http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/07/the-agnostics-vs-the-believers-regarding-karma-reincarnation-nirvana-as-described-in-buddhism-being-real-aspects-of-this-world/comment-page-2/#comment-1858

You’ll find other people there- secular Sinhalese- who may agree with your ideas. I’m hoping to show you that things are not as simply “Sinhalese vs Tamils” as you may think.

“To give a very quick response, it is precisely my religious Buddhist identity which sparked a sense of outrage within me after reading about what’s happening in Keerimalai. Perhaps if I were an agnostic like you or Agnos, I wouldn’t feel anything as I would consider Hindu customs to be superstitious foolishness (one of you ridiculed the practice of cremation in UK). But as a Buddhist, who does not share these customs, I can still empathize as I can ask myself how I would feel if my customs were being trampled upon in this manner.”

I admire your stand on this matter; however, I do not feel that one has to be religious in any sense to feel like you do! If one is a democrat and believes in freedom would feel exactly the same. I respect customs that do not undermine freedom, equality, and progression. Rituals and scattering ash in Keerimali Sea is an ancient custom of the Jaffna Hindu Tamils that was being practiced unhindered for centuries. Though I class myself as an Atheist, I too participated in these rituals; it is important to maintain customs and a sense belonging in a family and community.

“I would further argue that it is not Buddhism nor Buddhist identity which is threatening these Tamil Hindu traditions, but rather the disregard and ignorance of these traditions by Sinhalese.”

I disagree; I would say that, such ignorance and disregard is politicised and institutionalised within government machinery. This is why; there is nothing one can do about it!

““Secularizing” Sri Lanka will not cure this mentality. If Mahinda or Gotabhaya were in front of me right now, I would demand to know why any Buddhist would tolerate this behavior.”

A secular country does not mean intolerance towards religious practices and customs at all. A secular constitution and governance in a multi-faith and multi-cultural country can treat all equal. It is beyond clear that the Buddhist hardliners have been given free hand to do anything that they wish within the North and East; this will not be possible under a secular constitution. You can ask MR and GR whatever you like, but the Tamils will be Second Class nonetheless!

“my criticism is not directed at the ‘Rajapaksa phenomenon’ per se, but the crimes of the State, starting from when Srimavo was the PM.”

Why not start with SWRD Bandaranaike, who started Sinhala-Only and presided over the 1956 and 58 riots? Why exclude him?

My problem with pinning everything on “the State,” as opposed to individual leaders, is that it doesn’t delve very deeply into the nature of anti-minority politics nor does it lend itself to a solution. What should we do, not have a State and be like Afghanistan or Somalia?

In my view, there is no such thing as the Sri Lankan “State.” It died in 1972 with the Republican Constitution. What you have instead are a series of Regimes dominated by individual personalities.

You pointed out that Sinhalese such as myself underestimate the role of Mrs B in producing the subsequent war (which I would strongly dispute- scholars like K.M. de Silva and Dayan Jayatilleka put the blame for the war largely on the Bandaranaikes/SLFP while minimizing the role of Jayawardene’s UNP). I would respond that I perceive that many Tamils on the internet appear to put the 1974 police baton charge on the same level as the 1977 or even 1983 riots, treating these events simply as items on a laundry list of grievances rather than phenomena that require probing study to prevent future occurrences.

“My memory goes back to 1984. I was at a market in Jaffna, the SLA suddenly came in armored vehicles and stayed there for a few hours, threatening and arresting ordinary youths passing by.”

Thank you very much for sharing your personal experience. I appreciate your patience in trying to get me to understand what you have been through. I am surprised though that you did not bring up the burning of Jaffna Library. Were you there at that time?

Here is a different experience from someone in 2010:
http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/07/jaffna-after-the-war-observations-by-a-visitor/

While some people are happy with the army others are not. Those who are happy say “The solders are now friendly with us, they even speak Tamil”. Others say, “We are afraid of the army. They come and question our young boys and girls who have retuned from IDP camps. These young people are not admirers of the LTTE. They feared the LTTE would drag them away from their homes and make them fight. Today they are happy there is no LTTE. But the army suspects them and keeps harassing them. We spend sleepless nights because it is at night that they come.”

Although it is obvious that Jaffna would be better with the SLA not there, the above description is very different from yours. The soldiers who are “friendly” now seem to be a far cry from the uniformed thugs whom you encountered in 1984. If the State is simply the State, how would you account for the differences?

“You can also go back to 1958, 1965, 1977 and 1983 to see that the crimes of the State against Tamil people did not start or gain momentum “only after the LTTE’s atrocities became intolerable”

What happened in 1965?

“Wijayapala asked you a question about Keerimali and Hindu custom; you have no idea as to what the Tamils have been going through.”

To give a very quick response, it is precisely my religious Buddhist identity which sparked a sense of outrage within me after reading about what’s happening in Keerimalai. Perhaps if I were an agnostic like you or Agnos, I wouldn’t feel anything as I would consider Hindu customs to be superstitious foolishness (one of you ridiculed the practice of cremation in UK). But as a Buddhist, who does not share these customs, I can still empathize as I can ask myself how I would feel if my customs were being trampled upon in this manner.

I would further argue that it is not Buddhism nor Buddhist identity which is threatening these Tamil Hindu traditions, but rather the disregard and ignorance of these traditions by Sinhalese. “Secularizing” Sri Lanka will not cure this mentality. If Mahinda or Gotabhaya were in front of me right now, I would demand to know why any Buddhist would tolerate this behavior.

“To me, ending suffering is an important priority. But somehow, the Buddhist version of ending suffering doesn’t quite do it for me. You know, looking at people and going, oh too bad for that dude’s karma, must have been a serial killer in his previous life, good lesson for all of us. Let’s just sit under a bo tree and meditate for Nibbana….They don’t even know what in the world they are paying for so they can never really correct themselves! Aaww… These universal laws are so unfair! Life sucks. Let’s meditate!…No thank you. I prefer suffering to end through provision of earthly comforts to those in need due to *no fault of their own*, followed by intellectual liberation.”

Yet again your incredible secular agnostic capacity for STRAW MAN arguments has rendered me speechless.

Clearly my knowledge of Buddhism is vastly inferior to yours, ***as I was never taught nor have I ever learned on my own that Buddhists are supposed to ignore the suffering and misfortune of others, or that Buddhists should look down on people because of their kamma.***

Apparently your knowledge of the Dhamma is so vast that it exceeds even the Buddha’s! As the Vinaya says, the Buddha and Ananda tended to sick monks that others ignored, saying “He who attends on the sick attends on me.”:

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma3/sick.html

I know it’s asking a great deal for a “secular rationalist” to cite evidence, but would it be possible for you to show me the exact teaching of the Buddha’s that tells us to be blissfully detached from others’ suffering?

And to take things further, could you share with us your personal experiences in providing “earthly comforts to those in need due to *no fault of their own*?” After all, you would never make an empty claim, right?

Let me turn your argument in your own face: why would secular agnostics who reject kamma and samsara have any interest in helping others, when they can use the time and effort on themselves? After all, we Buddhists are bound by the dogma that the effects of responding to or ignoring others’ suffering will manifest either in the same lifetime or a future birth. If I were in your place, I wouldn’t worry about any of these effects as everything would end with death. What did Epicurus say about altruism?

“In fact, current research bears out the notion quite well. Please read “The Happines Hypothesis: Finding modern truth in ancient wisdom” by Jonathan Haidt.”

Before I read this book, why don’t you cite some of this pathbreaking research?

“IMHO, The main priority for humankind should be finding out the reasons for our existence – i.e. Finding Yapa’s elephant. This is not a problem for Buddhists, because someone has already found it,”

Really, Mr. Straw Man? Who found the reasons for our existence, or whom do the Buddhists believe found them (since I clearly don’t know)? Certainly not the Buddha; the answers he generally gave to these kinds of questions gave the impression that he wasn’t interested in simple existence as compared with samsara, a condition which you do not accept (based on your faith).

“If you can point to anybody else who laid out the means to find the end of suffering without requiring faith”
End of suffering? Without requiring faith? Oh dear Wijayapala. I’m unable to compute as usual. Could you kindly explain?

I already explained that Siddhartha Gautama clearly did not invoke any kind of faith to become a Buddha (whoops caught myself.. I almost referred to him incorrectly as THE Buddha), as there was no clear path for him to follow. He just tried different things- although not in a sporadic or undisciplined way- until he found something that worked. As a Buddhist I have to accept the tragedy that Siddhartha probably somewhat resembled you “unable to compute” secular agnostics, although his priorities were clearly different- finding the end to Dukkha.

“I already knew that!! Is this supposed to be the Fifth Noble Truth or something???”
If you already knew that, why do you keep demanding the same response?

Because you are?

“You can do better- you can provide evidence of your own to back YOUR claims! At least you can practice what you preach!”
Sure thing. What is it that you want me to back up? You don’t seem to fundamentally understand that an agnostic’s position can *never* be undermined. For the simple reason that they do not believe in anything if there is not enough *reason* to believe it.

What is your *reason* for believing that the mind is an illusion? You never explained that one, instead relying on your identity as secular agnostic to serve as an authority unto yourself (rather hypocritical given your tall claims of demanding evidence to accept things!).

“Current evidence? Our post-life responsibility is to provide nutrition to maggots.”

And here we come to the next weapon in the Secular Agnostic’s arsenal, Circular Logic:

1) Physical evidence is the only evidence we can accept, because

2) only physical phenomena are real, the rest are illusions;

3) our proof that only physical phenomena are real is that they’re the only evidence that we can accept…

“Thank you again for answering my own point. How did the Sinhala-Buddhists become the “single most powerful entity in SL?””
What other group makes up 70% of the population and are capable of making or breaking government?

Sigh.. as usual, you aren’t able to compute! I didn’t ask whether the Sinhala Buddhists are the “single most powerful entity in SL” but how they came to be.

“Read Dawkins. Hitler was a catholic.”

Instead of simply name-dropping, why don’t you list the arguments in favor of your position (here, that Hitler was a practicing Catholic)?

Wikipedia claims that Dawkins took Hitler’s statements out of context:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_views
In the below quote, the first two sentences are often left out, as has been done by Richard Dawkins,[33] for example, leaving the context to seem as if, as opposed to mocking Christianity and Christian belief, Hitler were making some public statement of his own embrace of Christianity. In response to Lerchenfeld, Hitler – feigning respect for Lerchenfeld – mocked both Lerchenfeld and Lerchenfeld’s beliefs and then skillfully turned the life of Jesus on its head for the purposes of furthering National Socialism. At the Bürgerbräukeller on April 12, 1922, Hitler said:

“I would like here to appeal to a greater than I, Count Lerchenfeld. He said in the last session of the Landtag that his feeling ‘as a man and a Christian’ prevented him from being an anti-Semite. I say: My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. .. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison.[34][35]”

“Stalin was an atheist. But *neither of them* killed in the name of atheism. But there have been enough wars where people have killed in the *name of religion*. Not a difficult point to grasp I believe.”

The least difficult point to grasp is Tool #3 in your Secular Agnostic box: Shifting the Context of the Argument When it Isn’t Going Your Way.

I asked what you guys would do if Buddhism in SL were threatened. You answered, “As for the secular rationalist brigade, they might not fight, no. Fighting, killing and murdering is best left to religious people,” stating that “secular rationalists” do not fight, kill, or murder people the way religious people do. I demonstrated that they most certainly do, in the name of “secular rationalist” belief systems like Naziism and Leninism-Stalinism.

“As absolutely reassuring as that is, I’m afraid that here I have to say that I don’t believe that you will.”
Doesn’t matter either way. But FYI, in that last thread, I was promoted to General by no other than Mr. Yapa over here. For fighting against the unethical Christians – no less! Now that I am ready to accept the Yapa-Godel synthesis, doubtless another promotion is due – maybe chief of Buddhist defense staff?

I entirely agree with your statement that your intentions/beliefs don’t matter. But is the rest of your above statement Tool #3 at work again?

“Please explain, in concrete, NON-ABSTRACT terms how Sri Lanka is not a “secular” or whatever you want country, how that is harming non-Buddhists, and what should be changed that will prevent this harm. Be SPECIFIC, and please avoid generalities that you can apply to any country.”
Currently. I think Sri Lanka looks good on paper as usual. First, I would like it to *at least stay that way*. In practice, we both know that this whole Sinhala-Tamil problem was at least partly fueled by the identity crisis of the Sinhalese. We both agreed that in turn was fueled at least partly by Buddhist paranoia. So that is clearly hurting Tamils – who are non-Buddhists. I don’t know how this harm can be prevented, but we can jolly well start by dismantling this insane conceit.

What “insane conceit” are you talking about?

The problem with your argument is that “this whole Sinhala-Tamil problem” is not the same now as it was before the war. The Tamils today are in no condition to threaten Buddhism (or anything else) largely thanks to V. Prabakaran’s destruction of Tamil society. This is certainly not to say that the Tamils ever had any hostile intent towards Buddhism, but simply to point out that even a complete idiot would be hard pressed to justify suppressing Tamils today.

“And I’ve repeatedly explained, we branched into this topic on Yapa’s claims of Buddhists being guardians of holy, absolute truths.”

What does any of this have to do with Akon? Akon’s rejection was primarily the result of Dr. Mervyn Silva wanting to settle a score with Sirasa TV, and the video provided a convenient excuse to hold a thug convention. Akon’s use of the Buddha statue explains why most people did not speak out against Mervyn’s actions- why defend something which you find to be insulting?

“As long as these delusions of grandeur persist, I fail to see how we can talk about secularism, without dismantling the conceit! Didn’t Yapa claim that religion and state cannot be separate, because that would be akin to separating the absolute truth from the state?”

What is your fixation with Yapa anyway? You seem far more interested in interacting with him than me or OTC. Do you consider us to be less Buddhists than Yapa is?

Yes. Who would dare separate the truth from the state eh?

“Didn’t you argue earlier that Kamma and rebirth were an essential part of Buddhism? How did it suddenly become something “directly observable by experience”?”

Uh, how are those two statements contradictory, and more importantly how did YOU resolve those contradictions?? After all, Sur pointed out your own claim that the Four Noble Truths- which inherently accept the phenomenon of samsara as the key problem- “are all understandable phenomena which can be subjected to a reasoned analysis based on our own observations.” (your words not mine)

Though the TNA should be condemned, there is a clear asymmetry between the TNA and the supporters of the regime which I stressed and which you seem to continue to ignore. So I won’t spend more time on that.

“Do you agree that the Rajapakse phenomenon “gained momentum” only after the LTTE’s atrocities became intolerable?”

This is clever wordplay, and though there is some truth in that more Sinhalese rallied behind the Rajapaksas after the LTTE’s actions during the ceasefire period, my criticism is not directed at the ‘Rajapaksa phenomenon’ per se, but the crimes of the State, starting from when Srimavo was the PM.

My memory goes back to 1984. I was at a market in Jaffna, the SLA suddenly came in armored vehicles and stayed there for a few hours, threatening and arresting ordinary youths passing by. I saw a youth being arrested by a SLA soldier– the soldier was pointing his gun to the youth’s head, forced him to face a wall where there was a bill containing Marxist slogans, along with advertisements. The soldier forced the youth at gun point to lick and remove the bill, without understanding any word of it–it was some harmless Marxist slogans in Tamil by one of the leftist groups then, likely the EPRLF. It was clear that the SLA was not arresting him for any crimes or based on any intelligence input, or even that he had stuck the bill there, but simply to humiliate a Tamil youth wearing a sarong and to ‘teach the youths a lesson.’ The people at the market looked on in stunned silence, visibly outraged. The LTTE by then was not well known at that time; it still had only a few people.
You can also go back to 1958, 1965, 1977 and 1983 to see that the crimes of the State against Tamil people did not start or gain momentum “only after the LTTE’s atrocities became intolerable.”

I won’t make further comments on Sangaree as it is pointless and a waste of time. I don’t think he has any political future as an independent and may seek to join the ITAK again. Such is politics.

Please read; an artcile on the following link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/04/sri-lanka-must-respect-war-memory

“I clearly see an AVERSION in you towards Sinhalese and especially those that are of the Buddhist world view.”

I have aversion towards all fundamentalists including the Tamil nationalism. In the Sri Lankan context, I do target the Sinhala Buddhist Chauvinists as I do not know as to when they will stop. The Tamil community is already under the impression, justifiably, that they are under a military rule. Then they see that the same military is planting Buddha statues in various places; this makes them feel vulnerable and helpless. I am all for creating conditions for people to move freely and settle wherever one wants to live; but, what has been happening in the North & East is an act of unleashing majorityism with impunity. What protections are there for Tamils to settle in Sinhala Heartlands?

The Sinhalese are the Majority and Buddhism is the majority religion; why do they need to behave in such a way? Don’t you think that what the GOSL is doing amounts subjugation of the Tamils than accommodating them with equal status? This is what you support under the guise of equal opportunity and status; you support majority views prevail come what may!

YOU SAID >>>>
—————–
“I pointed out with examples that the Sinhalese are getting preferential treatments while the IDPs languish with despair. You have no answers. The need of the hour for the GOSL and SLA is to plant Buddha statues wherever possible within the North & East. Big Sinhala only colonisation programs are afoot. If these activities do not amount to special treatment for the Sinhala I do not know what is! You made the claim that the Sinhala do not want special treatments but the reality is totally different.”

WHAT I SAID in Reply>>>> (ANSWER)
——————————————
The resettling of IDP should be the immeadiate priority of the government.

They the government must:

1. Verify or establish the identity of the person.
2. Issue Identity card for them if they don’t have one.
3. Establish next of kin of the person involved.
4. Work out where they originated.
5. Settle them with a proper land title and a way to live.

I don’t know whether you understood this BUT as I said I do not need the statement of giving foremost place for Buddhism in the constitution as it is a meaningless statement that appeared only in the 1972 Republican Constitution for the first time. It is just an electoral gimmick to fool the masses. Not effective therefore remove it. Buddhist us know what is the world view and life style we should follow.

YOU SAID>>>>>

“Wijayapala asked you a question about Keerimali and Hindu custom; you have no idea as to what the Tamils have been going through.”

MY ANSWER>>>>>>

Wijayapala,
ALL have the right to follow their religious festivals. I can not see and would not like to see any festival banned unless there is a National Security issue at stake. In which case it must take priority. THis by the way includes Buddhist festival as well…..

I SAID >>>>THE FOLLOWING ………….

“In Sri Lanka the head of state can be a NON-Buddhist. So How Does the executive give foremost place to Buddhism in such a scenario. That is when he is not a Buddhist himself.”………..

I gave this as an example to show the ineffectiveness of the Article 2 of the Sri Lankan Constitution. There is NO requirement for the President of Sri Lanka to be of a particular faith…(Eg: in United Kindom Queen is the head of state she is the head of the Anglican Church, In Thailand King is Buddhist, he is the head of state….) In Sri Lanka the president is elected on popular vote based on politics not religion. So there is a possibility that the President can be of a NON-Buddhist faith….IN THIS SCENARIO HOW DOES THE HEAD OF STATE GIVE FOREMOST PLACE TO BUDDHISM ????That was my question ?????

I clearly see an AVERSION in you towards Sinhalese and especially those that are of the Buddhist world view.

If you still have not worked this out yet:

I don’t support any community living under another community.
I don’t support any geography allocated excusively for any ethno-religious world view group.
No matter what they claim have been done against them by anyone.

I am ALL for Equal Opportunity for ALL.
I am ALL for merit based activities such as jobs , promotions and appointments.

ONE LAW FOR ALL. (This is how you create EQUALITY IN A MULTI-ETHNIC,CASTE, WORLD VIEW POPULATION and carry out the administration of that law diligently.–I AM ALL FOR IT)

“Well, I don’t think there was any coercion that forced the latter two into supporting the Rajapaksa regime and whitewashing and defending its crimes.”

The TNA’s collaboration with the LTTE similarly was not the product of coercion. If Sampanthan and Co. did not want to take Sangaree’s high road, they could have simply opted out of politics altogether. Instead, they became willing participants. Hence they should be held to the same standards as others (non-Tamils) whom you condemn.

“Given that the LTTE gained momentum only after the State’s atrocities became intolerable”

Do you agree that the Rajapakse phenomenon “gained momentum” only after the LTTE’s atrocities became intolerable?

“Until they do so, when they deal with the Rajapaksas as if nothing had happened, when they don’t condemn the regime for its crimes, their credibility will remain questionable.”

How would you compare Sangaree’s credibility with the TNA’s, taking into consideration that Sangaree asked the govt to avoid bombing the Vanni and supported a ceasefire to allow the people to escape?

“From then on, I was kind of estranged from all politics, though I continue to be an observer and have an emotional link to the struggle for justice by the Tamil people. Does it make me unprincipled?”

No, I was joking on that last bit about being unprincipled, although I was not joking about my curiosity regarding what you said at the TULF meetings as a 10-year old.