      |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eelam Map and the Truth
By Dr. P. H. D. H. de Silva
(Retired Director of National Museums)This has happened several times before with disastrous consequences to nations. A lie repeated ad infinitum ceases to be a lie. Instead it becomes accepted as the truth. This is the saga of the "Tamil Homeland" Theory which had been dinned into our ears and to the ears of the international communities, especially in Europe and North America and now South Africa as well. A good example is a map of Sri Lanka published on page 2763, in volume 7 of the Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia (1995) by Helcon Publishing Ltd., 42, Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford, Great Britain OX1 2EP. The Editorial Director was Michael Upshall. This map is shown as Map I.
It is a fact that nearly a third of the Tamil population in the North and the East live and work in the Sinhalese majority areas. It is also a fact that the Indian Tamil population in the Plantation areas in the hill country are descendants of those brought down by the British for their benefit. The British ousted the Kandyan peasentry from their inherited land which even after 50 years of independence in this country has not been restored to their rightful heirs. The Editorial Director lumping these two groups has attempted to give the readers of this volume an incorrect impression, damaging the rights and aspirations of the Sinhalese majority who have been in this island for more than 2000 years. There is no doubt that by publishing this map "The Eelam Map" at the request of the Eelamist lobby in London or submited by them to the Editorial Director for inclusion this publishing company has not only done a great injustice to the Sinhalese majority but also has violated the accepted norms and practices of such international publications.
Map II and III which are included here are from Professor K. M. de Silva’s book "Reap the Whorldwind", (Oxford Press) published in 1998 and appearing on pages 10 and 252. These two maps, which show the distribution of the three communities — the Sinhalese, Tamils and the Muslims in the island and the distribution of the same communities in the Eastern Province illustrate how inaccurate is Map I published in this Encyclopedia. At the same time it is well to remember that even these two maps do not indicate the distribution of both Tamils and the Muslims in the majority Sinhalese areas.
Maps II and III
It would not be out of place here to cite two paragraphs from two important books which appear relevant to the subject discussed. These are (i), Ceylon under the British occupation by Dr. Colvin R. de Silva, Vol. I., 1941, page 6 and (II), The Kandyan Kingdom 1707-1760 by Dr. L. S. Dewaraja, 1972, chapter IX.
Dr. L. S. Dewaraja writes —
"The Kandyan Kingdom consisted of two major territorial divisions, the ratas and the disavanies.... the Kanda Uda pas rata which was the nucleaus of the Kingdom was at this time divided into nine ratas.... The disavanies were more extensive areas sloping away from the central plateau towords the Dutch border or the sea". (Gadaladeniya Slab Pillar Inscription). "Two exceptions were Valapane and Udapalata, which lay on the mountains.... There were twelve disavanies in the Kingdom when the British took over in 1815 as given by D’Oyly. These were the Four Korales, Seven Korales, Uva, Matale, Sabaragamuwa, Three Korales, Valepane, Udapalata, Nuwara Kalaviya, Vellassa, Bintanna", (including Batticaloa)", "and Tamankaduwa", (including Trincomalee). "A manuscript written in the reign of Kirti Sri Rajasinghe", (B. M. or 6606 — 65), "adds... Panama, Munnesarama, Tambalagamuwa, Madakalapuwa (Batticaloa), Kottiyarama and Puttalam..... The king appointed Ahalapola disava of Batticaloa, Tambalagamuva, Nuvarakalaviya and the seven Korales", (Ahalapola Sannasa of 1745. page 226).
The purpose of appointment of disavas to these areas by the king of Kandy was for two reasons. One, was because of the growing importance of trade and two, was to keep an eye on the "refractory Vannias" of these difficult territories.
It is a historical fact that the Vannias paid an annual tribute to the King of Kandy until 1815 when the British captured Kandy.
Dr. Dewaraja states further that "when by the treaty of 1766 the entire coastal strip was ceded to the Dutch, all these maritime disavanies became Dutch teritory".
According to Dr. Colvin R. de Silva —
"By this treaty", (ie. the Peace Treaty signed by the king of Kandy and the Dutch on 14th February 1766), "the king ceded to them his entire coastal territory to the breadth of one Sinhalese mile’ inland.... The company was, however, to pay a tribute equivalent to the former revenues of its fresh acquisitions.... The Dutch, for their part, recognized the sovereignty of Kandy over the rest of Ceylon....."
The Dutch prior to this treaty had under their control the coastal areas wrested from the Portuguese i.e. the commandments of Colombo, Galle and Jaffnapatam. The southern boundary of the latter extended from Arippu on the Mannar coast across to the east above Cheddikulam and northernwards to the east coast ending south of Mullaitivu.
These are a few relevant facts only to show the harm and distortion done to the "Sinhalese majority" through the publication of this inaccurate and distorted "Eelam Map" in Hutchinson unabridged Encyclopedia. There is no doubt that the Editorial Director had been taken for a ride but the damage has been done. However, it is not too late for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to get the Publishers to apologise for the inaccuracy and to get them to publish the correct maps illustrating this article (ie Map II & III) appearing in Professor de Silva’s latest book.
Cat's Eye
In Memory of May WickramasuriyaThe death of Sri Lanka’s leading woman trade unionist, May Wickramasuriya, on 13th December 1998, is mourned by the Left parties, by the trade union movement (especially the CMU - Ceylon Mercantile Union) and by feminists of Sri Lanka. She had a long and eventful working life and lived through the tumultuous decades of industrial unrest, strikes, collective bargaining and political protests on local and international issues that gripped Sri Lanka from the 1950s onwards.
Born into a middle-class family, she had to go out to work at age 18, to support the family after her father’s death. This was during the Second World War when she worked in the Admiralty in Colombo, in charge of 23 female clerks. It was a time when middle-class, educated women came out to work as clerks and secretaries in mercantile firms and for British establishments connected with the war. Later May joined the architectural firm, Edwards, Reid and Begg, where she was not only active in the Ceylon Mercantile Union, but also attended classes in Marxism given by Bala Tampoe of the LSSP, and was a member of the Left Book Club organized by Justice Siriwardena. Before her death ,she was interviewed by Krisantha Sri Bhaggiyadatta (who is writing the history of the CMU). She said:
"I was sometimes the only woman in our May Day demonstrations in the early days... I was the first woman in the General Council and Executive Committee ... They generally accepted me... I think I was the first woman to directly negotiate with the Employers Federation of Ceylon".
Hard bargaining
May became the assistant secretary in 1956, working full-time for the union from 1959 until her death. Her long hours of hard work for the union, behind the scenes, her knowledge of the labour laws and her skills in negotiation were recognised and praised by both the unions and the employers. About herself and the labour laws, she said:You have to go through them studying section by section - labour tribunals, arbitrations, violations or interpretations of the Collective Agreement. I read them all. I used to read at the office, while at work. One Employers Federation lawyer thought that I was a lawyer when I was talking to him (Interview with Bhaggiyadatta).
In 1966, May married Bala Tampoe the General Secretary of the CMU and the pair worked as a team, Bala doing the bargaining, political speeches and the public relations work, while May did the solid, essential ground work as well as negotiating. As Franklin Amerasinghe (the Director General of the Employers Federation) writes in a tribute to May:
Bala’s advocacy was complemented by May’s incisive mind and solid preparation. They were an inseparable and formidable team... There are many instances where (we were) able to settle an almost insoluble problem purely by back room negotiations with May or with May and Bala together... May was gifted and skilled in the art of negotiation. She could be charming when necessary but could be firm and hard as steel when she needed to be so.
Feminist contribution May Wickremasuriya was also inspired by the feminist movement of Sri Lanka and brought a gender awareness to the CMU whose membership included a large number of women. She attended several international conferences on women, speaking on the economic role of Sri Lanka women. Unfailingly, she organized CMU meetings, with outside feminist speakers, for International Women’s Day on March 8th every year and she was responsible for Bala Tampoe’s strong stand on women’s rights. At her funeral, Nimalka Fernando spoke about May’s for concern women’s living and working conditions. Tributes to May’s advocacy for women have come from all sections of the women’s movement and also from Franklin Amerasinghe who states:
"I am personally aware of the great contribution May has made to women’s rights in Sri Lanka and in the private sector. She should be considered a role model for all gender activists."
In the trade union, she took up many issues of women’s health and welfare and also led a picketing campaign against the government’s proposal to abolish legislation preventing night work for women.
Other activities
Today if the CMU is able to commission a history of its work, it is because May meticulously kept the documents in order. As she has said:"I organized a system of keeping files and records... Union work is hard work, daily work, work under pressure... but I did this (filing) on our own time and not paid time... as a part of my dedication to our work."
In the 1960s, May was in charge of the Union’s publications ably supported by another woman militant, Jeanne Moonesinghe (from England), who like May was a member of the LSSP and the CMU and was active in many strikes of the period.
May who started her career in an architects’ firm was also responsible for persuading Bala, to construct and helping to design modern spacious premises, with all facilities, for the CMU. After she suffered a stroke, she spent her last years in this office, overlooking the sea, being cared for by Bala and the comrades of the CMU.
We pay tribute to May Wickramasuriya for her outstanding contribution to the cause of mercantile workers in Sri Lanka for over forty years, for her support of Left causes over these years, for her internationalism and anti-imperialism, for her stand in the campaign for women’s rights, and for her devotion to trade union activity in the hectic decades of the latter half of the 20th century.
This year, her union, the CMU, celebrated its 50th anniversary as an independent union with Left leadership. We hope that all those who knew May will rally round to record and celebrate her life and work as a full-time socialist activist and trade union leader.
Fiery sexual politics
Deepa Mehta’s award-winning film "Fire", which was screened in Colombo earlier this year to thoughtful reviews including one by Cat’s Eye, has created a major furore in India. And sex has everything - and nothing - to do with it.Assessing the travails experienced by women in the Indian joint family system and the institution of marriage, the film traces the burgeoning emotional and sexual intimacy between two sisters-in-law, Radha (Shabana Azmi) and Sita (Nandita Das) caught in failing marriages. Originally passed by the Indian censors with no cuts (but on condition that Sita be changed to Nita - perhaps a forewarning of what was to come, according to one columnist, given the role of the Ram-Sita story in the film) "Fire" ran for a couple of weeks in cities like Bombay and Delhi to critical acclaim and huge audiences. Then came trouble in the form of the extreme chauvinist backbone of Hindutva, the Shiv Sena. In the first week of December, Shiv Sena supporters, some men but mostly women, stormed a Bombay cinema at which the film was running, and smashed windows and tore up posters. Another cinema where the film was showing quickly discontinued the film in fear that it would be targeted next. Then it was Delhi’s turn. According to the BBC and India Today, the press was forewarned that it was going to happen, but the police were nowhere to be seen when the smash-up took place.
Hindutva
Such violence spread to other cities where the film was showing, and then was checked in Calcutta where the cinema audience chased out the self-appointed "guardians of morality". The Shiv Sena’s justification for such hooliganism? That lesbianism is antithetical and offensive to India’s cultural values - an assertion, among others, that has been contested through the protests held by several women’s rights groups, and civil rights and other human rights organisations. Well-known journalists and writers have also contested the attempted monopoly on cultural interpretation by Hindutva supporters and their ongoing bid to deny the multiplicity and erase the hybridity of Indian culture. Subsequent to the attacks, several prominent screen actors and directors petitioned the Indian Supreme Court to intervene in the growing controversy, not in the least because, in addition to the cultural terrorism that censored the screening of the film, it was sent back to the film censor for a second assessment - an uncommon move that bodes ill for the freedom of speech in India.Guardians of morality?
Ironies abound in the entire affair. First, while Deepa Mehta has insisted that her film was not about lesbianism, it is this very issue that has been seized upon by the Shiv Sena to discredit the film and justify the violence they have enacted.Second, while the Shiv Sena claims that it represents the voice of the "public" protesting the corruption of national culture, this very "public" - the cinema audiences - have in large measure not protested the film and its many themes, including the depiction of the homosexual relationship and other situations that interrogate the myths of the perfect family and marital bliss. In fact, as in Calcutta, this "public" has even openly and vigorously opposed the Sena’s attempts to obstruct the film’s screening.
Third, the self-styled guardians of morality have had the approval of at least one state government, Maharashtra, to carry out its hooliganism, thereby bringing into question the role of the state in maintaining the rule of law - in fact, Shiv Sena’s women supporters are quoted in India Today as stating that they themselves were the law, never mind that hooliganism was the way to ensure the rule of this "law"!
Fourth, journalists and others in the know have argued that the uproar around "Fire" has much less to do with the film or its content and much more to do with the fact that the BJP and its allies are losing political ground in India and therefore making much of relatively minor matters to divert attention from their failures.
All things considered, we in Sri Lanka, especially those of us who saw "Fire" and critically approved of it, send our support to the sensible "public" among the citizens of our neighbour who are committed to upholding the right to free speech and defending the diversities that have historically characterised India’s culture.
Historical roots of ethnic identity
By Kamalika PierisThe title of this paper is taken from a publication by Sirima Kiribamune, ‘Tamils in ancient and medieval Sri Lanka: the historical roots of ethnic identity’ published in Ethnic Studie Reports Vol 4(1) January 1986. It was prepared for the Asian Regional Workshop on Ethnic Minorities in Buddhist Politics, Bangkok, June 1985. At the time of publication, Sirima Kiribamune was Associate Professor of History at the University of Peradeniya.
Sirima Kiribamune states:
"According to the Chronicles the people of Sri Lanka were called Sinhala. It has been suggested that the name was given first to a dynasty, then to a kingdom and finally to a people. Paranavitana who has analysed the ethnic terms which occur in the early Brahmi inscriptions (3rd century B.C. — 1st century A.D.) points out that the name Sinhala does not appear in these records for it was not distinctive to be called so, for almost everyone was a Sinhalese. This seems to be a plausible explanation especially in view of the fact that a number of people have stated their group identities. One such group was the Tamils referred to as Damedas in these records. An inscription dated to the 2nd century B.C. makes reference to five Tamil householders (Dameda gahapatikana) whose leader seems to have been a mariner (navika). It is very likely that this group represents certain trading interests. Two other inscriptions also of about the same period, mention a Tamil trader, Visakha (Dameda Vanijha gapati Visaka) . There is yet another reference to a Tamil lady, Tisa. This inscription is fragmentary but the words Digavapi porana vanijhana (the ancient traders of Dighavapi indicate a trade connection. The insights afforded by these records illustrate the point made earlier, that peaceful migrants from South India went through a process of acculturation and-absorption,having maintained their group identity for some time. We need, at this point, to emphasise a crucially significant point namely that all these Tamils use the Sinhalese language and Brahmi script which are common to all the records of this period. Both the 1ady Tisa and the trader, Visakha,make Buddhist donations, while the exact purpose of the inscription of the Tamil householders is not clear. It is also interesting to note that all of them have Indo-Aryan names, It is very unlikely that any of them were first generation Tamils. The question which arises naturally is, why did these people, who are otherwise indistinguishable from the rest of the donors of cave grants, refer to their Tamil identity? The reason is not far to seek as all of them are in some way connected with trade.
"The foreign trade of Sri Lanka during the pre-Christian period was largely with India. It is very likely that the South Indian traders played an important part in this regard. The prestigious position occupied by them is amply demonstrated by the fact that Sena and Guttika, sons of a Tamil horse trader, were able to capture political power at a time not very far removed from the time of the inscriptions under review. Sena and Guttika too are known by Indo-Aryan names, again suggesting the tendency towards absorption noticed already. The Tamil trading groups would no doubt have wished to continue their commercial links with the mercantile communities of South India and group identity was probably a factor which facilitated mutual dealings. Therefore, styling themselves Dameda was both prestigious and profitable as far as the Tamil traders of the 2nd century B.C. were concerned."
In addition to trade, the Tamils also came in as mercenaries in the king’s army. Sirima Kiribamune presents this issue in the following manner:
"Disaffected princes who could not find military support in the island sometimes reached out to South India for troops. This practice is first noticed in the 1st century A.D. when Ilanaga (33- 43 A.D) captured the throne with foreign troops. Two centuries later Abhayanaga (231-240 A.D.) brought over Tamil soldiers to fight his enemies. It took another 250 years before the next contender Moggallana I (491-508 A.D.) returned from India with troops to capture the throne from his brother Kassapa I. These three seem to be isolated instances in a long period of dynastic history and they did not make any impact in terms of a foreign element.
By the seventh century, however, the situation became quite different. During the course of this century, the Culavamsa gives five instances when Tamil troops were brought over to participate in the power struggles of local princes. Although the backing of Indian rulers is not recorded except in the case of Manavamma (684-718 A.D.) who received troops from the Pallava king Narasimhavarman, it is very likely that such support was forthcoming. The chronicle describes these Tamil soldiers in the most condemnatory terms. Many of the Damilas brought by a general during the time of Silameghavarna (619-628 A.D.) are said to have been killed and the survivors distributed among the Buddhist temples as slaves. Although Aggabodhi III (628 A.D.) was defeated, he is said to have hewn down the Damilas while his strength lasted and finally committed suicide when a Damila was approaching to kill him. The Damilas together with Dathopatissa (639-656 A.D.) whom they served are said to have plundered temples and burnt down the palace and the temple of the Tooth Relic.
Subsequent attempts to expel them failed and the Culavamsa records that the Tamil soldiers requested a Sinhalese prince Hatthadatha (659-666), who was living in India at the time, to accept the throne. Same Tamil generals like Potthakuttha, Potthasala and Mahakanda were given high office by the Sinhalese kings. Potthakuttha even acted as king-maker for a brief period. Although the Tamils had become militarily a distinctively important factor in the country, they seem to have fallen in line with the cultural traditions of the island. All three generals mentioned above are said to have made extensive donations to Buddhist temples and it is possible to imagine that they had become converts to Buddhism. Close contact with the Buddhists of South India is reflected in the reference to a Damila Bhikkhu community which received donations from the queen of Udaya I (797-801 A.D.). Some Tamils did, however, remain an alien group.
"The 8th century, which saw same dynastic stability in the country, appears to have been relatively free of Indian troop movements. With the 9th century, however, Sinhalese rulers were called upon to face an entirely new situation, i.e., an open attempt to bring Sri Lanka under the political hegemony of South India. The first to try this were the Pandyans whose invasion caused great devastation in the country. The invaders, described in the Culavamsa as ‘plundering devils’ were joined by some Tamils who were resident in the country.
A counter- invasion in support of a Pandya prince by Sena II was successful and he was able to place his nominee on the Pandyan throne. The Pandyans were now called upon to meet the threat of the Colas and Sri Lanka began a policy of active collaboration with the Pandyans against the Colas. Invasions and counter-invasions followed throughout the 10th century at the end of which Sri Lanka or the major part of it became a province of the Cola empire.
"The events of the 9th and 10th centuries left a deep mark on both the social and political fabric of the country. The movement of troops between Sri Lanka and South India led to an increase in the number of Tamils resident in Anuradhapura and its environs. During this period, rulers found it necessary to make special arrangements for the maintenance of Tami1 soldiers. In the reign of Sena II (853-887 A.D.), we hear of a Demela Adhikari (named Mahasattana) for the first time. Another Demela Adhikari named Utur Pandirad is met with in the reign of Kassapa IV (898-914). Both officers were among those who were responsible for the promulgation of immunity grants to certain lands, and in the second grant the land involved is said to have included a Demela kaballa (Tamil allotment). The suggestion has been made that the Demela Adhikari was an officer in charge of such allotments. (By the 12th century, however, Damiladhikari had become a mere titular office as separate regulations for Tamil allotments had been done away with by this time.) References to dues from Tamil allottees(Demel kuli Tamil land allotments (Demela kaballa),land enjoyed by Tamils (demalat valademi avu),and village land belonging to Tamils (Demel gem bim) make it clear that these were are as set aside for this group of people, and it is likely that special regulations were operative in them. The village of Kinigama for instance had a separate section which was called Demel Kinigam,suggesting that the Tamil residents, most probably mercenary soldiers, were given separate land allotments for administrative convenience. The popularity of South Indian drums, tudi and soli,during the 9th and 10th centuries would no doubt have been due to their introduction by the mercenaries as war drums.
"The internal measures adopted by the Sinhalese kings to control the Tamil mercenaries could only succeed under strong rulers. Mahinda V, a weakling, found it extremely difficult to keep the mercenaries in and around Anuradhapura under control. Ultimately a revolt by the Kerala mercenaries in his army forced him to flee to Rohana. The Cola kings Rajaraja I and Rajendra I took advantage of these events and the result was the conquest of the northern part of Sri Lanka during the last decade of the 10th century. The period of Cola rule which lasted till about 1070 A.D. saw a further influx of Tamils to Sri Lanka. Traders, administrators and military men took up residence in the country and the Tamils began to use their own language for donatory records. Although one or two Tamil inscriptions which record donations to Hindu shrines can be dated to the tail end of the Anuradhapura Kingdom, it is only during the Cola occupation that such records become increasingly evident.
(Continued tomorrow)
Sarvodaya strategy a clue to peace
By Jehan PereraThe Sarvodaya Movement has been celebrating its 40th anniversary this year with large gatherings for peace, the most recent being at the historic Kelaniya temple where over twenty thousand gathered.
Sarvodaya’s strength has always been its ability to organise events, and programmes, on a mass scale especially in the predominantly Buddhist parts of the country.
The Sarvodaya philosophy, which endeavours to combine the social teachings of Mahatma Gandhi with the spiritual teachings of the Buddha, has obtained for the organisation a permanent place in the vocabulary of the people.
"We build the road, the road builds us," is a Sarvodaya motto that has connected social development with personal growth, so important in motivating voluntarism among people.
From the time of its birth in the mid-1950s, during the heady period of social revolution unleashed by Prime Minister Bandaranaike, Sarvodaya offered the common people the central role in the development of the nation.
Drawing on the visionary leadership of A.T. Ariyaratne, the organisation popularised new concepts of development, such as shramadana and village awakening, which it put into practice on a vast scale.
For many years, decades in fact, the Sarvodaya Movement made the proud claim that it was the largest people’s movement in the country.
It delivered civic awareness, economic infrastructure and social welfare services to many thousands of villages, which Sarvodaya estimated to be at least one third of the country.
But just five years ago, it seemed that this mighty organisation, known the world over, was on the verge of financial collapse.
The Sarvodaya Movement’s problem of survival began about a decade ago. Organisational analysts say that every organisation has a life cycle. There is birth, growth, consolidation and then decay.
Its critics pointed out that Sarvodaya had become over-extended, over centralised and over-dependent on foreign aid.
Despite its belief in being a people’s movement, and mobilising a considerable amount of voluntarism among the village people, the organisation had in fact become heavily dependent on foreign aid, just like any other regular NGO.
For a variety of reasons, Sarvodaya had become too dependent on its foreign donors.
Their money was needed to pay staff, maintain buildings and run the projects.
With their superior command of the English language and the jargon of modern development, the foreign donors believed that they should call the shots.
When they said "jump" they expected Sarvodaya to obey.
With its venerable legacy and size, Sarvodaya could not—and did not.
Vendetta
In the early 1990s, the foreign funding that had flowed in so abundantly in earlier decades, dried up.This process was encouraged by the government of President Premadasa who had a terrible enmity against the Sarvodaya leader Ariyaratne.
Perhaps the President felt that his old friend had failed him badly by not backing his election campaign in 1988.
He may also have suspected Dr Ariyaratne of having political ambitions himself.
Given the vast size of the organisation and its presence in all parts of the country, it is likely that Ariyaratne could have been a formidable opponent.
In any event,he stayed clear of party politics.
This did not prevent the governmental vendetta against the Sarvodaya Movement from reaching a climax with the witch hunt by the Premadasa-appointed NGO Commission.
But Sarvodaya survived retaining its broad popular acceptance, and with its credentials as an independent-minded civic organisation intact.
The question has been, what is the challenge it will take up today, a time so different from its earlier years of growth.
From a peacemaking point of view, Sarvodaya at 40 may offer a model of devolution, efficiency and secular spiritualism, to a country that is looking for a new way forward out of the morass of war and strife.
The Sarvodaya model is offered at a time when the people who inhabit this country are looking with increasing exhaustion and desperation for a new direction. The country is embroiled in war..
But the war still continues.
An election is to be held next month, which everyone fears will lead to substantial violence, which again no one says they want.
Ironically, it was not specifically to bring social peace to the country that Sarvodaya developed its new thrust, but to ensure its own survival while remaining relevant to the needs of the people.
It is not out of theories but out of its own practice that the lessons are being drawn. Today, adjusting itself to new realities, Sarvodaya has streamlined its operations, sharply reducing its dependence on foreign funding. Remarkably, for an NGO, Sarvodaya meets 50 percent of its overhead costs from its own resources, such as its press, the exports of wooden toys and batiks, and renting of infrastructure, such as its buildings and halls.
Radical break
More remarkably, Sarvodaya has made a radical break with its past.It has decentralised and devolved its administrative and fund raising systems. Each of its district offices has been granted the authority to raise funds independently of the centre, and to utilise those funds in their entirety for that particular district.
There is no central control over fund raising.
The only limitation is that certain basic policy guidelines should be respected.
For its part, the centre provides additional funds to those districts that are unable to generate adequate resources, to preserve equity between districts.
The Sarvodaya Movement has demonstrated this flexibility and these changes have been possible because the older generation of Sarvodaya leaders have gracefully yielded their place to a younger generation.
They have stepped aside from day to day management, to take on more perenniel and global issues.
Dr Ariyaratne spends most of his time on establishing "Vishva Niketan", a peace centre to which the restless and peace seekers of the world may come to.
The younger managers of Sarvodaya are less fascinated by the philosophy of Gandhi and the Buddha than their elders.
While adhering to core values that gave Sarvodaya a moral hold over poeple, they see the future in terms of economic rationality and technical competence.
They do not use the old language that draws its inspiration from religion and history.
They are also prepared to let go of central control for the sake of the survival of the larger organisation.
There are analogies in the Sarvodaya experience for Sri Lanka.
Sarvodaya has let go of central control.
It gives freedom to its district branches to devise their own projects and raise their own funds.
The safeguard against a "declaration of independence" lies in the simple fact that it remains beneficial to the district branches to remain within the Sarvodaya fold.
The centre does not deprive them of anything; instead it provides them with resources, and the goodwill that is associated with the "Sarvodaya" brand name.
The second lesson from Sarvodaya to our suffering country is that our political leaders should find a new language of economic efficiency and technical competence to replace the old language of "homelands" and "foremost place" in deciding on the most suitable scheme of governance for the country.
The old language hurts and offends those who are kept outside of it.
In their efforts to ensure the survival of Sarvodaya, the younger generation of Sarvodaya leaders are creating a new competence and a new language.
In our national effort to ensure the survival of Sri Lanka we should be doing the same.
