17 July 2021
Intellectual
logic is Human; Belief is Divine
[The letter from the
National Catholic Committee for Justice to Easter Sunday Attack Victims, a
group of bishops and priests led by Archbishop of Colombo Cardinal Malcolm
Ranjith, called on the president to take legal action against former President
Maithripala Sirisena for negligence as recommended by a presidential inquiry commission
report.]
Aljazeera
What if according
to Mr Sirisena’s interpretation of article 9 of the Sri Lankan Constitution –
he did not have jurisdiction over the interactions between Christians and
Muslims? As per my memory – Mr Sirisena kept stating that Sri Lanka was a
Buddhist country and the relevant branch applicable to Sri Lanka was Theravada
Buddhism. As per Wikipedia:
[According to Theravada Buddhism, mundane right view is a
teaching that is suitable for lay followers, while supramundane right view,
which requires a deeper understanding, is suitable for monastics. Mundane and
supramundane right view involve accepting the following doctrines of Buddhism:
1.
Karma: Every action of
body, speech, and mind has karmic results,
and influences the kind of future rebirths and realms a being enters into.
2.
Three
marks of existence: everything, whether physical or mental, is impermanent
(anicca), a source of suffering (dukkha), and lacks a self (anatta).
3.
The Four Noble Truths are
a means to gaining insights and ending dukkha.]
In essence, even
if we do not do anything – physical or mental – those involved would experience
the consequences of their actions . To do something one must believe that the
other is a part of her/him and/or know as per the structure – the consequences
of her/his actions.
Mr Sirisena was a
beneficiary of the Sri Lankan war. He did not earn credit as a fighter of armed
groups nor did he politically operate to earn the position of President. He ‘happened’
to be President. As per his own declaration – he was Buddhist foremost. Hence
he would not have had the intuition to know how Muslims or Christians would
have felt about each other. Nor did he have strong knowledge of Secular law to
apply the law intellectually and project outcomes.
Sri Lankan Catholic
leaders who limited themselves to their own religious congregations were the
parallels of this Buddhist president. Had they actively fought against Article
9 – they would have developed deeper common Sri Lankan rights.
The current
president showed in action that he was driven by his ancestor King Dutugamunu. Dutugamunu
as a king did not rule as per Buddhist values. To my mind he was one of the
reasons why Buddhism foremost article would have been included in the
Constitution. If he were living now and he acted as he did that would have been
in breach of Article 9. By taking oaths
at Ruwanwelisaya
the current President took oath to rule as King Dutugamunu did. That meant he was as a warrior foremost. So
long as he bound himself by a Buddhist leader breaches of Article 9 would have largely
been the responsibility of the leader above him. By becoming the President – he
took on the karmic results of his past – and escalated it to the king / corona
position. As a family – the Rajapaksas are known to believe in Astrology. As
per my knowledge – virtues or sins of our past are beyond our direct control.
If invoked for current purposes – they come with their ‘other side’ and do so
exponentially. Hence the fear of exponential spread of Corona virus. It is the
exponentiality of the spread that confirms that it is a sin from the past –
such as Silk Road karma.
On 13 December
2018, I invoked positive heritage of the Judiciary as follows:
[In the Colombo Telegraph article headed
‘Executive Presidency- Absurdity Of The Immunity Cover!’ – the author Mr Lukman
Harees refers to the following case brought against the then Attorney General -
Mr Shiva Pasupati – a Tamil. The case was named ‘Mallikarachchi vs. Siva
Pasupathy’
It ought to have been named Mallikarachchi vs
Attorney General – as the highest legal power within the
Government. The individual is mere medium of the government.
Justice Sharvananda, also a Tamil is
quoted by the above author as follows:
[In the SL Context, Sharvananda CJ in
Mallikarachchi vs. Siva Pasupathy explained the immunity granted to the
President as follows: ‘…the President is not above the law. He is a person
elected by the people and holds office for a term of six years. The process of
election ensures in the holder of the office correct conduct and full sense of
responsibility for discharging properly the functions assigned to him. It is,
therefore, necessary that special immunity must be conferred on the person
holding such high executive office from being subject to legal process or legal
action and being harassed by frivolous actions. If such immunity is not
conferred not only the prestige, dignity and status of the high office would be
adversely affected but the smooth and efficient working of the Government of
which he is the head would be impeded. That is the rationale for the immunity
cover afforded to the President’s actions both official and private’. ]
Hence if legal
action is taken against the former president, the value of immunity is lost.
These leaders have the right to bring action against the Attorney General with
the intent of disciplining all concerned in that Administrative structure. The
immunity covers the Governor in the position of President. A governor who
believes cannot be questioned and is taken as right. The individual cannot be
found fault with after he stepped down from that position, for her/his actions
or negligence during the time s/he was in that position. To do so would be like
the to punish in this life, for our past karma. The law does not have that
authority.
We Sri Lankans do
not know how the government would perform without being conscious of Buddhism
and its foremost status. When we fail to challenge Buddhism ‘foremost’ article –
we quietly condone it and when we think we are ‘free’ we do likewise. Then we
separate and become foreigners to each other. Hence we have no moral authority
to question leaders on the basis of faults that we ourselves carry. If the Sri
Lankan Catholic church believed in Jesus – they would invoke the global power
of Catholics which would effectively warn the would be offenders. This is why
Jesus must have said to turn the other cheek – confirming he was divine and therefore
was the offender and the victim.
No comments:
Post a Comment