03 November 2020
Belief Vs. Merit
In democracy governments are elected by the People who usually lack the intellectual ability to decide on merit basis. In heritage based autocracy also, the leading role of belief is confirmed. Belief based actions are perfectly reliable. Often, we have difficulty in differentiating between thought and belief. Thoughts also are reliable to the extent we use measures that we believe in.
Someone wrote to me in response to my yesterday’s article headed ‘Soul Power’:
[I think all dead bodies with the corona virus need to be cremated to prevent the spread of the virus.]
My response to this was:
[That is science based. The parallel in government is to recruit on merit basis and not as per belief]
Governance needs belief which spreads itself. I wrote as follows to one of my readers who asked me a question on the basis of my article headed Jaffna Languages:
[63 Naayanmaar reaslised wisdom through their pathway. It happened in India. That wisdom will manifest in different form in today’s Sri Lanka. The Energy is the same but not the form. Telling me means telling them – whom I have the highest respect for.]
Interestingly, my mind was taken to the Daily Mirror article ‘Probe social media video on illegal land acquisition: AG directs acting IGP’. This report is as follows:
[Attorney General Dappula De Livera has instructed the Acting IGP to commence an inquiry into the videos circulating through social media on forced acquisition of lands owned by Sri Lankans living abroad.
According to the CCTV footages circulated via social media, a particular political group has forged deeds to acquire these lands illegally.
The AG had advised the Acting IGP to submit a progress report within seven days.
Meanwhile, Minister of Sports and Youth Affairs Namal Rajapaksa releasing a Twitter message stated that several parties were attempting to accuse his family against the above matter and relevant authorities were already probing the matter.
"Saw a video on social media which implicates myself & members of my family. Relevant authorities are already looking into this matter. Incidents such as this should not be taken lightly! I can assure that no one from my family is involved or affiliated to this," the Twitter message posted by Minister Rajapaksa stated. (Yoshitha Perera)]
It is not unusual for folks to acquire lands on the basis of Prescriptive titles. Ours in Colombo was so possessed and at the primary level – the judge upheld that the possession was valid. On merit basis – I bought it from Mr A T Benedict who was our Director of Studies at the Institute of Chartered Accountants during my student days. But after the primary level judgment, I studied the law – the Prescription Ordinance 1872 - and appreciated that one who believed was entitled to Prescriptive title above documentary title. On that basis I was open to Mr Piyadasa’s claim that he believed that it was his.
What I did not know back then was that one needs to have belief in the measure being used. That measure in terms of Sri Lankan law is the time of minimum 10 years and where the legal owner is overseas – 30 years. The other measure is adverse possession.
After respectfully preparing my Appeal arguments – I sat near my meditation seat. My eyes were taken to the judgment in an ex-parte case in which our property address seemed to be listed under the respondent’s field. The date of that case was within the period of claim by Mr Piyadasa. I asked my husband to read the name which was in Sinhala and he said it was ‘Periyasamy’ . The Court of Appeal overruled the primary judgment and the reasons for their judgment include the above.
Mine was the deeper belief due to me foregoing usual pleasures at the age of 28 to purchase this land. This automatically placed a belief based protection to preserve the rights of true owner. Similar claim was made in relation to our temple land in Northern Sri Lanka, but once I physically went there – there was total acceptance and no claim of Prescriptive title. Such lands are sacred and they would decide who the titleholder is.
The parallel of belief based ownership in terms of law making are laws made by elected members of Parliament who believe in their electorate as well as the law being made. If the 19th Amendment to the constitution was made by believers in law – the repealing Amendment needs to be strong in terms of belief in People. If the current government was less believing in the law than the makers of the 19th Amendment – the right pathway was that of belief in the adverse pathway.
Those who are now protesting as stated in the above mentioned Daily Mirror report, are using that adverse power against the current government.
The way of Universal Franchise is that it takes over and changes form to deliver as per the needs of its stronger contributors. This is why in autocracy juniors are trained not to speak against seniors. Where a person/group is officially junior but has stronger belief in the whole, that person/group is supported and led by the Universal power of belief.