The Triple Gem

In terms of the above Op-ed by the three heads of individual countries, I positioned France as Buddha (Individual); Britain as Dharma (Right Conduct) and USA as Sangham (Society). The Triple Gem say ‘We are convinced that better times lie ahead for the people of Libya, and a pathway can be forged to achieve just that.’

by Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

Buddhaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi. (I take Refuge in Buddha)

Dharmaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi (I take Refuge in Dharma)

Saṃghaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi (I take Refuge in Sangha)

(April 16, Melbourne,  Sri Lanka Guardian) As I read the Joint Op-ed by Barack Obama, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy , published in Sri Lanka Guardian under the heading ‘Libya’s Pathway to Peace’ I thought of the Buddhist prayer invoking the Power the Triple Gem. Buddha’s forms may have sprung-up in my mind, due to my thoughts about some Sri Lankan feedback in relation to my response to Victor Rajakulendran’s letter to the President of USA. That was also about Libya – using Libyan situation to help victims of war in Sri Lanka. I wrote two special responses listed in Appendix 1. These are special due to disagreement which I value very much when it is genuine. It is genuine when we feel connected at the base – through some important shared Truth.

In terms of the above Op-ed by the three heads of individual countries, I positioned France as Buddha (Individual); Britain as Dharma (Right Conduct) and USA as Sangham (Society). To me, the statements were political and spiritual and NOT Administrative which is primarily the responsibility of the United Nations. I concluded that like the way we feel frustrated with our Australian Public Administrative system, these leaders also feel frustrated with the United Nations and seek to run ahead. I recalled that I expressed strong disagreement with this bi-lateral approach when Australian Government expressed support to the American Government during the war against Iraq. To me even though Mr. Howard was not likely to have read my communication, someone within the Administration of the Office of the Prime Minister and some others in my long lists of email addresses would have and to the extent they identified with what I wrote – there was soul level value; to the extent they disagreed there was intellectual value; and to the extent they filed it away or deleted it – there was process (Administrative) value. To me these three values exist in all genuine communications, including the above Op-ed. To the extent the three heads of States are genuine their communication has all three values. The soul level value would be through their work at a level that is higher than the UN’s Official work. This needs to be based on Truth they have realized together as a group and/or as individuals at that level of work – as if they were the Secretary General of the UN.

The Triple Gem say ‘We are convinced that better times lie ahead for the people of Libya, and a pathway can be forged to achieve just that.’

I recall President Rajapakse saying similar to Tamils in relation to LTTE leadership. Now President Rajapakse is being threatened with charges of “War Crimes” by the above Western Governments. As per the Australian article referred to below in regards to the UN’s Report “Western diplomats said the report would call for further UN-led action, setting up a diplomatic showdown between Colombo and nations such as Britain and the US, which passed a resolution last month calling for an international war crimes inquiry.”

To my mind, this would not have happened if President Rajapakse had stuck to Due Process and sought the Guidance of the UN – at least in his mind. I wonder whether President Rajapakse’s support for the Libyan leader has anything to do with this ‘timing’ which may seem like coincidence to some but not to deep seekers of real solutions. If the Libyan civilians and the Sri Lankan Tamil civilians are believed to be in similar plight (as stated by the likes of Dr. Victor Rajakulendran) then to those believers – President Rajapakse and President Gaddafi are in the same boat.

If Sri Lankan Political Leadership believed that LTTE was causing the suppression and they accept that the civilians of Libya were hurting before the intervention of the UN, then to them Colonel Gaddafi is the parallel of Velupillai Prabaharan and President Rajapakse is the parallel of the UN Secretary General. Wonder what Dr. Palitha Kohona’s thoughts on this are? Is Dr, Kohona the individual identifying with President Obama or Colonel Gaddafi?

To me, any support by outsiders needs to be strictly through civilians and not directly by foreign governments taking the place of local governments. The indicators usually are the post-war development of the People – whether the civilians are being educated and encouraged to take over leadership or whether foreigners are taking over the leadership. In this context, a Government that was believed to be part of the problem by majority victims is a foreign government. The Sri Lankan Government needs to work through Tamils – not only Tamil Politicians but also Tamil civilian leaders – within and outside Sri Lanka. To that extent Diaspora Tamils without strong Political bias have stronger real powers than any political leadership from within Sri Lanka. The reason I feel this my observation of the corruptions in our political structure. That needs to be addressed before we can recognize as legitimate the outcomes produced by/through that system. I strongly recommend that President Rajapakse thinks about this and seeks the Guidance of Lord Muruga to help him restore Peace in Tamil areas which is necessary for there to be Peace in Sri Lanka.

In turn, my suggestion to Tamil leaders – especially from the Diaspora which I am very much a part of is to ask themselves whether they are attacking the position or the individual? If the individual in the position is attacked then the attack ought to continue beyond their term in that position. But as per my observations, the attacks happen only so long as one is in that position. Hence Due Process needs to be followed if we are to include the powers of all others – globally – who have contributed to those positions in their own environments. This is the deepest value for such common structures and paths. It’s only when these are exhausted that we have the right to exercise our ‘sovereignty’ as individuals, independent communities or as nations. LTTE did not exhaust this process and hence is now included in the UN report – side by side with the military arm of the Government of Sri Lanka. President Rajapakse also did not exhaust this process through the UN. Both exercised their ‘sovereign’ powers as individuals and small groups. The effects of the exercise would particularly affect those who made them feel like Sovereign Kings. That is the Perfect system of Karma. Let’s keep watching the Triple Gem and pray that they integrate and not assimilate with victims of war – who are the Queens of Sovereignty to the extent they endured in silence pain and loss of global standards and submitted their pain and loss to Mother Earth – Poomah Thevi - at their local level. Mother’s heart receives such submissions from all parts of Herself and Mother would send signals to the Right Sovereign King to save Her children – as Rama came to Sri Lanka.

Appendix 1 – Responses by Gaja to a fellow Tamil Community Leader

1) To me, Victor as an Australian did have power to support my work in battling against racial discrimination here in Australia. To me that would have generated far more real power than finding fault with President Obama in relation to Sri Lanka. That is how my work through the Government of Australia and the UN does generate good value that I am able to identify with. To some others it may seem silly but I absorb all that and keep going - just as I did in my work within Australian Public Service. Victor could have done both - written to custodians of benefits and also supported ground level workers like myself. Since he did not do that I conclude that he is not in support of my work. To me my work is the most valuable work of all and I accept that to Victor his is the most important. Like you there must be others who are likely to be glad that Victor wrote. But to me that would not add strength to our deservedness. We must earn it by staying connected to victims at root level and also raising it to global level through OUR structures and not those of others. Why did Victor not write to the Human Rights Commission when I complained against Dr. Palitha Kohona? I took it as being differences in our fundamental approach to the issue.

As for bringing out the double standards by USA or any other global leader - I have not shied away from it at any time. But I cannot write about something that I do not feel within. In fact I feel with President Obama more because of his achievement in winning that position. I do not want to dilute that with particular criticism of Obama. If I did, that would dilute the connection I FEEL with him. That is my belief. I did write in common against some aspects of the American attack against Libyan leadership - under the heading 'Thou shall not kill'. To me that article is an expression of what I would have done/did/do under parallel circumstances in my environment. To me that was how I influenced this aspect of American Policy in real terms. It is highly likely that the President's office may not read either of our communications. But when the communication is from the heart - other seekers who do read our communications would identify as per their needs. That to me is good karma. The way you identified with Victor's there are many others who identified with mine on the same issue. As Gandhi said 'there is room for all of us'. I am not negating the value of Victor's contribution. I am adding mine to raise it to the higher level. That is likely to attract attention at higher levels. We need to also demonstrate our valuation of democratic opposition. THAT to me would be more attractive to the American Government and others who have faith in the system of Democracy - than blind agreement.

As for generalizing - to me that might dilute the power. I consolidate and bring it under Common Principle and Value, to do which I need to use my deep personal experience. To me otherwise it is very 'local' and not global. At our last community meeting with Department of Foreign Affairs - the AusAid representative specifically added my work to hers in presenting the issue to the forum. To me - that is the power I feel and share - due to my cultural commonness with them. If I blindly agreed with Victor - I would be diluting that power.

2) To me, this morning's report in The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/pressure-on-sri-lanka-for-war-crimes-probe/story-e6frg6so-1226039937074) is confirmation of the value of our work under a common umbrella. It is good to take Australians with us and not run ahead of them. Both - mine and Victor's work values are in this. I believe that mine is more through Due Processes and spirit of the issue and Victor's is more towards taking advantage of political wins and defeats at Lankan level. I identify with my work through the above report in The Australian much more than I do through Victor's letter.