දන්ත ධාතුව ප්‍රදර්ශනය ගැන අඳෝනා හොදටම ඇති

[Hyaenidae]

btw: gahanu ayatawath langata enna dunne nathi eke, me wenakan media walata content dunne nathi eke & president ta witharak wage access dena ekakata, lankawe unwa marapu 1908 di wage kaleka suddonta camera genalla real eka balanna dunna kiyala mamanam thambekata believe karanne na bn.

You're dead wrong about that. British took over SL in 1815, they had the authority to display the relic whenever they wanted to. All the members of the royal family who visited SL had private viewings of the relic (1870 - Prince Alfred, 1875 - Prince Albert, 1896 - Siamese Prince Bhanurangsi, 1897 - King of Siam Chulalongkorn, 1901 - Prince George, 1907 - An unnamed Japanese Prince, 1921 - Prince Edward, so and so forth... and Queen Elizabeth herself in 1954), plus they had their own Dalada peraheras dedicated for them.

---

This is just a photo of the case, not the real relic. Maligawa also shared this photo. Do you really think they would do that if it was the real relic?

Here's the complete recounting of the disrobing process of the relic - do you think the Prince was just shown a "case"?

------ Post added on Apr 21, 2025 at 12:13 AM

 

[Draco Malfoy]

You're dead wrong about that. British took over SL in 1815, they had the authority to display the relic whenever they wanted to. All the members of the royal family who visited SL had private viewings of the relic (1870 - Prince Alfred, 1875 - Prince Albert, 1897 - King of Siam Chulalongkorn, 1901 - Prince George, 1907 - An unnamed Japanese Prince, 1921 - Prince Edward, so and so forth... and Queen Elizabeth herself in 1954), plus they had their own Dalada peraheras dedicated for them.

that's your point in technical details. which is fair and simplest conclusion.

but my opinion is just because they had the authority, our monks wouldn't let any Buddhists massacred 'suddas' anywhere near the most sacred relic of Buddhists. monks showed the cover & maybe kept the real relic hidden away somewhere else. They didn't even let sri lankan women to go near it.
do you really think monks in those days would let British to just come and see and take photos just because they're the rulers of the land.
Dude British killed Sinhalese, destroyed so much of our land and culture. just the fact that British promoted alcohol & cigarettes for free to make our men weak so we can't fight back is enough to hate those. And everyone knows tooth relic was hidden for protection in many instances because of wars and invasions.
And just think, if the British asked to send the relic to the England, what would monks do? send it cause they're the rulers or go to war against them? Best thing is to convince the British that this cover is the real deal but keeping the real relic hidden. So even British take that, it's just the cover. No harm to the relic.

As I think monks should've considered British rulers were a potential threat to the relic, most probably kept it hidden. And made believe the British that everything is good.

 

[Hyaenidae]

that's your point in technical details. which is fair and simplest conclusion.

but my opinion is just because they had the authority, our monks wouldn't let any Buddhists massacred 'suddas' anywhere near the most sacred relic of Buddhists. monks showed the cover & maybe kept the real relic hidden away somewhere else.

Oh come on, you can't be serious. Your mother saw exactly the same golden lotus stand as every British author described it, do you honestly believe that the relic upon that lotus stand was a "fake" from 1815 to 1972?

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

You're dead wrong about that. British took over SL in 1815, they had the authority to display the relic whenever they wanted to. All the members of the royal family who visited SL had private viewings of the relic (1870 - Prince Alfred, 1875 - Prince Albert, 1896 - Siamese Prince Bhanurangsi, 1897 - King of Siam Chulalongkorn, 1901 - Prince George, 1907 - An unnamed Japanese Prince, 1921 - Prince Edward, so and so forth... and Queen Elizabeth herself in 1954), plus they had their own Dalada peraheras dedicated for them.

---

Here's the complete recounting of the disrobing process of the relic - do you think the Prince was just shown a "case"?

------ Post added on Apr 21, 2025 at 12:13 AM

1853 උන් දළඳා වහන්සේ බාර දෙනව අස්ගිරි මල්වතු නාහිමියන්ටයි දියවඩන නිළමේටයි. එතනින් පස්සේ කොහොමත් ඕනි ඕනි වෙලාවට බලන්න ඉඩක් තිබ්බේ නෑ ඒ වෙනකනුත් ආරක්ෂාවට අය දාලා තිබ්බට කරඩුවෙන් එළියට වඞීඑම්මන්න ඔය පාර්ශව ඔක්කොම ඕනි. ඕක උන්ට තනියම බලන්න කොහොමත් ඉඩක් තිබ්බේ නෑ. උන් දන්නෙත් පෙන්නපු දේ විතරයි. එතනින් එහාට උන්ට කරන්න පුළුවන් දෙයක් තිබ්බේ නෑ. දැකපු එක ආ ඒ තමා දළඳා වහන්සේ කියලා යන එක විතරයි උන්ට කරන්න පුළුවන් උනේ. අඩුම දළඳා වහන්සේ අතටවත් අරගෙන නෑ.

 

[emoji diaries]

Here's the complete recounting of the disrobing process of the relic - do you think the Prince was just shown a "case"?

------ Post added on Apr 21, 2025 at 12:13 AM

Yes, I do. The prince wasn’t a scientist or archaeologist, right? He came here as a tourist, not to do research. I’m not going to believe a 19th-century travel vlog, especially one made by a colonial ruler who tried to spread their religion in this small country.


The photo you shared is now on TV Derana YouTube.
Again, would Maligawa show this everywhere if it was the real relic, while telling people not to take photos of it?

 

[Hyaenidae]

1853 උන් දළඳා වහන්සේ බාර දෙනව අස්ගිරි මල්වතු නාහිමියන්ටයි දියවඩන නිළමේටයි. එතනින් පස්සේ කොහොමත් ඕනි ඕනි වෙලාවට බලන්න ඉඩක් තිබ්බේ නෑ ඒ වෙනකනුත් ආරක්ෂාවට අය දාලා තිබ්බට කරඩුවෙන් එළියට වඞීඑම්මන්න ඔය පාර්ශව ඔක්කොම ඕනි. ඕක උන්ට තනියම බලන්න කොහොමත් ඉඩක් තිබ්බේ නෑ. උන් දන්නෙත් පෙන්නපු දේ විතරයි. එතනින් එහාට උන්ට කරන්න පුළුවන් දෙයක් තිබ්බේ නෑ. දැකපු එක ආ ඒ තමා දළඳා වහන්සේ කියලා යන එක විතරයි උන්ට කරන්න පුළුවන් උනේ. අඩුම දළඳා වහන්සේ අතටවත් අරගෙන නෑ.

Again, dead wrong.

---

I’m not going to believe a 19th-century travel vlog, especially one made by a colonial ruler about his small colony.

And who are you going to believe? AFAIK no Sinhalese took photos or wrote about it.

Again, would Maligawa show this everywhere if it was the real relic, while telling people not to take photos of it?

lol It wasn't "Maligawa" who took this photo, it was in the public domain decades before they shared it on Facebook. Anybody who did a google search could see it
------ Post added on Apr 21, 2025 at 12:54 AM

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

Again, dead wrong.

ඉතින් ඔය සුද්දෙක්ද?

 

[emoji diaries]

lol It wasn't "Maligawa" who took this photo, it was in the public domain decades before they shared it on Facebook. Anybody who did a google search could see it
------ Post added on Apr 21, 2025 at 12:54 AM

It doesn’t matter, bro. Maligawa says this is just the case of the relic. They wouldn’t say that if it was the real one. That’s my point.

 

[Hyaenidae]

ඉතින් ඔය සුද්දෙක්ද?

There was a british government agent present every time the relic was privately displayed to foreign dignitaries; pretty sure he'd have made a fuss if they switched the relic or kept it in a "case" every time a "Suddek" examined it

Maligawa says this is just the case of the relic.

Source?

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

And who are you going to believe? AFAIK no Sinhalese took photos or wrote about it.

So, who wrote the දළදා වංශය?

 

[emoji diaries]

Source?

Watch that video

 

[Hyaenidae]

So, who wrote the දළදා වංශය?

I haven't read it. Can you share the section describing the relic's viewing in that book?

---

Watch that video

This is the "Hemamala Karaduwa" they're talking about in that video

As the British report I've posted above clearly details.

 

[Sonique]

Oh hell nooo. If they translated this book to sinhala, Sinhalese will riot and burn all the copies of this book. Thanks for this. What is this book though. Why can't people see that it doesn't look anything like a tooth anyway. Did we lose the tooth at some point or is this whole thing based on a massive lie

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

I haven't read it. Can you share the section describing the relic's viewing in that book?

Pdf නෑ වගේ . මුලින්ම කිත්සිරි මෙවන් රජතුමා දැකපු වෙලාවෙත් වර්ණය ගැන තමා සැක මතු කරා කියල තියෙන්නේ.

 

[emoji diaries]

I haven't read it. Can you share the section describing the relic's viewing in that book?

---

This is the "Hemamala Karaduwa" they're talking about in that video

As the British report I've posted above clearly details.

watch it again The monk cleeearly said “ දළදා වහන්සේ දැනට තැම්පත් කරලා තියෙන්නේ.... කුඩා කොපුවක හැඩයට සකස් කරලා තියෙන්⁣නේ..." while showing the exact same photo.

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

I haven't read it. Can you share the section describing the relic's viewing in that book?

---

This is the "Hemamala Karaduwa" they're talking about in that video

As the British report I've posted above clearly details.

ඉතිං දැන් ඔය කරඬුවට පස්සේ තමා කුඩා කොපුවක හැඩේ වැඩ ඉන්න කරඬුව ගැන කියන්නේ. සුද්දෝ එක තමා දළඳා වහන්සේ කියලා හිතාගෙන.

 

[Hyaenidae]

දළදා වහන්සේ දැනට තැම්පත් කරලා තියෙන්නේ.... කුඩා කොපුවක හැඩයට සකස් කරලා තියෙන්⁣නේ"

"And under this is revealed a minute thing like a tiny thumbstall of rubies. It is the covering of the very relic."

Exactly what the British recounting says, word by word.

And the video said "අවසාන කරඬුව ලෙස සලකන්නෙත් ඒක"

Again, just as it is in the British report.

"It is the covering of the very relic."

ඉතිං දැන් ඔය කරඬුවට පස්සේ තමා කුඩා කොපුවක හැඩේ වැඩ ඉන්න කරඬුව ගැන කියන්නේ. සුද්දෝ එක තමා දළඳා වහන්සේ කියලා හිතාගෙන.

Not sure if you're deliberately misunderstanding the book or genuinely don't understand what it says. The excerpt clearly describes the "කුඩා කොපුව" the video is talking about as a "tiny thumbstall".

Oh hell nooo. If they translated this book to sinhala, Sinhalese will riot and burn all the copies of this book. Thanks for this. What is this book though. Why can't people see that it doesn't look anything like a tooth anyway. Did we lose the tooth at some point or is this whole thing based on a massive lie

There are three books that describe the relic in detail:

Two happy years in Ceylon by Gordon Cumming, C. F. (Constance Frederica), 1901

In old Ceylon by Farrer, Reginald John, 1908

The Buddha’s Tooth - Western Tales of a Sri Lankan Relic by John S. Strong, 2021

 

[emoji diaries]

"And under this is revealed a minute thing like a tiny thumbstall of rubies. It is the covering of the very relic."

Exactly what the British recounting says, word by word.

And the video said "අවසාන කරඬුව ලෙස සලකන්නෙත් ඒක"

Again, just as it is in the British report.

"It is the covering of the very relic."



Not sure if you're deliberately misunderstanding the book or genuinely don't understand what it says. The excerpt clearly describes the "කුඩා කොපුව" the video is talking about as a "tiny thumbstall".



There are three books that describe the relic in detail:

Two happy years in Ceylon by Gordon Cumming, C. F. (Constance Frederica), 1901

In old Ceylon by Farrer, Reginald John, 1908

The Buddha’s Tooth - Western Tales of a Sri Lankan Relic by John S. Strong, 2021

The cover of the relic that you mentioned, what is it made of?

 

[හෙළයෙක්]

"And under this is revealed a minute thing like a tiny thumbstall of rubies. It is the covering of the very relic."

Exactly what the British recounting says, word by word.

And the video said "අවසාන කරඬුව ලෙස සලකන්නෙත් ඒක"

Again, just as it is in the British report.

"It is the covering of the very relic."

---

Not sure if you're deliberately misunderstanding the book or genuinely don't understand what it says. The excerpt clearly describes the "කුඩා කොපුව" the video is talking about as a "tiny thumbstall".

ඉතිං දැන් ඕකෙන් කියනවද දළඳා වන්සේ දැක්ක කියලා. මට නන් තේරෙන්නේ අවසාන ආවරණය උන් දැක්ක කියන එක විතරයි නේ. උන් පොටෝ ගන්න ඇත්තේ ඒක තමා

 

[Hyaenidae]

The cover of the relic that you mentioned, what is it made of?

No idea. The 5th dagoba is described as "a starry firmament of stones, clothed and muffled in a scarlet bandanna"

The 6th, "a Spiry pinnacle so close set with rubies as to seem one solid jewel"

The 7th and final one, "a minute thing like a tiny thumbstall of rubies"

It doesn't say what it is made out of.