Now that the Geneva deed is done, India should begin the damage control process

by M. L. Wickremasinghe

India lost the moral high ground in Geneva on March 22. Exactly a week after the ides of March, thousands of years after the back-stabbing in Rome, India became the only country in Asia to have voted against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC, prompting Sri Lankans to ask “You too India?”

From the Rig Vedic times through Upanishadic times and culminating in the teachings of Gautama the Buddha, India has been a beacon to the world, in promoting morality and righteousness.

Continuing on from the Great Ashoka to Mahatma Gandhi, the great traditions of righteousness and moral integrity has been the bedrock on which the Indian civilization and statehood has been built.

The brutish Empire, on which the sun was never expected to set, was unable to come to terms with the strength of the moral fibre and sinews of righteousness that the Independence movement of the Great Bharath Desh was endowed with under Gandhiji.

The massacres perpetrated by British troops, including that of the ‘Black Hole of Calcutta’ were never used as excuses to veer from the great traditions of righteousness.

Independent India, under Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru continued in the tradition of righteousness and moral integrity, symbolized by the ‘Dharma Chakra’ and the ‘Bhagavad Gita’. India continued to be the beacon to countries that were rising from the dehumanizing effects of imperialistic colonization perpetrated on a powerless people in Asia and Africa by England and some countries in Europe.

Due to its historical role in supporting countries aspiring to escape from the yolk of colonialism and the practice of frank and upright diplomacy, India was naturally and spontaneously elevated to a leadership role within the Non-Aligned Movement.

It is true that the emergent post-cold war world order, globalization and the neo- liberal economic practices are creating tensions in the world, as countries attempt to redefine relationships with each other, sometimes based on expediency and opportunism. Asia would increasingly be the hub of the global economy in the 21st century. This is forecast by American researchers.

India need not be a proxy of the West or hanker after cheap Western popularity to gain her rightful place in the 21st century economic order.

The ‘Bharath Desh’, while acquiring new technology and developing innovations to achieve the goal of economic liberation for its people, should not abandon the principles of moral integrity and righteousness, which sustained its civilization and statehood from time immemorial. If India attempts to forge ahead to economic superiority, sacrificing these traditional and age-old strengths, it could earn riches at the cost of integrity.

In this regard it would be useful for Indian citizens to understand what is apparently happening at Goldman Sachs – the much talked about American investment bank. It was only a week before the Geneva vote that Greg Smith, an Executive Director resigned his position, after writing an open letter. The letter received wide publicity in the international media, including the New York Times and the Guardian (and some media in Sri Lanka)

He wrote; “to put the problem in the simplest terms, the interest of clients continue to be side-lined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility and always doing right by its clients.” “Today, it is purely about how we can make the most possible money off them.” Smith links this weakness to a weakening of moral principles; “I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fibre represents the single most serious threat to its long run survival.”

Isn’t there some similarity between the alleged new decision-making principles at Goldman Sachs and the way the Indian government decided on how to vote on the US resolution?

Many Indian citizens would have felt uncomfortable about India’s decision-making in Geneva, especially the motivations and compulsions that influenced the decision process. The appropriate question is: Did the Geneva decision process represent a decline in India’s moral fibre, in matters of governance and diplomacy?

India not only damaged Sri Lanka’s interests by voting for the resolution, but by widely publicizing its decision well ahead of the vote, which perhaps would have influenced some countries to abstain, or even them compelled to be pushed into the ‘yes’ group.

India’s decision is tragic for two reasons; one, Sri Lanka had always stood firm in its support to India in all its international dealings and hence felt that it was stabbed in the back (The only exception occurred during the Jayewardene administration when, to the consternation and dismay of the majority of the Sri Lankan citizens, rude, unfair and undiplomatic comments were made about key Indian statesmen.

The Indian response was quick and in hindsight disproportionate – the arming of a nascent terrorist movement which grew to be the world’s most ruthless terrorist organization – the LTTE). The second and the greater tragedy, I believe, is the effect of the Geneva vote on India itself. The type of compulsions and pressures brought on the Indian establishment, both externally and internally, culminated in India’s decision to oppose Sri Lanka on March 22.

The decision would have been influenced by domestic political blackmail and the inability to handle pressure applied by a hard-lobbying, dominant world power. In this instance, ethics, morality and righteousness seem to have been put on the back-burner, (to borrow an American phrase).

Many Sri Lankans believe this to be the case. Perhaps, many citizens in the 23 countries who abstained or voted against, despite enormous external pressure, would also hold a similar view. It is now up to Indian citizens, to debate whether India’s unprecedented stand against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC has undermined the moral integrity of state decision-making and diplomacy.

The ‘Bhagavad Gita’, which provided inspiration to Mahatma Gandhi, describes the importance of ‘Nishkam Karma’ (Selfless Action) in performing duties or ‘dharma’. I quote from the publication Harvard Classics, Vol. 45 Part 4 The Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2-165:

“But thou, want not! Ask not! Find full reward of doing right in right! Let right deeds be thy motive, not the fruit which comes from them.”

However, let Sri Lankans be gracious and thankful to India for earlier assistance. For, we know that India stood firm in supporting Sri Lanka during the crucial phase of the humanitarian campaign waged against the most ruthless terrorist outfit, the LTTE.

Let the Sri Lankan state and the people continue to engage India in a friendly, positive and constructive manner. Let there be no ill-founded and or insensitive rhetoric emanating from Sri Lankan government ranks, the Opposition, or its citizens. One aberration cannot and should not be allowed to negatively affect the warm bonds that span a period of over 2000 years.

It is certain that many enlightened Indian citizens will continue to debate and reflect upon the propriety of India’s official position in Geneva, against Sri Lanka. An India with a guilt-complex towards Sri Lanka, would be a much more useful ally, if engaged judiciously, strategically and intelligently, than a self-righteous and supremely confident India placed in a morally superior position.

For it is apparent to many world citizens, including many open-minded westerners who are facing threats of terrorism, or whose countries are fighting terrorism, that differing and variable measures are being applied to assess responses against terrorism, from country to country, based mainly on political motivations.

Size, might and allegiance are factors that decide which country would be hauled up to answer apparent rights violations, and which country would be spared. It would not take much time or brain-power, for knowledgeable Indian citizens to find out that double standards have been applied to Sri Lanka, in singling her out for an unprecedented resolution at the UNHRC.

Therefore, any continuing justification by the Indian government of its role in Geneva will continue to drag it down the Himalayan slopes, in the mind’s eye of Asian public opinion. All Asians would want India to be the conscience of Asia, not a blind follower of the West nor of vociferous mono-ethnic lobbies.

Already, one of the unrepentant ethnic lobbyists Karunanidhi, while thanking Manmohan Singh for voting in favour of the US resolution, boasted that “a Tamil Eelam” was his unrealized dream and that he would “fight for its realization.” (The Island March 24, 2012). Shouldn’t this be interpreted as an open call to resurrect terrorism in Sri Lanka to achieve Tamil Eelam?

The Asian community would wish India to be on the Himalayan heights of moral and principled action; not at its foothills as an ethnic or western proxy.

India needs to realize that, other than herself, no other Asian country voted with the US resolution that aimed at devaluing international law regarding non-interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country, when that country had initiated domestic action and had appealed for time to implement the three months old recommendations of the domestic mechanism.

Now that the Geneva deed is done, India should begin the damage control process. Sri Lanka, by its continuing and constructive engagement (with India), should assist India to reaffirm its position as an independent and conscientious leader representing the region in international affairs.

India should re-embrace its roots that were born and fostered through thousands of years of moral learning and principled action and in that process, genuinely and comprehensively insulate Sri Lanka from the external interference that the Geneva vote seeks to subject its sovereign citizens to, unfairly.

This is the sane option open to both of the countries. It is hoped that the wisdom distilled through thousands of years of civilization of both countries would come to the fore; neither emotion on the part of Sri Lanka, nor misplaced loyalty to a questionable decision, on the part of India.

The hidden agendas of the ethnic lobbyists such as Karunanidhi, that is now beginning to break surface, should surely be an eye- opener to the Government of India

The Dhammapada and the study of classical texts

The Dhammapada, which is basically a manual that summarizes the teachings of the Buddha in a readily understandable form, consists largely of propositions taken from earlier discourses. there are 423 stanzas in all, and as with most compilations of this nature, some of the verses are extremely poetic and enforce their intended message through the power of phrase and image, while others are less so, and carry less poetic conviction.


Many of the most poetically memorable verses contained in the Dhammapada, as indicated earlier, locate the reader in a familiar and neatly realised natural and cultural world. The following are some representative examples that illustrate this aspect of the text.


Death carries off a man who is gathering flowers, whose mind is distracted, just as a flood carries off a sleeping village.


Just like a lake that is deep, clear, and calm, the wise become tranquil, having absorbed the doctrine.


Virtuous
From after shine the virtuous like the Himalaya mountain. But the wicked are not visible like arrows shot by night. He who, like water on a lotus petal, or a mustard seed on the tip of a needle, who does not cling to sensual delights, him i call a Brahnmin.


It is evident that there is a sense of urgency in the message of the Dhammapada, and many of the exhortations and admonitions that spring from the nerve-center of Buddhist thought convey this feeling very powerfully. The following stanzas that are frequently cited in countries such as Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, capture well this sense of urgency, this imperative to act soon and decisively.


Even the gods cherish him whose faculties have been subdued like horses well tamed by a charioteer whose pride has been destroyed and who is free from taints.


Withered leaf
You are now like a withered leaf, even the messengers of death are standing around you. You stand at the portals of death and you have no provisions for your journey.


Like a frontier town well-guarded both from within and without, protect yourself. Let not a moment pass by, for those who have let the moment slip away do indeed grieve, being consigned to hell.


People driven by craving run round and round like a trapped hare; bound by the fetters and shackles they experience suffering again and again for a long time.


To a reader from a different culture other than the one in which the Dhammapada is a venerated text, the Dhammpada can open up a new cultural territory for travel. It can dramatise how others think and feel and the kind of things they value. Clifford Geertz, the well-known anthropologist, said that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun, and that he takes culture to be those webs of significance.


Awareness
He also said that culture provides us with the frames of awareness within which people live and form their convictions, their selves and their solidarities. Anyone reading the Dhammapada, whether from a Buddhist or non-Buddhist country, will gain a clear understanding of the webs of significance that people have spun around themselves.


Geertz sees culture as an historically transmitted patterns of meaning embodied in symbols, as a system of inherited concepts and articulated in symbolic form through which human beings circulate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge and attitude to life.


A work like the Dhammapada with its dense network of cultural valuations and religious allusions enable those living outside the gambit of the culture represented to gain access to a vital segment of that terrain of meaning in Buddhist societies. By reading the Dhammapada, for example, a western reader can acquire a greater understanding of the different ways in which fundamental issues of life and death are discursively produced in different moral and cultural spaces. In a very insightful commentary, Clifford Geertz made the point that the importance of religion lies in its capacity to serve as a model of and model for society. The Dhammapada serves both of these functions and has the merit of opening an interesting window on to Buddhist culture. Indeed it projects a field of consciousness that encompasses both these important aspects.


Cultural enlargemnent
Reading texts valorised by other cultures enables one to shed one’s parochialisms and provincialisms, and enter imaginatively into other modes of being-in-the-world.


Such an effort repays in cultural enlargement and expansions of horizons. At the same time, it also helps to see the topography of one’s own culture with newer eyes.


It encourages one to observe ones own culture as one possible form of organisation among many others, and ones own spirituality as one discourse among similarly fashioned ones.


It is evident that the world human beings inhabit is a world of meaning, and the more territories of it that we begin to understand, the richer our lives Richard J McCarthy, the translator of al-Ghazali’s Freedom from Error (which he has chosen to call Freedom and Fulfillment) says, ‘my reading of Ghazali has made me, or at least incited me to be, a better practicing catholic in the fullest sense of the term.


It has not made me, despite my real admiration, and even veneration, for Ghazali to embrace Islam. Rather, it has made mo more aware of the general spiritual riches at hand in my own catholic tradition.’ And the renowned literary theorist, Fredric Jameson has underscored the value of being ‘vulnerable in some new and original sense’ to influences from distant culture.


Next, in discussing the importance of the Dhammapada as a classical text, the whole issue of virtues and their bearing on human flourishing and happiness merit closer study.


I said at the very beginning of this essay that for me the great attraction of the Dhammapada lies in its embodiment and articulation of virtues that would lead to the ultimate freedom of human beings.


Freedom, in a deeper sense, presupposes the seeing through of the fictitious nature of the world we live in, says the Dhammpada, and hence the gaining of freedom and the acquisition of virtues both as a means and end, that is to say, instrumental virtues and ultimate virtues. Hence I believe the virtue of virtues is a topic that this text foregrounds in a way that would appeal to both Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike.


Amelie Oksenberg Rorty says that dispositions, habits, skills, and capacities that can be voluntarily and discriminatingly exercised are classified as virtues when they are admired or when they are thought socially beneficial, and when acquiring them is thought to involve some initial effort. She goes on to point out that some of the virtues are identified against ‘the background of theories about ideal exemplas of human excellence’ and that such virtues represent the realisation of ‘what a culture prizes as expressing what is highest and best in us.’


This is a good enough starting point; this characterisation of virtue makes a great deal of sense in terms of the themes and strategies of representation, that literary scholars normally find interesting, contained in the Dhammapada. The text clearly enunciates what a Buddhist culture prizes in terms of human values and goals.


Humanity
Virtues like self-control, detachment, humility, and steadfastness which are articulated in this book are basically attributes of human character. This highlights the projection of an ideal person, an exemplar of human excellence that I pointed to earlier. That brings these virtues into vivid embodiment. As many philosophers have observed an ethic of virtue significantly overlaps with an ethic of person. The fact that human beings are rational, social, fallible, desiring, self-reflective animals who are educable and persuadable makes this connection between virtue and personhood an inevitable one. Hence the emphasis on virtue as a pathway towards human contentment and freedom as explored in the Dhammapada has two salient sides to it; the focus on the dispositional possibilities of human beings for self-enhancement and the pointing out of the nature of superior persons who have thoughtfully made use of those potentialities for the achievement of the ultimate human goal of total freedom. As the Dhmmapada clearly bears out, virtues can best be understood in terms of moral psychology and psychology of character.


The whole terrain of virtues is extraordinarily complex and cannot be mapped very easily. We can, at best, to use Sidgwik’s memorable phrase, talk about the ‘whereabouts of virtue.’ Virtues can be categorised as public and private, instrumental and final, culture specific and culture transcending and so on. However, these distinctions cannot be enforced with great certitude or any finality. For example, it is generally held that the courage is a public virtue as exemplified in the brave way that soldiers fight in the battlefield.


However, should one not consider a patient bravely bearing up his pain in the privacy of his room as an act of courage? At times virtue can be in conflict depending on the play of such variables as age, location, cultural beliefs.


To take a simplex example, some of the virtues associated with youth are not necessarily relevant – at times could be even antithetical-to the concerns of old age. Hence, when any work seeks to clear a path of virtue through the dark and forbidding jungle of human desire and interaction, we need to take into consideration the internal consistency and mutual compatibility of these virtues.


Virtues
In other words, the preferred virtues should constitute an interactive and mutually supporting system. It seems to me one of the strengths of the Dhammapada is that it succeeded in reconfiguring just such a mutually supporting system. The virtues of mental purity, good will, self-restraint, vigilance, thoughtfulness, in speech and action, serenity of mind, forbearance, non-violence etc. that it advocates form, in the unfolding message of the book, into an interactive, integrated, and mutually supporting system. This appeal of the Dhammapada is enhanced by the fact that there is in it a nice balance between what ethicists normally refer to as first order and second order judgments. That we should refrain from hurting others is a first order judgment, while an elucidation of how we think about that injunction is a second order judgment. Second order judgments serve to elucidate how we think about ethical matters.


In the Dhammapada, we see the play of both instrumental and ultimate virtues. The kind of virtues that I referred to few sentences earlier, which appear frequently in the body of the text, can be termed instrumental virtues in the sense that they are all signposts to the acclaimed ultimate virtue of wisdom. Emancipation and wisdom, as the Dhammapada delineates them, are coterminous. The ultimate virtue upheld by this book is wisdom, and in this, one might recognise a superficial resemblance to some of the ideas contained in Plato’s dialogues.


The concept of wisdom as articulated in the Dhammapada merits closer examination. We generally take wisdom to be the kind of knowledge required to live purposefully and morally, and to encounter courageously the crucial problems of living. However, the way the concept of wisdom is given expression in this text one senses that there is more to it than meets the eye. Wisdom is seen not only as understanding the truths of life but also living according those insights.


In other words, the Dhammapada projects a notion of wisdom in which both theory and praxis are equally important. Indeed, one arrives at the portals of wisdom only by leading the kind of virtuous life inseparably linked to wisdom. This is to say one who has wisdom is the one who uses it. Moreover, in common parlance, wisdom is usually seen in relation to different and competing segments of reality.


However, as delineated in the Dhammapada, it can be considered a unifying force that brings together the different perceived wisdoms into one focal point by pointing out the basis of all wisdom- in other words, by focusing on meta-wisdom. Therefore, the Dhammapada is right in asserting that wisdom is not an instrumental virtue, like self-control or humility, but an ultimate one that is coterminous with total freedom.


Cultural landscape
The kind of issue related to virtues that emerge from a reading of the Dhammapada has a wider application vis-à-vis the cultural landscape and intellectual cartography of the West. Today, we clearly see a renewal of interest in virtues among philosophers, notably those in the domain of ethics of virtue. Thinkers such as Alasdair Macintyre, Bernard Williams, Charles Taylor, in their different ways and from their respective vantage points, have focused the spotlight on virtues.


There is an increasingly perceptible dissatisfaction with moral discussions confined to Kantianism, utilitarianism and deontology. These were the areas that attracted the most attention until recent times. This desire to re-focus on questions of virtue and character is not confined solely to the formulations of philosophers.


In disciplines such as political science, one notes an emergent interest in human virtues and their bearing on public policy. Hence, one can justifiably say that the problem of virtue has once again entered the arena of intellectual discussion and debate and theorisation.


These developments, which to my mind are extremely salutary, underscore the topical interest in books like the Dhammapada. Like the Analects of Confucius or Plato’s republic, it can be termed a canonical work. A distinguishing feature of such a work is that it has a permanent value; paradoxically, it has a permanent value because it has a permanent topicality. This fact has great implications for the study of classical texts which indeed is our primary focus. This interplay of universality and topicality is at the centre of any programme designed to further the imaginative and productive study of classical texts.


These are just some of the reasons why the Dhammapada should prove to be of interest and value to those living outside Buddhist cultures this is, of course, not to suggest that these reasons can be relevant to these those living inside Buddhist cultures as well. I started out this essay by observing that the Dhammsapada seeks to answer the question; how should one live purposefully and morally/ in answering this question, it presents an image of an ideal person, a venerable exemplar, and a paradigm of human excellence.


By reflecting on the nature of this ideal person and the cultural and religious discourses from which it emerges, we should be in a better position to participate in a wider conversation across cultures, religions, space and time related to central issues of living.


Humanism
As we read the Dhammapada, it becomes clear that it can be described as a text that represents the essence of Buddhist humanism. Now the term humanism has taken on the character and power of a smear-word in current academic polemic in the west, and this bent of mind is travelling to the East as well. It has been reduced, unjustifiably in my judgment, to a colonising and reactionary ideology.


This is largely due to the writings of such thinkers as Michel Foucault, who drawing on the formulations of Nietzsche, have counter-posed an anti-humanist critique to humanistic thought and reflection. The Dhammapada allows us the opportunity to examine some of the criticisms leveled against humanism, in a wider cultural canvas.


The question of humanism, in relation to the Dhammpada takes on an added urgency in view of the fact that Irving Babbit, who is generally regarded as a latte-day Matthew Arnold and an indefatigable advocate for modern humanism, was responsible through his English translation of the Dhammapada and his celebrated essay Buddha and the occident in generating a great measure of interest in this text in particular, and Buddhist thought in general, in the United States.


Babbit’s translation, which is for the most part based on Max Muller’s translation made in 1870, is elegant but misses out on some of the nuances and cultural resonances of the original.


Some of the charges levelled against European humanism by modern theorists are legitimate and merit closer study. The need to contextualise, historicise, these texts and their attendant values as ageless and universal by humanists, the tendency towards walled-off elitism, the neglect of the institutional and discursive networks from which the canonised texts emerge certainly deserve careful examination.


It is interesting to see how the Dhammapada relates to some of the issues highlighted in current debates in the western academe. In the case of the Dhammapada some of the charges brought against humanism to lose their sting. Here I wish to focus on three intersecting areas of concern.


Ideology
First, humanism is generally perceived as a form of ideology that tends to de-contextualise some of the ideas and values associated with the renaissance in Europe, and to freeze them into universality. It is thought of as a way of dissolving plurality and diversity and reducing difference to subservient otherness. Jean Paul Sartre went so far as to say, ‘humanism is the counterpart of racism; it is a practice of exclusion.’


However, a study of a text like the Dhammpada will surely have the opposite effect; it will display the shaping of other cultural worlds, other forms of being-in-the-world, other values and belief systems. This will have the salutary effect if extending the discursive boundaries of traditional European humanism and counter-posing possible alternative paradigms of human excellence.


Second, humanism as generally understood in western discourse, places at the centre of interest the sovereign individual – the individual who is autonomous and the originator of action and meaning. It is linked to specific concept of the self. However, the concept of the self that is represented in the Dhammapada, as we saw earlier, presents a very different picture.


The nature and significance of the idea of the self propounded in Buddhism differ considerably from the nature and significance of the idea of self associated with European humanism.


The Dhammapada, to my mind, underlines the need to de-substantialise the concept of self and point out its illusory nature. Consequently, the idea of Buddhist humanism is not constructed on the conviction of a autonomous self as in European writings.


Critics
Third, it has often been remarked by critics such as Michel Foucault that humanism should be understood not as a free-floating, timeless entity, but as a human creation that bears the distinct imprint of specific discourses and institutions. This is indeed a valid argument, and one that humanists would be well advised to take seriously. In reading texts such as the Dhammapada, we need to lace them against their proper historical and institutional background, and examine the discourses that subtend them. This is a matter of historical placement. In addition, as I stated in the beginning, the Dhammapada should be subject to a careful reading, critically examining its message and structure.


This calls for reading against the grain, identifying silences, gaps, seeming elisions and contradictions in the text as well as probing into the interplay between the rhetorical and religious dimensions of it. Such a historically grounded critical reading of it will enable us to meet some of the criticisms levelled against humanism by certain segments of prominent thinkers. In addition, such an effort carries the additional virtue of underlining some of the important aspects of what a serious study of classical texts would entail.


Sensibility
One useful way of understanding the kind of humanism that animates the Dhmmapada is to see how Martin Wickremasinghe articulates his version of Buddhist humanism. He was a great admirer of numerous Buddhist texts including the Dhammapada. He advocated a form of humanism that grew out of Buddhist thought and sensibility. He pointed out tat humanism s not monolithic and that there could be other forms different from the European version.


Wickremasinghe rejected the notion of a sovereign, totally autonomous individual which is at the heart of western humanism and pointed out the individual is a product of language, history, culture he also make the point that humanists, at times, tend to privilege a moral universalism that pays insufficient attention to questions of difference that should be so vital in any discussion of this nature.


His assertion was that it was precisely this notion of human dignity, integrity, commitment, that served to reinforce recognition of human otherness and difference.


Without the ideas of human dignity, integrity, commitment and so on, he contended, one cannot appreciate the true magnitude of otherness and difference.


The kind of humanism that flows within the lines of the Dhammapada, and which has been ably re-interpreted by Martin Wickremasinghe, is different from the European variety: one important difference in this regard is the valuation he places on intellect and rationality. Western humanists generally consider rationality to be supremely significant in the conduct of human interactions and mapping the social world we inhabit.


Wickremasinghe, on the contrary, in his numerous studies of Jataka stories and other Buddhist writings has demonstrated the limitations of rationality. It is not that he devalued rationality; to be sure, he recognised its importance. However, his ambition was to point out the compelling need to buttress rationality with intuition and the capacity for empathy. Indeed, in recent times, philosophers such as Martha Nussbaum have made clear how feeling, empathy, intuition are vitally connected with the human thinking process and the critical imagination..


Empathy
What Wickremasinghe successfully demonstrated was that rationality is not self-sufficient and absolute and it has to be supplemented by the human capacity for empathy, imaginative identification, intuition. Hence, the kind of humanism that he promoted was not a sterile academic endeavour but rather a cultural practice that was deeply rooted daily life. And this is the kind of humanism that one finds in incipient form in the stanzas of the Dhammapada. When we study this work as a classical text this is indeed an aspect that invites close scrutiny.


Another facet of the kind of Buddhist humanism that Wickremasinghe promoted that is somewhat different from the concerns of western humanisms is the emphasis given to the idea of carma. This is also present the Dhammapada. This relates to the idea of karma or moral retribution. The Jataka stories narrate experiences related to the present world and the previous world, the migrations from life to death to life. The idea of carma is central to comprehending the traffic between these two worlds. Wickremasinghe glosses the idea of karma in interesting ways to focus on ideas of human agency, responsibility, moral retribution and freedom. What is interesting about these re-interpretations of the notion of carma is that they underline the fact that Buddhist humanism cannot be facilely contained within the discursive space of standard and falsely universalised form of European humanism. It is apparent, then, that there is not one, unitary, humanism, but rather a plurality of them. Both the Dhammapada and Martin Wickremasinghe’s exegetical writings serve to draw attention to this fact.


What I have sought to do in these columns on the Dhammapda is to focus on the numerous issues that we should concentrate on if we are to study it fruitfully as a classical text. I have explored the themes, forms, styles, rhetorical strategies and vision that emerge from this text as a way of advancing the project of studying classical texts. The Dhammapada serves as an encouraging example. An interesting point about classics is that literary critics as diverse as T.S.Eliot and Frank Kermode have perceptively explained that they have stood the test of time. They have done so because they were able to establish continually their contemporary relevance and display their topical value. What I have laboured to do is to establish the contemporary relevance of the Dhammapada. The central question for me was, how might a reader in the twenty-first century respond to this text?


This indeed involves an act of re-contextualisation. To understand a classical text afresh is to locate it in newer contexts of interests. This is what the high-sounding term ‘hermeneutics’ points to. It is concerned with understanding, the dynamics of textual understanding. We can best appreciate a text by promoting a dialogue between the text and the reader, an active one.


Thanks to the important work of modern literary theorists, we no longer believe that the reader is a passive absorber of meaning; rather, he or she is a co-creator of meaning. This fact becomes even more important in the study of classical texts.


Dialogue
A text such as the Dhammapada was composed thousands of years ago. How can a reader in the twenty-first century enter into the experience of the poem and explore its meaning and significance? Here the active dialogue between the text and the reader assumes a great importance. We need to appreciate the historical moment from which the text arose and the traditions within which it operated.


At the same time, we can bring modern understandings of literary analysis to the task of uncovering the complexities in the text. This is indeed what I have sought to do in my last few columns on the Dhammapada. The fusion of horizons that takes place – those of the text and the reader – that the eminent German philosopher Gadamer talked about in relation to the understanding the generation of textual meaning is extremely relevant to this endeavour.

Indian PM writes to President Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka

 The Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has written to President Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka on the resolution in the UN Human Rights Council.

The text of the Prime Minister`s letter to the President of Sri Lanka is as follows:

"Thank you for your letter of March 19 regarding the ongoing session of the UN Human Rights Council and the introduction of a resolution therein on the post-conflict situation in Sri Lanka.

As Your Excellency is aware, the Government and the people of India have stood firmly by Sri Lanka in its struggle against terrorism. The end in May 2009 of a long and tragic conflict that had claimed numerous innocent lives, in Sri Lanka and in India, was something that we regarded as providing, at long last, an opportunity for genuine national reconciliation end for addressing the urgent needs of development and reconstruction of all citizens of Sri Lanka. Our two governments have, over the last three years, engaged intensively in the immediate tasks of relief and rehabilitation for those displaced by the conflict, as well as the more long-term effort of reconstruction of national infrastructure. Much important progress has been registered on this front and I wish to record my appreciation of the assistance your Government has provided to various Indian agencies implementing projects of national significance on the ground in Sri Lanka. I was also happy to learn of Your Excellency`s intention to continue the process of implementing the recommendations of the LLRC.

We have also had occasion in the past to discuss the way ahead with regard to a political solution that will address all outstanding issues, in particular the grievances of the Tamil community in Sri Lanka, in a spirit of understanding and mutual accommodation. It is our conviction that a meaningful devolution package, building upon the 13th Amendment, would lead towards a lasting political settlement on many of these issues and create conditions in which all citizens of Sri Lanka, irrespective of their ethnicity, can find justice, dignity, equality and self-respect. I would like to reiterate to Your Excellency my Government`s commitment to continue to be of assistance in the achievement of this important objective.

With regard to the matter of the resolution in the UN Human Rights Council, I had instructed our delegation to remain in close contact with its Sri Lanka counterparts in an attempt to find a positive way forward. Your Excellency would be aware that we spared no effort and were successful in introducing an element of balance in the language of the resolution.

I wish to assure Your Excellency that, going forward, we will continue our engagement with the shared objective of building a stable, secure and prosperous environment in Sri Lanka in which all communities can flourish and in which India-Sri Lanka relations can continue to grow from strength to strength."

Indian Govt did what it did under pressure from the DMK and AIADMK

Pressure exerted by the United Progressive Alliance government’s southern comrade, the Dravida Munnetra Kazagham, forced India to vote in favour of the U.S.-sponsored censure motion against Sri Lanka on Thursday in the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, urging that country to probe rights abuses in the war against the Tamil Tigers.

But this is not the first time a UPA ally has influenced India’s foreign policy.

Last September, the Trinamool Congress, which routinely railroads economic decisions the UPA government would like to take — from permitting FDI in retail to increasing rail passenger fares — also cast a long shadow over India’s relations with its eastern neighbour, Bangladesh, when the party torpedoed the Teesta River Waters Agreement.

At the time, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Bannerjee, apprehensive that the treaty would adversely affect irrigation and power projects in the northern part of her State, even refused to accompany Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Dhaka. This time the DMK, by threatening to pull out its Ministers from the government at the Centre if India did not back the U.S.-sponsored resolution, exerted a similar influence on the UPA.

Since then, the Indian government may have underscored the fact that it did so only to enable Sri Lankan Tamils to get justice and it did not wish to infringe Colombo’s sovereignty.

But it is more than apparent that it allowed domestic political compulsions to prevail over the country’s strategic interests. The fact is the government did what it did under pressure from the two Tamil parties, the DMK and the AIADMK.

Running counter to its policy of not voting for a country-specific resolution, and that too against a close neighbour, the UPA government defended the volte face, saying it was in line with the assurance Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had given in both Houses of Parliament — that the government was “inclined” to back the UNHRC resolution — and that it had “diluted” the intrusive character of the original resolution moved by the Americans.

But the development, say foreign policy experts, could impact India’s ties with Sri Lanka, and help China increase its influence with the island nation at the cost of India.

For the UPA government, afflicted with policy paralysis, largely because of opposition from its allies to policy decisions, interference in foreign policy is only going to add to its troubles.

In the run-up to the election of the next President, the UPA government needs to devise political management tactics to keep its allies on board that can complement the new media management strategy, of which we got a glimpse on Thursday. Displaying admirable reflexes for a change, a sure-footed Prime Minister’s Office succeeded in quashing a damaging news report about losses to the exchequer as a result of the government’s coal block allocation policy, within hours of the story appearing in a leading daily, TV channels picking it up and the opposition raising it in Parliament.

The PMO posted portions of a letter from Comptroller and Auditor-General Vinod Rai to the Prime Minister on its website, describing the report as “exceedingly misleading” and stressing that the purported CAG report on which it was based was at a preliminary stageCourtesy: The Hindu

‘Rajapaksa Rottweiler’ Mervyn Silva threatens to break limbs and bones of journalists and human rights defenders in public

Running dog of the Rajapaksa regime,Mervyn Silva has threatened to break in public the bones and limbs of Journalists and Human Rights Defenders who had allegedly worked against the Country at the United Nations Human Rights Council(UNHRC) in Geneva.


 
The Minister of Public Relations in the Rajapaksa Government made threats at a public meeting held in Kiribathgoda to condemn the resolution against Sri Lanka at the 19th session of the UNHRC in Geneva.


Mervyn Silva boasted publicly at the meeting that he was responsible for chasing out senior journalist Poddala Jayantha from the Country and warned that he would break the limbs of other journalists and human rights defenders regarded as traitors by him.


The Gampaha district MP who hails from the Hambantota district named persons like Nimalka Fernando, Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, Sunanda Deshapriya and Poddala Jayantha as traitors and threatened he would break their bones in public.


The “Rajapaksa Rottweiler” stated openly that “even if a Tsunami flowed from Sigiriya, no Tsunami would flow against him from Rajapaksa” meaning there would be no action taken against him by President Rajapaksa.
Referring to the President as the King of the Country Mervyn Silva said “ I know the sons of D.A. Rajapaksa from the time they were kids. The King of this country loves me, the King of this country trusts me”.





Excerpts from News reports about Mervyn Silva’s open threats in Sri Lankan newspapers are reproduced below –


A news report in “Daily Mirror” under the heading “Mervyn threatens to break limbs of journos” stated as follows-
“Minister of Public Relations Mervyn Silva warned that he will break the limbs of some journalists, who have gone abroad and made various statements against the country, if they dare to set foot in the country.


“I’m the one who chased one of those journalists ‘PoddalaJayantha’ out of this country. I will break the limbs of all these journalists, in public if they dare to set foot in the country” the Minster warned.


Speaking at a demonstration against the resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC held in Kiribathgoda today Silva also said it is the only the President who can remove him from office.


He also said “Even if a Tsunami flow from Sigiriya I’m sure that no Tsunami will flow against me from President Mahinda Rajapaksa” . “Only Mahinda Rajapakshe can sack me, no other big shot can lay their hands on me until that happened I won’t leave Kelaniya. I know the sons of D.A. Rajapaksa from the time they were kids. The King of this country loves me, the King of this country trusts me” he said.


The Minister informed the public present at the meeting that his son, from this day, would be in the hands of the public. “I’m not afraid to die; two drug dealers from Colombo want to chase me away. But I’m not frightened to die, if something happens to my life, my wife and two children will still be there. From this day onwards my son will be in your hands” he said





A news report in “The Island” under the heading “I threw Poddala out of the Country” stated as follows-


Public Relations Minister Mervyn Silva yesterday threatened to break the limbs of those who had campaigned against Sri Lanka at the just concluded United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) sessions in Geneva.
Leading a protest, at Kiribathgoda, against the passage of US-sponsored resolution, the Gampaha District parliamentarian declared that President Mahinda Rajapaksa had confidence in him and he couldn’t be even moved by a tsunami.


Addressing the media covering the demonstration, the minister revealed that he was responsible for forcing Lake House journalist Poddala Jayantha to flee the country.Claiming that the people of Kelaniya were behind him, the MP lashed out at Sunanda Deshapriya, Nimalka Fernando, Poddala Jayantha and Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu for being involved in undermining the country during the Geneva sessions. Calling them traitors, the MP warned that he would break limbs of those traitors in public.


The latest threat was made in the wake of the SLFP launching an internal inquiry into a simmering dispute between the MP and a group of Pradeshiya Sabha members representing the Kelaniya PS. The police are conducting a separate inquiry.


“Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields: War Crimes Unpunished’ alleged that the Rajapaksa government had killed many journalists and media workers, while forcing many to leave the country.



Meanwhile a news story in the “Daily Mirror” stated that UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navaneetham Pillay had warned that there should be no reprisals against Sri Lankan Human rights defenders and had called upon the Government to dissociate itself from such threats of reprisals. Here is the news report-


“The High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay today warned that there must be no reprisals against Sri Lankan human rights defenders in the aftermath of yesterday’s adoption by the Human Rights Council of a resolution on Sri Lanka.




Spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Rupert Colville quoting Miss Pillay said that during this Human Rights Council session, there has been an unprecedented and totally unacceptable level of threats, harassment and intimidation directed at Sri Lankan activists who had travelled to Geneva to engage in the debate, including by members of the 71-member official Sri Lankan government delegation. Intimidation and harassment of Sri Lankan civil society activists have also been reported in other locations around Geneva.
On the other hand, the Sri Lankan ambassador in Geneva received an anonymous threatening letter which is being followed up by the police and UN security.
At the same time in Sri Lanka itself, newspapers, news websites and TV and radio stations have since January been running a continuous campaign of vilification, including naming and in many cases picturing activists, describing them as an “NGO gang” and repeatedly accusing them of treason, mercenary activities and association with terrorism.


Some of these reports have contained barely veiled incitement and threats of retaliation. At least two comments posted by readers of articles of this type have called for burning down of the houses of the civil society activists named in the articles, and at least one such comment called openly for them to be killed.


The High Commissioner has noted that some of the attacks on human rights defenders were carried in Sri Lankan state media and Government websites or were filed by journalists who had been officially accredited to the Human Rights Council session by the Sri Lankan permanent mission. She is calling on the Government to ensure the protection of human rights defenders, to publicly disassociate itself from such statements, and to clearly uphold the right of Sri Lankan citizens to freely engage in international debate of this kind.


The High Commissioner has also noted that Sri Lanka’s own Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission, in its report published in December, made extensive and positive references to the role civil society can play in reconciliation and rehabilitation efforts, and stressed this would require greater tolerance towards differing views within Sri Lankan civil society and the protection of Sri Lankan human rights defenders.”



In a separate development three well known Human Rights Defenders Sunila Abeysekara,Nimalka Fernando and Dr.Paikiyasothy Saravanamuttu issued a joint statement regarding the threats and personal attacks against them. The text of this statement is given below-


“Our Work To Defend Human Rights In Sri Lanka Must And Will Go On”
by Sunila Abeysekara, Nimalka Fernando and Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
As the three Sri Lankan human rights defenders who have come most under attack by the state media in Sri Lanka in the past week, because of our active involvement with the on-going session of the UN Human rights Council in Geneva, we feel compelled to issue this statement of clarification.


We do not deny that we are critical of the conduct of the government of Sri Lanka, and the institutions and agencies under its control, whenever disregard for the human rights obligations imposed on the government by virtue of its being signatory to almost all international human rights conventions comes to our attention.


As the President of Sri Lanka, and his Special Envoy on Human Rights well know, the three of us have offered our services to this government to ensure human rights accountability in the past. For example, all of us served on the National Advisory Council appointed by Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, when he held the portfolio for Human Rights.


Nor do we deny that we work with a range of human rights organizations, nationally, regionally and internationally, to draw attention to human rights violations in Sri Lanka as well as to the culture of impunity and the lack of accountability for violations of the past and of the present. This is our right, as human rights defenders, and we have exercised that right for many years, under various governments, in spite of a barrage of attacks and intimidation from various quarters, including state and non-state entities.


It is indeed regrettable that at a time in the history of our country when we have the opportunity to transform our society, to move from a post-war to a post-conflict phase, and to enjoy the support of the international community to rebuild a just, humane and prosperous Sri Lanka in which all its citizens can live together with peace and dignity, the government and its media have seen it necessary to launch into an unprecedented and utterly personalized attack against the three of us.


There is no attempt to challenge us substantively on any point. None of the comments attributed to us, were actually ever made by any one of us; there are many who were present at the side events where we have spoken who can testify to that.


This attack is totally counter-productive in terms of the government’s campaign to resist the Resolution on Sri Lanka, which has been tabled at the Council. In fact, in Geneva today, there is more focus on the attacks and acts of intimidation of Sri Lankan human rights defenders than there is on the negotiations around the Resolution


Those who accuse us of bringing the country into disrepute would do well to examine both their own motives and the consequences of their actions.
Instead of carrying on with advocacy for defeating the Resolution, Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the Council, Ms. Tamara Kunanayagam has had to spend hours of her valuable time talking to delegations, to the President of the Council and to officials of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights about the campaign of intimidation and attack against Sri Lankan human rights defenders at the Council and in Sri Lanka.


As human rights defenders working to defeat impunity in Sri Lanka and to build a strong system of justice and accountability for human rights violations, whether committed in the past or in the present, we remain committed to our ideals and to our goals.


For us, whether there is a Resolution on Sri Lanka at the UN Human rights Council or not, our work to defend human rights in Sri Lanka must, and will, go on.

NAVI PILLAY WARNS AGAINST HARASSING SRI LANKAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS

The UN rights chief warned Friday against reprisals on Sri Lankan activists, noting “threats and intimidation” carried out by Colombo in the run-up to a contested resolution vote.

The UN Human Rights Council on Thursday adopted to the consternation of Colombo a US-led resolution demanding a probe to violations carried out in Sri Lanka’s battle against Tamil Tigers separatists during their war in 2009.

The run-up to the vote was marked by “an unprecedented and totally unacceptable level of threats, harassment and intimidation directed at Sri Lankan activists who had travelled to Geneva to engage in the debate, including by members of the 71-member official Sri Lankan government delegation,” said Navi Pillay.

“There must be no reprisals against Sri Lankan human rights defenders in the aftermath of yesterday’s adoption by the Human Rights Council of a resolution on Sri Lanka,” said the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In Sri Lanka, media outlets have also been running a “continuous campaign of vilification, including naming and in many cases picturing activists, describing them as an ‘NGO gang’ and repeatedly accusing them of treason, mercenary activities and association with terrorism,” said Pillay.

“Some of these reports have contained barely veiled incitement and threats of retaliation,” she added.

Some were carried by state media outlets or filed by journalists accredited to the Human Rights Council session through the Sri Lankan mission, noted the UN rights chief.

In one example, a video clip carried on website www.adaderana.lk showed a member of parliament Mervyn Silva accusing three activists of giving evidence against Sri Lanka at the council.

“If you get caught by me in Sri Lanka, I will break your limbs in public,” he warned the three in the clip.

Meanwhile, the Sri Lankan envoy to Geneva himself also received an anonymous letter which UN security and the police are investigating, she said. - AFP

Financial sanctions by US on SL likely-report

Sri Lanka is among eleven countries which may be subjected to American financial sanctions for failing to cut on oil imports from Iran, Russia Today newspaper revealed.

The US State Department has revealed the list of 12 countries including Sri Lanka. The number of countries was mentioned earlier on Tuesday, as Washington announced a penalty waiver for Japan and 10 EU counties which complied with American demands and reduced their purchases. However, the names of the countries were not given.

Four of the countries on America’s anger list are among top 100 buyers of Iranian crude. They are China, India, South Korea and South Africa, with the first two being the two largest buyers.

Also targeted by possible financial sanctions are Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan and Turkey.

US President Barack Obama may order banks based in those countries and involved in oil trade with Iran to be cut off America’s financial system. On the other hand, he may exempt some of them from sanctions, if US national security demands it. So America’s allies like South Korea or Pakistan may dodge repercussions.

Meanwhile China on Thursday slammed America’s pressure on Iran’s trading partners following the exemption of Japan and European countries from penalties. The People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the ruling Communist Party, called the US policy misguided and selfish.

"One stand-out feature of unilateralism is this: that one's own rules become the world's rules. Everyone must respect them, and if you don't, then you will be punished," the paper said in a commentary.

The US is campaigning to cripple Iranian oil export as part of pressuring it into stopping uranium enrichment. In January the EU joined the sanctions with a six-month grace period, while Japan adopted a policy to reduce imports from Iran. Western countries say the Islamic Republic may be trying to build a nuclear weapon under the guise of its civilian nuclear program.

Tehran rejects the allegations. Some counties including UN Security Council members Russia and China say no evidence of such intension is available and oppose economic sanctions against Iran, saying they fail to resolve the problem.

The uncertainty of the situation over Iran has resulted in world oil price gradually climbing over the months. The IMF warned this week that if the flow of crude from the country is abruptly cut, the resulting price shock would deal a serious blow to the global economy.