<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Oct 22 2007, 12:45 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Oct 22 2007, 12:45 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Maintained in China: Burma's foul regime depends on Beijing.
By Christopher Hitchens
Excerpt:
Joining the young and passionate demonstrators outside the office of a certain Washington military attaché last week (and there was I, having thought that my "demo" days were over) helped me to settle one trivial question. The crowd was united in chanting "Free, Free, Free Burma." This may seem like a detail, but I think it's right to object to the grotesque renaming of Myanmar and Yangon, and I am glad that the Washington Post, at least, continues to say Burma and Rangoon. (You can tell a lot from this sort of emphasis. Lanka is the Sinhala word for Ceylon, and <b>Sri means "holy," so the name Sri Lanka expresses the concept that the island is both Sinhala and Buddhist, an idea that is alienating to many Tamils on the island</b>. As a result, some Tamils still call it Ceylon or demonstrate their own nationalism by calling it Eelam. Lives are lost on the proposition.)
[right][snapback]74510[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Christopher Hitchens has confused himself. Sri does mean sacred - possibly it does so in Buddhism, it *most certainly* does in Hinduism and for longer than Buddhism has existed. "Sri Rama", "Sri Vinayakar" and a thousand other examples. Sri is also the proper name of Lakshmi. In "Sri Rama" it has both the meanings at the same time. (In Tamil Nadu we often use Thiru - the Tamil equivalent of Sri - for temples, but we still say Sri Rama.)
In any case, Sri Lankan Tamil Hindus call the island "Sri Lanka"; they find Ceylon to be colonialist. Although it is likely true that the christian LTTE and christian Lankans call it Ceylon - a christian Tamil SL family with Portuguese surname certainly label their famous tea "Made in Ceylon".
Perhaps Hitchens has overlooked the fact that to both the Buddhists and Hindus in SL, the country is "Sri"=Holy. But I can well understand christian Tamils are entirely "alienated by the idea" of a sacred homeland (outside of Jerusalem). But in this case the distinction has to be made between Hindus and christians as opposed to Buddhists and a generalised "Tamils". Or perhaps western journalists imagine that all Sri Lankan Tamils have successfully been converted to the christoterror? Sorry to disappoint them then, but no.
By Christopher Hitchens
Excerpt:
Joining the young and passionate demonstrators outside the office of a certain Washington military attaché last week (and there was I, having thought that my "demo" days were over) helped me to settle one trivial question. The crowd was united in chanting "Free, Free, Free Burma." This may seem like a detail, but I think it's right to object to the grotesque renaming of Myanmar and Yangon, and I am glad that the Washington Post, at least, continues to say Burma and Rangoon. (You can tell a lot from this sort of emphasis. Lanka is the Sinhala word for Ceylon, and <b>Sri means "holy," so the name Sri Lanka expresses the concept that the island is both Sinhala and Buddhist, an idea that is alienating to many Tamils on the island</b>. As a result, some Tamils still call it Ceylon or demonstrate their own nationalism by calling it Eelam. Lives are lost on the proposition.)
[right][snapback]74510[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Christopher Hitchens has confused himself. Sri does mean sacred - possibly it does so in Buddhism, it *most certainly* does in Hinduism and for longer than Buddhism has existed. "Sri Rama", "Sri Vinayakar" and a thousand other examples. Sri is also the proper name of Lakshmi. In "Sri Rama" it has both the meanings at the same time. (In Tamil Nadu we often use Thiru - the Tamil equivalent of Sri - for temples, but we still say Sri Rama.)
In any case, Sri Lankan Tamil Hindus call the island "Sri Lanka"; they find Ceylon to be colonialist. Although it is likely true that the christian LTTE and christian Lankans call it Ceylon - a christian Tamil SL family with Portuguese surname certainly label their famous tea "Made in Ceylon".
Perhaps Hitchens has overlooked the fact that to both the Buddhists and Hindus in SL, the country is "Sri"=Holy. But I can well understand christian Tamils are entirely "alienated by the idea" of a sacred homeland (outside of Jerusalem). But in this case the distinction has to be made between Hindus and christians as opposed to Buddhists and a generalised "Tamils". Or perhaps western journalists imagine that all Sri Lankan Tamils have successfully been converted to the christoterror? Sorry to disappoint them then, but no.