Professor Buddhadasa Hewavitharana- A Scholar Par Excellence

Speech made by Prof. Wiswa Warnapala at the
launching the two volume Felicitation Volume in honour of Prof. B. Hewavitharana,
at Hotel Ramada, Colombo on
3rd April 2012.

I am happy indeed to be present here today at this very special occasion, the purpose of which is to honour an eminent economist, who was an equally eminent academic who adorned the intellectual life at Peradeniya for more than 50 years. It, therefore, is a rare privilege for an academic of the calibre of Prof. Hewavitharana to be honoured by a public gathering of economists, academics and intellectuals. We have assembled here to day to felicitate him for his achievements in his academic career spanning a period of more than 50 years of active intellectual life, through which he enriched the intellectual enterprise in the country.

Fifty years, in the life and career of an academic, is virtually the adult life of an intellectual and it, above all, is no small a slice in the life of an intellectual whose achievements could not be divorced from these of the University of Peradeniya and the country. His illustrious academic career begins with the final decision to locate the University of Ceylon at Peradeniya in 1952. It was in 1951 that he entered the University of Ceylon and he came from Ananda College, from which, as many a student of the period, imbibed a set of ideas which moulded his subsequent academic career, as well as his role as an intellectual. It was from this group of students in 1952 that Jennings himself expected traditions and style of life in the formative years of the University at Peradeniya. Hewavitharana belonged to the ‘pioneering squad’ which, within a period of four years, established many a tradition, some of which are radical in character while others ‘are non-conventional. All undergraduates, to a certain extent, are non-conventional and it is this which upset the adult world; the intellectual radicalism and the student activism which students of his period displayed, was seen in the famous hartal incident inside the campus which the ruling class of the period, as usual, saw it as an attempt to overthrow the state. It has to be mentioned that with this, the student estate had emerged as a power to be reckoned with.

Economics was a subject which was popular at the university and it, from the days of the University College, assumed significance as the leader in Social Sciences. No wonder that most, if not all, enterprising students opted to read Economics at the University and the Department of Economics, from which many a scholar was made and trained, dominated the academic life of the university for decades. Prof. Hewavitharana read Economics and it was in 1955 that he joined the Department of Economics as an Assistant Lecturer in Economics and this was the department which had a galaxy of eminent scholars like Das Gupta, N. K. Sarkar, F. R. Jayasuriya, H. A. de S. Gunasekera, Tawney Rajaratnam, Ian Vanden Driesen, Victor Gunaseker Indraratna and S. A. Meegama. In addition, there were scholars like I. D. S. Weerawardene and A. J. Wilson, though in the Department of Economics were specialists in politics, the study of which was then part of the Department of Economics. Prof. Hewavitharana, undoubtedly, derived inspiration from his peers in the department, and he, probably inspired by the oft repeated saying of Alfred Marshall that economics is not a body of concrete truths, but an engine for the discovery of concrete truths, spent a life time discovering the truth in a variety of fields related to economics. It has been mentioned that Adams Smith spent 12 years in thinking about his work and took another 12 years to write his celebrated work, ‘Wealth of Nations’ (1776), and this explains the nature of economic thought in the world. Prof. Hewavitharana has been honoured with a Felicitation Volume, a rare kind of Festschrift which in itself a rare feat in the world of academia because the it is a Felicitation Volume in two volumes. It is certain to remain a seminal piece of work.

What did motivate his students, most of whom are eminent scholars to produce, a voluminous Felicitation Volume to honour this scholar with whom I was able to maintain a close relationship for more than fifty years. For more than thirty years, I was his colleague in the department and later in the Faculty of Arts and the Senate; we shared many a decision and overcame many a controversy together during the Post-1977 period and it was he who guided me in numerous matters, including my final decision to leave Peradeniya and enter Parliament.

Most of the senior staff of the Department of Economies had been trained at the London School of Economics and Prof. Hewavitharana too went to the London School of Economics to pursue his post-graduate studies and he worked under Sydney Caine, who was in Sri Lanka as the head of the IBRD Mission in 1952 and it explains the stature of the supervisor under whom he worked for his doctorate. I can remember that all young Assistant Lecturers in Economics aspired to pursue a post-graduate career at the LSE, probably because of its reputation as a centre of intellectual radicalism. It has established a tradition which even ‘if we dissent from it, must yet be recognised as of primary importance’. According to Harold Laski, the spirit of the London School of Economics has been set out in what Bentham stated. "Has a man talents," Bentham asked, "he owes them to his country in every way in which they can be serviceable." I, therefore, can claim with abundant pride that Prof. Hewevitharana, since his arrival in the country with a PhD from the LSE, worked very hard to achieve this objective, both in teaching and research while making an effort to change the Sri Lankan economy. As Spinoza said, Prof. Hewavitharana, in the course of his academic career, disciplined the mind not to ridicule, nor to lament, nor to detest the actions of men, but to understand them’ and this, as fas I know, enabled him to make the teaching of economics an exercise in the are of intellectual understanding. The influence of the London School of Economics on generations of men has been profound because it had produced a powerful body of knowledge in both economics and, politics. I therefore, need to refer to his doctoral dissertation which, compared to those of his erstwhile predecessors, was different, because it focused on the factors in the Planning and Implementation of Economic Development in Ceylon. The issue has been explained from the point of view of the need to harness the available resources for development and the entire approach has been innovative. In the teaching of Economics at the University, he has been equally innovative and it was this feature which made a lasting influence on the undergraduate community. The unique character of his academic care unlike that of mine, was that from the date of his recruitment as an Assistant Lecturer in Economics in 1955 until his retirement in 1998, he served the university for an unbroken period of 44 years. This is in contrast to individuals who made use of the department for initial success and later went in search of greener pastures. His decision to remain at Peradeniya till his retirement was entirely due to the unique personality of the man. What he valued more was ‘the liberty of the professor to teach according to his conviction and his conscience, and the liberty of the student to learn from the professor in whose classes he chosen to follow. These are two legacies given to the academic world by the universities of the 19th century and the liberties referred to constitute the concept of academic freedom. Prof. Hewavitharana valued the concept of academic freedom, which he defended when it was under attack.

Both teaching and research, of course done with commitment and consistency equip you to tackle any situation, especially in state craft and public policy. The aim of a University Don, as Mark Pattision put it, was to produce ‘not a book, but a man’. Prof Hewavitharana used the curriculum in Economics, rather freely, to fashion the undergraduate in a certain tradition, to tailor him to a certain style of economic thinking. He wanted the graduate to look at the theory from the point of view of economic reality and this approach widened the vistas of the student. It is in this background that he brought in the economic ideas of Raul Prebisch into the class room, and this was some new diet away from the staple, the ideas of classical economists. The introduction of Raul Prebisch inspired the young undergraduate to look for material beyond the established text books; they were so interested in Prebisch who was known as ‘an implacable foe of the First World’. The ‘dependency thesis’ of Raul Prebisch became a popular issue among students. This provides ample evidence that Prof. Hewavitharana excelled as a teacher; he inspired in them a great veneration to the subject of Economics.

With his appointment as Professor of Economics - third to get the Chair and the one who succeeded H. A. De S. Gunasekera of was a member of the Selection Committee which chose Prof. Hewavitharana, as the Professor of Economics when he was on leave on a Commonwealth Grant at Cambridge and I was the Head/Economics. I can remember the intrigues and petty jealousies that began to operate in respect of this matter, and such things are not unusual in the world of academia. The appointment to the Chair in Economics gave him the power and responsibility to mould the department on the basis of his ideas. In addition to the role of an exemplary teacher, a University Don has to be a reputed researcher in his own field, and thirdly, he has to be a disseminator knowledge for the benefit of the public, which, in fact, is the role of the public intellectual. Max Weber once said that all intellectuals are occasional politicians. Prof. Hewavitharana combined all these roles in the form of an enthusiastic academic interested in innovative thinking. In the field of research, he displayed his commitment to public policy based research and they constituted the basis for the formulation of public economic policy. In that sense, he was a role player in the field of public economic policy. He, as the economic adviser to Dr. N. M. Perera, played an important role in formulation economic policy, and he was directly involved in the establishment of a number of public corporations. His research in the last fifty years encompassed wide and varied fields and it explains the intellectual achievements of the individual. His journey into different areas of intellectual activity could be illustrated by his writings on Buddhism. Such diversions are rare among intellectuals, and Prof. Hewavitharana, unlike many scholars of his generation, chose diverse paths in the production of knowledge.

Prof. Hewavithrana’s career at the University of Peradeniya was outstanding, and his contribution to the development of the department and the disciplines of Economics was equally outstanding. He, in my view, believed in the techniques and conventions of scholarship, and the moral principle which guided him in his illustrious career was his reverence for truth and commitment to social concerns. In his intellectual orientation, he displayed the characteristics of an intellectual pragmatist. He cultivated the art of dissent from orthodoxy. His influence on generations of university men has been profound; some who have sat at the feet of his wisdom have in after days been called to handle the economic issues and public policy in this country. Finally, I thank the organisers of this great event for giving me an opportunity, which, in itself, was a rare privilege, to speak about an intellectual cum academic, who made a permanent contribution to enrich the intellectual life of this country.

 Hits: 2136     Send to Friend