Thailand Vs. Sri Lanka

[fognsnow]

According to what I have read there are only 5 majority Theravada Buddhist nations in the world: Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar and Sri Lanka (significant minority populations in Southern Vietnam and Xishuanphanna part of Yunann in SW China). I have been to all of these nations and am considering Ceylon. Burma is the only one that truly suited me, as it combines both South and S.E. Asian elements - and a lot of ethnic variety.

Anyone have experience in extended visits to Sri Lanka and care to comment? Obviously there are ethnic, geographic, political and other differences between Theravada majority countries. I just want to stay in my 'comfort zone' of the mentality of mainland S.E. Asia. I hear Ceylon is really more like India - which I like for 3 weeks then I start to find the men aggressive and the place chaotic (though I prefer South Asian food) I would like to visit a Theravada Buddhist country that has large non-Buddhist population so they don't get cocky/oppressive. Sri Lanka has plenty of Tamils Hindu and Muslim).

[Xangsamhua]

According to what I have read there are only 5 majority Theravada Buddhist nations in the world: Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar and Sri Lanka (significant minority populations in Southern Vietnam and Xishuanphanna part of Yunann in SW China). I have been to all of these nations and am considering Ceylon. Burma is the only one that truly suited me, as it combines both South and S.E. Asian elements - and a lot of ethnic variety.

Anyone have experience in extended visits to Sri Lanka and care to comment? Obviously there are ethnic, geographic, political and other differences between Theravada majority countries. I just want to stay in my 'comfort zone' of the mentality of mainland S.E. Asia. I hear Ceylon is really more like India - which I like for 3 weeks then I start to find the men aggressive and the place chaotic (though I prefer South Asian food) I would like to visit a Theravada Buddhist country that has large non-Buddhist population so they don't get cocky/oppressive. Sri Lanka has plenty of Tamils Hindu and Muslim).

Hi fognsnow

This query sounds more like it should be in the Travel forum, unless you're looking for a more in-depth Buddhist tour of Sri Lanka.

Mrs Xangsamhua and I spent just a few days there recently and the only specifically Buddhist things we did were to visit the main temple (Gangaramaya Vihara), which is well worthwhile. The temple has a museum and gallery and a curator who is very knowledgeable and hospitable. The abbot is quite famous for his outreach to tsunami orphans, vocational education, etc. The Temple of the Tooth in Kandy is a must-see place with a very good gallery of murals (a bit like the stations of the cross!) that explain the history of Buddhism in Ceylon and the saga of the Tooth.

Buddhism was in fairly bad shape until the late 19th century when a revival took place led by Migettuvatte Gunananda Thera and promoted by the American Theosophist Colonel Olcott. The main street running past Pettah markets and the Fort railway station is named after the colonel.

I think the Sinhalese people are very devoted to their religion. Impressive statues of the Buddha are found all over Colombo in the middle of intersections, at street corners, in shrines off the footpath etc. I also think there is a fair amount of religious tolerance. About 6%, I was told, of Sri Lankans are Christian (mainly Roman Catholic) and the Tamil people are Hindu. Muslims were in evidence in Colombo. I don't know if you'll be able to go to the Tamil parts of the island as they've been embroiled in a war of secession for many years and, despite the government's recent capture of the Tamil capital, I think it would be very insecure. There was a suicide bomb attack in Colombo when we were there.

Incidentally, beware of touts and people who want to "do you a favour" because you're a visitor.

[sabaijai]

I have been to Sri Lanka a couple of times, spending a total of four months there in all. Yes the culture is much more like that of India than SE Asia. I enjoyed my stays there very much and look forward to future visits.

Although Buddhism is the majority religion, many Sinhalese exhibit a consistent anxiety about what they perceive as 'competing' creeds, ie, Tamil Hinduism and Christianity (including Catholicism). One hears and reads lot of rhetoric about preserving Buddhism to a point that borders on religious intolerance. Check any of the major English-language Sri Lankan news services or newspapers online and you will soon find examples of this mentality. Search the Buddhism subforum here for 'Sri Lanka' and you'll find a thread or two that goes into the history of Buddhist nationalism in Sri Lanka in more detail.

One significant difference in the way Buddhism is practiced and perceived in Sri Lanka, compared to Thailand, is that the religion is much more political there. For example, Buddhist monks have their own political party and, last I checked, there were at least nine monks sitting in Parliament.

On the other hand, this Buddhist nationalism shouldn't affect anyone visiting the country in order to practice Buddhism.

Another noticeable difference is the monastic discipline. Sri Lankan Buddhist monks don't follow the Vinaya as strictly as Thai monks with respect to, e.g., monthly head-shaving.

[amal2029]

I have been to Sri Lanka a couple of times, spending a total of four months there in all. Yes the culture is much more like that of India than SE Asia. I enjoyed my stays there very much and look forward to future visits.

Although Buddhism is the majority religion, many Sinhalese exhibit a consistent anxiety about what they perceive as 'competing' creeds, ie, Tamil Hinduism and Christianity (including Catholicism). One hears and reads lot of rhetoric about preserving Buddhism to a point that borders on religious intolerance. Check any of the major English-language Sri Lankan news services or newspapers online and you will soon find examples of this mentality. Search the Buddhism subforum here for 'Sri Lanka' and you'll find a thread or two that goes into the history of Buddhist nationalism in Sri Lanka in more detail.

One significant difference in the way Buddhism is practiced and perceived in Sri Lanka, compared to Thailand, is that the religion is much more political there. For example, Buddhist monks have their own political party and, last I checked, there were at least nine monks sitting in Parliament.

On the other hand, this Buddhist nationalism shouldn't affect anyone visiting the country in order to practice Buddhism.

Another noticeable difference is the monastic discipline. Sri Lankan Buddhist monks don't follow the Vinaya as strictly as Thai monks with respect to, e.g., monthly head-shaving.

Dear mr. Sabaijai,

I am glad that you had visited SriLanka before make any comments. But I am bit of mi-sabaijai for calling SL culture is more like India. SL culture is not anyway near to India. Of cause there are some minority in SL that has a culture same as India but majority (75%) Sinhalese’s culture is no part of India. So, SL is not another India. Many westerners try to link SL with India or even refer to SL people as Indians. This is purely ignorant or lack of respect to other cultures.

SL has a good history of religious harmony with other religions. Presently It is been spoiled by Evangelist who is taking advantage of the religious tolerance of SL Buddhist which I do not wish to discuss here.

A piece of advice. Next time when you visit SL do not hang around Gangaramaya Viharay. It’s a highly politicalize temple and famous because of a vocational school run by foreign donations.

There is one noticeable difference that you failed to mention or you haven’t noticed yet. In SL young men do not enter into monkhood for shot time in the name of culture or to learn or get a firsthand experience of Buddhism as Thais explain to me. In SL getting into monkhood is a one way trip. No turning back. A man is highly respected if he is able to devote himself to buddhsim as monk at the same time he will be disgraced to his family if he leave the monkhood for what ever reason.

[Xangsamhua]

A piece of advice. Next time when you visit SL do not hang around Gangaramaya Viharay. It’s a highly politicalize temple and famous because of a vocational school run by foreign donations.

Thanks amal2029 for your informative post, but I wonder what you have against the Gangaramaya Vihara. The fact that it has a vocational school funded by foreign donations doesn't seem to be a strong reason not to go and visit it. What's wrong with a vocational school, funded from whatever source? I thought the temple was rather nice and enjoyed talking with the curator of the museum there.

[ff978472]

Dear mr. Sabaijai,

I am glad that you had visited SriLanka before make any comments. But I am bit of mi-sabaijai for calling SL culture is more like India. SL culture is not anyway near to India. Of cause there are some minority in SL that has a culture same as India but majority (75%) Sinhalese's culture is no part of India. So, SL is not another India. Many westerners try to link SL with India or even refer to SL people as Indians. This is purely ignorant or lack of respect to other cultures.

SL has a good history of religious harmony with other religions. Presently It is been spoiled by Evangelist who is taking advantage of the religious tolerance of SL Buddhist which I do not wish to discuss here.

A piece of advice. Next time when you visit SL do not hang around Gangaramaya Viharay. It's a highly politicalize temple and famous because of a vocational school run by foreign donations.

There is one noticeable difference that you failed to mention or you haven't noticed yet. In SL young men do not enter into monkhood for shot time in the name of culture or to learn or get a firsthand experience of Buddhism as Thais explain to me. In SL getting into monkhood is a one way trip. No turning back. A man is highly respected if he is able to devote himself to buddhsim as monk at the same time he will be disgraced to his family if he leave the monkhood for what ever reason.

I have both Sri Lankan and Indian friends and I can confirm what amal2029 said.

Sri lankan and Indian are a lot different.

Both trees have different root.

In fact, I found my Sri lankan friends have a lot like myself (Thai) than Indian.

[sabaijai]

I have both Sri Lankan and Indian friends and I can confirm what amal2029 said.

Sri lankan and Indian are a lot different.

Both trees have different root.

In fact, I found my Sri lankan friends have a lot like myself (Thai) than Indian.

ff978472 have you ever been to Sri Lanka? I think the cultural similarities between Thailand and Sri Lanka are often exaggerated by the respective countries because the majority of countrymen in each country profess Theravada Buddhism. For reasons of Buddhist nationalism, the two cultures prefer to see the shared religion (although the ways the two countries practice Theravada Buddhism bear striking differences) as the overriding similarity, ignoring other, more extensive differences.

In my observation the Sinhalese share more affinity with peoples of the Indian subcontinent (who are incredibly diverse themselves; a Tamil and an Assamese are more different than, say, a Keralan and a Sinhalese) than with SE Asians, if you're talking about cuisine, dress, architecture or virtually any other aspect of tangible, practical, analysable culture.

The Sinhalese tend to maximise the differences between Sri Lanka and India because they identify most things Indian with Sri Lanka's Tamil minority and it thus becomes a political issue. But there is more to India than Tamil culture.

Thais tend to identify 'culture' with social ideals and mores, ie, religion, ethics, and ritual custom, rather than with cuisine, language, dress, architecture and other modes of living. The equivalent Thai concept, watthanatham, is more concerned with those things in everyday discussion in Thailand. I'm not sure whether the Sinhalese see 'culture' in a similar way. But to academics, for example, 'culture' includes all normalised modes of behaviour.

Just as one example, Sinhala, the language of the Sinhalese, is an Indo-Aryan language, and is thus much closer to the languages of south India than it is to Thai. From Wiki:

About the 5th century BCE, settlers from North-Western India reached the island of Sri Lanka, bringing with them an Indo-Aryan language. (This first group of settlers is referred to as prince Vijaya and his entourage in the chronicle Mahavamsa.) In the following centuries, there was substantial immigration from North-Eastern India (Kalinga, Magadha) which led to an admixture of features of Eastern Prakrits.

In addition to many Tamil loanwords, several phonetic and grammatical features present in neighbouring Dravidian languages, setting today's spoken Sinhala apart from its Northern Indo-Aryan siblings, bear witness to the close coexistence of the two groups of speakers. Some of the features that may be traced to Dravidian influence are

* the distinction between short e, o and long ē, ō

* the loss of aspiration

* left-branching syntax

* the use of the verbal adjective of kiyanavā "to say" as a subordinating conjunction with the meanings "that" and "if"

All of my Thai friends who have been to Sri Lanka - and I've travelled on the island myself with several of them - agree that Sri Lanka shares more affinities, overall, with the Indian subcontinent than with SE Asia. And that is one reason they enjoy travelling there. Vive la difference

It's not that Sri Lanka isn't distinct from India. But it's also quite distinct from Thailand. Having spent considerable time working in all three countries, I stand by my personal observation that Sri Lanka is culturally more similar to India than to Thailand.

As always, your personal impressions may differ.

[fabianfred]

Buddhism was actually wiped-out in Sri Lanka by the Tamils....all the monks and novices being murdered except a single novice who fled into the jungle and survived there for many years.