Kataragama Temple - Hindu and Buddhist Conflicts

Hindu and Buddhist Conflicts

Sri Lanka has had a history of conflict between its minority Hindu Tamils and majority Buddhists since its political independence from Great Britain in 1948. Paul Wirz in 1930s wrote about tensions between Hindus and Buddhists regarding the ownership and mode of ritual practice in Kataragama. For the past millennia the majority of the pilgrims were Hindus from Sri Lanka and South India who undertook an arduous pilgrimage on foot. By the 1940 roads were constructed and more and more Sinhala Buddhists began to take the pilgrimage. This increased the tensions between the local Hindus and Buddhists about the ownership and type of rituals to be used. The government interceded on behalf of the Buddhists and enabled the complete takeover of the temple complex and in effect the shrines have become an adjunct to the Buddhist Kiri Vehera.Protests occurred upon this development in the 1940s, particularly when restrictions were placed on Tamil worship at the shrine.

Typical Tamil Hindu rituals at Kataragama such as fire walking, Kavadi dance and body piercing have been taken over by the Buddhists and have been spread to the rest of the island. The Buddhist takeover of the temple and its rituals has also profoundly affected the rationale nature of austere Theravada Buddhism practiced in Sri Lanka to that of the personal Bhakti veneration of deities found amongst the Hindus of Sri Lanka and South India. The loss of Hindu influence within the temple complex has negatively affected the Sri Lankan Tamil Hindu society. According to Paul Younger the Buddhist takeover was precipitated by the overwhelming participation of Buddhists in what are essentially Hindu rituals that worried the Buddhist establishment. There is a strong political and religious pressure to further modify the temple rituals to conform within an orthodox Theravada Buddhist world view.

Read more about this topic:  Kataragama Temple

Famous quotes containing the word conflicts:

    In motherhood, where seemingly opposite realities can be simultaneously true, the role of nurturer invariably conflicts with the role of socializer. When trouble came as it surely must, was I the good cop who understood, the bad cop who terrorized, or both?
    Mary Kay Blakely (20th century)