8th August 1999

Nilames & their duties

With the perahera season now on, many Buddhists are discussing the desecration of such events by Nilames with footwear.

As if that wasn't bad enough, they also get the ceremonial perahera umbrellas carried over their heads.

The dancers and others in peraheras never have footwear as a mark of respect for the Buddha.

The monks too are the same. Therefore, it is offensive to see modern nilames with footwear disregarding Buddhist traditions.

Ceremonial umbrellas are symbols of royalty. They were carried in processions to honour the Buddha and certainly not for the glorification of nilames. Paintings by 17th, 18th and 19th century European artists clearly show that the nilames who served our kings were never allowed to walk under any umbrella. Descriptions of peraheras such as the one held in 1828, clearly show that Dehigama, Dunuvila, Madugalle, Nugawela, Unamboowa and other nilames personally carried the umbrellas without pompously walking under them as the modern ones now do.

The status disparity between royalty and the nilames was so great that the nilames had to prostrate themselves in the royal presence and refer to themselves as servile dogs (balu gettas). If a nilame dared to wear jewellery, swords, shoes or walk under an umbrella in royal times he would certainly have been beheaded.

The nilames were not even allowed to sit on the floor in the king's presence. They had to crawl until permitted to kneel and were required to rise even when the king's dirty linen was taken past.

The duties of past Diyawadana Nilames were bathing the king daily, oiling and combing his hair, trimming his beard and also cleaning his toe-nails.

Another deplorable practice of the modern nilames is the way they make hapless temple tenants dance on command, by haughtily bringing their hands to the waist.

This is not for the glory of the Buddha or the benefit of the pious crowds. It is to amuse the nilame's friends and relatives seated in complimentary pavilions. When they want to move on, the hands are dropped as a signal for the artists to stop dancing.

The Kohomba Kankariya was traditionally a sacred dance performed only in temples. Throwing it onto the streets to be danced over piles of elephant dung is a recent tragedy. Mrs. Sicille Kotalawela too has commented on it in her book on traditional dancing.

Therefore, it is clear that nilames are now subverting tradition and using religious pageants to glorify themselves. Honours previously accorded to the Buddha have been misappropriated by vain individuals who have no regard for Buddhism or our culture.

Peraheras are widely promoted as cultural events that preserve our traditions and are often aided by the state.

Therefore, immediate action is necessary to prevent the subversion of tradition by modern peraheras.

Over to you ministers, ministries, deputy ministers, secretaries and whoever else in charge of Culture, Buddha Sasana and Religious Affairs.

V.R. de Silva
Rajagiriya

Students have no right to decide

As a at retired lecturer of the Moratuwa University, I wish to clarify certain issues on the crisis there.

The prime objective of the National Diploma in Technology (NDT) course is to produce middle-level technicians. Until 1987, this course was conducted at the university by the Higher Education Ministry.

Since there was a great demand for middle-level technicians, the ministry, with foreign aid, started a new course known as Higher National Diploma in Engineering (HNDE) at Technical Colleges.

After this, the ministry felt that there was no need to continue with the NDT course and the university took over the course. as the NDT course was not new to the university, the authorities did not make decisions on certain issues such as certificates etc.

In 1992, the university senate proposed a certificate for the first batch which completed the course, but the students did not accept it and demanded the removal of the phrase, "middle-level technicians'' from the certificate.

A committee appointed to look into this matter recommended the inclusion of the duration of the course instead of "MLT", but the students once again refused to accept the certificate.

In 1999, when the students agreed to accept the certificate put forward by the senate, the engineering students protested that the certificate affected the integrity of the engineering profession.

It is shameful that the university authorities have been taken for a ride by both student groups. Neither the engineering students nor the diploma students have any right to decide what should be on the certificate.

It is a tested theory that two professional courses should not be conducted by the same institution. Corrective action should be taken to safeguard both the professionals and diploma holders.

Former lecturer
University of Moratuwa

Return to the Letters to the Editor Contents

Return to the Plus Contents