Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

30 August  2020

 

 

Nationalism or Separatism?

 

Victor Rajalingam who thanked me after our last public debate, sent me an email headed ‘Justice Wigneswaran's brilliant speech in Parliament’. Today, I opened it as per my order of priority allocated to the role of this relationship between Victor and Politician Wigneswaran.

 

The written version of the speech which was circulated to the press carried the headlines:

 

[ In Parliament Proceedings of 28/08/2020 Debate on the Vote on Account Speech by Justice C.V.Wigneswaran, M.P.]

 

Mr Wigneswaran apparently invokes Guru through Hindu ‘Guru Brammah’ mantra. If his Gurus had blessed him – then his speech would have been self-balancing which would have promoted him to the next higher level of thinking in that parliament. Each completed job without owing debt to others promotes us automatically to the next higher level of thinking. Let’s see whether Mr Wigneswaran completed his job on 28 August 2020 – through his own narration / manifested facts.

Let us take the first part:

 

[ I met a very senior respected Sinhala Politician a day or two ago. He made a pertinent observation. He said my speeches were not vituperative nor abusive. He advised "Never lose sight of the need to be objective”. I truly value his advice. I hate none. But I love Truth.]

 

The question that arises in my mind is whether Mr Wigneswaran identifies with being Objective as an alternate to being Subjective. My search brought to my attention the following definition:

 

[In philosophy, objectivity is the concept of truth independent from individual subjectivity (bias caused by one's perception, emotions, or imagination)]

 

In other words – the outcome needs to be clean of any  subjective influence – personal to a person and / or her / his group.

 

Mr Wigneswaran’s claim  ‘I hate none. But I love Truth’ is about himself and is valid only within the circle of his belief. This includes the likes of Victor who blindly follows Mr Wigneswaran. It is his right to do so but it is wrong to declare it to be ‘brilliant’ in a public space – insulting those who are more brilliant but remain as silent energies or quiet participants.  When a subjective declaration comes into a common area – it needs to take an objective form. The above two were valid in his political group where Mr Wigneswaran’s followers would seek to be like him through common qualities. Hence political parties of common belief. The above two statements were invalid in Parliament where there are other political groups also.

 

 

 

 Mr Wigneswaran goes on  as follows:

 

[ I have come to conclusions about our past after studying certain historical facts. If my conclusions are wrong others must point out the shortcomings in my conclusions. Instead to get upset and abuse me and invite me for public debate does not make Truth a falsehood or vice versa.]

 

Historical facts are like the vote. In terms of the Parliamentary Proceedings on 28/08/2020 for the purpose of Debate on the Vote on Account: the relevant facts would  have been the items of expenditure which were needed to be matched with the needs of the People represented by that Parliament. Mr Wignewaran had the duty to base his vote on the basis of his identity with the stated Expenditure’s match to the needs of Jaffna People.

 

He stated the following instead:

 

[ If need be, Honourable Speaker! let a Commission be appointed consisting of top Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim and International Historians well versed in South East Asian History to report on our heritage and history. The Historians must be Internationally recognized.

 I for my part would like to tender a note to Your Honour to be included in the Hansard which speaks of The Antiquity of the Tamil Language and Tamil Society in Sri Lanka prepared by a respected Emeritus Professor of History – Professor Pathmanathan.]

 

Professor Pathmanathan is an academic and needs to be independent of the Parliament. When recommended by a Parliamentarian on personal knowledge, it is a subjective recommendation. Since Mr Wigneswaran is a Tamil who by his own declarations is committed to Tamil Nationalism – that recommendation becomes inadmissible in Multicultural Parliament where Ethnic issue is being debated.  Through  inappropriately structured plan, Mr Wigneswaran is ‘telling’ the government to do something as if they were his juniors. That confirms attachment to the past where in his Court of Law he was the most senior of all. This means he did not get the blessings of Guru Maheshwarah – the destroyer of attachment to body of ‘facts’ which confirm the past. Such an example was set by Great King Maker the Hon Kamraj of India who as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu his internal Opponents Mr Subramaniam and Mr Bhakthavatsalam in the cabinet. This confirms blessings of Lord Maheshwarah – the destroyer of attachment to the physical – so the mind is elevated to Energy level. It is this Energy that promotes our through structure to the next higher level.

 

Mr Ranil Wickremesinghe who is a Parliament elder has wisdom in Parliamentary procedures especially in relation to Vote on Account. This was revealed after the dissolution of Parliament. If Mr Wigneswaran was blessed on 28 August 2020, by the Holy Trinity Brammah would have come through Mr Ranil Wickremesinghe, Vishnu through Mr Sumanthiran and Shiva through my mind which has been commonly available to the public in need of such services.

 

It is not enough to openly invoke the Holy Trinity. Shanthi, Shanthi, Shanthi was needed to say Thank you to each. It is this that confirms completion of the job at that level and naturally promotes us to the next higher position. When we fail to so complete – we fail to attribute to Guru and therefore demote our mind structure.

 

Mr Wigneswaran shared with us the current facts he produced  as follows:

 

[An Honourable Member from Colombo named me personally yesterday and referred to certain matters against me. I may be given a few minutes in addition to my quota to reply him. Firstly he said that I had forbidden Sinhalese and Muslims entering the North when I was Chief Minister. Truly I must be a Demon to have said so when my children have both married Sinhalese. Mr.Speaker! I do not indulge in such vituperative, racial exercises. I would like to see any video or audio report of such speech if there be one to explain to the Honourable Member. But certainly I may have said that it was wrong to bring outsiders to set them up in Mahaweli Colonisation Schemes contrary to International Law principles which expects the local people to be given priority.]

 

Since Mr Wigneswaran is able to live with his children as One unit by structure, is it appropriate that he seeks Separation of provinces on ethnic base? The individual merges with family; the family with community and community with the nation. Once Tamil Nationalism is claimed – physical separation on the basis of primary level cultural commonness confirms attachment to the past. If Mr Wigneswaran claims Nationalism then he has no authority to claim Separatism for the people claims to represent.

 

Facts, like the vote can be interpreted by each one as per their beliefs and logical thoughts. Diverse beliefs oppose each other and are needed to prevent bipolarism through separation as an alternative to  opposition. If Sinhalese and Tamils had opposed each other – instead of separating – we would have prevented the war and become a successful Democracy. Mr Wigneswaran had the duty to Oppose and not recommend separatism in any form, as per the past to which he did not contribute directly. If Sinhalese do it – that is their problem and not ours for we are Sri Lankans.