nationhood and self- identity. Accordingly, the play’s thematic content is applicable to the majority of conflicts of the global South, including of course Sri Lanka.
A parable like quality which was notable in the ‘Children of the Little Olive Park’ enhanced its appeal. Although the presumed encroacher on land, in this case Israel, emerges dominant, the play stresses that the latter’s might would not be possible if not for the biased support lent to it throughout the decades by the major imperial powers, headed by the US.
The audience is left with the sense that it is the powerful and their wards who finally win and prevail in conflicts of the kind that are playing out in the Middle East.
If one were to paraphrase summarily the content of the ‘Children of the Little Olive Park’, it would go thus: ‘Once upon a time there was a little garden with an Olive tree that bore a lot of fruit. The garden was a playground for children in the village where the tree grew and they also freely tasted of its fruit.
‘But one day, two important persons from the big world outside brought a child from a nearby village and asked him to eat the Olives and play in the garden as well. But as time went by the boy from outside bullied the original children of the park, ate the fruit all by himself and brought his playmates from his villages to settle in the land as well. This resulted in quarrels and fights between the groups. However, the children who were bullied did not give in; they too armed themselves and fought back. In this way the stage was set for a long, unending fight.’
Thus, the play’s import and relevance is plain to see. However, the mode in which the play was presented made it memorable as well. It was stylized drama of a very fluid kind which was most economical in its use of the usual theatrical resources, such as props and stage sets. Thus, the audience was invited to intuitively and imaginatively connect with the play’s content. Besides, the actors engaged in spectacular movements which realistic drama would not have made possible.
‘Patterns of our Genocides’ continued with the same thematic concerns. However, the focus here shifts to the situation of the Rohingyas of Bangladesh. It is the now quite familiar story of how the Rohingyas came to be brutally victimized and driven out of their land by Bangladesh’s military rulers. Their only ‘flaw’, from the viewpoint of their oppressors, is their ethnic and religious identity. It is a case of the powerful of the land siding with the majority community and pandering to the latter’s power aspirations.
Unlike in the case of the former play, ‘Patterns of our Genocides’ unfolds in the form of mainly a narration by an actor who represents the Rohingya community. He narrates the suffering and persecution of the community, which to a degree, is dramatized and rendered engrossing. Many Sri Lankans would not find it difficult to engage deeply with the unfolding narration, since the issues strike one as familiar and are common to some local communities.
During the Q&A which followed the staging of the plays a member of the audience referred to the need for the first play to incorporate the Israeli viewpoint as well. Ideally, this should have been the case but since the play was a short one it would have been impracticable to meet this need. May be the creators of the play could consider dramatizing a play of this scope in the future running into two hours or thereabouts.
However, the plays performed a vital role by raising awareness on the gut issues in the relevant conflicts in a most exhilarating and engrossing fashion. The choice of the artistic medium ought to be commended because it concretized, as few other art forms could, the issues at the heart of the conflicts, which are only read about by most Sri Lankans.
The Middle East conflict, along with scores of others raging in the South, are not likely to abate any time soon and the intractable nature of the issues involved account in good measure for this. Moreover, there needs to be also a total coming together of all local and international stakeholders in these conflicts, with peacemaking as their main aim, for the purpose of establishing even a degree of peace in these contemporary killing fields.
However, hopes cannot be entertained on the latter score as well. This is mainly on account of the fact that the major powers are usually at cross-purposes and unity of aim among these players is essential for the effective functioning of the UN system. Such effectiveness continues to determine to a great extent whether the world would have a measure of peace or otherwise.
Unfortunately, US President-elect Donald Trump is showing all signs already of being a negative factor on the international peacemaking front. For example, his choice of US Permanent Representative to the UN is said to be a ‘fierce critic’ of the system. It is plain to see that Trump is not acting in good faith on the question of making the world a less dangerous place to live in.
Features
New coffee-table book unveils rich, little-known heritage of Sri Lanka’s Moor Community
Author Asiff Hussein , known for his extensive research on the culture and traditions of Sri Lanka’s Muslim communities, discusses his latest work.
The author of ‘A Ceylon Moor Pictorial with a Glimpse into the Moorish Life of Old,’ has set out to showcase the often-overlooked culture of Sri Lanka’s largest Muslim community, the Moors.
Speaking to The Island, Hussein explained the inspiration and scope behind his coffee table book, which offers a visual journey into the unique customs, attire, and culinary heritage of this long-established community.
By Ifham Nizam
“Moors have a very rich culture, but it remains largely unknown outside the community,” Hussein said. “Beyond the familiar dishes like biriyani, wattalappam, and falooda, the Moorish culinary heritage includes diverse foods from India, Persia, and the Arab world. These foods reflect the centuries of cultural exchange that have shaped our community.” His new book aims to broaden public awareness, capturing the community’s traditions and customs in 360 images that span family portraits, wedding ceremonies, traditional dress, and heirloom artifacts.
Excerpts of the interview:
Q: What inspired you to create a pictorial book about the Moor community of Sri Lanka?
A: That’s a good question. Little is it known that the Moors, who are the largest Muslim community of our island, have a very rich culture. However, it is not much known outside of the community, that is except in respect of food, which is shared with others, but even here only part of it is known, like biriyani, wattalappam and falooda, which need no introduction. There are, actually, many more rich rice dishes, desserts and beverages the Moors are heir to, and have originated from lands as far as India, Persia and the Arab World, showing the diverse cultural influences the community has been subject to over the course of a thousand years or so.
When I published my book Sarandib, an Ethnological study of the Muslims of Sri Lanka, now in its third edition, I included some photographs, but these were not many. Over time, during my excursions and sojourns in various parts of the island, where the Moors had established settlements long ago, I would at every given opportunity take photographs of various items, artefacts, dishes of various kinds of food and even old houses and flora and fauna believed to have been introduced here by the Arabian ancestors of the Moors long ago. Old Moor families shared their albums and heirlooms to take pictures of, and museum collections such as those housed in the Southeastern University were another important repository of our traditional culture which I took photographs of during my visits to the provinces. By the middle part of this year I had gathered a considerable collection.
Although I had initially planned to publish some of these in subsequent editions of my book Sarandib, over time, I conceived the idea of producing a coffee table book with a lot of visual content including old and rare monochrome photographs, colour photographs of more recent times, vintage maps, paintings and sketches that captured the life and culture of those times, supplemented by extracts from journals and travelogues, and my own field work and research findings that went into both the main text and captions.
Q: Can you elaborate on the significance of the 360 images included in the book?
A: Well, I must say it’s quite a collection and includes old photographs that capture the traditional life of the community such as weddings and circumcision ceremonies and individual and group photos from family albums that clearly depict how the Moor gentlemen and ladies of old were attired, more recent colour photographs of various cultural items, including food items prepared by the traditional families, articles of dress and jewellery from museum and heirloom collections, some interesting artefacts from heritage mosques, including an old hatchet buried under the old mihrab of the Maradana Mosque which must have had some ritual significance, and a very old tile, that goes back to Kandyan times, I discovered at the Bakinigahawela Mosque in Uva Province, not to mention extracts of Old Dutch registers, known as Tombos, which show what Moor names were like more than three hundred years ago and vintage maps showing old Moor settlements, such as a very old Dutch map I came across in the Old Town Hall of Colombo.
Besides these, the book contains old sketches including Moormen in Surattu Toppi which was the traditional headgear of the Moor gentleman before the Fez cap took its place, and old paintings such as of the Maradana Mosque which is shown standing besides a graveyard with the gravestones clearly seen, proving that it served as a burial ground for the faithful of old.
Q: What cultural traditions and unique practices of the Moor community do you hope readers will appreciate the most?
A: There are many such traditions and practices covered, including some which have gone out of usage and others which are little understood outside of the community. An interesting item I came across in the Maradana Grand Mosque was an iron hatchet that had been under the older Mosque and which I feel had some ritual significance, such as to ward off the Jinn who Islamic lore holds are beings created out of smokeless fire. Even Satan, known in Arabic as Shaitan, is one such being. Such jinns are said to be afraid of iron and one finds a similar belief in Sinhala culture where the Yakku or demons are likewise supposed to be scared of iron. Such practices are, however, no longer followed when erecting mosques.
Others are little understood, but need to be told so that we have greater understanding between our communities. One such is female circumcision, which has been falsely compared to the African practice of FGM by interested NGOS whereas what we practice here is a harmless procedure which may actually be beneficial if performed in the religiously prescribed manner of removing the redundant skin surrounding the clitoris, both for hygiene’s sake and a better sex life later in life. We never had any problem with it in the past and there’s no reason why it should be an issue now. So there’s a lot others need to understand about us and this book brings that out vividly.
Q: Why do you believe this book is important for Moor households and the wider public in Sri Lanka?
A: The Moors, as I said earlier, have a very rich culture. Sadly it is not much known outside the community. Unlike in other communities, there have been very few writers who have written about it in languages other than in Tamil. This is despite the fact that a good number of Muslims, in the Sinhala-majority areas, are literate and conversant in both Sinhala and English. In fact many Moors today speak these languages as their ‘home language’ like my family, but sadly these have not as yet been fully established as full-fledged literary languages of the community.
Another reason is, of course, the fact that many Moors have been traditionally business people and since their interaction with others was limited, they may have not thought it necessary to share those features of their culture other than food, which was, of course, much appreciated by others. That said, the situation has changed somewhat over the years and even prominent business families now feel a need to share and showcase their culture. In fact the sponsors of this book are one such family, the Hashim family of Malship fame.
So I think it’s quite important that Moorish culture be publicised in its full scope and range from the seemingly trivial to the more salient aspects so that others know, understand and appreciate us better as a cultured community. Here’s what one Tour Guide said after seeing a post about the book “I was immediately captivated by the intriguing history and culture of the Ceylon Moors. After receiving my own copy, my admiration for the community deepened, sparking an even greater sense of pride in the country I call home. As a tour guide constantly learning and discovering new facets of Sri Lanka’s diverse heritage, this book is a valuable addition to my collection. I believe this work belongs in every Moorish household and in the homes of anyone who appreciates the rich cultural tapestry that defines Sri Lanka”.
The members of the community also look upon it as a valuable contribution to preserving our traditional way of life and have told me so. In fact at a MyBiz event after I had made a presentation about the book, there was this lady who had been gifted a copy by a friend and had gone through it cover to cover and got up to tell the audience how important it was to have the book in their households, not the least because their children would come to know what their culture was really like in the good old days.
So yes, we have come a long way, and ours is a story worth telling in pictures that speak a thousand words.
Features
Big scene…here as well
Glam Scene
Last week’s Presidential Election, in America, generated worldwide attention.
It was also the talk-of-the-town, in the scene here, and these are the views some of the known local personalities, based here and abroad, decided to share with readers of The Island:
* Manilal Perera (Singer/Entertainer):
I have been a huge Trump supporter. Trump was the only American President to tame the North Korean dictator. He openly called him the “Rocket man” and said that America can wipe him and North Korea off this earth. Grande Trump. Bravo!
* Maneka Liyanage
(The Island Beauty Tips/Model):
Imagine a world where the threat of global conflict no longer looms over us. What if, under the leadership of President Donald Trump, we could see an end to the escalating tensions and conflicts that have plagued us for so long? Could this be the moment when diplomacy prevails over division, when dialogue replaces destruction, and when nations work together, not against each other? With a clear commitment to preventing World War III, Trump promises to bring stability, peace, and cooperation back to the world stage. Is it possible to secure a future where war is no longer an option? Let’s believe it’s possible—and take the steps together to make peace our priority.
* Sohan Weerasinghe (Singer/Entertainer):
Trump victory means oil prices will become stable as America will start drilling for oil and that means energy Independance. However, although he will be better at handling the economy and immigration, Kamala Harris would have been a more humane President and looked after the interest of the poor people. Whether America will become great again…we will have to wait and see!
* Rozanne Diasz (Catwalk Coach and Choreographer):
I am a Donald Trump fan…even when he lost, I rooted for him. I like his straight forwardness and strategy. I am also a big fan of Vivek Ramaswamy who backed him. They make a good team.
* Andrea Marr (Singer/Entertainer):
This is a time for people to come together, put aside political differences, and be kind to each other. There is a lot of pain and suffering in the world and that’s where our focus should be.
* Kay Jay (Singer/Entertainer/Beautician):
Hopefully, Donald Trump will do what’s right. It’s a bit hard to trust Politicians nowadays. So let’s Hope for the best. Fingers crossed.
* Angela Seneviratne
(Film/TV Stage Artiste/Former Model):
We, Sri Lankans, pulsating with the excitement of the recent Presidential elections, flowing into the General Elections, could learn a lesson that people’s power, no matter how large or small the country is, is the one strength we have to accept, and importantly, support for the betterment of the nation.
* Raffealla Fernando (Photographer/Fashion Designer/Stylist):
My thoughts are quite turbulent about the American presidential election and Donald Trump’s victory. In 2020 he lost because it was disastrous management, the predatory instincts and compulsion to dominate, I don’t know if this behaviour, or way of ruling the nation, would continue. Let’s see if he will bring a different approach this time. A lot will change in America…greatest country in the world might not have the greatest leader for some time, I guess.
* Shareefa Thahir
(TV Presenter/News Anchor/English Radio Announcer/News Reader/Emcee):
Given that the previous Trump administration maintained minimal interference in the affairs of other nations I feel his re-election may bring a continued focus on global stability, similar to his previous term.
* Lankika Perera
(Singer)
“Let me congratulate America’s 47th President Donald Trump for his historic and magnificent victory. His victory speech was truly extraordinary and I was so impressed when he said, “We don’t worship Government, we worship God,” and his ambition is to spread Christian values. May God bless the USA and President Donald Trump, and protect him and give him strength, wisdom and good health, always.
-
Features5 days ago
When Sir John Kotelawala visited St. Joseph’s College
-
News5 days ago
SL will not be able to join BRICS right now but membership of its NDB bank okayed
-
Sports5 days ago
Pathum Nissanka; the ace up Sri Lanka’s sleeve
-
Features5 days ago
The Assassination of Mr Bandaranaike
-
News3 days ago
Harin drags Messi into poll mess
-
Features2 days ago
Adani’s ‘Power’ in Sri Lanka
-
Features5 days ago
America stands by its Man!
-
Opinion4 days ago
Sri Lanka’s missed opportunities