If you think that Sri Lanka is a SinhalaNadu or a Sinhala country, then please read the following,
THERE WERE NO SINHALESE BEFORE THE 13TH CENTURY AD.
According to the Mahavamsa, Vijay the son of Sinha Bahu (Sinha Bahu`s father was a Sinha/lion) from the Lala country where he established a kingdom and founded a city named Sinhapura is believed to be the forefather of the Sinhalese.
It is said in MAHAVAMSA CHAPTER VII - THE CONSECRATING OF VIJAYA,
**But the king Sihabähu, since he had slain the lion (was called) Sihala and, by reason of the ties between him and them, all those (followers of VIJAYA) were also (called) Sihala.**
The term Sinhala/Sihala is mentioned in the Mahavamsa only twice in the beginning chapters as shown above. After that, the term Sinhala is only found in the Chulavamsa written after the 13th Century AD.
None of the ancient historical Objects/Monuments/Buildings which were in existence or found in the archaeological surveys in Sri Lanka before the 13th Century AD says anything about a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom or a Sinhala Country or a Sinhala civilization, or a Sinhala culture or a Sinhala language, and none of the Written History, Rock Carvings, stone inscriptions, etc, says anything about a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom or a Sinhala Country before 13th Century AD.
There never existed a race/ethnic group/nation called Sinhala in Sri Lanka before the 13th century AD, there never existed a kingdom called Sinhala in Sri Lanka before the 13th century AD and Sri Lanka was never known as a Sinhala country throughout history.
The archeologist/historian Prof. S. Paranavitana was a biased researcher who did all his research with a preconceived Sinhala-Buddhist mindset. His findings and assumptions magically supported all the myths found in the Mahavamsa.
Prof. K. Indrapala in his book (pg.19) says,
**the assumption forming the basis of Prof. Paranavitana?s statement is that the people of the kingdom ruled by the Anuradapura kings and the inhabitants of Rohana and other southern chiefdoms were all Sinhalese and that any ruler other than a Sinhalese in control of Anuradapura or other chiefdoms was a foreigner. As will be seen later in this book, such an assumption is not supported by archeological or epigraphical evidence. In the centuries before the Common Era, there were many ethnic groups in the island and one of them was the group known as the Damedas in inscriptions and Damilas in the Pali chronicles, identified without any controversy as the Tamils. Sena and Guttaka, the first Tamils mentioned in the Pali chronicles as having gained power at Anuradapura were from a merchant family and are not even described as invaders.**
According to Prof. R. A. L. H. (Leslie) Gunawardana, a historian/archeologist at the Peradeniya University, there NEVER was a Sinhala race/ethnic group or a Sinhala Kingdom before the 13th CAD. What existed was ONLY a Sinhala dynasty, a ruling linage group. There is NO evidence whatsoever to prove that an ethnic group/race or a kingdom by the name Sinhala existed in Sri Lanka before the 13th CAD. The concept that the Sinhalas were indigenous people or the first to arrive in the island originated only during the colonial and post-colonial period.
In his publication `The People of the Lion: The Sinhala Identity and Ideology in History and Historiography`, Prof. Leslie Gunawardana says,
**Sinhala was a name adopted by a ruling linage group for whose origin the lion myth had been created. He says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the Sinhala identity was associated primarily with the dynasty which ruled Anuradapura. He goes even further by saying that, not only the Sinhala kingdom but also the Sinhala ethnic identity (race) in Sri Lanka emerged only after the 13th Century AD. Before that, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty).**
NOW, WHO SAYS THAT THE SINHALESE HAVE A COUNTRY?
Unfortunately, even the Sri Lankan constitution does not say that Sri Lanka is a Sinhala Country.
Bikku Mahinda and the missinory monks who introduced Buddhism and the Pali/Prakrit language to the Island called the language that existed when they arrived (before 3rd Century BC) as Dipa Basa and still no body knows what this dipa basa was, it can even be ancient Tamil.
It was only some Europeans such as Wilhelm Geiger, who studied the language of the Island (after Buddhism was introduced) in depth and divided the newly developing language into many phases. Later, he came up with the following name labels.
Prakrit-Sinhala (3rd Century BC - 4th Century AD), What he called as Prakrit-Sinhala is an ancient Prakrit spoken by many in South Asia in ancient times.
Wilhelm Geiger also came up with terms such as Proto-Sinhala (4th Century AD - 8th Century AD) and proper Sinhala (after 8th Century AD) for the developing stages of the new language.
The people in Sri Lanka who are known as Sinhalese today boast about a written Sinhala history that was neither written in Sinhala nor says anything about Sinhala, they boast about an ancient Sinhala history and civilization which is not mentioned anywhere in the ancient artifacts or publications or inscriptions as Sinhala, they boast about Sinhala Kingdoms which nobody, even Ven. Mahanama the author of Mahavamsa has never mentioned. They boast about a Sinhala Nation which never existed, they talk about a Sinhala race/ethnic group which came into existence ONLY after the 13th Century AD and they boast about a Sinhala country which neither existed then nor exist now. Just because their leaders, the Sinhala Kalu Suddhas (Senanayakes, Jayawardanes, Bandaranakakes, Wijayawardenas, Kothalawelas and many others) licked the bottoms of the British Suddhas, they gave the whole of Sri Lanka including the Tamil Eelam to the majority on a platter. Even then, the Sri Lankan constitution does not say it is a Sinhala country.
Today, for anything and everything, the term Sinhala is attached, Sinhala-Buddhism, Sinhala-Medicine, Sinhala-Roofing tiles, Sinhala-Rice, Sinhala-that, Sinhala-this, etc but before the 13th Century AD, why the word Sinhala is not mentioned anywhere?
Of course, many different races existed before the 13th Century AD, but a race known as Sinhala never existed.
According to the genetic study conducted recently, the people who call themselves Sinhalese today are having 70% Indian Tamil genes and they still call themselves Aryans.
It is absolutely hilarious to see a race which never existed before the 13th CAD claiming to be the natives and the sole owners of the Island Sri Lanka just because they speak a new language (borrowed from many others), they became a majority due to reasons we all know and since the British gave them the whole country on a platter.
THERE WERE NO SINHALESE BEFORE THE 13TH CENTURY AD.
According to the Mahavamsa, Vijay the son of Sinha Bahu (Sinha Bahu`s father was a Sinha/lion) from the Lala country where he established a kingdom and founded a city named Sinhapura is believed to be the forefather of the Sinhalese.
It is said in MAHAVAMSA CHAPTER VII - THE CONSECRATING OF VIJAYA,
**But the king Sihabähu, since he had slain the lion (was called) Sihala and, by reason of the ties between him and them, all those (followers of VIJAYA) were also (called) Sihala.**
The term Sinhala/Sihala is mentioned in the Mahavamsa only twice in the beginning chapters as shown above. After that, the term Sinhala is only found in the Chulavamsa written after the 13th Century AD.
None of the ancient historical Objects/Monuments/Buildings which were in existence or found in the archaeological surveys in Sri Lanka before the 13th Century AD says anything about a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom or a Sinhala Country or a Sinhala civilization, or a Sinhala culture or a Sinhala language, and none of the Written History, Rock Carvings, stone inscriptions, etc, says anything about a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom or a Sinhala Country before 13th Century AD.
There never existed a race/ethnic group/nation called Sinhala in Sri Lanka before the 13th century AD, there never existed a kingdom called Sinhala in Sri Lanka before the 13th century AD and Sri Lanka was never known as a Sinhala country throughout history.
The archeologist/historian Prof. S. Paranavitana was a biased researcher who did all his research with a preconceived Sinhala-Buddhist mindset. His findings and assumptions magically supported all the myths found in the Mahavamsa.
Prof. K. Indrapala in his book (pg.19) says,
**the assumption forming the basis of Prof. Paranavitana?s statement is that the people of the kingdom ruled by the Anuradapura kings and the inhabitants of Rohana and other southern chiefdoms were all Sinhalese and that any ruler other than a Sinhalese in control of Anuradapura or other chiefdoms was a foreigner. As will be seen later in this book, such an assumption is not supported by archeological or epigraphical evidence. In the centuries before the Common Era, there were many ethnic groups in the island and one of them was the group known as the Damedas in inscriptions and Damilas in the Pali chronicles, identified without any controversy as the Tamils. Sena and Guttaka, the first Tamils mentioned in the Pali chronicles as having gained power at Anuradapura were from a merchant family and are not even described as invaders.**
According to Prof. R. A. L. H. (Leslie) Gunawardana, a historian/archeologist at the Peradeniya University, there NEVER was a Sinhala race/ethnic group or a Sinhala Kingdom before the 13th CAD. What existed was ONLY a Sinhala dynasty, a ruling linage group. There is NO evidence whatsoever to prove that an ethnic group/race or a kingdom by the name Sinhala existed in Sri Lanka before the 13th CAD. The concept that the Sinhalas were indigenous people or the first to arrive in the island originated only during the colonial and post-colonial period.
In his publication `The People of the Lion: The Sinhala Identity and Ideology in History and Historiography`, Prof. Leslie Gunawardana says,
**Sinhala was a name adopted by a ruling linage group for whose origin the lion myth had been created. He says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the Sinhala identity was associated primarily with the dynasty which ruled Anuradapura. He goes even further by saying that, not only the Sinhala kingdom but also the Sinhala ethnic identity (race) in Sri Lanka emerged only after the 13th Century AD. Before that, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty).**
NOW, WHO SAYS THAT THE SINHALESE HAVE A COUNTRY?
Unfortunately, even the Sri Lankan constitution does not say that Sri Lanka is a Sinhala Country.
Bikku Mahinda and the missinory monks who introduced Buddhism and the Pali/Prakrit language to the Island called the language that existed when they arrived (before 3rd Century BC) as Dipa Basa and still no body knows what this dipa basa was, it can even be ancient Tamil.
It was only some Europeans such as Wilhelm Geiger, who studied the language of the Island (after Buddhism was introduced) in depth and divided the newly developing language into many phases. Later, he came up with the following name labels.
Prakrit-Sinhala (3rd Century BC - 4th Century AD), What he called as Prakrit-Sinhala is an ancient Prakrit spoken by many in South Asia in ancient times.
Wilhelm Geiger also came up with terms such as Proto-Sinhala (4th Century AD - 8th Century AD) and proper Sinhala (after 8th Century AD) for the developing stages of the new language.
The people in Sri Lanka who are known as Sinhalese today boast about a written Sinhala history that was neither written in Sinhala nor says anything about Sinhala, they boast about an ancient Sinhala history and civilization which is not mentioned anywhere in the ancient artifacts or publications or inscriptions as Sinhala, they boast about Sinhala Kingdoms which nobody, even Ven. Mahanama the author of Mahavamsa has never mentioned. They boast about a Sinhala Nation which never existed, they talk about a Sinhala race/ethnic group which came into existence ONLY after the 13th Century AD and they boast about a Sinhala country which neither existed then nor exist now. Just because their leaders, the Sinhala Kalu Suddhas (Senanayakes, Jayawardanes, Bandaranakakes, Wijayawardenas, Kothalawelas and many others) licked the bottoms of the British Suddhas, they gave the whole of Sri Lanka including the Tamil Eelam to the majority on a platter. Even then, the Sri Lankan constitution does not say it is a Sinhala country.
Today, for anything and everything, the term Sinhala is attached, Sinhala-Buddhism, Sinhala-Medicine, Sinhala-Roofing tiles, Sinhala-Rice, Sinhala-that, Sinhala-this, etc but before the 13th Century AD, why the word Sinhala is not mentioned anywhere?
Of course, many different races existed before the 13th Century AD, but a race known as Sinhala never existed.
According to the genetic study conducted recently, the people who call themselves Sinhalese today are having 70% Indian Tamil genes and they still call themselves Aryans.
It is absolutely hilarious to see a race which never existed before the 13th CAD claiming to be the natives and the sole owners of the Island Sri Lanka just because they speak a new language (borrowed from many others), they became a majority due to reasons we all know and since the British gave them the whole country on a platter.
