Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

14 April  2020

BRAVERY OR SLAVERY OF SUICIDE BOMBERS

Saint Yoga Swami of Jaffna origin said ‘Summa Iru’ – be still. The message came to me from Sunthu who also was a devotee of Swami. Just before  I received it – I was preparing to write to a work-colleague and it was driven by emotions. But when I received the message I automatically went into ‘faith’ mode. I did not write. Later I realised the perfect logic of faith. I believe that I received that message without any direct causal action or thought on my part. Common faith led me.

Being still could be interpreted by those who are physically driven as being idle. The idle mind gets excited and depressed alternately. That is as per the law of nature. Such minds allow other minds to live in them – as in brainwashing – including to commit suicide. In Sri Lanka, it is significant that suicide bombers were from minorities who reacted to discrimination pain as presented by politicians. Where one dies for what one believes in through her/his truth – that is an act of bravery. But where one dies due to being brainwashed – usually by a senior – that confirms slavery.  It happens when the mind is idle. The parallel of that in majority is suicide of the brain through frivolous information glorified by self-appointed leaders in the media including cyberspace.

Today I was directed to the following in Facebook: The message in English stated ‘Listen to the nurse who is serving at the idh hospital....’

My response was as follows:

[I cannot read Sinhalese. But I can read the picture and am seriously concerned that the nurse is not wearing protective clothing. The service provider must practice preventive care for the patients to cure themselves through the provider's example]

The translation came as follows:

[What she says is she loves her nursing uniform. But she never imagined she had to wear the PPe like in the other picture. She describes the difficulties of wearing such gear . Inspite of that she still loves her job and requesting the public to stay at home to win this war against the virus. This is a good message ( a plea) to the public. That is why I shared.]

I responded:

[How can someone who feels the need to share her discomfort with PPE have the authority to 'tell' the Public??? One needs official status to do so. For example a Medical Administrator duly empowered by law has that power. One who loves her job would be busy comforting the patients who need assurance of nurses like the nurses who were with your British PM. Now THAT was service.]

Last night my husband received a call from a former schoolmate now living in London. This guy kept on stating that the British PM got special treatment that was not available to the ordinary person. My husband said to him that the British PM deserved the best of care due to his position. I added that Mr Boris Johnson the person believed in global powers and hence the services were received as provided.

Later my husband thanked me for the care that I provided when he was   in hospital after a serious accident. Even one person providing services with deep faith as if the person being served is a part of her/himself is empowered by Natural Forces. When this happens – the mind of the person lives beyond the body. That to me is the real message of Easter.

To me, the above Sri Lankan message is frivolous. Each one of us to whom Sri Lanka is ‘home’ contributes to strengthen or weaken the Sovereignty of the home-group through which we exercise our rights or affect the rights of others through our actions and expressions.

In groups where the actual practice of common law is limited, one relies heavily on personal and/or home-group beliefs to be empowered by one’s own Sovereignty. In Sri Lanka, as per its Constitution, all articles starting with Article 9 do not uphold Sovereignty due to lack of Commonness.

While writing this,  I was forwarded message about the book –

‘THE JUDICIAL MIND IN SRI LANKA;RESPONDING TO THE PROTECTION OF MINORITY RIGHTS – by

Jayantha de Almeida Guneratne

Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena &

Gehan Gunatilleke

The message came with the covering note from Mr C V Wigneswaran as follows:

[This is why I opposed persons from Attorney General's Department being appointed to the Higher Judiciary. 

They are trained to look after the administrative interests of the State. ]

Last paragraph from  The Judicial Mind in Sri Lanka; Responding to the Protection of Minority Rights

"What appears to be at the heart of the challenge faced in Sri Lanka is this apparent transformation of the juridical to the administrative. When those who are in the juridical sphere are compelled by political circumstances or by systemic compulsions to think and act in a similar manner to those who are dealing with the administrative sphere, the  juridical is replaced with the administrative and the rights of individuals are imperilled. This unfortunate truth fundamentally defines the future challenge to reform institutions in Sri Lanka."

The book is academic work. Academics are required to be independent of Judiciary as well as the Administrative arm of Governance. If therefore it is considered inappropriate for ‘persons from Attorney General's Department being appointed to the Higher Judiciary.’   then using the same measure, the following attribution is also inappropriate:

[Dedicated to those Sri Lankan judges who had the fortitude to uphold their constitutional role during extraordinary challenges to the Rule of Law]

The rule of law would be interpreted by diverse groups as per their own fundamental faith. Each group will have different elders as their mentors. Academics attributing to Judicial elders is in breach of the Doctrine of Separation of Powers. Whether their work is accepted or not by various arms of governance – to the extent it is independent and true – it strengthens the Sovereignty of Sri Lanka – as in ‘Postal Acceptance Rule’.

The book discusses the role that ‘Buddhism foremost’ Article in the Sri Lankan Constitution plays in various interpretations relating to religious rights. But I could not find an assessment of whether this ‘Buddhism foremost’ is valid in terms of Sovereignty. To be valid that article must divide into two Equal halves when presented as a rule as in the two sides of the one coin. Hence application of Buddhist law is allowed to happen first. Then any other law – including secular law.

The authors of the book have dedicated their work as follows:

[Dedicated to those Sri Lankan judges who had the fortitude to uphold their constitutional role during extraordinary challenges to the Rule of Law]

Which Law? Buddhist Law or Secular Law?

All these pundits – including Mr Wigneswaran have confirmed that they lack belief in the fundamental principle of Commonness in any law. Those who give preference to Buddhist law have no jurisdiction over others with different form of belief. ‘Foremost is Relative’.

Recommending the use of Ayurvedic / Indigenous  medicine for example is the parallel of Buddhism foremost. If practitioner of Western medicine recommends Ayurvedic / Indigenous  medicine s/he has the moral obligation to renounce first – the practice of Western Medicine. Likewise in law.

Whether it be in law or in medical practice, where there are unknown causes one needs Belief to defeat the problem. We thus prevent reacting to visible effects which leads to panic attacks. Belief helps us keep a Still mind and be Equal minded about life and death of the body. Truth is our virtual reality.