'Aba': Mahawansa with a Biblical touch

Is artistic freedom unlimited or should a line be drawn somewhere?
The issue has come to the limelight in the wake of the controversy over the film Aba supposedly based on the life of Sri Lanka's King Pandukabhaya (437-407 BC).
Histories of nations constitute both facts and legends. The longer the history the greater are the number of legends. No country's ancient history is devoid of stories factual or otherwise. All these facts and myths contribute to the evolution of national culture and identity.
This is what really matters for a society in developing its own values and traditions through the centuries. No artist or writer therefore has the right to distort or belittle that image and confuse people with his own interpretations of it by presenting them as facts.
This was the crux of the arguments raised at a public seminar held on October 13 at Mahaweli Centre, 96 Ananda Coomaraswamy Mawatha, Colombo 7 on the topic "Aba: Distorting History?". The Royal Asiatic Society Sri Lanka hosted the seminar for discussing the controversial film. A panel of professional historians and eminent commentators examined the Aba's content and its implications despite this probe being branded a "pseudo intellectual exercise" and a "one-party pop at Aba filmmaker in his absence."
The seminar's objective was not to focus on the movie's cinematic aspects but only on its approach to history as recorded in the chronicle Mahawansa. The allegation was thatDirector Jackson Anthony had distorted the Mahawansa story of Pandukabhaya despite his claims that he followed the chronicle to the letter in making the film. The critics' conclusion was that Aba is not Pandukabhaya's story but an imaginary story based on symbols like Herman Hesse's Siddhartha - the difference being that while Hesse did not say his story was about the Buddha Jackson Anthony has given the impression thatAba is the story of Pandukabhaya.
The panelists were the Venerable Shasthrapathi Vitharandeniye Medhananda, Dr. W.M.K. Wijetunga and Prof. Oliver Abeynayake.
Venerable Medhananda said that Aba was aimed at the psyche of Sri Lankans who loved history but had no understanding of its depth. Although the film's Director had argued that the Aba script was written in accordance with the Mahawansa, when his attention drawn to the movie's inaccuracies he had been reluctant to publicly accept that his version was inconsistent with the ancient chronicle, according to the Ven. Medhananda. He noted that this was no different to LTTE Leader Prabhakaran concocting a Tamil Eelam 'history' for his political ends. Jackson Anthony - a member of the audience said - had tried to wriggle out of this issue by claiming that art is more philosophical than history.
Dr. Wijetunge observed that Aba was designed to (a) challenge people's beliefs and age-old traditions and (b) create controversies of a sensitive and divisive nature by suppressing Mahawansa traditions and introducing new material.
Speaking from the audience Dr. Hema Goonatilake said that Mahawansa is not only Sri Lanka's history but also that of Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos where she had a spent considerable time. In fact, the history of these countries has been modeled on the Mahawansa, according to her. Dr.Goonatilake made special reference to a 12th Century Buddhist Temple in Pagan, Myanmar where many events cited in the Mahawansa like Arahat Mahinda introducing Buddhism to Sri Lanka and the arrival of Bhikkuni Sanghamitta in the island have been painted on the temple walls. She reminded the audience that the UNESCO has recognized these beliefs and traditions as social values that need to be protected – myths or not. UNESCO is committed to protecting the cultural legacy and sensitivities of a country. Myths or not an artist has no right to hurt a nation's sensibilities, she pointed out.
Sociologist Dr. Susantha Goonatilake noted that Aba is a technically well-made film that targets Buddhist culture in a country where the government banned Satanic Versus and the Da Vinci Code on charges of distorting respectively Islam and Catholicism. According to him this movie has created as much controversy as did Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses and the Da Vinci Code, which were both banned by the Government.
"The execution of two of the Aba movie characters – Chittaraja and Kalavela – is depicted using features of the killing of Christ. The two convicts are being marched to the execution grounds with a bar over their necks, very much like Christ being marched chained with a cross on his neck but in this film without the vertical bar of the cross. All this several centuries before the Christian era! "
Watching the execution are veiled women very much dressed like those in the time of Christ as in the dress of Catholic nuns of today whereas no Sri Lankan women dressed like that before Islam came to the Indian sub-continent, said Dr.Goonatilake.
He further observed," Chittaraja's journey to his death is the same as that of Jesus, fixed to a 'crucifix' bleeding, wailing lining the path to resurrection. Then Chittaraja rises from the dead with a shining light, (the parallel is the light in the cave where Jesus' body was kept). Chirttaraja is seen by his people, dressed just like Jesus, blessing his people… But most important – the Buddha is left outside. He came to Sri Lanka and claimed the land according to the Mahawansa in the time of Vijaya. But according to Jackson, Jesus was there first! The Mahawansa is being retold partly scripted by the Bible, a pre-emptive strike against the Buddhists."
This echoes the view that Dr.Lakshman Ranasinghe expressed in the Nation of August 31 where he writes that a film director has to be cautious not to impose one culture or religion on another and convey erroneous interpretations.
The most amusing reaction to 'Aba ' however came before the seminar from a Sinhala 'peacenik' Mano Fernando who charged that film was made with a "despicable reactionary objective of justifying government policy and making profits by rousing the passions of the people" suffering from a "ethnic mentality." (Rawaya October 10).
Participants largely agreed that none of the films based on Sri Lanka's history did justice to the achievements of the Sinhalas of the pre-colonial era or thereafter. Instead the some of the so-called award-winning films were aimed at denigrating Sinhala culture and the armed forces.
- Asian Tribune -