Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

25 July  2019

ISIS Mind Connection

How do mind connections happen? If they are of negative value to us – how do we protect ourselves from them? As per current news headlines in Sri Lanka :

[Testifying before the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) probing the Easter Sunday attacks, Senior DIG and Head of CID and TID, Ravi Seneviratne today said no evidence had been found to confirm that those who staged the attacks had connections with ISIS.]

If there was evidence, what was the remedy available to the Sri Lankan government against ISIS? Is ISIS more challenging or less challenging than the LTTE? Should the government get the help of  more powerful nations? How about American help? Is this why SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement ) is currently  important of our news?

One Sinhalese – Attorney at Law Dharshan Weerasekera – has written strongly against it in his article headed ‘US Ambassador’s disingenuous statement on SOFA’ published by the Daily Mirror.

Another who to my mind is Sri Lankan – Ms Chandra Amerasekare has taken the American support gracefully. This lady for example states:

[We Sinhalese do not have a super right to the country. Every citizen of this country has an equal right to this country legally and ethically. We can never live in peace by destroying the peace and dignity of the minorities. We need to respect others’ rights and dignity for them to respect ours. -] Financial Times article headed - Who should be our next president? – by Chandra Amerasekare

I believe that my mind naturally connects to this lady’s but keeps its distance from Mr Dharshan Weerasekera who states in his above mentioned article:

[ ‘From the PM’s testimony at the bond scam hearings, Sri Lankans discovered that formulation of the national monetary policy including ‘growth strategy’ had been handed over to an official brought in from the US Treasury Department]

The lady – Ms Chandra Amerasekare - presents a different interpretation:

[A bogey used often by politicians with regard to trade agreements, foreign-funded consultants is to scare the public by declaring ‘Sri Lanka’s sovereignty will be lost’. Often this kind of bogey is brought out to scare the public when something good is done by the opposite party.

In the past, government ministries, departments and research institutions had both foreign and local consultants paid from foreign funds coming from governments or international agencies under technical assistance or capital aid projects. That is one way transfer of technology takes place in the world. They were not foreign agents, but specialists employed by the Government and reporting to the local boss.]

From the point of view of the citizen if s/he interpreted in the form presented by Mr Dharshan Weerasekera – then the citizen would add her/his energy to a group like ISIS which is openly opposed by the American Government.

The Sri Lankan parallel of the above picture – is Sinhalese Government on the one side and Muslims, Tamils and Christians - strongly attached to their local territories and cultures at the physical level. When the latter feel threatened by the former they ‘flee’ (as in Fight or Flight decisions). They are embraced by Muslims without borders Tamils without borders  - starting with  Indians,  and Westerners without borders. China embraced Sinhala Buddhists who were fleeing from Indian power as perceived by the then leaders.

They say in Tamil culture – that money without common basis ruins relationships. Likewise information / data.

The lady – Ms Chandra Amerasekare is presented by Daily News as follows:

[The writer was a senior member of SLAS and Additional Secretary of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. She was also Minister/Counsellor attached to the Sri Lanka Mission to the UN from 1991 to 1995 and represented Sri Lanka at several UN conferences.]

Every completed relationship becomes common value which strengthens the whole exponentially. When we identify with such persons – as if they are our seniors or equals – our minds merge vertically or laterally.

If on the other hand – we imagine ourselves to be their seniors and criticize them to impress our followers – we depend on those very voters and therefore majority power to retain our position by hook or by crook.

I myself identify with some Sri Lankan High Commissioners in Australia and Australian High Commissioners in Sri Lanka. To the extent I identify with them – their work becomes mine and v.v. Hence my yesterday’s article headed ‘Australian High Commissioner and Jaffna Governor’

Big institutions such as the UN and Universities facilitate us to self-regulate our thoughts so that we would be driven by philosophy rather than the visible outcome already produced by others. The American Government disciplined the Sri Lankan government through UN Resolution. But prior to that in 1997 they listed LTTE as a Foreign Terrorist organization.  This is the ‘position’ in their Government structure. Such positioning helps them to ‘relate’ to those associated with the group. At that time – the Sri Lankan Government was a positive relative to American Government. But as reports of abuse during the war emerged – they sponsored the Resolution to investigate such abuses. It was their democratic and Dharmic  duty to do so – especially after listing in 2001 – the LTTE as a Global Terrorist organization.

Such listings affect whole communities. Even though individuals may not take action – every individual who has not earned that label but is adversely affected by that label has the capacity to place a curse – the equivalent of ‘negative vote’ against the American Government  in the system of Natural Justice that works on the basis of Truth and which produces the ultimate reality – in our minds.  Indian Government  itself listed the LTTE as a Terrorist organization after its Prime Minister was killed by LTTE members. But in contrast – the Sri Lankan Government made ‘Buddhism Foremost’ status was handed over to the Buddhist clergy in 1972. This happened despite the Judicial findings  which led to Capital Punishment:

[Although Bandaranaike's administration had suspended capital punishment, Talduwe Somarama was hanged on 6 July 1962. It was claimed by the court that the reason for the murder of the Bandaranaike, was due to Bandaranaike's refusal to entertain Buddharakitha Thero's requests following his support for Buddharakitha in the election.] Wikipedia

The parallel of that in the case of Tamil leadership  would have been to elevate the status of LTTE after they assassinated Rajiv Gandhi. It was the Sri Lankan Government led by Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa that elevated Karuna Amman – to Ministerial position in 2008. This confirms lack of commitment to firm and reliable structures. When one dismantles the enemy’s structure – for selfish reasons – and elevates a senior individual from the enemy’s side – that confirms disorder of the highest level. Mr Rajapaksa is as guilty as LTTE and this has been upheld by Truth and the American Government led UN Resolution. One does not need proof. All one needs is to recognize that truth and structure one’s own mind accordingly.

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

24 July  2019

Australian High Commissioner and Jaffna Governor

When I met Dr Raghavan – the governor of Northern Sri Lanka, earlier this year in Jaffna, I was happy. It reminded me of my early interactions with Professor Bruce Dowton – then the Dean of Medicine at the University of NSW (UNSW) and now the Vice Chancellor of  Macquarie University. In both cases I realised that they were good gentlemen but as my seniors – could not satisfactorily complete their duties in senior positions.  In many ways UNSW is the parallel of Jaffna and Macquarie University is the parallel of Colombo.

Earlier this week my husband did draw my attention to the news report that Dr Raghavan had met our Australian High Commissioner. I was happy about it but did not think further about it. This morning my attention was caught by the Island article headed ‘Australia-Sri Lanka relations and the significance of Chundikuli meeting’

Chundikuli is a suburb in my home area in Jaffna. In essence, author of the Island article - Shamindra Ferdinando – who I understand is the News Editor of the Island – sounds unhappy with the meeting – as perceived by him. I on the other hand was happy that it happened. It was as if I had met with Mr David Holly. Every person who feels ownership in Jaffna is a governor of Jaffna. I am a natural governor of  Jaffna as well as Australia.

The article presents the following picture:

[Holly succeeded Bryce Hutchesson, in late January 2019. Hutchesson took over the Colombo mission in Feb 2016. His predecessor was Robyn Mudie (January 2012 to Feb 2016). Mudie was preceded by Kathy Klugman (Feb 2008 to January 2012).]

When Ms Robyn Mudie was to become the High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, our Department of Foreign Affairs organized a meeting with those of us of Sri Lankan origin and I was facilitated to participate in it from Sangarathai-Thunaivi in Northern Sri Lanka through teleconferencing facilities. I felt that the High Commissioner had come to Sangarathai-Thunaivi. That is the way a governor feels. I invested in that position through service - and hence I am part of that position.  The Executive on the other hand would need arrangements that would show logical connections.

Mr Shamindra Ferdinando for example states:

[ Australian High Commissioner, David Holly, must have been quite surprised by the unprecedented controversial advice he received from Northern Province Governor, Dr. Suren Raghavan, when they met at the Northern Province Governor’s official residence, at Chundikuli, in Jaffna, on July 16, 2019.]

As an Australian I am not surprised and hence I expect High Commissioner Holly also not to be surprised.  For example – I received a response to my complaint to our Minister for Immigration which began as follows:

“Thank you for your correspondence of 16 May 2019 to the Minister for Immigration,

Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs, the Hon David Coleman MP,

concerning an Australian citizenship certificate. The Minister appreciates the time you have taken to bring this matter to his attention and has asked that I reply on his behalf.”

The communication concludes as follows:

[The Citizenship Act 2007 does not provide for certificates to be re-issued or amended.

If a person wishes to replace a certificate that has been lost, stolen or damaged, or to reflect a change in their legal name, the person must apply using the prescribed form, provide the required information and pay the application fee.

Before approving an application and issuing a certificate, the delegated officer must

be satisfied of the person’s identity and that they are an Australian citizen.

These requirements assist in reducing the risk to the Australian community from

identity fraud.]

My complaint in essence was that I did not have to go through a process for a certified copy - that was identical to the process for the original. So out of frustration I suspended my application and wrote a complaint – so others would be better served. To me it ought to be not that much more difficult than getting a new passport.

Later our son who was in Sydney on work related visit - messaged his sister in Melbourne and our daughter confirmed that she had the original and said that I had asked her to keep it with her as her name was also included in it. Our daughter promptly sent it to me by express courier. To my mind – that was because of my genuine commitment to not only maintain documents but also to not disrupt others. I had forgotten that I had asked our daughter to keep it.

To me – the essence of my work in applying for a duplicate – was in that complaint. I expected it  to go towards improving  the relevant process. The response from the  Ministry did not address that but repeated what I already had knowledge of.  My contribution therefore was in ‘spirit’ – that I cared about fellow Australians at my level.

In the case of Australian High Commission and Governor of Northern Sri Lanka – the Island report presents the following picture:

[..All of them worked hard to advance Australia’s interests in Colombo. Australia pursued tough strategy to prevent Sri Lanka being used as a launching pad for those seeking illegal entry into Australia. In fact, unprecedented Australia-Sri Lanka co-operation, on measures to thwart human smuggling, received Canberra’s commendation throughout this period. In line with the Australia-Sri Lanka strategy, HC Holly, at his meeting with Dr. Raghavan, has reiterated Australia’s commitment to thwart illegal migration from Sri Lanka. Dr. Raghavan, according to his Office, told HC Holly as to how Australia could retain its ‘place internationally by creating a policy on the humanitarian basis, in the case of refugees, like the Canadian government.’

Dr. Raghavan’s suggestion is obviously contrary to the Australian foreign policy and the Australia-Sri Lanka project meant to thwart illegal migration. In spite of the change of government, in January 2015, Sri Lanka followed the joint operation, agreed during the previous administration.]

As governor of a Province which is strongly linked to emigration – it is natural that Dr Raghavan would identify with the relatives of emigrants to Australia from that region. Emigration outside the lawful pathway could be illegal but Dharmic/Right as per truth/common conscience.

On the basis of truth  if Australia has benefited more from adult migrants made in Sri Lanka – relative to ‘Australians born and groomed in Australia’ of the same age - then laws and agreements that block the manifestation of this value at national level – would result in diluting the real value of Australia’s investment in Sri Lanka.

Mr Shamindra Ferdinando shares the following with us, in this regard:

[Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne, while announcing Holly’s appointment on January 29, 2019, referred to Australia’s Sri Lankan community of 170,000 people making a significant contribution to the Australian society.

Payne: "Our relationship encompasses development cooperation, education and close collaboration on countering people smuggling and transnational crime. Two-way trade reached a record $1.54 billion in 2017-18. We will continue to support Sri Lanka as it makes progress towards meaningful reconciliation. Australia and Sri Lanka work productively, together, to address shared challenges in the Indo-Pacific region, including through the Indian Ocean Rim Association."

The Foreign Ministry should explain Sri Lanka’s policy as regards a vital agreement/understanding with Australia. Sri Lanka cannot, under any circumstances, afford to undermine relations with major powers as a result of politicians and top officials taking different views on contentious issues.]

I see the  above ‘advice’ by Dr Raghavan as the parallel of mine to the Minister for Immigration. Unless Dr Raghavan had acted  in breach of the rules of his position as Governor – he has contributed to lift the relationship to global level. In fact it is the duty of every Governor who enjoys official status to do so. That is how the value of the whole is greater than the sum of individuals. Natural governors like myself – are free to share or not to share.

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

24 July  2019

Are Sri Lankan Buddhists Free to slaughter animals at their Temples?

A UK Tamil Diaspora leader forwarded a the declaration by the Federation of Saiva Hindu Temples UK confirming their opposition to Buddhist monks invading an area considered to be Hindu area by majority currently living in that electorate. The communication included the following:

‘We note with considerable concern that extremist Buddhist monks are taking the law into their hands and undermining the very constitutional safeguards to illegally construct a Buddhist shrine by destroying a popular Hindu temple for Ganesha in the land owned by the Hindus in Kanniya in Trincomalee with the backing of exclusively Buddhist Archaeological Department.’

The above was preceded by reference to Articles 9 , 10 and 14 (1) (e ) of the Sri Lankan Constitution. Unless one takes legal action in Court – the above sections of the Constitution become irrelevant. But to the extent we actually practiced them – they become valid and the truth in them works naturally to deliver as per our truth.

The Contradiction

Article 3 of the Constitution states ‘In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise.’

Article 4 (a)

the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, consisting of elected representatives of the People and by the People at a Referendum ;

Article 4 (d)

the fundamental rights which are by the Constitution declared and recognized shall be respected, secured and advanced by all the organs of government and shall not be abridged, restricted or denied, save in the manner and to the extent hereinafter provided

Article 4 (e)

the franchise shall be exercisable at the election of the President of the Republic and of the Members of Parliament and at every Referendum by every citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years and who, being qualified to be an elector as hereinafter provided, has his name entered in the register of electors.

The most accessible of the three (government, fundamental rights and the franchise) to the self-governing citizen is Fundamental Rights. Articles 10 and 14 fall within the group that defines Fundamental Rights.  

Article 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.

Article 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

Article 9 of the Constitution states ‘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).’

The contradiction is within Article 9 itself. If the Republic of Sri Lanka gives Buddhism foremost place – every non-Buddhist loses her/his  Divine and Natural Sovereignty. Article 9 is invalid because it comes after Article 3 which states:

“In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise”

To be valid every Sri Lankan needs to be grouped by a section that is self-balancing in terms of Sovereignty. Hence Buddhists cannot ‘tell’ non-Buddhists. Article 3 does not state ‘unless stated otherwise in another part of the Constitution.’ Any article that renders foremost status to a particular group provided for in the Constitution is invalid due to Article 3 – the mother article of status definition.

The Constitution has provided for self-interpretation and exercise of Fundamental Rights which include religious forms.

In the case of Kanniya wells in Trincomalee – all that a Hindu has to do is practice his belief . Likewise a Buddhist if there was no Article 9. But due to article 9 the Buddhist has to first assure that the Hindu is assured of her/his privacy before the Buddhist finds her/his private area to practice Buddhism. The two cannot live in the same place due to different  ‘forms/structures’ through which their respective beliefs are declared/manifested.

The simplest and common measure of Sovereignty is Truth. Any form that does not connect to Truth is irrelevant. The Constitution is no exception to this. Truth is confirmed when it is perfectly balanced on a flat plane. Hence two sides of the coin and more to the point – government and opposition of equal status in a democratic structure.

If the Constitution of Sri Lanka is to be valid as per Democracy which requires us to view manifestations on a flat plane – one has to separate Buddhists on one side – and non-Buddhists on the other. The Buddhist side positions are already structured  as per Buddha Sasana and the custodians of power being the Buddhist clergy.

The other side is democratically structured and every individual is protected by structure to take her/his autonomous place – as per her / his belief.

Recently the Sunday Times reported that the Court of Appeal set aside the ban imposed by the Jaffna High Court through its ruling against animal slaughter:

[The Court of Appeal (CoA) this week set aside the ban imposed by the Jaffna High Court (JHC), which prohibited animal sacrifice ritual in the Northern Province (NP), for the last 3 years…….

The Court held that animal sacrifice, as a religious practice, cannot be performed in violation of the Law of the land. If any religious place, including a Kovil, is to slaughter animals as animal sacrifice, a licence, under the Butchers Ordinance, shall be obtained and also, shall not violate the provisions of the Cruelty to Animals Act. ]

According to the Constitution – if the Hindu believed that slaughter was part of the religious rituals in her/his group – he was free to manifest it. But if the legislators sought to regulate slaughter through secular laws – then a Hindu is bound by that as all non-Buddhist religious followers are to be covered by the law. A Buddhist has no such exception. If the Buddha Sasana prohibits animal slaughter at the temple then the Judiciary cannot override it through secular laws.

Two structures in the constitution is not permitted due to Article 2 which states:

[The Republic of Sri Lanka is a Unitary State.]

Article 9 is invalid due to Article 2. To qualify as a Unitary structure – the fundamental value needs to be One. This in a Court of Law is the source definition of that law. In areas not covered by the law – or covered by contradictory laws – truth is the law. I explained this to a fellow Hindu lawyer who failed to turn up at Mallakam District Court yesterday – in relation to a Testamentary matter :

[Mr Yogendra, I am conscious of your devotion to Lord Shiva. The Lord Shiva in you and the Lord Shiva in me are the same. Likewise the Lord of Public  Administration in each one of us. When the matter was being heard and there were strikes – I still attended Court. In the High Court of Jaffna – I did likewise even when our Attorney - Mr Manivannan stated that he would not  attend. As you recall – this happened on the day Mr Parathalingam came ready to argue against our Leave to Appeal application. When Judge Elancheleyan under the influence of Mr Parathalingam warned us that our application could get dismissed due to our lawyer not being present – I stood up and stated words to the effect ‘I prepared the Leave to Appeal Application which was accepted by the Court. I am ready to argue the case myself.’  Then Judge Elancheleyan smiled and said to inform our lawyer about the next date. As you are aware it was Mr Parathaligam who was dismissed at that level – when we were granted leave. As per the rule of truth – your application ought to have been dismissed today on the same basis that your senior Mr Parathalingam sought to dismiss us.

…… I believe that when our path to contributing to just outcomes is blocked – our true contributions find alternate pathways. In this instance it is through Court Administration. Each one of us has made our true contribution to that pathway – even though the forms of our respective positions differ. Today the judge was the Lord of Court Administration who upheld our true contribution]

The source of the most reliable  law in us is our own truth and the judge is our conscience. Those who continue along that path are joined and supported by Natural Universal  Force. The law courts may fail us ; the government may fail us but our conscience will uphold our truth for us and by us.

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

http://austms.blogspot.com.au/

23 July  2019

Finding the  President

The real President is in us. In Democracy – the voter does not have the right to express an expectation that shows more than the value of that governor within. Those of us Sri Lankans who do seek to show greater value need to change the pathway through which a President is elected. The former confirms our past whilst the latter would help us project a better future. The former like the queen would be largely ceremonial whereas the latter would need some degree of Executive authority with the protection of impunity. Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa assumed that role at  time when the country was threatened by attacks from Northerners. The law would not protect from those who make their different laws.

As per the existing Sri Lankan Constitution the President needs that part of the Executive power needed to prevent takeovers - internal as well as external. He needs also to be one who does not have ambitions to be active in that role – as Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa was. Most importantly – he must identify with himself as being fit in both roles. There are many such Sri Lankans but they are not in politics.

Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was identified as being suitable by some – including a professional associate of mine. But that voter drops responsibility in the custody of the leader in her immediate circles. Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa did likewise when he migrated to the USA before his brother became President.

As per Adaderana news under the heading -‘I never said Gotabaya would be presidential candidate – Mahinda’:

[Leader of the Opposition Mahinda Rajapaksa points out that he has never stated that former Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa would be the next presidential candidate.

….Speaking on the passing of three months since the Easter attacks, he stated that victims of the attack are still dying on hospital beds. The government pays no proper attention to the, he added.

The Opposition Leader further stated that some claim that the national security is ensured while some say it’s not.]

I am reminded of my dear friend Dr David Garlick who said about Sri Lankans -  that we say ‘yes, yes’ in words and shake our heads from side to side – which means ‘no no’.  The above in response to a question ‘Whether Sri Lanka needs a military president?’ would fall within that category. But clever that he is – Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa quickly identifies with the possibility of partnership with Mr Sarath Fonseka who was the Sri Lankan Army Commander during the war against the Tamil Tigers and who was punished by Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa for daring to think of becoming President:

[He points out that former Army Commander Field Marshal MP Sarath Fonseka states that terrorism hasn’t been curbed completely as of yet]

Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa is known for his attachment to the past. His habit of consulting with astrologers confirms this. Astrology is the science through which we learn about our past – a past that , like genes, is beyond our control to change. Knowing the truth of our past would help us know why we acted subconsciously . But if we activate that for current benefit – it leads to confused mind-structure where there has been strong change in structure / culture that regulates the conduct. Racial discrimination often happens due to such attachment which distracts us from the current merit based assessment. The voter who actually votes for the President within – will invoke that president when needed. Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa has confirmed that former Army Commander Field Marshal MP Sarath Fonseka would be his kind of President. The question then arises – whether Mr Rajapaksa would then invoke his past through the position of Prime Minister – as he did in October last year?

In the meantime Daily Mirror reports through its article ‘Gota not in 1st quarter list ending March 31’-  that as of 31 March 2019 – Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was still American citizen. It will take time for Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa to change his mind structure to ‘Sri Lankan Only’ within a short period. Hence to my mind, his brother Mahinda’s statement confirms withdrawal from such a possibility.

When we seek through the President we have genuinely developed – we would find the President we need. As per current truth – the Easter bombings happened due to lack of Truth sharing in government. A big reason for this is that the President is of one political group and the Prime Minister is of another. Given that the President and the Opposition leadership is of the one political group the President was the Opposition Leader in the Government. Had this not been taken away from the Tamil National Alliance – that would have warned ISIS supporters / copycats to beware of American support to Sri Lanka through Tamils – which was revealed through the US at UN level. Such one-sided resolutions are valid beyond law – due to Belief. The deeper the appreciation by Sri Lankans – especially Tamils of the role played by America to uphold the dignity of Tamils - the more protected Sri Lanka would be from groups that are not committed to law and order. If Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa does not feel American any more – then he would not have the capability of invoking this belief based power at that level.

Truth is everywhere – in every manifestation. Those who travel along the common highway of Law – would discover and invoke that Truth at that higher common level. Truth being universal will naturally merge with the truth of those who hold high positions. Towards this we need to surrender our own attachment to the common wellbeing of all.

Yesterday I read about Lord Buddha saying to a follower – that they were both Buddhas. Lord Buddha knew he was but the other did not. Likewise, the President. The true governor knows he is. One who merely thinks needs law to regulate her/his thoughts and conduct.

One who needed his brother to produce high level outcome – confirms lack of independence needed to be governing President. 

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

22 July  2019

Motherless Sri Lanka

The Easter Bombings based message from National Peace Council (NPC) of Sri Lanka - came my way again this morning.  The essence of their message is highlighted at the top as follows:

[The ongoing political crisis in the country, the political deadlock, the weak governance, and the shocking security lapses that led to the Easter Sunday bombings are evidence enough of the disastrous impact that partisan politics ]

The NPC recommends as follows:

[The National Peace Council, therefore, calls for a 20th Amendment to the constitution by which any person elected as the president would be required by law to step down from all party political positions and be a non-partisan president who works for the wellbeing of all.]

If this is a reality the President represents Sinhalese who have realised the reality of government by majority. In terms of language – this represents Sinhalese language. If the President is without any political position – then it would be stating this obvious reality – that Sinhalese ARE the only government.

The best example I can think of is family. If the  mother is without administrative powers to lead – the mother becomes the non-executive President. Mr Sirisena came along the pathway of the executive presidency. When he was placed in the position of Presidency sans that Executive power – he demonstrated serious disorder that embarrassed that position and the nation. A nation without governing president / leader is a nation without a true mother. They say in Tamil that even the father is recognized  through the mother.

The Executive part of family Government is father. The father connects the family to the outside world. Hence father needs to have knowledge of the external. Where this knowledge is based on current and direct inputs and outputs  only – as in quid pro quos – there needs to be separation between inputs and outputs. This helps to know that the Service Provider/Supplier  is different in make up to the Service Receiver / Customer. In the hierarchical arrangement – this separation is through senior-junior positions.  In that arrangement – one driven by visible  outcomes is the junior-most  in immediate family or most distant relation in extended family.

The law plays the role of the father is that of the Executive in National Government. In action this has been played more effectively by the current Prime Minister – empowered by the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution. Even though Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa was himself capable of playing the father’s role – the world that he connected us to was different to the one that emigrants would prefer to go to. This was the case with his own brothers who are American citizens. Internally they ‘deny’ that to the citizens. All Sri Lankans who promote this actively  – confirm that they are dictators. Those who passively accept it deny themselves the opportunity to self-govern and with time become the enemies of democracy. Those who vote idly become slaves who could be easily brainwashed for they receive the curse of democracy.

One who recognizes value at character or energy level – confirms a deep mind. A lady  who foregoes earned benefits so they could be shared with all members of the family as per their needs – is a true mother. Such a lady does not need Executive power because she has transformation power. The source of that transformation power is her own sacrifice of the personal for the common good. Such a leader cures just by being herself. Since Mr Sirisena is uncomfortable with that position – we are entitled to conclude that he becomes idle when ‘given’ that position. Hence the devil entered his mind from time to time. In his previous life/structure – he was a distant relation of the Executive president but was shown as close relative due to his passive demeanour .

The caring governor and the idle executive would look the same. The former would lead through exponential power whilst the latter would sink in the outcomes that entertain the devil.

The law that is needed by Sri Lanka to become Democratic would become visible through the Truth of the  Sri Lankan who has demonstrated most respect for the law.

DBS Jeyaraj presents  the ‘attachment’ to lead status by males through his article ‘From housewife to Prime Minister: Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s political journey’ as follows:

[“Sirima, Kitchen, Kitchen”
SWRD himself never encouraged Sirima to be actively involved in politics. An apocryphal anecdote that was often related in those times was illustrative of this. Apparently SWRD, Philip Gunewardena and a few other senior government ministers were discussing the envisaged Paddy Lands Act in 1958. The Act provided greater rights and concessions to the long-suffering tenant cultivators. There was however a large segment of semi-feudal, land-owning class supportive of the SLFP that resented the Paddy Lands Act. This discontent was reflected in the case of Sirima too. She surprised the gathering by participating in the conversation on the subject. When Sirima started berating Philip, her enraged husband shouted at her to stop saying “Sirima kussiya, kussiya” (Sirima, kitchen, kitchen). ]

 The above if true, confirms that  Mr SWRD Bandaranaike considered women  to belong in the kitchen while showing outsiders that his wife was first lady. The former is the form of his truth and the latter is for structure. When Tamils are treated as minorities – they are also told by majority that they belong in the kussiya / cuisinee /kitchen. Was Ms Bandaranaike a home maker or a disorderly participant in the above experience?

If a homemaker without a visible executive position– the lady would have quietly influenced her husband through her own belief.  By directly participating without a structured position  – the lady confirmed disorderly leadership. This disorder was inherited by Mr Sirisena who acted to produce outcomes outside the lawful boundaries of his position.

Mrs Banadaranaike’s lack of commitment to structures was clearly visible through Buddhism foremost clause which effectively divides the country. Laws need positions and positions confirm structures. If elected by the people through a democratic structure – the elected person has the duty to uphold that fundamental structure. All laws that show senior-junior positions by effect – confirm breach of democracy. When practiced they naturally divide the whole into parts. The quid pro quos in such a government come from those genes.

As per my study of Tamils who live in democratic countries but continue to promote male dominance this kind of ‘attachment’ to the outcomes / benefits produced by militants who were by choice using the hierarchical pathways – they go back to the time when they had this easy way to dominate. Most of the time Mrs Bandaranaike’s parallels in the Tamil community – yearn for the time when they were effectively kussi-ammahs/kitchen-mothers. State Minister MrsVijayakala Maheswaran expressed this openly last year in Jaffna when she verbally resurrected  the LTTE leader at a public rally. Mrs MrsVijayakala Maheswaran is the Tamil parallel of Mrs Bandaranaike who elevated the very Buddhist leadership that killed her husband. Mr Sirisena is an heir of Mrs Banadaranaike.

Those driven by outcomes do not recognize structures which need Energy / Truth. A child needs to respect the parents to inherit their positive contribution to parenthood. Otherwise a child needs to separate from the parent to form her/his own independent position as a separate family. In a natural environment the depth of our invisible belief produces the highest visible form of belief. I believe that my inheritance of our family temple in Sangarathai happened is a clear confirmation of my respect for my parents and ancestors. My younger brother respects and accepts that leadership – not as per Thesawalamai law but as per his true experience.

They say that no one is above the law. Truth is above the law. It underpins all manifestations and is most visible at low levels in areas where the laws have been abandoned. An outcome born out of one structure when used in another differently structured system – confirms disorder. This is why in educational institutions plagiarism is a serious offence. At University level – when left undetected it demotes the mind structure of the whole university.  Each  true discovery confirms the mind structure of the person who went deeper than the surface / the apparent – to access that power that adds value for the whole to become greater than the sum of the individuals. One has to respect such a person to inherit that mind structure. Taking the benefits without paying our respects brings about exponential deterioration. Mrs Bandaranaike confirmed it, Mrs Vijayakala confirmed it; Mr Wigneswaran confirmed it and Mr Sirisena confirms it. With all his deviations from Democracy – it was Mr Rajapaksa who defeated the LTTE. His junior under that structure – needed to pay his respects to Mr Rajapaksa before taking up that Executive position. The other alternative was to use truth instead of the law – as my brother did.  If the Parliament was a temple – to Mr Sirisena – then the true  Parliament beyond current times would have made the call and supported him as did our family temple.