Opinion
Of religion, religions and harmony
One should think it quite odd to hear a term like “religious violence” given that religion is said to be all about promoting love and peace. what on earth is religious violence? Isn’t it pathetic or even preposterous that we often hear of religion-based violence, when religion is popularly known, in all cultures, to be the most humanising agent in the world? And, how about terms like religious intolerance, religious strife, religious persecution, religion-based genocide, etc.? These terms which combine the adjective ‘religious’ with all the wrong words like persecution and genocide, appear to be replete with irony. Of course, one would understand, for example, terms like tribal intolerance, tribal violence, tribal genocide, etc. because ‘tribal’ is disparagingly used to mean crude, unrefined or violent. Consider a term like ‘tribal instincts’, which conjures images of aggression and violence. How about the term ‘religious instincts’? Can you ever associate them with violence? Certainly not. Then how are we so accustomed to consider the adjective ‘religious’ being used in association with intolerance, strife and persecution in the same way we do ‘tribal’? curious to say the least!
What has trained us to consider as normal and live with this patent incongruity- that any term signifying cruelty being so complacently linked with the word ‘religious’ as in, for example, ‘religious persecution’ is that we have, pathetically, a history which has been bloodied by religion-based atrocities. How can religion give rise to animosity, cruelty or bloodshed? If religions have made people broadminded, intelligent and sensitive, how can we live in a world where we take something like ‘religious intolerance’ as quite normal? How can we not feel perplexed by such terms? Surely, each religion has given us a divisive and irreconcilable brand or label, which is pathetic.
Of course, every religion is supposed to promote goodwill and fellowship; but how about “religions”? When we move from the singular to the plural; that is, from “religion” to “religions”, the relevant connotations begin to take a U-turn from love, compassion and altruism to intolerance, otherness and antagonism! If we think of our living experience with religion, it has never existed in the singular; ours has always been a world of religions, which have alienated us rather than unite. That’s the unpalatable truth. It would be a futile journey if one were to set out to find a society where religions have functioned as a unifying factor instead of an alienating factor. Can there possibly be an ingrained element in all organised religions – an element, which makes us feel insecure and threatened by the presence of other faiths?
As if ‘religious strife’ were not ironic enough, today we are also talking about ‘peaceful coexistence’ in multireligious societies, as if religious groups are naturally hostile, and badly in need of discipline and intelligence that have to be brought from outside of religion. Isn’t this a sorry state of affairs? How ridiculous it would be, if we were compelled to consider communities of different religions- those who are supposed to be refined by their respective religions, in the same way we do those tribal groups that destroyed each other in those dark ages?
Hence, isn’t it quite important to tease out the component in religion which makes people think in terms of “us” and “them”? Time and time again, human history has given evidence to the fact that “The more, the merrier” doesn’t ring true in matters of religions. Conversely, the world has shown that when it comes to religion, what applies is, “The more, the scarier”. Woeful, isn’t it? Religions have pathetically divided societies into camps where sparks of enmity lay dormant beneath deceptive calmness – only to emerge at the drop of a word. And, we jubilantly call that brittle state “religious harmony” as if it is an uncommonly jolly state of affairs, giving the impression to a cosmic guest on our planet that human religions are naturally seditious and hence, for them- the earth dwellers, a short spell of the so-called religious harmony is something worth partying.
The word religion works like a mantra or magic on most of us. It casts a spell on us and makes us think and behave quite differently from our normal conduct. It is a realm of experience in which we are made to feel self-righteous in how we think and act, and, interpret the world. It’s the only discipline in which death is not considered as final but as a door to an ‘afterlife’. If anyone ever referred to afterlife seriously in any of the hundreds of ordinary human interactive situations or disciplines i.e., interviews, academic/business discussions, law, medicine, psychology, business, economics, engineering, education, etc., he would do so only at the risk of inviting scornful laughter. For example, no court of law would consider mitigating a punishment in consideration of the punishment a ‘sinner’ is deemed to suffer in afterlife, either in hell or in any other so-called life forms. Let alone considering the possibility of retributive justice in afterlife, even a mere suggestion of such a prospect would be treated as a sign of unbelievable naivety. Yet, the very same people, if gathered at their respective holy place- temple, church or mosque, will believe afterlife as more concrete than the lived life. But this is quite normal and sane, you know!
Let’s look for some more examples to understand how a multitude of things being considered absurd in real life are treated as holy truths in the area of religion. The followers of both monotheistic and polytheistic religions consider heaven and hell as real places. As we know, even Buddhists believe in heaven and hell although they talk about being reborn on this planet in any of the numerous animal forms, not excluding other realms like the so-called pretha loka. However, strangely, none of these believers hope to discover where the heaven or hell is located; no globetrotter has ever evinced any interest in paying a visit to either heaven or hell to see those places and their inhabitants. Nobody who is not out of his mind would hope to find them using a telescope or by digging the earth, though heaven and hell are sure to be somewhere in the sky and in the dark depths of the earth, as we have been made to believe, respectively, from infancy.
Our ancestors literally believed in the existence of these two terrains, heaven and hell, when religion was an indivisible part of their day-to-day life, just as science and scientific thinking are inseparable from modern life. They had never doubted the existence of either heaven or hell although they couldn’t see them. However, with science shedding more and more light on areas of knowledge over which religion had used to wield absolute authority, people have begun to be torn between new knowledge, questioning those religious claims, on one hand, and their long-preserved faith in unverified ‘realities’, on the other hand.
Today, as Sri Lankans, we have become much more sophisticated than we used to be with regard to, not only religion, but also ordinary issues like, for example, politics. People’s maturity was tested recently when in two instances, Buddhism was supposedly slighted by two persons. People are practicing tolerance thanks to secular discourse. Therefore, the relative calm with which the general public have begun to treat religion, i.e., as something increasingly being exploited as a divisive tool by unscrupulous politicians and their sycophants for political gain, we can be optimistic about ushering in a society of enduring peace, resulting from a more objective understanding of this phenomenon called religion.
More importantly, people in general, have realised that their lives have become topsy-turvy because of wily politics and that they have to engage in real life issues instead of the “other worlds”, which politicians are most keen to transport us to, with the promise of unparalleled luxury.
The bottom-line is, no human institution, principle, ideology or concept by itself – be it race, religion, nation, democracy, etc., however much idolized or sanctified it may be, is above human beings and their collective wellbeing. All else are means to it, not ends.
Susantha Hewa
Opinion
The policy of Sinhala Only and downgrading of English
In 1956 a Sri Lankan politician riding a great surge of populism, made a move that, at a stroke, disabled a functioning civil society operating in the English language medium in Sri Lanka. He had thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
It was done to huge, ecstatic public joy and applause at the time but in truth, this action had serious ramifications for the country, the effects have, no doubt, been endlessly mulled over ever since.
However, there is one effect/ aspect that cannot be easily dismissed – the use of legal English of an exact technical quality used for dispensing Jurisprudence (certainty and rational thought). These court certified decisions engendered confidence in law, investment and business not only here but most importantly, among the international business community.
Well qualified, rational men, Judges, thought rationally and impartially through all the aspects of a case in Law brought before them. They were expert in the use of this specialised English, with all its meanings and technicalities – but now, a type of concise English hardly understandable to the casual layman who may casually look through some court proceedings of yesteryear.
They made clear and precise rulings on matters of Sri Lankan Law. These were guiding principles for administrative practice. This body of case law knowledge has been built up over the years before Independence. This was in fact, something extremely valuable for business and everyday life. It brought confidence and trust – essential for conducting business.
English had been developed into a precise tool for analysing and understanding a problem, a matter, or a transaction. Words can have specific meanings, they were not, merely, the play- thing of those producing “fake news”. English words as used at that time, had meaning – they carried weight and meaning – the weight of the law!
Now many progressive countries around the world are embracing English for good economic and cultural reasons, but in complete contrast little Sri Lanka has gone into reverse!
A minority of the Sinhalese population, (the educated ones!) could immediately see at the time the problems that could arise by this move to down-grade English including its high-quality legal determinations. Unfortunately, seemingly, with the downgrading of English came a downgrading of the quality of inter- personal transactions.
A second failure was the failure to improve the “have nots” of the villagers by education. Knowledge and information can be considered a universal right. Leonard Woolf’s book “A village in the Jungle” makes use of this difference in education to prove a point. It makes infinitely good politics to reduce this education gap by education policies that rectify this important disadvantage normal people of Sri Lanka have.
But the yearning of educators to upgrade the education system as a whole, still remains a distant goal. Advanced English spoken language is encouraged individually but not at a state level. It has become an orphaned child. It is the elites that can read the standard classics such as Treasure Island or Sherlock Holmes and enjoy them.
But, perhaps now, with the country in the doldrums, more people will come to reflect on these failures of foresight and policy implementation. Isn’t the doldrums all the proof you need?
by Priyantha Hettige
Opinion
GOODBYE, DEAR SIR
It is with deep gratitude and profound sorrow that we remember Mr. K. L. F. Wijedasa, remarkable athletics coach whose influence reached far beyond the track. He passed away on November 4, exactly six months after his 93rd birthday, having led an exemplary and disciplined life that enabled him to enjoy such a long and meaningful innings. To those he trained, he was not only a masterful coach but a mentor, a friend, a steady father figure, and an enduring source of inspiration. His wisdom, kindness, and unwavering belief in every young athlete shaped countless lives, leaving a legacy that will continue to echo in the hearts of all who were fortunate enough to be guided by him.
I was privileged to be one of the many athletes who trained under his watchful eye from the time Mr. Wijedasa began his close association with Royal College in 1974. He was largely responsible for the golden era of athletics at Royal College from 1973 to 1980. In all but one of those years, Royal swept the board at all the leading Track & Field Championships — from the Senior and Junior Tarbat Shields to the Daily News Trophy Relay Carnival. Not only did the school dominate competitions, but it also produced star-class athletes such as sprinter Royce Koelmeyer; sprint and long & triple jump champions Godfrey Fernando and Ravi Waidyalankara; high jumper and pole vaulter Cletus Dep; Olympic 400m runner Chrisantha Ferdinando; sprinters Roshan Fernando and the Indraratne twins, Asela and Athula; and record-breaking high jumper Dr. Dharshana Wijegunasinghe, to name just a few.
Royal had won the Senior & Junior Tarbats as well as the Relay Carnival in 1973 by a whisker and was looking for a top-class coach to mould an exceptionally talented group of athletes for 1974 and beyond. This was when Mr. Wijedasa entered the scene, beginning a lifelong relationship with the athletes of Royal College from 1974 to 1987. He received excellent support from the then Principal, late Mr. L. D. H. Pieris; Vice Principal, late Mr. E. C. Gunesekera; and Masters-in-Charge Mr. Dharmasena, Mr. M. D. R. Senanayake, and Mr. V. A. B. Samarakone, with whom he maintained a strong and respectful rapport throughout his tenure.
An old boy of several schools — beginning at Kandegoda Sinhala Mixed School in his hometown, moving on to Dharmasoka Vidyalaya, Ambalangoda, Moratu Vidyalaya, and finally Ananda College — he excelled in both sports and studies. He later graduated in Geography, from the University of Peradeniya. During his undergraduate days, he distinguished himself as a sprinter, establishing a new National Record in the 100 metres in 1955. Beyond academics and sports, Mr. Wijedasa also demonstrated remarkable talent in drama.
Though proudly an Anandian, he became equally a Royalist through his deep association with Royal’s athletics from the 1970s. So strong was this bond that he eventually admitted his only son, Duminda, to Royal College. The hallmark of Mr. Wijedasa was his tireless dedication and immense patience as a mentor. Endurance and power training were among his strengths —disciplines that stood many of us in good stead long after we left school.
More than champions on the track, it is the individuals we became in later life that bear true testimony to his loving guidance. Such was his simplicity and warmth that we could visit him and his beloved wife, Ransiri, without appointment. Even long after our school days, we remained in close touch. Those living overseas never failed to visit him whenever they returned to Sri Lanka. These visits were filled with fond reminiscences of our sporting days, discussions on world affairs, and joyful moments of singing old Sinhala songs that he treasured.
It was only fitting, therefore, that on his last birthday on May 4 this year, the Old Royalists’ Athletic Club (ORAC) honoured him with a biography highlighting his immense contribution to athletics at Royal. I was deeply privileged to co-author this book together with Asoka Rodrigo, another old boy of the school.
Royal, however, was not the first school he coached. After joining the tutorial staff of his alma mater following graduation, he naturally coached Ananda College before moving on to Holy Family Convent, Bambalapitiya — where he first met the “love of his life,” Ransiri, a gifted and versatile sportswoman. She was not only a national champion in athletics but also a top netballer and basketball player in the 1960s. After his long and illustrious stint at Royal College, he went on to coach at schools such as Visakha Vidyalaya and Belvoir International.
The school arena was not his only forte. Mr. Wijedasa also produced several top national athletes, including D. K. Podimahattaya, Vijitha Wijesekera, Lionel Karunasena, Ransiri Serasinghe, Kosala Sahabandu, Gregory de Silva, Sunil Gunawardena, Prasad Perera, K. G. Badra, Surangani de Silva, Nandika de Silva, Chrisantha Ferdinando, Tamara Padmini, and Anula Costa. Apart from coaching, he was an efficient administrator as Director of Physical Education at the University of Colombo and held several senior positions in national sporting bodies. He served as President of the Amateur Athletic Association of Sri Lanka in 1994 and was also a founder and later President of the Ceylonese Track & Field Club. He served with distinction as a national selector, starter, judge, and highly qualified timekeeper.
The crowning joy of his life was seeing his legacy continue through his children and grandchildren. His son, Duminda, was a prominent athlete at Royal and later a National Squash player in the 1990s. In his later years, Mr. Wijedasa took great pride in seeing his granddaughter, Tejani, become a reputed throwing champion at Bishop’s College, where she currently serves as Games Captain. Her younger brother, too, is a promising athlete.
He is survived by his beloved wife, Ransiri, with whom he shared 57 years of a happy and devoted marriage, and by their two children, Duminda and Puranya. Duminda, married to Debbie, resides in Brisbane, Australia, with their two daughters, Deandra and Tennille. Puranya, married to Ruvindu, is blessed with three children — Madhuke, Tejani, and Dharishta.
Though he has left this world, the values he instilled, the lives he shaped, and the spirit he ignited on countless tracks and fields will live on forever — etched in the hearts of generations who were privileged to call him Sir (Coach).
NIRAJ DE MEL, Athletics Captain of Royal College 1976
Deputy Chairman, Old Royalists’ Athletics Club (ORAC)
Opinion
Why Sri Lanka needs a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Sri Lanka is now grappling with the aftermath of the one of the gravest natural disasters in recent memory, as Cyclone Ditwah and the associated weather system continue to bring relentless rain, flash floods, and landslides across the country.
In view of the severe disaster situation, Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne had to amend the schedule for the Committee Stage debates on Budget 2026, which was subsequently passed by Parliament. There have been various interpretations of Budget 2026 by economists, the business community, academics, and civil society. Some analyses draw on economic expertise, others reflect social understanding, while certain groups read the budget through political ideology. But with the country now trying to manage a humanitarian and economic emergency, it is clear that fragmented interpretations will not suffice. This is a moment when Sri Lanka needs a unified, responsible, and collective “national reading” of the budget—one that rises above personal or political positions and focuses on safeguarding citizens, restoring stability, and guiding the nation toward recovery.
Budget 2026 is unique for several reasons. To understand it properly, we must “read” it through the lens of Sri Lanka’s current economic realities as well as the fiscal consolidation pathway outlined under the International Monetary Fund programme. Some argue that this Budget reflects a liberal policy orientation, citing several key allocations that support this view: strong investment in human capital, an infrastructure-led growth strategy, targeted support for private enterprise and MSMEs, and an emphasis on fiscal discipline and transparency.
Anyway, it can be argued that it is still too early to categorise the 2026 budget as a fully liberal budget approach, especially when considering the structural realities that continue to shape Sri Lanka’s economy. Still some sectors in Sri Lanka restricted private-sector space, with state dominance. And also, we can witness a weak performance-based management system with no strong KPI-linked monitoring or institutional performance cells. Moreover, the country still maintains a broad subsidy orientation, where extensive welfare transfers may constrain productivity unless they shift toward targeted and time-bound mechanisms. Even though we can see improved tax administration in the recent past, there is a need to have proper tax rationalisation, requiring significant simplification to become broad-based and globally competitive. These factors collectively indicate that, despite certain reform signals, it may be premature to label Budget 2026 as fully liberal in nature.
Overall, Sri Lanka needs to have proper monitoring mechanisms for the budget. Even if it is a liberal type, development, or any type of budget, we need to see how we can have a budget monitoring system.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Whatever the budgets presented during the last seven decades, the implementation of budget proposals can always be mostly considered as around 30-50 %. Sri Lanka needs to have proper budget monitoring mechanisms. This is not only important for the budget but also for all other activities in Sri Lanka. Most of the countries in the world have this, and we can learn many best practices from them.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is essential for strengthening Sri Lanka’s fiscal governance and ensuring that public spending delivers measurable value. Such an office would provide an independent, data-driven mechanism to track budget implementation, monitor programme outcomes, and evaluate whether ministries achieve their intended results. Drawing from global best practices—including India’s PFMS-enabled monitoring and OECD programme-based budgeting frameworks—the office would develop clear KPIs, performance scorecards, and annual evaluation reports linked to national priorities. By integrating financial data, output metrics, and policy outcomes, this institution would enable evidence-based decision-making, improve budget credibility, reduce wastage, and foster greater transparency and accountability across the public sector. Ultimately, this would help shift Sri Lanka’s budgeting process from input-focused allocations toward performance-oriented results.
There is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in Sri Lanka’s economy, where export diversification, strengthened governance, and institutional efficiency become essential pillars of reform. Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is a critical step that can help the country address many long-standing challenges related to governance, fiscal discipline, and evidence-based decision-making. Such an institution would create the mechanisms required for transparency, accountability, and performance-focused budgeting. Ultimately, for Sri Lanka to gain greater global recognition and move toward a more stable, credible economic future, every stakeholder must be equipped with the right knowledge, tools, and systems that support disciplined financial management and a respected national identity.
by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera ✍️
-
Features5 days agoFinally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight
-
News7 days agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
News6 days agoCyclone Ditwah leaves Sri Lanka’s biodiversity in ruins: Top scientist warns of unseen ecological disaster
-
News7 days agoRising water level in Malwathu Oya triggers alert in Thanthirimale
-
Features5 days agoHandunnetti and Colonial Shackles of English in Sri Lanka
-
Business3 days agoCabinet approves establishment of two 50 MW wind power stations in Mullikulum, Mannar region
-
Business7 days agoSri Lanka betting its tourism future on cold, hard numbers
-
News6 days agoJetstar to launch Australia’s only low-cost direct flights to Sri Lanka, with fares from just $315^
