Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

03 January 2019

Sri Lanka - a Lesson for India

This morning I wrote about Buddhism foremost in the Sri Lankan constitution dividing the country into two nations. A little later, my attention was drawn to the Sri Lanka Guardian article ‘Judicial Antic-Disposition’ about judge of India’s Meghalaya High Court -  Justice S.R.Sen’s statement that India should have been declared a Hindu country after Partition. To me, it was my belief based investment in the issue and Sri Lanka Guardian that drew my attention  to confirm that there was a need to make my contribution to this very important issue that is the root cause of Sri Lankan political problems which translate as ethnic problem at citizens’ level.

Rule by majority is the mantra of democracy. To be truly valid, the whole needs to be ‘common’. To be common at the root – one needs common belief.  This is possible only through a secular system or One religion system. If religious status was used as the measure – then the contribution to belief and therefore commonness is diminished, to the extent we take benefits for our contributions and sacrifices. That is the rule of Truth.

In marriage there is the arranged marriage system and there is the love based system. In majority successful marriages – structure based approach is important. Even though love marriages are taken to be one to one and arranged marriages to be family to family, the real value is whether the pathway is structured to include others in our environment or whether it is between only the two concerned and therefore prevents interference. The ultimate goal is love.

Likewise in governance, whether one realises self-governance within one community and then shares the values of self-governance with other communities or whether we use the arranged system of calculated merit based pathway. The former is the parallel of love marriage and the latter is parallel of arranged marriages.

Marriages between two only  would fail unless there is strong commonness between the two individuals concerned. Likewise, one religion based government would fail unless belief in the religion is strong. The more we ‘show’ love, the less there is to enjoy at soul level – the sweetness of nature. Likewise with divinity – the goal of all religions.

Where religion is part of government administration, there is need to show more to impress the primary voter who needs to ‘see to believe’. It was this ‘showing’ that separated Pakistan from India, followed by Bangladesh from Pakistan. Likewise, in Sri Lanka, showing Buddhism diluted the contribution to common belief and hence the ethnic problem with Hindus who in Sri Lanka are the parallel of Muslims in India prior to partition.

Be it in India or Sri Lanka, Religious tenets are already in place. Not so the secular tenets common to all. If therefore religion is used as leadership criterion to measure merit – those who are already in that religion start with an advantage. In democracy, as in any competitive game, one starts with zero advantage.

With article 9 stating that it is the duty of the Government to attribute Buddhism the foremost place, Sri Lankan governments can never be democratic in structural value. The end of religions pathway in a multi-religious group is separation. If India is declared a Hindu nation – then there will be more and more little Indias of various religions.

Those of majority culture have the natural advantage of becoming self-governing, divine, loving – provided they actually believe in their culture. They would then not need a calculated measure to lead and be led. Such leadership happens naturally and those who have the sweet experience know. Those who need religion in Administration – confirm lack of belief in their religion and therefore disability to lead by belief.

If Indian leaders  were to declare that India is a Hindu country – then Indian Hindus are declared to be lacking in belief in Hinduism. The sweetness of Love, Truth, Divinity is experienced in the stillness of Natural mind sans any calculation.