Opinion
Ravi: What I did as Finance Minister was like running a tavern without arrack
By Saman Indrajith
UNP Assistant Leader and former minister Ravi Karunanayake, in an interview with The Island conducted on July 30, says there is no significant threat from his party’s offshoot, the SJB, which he describes as only ‘a mere irritant factor.’ Excerpts of the interview:
Q: The country is going through very turbulent times. The economy is in the doldrums. Many developing countries, including Pakistan, have opted for requesting loan waivers from their lenders such as China, considering the impact realities of COVID-19. As a former Finance Minister do you think Sri Lanka should do likewise?
A: In the current situation we see the country’s revenue dwindling. There is a yawning gap between revenues and cost of living, and this gap has led to the widening of the budget deficit, which cannot be bridged with taxes. In the process of cushioning this impact you have to reduce either the recurrent expenditure or the country’s loan commitments. One of the two has to be reduced to make the fiscal space possible for the country’s economy to move forward. I do not see that happening. The revenue is dropping and expenditure increasing and this has caused the alarming fiscal imbalance. Economic disparities seem to be becoming more complicated by the day. In this situation, seeking loan waivers is not the answer. If you ask for waivers, you’ll lose the opportunity of getting loans in the future. The impact of loan waivers would vary on bilateral and multi-lateral loans which are a few and far between but not so on international sovereign bonds. It would lead to a negative economic outlook. When I took over the Finance Ministry, we had a negative outlook. We had to convert it into a positive outlook and we went forward. Under this government, such good work is being undone and the country is moving backwards. The World Bank has moved Sri Lanka from a medium-income earning country to a low-income earning country.
Q: What is the solution?
A: We have to navigate through these turbulent times. For that we need a strong national economic agenda, which should be able to address the issue of decreasing revenue and keep the economy afloat.
Q: The government has received encomia for handling the COVID-19 threat professionally. It is popularly thought that a UNP government would have made a mess of the battle against coronavirus and economic recovery. What would you say to this?
A: If we are elected, our immediate intention should be to restore confidence in the people, in the investors, in the local and foreign markets. We need to create a situation where people would get economic activities restarted. It is a matter of how you would be able to rekindle that confidence. For that you need consistent and coherent policies. At the moment we have policies that change by the day. When we were elected to office on Jan 8, 2015 the country’s economy was not better than this. In a way it is same with the post-COVID-19 situation.
The other factor is that the country’s economy had been in the doldrums well before the COVID-19. The impact of pandemic started on March 21, but economy had started experiencing trouble well before that. The main reason for that was because the government tried to reduce VAT from 15 to 8. And with many other things, the resultant loss was about 600 billion rupees. That amount is almost one third of the government revenue for the year 2019. When you don’t have revenue, there is no economic kick start. You lose 600 billion and the economy is going to tailspin. On the other hand, none in society would feel any relief from VAT reduction because of that increases that have taken place are so much more. With the 600 billion just thrown down the drain there has been no resultant economic gain.
Q: On the political front, the split within the UNP resulted in a confusion among UNP voters. The SJB has emerged a formidable political force. What do you think the impact of the split on the UNP’s electoral performance?
A: Our fight is with the SLPP and not any other party. This government has been in power for eight months. It’s almost one fifth of its full term. During this period, the cost of living has gone up dramatically and now it is almost 40 per cent. There have been job losses though the government promised to create many more. The SJB is a by-the-way party. Our main focus is to ensure that we are engaged with the main opponent rather than by-the-way parties. Every time when there is an election such by-the-way parties are formed by breakaway groups. It is like old leaves falling from a tree. New leaves will appear and fill the gaps. The UNP is such a strong party that it will not be affected by splits.
The people who have left the party have something in common. They are people who lost badly in their electorates at the last presidential election. Their leader lost that election. The SJB is only an irritant factor.
The UNP is a reservoir of talent. Whenever there is a slip-off we have lot of new talent to remedy it. The UNP is the oldest party in the country and it is getting stronger.
Q: Speculation is rife that the SJB members will join the UNP after the election. Some UNPers have said they will never allow them to return to the party’s fold. In your case, you were with Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake when they left the UNP to form the DUNF and contest under the Eagle symbol. The DUNF was a splinter of the UNP like the SJB. Years later, DUNF members returned to the UNP’s fold. So, what’s wrong with the SJB members coming back to the UNP?
A: You cannot compare the two events. The bravest in the UNP at that time such as Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake challenged what they saw as wrongs within the party. So, they were virtually thrown out of the party as a result of their struggle for democracy. In the present instance, some disgruntled party members have left the UNP as they could not achieve their ambitions.
I beg you not to compare the two events for it’s unfair by Lalith, Gamini and others of their calibre, who formed the DUNF.
The final outcome of an event is determined by the performance of a team. If you are a member of a cricket team, you have to be led. You cannot be led by the spectators outside the field. You can’t win the match by singing hosannas for his father or grandfather. Your success hinges on your performance.
The SJB lied to the people and they lied to the judiciary. That is why it lost the case. When it appealed to Court of Appeal and they had to pay Rs 25,000 fine as well. So, now the people can understand that their version of what happened at the Working Committee meeting of the party was not true.
With regard to the rumours of their return after the election, I must say the UNP is not a rest house where you come and go as you please.
Q: Some opposition parties have criticized the government’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis. Do you subscribe to this criticism?
A: COVID situation is something unprecedented. We would give our support to the government to face any such crisis for the sake of the people. I believe the government is doing its best, given the situation. But I cannot say the same about its handling of the economy.
Winning the COVID-19 war and winning the economic war are two different things. You cannot justify losing the economic war in post-COVID situation even if you fare well in your fight against COVID.
Q: The yahapalana government failed to prevent the Easter Sunday carnage. Don’t you think those terror attacks will have an impact on the outcome of the upcoming election as well?
A: If you say the Easter bombing had an impact on the then government’s electoral performance, then the COVID-19 pandemic will have a similar impact on this government. If people are guided by their emotions in casting their votes, then they will vote against this government. The economy is in tatters, companies are closing, cash flows are threatened and it is these major problems that will have an impact on the outcome of the upcoming election.
Q: The Easter Sunday carnage took place under a UNP government and the presidential election results show that people are concerned about national security and their safety. What would you say?
A: Well, it is unfair to say it happened on our watch because basically all security matters were in the hands of a single person, who is not in the government when this disaster occurred. It happened during the time of our government but everybody knows that the Prime Minister was not even invited to the national Security Council meetings. Everything was handled by the Presidential Secretariat. It was virtually one man show going on. We see the same now as investigations are on for eight months, but nothing new has been found out.
Q: What do you have to say about the disastrous MCC agreements with the US? Some opposition parties have already accused the government of duplicity?
A: They promised to dump the MCC agreement if they were elected. Have they thrown the MCC agreement? What a fuss they made prior to the presidential election. They said that the country would be under the dictates of America; the country would be divided and we would have to get visas to enter parts of our own country beyond Anuradhapura. We call upon the government to state its standpoint. If they reject the MCC agreement then they could tear it off and, if not, they have to admit that we did the right going ahead with it. It first started under the Mahinda Rajapaksa government; we went forward ahead because it was a grant in appreciation of good governance. What’s wrong with that?
Q: The SLPP is seeking a two-thirds majority to do away with the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. How do you propose to counter this campaign?
A: The 19th amendment was brought to do away with the 18th Amendment to the Constitution. The 18th amendment allowed the President to act according to his whims and fancies. So, the 19th Amendment had to be brought in. It was the will of the people.
At the time the 19th Amendment was introduced there were two opinions — either to do away with the presidential system or reduce its executive powers. I believed that we should do away with the executive presidency and give more powers to parliament. The 19th Amendment was introduced to pave the way for scrapping the executive presidency. People since 1988, have voted for its abolition but none of the governments care to respect their will.
Q: Treasury bond controversy had a huge impact on the UNP. Allegations have been levelled against you as well. What kind of impact this issue will have on the upcoming election?
A: This is a miscarriage of justice. I happened to be the Finance Minister, but the Central Bank was under the Prime Minister and other commercial banks were under Kabir Hashim. It was not the Prime Minister but his deputy Minister Harsha de Silva who did all the work at the Central bank. Both of them have been kept out of this issue while people who are not relevant were dragged into it.
There were five committees on the matter. First there was the Pitipana committee. There is nothing against me. Then there was DEW Gunsekera Committee. He was in the opposition then. His report does not say I was involved. Then there was Sunil Hadunnetti-led COPE investigation. They found nothing against me or the party. Then there was a presidential commission. There is nothing mentioned in their report about me with the issue at hand. They also found that Central Bank officials are responsible for this. Have any of them been questioned? Then there is another report of which 108 pages are missing. Why are they missing? Why hasn’t it been published? These were the things in the hands of the then President. It was a political witch-hunt. It was aimed at character assassination. Then there was a forensic audit report. It shows very clearly what happened during the period of 2005 to 2015. Why is that report not brought out and why action has not been taken on its findings? They have clearly stated that losses have occurred since 2005 onwards and that Central Bank had not got relevant approval for the implementation of private placements. When this question arose, I, as the finance minister, asked the Auditor General to compare what had been happening since 2005 to 2015. All are silent. They are trying to kill the messenger and distract public attention. That is an absolute national crime. At the moment those investigations have got nowhere, found nothing at all, and why are 108 pages missing? Why is that, not a single Central Bank official has been even basically mentioned? Because these are the guys- the central bank officials, not all of them but seven or eight people. They live luxurious lives. They are earning 2.5 or 3 million salary and dictate terms to people who get by on 25,000 to 30,000 a month. It is said that the monetary policy is being pursued by the Central Bank. The government’s or the financial minister’s role is to handle the fiscal policy. But the central bank was always at loggerheads with the government. We believe that the innocent people should have low interest rates on their borrowings, so that you could bring about an economic upturn, but the Central Bank officials pursue a high interest rate where they basically think that would ward off inflation. This is the problem that exists. And this menace must come to an end. These are the people who created it. Once again, I say I was not in charge of the Central Bank; I was not in charge of the commercial banks. Then why am I being accused of something I did not do? This is simple case of character assassination. That has to be corrected. When I was the Finance Minister, what I did was like running a tavern without arrack.
I was the Finance Minister but I did not have the banks under me. Even then we were able to bring economic stability. We were able to bring in financial discipline. We established the focus on right financial directions. That was during the three years I was in charge of the finance ministry. Some of them who are engaged in character assassination have left the party. They were responsible for the footnotes of the Sunil Handunnetti COPE report. Why do they hold me accountable for this? It was they who involved in it. People within the country did not recognize us, but outside world recognized us and that was how the Bankers’ Institution in the UK, which is highly respected one, voted me the best finance minister Asia Pacific for 2017.
Q: What plans does the UNP have for the future of the younger generation of the country?
A: Not that you cannot develop this country. It’s a matter of whether you want to develop this country or not. The talent is there, the opportunity is there and we do not apply ourselves in order to get to that. My best comparison is Sri Lanka in the time we got Independence 72 years ago, we had a per capita income of $ 49 and Japan had $ 48. Japan got battered in the Second World War and without any natural resources, they are basically today enjoying a per capita of 55,000 dollars while in Sri Lanka its 4,000 dollars.
Q: The UNP is doomed in the opinion of its critics. How do you counter this view?
A: Before talking of the party’s future, I should say we should talk of the present. We should handle it very dexterously. The UNP is very hierarchy-oriented, very seniority-oriented and competency-oriented party. In election times you hear various things from people who cannot even stand on their own feet. In the UNP, we have a leader in the party and our emphasis is on discipline. As for the party hierarchy Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe is the senior most and next to him is John Amaratunga and I come next to him in order of seniority. I guess competency, discipline, loyalty, comradeship all would be put together and at the right time we will come as the right team.
Opinion
Buddhist insights into the extended mind thesis – Some observations
It is both an honour and a pleasure to address you on this occasion as we gather to celebrate International Philosophy Day. Established by UNESCO and supported by the United Nations, this day serves as a global reminder that philosophy is not merely an academic discipline confined to universities or scholarly journals. It is, rather, a critical human practice—one that enables societies to reflect upon themselves, to question inherited assumptions, and to navigate periods of intellectual, technological, and moral transformation.
In moments of rapid change, philosophy performs a particularly vital role. It slows us down. It invites us to ask not only how things work, but what they mean, why they matter, and how we ought to live. I therefore wish to begin by expressing my appreciation to UNESCO, the United Nations, and the organisers of this year’s programme for sustaining this tradition and for selecting a theme that invites sustained reflection on mind, consciousness, and human agency.
We inhabit a world increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence, neuroscience, cognitive science, and digital technologies. These developments are not neutral. They reshape how we think, how we communicate, how we remember, and even how we imagine ourselves. As machines simulate cognitive functions once thought uniquely human, we are compelled to ask foundational philosophical questions anew:
What is the mind? Where does thinking occur? Is cognition something enclosed within the brain, or does it arise through our bodily engagement with the world? And what does it mean to be an ethical and responsible agent in a technologically extended environment?
Sri Lanka’s Philosophical Inheritance
On a day such as this, it is especially appropriate to recall that Sri Lanka possesses a long and distinguished tradition of philosophical reflection. From early Buddhist scholasticism to modern comparative philosophy, Sri Lankan thinkers have consistently engaged questions concerning knowledge, consciousness, suffering, agency, and liberation.
Within this modern intellectual history, the University of Peradeniya occupies a unique place. It has served as a centre where Buddhist philosophy, Western thought, psychology, and logic have met in creative dialogue. Scholars such as T. R. V. Murti, K. N. Jayatilleke, Padmasiri de Silva, R. D. Gunaratne, and Sarathchandra did not merely interpret Buddhist texts; they brought them into conversation with global philosophy, thereby enriching both traditions.
It is within this intellectual lineage—and with deep respect for it—that I offer the reflections that follow.
Setting the Philosophical Problem
My topic today is “Embodied Cognition and Viññāṇasota: Buddhist Insights on the Extended Mind Thesis – Some Observations.” This is not a purely historical inquiry. It is an attempt to bring Buddhist philosophy into dialogue with some of the most pressing debates in contemporary philosophy of mind and cognitive science.
At the centre of these debates lies a deceptively simple question: Where is the mind?
For much of modern philosophy, the dominant answer was clear: the mind resides inside the head. Thinking was understood as an internal process, private and hidden, occurring within the boundaries of the skull. The body was often treated as a mere vessel, and the world as an external stage upon which cognition operated.
However, this picture has increasingly come under pressure.
The Extended Mind Thesis and the 4E Turn
One of the most influential challenges to this internalist model is the Extended Mind Thesis, proposed by Andy Clark and David Chalmers. Their argument is provocative but deceptively simple: if an external tool performs the same functional role as a cognitive process inside the brain, then it should be considered part of the mind itself.
From this insight emerges the now well-known 4E framework, according to which cognition is:
Embodied – shaped by the structure and capacities of the body
Embedded – situated within physical, social, and cultural environments
Enactive – constituted through action and interaction
Extended – distributed across tools, artefacts, and practices
This framework invites us to rethink the mind not as a thing, but as an activity—something we do, rather than something we have.
Earlier Western Challenges to Internalism
It is important to note that this critique of the “mind in the head” model did not begin with cognitive science. It has deep philosophical roots.
Ludwig Wittgenstein
famously warned philosophers against imagining thought as something occurring in a hidden inner space. Such metaphors, he suggested, mystify rather than clarify our understanding of mind.
Similarly, Franz Brentano’s notion of intentionality—his claim that all mental states are about something—shifted attention away from inner substances toward relational processes. This insight shaped Husserl’s phenomenology, where consciousness is always world-directed, and Freud’s psychoanalysis, where mental life is dynamic, conflicted, and socially embedded.
Together, these thinkers prepared the conceptual ground for a more process-oriented, relational understanding of mind.
Varela and the Enactive Turn
A decisive moment in this shift came with Francisco J. Varela, whose work on enactivism challenged computational models of mind. For Varela, cognition is not the passive representation of a pre-given world, but the active bringing forth of meaning through embodied engagement.
Cognition, on this view, arises from the dynamic coupling of organism and environment. Importantly, Varela explicitly acknowledged his intellectual debt to Buddhist philosophy, particularly its insights into impermanence, non-self, and dependent origination.
Buddhist Philosophy and the Minding Process
Buddhist thought offers a remarkably sophisticated account of mind—one that is non-substantialist, relational, and processual. Across its diverse traditions, we find a consistent emphasis on mind as dependently arisen, embodied through the six sense bases, and shaped by intention and contact.
Crucially, Buddhism does not speak of a static “mind-entity”. Instead, it employs metaphors of streams, flows, and continuities, suggesting a dynamic process unfolding in relation to conditions.
Key Buddhist Concepts for Contemporary Dialogue
Let me now highlight several Buddhist concepts that are particularly relevant to contemporary discussions of embodied and extended cognition.
The notion of prapañca, as elaborated by Bhikkhu Ñāṇananda, captures the mind’s tendency toward conceptual proliferation. Through naming, interpretation, and narrative construction, the mind extends itself, creating entire experiential worlds. This is not merely a linguistic process; it is an existential one.
The Abhidhamma concept of viññāṇasota, the stream of consciousness, rejects the idea of an inner mental core. Consciousness arises and ceases moment by moment, dependent on conditions—much like a river that has no fixed identity apart from its flow.
The Yogācāra doctrine of ālayaviññāṇa adds a further dimension, recognising deep-seated dispositions, habits, and affective tendencies accumulated through experience. This anticipates modern discussions of implicit cognition, embodied memory, and learned behaviour.
Finally, the Buddhist distinction between mindful and unmindful cognition reveals a layered model of mental life—one that resonates strongly with contemporary dual-process theories.
A Buddhist Cognitive Ecology
Taken together, these insights point toward a Buddhist cognitive ecology in which mind is not an inner object but a relational activity unfolding across body, world, history, and practice.
As the Buddha famously observed, “In this fathom-long body, with its perceptions and thoughts, I declare there is the world.” This is perhaps one of the earliest and most profound articulations of an embodied, enacted, and extended conception of mind.
Conclusion
The Extended Mind Thesis challenges the idea that the mind is confined within the skull. Buddhist philosophy goes further. It invites us to reconsider whether the mind was ever “inside” to begin with.
In an age shaped by artificial intelligence, cognitive technologies, and digital environments, this question is not merely theoretical. It is ethically urgent. How we understand mind shapes how we design technologies, structure societies, and conceive human responsibility.
Buddhist philosophy offers not only conceptual clarity but also ethical guidance—reminding us that cognition is inseparable from suffering, intention, and liberation.
Dr. Charitha Herath is a former Member of Parliament of Sri Lanka (2020–2024) and an academic philosopher. Prior to entering Parliament, he served as Professor (Chair) of Philosophy at the University of Peradeniya. He was Chairman of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) from 2020 to 2022, playing a key role in parliamentary oversight of public finance and state institutions. Dr. Herath previously served as Secretary to the Ministry of Mass Media and Information (2013–2015) and is the Founder and Chair of Nexus Research Group, a platform for interdisciplinary research, policy dialogue, and public intellectual engagement.
He holds a BA from the University of Peradeniya (Sri Lanka), MA degrees from Sichuan University (China) and Ohio University (USA), and a PhD from the University of Kelaniya (Sri Lanka).
(This article has been adapted from the keynote address delivered
by Dr. Charitha Herath
at the International Philosophy Day Conference at the University of Peradeniya.)
Opinion
We do not want to be press-ganged
Reference ,the Indian High Commissioner’s recent comments ( The Island, 9th Jan. ) on strong India-Sri Lanka relationship and the assistance granted on recovering from the financial collapse of Sri Lanka and yet again for cyclone recovery., Sri Lankans should express their thanks to India for standing up as a friendly neighbour.
On the Defence Cooperation agreement, the Indian High Commissioner’s assertion was that there was nothing beyond that which had been included in the text. But, dear High Commissioner, we Sri Lankans have burnt our fingers when we signed agreements with the European nations who invaded our country; they took our leaders around the Mulberry bush and made our nation pay a very high price by controlling our destiny for hundreds of years. When the Opposition parties in the Parliament requested the Sri Lankan government to reveal the contents of the Defence agreements signed with India as per the prevalent common practice, the government’s strange response was that India did not want them disclosed.
Even the terms of the one-sided infamous Indo-Sri Lanka agreement, signed in 1987, were disclosed to the public.
Mr. High Commissioner, we are not satisfied with your reply as we are weak, economically, and unable to clearly understand your “India’s Neighbourhood First and Mahasagar policies” . We need the details of the defence agreements signed with our government, early.
RANJITH SOYSA
Opinion
When will we learn?
At every election—general or presidential—we do not truly vote, we simply outvote. We push out the incumbent and bring in another, whether recycled from the past or presented as “fresh.” The last time, we chose a newcomer who had spent years criticising others, conveniently ignoring the centuries of damage they inflicted during successive governments. Only now do we realise that governing is far more difficult than criticising.
There is a saying: “Even with elephants, you cannot bring back the wisdom that has passed.” But are we learning? Among our legislators, there have been individuals accused of murder, fraud, and countless illegal acts. True, the courts did not punish them—but are we so blind as to remain naive in the face of such allegations? These fraudsters and criminals, and any sane citizen living in this decade, cannot deny those realities.
Meanwhile, many of our compatriots abroad, living comfortably with their families, ignore these past crimes with blind devotion and campaign for different parties. For most of us, the wish during an election is not the welfare of the country, but simply to send our personal favourite to the council. The clearest example was the election of a teledrama actress—someone who did not even understand the Constitution—over experienced and honest politicians.
It is time to stop this bogus hero worship. Vote not for personalities, but for the country. Vote for integrity, for competence, and for the future we deserve.
Deshapriya Rajapaksha
-
News3 days agoSajith: Ashoka Chakra replaces Dharmachakra in Buddhism textbook
-
Business3 days agoDialog and UnionPay International Join Forces to Elevate Sri Lanka’s Digital Payment Landscape
-
Features3 days agoThe Paradox of Trump Power: Contested Authoritarian at Home, Uncontested Bully Abroad
-
Features3 days agoSubject:Whatever happened to (my) three million dollars?
-
News3 days agoLevel I landslide early warnings issued to the Districts of Badulla, Kandy, Matale and Nuwara-Eliya extended
-
News3 days agoNational Communication Programme for Child Health Promotion (SBCC) has been launched. – PM
-
News3 days ago65 withdrawn cases re-filed by Govt, PM tells Parliament
-
Opinion5 days agoThe minstrel monk and Rafiki, the old mandrill in The Lion King – II
