Thursday 2 June 2022



02 June 2022

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam


Does a law have  a mind? As per my discovery -  ‘yes, it is powered by the mind of the user/interpreter. Does the Constitution have a mind? – Yes it is powered exponentially, by the believer in the whole.

To be valid, every law, needs to be sovereign. How does one know that it is sovereign? If Sovereignty is represented by a circle (There is no beginning or end in the full circle),  the test is to cut it into two through its centre. Each of the two halves have beginning and end. Each half is relative.

What happens when laws are made – by those who do not believe in the whole but only a section – but claiming it to be applicable to the whole? – In terms of circles – if majority of say 80%  make a law applicable to the 100% (circle) it would not confirm Sovereignty.  

As per my discovery the ‘other side’ of any action by such a maker exponentially benefits the section that believes in the whole but did not get to make the law.

Let us take for example Article 9 of the Sri Lankan Constitution, which states:

[9. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).

Articles 10 and 14(1)(e) state as follows:

10. Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

14. (1) (e) Every citizen is entitled to –the freedom, either by himself or in association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching;]

When one has ‘duty’ – there is a position. Where there is position, the power is relative and not sovereign.

As per the above – the government has the duty to protect Buddha Sasana (Philosophy and Practice of Buddhism). Hence that article disturbs the Sovereignty of the constitution. It also confuses the average citizen – as demonstrated recently by the conflict between the Governor of Northern Province and the Mayor of Jaffna who is also a lawyer.

As per News reports the Governor held the view that Buddhists were entitled to light Vesak lanterns along the big pond known as Ariya Kulam. But the Mayor had ruled that no religion based request would be entertained.

This is not only in breach of Article 9 but is also in breach of articles 10 and 14(1)(e) – which apply to all religious followers including Buddhists.

Then there was the interview with “Sri Lanka’s former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga on the crisis facing her country and, in particular, on her detailed proposals for changing the governance structure of Sri Lanka to tackle the serious political and economic crises it faces.” at

During the interview, Madam Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, confesses to being influenced by the ‘French Economic, Social and Environmental Council’. The protestors are could not work the existing laws that governments have made up to now. The above Buddhism Foremost Article was given birth to by Madam Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s mother, Mrs Sirimavo Bandaranaike, in 1972. No one since then, including Madam Kumaratunga, saw the imbalance in Article 9. A true Buddhist would have.

So, does such article have the capability of causing damage to the harmony of Sri Lanka? The answer as per my belief is ‘yes’.

It is often difficult for us to know the ‘ cause’ of our own actions. When we ‘see’ and/or know the causes we would make connections. But belief based causes are largely not known, until they manifest unpleasant effects. Until the current protests – we tended to accept the causal reasons by politicians and armed rebel leaders. The latter include a degree of ‘fear’ if we disagreed. This continues in Tamil areas and may be in South also  - as indicated by the violence on 09 May.

So, whatever the structure – would it fail due to Article 9? If yes, is Article 9 powered by an invisible independent force such as the Corona Virus?

As per the system of Karma, when our bodies ‘die’ we share our virtues and sins with our heirs – both physical and mental. When Lord Buddha attained ‘Nirvana’ believers automatically share in Buddha’s virtues. Nirvanam means naked in Tamil. As per my understanding Nirvana is ‘free’ of the physical. It is absolute power of the soul.

The question therefore arises as to whether article 9 is pathway to Nirvana? The Hindu parallel is Shiva aspect of the Holy Spirit. In Christianity it is Holy Spirit. In Buddhism as per Wikipedia:

[Buddham saranam gacchami.
      I take refuge in the Buddha.
Dhammam saranam gacchami.
      I take refuge in the Dharma.
Sangham saranam gacchami.
      I take refuge in the Sangha.

 Sangha, to my mind is the Spirit of the community.

Given that ‘foremost’ is relative, Sri Lankan Buddhist community is at ‘Buddha’ stage. This means it has its own definite identity. It is Brahma stage in Hinduism, and Father stage (physical relationship) in Christianity.  

The problem with that is that the other side is automatically generated at the physical state – as in there being an Equal and Opposite reaction to every action. Hence whoever, under the influence of Buddhism acts to hurt another Sri Lankan, would automatically generate the Equal other force. If we do not know why (motivation) we have the duty to conclude the reason to be as per the relevant law.  In this instance Article 9. If Article 9 was desire-based – then its reaction would be fear-based, if left unaddressed.

Buddha renounced physical comforts of a Prince to beg for food. Any Buddhist who indulged in benefits above their needs – would therefore be punished by the reaction unless they surrender to Buddha. If they had  surrendered – they also would have joined the queues – instead of making speeches in Parliament and through the media.

Article 9, as per its timing  was an escape route from JVP armed rebels.  Until it remains – we would continue to be physically driven. The question is ‘who is to bell article 9?’




No comments:

Post a Comment