Thursday, April 27, 2017

REPLY OF VIDYAJOTI WALTER MARASINGHE EDITOR JRAS NS 2016 VOLUME 61 PART 1 AND 2 ON THE REVIEW BY HEMANTHA SITUGE RECEIVED BY HIM VIA E MAIL ON 20 th APRIL 2017

Editor's Reply to Hemantha Situge's Review on RASSL Journal Vol. 61, Parts 1 & 2
A review on the latest issues of the RASSL Journal Vol. 61, Parts 1 & 2  (2016) has been released by Mr. Hemantha Situge, a former Treasurer of the Royal Asiatic Society of Sri Lanka.  The learned reviewer has taken to task almost all the articles and the two obituaries published in these issues.  While I deeply appreciate the few constructive criticisms he has made, I regret to say that the majority of his comments have no firm ground to stand.
            As the Editor of the Journal, I take full responsibility of the contents of the articles and would like to place on record what I have to say about some silly remarks made by the reviewer, leaving it to the respective authors to reply to them more authoritatively.
            First, the article by Prof. Mahinda Somathilake on Ajanta murals and their chronology.  As to the date of discovery of the paintings, there is a difference of just two years between that of Somathilake and that of Benjamin Rowland.  The latter however does not substantiate his statement, but Somathilake provides some evidence for his date.  Which view are we to accept? Are we to accept Benjamin Rowland just because he is a Britisher?   We must also note that  Somathilake's article is not on Ajanta murals but an endeavor to establish their chronology.  In this attempt the scholar does not depend on the paintings per se and their stylistic differences and has given valid reasons for excluding them as unreliable criteria.  He considers inscriptional, paleographical and architectural factors more reliable.  We cannot, therefore, blame Somathilake for not referring to scenes from the Sinhala Avadana, which are quite outside his purview.
            Article Two.  The reviewer finds fault with Chandana Jayawardana for not mentioning whether he is dealing with unpublished or published literature.  Is it really necessary?  Any one who reads through the article will find that Chandana's review is based on the published Buddhist literature in Pali.  I, therefore, do not see any reason why he should give a long list of catalogues of unpublished material in Sanskrit, Pali and Sinhala, which are quite irrelevant to his study.  A. B. Keith's book deals with the history of classical Sanskrit literature from Asvaghosa downwards.  What is the relevance of that book to this study?  In my opinion,  Chandana has done an excellent job, and a word of appreciation would have been an encouragement to that young researcher.
            Article Three.  Using 'Veragala' for 'Veheragala' is not a mistake.  'Veheragala' becomes 'Veragala' by a rule of euphonic combination.  Chandrajeewa personally told me that he was sticking to the commonly used term 'Veragala'.
            Review article on Anand Singh's book.  I personally do not think that mentioning the reviewer's email address at the end of the article is a serious violation of tradition.  It is given there actually for the purposes of communication, for he is a foreign scholar.  On the other hand, tradition should change with times.  Tradition is not to be deified as a perpetual legacy.  When an age-long  practice becomes no longer relevant, there is no point in preserving it.  Euripides is acclaimed as a great dramatist mainly because he fought against the established order based on meaningless tradition.  We have violated tradition this time by changing 'PUBLISHED BY THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY OF SRI LANKA, COLOMBO' to 'BIANNUAL PUBLICATION OF THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY OF SRI LANKA, COLOMBO'  on the Cover and Title Pages of the Journal!.
            Now articles in Part 2.  The title of the first article appearing as 'Uri Lanka's . ..' is actually a printer's devil.  As soon as it was detected it was brought to the notice of the Printer  He was very apologetic and took immediate steps to rectify the error.  But unfortunately a few copies of the Journal were issued at the AGM before the correction was done.  We apologize to those members who received their copies before it was corrected.
            I admit that it would have been better if the author had mentioned the museum inventory numbers of the several statues.  But this lapse has no bearing  on the contents of  the article.  Ulrich von Schroeder' s book, The Golden Age of Sculpture in Sri Lanka, is hard to find.  Since it is a catalogue published for the Exhibition of Sri Lankan bronze images held at the Smithsonian Institution from November 1992 to September 1993, British Museum Tara Devis are not included in it.  But I brought it to the notice of the author that a number of references to Tara and other Buddha saktis and architectural details of the pabbata-viharas to which Vijayarama belonged are found in the Vastuvidyasastra and Citrakarmasastra of Manjusri, which had escaped her notice.  Shanti expressed her gratitude for pointing them out and gave me full permission to include those details suitably.  Unfortunately, by the time the article had gone to the printer and I was unable to comply with her request.
            We have taken note of the absence of photo accreditations in all the articles as pointed out by the reviewer, and we shall discuss this matter at the next meeting of the new Publications Committee to arrive at a decision.  I personally agree with the reviewer to look into the possibility of publishing colour photographs, but there is also a view that an academic journal need not publish colour photos, which would also add to the cost of the Journal.
            The reviewer has no comments on the next article by Prof. Mathilal de Silva, except that his title Attorney-at-Law appears along with his name.  He is not only an Attorney-at-Law but a retired Professor in Law at the Management Faculty of University of Sri Jayewardenepura.  His title was used in consideration of the highly specialized nature of the article.  The author of the next article, Ramla Wahab-Salman,  is a talented young member of the RASSL, and I am sure that she will take the reviewer's comments in good spirit.  However, Ramla's main concern has been the contribution made by the Journal Muslim Nesan during the eight years from 1882 to 1889, to which topic she has done ample justice, I believe.
            It is easy to criticize.  Today a thousand of references can be found on any topic in a few moments.  So it is very easy for a reviewer to find a loop-hole in any article.  But what is more important and expected of a reviewer is, while pointing out shortcomings, to appreciate any good points by way of encouragement for the researcher.  Nowadays it is very difficult to obtain good articles for the RASSL Journal, and  I am afraid sheer criticism might tend to discourage even those few researchers who take great pains to write articles for the Journal,  from doing so.
Walter Marasinghe,
Hony. Editor/RASSL Journal.
  


No comments:

Post a Comment