Connect with us

Features

Milinda Problem: The Missing Buddhist Mandate

Published

on

Milinda and Nagasena

Most of what we see in modern rulers resembles a Turkish proverb: when a clown enters a palace, he assumes he will become a king, but instead the palace becomes a circus. Democracy is visibly crumbling, yet no convincing alternative has appeared. The most pragmatic models of governance once proposed by anarchist thinkers have been so badly misrepresented that many people now equate anarchism solely with chaos. Yet early anarchist texts and contemporary writers such as Noam Chomsky are clear: properly understood, anarchism offers tools to dismantle entrenched inequality and bureaucratic apathy, enabling decentralised decision-making and genuinely participatory politics. But the birth of a new system of governance is slow, far slower than our political impatience allows. If anything truly new is to emerge, it may not mature until the coming decades.

Meanwhile, what has unfolded in countries that claim Buddhist heritage is especially disheartening. Many Buddhist-majority nations today are mired in corruption, with political structures that have hardened into unresponsive, self-protective systems. Leaders no longer trust monastic institutions; temples increasingly resemble financial enterprises sustaining the comforts of senior monks. The ethical foundations the Buddha emphasised—compassion, equanimity, self-restraint—have largely faded from public life. As Aravind Adiga quips in The White Tiger, if the Buddha returned to witness the behaviour of many who claim to follow him, he would run immediately without looking back. Cultures once committed to moral clarity and dharmic governance have become parodies of their guiding philosophies.

It is here that the Milinda Pañha offers a corrective. Though framed as a religious dialogue, it contains a form of political wisdom urgently relevant today. The text records conversations between King Menander I—known in Buddhist tradition as Milinda—and the monk Nâgasena. Menander, ruling from roughly 165 to 130 BCE, governed a relatively small Indo-Greek kingdom across parts of north-western India and Afghanistan. Unlike Emperor Ashoka, whose empire was vast and centrally controlled, Menander oversaw a fragmented realm more reminiscent of Hellenistic city-states. His coins, blending Greek and Indian motifs, and the bilingual inscriptions of his era demonstrate a ruler versed in cultural negotiation and administrative pragmatism. Although no evidence suggests direct influence from Ashoka, Menander clearly lived within a Buddhist intellectual atmosphere shaped by earlier imperial reforms.

The Milinda Pañha captures a rare moment: a Hellenistic ruler engaging seriously with Indian philosophical thought. Menander approaches Nâgasena with disarming humility, asking sharp and often sceptical questions rather than asserting royal authority. The dialogues follow a method of inquiry not unlike the Socratic tradition, though rooted in Buddhist reasoning. Milinda challenges, Nâgasena clarifies, and truth emerges through structured questioning.

The famous opening conversation is well known. Milinda asks, “Venerable sir, what is your name?” Nâgasena replies, “I am called Nâgasena, Majesty. But ‘Nâgasena’ is only a name, a convenient designation. In the ultimate sense, there is no person here to be found.” Milinda presses the point: “If there is no Nâgasena, then what stands before me? Are your robes Nâgasena? Is your bowl Nâgasena? Is your body or your mind Nâgasena?” Nâgasena answers calmly: “No, Majesty. None of these is Nâgasena. Yet because these parts occur together, the name is used—just as ‘chariot’ is spoken of although no single piece is the chariot itself.”

This method continues through the text. In another exchange, the king asks, “If there is no permanent self, who receives the results of actions?” Nâgasena responds, “Majesty, the deed and its fruit meet within a stream of continuity. The one who acts and the one who experiences the result are connected like one lamp lighting another—new, yet not disconnected.”

At times, Milinda’s challenges resemble those in Greek philosophical dialogues, though the content remains distinctly Buddhist. He asks, “Why does the mind wander even when one wishes to concentrate?” Nâgasena replies with an analogy: “Majesty, as the wind bends a tree’s branches though the tree desires stillness, so the untrained mind is shaped by habit. Training and insight are the roots of stability.”

In another discussion, Milinda asks, “What makes a wise ruler different from an ordinary man?” Nâgasena answers: “A wise ruler, Majesty, sees consequences before they ripen. As a farmer recognises storms on the horizon, the ruler discerns danger in its beginning. The ordinary man sees only when the flood has already risen.”

These exchanges highlight qualities absent in contemporary politics: humility, intellectual urgency, and the ability to examine one’s own assumptions. The text repeatedly employs metaphors to illuminate causal complexity.

When the king asks why results do not always appear immediately, Nâgasena replies: “Majesty, a fruit tree does not bear fruit at the moment of planting. Its conditions must ripen. So too with actions: their results arise when causes come together.” This principle—conditionality—offers a lesson modern policymakers often ignore. Outcomes depend on numerous interlocking factors; hasty interventions usually produce unintended harm.

Menander’s engagement with Buddhism was not merely decorative. Historical evidence suggests he earned unusual respect for a foreign king, and later Buddhist tradition even describes him renouncing his throne for contemplative life. Classical sources offer two endings to his story: one claims he died while campaigning and that his ashes were divided among several cities, while another Buddhist account says he abandoned royal life, lived as a renunciant, and passed away in contemplative retreat.

One cannot forget that the true Buddha’s teaching encourages questioning, urging individuals to examine ideas through reflection, experience and reason rather than blind acceptance. The Kalama Sutta warns against accepting teachings simply because they are ancient, revered, or widely repeated. The Buddha advises, “Do not go upon tradition, nor scripture, nor hearsay; but when you know for yourselves that something is wholesome, undertake it.” That spirit of scrutiny underpins the Milinda Pañha. Nâgasena repeatedly urges the king to test ideas for himself rather than accept them on faith. Imagine if governments operated in this way: policies examined not for optics but for actual consequences, ministers interrogating not opponents alone but also their own assumptions.

The parallels with Greek philosophy deepen this point. Socrates famously insisted that true understanding begins with recognising one’s ignorance. Menander, though a king, behaves exactly in this spirit. His authority becomes irrelevant within the dialogue. What matters is the pursuit of clarity. This distinction—between power and truth—has nearly disappeared in modern politics, where charisma or inherited office is often treated as a substitute for competence.

The Milinda Pañha demonstrates that deep inquiry is inseparable from ethical leadership. Questions about the self, impermanence, responsibility, and causality are not abstract diversions; they shape how a ruler thinks about law, punishment, social welfare, and public duty. Without this reflective foundation, political systems decay into precisely what we see in many Buddhist-majority nations today: corruption, bureaucratic excess, and institutions more invested in pageantry than in moral purpose.

Modern leaders, whether Buddhist or not, might find in Menander and Nâgasena an urgently needed model. It is not the ceremonial connection to Buddhism that matters, but the intellectual discipline the text illustrates. A Milinda-inspired polity would prioritise careful questioning, ethical reasoning, and awareness of long-term consequences. It would distinguish the symbolic from the substantive. It would recognise that governance, like a chariot, is held together not by any single part but by the integrity of the whole. Without these missing links—without humility, enquiry, and ethical imagination—can today’s rulers move beyond the hollow performance that has replaced genuine leadership?

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Misinterpreting President Dissanayake on National Reconciliation

Published

on

President Dissanayake

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been investing his political capital in going to the public to explain some of the most politically sensitive and controversial issues. At a time when easier political choices are available, the president is choosing the harder path of confronting ethnic suspicion and communal fears. There are three issues in particular on which the president’s words have generated strong reactions. These are first with regard to Buddhist pilgrims going to the north of the country with nationalist motivations. Second is the controversy relating to the expansion of the Tissa Raja Maha Viharaya, a recently constructed Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai which has become a flashpoint between local Tamil residents and Sinhala nationalist groups. Third is the decision not to give the war victory a central place in the Independence Day celebrations.

Even in the opposition, when his party held only three seats in parliament, Anura Kumara Dissanayake took his role as a public educator seriously. He used to deliver lengthy, well researched and easily digestible speeches in parliament. He continues this practice as president. It can be seen that his statements are primarily meant to elevate the thinking of the people and not to win votes the easy way. The easy way to win votes whether in Sri Lanka or elsewhere in the world is to rouse nationalist and racist sentiments and ride that wave. Sri Lanka’s post independence political history shows that narrow ethnic mobilisation has often produced short term electoral gains but long term national damage.

Sections of the opposition and segments of the general public have been critical of the president for taking these positions. They have claimed that the president is taking these positions in order to obtain more Tamil votes or to appease minority communities. The same may be said in reverse of those others who take contrary positions that they seek the Sinhala votes. These political actors who thrive on nationalist mobilisation have attempted to portray the president’s statements as an abandonment of the majority community. The president’s actions need to be understood within the larger framework of national reconciliation and long term national stability.

Reconciler’s Duty

When the president referred to Buddhist pilgrims from the south going to the north, he was not speaking about pilgrims visiting long established Buddhist heritage sites such as Nagadeepa or Kandarodai. His remarks were directed at a specific and highly contentious development, the recently built Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai and those built elsewhere in the recent past in the north and east. The temple in Kankesanturai did not emerge from the religious needs of a local Buddhist community as there is none in that area. It has been constructed on land that was formerly owned and used by Tamil civilians and which came under military occupation as a high security zone. What has made the issue of the temple particularly controversial is that it was established with the support of the security forces.

The controversy has deepened because the temple authorities have sought to expand the site from approximately one acre to nearly fourteen acres on the basis that there was a historic Buddhist temple in that area up to the colonial period. However, the Tamil residents of the area fear that expansion would further displace surrounding residents and consolidate a permanent Buddhist religious presence in the present period in an area where the local population is overwhelmingly Hindu. For many Tamils in Kankesanturai, the issue is not Buddhism as a religion but the use of religion as a vehicle for territorial assertion and demographic changes in a region that bore the brunt of the war. Likewise, there are other parts of the north and east where other temples or places of worship have been established by the military personnel in their camps during their war-time occupation and questions arise regarding the future when these camps are finally closed.

There are those who have actively organised large scale pilgrimages from the south to make the Tissa temple another important religious site. These pilgrimages are framed publicly as acts of devotion but are widely perceived locally as demonstrations of dominance. Each such visit heightens tension, provokes protest by Tamil residents, and risks confrontation. For communities that experienced mass displacement, military occupation and land loss, the symbolism of a state backed religious structure on contested land with the backing of the security forces is impossible to separate from memories of war and destruction. A president committed to reconciliation cannot remain silent in the face of such provocations, however uncomfortable it may be to challenge sections of the majority community.

High-minded leadership

The controversy regarding the president’s Independence Day speech has also generated strong debate. In that speech the president did not refer to the military victory over the LTTE and also did not use the term “war heroes” to describe soldiers. For many Sinhala nationalist groups, the absence of these references was seen as an attempt to diminish the sacrifices of the armed forces. The reality is that Independence Day means very different things to different communities. In the north and east the same day is marked by protest events and mourning and as a “Black Day”, symbolising the consolidation of a state they continue to experience as excluding them and not empathizing with the full extent of their losses.

By way of contrast, the president’s objective was to ensure that Independence Day could be observed as a day that belonged to all communities in the country. It is not correct to assume that the president takes these positions in order to appease minorities or secure electoral advantage. The president is only one year into his term and does not need to take politically risky positions for short term electoral gains. Indeed, the positions he has taken involve confronting powerful nationalist political forces that can mobilise significant opposition. He risks losing majority support for his statements. This itself indicates that the motivation is not electoral calculation.

President Dissanayake has recognized that Sri Lanka’s long term political stability and economic recovery depend on building trust among communities that once peacefully coexisted and then lived through decades of war. Political leadership is ultimately tested by the willingness to say what is necessary rather than what is politically expedient. The president’s recent interventions demonstrate rare national leadership and constitute an attempt to shift public discourse away from ethnic triumphalism and toward a more inclusive conception of nationhood. Reconciliation cannot take root if national ceremonies reinforce the perception of victory for one community and defeat for another especially in an internal conflict.

BY Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Recovery of LTTE weapons

Published

on

Sri Lanka Navy in action

I have read a newspaper report that the Special Task Force of Sri Lanka Police, with help of Military Intelligence, recovered three buried yet well-preserved 84mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers used by the LTTE, in the Kudumbimalai area, Batticaloa.

These deadly weapons were used by the LTTE SEA TIGER WING to attack the Sri Lanka Navy ships and craft in 1990s. The first incident was in February 1997, off Iranativu island, in the Gulf of Mannar.

Admiral Cecil Tissera took over as Commander of the Navy on 27 January, 1997, from Admiral Mohan Samarasekara.

The fight against the LTTE was intensified from 1996 and the SLN was using her Vanguard of the Navy, Fast Attack Craft Squadron, to destroy the LTTE’s littoral fighting capabilities. Frequent confrontations against the LTTE Sea Tiger boats were reported off Mullaitivu, Point Pedro and Velvetiturai areas, where SLN units became victorious in most of these sea battles, except in a few incidents where the SLN lost Fast Attack Craft.

Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers

The intelligence reports confirmed that the LTTE Sea Tigers was using new recoilless rocket launchers against aluminium-hull FACs, and they were deadly at close quarter sea battles, but the exact type of this weapon was not disclosed.

The following incident, which occurred in February 1997, helped confirm the weapon was Carl Gustaf 84 mm Recoilless gun!

DATE: 09TH FEBRUARY, 1997, morning 0600 hrs.

LOCATION: OFF IRANATHIVE.

FACs: P 460 ISRAEL BUILT, COMMANDED BY CDR MANOJ JAYESOORIYA

P 452 CDL BUILT, COMMANDED BY LCDR PM WICKRAMASINGHE (ON TEMPORARY COMMAND. PROPER OIC LCDR N HEENATIGALA)

OPERATED FROM KKS.

CONFRONTED WITH LTTE ATTACK CRAFT POWERED WITH FOUR 250 HP OUT BOARD MOTORS.

TARGET WAS DESTROYED AND ONE LTTE MEMBER WAS CAPTURED.

LEADING MARINE ENGINEERING MECHANIC OF THE FAC CAME UP TO THE BRIDGE CARRYING A PROJECTILE WHICH WAS FIRED BY THE LTTE BOAT, DURING CONFRONTATION, WHICH PENETRATED THROUGH THE FAC’s HULL, AND ENTERED THE OICs CABIN (BETWEEN THE TWO BUNKS) AND HIT THE AUXILIARY ENGINE ROOM DOOR AND HAD FALLEN DOWN WITHOUT EXPLODING. THE ENGINE ROOM DOOR WAS HEAVILY DAMAGED LOOSING THE WATER TIGHT INTEGRITY OF THE FAC.

THE PROJECTILE WAS LATER HANDED OVER TO THE NAVAL WEAPONS EXPERTS WHEN THE FACs RETURNED TO KKS. INVESTIGATIONS REVEALED THE WEAPON USED BY THE ENEMY WAS 84 mm CARL GUSTAF SHOULDER-FIRED RECOILLESS GUN AND THIS PROJECTILE WAS AN ILLUMINATER BOMB OF ONE MILLION CANDLE POWER. BUT THE ATTACKERS HAS FAILED TO REMOVE THE SAFETY PIN, THEREFORE THE BOMB WAS NOT ACTIVATED.

Sea Tigers

Carl Gustaf 84 mm recoilless gun was named after Carl Gustaf Stads Gevärsfaktori, which, initially, produced it. Sweden later developed the 84mm shoulder-fired recoilless gun by the Royal Swedish Army Materiel Administration during the second half of 1940s as a crew served man- portable infantry support gun for close range multi-role anti-armour, anti-personnel, battle field illumination, smoke screening and marking fire.

It is confirmed in Wikipedia that Carl Gustaf Recoilless shoulder-fired guns were used by the only non-state actor in the world – the LTTE – during the final Eelam War.

It is extremely important to check the batch numbers of the recently recovered three launchers to find out where they were produced and other details like how they ended up in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka?

By Admiral Ravindra C. Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc (Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Continue Reading

Features

Yellow Beatz … a style similar to K-pop!

Published

on

Yes, get ready to vibe with Yellow Beatz, Sri Lanka’s awesome girl group, keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-pop!

With high-energy beats and infectious hooks, these talented ladies are here to shake up the music scene.

Think bold moves, catchy hooks, and, of course, spicy versions of old Sinhala hits, and Yellow Beatz is the package you won’t want to miss!

According to a spokesman for the group, Yellow Beatz became a reality during the Covid period … when everyone was stuck at home, in lockdown.

“First we interviewed girls, online, and selected a team that blended well, as four voices, and then started rehearsals. One of the cover songs we recorded, during those early rehearsals, unexpectedly went viral on Facebook. From that moment onward, we continued doing cover songs, and we received a huge response. Through that, we were able to bring back some beautiful Sri Lankan musical creations that were being forgotten, and introduce them to the new generation.”

The team members, I am told, have strong musical skills and with proper training their goal is to become a vocal group recognised around the world.

Believe me, their goal, they say, is not only to take Sri Lanka’s name forward, in the music scene, but to bring home a Grammy Award, as well.

“We truly believe we can achieve this with the love and support of everyone in Sri Lanka.”

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz as they have received an exceptional opportunity to represent Sri Lanka at the World Championships of Performing Arts in the USA.

Under the guidance of Chris Raththara, the Director for Sri Lanka, and with the blessings of all Sri Lankans, the girls have a great hope that they can win this milestone.

“We believe this will be a moment of great value for us as Yellow Beatz, and also for all Sri Lankans, and it will be an important inspiration for the future of our country.”

Along with all the preparation for the event in the USA, they went on to say they also need to manage their performances, original song recordings, and everything related.

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz

“We have strong confidence in ourselves and in our sincere intentions, because we are a team that studies music deeply, researches within the field, and works to take the uniqueness of Sri Lankan identity to the world.”

At present, they gather at the Voices Lab Academy, twice a week, for new creations and concert rehearsals.

This project was created by Buddhika Dayarathne who is currently working as a Pop Vocal lecturer at SLTC Campus. Voice Lab Academy is also his own private music academy and Yellow Beatz was formed through that platform.

Buddhika is keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-Pop and Yellow Beatz began as a result of that vision. With that same aim, we all work together as one team.

“Although it was a little challenging for the four of us girls to work together at first, we have united for our goal and continue to work very flexibly and with dedication. Our parents and families also give their continuous blessings and support for this project,” Rameesha, Dinushi, Newansa and Risuri said.

Last year, Yellow Beatz released their first original song, ‘Ihirila’ , and with everything happening this year, they are also preparing for their first album.

Continue Reading

Trending