Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

11 September   2021

 

 

Indian Flag in Australia

The Newsletter of Hindu Council of Australia carries the an article headed -  ‘Hinduphobia debunked by Public prosecutor and Justice in Australia’. The opening paragraph goes as follows:

[Hinduphobia and hate against Hindus or asking them to lie low and not to show pride in their heritage is becoming a rage in Australia. It is a worrisome development and has the potential to increase in hate crimes against peaceful Hindus. The latest act by Hindu haters is a Hindu Hate conference to dismantle the essence of Hinduism globally. Unfortunately this conference is being organized in the name of American Universities and some of the speakers are “not well known” academics who might be hoping to get into some limelight. If anything, their acts may lead to unwarranted suspicion against Hindu students in Universities across the western world including in Australia.]

True or false? When in an Australian University – say for example – the University of NSW (UNSW), is it appropriate to ‘show’ you are a Hindu? If you don’t ‘show’ how would the other ‘see’? As I began writing this article I received a video clip from Mr Kandiah Suntharamoorthy about the value of Hinduism. There were two members in that group who have expressly written against belief in Hinduism. There is also a Muslim in the group. By ‘showing’ the Hindu clip was he not self-elevating himself ? The video also presents how valuable Hinduism is.  If the audience is Hindu – then the presenter is taking a senior role. If the audience is non-Hindu – the presenter is generating either conversion tendencies or Opposition at that level.

When the Police arrested me at the UNSW, I asked them ‘under what law’? They said ‘Trespass’. The true response would have been ‘We were asked by the office of the Vice Chancellor to have you removed.’ The senior advisor to the Vice Chancellor had already asked me to leave and I said to him that he did not have the position authority to ask me to leave. Prior to that the University Security Officers asked me to leave and when I asked them under what law (thanks to Gandhi in me) and explained that the University was public property - they did not go further. In the arrest report – the Police listed me as Indian. After I informed them details to fill out the form they listed my nationality as ‘Sri Lankan’.

When I read the following in the Hindu Council article – I naturally ‘opposed’ it due to my own experience with the police and the courts:

[Thanks to the fair go of Australians and fairness and tenacity to be just, after many months of languishing in Jail, hate crime charges against Vishal Jood have been dropped and he has been granted bail by a court of law. According to his lawyers, appearing before Magistrate David Price at Parramatta Local Court, the Department of Public Prosecution (DPP) withdrew eight charges out of ten. A police request to lay a further charge under section 93Z of the Crimes Act of publicly threatening or inciting violence on grounds of religion was not sanctioned by the DPP.]

To my mind, on the basis of my experience, if Vishal Jood had represented himself  - as I did – he would not have had the above outcomes.

According to NRI affairs :

[The Haryana Chief Minister had intervened in the matter and written to India’s Foreign Minister to get Vishal released. In a tweet, CM’s office wrote, “CM @mlkhattar spoke to External Affairs Minister, Shri @DrSJaishankar for immediate release of Vishal Jude, a Haryanvi youth lodged in Australia’s jail & appealed for immediate intervention in the matter. The Foreign Minister has conveyed India’s concern to the Australian Embassy”.]

That confirms Political involvement. The above report includes also:

[At the time of his arrest, Jood was reported to have been living in Australia under an expired visa.

Supporters had cited Jood’s nationalism  and his defence of the Indian flag as the reason for his arrest and asked for consular support from the Indian Government to assist Jood with his court case.]

The origin of the above is identified by the Hindu Council of Australia as follows:

[Vishal’s counsel played a video to the court of a Farmers Rally at Quakers Hill in Sydney in December 2020. The video showed Vishal unfurling the Tiranga (the national flag of India), following which over a dozen goons surrounded him, pushed and dragged him and assaulted him repeatedly. The crowd was chanting “Modi kutta, Modi kutta.” (Abusive language against India’s most popular Prime Minister Narandra Modi).  The court heard that following this rally, Vishal received numerous threats on social media from anti-India elements.]

The National flag of India has the Ashoka Chakram/wheel of Dharma at the centre. Was it Dharmic of Vishal – an Indian - to unfurl on Australian soil - the Indian flag at the Farmers’ Rally - which was to express opposition to the Indian government’s new Agricultural laws?

The report states further:

[On 14th February, Vishal was standing on Wigram Street when he heard one the cars” occupant’s yelling, “There’s Rahul Jood.”  Several people came out of one of the cars. One of them ran towards Vishal armed with a baseball bat. Vishal took the bat off him and smashed a window of the nearest car with it, to scare away his attackers.

Attempts to ruin the life of a young man by terming an altercation as a religious motivated crime]

 

The Police are likely to make it out to be religiously motivated because most of the protestors were Sikhs. They are the parallels of Tamils in Sri Lanka. In both instances -  Militants supported by their respective Diaspora groups seek separations. In the case of India the actions against separatism by the then government is reported by Wikipedia as follows:

 

[ Operation Blue Star was an Indian military operation carried out between 1 and 8 June 1984, ordered by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to remove militant religious leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and his armed followers from the buildings of the Harmandir Sahib complex in Amritsar, Punjab ]

 

[After Gandhi ordered military action in the Golden Temple in Operation Blue Star, her own bodyguards and Sikh nationalists assassinated her on 31 October 1984.]

Interestingly, the IPKF also included Sikhs

13th Battalion, Sikh Light Infantry with the 54^th Infantry Division

And 14th Battalion, Sikh Light Infantry within the 37^th Infantry Division

About the 54^th Infantry Division - during the Indo-Pakistan war 1971:

[The division moved from its peacetime location in Secunderabad to its operational location in the Punjab and was ready by mid-September 1971.]

As per Wikipedia – ‘ of the About 57.7% of the population of Punjab state is Sikh’

The connection I make is that Sikhs are recognized first for their warrior skills – by themselves and by others.

In terms of IPKF – the report goes as follows:

[On December 17, 1987, Sepoy Karnail Singh of 14 Sikh light infantry of the IPKF faced dismissal and one year's imprisonment for raping a Tamil woman from the village of Idaikkurichy. Similar punishment was given to A. Mani, the barber of 93 Field Regiment for raping an unmarried woman near Kodikamam on December 24, 1987]

This indicates a strong reason as to why the LTTE with its strict rules in relation to sexual pleasures would have been the natural opposition of the IPKF. The way his mother was killed by Sikh bodyguard to whom Sikhism came first – Rajiv Gandhi got killed by the very LTTE his mother facilitated in India. To LTTE also fighting is foremost.

In terms of the Australian experience – it is understandable that the Indian student would have interpreted the Farmers’ Rally as being one that would promote a fight . But was it his role to represent the Indian government against Sikhs which would have  invoked that fighting spirit? It was more disappointing to note that he did it while here on student visa and one that had expired as well. Is that the ADharma that the Hindu Council of Australia is claiming to uphold?

 

 

 

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

10 September   2021

 

 

Corona Asuran or Avatar?

From time to time, when the vaccine rollout did not happen as promised, despite me completing my duty as a citizen – I wondered whether the King-virus was indeed an Avatar. As per my belief  as a Hindu – Lord Vishnu took Narasimma (Nara=man; Simma=Lion) Avatar to eliminate Asura (brawn driven) King Hiranyakasippu who claimed he was god and tried to force his son Prahalathan to worship him instead of worshipping Vishnu. Hiranyakasippu had the boon of exemption from death in sky,on land, in sacred area, in the underworld by any weapon, by man, god, asura or animal. Hence the combination by Vishnu in man-animal form. Narasimman appeared when young Prahalathan was challenged by his father to ‘show’ the Omnipresent Vishnu in the pillar. Prahalathan  invoked and Vishnu came.  The form was ferocious due to the Lion half. The above picture confirms that the other requirements were also satisfied. Lion is the king of animals. The Corona virus is the King of viruses.

Just because Corona takes lives, it does not mean that it is an evil virus. My thoughts led me to identifying with the following declaration by Dr S.B.Asoka Dissanayake:

[I welcome the Coronavirus the equaliser of human religious civilizations and its eventual destiny.]

If the Virus is an Asuran then we need a young (not necessarily by age) person with unshakable belief in Omnipresent Divinity / Positive Energy – to invoke that Energy. Such a virus would seem ferocious by effect but would eliminate those rulers driven by immediate benefits in Politics than by Governance in their areas of leadership. This includes leaders who are politicizing the vaccine. Those who invoke their own positive Energies would self-govern at the end of this – including through death.

 

 

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

09 September   2021

 

 

Politics of Covid

The Daily Mirror carries an article headed ‘SL reiterates study on the origin tracing of coronavirus should not be politicized’. The article commences as follows:

[Sri Lanka has reiterated that the study on the origin tracing of SARS-Co-V-2 should be based on scientific and evidence-based methods and should not be politicized.

The Foreign Ministry said that the next phase of the study should reflect the key findings of the previous WHO-led joint study report.]

 

To my mind, if Politics is the body of group power, Governance is the soul. A government needs to know first as to the origin of  coronavirus in its own nation. As per Wikipedia :

[The first case of the virus in Sri Lanka was confirmed on 27 January 2020, after a 44-year-old Chinese woman from Hubei, China, was admitted to the Infectious Disease Hospital in Angoda, Sri Lanka] The origin of this report is Colombo Page.

The Australian parallel goes as follows:

As per media release on 20 January 2020 – by the office of the Hon Greg Hunt MP – Australia’s Minister for Health and Aged Care :

[The first case of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) has been confirmed by Victoria Health Authorities this morning]

The former confirms Global base at Sri Lankan Diaspora political level and the latter Australian Governance level awareness. The Australian government has accordingly taken steps to investigate the origins of the virus. In essence, Australian government’s vote is a governance vote, whereas the Sri Lankan government’s vote is a political vote.

As per the Daily Mirror report:

["It is equally important to conduct a comprehensive, inclusive, and impartial study on the origin of the virus. Sri Lanka notes the leading role played by the World Health Organization (WHO) in this regard and the contents of the joint report of the WHO–convened Global Study released in March 2021, the Ministry said.]

That again is confirmation that the Sri Lankan government at best is dependent on WHO which did not declare the pandemic on time.

While what happened is global – why it happened to a person or sovereign group is known to the person or sovereign group. To identify with that truth within, that person needs to be aware of her / his /its sovereignty. That is the way of Truth and therefore Sovereignty. To know why something happened to us – through our own measures as per our own research into ourselves – we need to go into ourselves until there is no physical form to the problem. That happens when the problem and the solution are at Equal level. That is our inner belief.

Those who believe in us would in turn access that power to know the connection between causes and effects that happened to them. The latter is known as Subjective power. Since each group is sovereign, they operate on their own and around the Common power – the Sun of the system. In the case of the virus the WHO is taken to be the Sun. Every person who discovers why s/he was affected by the attacks of the virus, contributes to finding her/his cure. The home group that s/he belongs to, is in turn empowered by all such discoveries. They as a group empower the Sun. In return they are empowered by the Sun in common. That is the way of Sovereignty.

In the case of the current government of Sri Lanka, by being dependent on China from whom they ‘took’ money beyond the powers of their relationship – they lost the way to Sovereign power to that extent. This then automatically groups Sri Lanka under the rule of the ‘giver’ - as part of China. To the extent the People oppose this through their own belief – the Sovereign power of Sri Lanka gets restored. This in terms of groups are the minorities by natural culture that have withstood the test of time and in the case of migrants who joined the global community  - the test of displacement. To the extent they make discoveries on their own as individuals and/or groups – the vote of this government will be diluted at the global level governance. Not so if one takes the competitive pathway and attacks through local measures to elevate their own status. Tamils who do not make up for the excesses of the LTTE remain competitive and revengeful and hence would reverse the Tamil Diaspora structure where the clever young ones lead those with experience. This does not reach the global pool, leave alone the Universal pool.

Withdrawal from the Commitment to use Global Measures of the UNHRC happened about a month after Sri Lanka’s first attack by the virus. As per my discovery, time and place indicate commonness. In terms of Sri Lanka as a separate country it lost the support of globally Sovereign powers in terms of wars that affect it exponentially – as the war, effectively against Tamils did. That was due to Hindu belief in common with India which commonness was seriously attacked when the LTTE used its local measures to kill a world leader. A part of that karma would have gone to the Sri Lankan government also. Thereafter Sri Lankan Tamils also effectively became ‘local’. Belief in Theswalamai customary law alone would have informed Jaffna Tamils that the performance of a devolved group cannot be measured by the whole nor v.v.

The declaration by the Sri Lankan government is not new as per its purpose. Once we lose control of effects beyond our immediate circle – the independent powers such as that of the virus take control. This would mutate into economic virus in those who are not economically independent. That is how Karma works. This government needs to have remorse for withdrawing from the UNHRC – which is the Sun of Human Rights groups.