Connect with us

Opinion

Asking a donkey to do a dog’s homework – II

Published

on

(Continued from Wednesday,July 23, 2025)

One is tempted to ask whether it is on purpose that president Anura Kumara Dissanayake has given the portfolio of Buddha Sasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs to Hiniduma Sunil Senevi instead of to a more acceptable MP with the requisite qualifications for the job, chosen from his massive parliamentary majority.

By appointing such individuals to be in charge of Buddha Sasana affairs, is President Anura Kumara Dissanayake flaunting his secularistic nonchalance towards the pivotal Article 9? Not likely, in my opinion. Having been in continuous parliamentary politics for twenty-five years, thanks exclusively to the support that the voters, the majority of whom are Sinhalese Buddhists, have extended to him to date, he would be the last to cock a snook at the place of special recognition given to Buddhism by the Constitution.

Article 9 is listed under Chapter 2 of the  Constitution which is exclusively devoted to Buddhism. The importance of the area of governance covered by that term (Buddhism) is underscored by the fact that it is placed next to the topics of primordial importance: ‘The People, the State and Sovereignty’ described in Chapter 1. Article 9 (coming under Chapter 2) states: ‘The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place ….” It is not possible that the President wants to openly show contempt for Article 9 because he knows too well that it is totally compatible with secular democracy, and that it does not give Buddhism the status of a state religion that would impinge on the rights of adherents of minority religions.

But what about the novice MPs of his alliance, the NPP, who got swept into Parliament in November 2024 on the crest of a popular wave of electoral support generated by his, realistically speaking, less than unqualified success at the presidential election held hardly two months before, in September? Though the parliament is filled with them, even the ruling party hierarchy look down upon most of them as papisi (door mats) and polleli (dry coconut husks). My personal opinion is that these abysmally ignorant self-styled secularists or so-called niragamikayas of the JVP/NPP, given little significance for policy-making, have  seriously misunderstood the meaning of ‘secular’ as merely niragamika (Sinhala: without any religious affiliation). The Sinhala term is actually derived from Sanskrit; it is a combination of the two elements nir+agamika, which these newly elected parliamentarians might understand, depending on their level of general knowledge, cultural and linguistic sophistication, and common sense, as ‘without any religion’ or ‘rejecting religion altogether’, or ‘non-religious’, or ‘areligious’, or ‘irreligious’, and hence, happily ‘amoral’, or even ‘immoral’! They also seem to labour under the additional misconception that Buddhism is your typical religion with all the inherent negative attributes usually associated with all normal religions such as dogmatic beliefs that must be accepted as incontrovertible truths and followed without questioning, otherworldly attitudes that obstruct a person’s material advancement and that accommodate unconscious antisocial self-centredness.

But Buddhism is essentially a nonreligious, moral ethical philosophy (that is, Buddhist spirituality has no connection with religion). It nevertheless needs to assume the religious cultural form of a conventional religion in order to survive among actual religions. Very much the same thing may be said about Hinduism, in spite of the apparently chaotic and obscurantist (= that which prevents knowledge of facts) nature of its practical popular forms. But here I am taking you towards the deep end. Let’s swim back to the safer side.

Historically speaking, Buddhism emerged in the spiritual matrix of Hinduism. We shouldn’t forget that Siddhartha Gautama, who became the Buddha was born a Hindu. Hinduism and Buddhism are not religions. (Ask the famous Sadhguru/Jagadish Vasudev of Tamil Nadu, founder of the Isha Foundation). Hinduism and Buddhism  professed as religions  by over eighty percent (80%) of the Sri Lankan population are the most secular (liberal democracy) friendly, and, at the same time, mutually compatible  spiritual traditions that together make for  peaceful coexistence among the diverse ethnic/religious communities within multifaith Sri Lanka. Secularism is no threat either to Hindus or to Buddhists. (Actually, solidarity between these two groups is the key to Sri Lanka’s national unity.)

But unfortunately, it is a group of young Buddhist monks who rail against secularism the loudest, believing that it means total rejection of religious values in politics and in general civil society, while their Hindu, Christian, and Muslim counterparts, knowing the truth about secularism in governance, hold their peace.

Nevertheless, we cannot ignore these ‘embattled’ young monks’ patriotic intentions. They must be taught about the importance of secularism (= keeping religion and other matters separate from each other) in governance, civil administration, art, entertainment, in fact, in all spheres of human activity. AI offers the following definition: ‘Secularism is the principle of separating religion from other aspects of life, particularly government and public institutions. It advocates for a society where religious belief is a private matter and the state does not favor or discriminate against any particular religion. Secularism promotes freedom of thought, conscience, and religion for all, ensuring that individuals can hold diverse beliefs without facing coercion or disadvantage’.

However, in the real world, religion does not always manifest itself as a strictly private matter. Religions become socio-political markers that identify separate ideological groups of people. It is a well-known fact that religions promote herd mentality among individuals within a larger group. It makes them conform to beliefs, morals and ethics, and attitudes of the majority (within a community), though they do not privately subscribe to those beliefs, attitudes, etc. So, religions have great political power.  In the world today, for example, Christianity and Islam are both politically powerful in different, sometimes, mutually hostile ways, as in Western and Middle Eastern countries respectively. A common observation is that secular democracy is more prevalent in the Christian West than in the Islamic Middle Eastern states. However, secular democracy is strongest in the Hindu and Buddhist majority countries including India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, etc. Hinduism and Buddhism do not seek world dominance. They only offer a firm moral anchor for individuals and groups based on non-violence, wisdom, and universal compassion.

 A memorable instance that showed the efficacy of this attitude was when Finance Minister J. R. Jayewardene of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) who attended the San Francisco Peace Conference held in 1951 made a powerful speech in which he quoted from the Dhammapada: ‘Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world – By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is an ancient Truth’, and made a passionate appeal on behalf of Japan, which was struggling after its defeat at World War II; he requested that the demand for war reparations be disclaimed; he said his own country was not going to accept any such compensation money from Japan. Jayewardene’s words were a clarion call for the humane treatment of Japan by the victorious side as well as a morale booster for that country. The grateful Japanese built a statue of Jayewardene in his honour at the Kamakura Temple in Kanagawa in Japan, which is carefully maintained even today.

Though today we tend to look upon secularism as something modern imported from the West, a glance at our own history shows that from the very beginning, even before the advent of Buddhism, our rulers adopted a secular mode of governance that was nevertheless subject to wholesome moral standards where Brahman priests and later  Buddhist  monks played only an advisory role for the king, speaking up in the interest of public good, but never took part in governing. The Dasa Raja Dharma or the Ten Kingly Virtues are the moral and ethical duties of a ruler, which emphasise compassionate governance, social justice, and the well-being of the people. They are relevant not only for political leaders, but also for anyone in a position of authority, including business leaders and managers’, as an AI summary explains. No religion is involved here. These are secular principles of good governance. If only Anura Kumara Dissanayake cared to look at what these ten tenets of righteous government are, he would have improved his performance in no time.

In this article (published in two parts), I dwelt on the misunderstood concept of ‘secularism’ that vitiates the JVP/NPP government’s handling of Article 9 of the Constitution. However, the main thrust of president Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s address at the inauguration of the 74th Upasampada Vinayakarma ceremony of the Ramanna Nikaya was to stress his determination to stamp out the evil of  ‘nationalism’ that he seems to have identified as what has been plaguing independent Sri Lanka in the form of the so-called curse of the past 77 years. He appears to be trying to impress on his avowedly secularist party ranks, as well as the meddling outsiders (with strategic geopolitical designs on our country) who are looking over his shoulder, the strength of that resolve.

But he cannot be unaware of the fact that the Sinhala neologism jaatikavadaya was coined about two decades ago as an equivalent to the English term ‘nationalism’ perceived then (at least among us Sri Lankans) as a positive concept identical with patriotism. His current definition of nationalism as an evil that should be suppressed is in accordance with America’s negative interpretation of the concept of ‘nationalism’ in respect of nations/countries that independently choose to promote their own national interests without shaping their foreign policy to subserve ‘the five vital interests’ of the world’s only superpower. This is an idea that I owe to senior American public intellectual, social activist, and former linguistics professor Noam Chomsky.

Critics have begun to ask whether Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s erroneous substitution of jaativadaya (racism) for jaatikavadaya (nationalism), is a self-conscious ploy to please the Tamil diaspora in the West who secured for him and the alliance he leads the majority of the Tamil votes in the North and the East provinces at the presidential and parliamentary elections held respectively in September and November, 2024, as would be obvious to any unbiased observer.

by  Rohana R. Wasala ✍️



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Pot calling the kettle black?

Published

on

Doctor Upul Wijayawardhana (eminent physician), posed a riddle for us. He wrote about that island Sri Lanka as ‘ this little dot in the ocean’ when deriding the remark of President Dissanayake who had said that Sri Lanka was a hunduva , a term that indicated a small volume: me hunduve inna puluvan da? (Can you live in this restricted space?) Most sensible people, even uneducated, judge that the volume of a little drop (of whatever) is smaller than that of a hunduva; so is weight. When the learned doctor emphatically maintains ‘….we are not a hunduva’ but ‘… a little dot in the ocean…’, is the pot calling the kettle black or worse?

Physically and population wise, Sri Lanka is neither ‘a little dot’ nor ‘a hunduva. This is all in the rich imaginations of Dissanayake and Wijayawardhana. I once counted that there were more than 50 members of the UN who were smaller than Sri Lanka in physical and population size. England was a sizeable island with a small population in the northwest corner of Europe in late 18th century when it began to become what China, with 1.3 billion people and jutting out to the Pacific, is now. From about 1850, when the population of Great Britain was about 20 million, less than that of Sri Lanka in 2026, it ruled more than half the world. Besides, do not forget Vanuatu, Kiribati, Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Lesotho and New Zealand (who habitually beats us at cricket). New Zealand with 5 million population played against 1.5 billion population India (1:300) for the T20 cricket championship a few weeks ago. I quietly wished New Zealand would win; so much for crap about dots in the Indian Ocean or the south Pacific.

Dr. Wijayawardhana also wrote about history and about ‘The achievements of Hunduwa’. The massive reservoirs and extensive irrigation systems in rajarata and ruhuna as well as the stupa are indeed tremendous works of irrigation and bear witness to superior ingenuity and organising ability, for the time they were built. They compare very well among structures elsewhere in the ancient world. Terms like ‘granary of the East’ must be taken with more than a grain of salt. Facile use of such terms does not take account of whatever shreds of evidence there is of adversity in those times. Monsoon Asia over the ages has more or less regularly suffered from floods, droughts and consequent famines. The last dire famine was in Bengal in 1944. The irrigation works in Lanka were a magnificent response to those phenomena. The modern response has been scientific agriculture making India a major grain exporter, from near famine conditions in 1973-74. Recall Indira Gandhi’s garibi hatao (eliminate poverty) speech to the General Assembly of the UN, that year.

The bhikkhu who wrote down the tripitaka in aluvihara did so because there was the threat of a severe famine in the course of which learned bhikkhu might have come to harm. Buddhist thought over centuries had been passed from generation to generation vocally (saamici patipanno bhagavato savaka (listener) sangho) and the departure from that tradition must have required a major threat of famine. There are stories of bhikkhu from Lanka fleeing from dire straits. In the same vein, while the mahavamsa speaks of kings and their valiant deeds, there is little account of the large mass of little people who lived then. Sensible teaching of the history of a people must include the history of as much of the people as possible and some idea of the history of other peoples in comparable times to avoid feeling dangerously smug and arrogant, which we have seen many times over.

Usvatte-aratchi

Continue Reading

Opinion

Ministerial resignation and new political culture

Published

on

Kumara Jayakody

The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.

The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.

Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.

Politically Astute

One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.

There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.

The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.

New Practice

The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.

Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.

The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime

Published

on

The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.

We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.

However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.

The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.

The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?

The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.

by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa

Continue Reading

Trending