Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
16 February 2018
Who
Divided Sri Lanka?
In
response to my letter to the Hon Navin Dissanayake, MP, Minister of Plantation
Industries, Sri Lanka, under the subject-matter
‘Tamil Political Grouping in the UK’ – I
received the following response:
[Inheriting the LTTE philosophy of Separation rather than
realizing Independence within one Common structure of Administration. The philosophy of separation did not come from LTTE as it goes
behind it since Suntharalingam.]
My response was:
‘To be intellectually valid and be
reliable pathway to Independence, the Constitution needs to be Common to those
who are culturally different . Speaking without analysing I state that the Hon Suntheralingam’s philosophy as
registered within me is ‘One Language Two Nations’. That One Language policy
was the LTTE’s in common with the SLFP’s. Buddhism foremost is another form of
Sinhala only. There is a huge difference between LTTE policy and the Hon
Suntheralingam’s philosophy
To
Administer on Equal footing, we need Common Law. If you are Buddhist – you are
bound by Article 9. As a Hindu I am bound by Articles 10 & 14 (1)(e ) of
the Constitution. How can we be Administered under one structure? I am open to
learning.’
The question that keeps surfacing is whether or not ‘Buddhism
foremost’ Article in the Sri Lankan Constitution, has active life? The
Constitution being the mother of all laws, would need to confirm ‘Self-Balance’
as a whole – like in a Balance Sheet. Truth confirms balance anytime anywhere. When
a Balance Sheet, on the face of it, fails to confirm Equality between Assets
and Liabilities plus ownership – we know that there has been some error in processes.
The processes through which laws are to be applied, confirm Energy at the
Source. They are like Lakshmanan Line:
[ “Lakshmana
Rekha, in modern Indian parlance,
refers to a strict convention or a rule, never to be broken. It often refers to
the ethical limits of an action, traversing which may lead to undesirable
consequences. Example of use:
As per the Hindu Epic Ramayanam – historically common
to Indians and Sri Lankans – this line was drawn by Lakshmanan - the younger
brother of Rama. It represented Lakshmanan’s Divine Energy to protect someone
who stayed within those lines. It was drawn to protect Rama’s wife Seetha who
was also divine but at that time Seetha’s mind was weakened by her human concerns
for her husband’s safety. Seetha was imprisoned by Ravana because Seetha
crossed that Lakshmanan Line – which effectively was Protecting Energy – at that
place at that time.
I drew such a line around our temple in Northern Sri
Lanka towards protecting the Temple from vandalism. The gardener who for
selfish reasons overrode my orders about not allowing any cows to graze within
temple boundaries – suffered physically and financially – after disobeying my
orders. When his daughter asked me for help – I said to stop tying the cows within temple
boundaries – for I felt that that was the reason for their woes. To the gardener
with little direct practice of law – and who was used to ‘freedom’ when he did
not see the lawful owners, my orders would have seemed like Article 14 (1) (e )
of the Lankan Constitution which entitles every Lankan to - ‘the freedom, either by himself or in
association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his
religion or belief in worship, observance, practice or teaching’. In the
case of the gardener it was to graze his animals in the garden which he was able
to enter and leave without approval.
Like the Parliamentarians who are the custodians of
power to Administer the Nation – this gardener who also got paid for his work, demonstrated
that he had developed the thought that the temple compound was ‘his’ – so much
so that sometimes even when I was physically present – he tied the cows to
graze within the temple compound until I disciplined him. Now, after stopping
that habitual practice of grazing the cows, the family is slowly recovering from the debilitations.
To majority Sri Lankans, the Constitution is a
status symbol of their country’s civilization. To some it is a work-tool. It is
a source of Respect only to a few. These few would keep drawing the Lakshmanan
Line, to manifest their Energies to protect the Nation.
The Vaddukoddai
Resolution 1976 was such a line by Tamil Politicians. The ‘Sinhala only’ legislation
lacked the belief based Energy to be a Lakshmanan Line. ‘Buddhism foremost’ provision
in the Constitution would be Lakshmanan Line only where majority are Buddhists
and the leaders have raised their investment in Buddhism to Energy level.
Even without Articles 10 and 14 (1) (e ) in the
Constitution, non-Buddhists who genuinely practice their respective religions
would be ‘free’ in their minds – so long as they stayed within the boundaries
of their Belief. On the other hand, Buddhists who use Article 9, consciously or
otherwise, to enforce their thoughts on non-Buddhists –
would lose their ‘mental freedom’ – which then requires other avenues through
which to maintain balanced mental order. That is the way the theory of ‘Oneness of Soul’
works.
Lakshmanan Lines confirm Divine Energy developed
through renunciation of earned pleasures and benefits. In a nation where Hindus
are minorities by law, but feel deep belief through practice of their religion
within their own Lakshmanan Lines, the Separation of Powers happens naturally. Those
who disrespect these Boundaries of Belief are invaders in the Ledgers of Natural Justice.
The Sri Lankan Government that seeks to keep ‘Buddhism
foremost’ provisions in the Constitution, for political purposes, needs to do relatively
more for non-Buddhist areas to fill the ‘gap’
through time and money to balance the books. Otherwise, the natural divisions
would continue – so long as non-Buddhists stay within their own Lakshmanan Lines.
The LTTE did step outside the Lakshmanan Line drawn
by the Vaddukoddai Resolution 1976. But indiscriminate punishment of Tamils, by
Government forces, resulting in ‘enforcements’ beyond Boundaries of Belief –
worsened the imbalance to debilitate areas Administered by ‘Buddhists’ to
divide into smaller and smaller groups of governance.
Once we know that we are not bound by common belief
it is better for us to not Administer but let karma happen. This works in any
institutional setup – starting with the family and workplace.
No comments:
Post a Comment