| by Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

( April 10, 2014, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) The proscription of Tamil organizations and individuals by the Sri Lankans Government has received strong criticism from many activists. But was this unexpected? Even if it was expected is it wrong or unjust? If yes, as per which Common Measure – Race or Terrorism? These are the questions that we as a community need to ask ourselves in order to ensure that our community has a better tomorrow – especially for young ones who seek to carry forward our values and feel self-sufficient whichever part of the world they may live in.

Taking the Australian organizations and individuals as an example, I am able to work out that some individuals have been left out even though they were openly active in helping the victims of war. I have learnt through my real life Australian experiences that when it comes to Natural ways – one cannot accurately assess why someone did what they did. In this instance – all those who claim to be ‘outsiders’ to the Sri Lankan Government – would not know the reason why the government proscribed. Hence I conclude that all those who do claim to know – are claiming to be insiders.

When we are truly insiders – we would know the reason why if we look within ourselves, but would not express it publicly unless we believe that that would be good for the family/organization/ country, as a whole. That is why we are insiders. Those who do express publicly for better or for worse without this higher purpose, are outsiders (even if they hold government positions and say words that they are high level Sri Lankans) and they need to take their position as equal outsiders. Many Australians of Sri Lankan origin – of various ethnicities who express reasons about the Sri Lankan Government or the LTTE that was Sri Lankan and not Australian, are worse than those who expressly take ‘outsider’ positions. They are the ones sitting on the fence – only to die without having lived.

Strong investors in an issue would identify with the real reason by either manifesting the outcomes directly or contributing strongly to a particular outcome. Those affected by the outcomes have equal right to express why they ‘believe’ something happened to them. To the extent they were not facilitated to participate in the manifestation of the outcome – they are entitled to express their belief as the reason they think it happened to them. Acts of God could be identified with as such, on the basis of experience, only if one believed. To the extent it is belief based – one would not reason through rights and wrongs / credits and debits. One would link the effect back to the cause. This cause could be natural and yet be unlawful. It’s natural when the perpetrator is not conscious of rights and wrongs through common measures. Hence the use of cause and effect – which would uphold any judgment through just laws.

When individuals/groups act naturally without being conscious of the cause – one could only identify with that cause but not mark rights and wrongs as if common measures had been used. Those who are genuinely affected would identify with the reason why. They would not take revenge or seek to punish, but share their Truth to strengthen the whole.

When I worked sincerely to develop democratic financial management systems at the University of New South Wales – I faced many challenges. No one directly responsible – demonstrated open support for me once the challenges became public. But through the manifestation of Holy Powder, Swami Sathya Sai Baba assured me that He was identifying with my work. That was a miracle I needed, to release myself from the falsity of a system that had long lost its way. The University, like the temple, had the unique authority to seek and find the Truth and publish it under its own authority. To the extent it received funds and human assistance from various sources, it needed to follow a common structure while making those discoveries. Until the University sought and found the Truth - it had the obligation to produce outcomes strictly within the rules of the common structure. It’s like in family. We may feel much affection for one individual over others holding equal/common positions. But when expressing ourselves – we need to consciously structure our expressions as per the status of the respective positions held. These structures are weakened when we express ourselves prematurely as the LTTE and other armed groups did in Sri Lanka. The courage to express ourselves comes from the Truth within. The Truth of the average Tamil was not strong enough to be expressed above the level of armed conflict.

When I felt persecuted – by the very managers who had the professional responsibility to include me as their junior, I felt alienated (as the proscribed Australian Tamils are likely to feel right now without the support of their Government) . This therefore gave me the moral right to express my belief – on the basis as to why I would do what they did. That is why we must do unto others what we would have them do unto us. I complained therefore on the basis of unlawful racial discrimination. The Administration and the Judiciary dismissed me. But not so the Court of Natural Justice whose Judgment was identified with by the outcomes that followed and identified with as being race related. The University suffered much damage to its reputation due to complaint by migrant students and staff who were still ‘outsiders’ to the Australian University system. They became the medium through which my belief that it was racial discrimination - was confirmed. The University spent millions of dollars as a consequence. I felt that my pain was heard and registered and the outcome was produced through the appropriate medium.

Likewise, later, when Mr. John Howard, then our Prime Minister who was sued by me, was present during 9/11 attack. Those who follow common laws are protected by their following. To the extent that system has the capacity to protect and support the contributors – that system would respond to their call, as per their investment. When a system lacks the capacity to support – and we continue to believe that it would – the belief is heard by the Court of Natural Justice. To the extent we continue to be attached to the outcomes from a particular source – we would not identify with the higher outcome – delivered by the Court of Natural Justice.

The discovery I made is also that - when there is no lawful reason but the interactions continue, the individuals/groups in authority start producing the objectively measurable evidence to confirm or reject the reason identified with through belief. To the extent Tamils for example believed that the civil riots were the outcomes of racial discrimination by the Sinhalese in Government, but they did not have the power / facility to prove their claim through equal access to the Justice system – and did not contribute to the subsequent outcomes produced by the Government of Sri Lanka – including the May 2009 deaths of Tamil civilians – the outcomes confirmed to the believers that race was the reason. Groups such as the LTTE that contributed actively to the outcomes would not identify with this deeper natural reason. They would produce their own outside common structures. On that basis if the Sri Lankan Government and/or their voters believed that the LTTE were Terrorists – all they had to do was to take action as per their structured authority and then remain in that belief. Time will tell whether the LTTE and therefore its supporters were Terrorists. To the extent the Sri Lankan Government believes that the proscription was needed for it to protect its civilians it would remain quiet after the decision has been delivered at the higher level. To Tamils who have disrespected the Sri Lankan Government from outside – the proscription would not be hurtful. Any objection is mere surface reaction.

The UNHRC Resolution would empower all those who did not contribute to outcomes at lower levels – but rather waited quietly – all the while believing and empowering themselves. God / Truth / Love helps us believe and use that belief only after exhausting all structured avenues available – so whatever happens from then on becomes act of god. Truth thus manifested becomes the source of tomorrow’s laws.