හූල්ගේ හාමදුරුවාදය
සියලු ආකාරයේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන් සිතන්නේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියේ අවසානය ළඟා වී ඇති බවයි. සිංහල බෞද්ධ රාජ්‍යය පිළිබඳ අදහස පරාජය වී ඇතැයි ඔවුන් සිතනවා. ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්‍ෂ සිංහල බෞද්ධ රාජ්‍යයක් ගොඩ නගාවි යැයි අප සිතූ බව ඔවුන්ගේ මතයයි. එහෙත් අප ජනාධිපතිවරණයට පෙර සිට ම කියා ඇත්තේ මේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුව ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක් කිරීමටවත් නුසුදුසු බවයි. රාජපක්‍ෂලා පොදුවේ ගත්කල දේශීය දැනුම ගැන විශ්වාසයක් තැබුවේ නැහැ. පහුගිය කාලයේ රසායනික පොහොර තහනම් කෙළේ දේශීය ගොවිතැනකට පදනම දැමීමට නොව පුංචි බණ්ඩාගේ වුවමනාවට ඩොලර් ටිකක් ඉතුරු කර ගැනීමට පමණයි. වකුගඩු රෝගය ගැන ආණ්ඩුව ක්‍රියා කෙළේ බටහිර වෙදමහතුන්ට අවශ්‍ය ආකාරයට. අප කියන විධියට වැඩ කිරීමට නොහැකි බව මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ කියා ඇති අතර බැසිල් රාජපක්‍ෂ කිවුවේ අප ප්‍රීමා සමාගමෙන් මුදල් අරගෙන ආසනික් ගැන කතා කරන බවයි. වකුගඩු රෝගය හා රසායනික පොහොර අතර සම්බන්ධයක් ඇතැයි රාජපක්‍ෂලා විශ්වාස නොකළ බවට හොඳම උදාහරණය ඔවුන් අවුරුදු කිහිපයක් ඒ පොහොර ගොවීන්ට නොමිලයේ ලබාදීමයි.
එසේ වූුණත් මේ ආණ්ඩුව හා යහපාලන ආදී එ ජා ප ප්‍රමුඛ
රාජ්‍යය අතර ජාතිකත්වය සම්බන්ධයෙන් වෙනසක් තියෙනවා. එය බටහිරයන් ඒ ඒ ආණ්ඩු ගැන
දක්වන සැලකිල්ල අනුවත් පෙනෙනවා. බටහිරයන්ට මහින්ද හා ගෝඨාභය ගෙදර යැවීමට අවශ්‍යයි.
පඬි නැට්ටන් කෙසේ කීවත් රනිල් ආණ්ඩුවට එකතු වී ඇත්තේ රාජපක්‍ෂලා රකින්න නොව රාජපක්‍ෂලා
ගෙදර යැවීමටයි. ඔහුට අවශ්‍ය විජේදාස රාජපුර හෙවත් රාජපක්‍ෂ යොදා ගෙන විසිඑක මගින්
ජනාධිපති බලතල කප්පාදු කර බලය තම අතට ගැනීමටයි. අද පොහොට්ටුව කටයුතු කළ යුත්තේ
ඉක්මණින් ම රනිල් හා විජේදාස ගෙදර යැවීමටයි.
සියලු සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන් උත්සාහ කරන්නේ
සියලු වැරදි රාජපක්‍ෂලා පිට පැටවීමටත් ආර්ථික අර්බුදය ගෝඨාභයගේ වැරදි නිසා සිදු වූ
බව කියා සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියට පහර දීමටයි. ආර්ථික අර්බුදය අප අවුරුදු හැත්තැපහක්
පමණ අධිපරිභෝජනය බොරු ෂෝක් හා බොරු උගත්කම
ගැන පුරසාරම් දෙඩීම නිසා ඇති වුවක් මිස රාජපක්‍ෂලා හොරකම් කළ නිසා ඇති වුවක් නො
වෙයි. මේ චෝදනාව අසන සෑම අවස්ථාක මට හිතෙන්නේ රාජපක්‍ෂලා මෙන තරම් මෝඩයන් ද කියා. 2005
සිට 2015 දක්වා ඔවුන්ට මීට වඩා තුන් හතර ගුණයක් හොරකම්
කර එකල ම රට ප්‍රපාතයට හෙලන්න තිබුණා. අද ප්‍රශ්නයට මුල අප සිංහල බෞද්ධ
සංස්කෘතියෙන් ඇත්වීමයි. එයට ඊනියා ලිබරල්වාදීන්, පැරණි වම, වමක් නැති වමාලා, ජෙප්පන් හා සෙප්පන්, වෘත්තීය සමිති, බටහිර
ක්‍රිස්තියානි ආධිපත්‍යය, තකතීරු
අධ්‍යාපනය වග කියන්න ඕන.
අද මිනිසුන් තෙල් පෝලීමේ ගැස් පෝලිමේ ඉන්න නිසා
සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන් ඒ සියල්ල සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය නිසා වූ බව කියමින් සිංහල
බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය විනාශ කිරීමට කටයුතු කරනවා. එයට සිංහල බෞද්ධයන් ම බොහෝ විට
හාමුදුරුවරුන් ම යෙදා ගන්නවා. ආතල්ගමේ අරමුණ සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය නැති කිරීම
බැරි නම් එයට හිමි සුවිශේෂත්වය ලබා නොදීම. ගෝඨා ගෝ පිටුපස ඇත්තේ බුද්ධ ගෝ යන්නයි.
පහත සඳහන් ලිපිය රත්නජීවන් හුල් විසින් පසුගිය
විසිවැනි දා (ඊයේ) කලම්බු ටෙලිග්‍රාෆ්
වෙබ් අඩවියේ පළ කළ එකක්. එය සිංහලට පරිවර්තනය කිරීමට මා උත්සාහ කරන්නේ නැහැ. ඔහු
මෙහි දී හාමදුරුවාදය හා යුක්තිවේදය (deontology ) ගැන
කියනවා. හූල් විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිසමේ හා මැතිවරණ කොමිසමේ සේවය කර
තියෙනවා. ඔහු දෙමළ ක්‍රිස්තියානි බැතිමතෙක්. ඔහු එවැනි තනතුරු දරා ඇති නමුත්
කියන්නේ මෙරට දෙමළ කතාකරන ජනයාට තැනක් නැති බවයි. හූල්ලා හූල්ලන්නේ තමන්ට මෙරට
රාජ්‍ය නායකයා වීමට නොහැකි යැයි සිතන බැවින්. පොන්නම්බලම් රාමනාදන් ඉංගිරිසින්
යටතේ හිමිකර ගත් නායකත්වය ඔවුන් හැමදාමත් අපේක්‍ෂා කළා.
හූල් කියන්නේ මෙරට ප්‍රශ්න හාමදුරුවාදය නිසා
ඇති වූ බවයි. මා පාසල් වියේ සිට ම දන්නා දෙයක් නම් සිංහල නොවන අයට හාමුදුරුවො කියා
උච්චාරණය කිරීම අපහසු බවයි. ඔවුන්ට කියැවෙන්නෙ හාමදුරුවො කියා. සමහරවිට ඔවුන් හාම
කියාත් කියනවා. හූල්ට අනුව යුක්තිවේදය බයිබලය කුරානය ව්‍යවස්ථාව වැනි පොත්පත්වල
තියෙනවා. ඔහු ත්‍රිපිටකයවත් ජාතක පොතවත් සඳහන් කරන්නේ නැහැ. ඔහුට අනුව අද
හාමදුරුවාදය ඇංග්ලිකන් ක්‍රිස්තියානි පල්ලියටත් රිංගලා. අද බිෂොප්ලා සියලු
නොපණත්කම් කරන්නේ යුක්තිවේදය පසෙක දමා හාමදුරුවාදය අනුව කටයුතු කරන නිසා.
මෙරට අවුරුදු දෙදහස් තුන්සියකට වැඩි කාලයක්
ජාතිය හදා ඇත්තේ හාමුදුරුවරුන් බව හූල් අමතක කරනවා. ඔහුගේ සංස්කෘතිය මෙරටට පැමිණ
අවුරුදු දෙසීයක් පමණයි. ඔහුගේ පරම්පරාව මෙරටට පැමිණ ඇත්තේ අවුරුදු තුන්සිය පනහකට
මෙපිට. බටහිරයන්ගේ හා ඔවුන්ගේ ගැත්තන් සියලු දෙනාගේ වෛරය ඇත්තේ හාමුදුරවරුන්
සමගයි. ඔවුන්ට තමන් මෙරට පාලනය කළත් අප තම අණසක යටතට ගැනීමට නොහැකි වූයේ හාමුදුරුවරුන් නිසයි. ඒ බව
බ්‍රවුන්රිග් ප්‍රසිද්ධියේ ම කියා තියෙනවා. අද ඔවුන්ට ඇත්තේ නන්දිකඩාල් පරාජයේ
පළිය ගැනීමයි. රාජපක්‍ෂලා ගෙදර යැවීම පිටුපස එය තියෙනවා.
මේ ලිපිය සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගේ අවධානයට යොමු විය යුතු
ය කියා මා හිතනවා. ලිපිය සිංහලට පරිවර්තනය කර ඉදිරිපත්කරන්නකුට මා කෘතඥ වෙනවා.
Hamaduru Ethics Or Deontology?
The Challenge Before Modern Sri Lankans
The Two Major Foundations of Ethics: Hamaduruism and Deontology
In ethics there are two major branches. This article argues that
Sri Lanka is overwhelmed by just one of these, Hamaduru Ethics – with apologies
to the few upright Hamadurus who do not fit this generalization. Most of us
practise this. It is formally known as Utilitarian Ethics. It is the norm for
people in authority such as Hamadurus, village headmen, and other religious
leaders (especially in free churches where the pastor is god). Their authority
carries their decisions, and its basis is utility – which often in Sri Lanka is
the majority group’s utility. It is used to suppress dissent of any kind, and
aggrandize privileges for themselves, going so far as murdering minorities.
In Hamaduru Ethics we examine how many people are benefitted by
an ethics decision and how many adversely. On these considerations, we decide
on what is good for the majority and that becomes the right thing for us to do.
The Sinhala-only Act, the non-implementation of the 13th Amendment, the impunity as well as the pardoning
of those who murdered Tamils, the multi-billion thefts in government, and the
self-rewarding by politicians like giving themselves cars, huge salaries and
their wives jobs as their Personal Assistants, are all signs of the dominant
hold that Hamaduru Ethics has on Sri Lanka – there is no formal ethics in these
Hamaduru-like decisions bereft of morality. Hamadurus plant temples in Tamil
areas and supervise the beating up of minorities in the name of religion. It
allows us to go by the will of the majority. Hamaduru ethics therefore tends to
be arbitrary and unfair and ignores all human rights considerations. Even our
Supreme Court of political appointees protects the system. Good Sinhalese
rooted in the law are sidelined. An example is the late Elmore Perera. Others
(the good cowards) are cowed into silence.
Negation of Hamaduruism
A real incident from the Chino Police Station in California is
used as an argument against Utilitarianism or Hamaduruism (Taken from Hoole,
Hoole and Hoole, Ethics for Professionals: An Internationalist,
Human Rights Perspective, Cognella Press, San Diego, 2018). A woman
who had been assaulted complained to the Chino police who insisted she should
undress and allow photos to be taken in various postures of her injuries. These
photographs were then reproduced and circulated among other policemen who
derived much pleasure from them. The complainant went to the US Court of
Appeals and prevailed over the police. However, the utilitarian absurdly argues
that the complainant’s violation of rights was far outweighed by the pleasure
derived by the many policemen who had viewed her nude photographs. Reductio ad absurdum; quod erat demonstrandum.
[The thesis of Hamaduruism has been reduced to the absurd; its error
demonstrated]. But that was in America with a strong judiciary, and this is Sri
Lanka without dispassionate thinking among the people. Indeed, a Supreme Court
Justice defended in open court the murder of a 12-year old in the Bindunuwewa
Massacre. Who in Sri Lanka protested?
Deontology
In contrast to Hamaduruism stands deontology – the ethics basis
where we look at an authoritative book to decide what is right – the Bible, the
Koran, law books, the constitution, ethics codes (yes there are such things),
etc. It is the way of the modernist, repeatable decisions stripped of personal
prejudice. This is why deontologists are called “The People of the Book.”
The diminution and destruction of Sri Lanka are owed to
Hamaduruism – violation of the judicial process by the massacres and
necrophilia on the beaches of Mullivaikal by Sri Lanka’s “heroic soldiers” who
were subsequently promoted to the highest offices of our land, promotions of
politically pliant judges, the sacking of Supreme Court Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, finding, the late irrepressible
lawyer Elmore Perera in contempt of court based on the
vague and flimsy “rude body language,” the pardoning of convicted murderers,
the looting of the treasury through the bond scam and bribery, etc.
These outrages including the numerous anti-Tamil riots
accompanied by murders and looting had the support of the 6.9 million people
who voted for Gotabaya Rajapaksa. These events reeking of barbarism and
savagery made the primitive majority of Sri Lankans (6.9 million in numbers!)
happy. They were therefore sound ethical decisions by the yardstick of
Hamaduruism.
Deontology protects us and the truth. For example, after I wrote
about how the Church had approved Rs. 10 million each in cars for church
officials, Bishop Dhilo Canagasabey ruled under Hamaduruism at the
Standing Committee on which I was a member, that information from the committee
must never go out. I asked him “By what rule?” The matter ended there in a
triumph for deontology. Unfortunately, the new Bishop, Dushantha Rodrigo, also is going by the same secrecy rule
imposed through fear. If a committee is honest in its work, it must not fear
public scrutiny. Good sense tells us what is not to be talked about. It should
never be a cover for misgovernance. Suppression of information is usually to
hide unethical practices, even by Bishops.
Hamaduru Appointment of Incompetent Archdeacon
Right now, a Marxist who prefaces everything he says with “God’s
Kingdom Greetings” has been appointed Archdeacon of Jaffna in the Anglican
Church. He is big on talk but lacks common sense and Christian knowledge. He
says in his assorted messages that
a) “Until the advent of colonialism there was peace between
religions in our land,”
b) “the church is a cult” (A cult by Merriam-Webster Dictionary is a ‘religion regarded
as unorthodox or spurious.’) His diocesan council resolution declaring the
Anglican Church a cult received Bishop Rodrigo’s assent and thereby became
official policy,
c) “We must replace Jesus with God,” – that is, move from a
Christocentric Faith to a Theocentric Faith,
d) “You are saying ‘Jesus is coming, Jesus is coming,’ but he
has come and gone,”
e) “Your going to heaven depends on whether you did more good
than bad,” and
f) Jesus was born into the ordinary family of Mary and Joseph
and did not come from the skies.”
He has denied saying some of these things but my wife has or I
have heard him.
We can argue. For no one has a faith thrust upon him. However, a
church is a community of believers of shared faith voluntarily coming together
and is governed by a constitution. These 6 statements are all a violation of
deontology, against the Constitution of the Church. Anglican Deontology rests
on it. Therefore, the Archdeacon is totally unfit as an Anglican leader and was
dumped on Jaffna because of personal friendship with the Bishop. It was a
Hamaduru decision to make an unfit person our Archdeacon – a person who
probably is amply qualified to be a Hindu priest if Hindus want him. The
Bishop’s decision follows the pattern of the Rajapaksas using Tamils to reward
Douglas Devananda by making him a Tamil Minister.
K.T. Ganeshalingam
The worst example of Hamaduru management was 19th June, 2022. As
President of the Jaffna Christian Union, this Archdeacon invited Prof. K.T.
Ganeshalingam who was elected Dean of Arts in Jaffna. That same faculty had
successfully campaigned to defeat The Rev. Fr. Dr. G. Pilendran asking how a
Christian can head a Jaffna University faculty. The same people have now
elected as Dean this man Ganeshalingam. Something surely is wrong with Jaffna
because of who Ganeshalingam is. Who is he?
Ganeshalingam’s wife (about 20 years ago) went on a pilgrimage
to India arranging for a minor girl from the hill country to see to “his
needs.” She became pregnant. He took her for an abortion but the period for a
legal abortion was passed. The police took him into custody. He was a big shot
in the Tigers’ Pongu Thamil extravaganzas. The Tigers had no sense of
deontology. When their own man in Valvettithurai made his daughter’s friend
pregnant, they put him in a bunker for three months and then chased him off to
India.
But when some three workmen unrelated to the Tigers going to a
Tiger camp made some girls there pregnant, the workmen were asked to lie on the
street and shot in the back a la the army’s
Mullivaikal style massacres. The women were Kadal Purakkal (the
Tigers’ female naval force of Sea Pigeons). They lived in their Valvettithurai
camp that was a former army camp the Tigers had taken over. The matter incensed
the Tigers who were pretending to sexual purity. The women were also presumably
killed. However, I am unable to verify this.
Now the Tigers had their man behind bars for the statutory rape
of minor. His conviction would have deflated Pongu Thamil. They successfully
persuaded the legal system in which they had a hand to release Ganeshalingam.
Women’s groups tried hard to make Ganeshalingam pay. They failed. They regret
to this day that they could not stand up against the Tigers.
Ganeshalingam is a big man in Jaffna now, invited everywhere for
everything. He was invited to St. James’ Church Nallur today (19 June) to speak
on “The Role of Religious Bodies in the Present Politico-Economic Circumstances
– A viewpoint.” What a guy to preach to Religious Bodies – especially a
Christian Church. Fortunately, the event attracted only about 10 persons as
many in Church had come to know of the man and his exploits.
Thus it was that Ganeshalingam stood before the St. James’
Church altar and held forth about the Tiger days when we managed despite the
embargo, how we bicycled when there was no fuel, and talked a lot about himself
and became a hero to the few young Christians present who knew nothing of his
jailbird days, or of the time of the Tigers’ rule, all subject to manipulated
heritage histories. He said it is time for a revolution. Our Archdeacon seems
to realize his vision for “Liberation Theology” through a return to the days of
Tiger misrule and oppression using Ganeshalingam as his cat’s paw.
In fact, the church is truly ruled by Hamaduruism because our
Church Constitution’s Chapter 25, Canons 1 and 2, separate church property
“from the common uses of mankind” (like a public seminar by a Hindu
child-abuser in front of the altar). It also separates by Canon 9 the use of
church buildings and furniture which are granted for “the celebration of
services.”
At the Cathedral, the Bishop’s seat in Colombo, food is served,
and concerts held in Hamaduru style violating the awe and reverence for God
that private worshippers in church come for. The Sri Lankan nation is
intrinsically lawless, going just by the unprosecuted murders of Tamils. So the
Sinhalese Church goes Hamaduru style, lawlessly ignoring our constitution with
parties and Ganeshalingams inside church. Being yoked to the Sinhalese hurts
the Tamil people’s sense of good governance and commitment to deontology. What
our Hamaduru Bishops started has now spread to Jaffna churches after this
Archdeacon was appointed. The Sinhalese style is not welcome here by Christians
used to reverence in Church, and have a tradition of deontology – we read the
Constitution for decisions. Our churches are not canteens or dining halls as
the Bishop’s Cathedral is.
The Sacking of the Jaffna Archdeacon and Resignation of Bishop
Rodrigo
Deontologically this Archdeacon of Jaffna needs to be
disciplined. He is the Bishop’s representative in Jaffna. As such he ensures
that other priests are going by deontological administration. Yet he cannot do
simple things under him right. He had a parish AGM that lacked the
constitutionally required notice. The Accounts were sneaked in at the last
minute; with what mistakes and camouflaged frauds I do not know. He had an
anonymous resolution for a new diocese and Anglican Province that the Church
Secretary in Colombo, Arun Gamalatge, wanted. He had no proposer or seconder.
How can Bishop Rodrigo whose best appointee cannot correctly
administer a small parish, administer a Province? I believe the Bishop stopped
the AGM after I protested but few know that. He really had no choice, given the
deontologically justified illegalities. Now the Bishop has true choice in sacking
the man and rectifying his error in making that terrible appointment.
For all these lapses Bishop Rodrigo should also resign,
including for not revising the Tamil prayerbook. He has ignored a diocesan
resolution from some 4 years ago for immediate revision. That prayerbook forces
us Tamils to address God as “him without purity.” Would the Sinhalese have
tolerated such an uncorrected mistake in their prayerbook? He could have, but
failed to order the parishes to cross-out that blasphemous line by hand.
I state that Bishop Rodrigo is insensitive to Tamils and our
needs, and has acted illegally in not “immediately” revising the prayerbook.
These make a strong case for a separate Anglican Church for Tamils. Retired
Bishop Kenneth Fernando, like the Sinhalese communalists who tell Tamils “Go to
India if you do not like it here,” suggested that Tamils should join the Church
of South India. That CSI is unable to pay pensions to its retired clergy. Is it
a case of getting rid of us from the Church so as to keep all of the Rs. 20
billion wealth of the Church in investments alone for the Sinhalese?
Contempt: Are our Courts Administered by Hamadurus or
Deontologists:
Sri Lankan institutions suffer from Hamaduruism. No one dares to
question a chairman. Committees instead of advising and correcting a chairman,
affirm all decisions by the chair, thereby giving democratic cover to illegal
operations. Even auditors and the Supreme Court fulfil the same function. An
ongoing example is the experience of Naganada Kodituwakku. Rightly or wrongly he has accused 10
justices including the Chief Justice of Bribery. In a separate case he asked
that one of the other judges handle the case since her sitting in judgement
would violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
which we have acceded to. It guarantees a free and fair access to justice. The
CJ has been refused so far, but Kodituwakku being Kodituwakku keeps hammering
the justices on this. Our Supreme Court according to the Constitution in the
highest court. Its decisions on contempt matters are final. However,
questioning the Supreme Court is not a misapplication of deontology. For, ICCPR
runs counter to the Constitution of Sri Lanka which guarantees us a fair trial.
To argue “I am the Chief Justice. I can decide if you are in contempt” is
Hamaduruism. Nothing is lost by the Chief Justice’s recusal. A lot is lost in
the appearance of fairness and by our democracy when recusal is refused. Good
sense must prevail.
The right to appeal to a higher body is badly abused using
Hamaduruism. So much so it is common knowledge that a judge in Trincomalee
harshly keeps insulting in open court a litigant and his lawyer who
successfully appealed to the High Court. The two judges who heard the appeal
impugned the judge’s decision as “rubbish” and ordered the judge to conduct an
inquiry before taking a decision again. According to an affidavit filed before
the Bar Council by young lawyer Prashandini Uthayakumar, this judge gave a
decision in her favour in open court, and then rewrote it in his chambers
because he is partial to a lawyer on the other side. Two other lawyers, R.
Thirukumaranathan and Mohan Nagarajah, have also given separate affidavits on
this judge’s partiality.
Will the Bar Council go with Deontology or Hamaduruism? If it
goes for Hamaduruism and does nothing to the judge such as debarment, will the
judge now begin ruling against the three lawyers in all their cases? That is
the fear that lawyers have in crossing this judge. Judicial bullying from the
bench attacking those who appeal against a decision is really what brings
contempt upon the judiciary and all its judgements.
The Future
Unfortunately, the Christian church, the source of deontology
has sunk into Hamaduruism. The Bishops and church elders had better straighten
out this mess we have instead of creating and administering a province through
their home-grown incompetent leadership we have. They must stop refusing to
appoint anyone good to church office who points out the leadership’s faulty
decisions.
The Sri Lankan nation should begin educating at the school level
our children so that they are passionately for deontology and the rule of law,
and totally against Hamaduruism. This means children must be avid readers to
implement deontology. Or we will have political suck-ups and sycophants as our
justices, attorneys-general who will file selective charges rather than by the
book, administrators who do what they like for their friends and suck-ups
rather than what is best for institution they administer, ministers who steal,
and churches and universities full of sexual predators.
Till then we will have leaders wearing shallow insignias of
western sophistication. They will know only the bailas in Los Angeles, own
mansions in the West (from our stolen money of course), swig whiskey, toast
with wine, chant in Latin and throw about Latin phrases in court, and speak
English. But they will be glorified Hamadurus in fact.
