I don’t like tree-cutters and am wary of big-spenders

These are electioneering days.  Poster-days.  Almost four years ago, there was a General Election. The following was written around that time.  So it's 'dated' in that sense. Still, the argument about posters and trees, funding and spending etc., remain relevant.


I, Malinda Seneviratne, citizen of Sri Lanka, nondescript and unknown in the poster-pasting, cut-out putting and cutting, ad-taking, loud-speaking, fire-cracking electioneering firmament, humbly request that you vote for me at the upcoming General Election.

I think I have about 10,000 rupees that I could spend on an election campaign.  There are very few people I can ask, but I think I should be able to collect around 50,000 rupees if I had a few weeks to go around with some lay equivalent of a begging bowl.  I think I could do a one time ad in a single newspaper.  Just a quarter page ad or else a leaflet which I could distribute in some corner of the smallest electorate in the district.  My chances would be close to zero, right?   

I can’t even take heart from Dullas Alahapperuma’s success story.  Dullas, already known as an excellent writer/journalist, just distributed a single leaflet and got elected from the Matara District.  I write in English and most people who read English newspapers in Colombo are unlikely to identify with the political positions I subscribe to, are mostly kepuwath-kola types and even those who are not would not ‘waste’ vote on an independent candidate.  Am I correct?

I am a realist.  I know what’s possible and what’s not. So please don’t take the first paragraph above seriously.  Instead read it again, please, and then reflect on the guys and gals soliciting your ‘valuable’ vote in the coming weeks.  I would suggest that we all meditate a little on the in-your-face issues that few candidates are willing to talk about.

There are people who think nothing of plastering your wall with their ugly mugs.  They don’t seem to worry about the time, money and other hardships you had to undergo to build that wall and to paint it.  They desecrate school walls, most of which are built using money collected from and by school children.  That’s vandalism.  That’s arrogance. That’s thuggery. 

Now let’s ask ourselves a simple question: ‘Will Duminda Silva, Rohitha Bogollagama, Wimal Weerawansa, Niroshan Padukka, the ‘Nommara Eke UNP kaaraya’ turned ‘Hathara-watenma-Muzzammilta’ Muzammil, Bandula Gunawardena, Maharoof, Jeevan Kumaratunga, Gamini Lokuge, Sunethra Ranasinghe and other poster-boys and poster-girls who don’t give second thought to desecrating your wall and don’t care about the fact that your tax money will have to be used to clean all the public spaces they vandalize, really care about your concerns?  

There are other implications of this marked readiness to vandalize.  It shows a disregard for both law and decency.  Arrogance in campaigning will necessarily be augmented if elected.  It is a short distance from desecrating wall to destroying garden and from there to pillaging your house.  Rape can’t be far away either. 

Second point for reflection: money.  Where does the money come from?  I calculated recently that the big spenders dish out about 100 times more during a campaign than they would earn as parliamentarians.  Why spend so much for so little?  To serve the nation? Well, for that there has to be some minimum complement of skills, right?  None of the big spenders have shown anything to indicate skill.  Indeed it is ironic that the ‘poorer’ candidates seem to be the ‘doers’. I am thinking of Dinesh Gunawardena and Champika Ranwaka.  Thilanga Sumathipala is an exception in that he is rich and he ‘does’, although a lot of what he has done has come under query.  Milinda Moragoda is an exception in that he has the bucks but he’s not defacing my wall.  And how can we forget Rosie Senanayaka, a pretty face who can’t seem to get anyone to put up a poster?  Is it because some big-name politician is purchasing all her foot-soldiers? 

Yes, we need some answers about where the bucks come from?  The only way we can ascertain ‘decency’ in this business of splashing money around is through asset declaration and disclosure of campaign finances. We need to know who contributed and how much was given.  That’s one way of figuring out what a candidate’s true agenda is. 

We are talking about millions of rupees. Sorry, over hundred million rupees spent by the big boys.  Are you sure you want to vote for someone who spends that much money without having the decency to tell you where he/she got that money from?   We all know that many people in power rob the Treasury and indulge in all kinds of corrupt activity.  This is why we tend to think that money spent electioneering is nothing more nothing less than ‘investment’. 

There’s a third point, which I have alluded to in previous articles but which is so important that it needs to be repeated: trees.  The Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Champika Ranawaka said recently that approximately 300 big trees have to be felled to make the paper required for the poster campaigns of the big spenders. I think in this regard Duminda Silva probably has cut more trees than all others put together. 

We, the citizens, need to send a strong message to tree-fellers.  It’s simple arithmetic.  If a tree cutter is not elected, we are not going to have the country going down the tube.  However, it takes decades to ‘replace’ a single tree.  What would you rather have, the tree or the politician? 

I am thinking about it and I am thinking, ‘TREE-CUTTERS OUT!’

I think, also, under the circumstances, it is safe to pick the poorest candidate.  Or the candidate whose face we are least familiar with. Chances are he’s lived a far more principled life than the in-your-face money-flaunter. 

I am not going to contest, let me repeat.  It would be a waste of time and my 10,000 rupees can be put to better use.  I think I will invest it right away.  A nursery would be good idea, what do you think? 

malinsene@gmail.com

Read more

Kalagngnu: the importance of time, timeliness and timing

Elections are about representatives. Leaders.  Candidates believe they are leaders or at least that they can be leaders.  Maybe they know everything there is to know about leaders.  Some, though, may benefit from some salient points made more than 2,500 years ago by the Enlightened One, Siddhartha Gauthama, the Buddha. This is the fourth of a five-part explication, first published three years ago in 'The Nation'.

The commentary on the Pagnamakkanuvattanasutta (‘First on the turning of the wheel’) in the Raja Vagga (discourses referring to kings) of the Anguttara Nikaya (Numerical Discourses) that I began a few weeks ago was once again interrupted by the need to respond to certain ill-advised and obnoxious comments made by Sonia Gandhi, leader of the Congress Party, India.  I return this week to the fourth attribute that a Chakravarthi or ‘Universal King’ is endowed with, or which an aspirant to such a position is advised to acquire according to Siddhartha Gauthama, our Budun Wahanse, that of Kalagngnu.

‘Kalagngnu’ refers to the matter of time and the quality of being able to weigh the pros and cons relevant to saying and doing at a particular moment.  Today’s politicians are a superstitious lot and place great value on determining the auspicious moment for almost every public act, from announcement of candidature through casting vote to launching this or that project.  While the particular configuration of celestial elements may or may not have bearing on things, the quality of kalagngnu speaks to a much broader consideration of the time factor. 

The ruler or leader of any body, from a state to a village-level society and all things between these, is advised to locate ‘moment’ in terms of both past and future; in other words acquire what is called the thun kal dekma or the ability to factor in the three broad time categories of history, the here-and-now and the tomorrows that will be impacted by decision and non-decision.  A leader has to see beyond his/her term in office and his/her vision should have dimensions broader than issues of personal career objectives and prospects.  Indeed a leader needs to take into account the possible impact of what is said and done several generations into the future. This is what makes a leader a statesman and not a politician.

No extrapolation is possible if history is discounted.  A leader needs to take cognizance of the past, what has worked and what has failed, learn the lessons embedded in success stories as well as failure.  This includes a consideration of the sum total of knowledge on the particular matter at hand and adjustment according to changed realities.  It is of course not a perfect science for the sum total of human knowledge is but a speck of dust compared with the universe of our human ignorance.  This is no excuse for deleting ‘past’ from the relevant decision-equation. 

Leaders tend to focus on the here and now and base calculations on immediate and tangible benefits.  Such leaders can be successful but history will not remember them in soft and fond terms.  Time will designate for them little more than name and number.  The great leaders are those who constantly base judgment on things past, the wisdom wrought of experience, the words of the wise.  They will add to all these the visible and known realities of the particular moment and will stay decision until they are able to make a reasonable assessment of impact, not just for those who inhabit the ‘today’ but those who are yet unborn, factoring in also those other processes which can be expected to have a bearing on the future. 

It would be worthwhile at this point to reflect on what kinds of outcomes have been produced by what is clearly an aversion to the idea thun kal dekma.  Modernity is characterized by a fixation with the present.  Although leaders (political as well as religious and the captains of industry) do refer to forecasts, they rarely calculate beyond the short-term.  ‘Long term’ rarely exceeds a couple of decades and gaze never proceeds beyond the next generation.  ‘Profit now’ seems to be the preferred the guiding principle and since this is an economy and a development paradigm obsessed with trade and markets, and since ‘moment’ is where need and need fulfillment intersect, there is an inevitable rubbishing of the past, sanitized as ‘sunk costs’ while the future gathers dust in the innumerable ‘imponderables’ that will not find residence in relevant equations. 

Profit now goes hand in hand with seizure of wealth and securing and protecting markets as well as avenues of resource and value extraction.  We have as a species plundered and raped the earth with scarcely any concern about resource depletion, compromising of biodiversity and indeed impact on the natural cycles of the earth.  The response to these dark clouds ought to have infused caution into calculation but in reality it seems to have spurred even more frenzied extraction and produced a firm entrenchment of ‘moment-thinking’.

How does a leader acquire the quality of kalagngna?  Politically speaking, the aspiring leader does a lot of learning on the job.  The experience of others and his/her own experiences yield understanding in this regard.  On the other hand, the great and successful leader is required to employ this character trait to matters that go beyond securing and maintaining political power.  It is learnt not on the job but in applying principle to all considerations, however small and seemingly insignificant.  It requires the applicator to also equip him/herself with humility, the ability to reflect, the virtue of being cautious and, ideally, a commitment to observe the sathara brahma viharana, i.e. loving kindness, compassion, equanimity and the ability to rejoice in another’s happiness. 

In general, those who have resolved to understand the eternal verities invariably are better equipped to apply the principle of kalagngnu.  For example, those who understand the reality of impermanence are not prone to succumb to the inevitable traps set up by ego. They are fully conscious of their mortality. They will therefore eschew the pursuit of popularity and for this very reason will succeed in leaving behind a legacy.     

    

Kalagngnu is a quality that mellows a leader.  It is about being punctual and this is no doubt important. It is about efficient time management, another important trait in a leader. It is about picking the right moment to say something and the right time to do something.  It is more than all this, as elaborated above.  A leader who is guided by the principle of Kalagngnu will protect a heritage and thereby ensure that sense of meaning and cultural relevance is preserved in his/her people and moreover will always consider seriously the matter of sustainability. Such a leader will eschew gimmicks and cheap thrills, will not succumb to the cry and holler of the crowd but will operate with full ear to the silence of those yet to come.  Such a leader will, in time, be hailed as ‘good’, ‘benevolent’ and ‘successful’.  Such a leader will have a tender place in history. 

Sabbe aatta bhavantu sukhitatta.  May all beings be happy.

msenevira@gmail.com

Read more

Ranjan Madugalle’s ‘lesson’ in 1982*

I think it was L.D.H. Peiris, Principal of Royal College (1972-1980) who introduced a tradition of inviting a distinguished old boy to address the student during assembly.  Or he may have been continuing an old tradition.  We never knew who or what would be foisted on us when we went for assembly, but it was always entertaining and speaking strictly for me, looking back I can say with certainty, I benefited. 

Yesterday (that would be Thursday) I spent a few hours at the 131^st Battle of the Blues.  As always happens, one runs into old friends, some who have not been seen in years or even decades. There’s catching up, there’s chit chat, the occasional checking of score, dancing, singing and drinking. 

I knew I would meet Rajitha Dhanapala, friend from Grade 1A and about whom I wrote a few weeks ago (how he was unfairly dropped from the team, along with two others who constituted the top three batsmen in terms of batting averages that season, Chandana Panditharatne and Assagi Ranasinghe).  Rajitha was laughing.

‘Machang, I got so many calls. Pandi called after 22 years!  I even got calls from some Thomian friends who wanted to know if you would write about similar things that happened in their school.’

Now I know that such things happen in all schools, in all sports and indeed in all places and all things where some form of selection takes place.  I wasn’t ready for something that I heard yesterday though: ‘it happened this year too!’  What could I do or say but ‘oh well!’? 

Got me thinking though.  I remembered L.D.H. Peiris. Remembered his deep voice introducing a guest, a distinguished old boy, two of them in fact, way back in the year 1982.  Ranjan Madugalle and Asantha De Mel.  The former captained Royal in the 99^th and the Centenary Battles of the Blues, the latter was ‘imported’, people said, from Isipathana College just for the Centenary match (1979).  They are both well known names today, but back then their claim to fame was just the fact that they were members of team that played Sri Lanka’s first test match (against Keith Fletcher’s England team). 

The Principal broke tradition. He had to.  There were two old Royalists in that team.  It was only Ranjan who spoke and I distinctly remember Asantha opting to ‘pass’ the invite to speak.  Ranjan was then a young old boy and therefore quite familiar.  He wasn’t as ‘distinguished’ as other distinguished old boys we had previously listened to, but that didn’t bother us. He was hero and later on did acquire distinction that put him way up there among the ‘distinguished’ who lectured young Royalists on certain mornings.  He spoke at length, but of all the things he said only one thing stuck in my mind.

‘Whenever I am out of form, getting out cheaply or to poor shots, I revert to the fundamentals.  I go back to the nets. I check my stance. I check the back-lift.  Things like that.  Invariably, I start performing better.  That is a life lesson. Whenever we go wrong, it is good to ask yourself if you’ve got the fundamentals wrong.  Basic things like discipline. Like values.  You will always find that that’s where the problem lies.  That is what needs to be corrected.’

I am obviously paraphrasing and would humbly accept any correction if Ranjan thinks I’ve done him injustice here.  

Ranjan would have been about 23 or 24 at the time and these words were indeed profound for someone so young.  It is clear also that he has consistently applied these principles to both his cricket and his career as a match referee. 

I remembered Ranjan because his is a lesson that is valid not just for cricketers and schoolboys, but coaches, teachers-in-charge, selectors and others involved in the game.  I am not sure if there was any wrong doing in team-selection this time around, but I am sure it won’t hurt anyone to step back and check ‘fundamentals’ now and then. 

In the matter of ‘selection’, it is a lesson that politicians and party leaders can benefit from if they choose to reflect deep on decisions made and processes adopted.  At what point does ‘procedure’ gets overruled by that dubious but sometimes inevitable concept called ‘discretion’?  Sometimes one does go with ‘gut-feeling’ but do they pause and ask themselves if ‘gut-feeling’ is an alibi for favouritism?   What kind of fundamentals are referenced during decision and in post-mortem?  And are these principles referred to selectively, i.e. at one’s convenience or worse for purposes of justification? 

I am thinking right now about party leaders, parties and the committees tasked with making candidates’ lists for the upcoming parliamentary elections.  We are not living in Utopia and therefore the insertion of celebrities can be understood and indeed it is more an indictment of how voters think than about the intellectual paucity of leaders. On the other hand, I think there is a thing called a ‘bottom line’, a minimum standard that should not be violated.   Sad to say, in many cases, the ‘bottom line’ is right at the bottom, meaning it cannot get worse. 

What are the fundamentals pertaining to politicians?  Manifesto, isn’t it?  How many of the elected actually return to the document they waved before the voter?  How many check if what they have done or are doing is consistent with the pledges made?  Do they ever go to the larger ‘fundamental’ of representation and of course that of proper conduct, which includes (or ought to include) things such as honestly, transparency and accountability?  Do they then check constitution and observe lacuna with respect to these things and if they do discover incongruence do they then work systematically and with utmost dedication to correct error? 

I think Ranjan Madugalle’s comment on returning to the fundamentals is a timeless one. There’s no magic in it, except in the fact that at a tender age he appeared to have learnt a lesson that few can claim to have learnt by the time they reach 80 and one which many refuse to think about because it would cause a lot of inconvenience. 

It is timeless in that it is embedded in most religious tenets and all societies have definite or loosely defined terms of reference equivalent to the stance, back lift, the virtues of discipline, commitment, fitness and practice. 

I am not sure who lost out and who benefited from someone refusing to be true to the fundamentals.  Life is long and can be quite an equalizer.  Sometime it takes years and decades (ask Rajitha Dhanapala, Chandana Panditharatne or Assagi Ranasinghe).  It is easier and more fruitful overall to do the right thing at the right time, if you really think about it.  That boils down to another ‘fundamental’: values. And it doesn’t matter if they are underwritten by notions of a supreme being waiting to judge or notions of natural justice as in the paticcasamuppada, the principle of dependent origination or some other ‘law’ drawn from other cosmologies. 

These are hardly the things that come to mind or are talked about during a ‘big match’ of course; but then again all human beings, thanks to inherent frailties, tend to go wrong and that’s when the simple observation made by Ranjan Madugalle almost three decades ago could show a pathway. 

*First published in March/April 2011

malinsene@gmail.com

Read more

Of big matches, camaraderie and playing with a straight bat

The Cricket World Cup (2011) was more than compensated for the drag-farce that was the 2007 edition of the event.  The great thing about one-day matches is that rain permitting there’s always a result.  Someone wins, someone loses and when there are no winners, i.e. in the event of a tie, the anticipation, breathlessness, agony and heroics are as or more exciting than those generated by wins, even those that are decided in the last over. 

Courtesy 'Daily News'

Now I am not anti-Test.  Tests are different.  They call for a vastly different approach and temperament and although they do drag (I prefer rugby, by the way), they have their moments and magic, things to savour and do generate heartaches and mindless celebrations from time to time.  Frequently enough not to abolish the format, I might add.  Still, the shorter versions (ODIs and T-20s) are arguably more exciting and generating of spectator interest. 

Cricket is not just matches between two countries.  There are a lot of versions between Tests and the odd games that are fiercely contested in countless neighbourhoods with rules of their own, field and stroke restrictions etc. In between there are what are called ‘big matches’, annual encounters between two schools which generate as much or more spectator interest as a World Cup final.

Some people bemoan the fact that most big matches end in draws and sometimes dead boring ones to boot.  The assumption however is that ‘action’ is what happens on the field.  The truth, however, is that while people would love their school to do well and notch a win or two every decade or so, most spectators are not emotionally invested in the run of play or the outcome.  What happens outside the boundary line is what matters and it is for this that old boys attend big matches, some traveling from the other end of the earth just to relive the schoolboy experience, meet old friends and teachers, reminisce and so on.  This is why I attend the Royal-Thomian. 

I am not blind to school colours or what scoreboard story but hardly ever turn my eyes to the cricket, except when there’s a surge in the cheering indicating wicket, boundary or a batsman reaching 50 or 100.  I can generally tell what the cheering was about by a quick survey of flags. If it is mostly black and blue then it’s something the Thomians can cheer about and if it is blue and gold it’s a Royal moment.  It is almost always after-the-fact and I have found myself instinctively waiting for replay that will not come.  I am a creature of the idiot-box, I humbly acknowledge.

On the third and last day of play, as I was doing my usual rounds from tent to tent, I ran into my old friend and former boss, Krishantha Cooray.  It was late in the day and both of us were in high spirits.  ‘Write about the camaraderie,’ he requested. 

He related a story.  Some Thomian prefects had been passing the Seylan Bank tent, waving flags and cheering their school.  For some reason this had irked some young old Royalists who had started pelting these Thomians with whatever they could lay their hands on.  It was ugly.  An older Old Royalist had stood up and urged his younger schoolmates to desist.  He had been quite vocal and very insistent.  Sanity was restored and everyone reverted to whatever it was they were doing before this silly incident took place. 

‘There is camaraderie, Malinda,’ Krishantha explained, cautioning, ‘but it’s the older generation that understands this.’

Krishantha is a Thomian.  He’s not my only Thomian friend though.  Every year I go to ‘The Stables’ which is an enclosure that is open to anyone although organized by the Thomian Group of ’79.  I meet Royalists there, but I go there specifically to meet up with a bunch of Thomians including Harinlal Aturupane and Sidath Samarakkody (he was missing this year).  There’s something in what Krishantha says.  There is school loyalty but this is secondary to inhabiting and absorbing of the overall spectacle that is the Royal Thomian.  There is the occasional fraying of tempers, the wrong word being said at the wrong place and time, drink-fuelled overreaction and such, but things are sorted out very quickly for the most part.  Speaking strictly for myself, I am all for draws. ‘Dead-boring’ is great in my book and ‘Rained-out’ truly magical. I don’t want anyone to be unhappy.  I believe that others would define ‘camaraderie’ in different ways, but I am sure few would disagree with Krishantha. 

I wondered however about the incident, though. Was it about camaraderie?  Was it a Royal-Thomian thing?  Made me remember a story about an incident that took place at Kelaniya University (then Vidyalankara).  Some boys from Vidyodaya (now Sri Jayawardenapura University) had come for a volleyball match along with some supporters. Some words were spoken, someone was irked, someone cast the first stone, someone else reacted with a stone-casting of his own and soon there was a fully fledged battle going on. A student leader from Vidyalankara had noticed one boy from the opposite camp turning his back to the missiles directed towards his friends, urging his friends to stop it.  He had realized that if this boy had been hit, things would have got totally out of control. He himself had turned around, ignoring the missiles that came his way and urged his friends to stop. Sanity was restored.  Camaraderie may have been a factor in the Seylan Tent incident, but there must have been something more too. 

The boy who stood up to his mates later pioneered the revitalization of thrift and credit cooperative societies in the island and built a movement that has earned the accolades of the entire international cooperative movement.  He was awarded an honorary doctorate and conferred the enviable national honour of ‘Vishva Prasadhini’ (Universally Acclaimed).  His name is known across the length and breadth of this nation. He is leader to a movement that consists of over 8000 village-level societies and close to a million members, has spawned a number of national-level commercial and cooperative outfits. He ‘did’ microfinance long before corporate financial entities discovered the term and concept and moved in to tap hitherto ignored market segments, and yet senior government officials lament that there’s no Sri Lankan version of the Grameen idea. 

The other boy, who related the incident, once defied a vote-and-die edict issued by the JVP, cast his vote the moment the polls opened and went around showing his inked-finger to all saying ‘They said they’ll kill the first to vote; I was the first, now you go ahead and exercise your franchise’.  He was shot at and escaped by throwing at his assailants a bottle of milk he had grabbed from an old woman nearby. He is the author of several books on a wide range of issues. He lives frugally and observes all precepts pertaining to the idea of Anagarika. 

It is not a Royal thing or a Thomian thing. It is still cricket and referes to camaraderie with the larger collective and commitment to things good and wholesome. These individuals subjected themselves to the greater Tests, played ODIs on a day-to-day basis, were equally adept at playing the necessary cameo in life’s T-20s, i.e. the bigger ‘Big Matches’.   I am not watching the scoreboard and didn’t see what happened, but these out-of-ground strokeplay is all that matters. Krishantha would agree, I am sure. 

[First published in the 'Daily News' on March 11, 2011]

msenevira@gmail.com

Read more

The leader must understand 'appropriateness'

Elections are about representatives. Leaders.  Candidates believe they are leaders or at least that they can be leaders.  Maybe they know everything there is to know about leaders.  Some, though, may benefit from some salient points made more than 2,500 years ago by the Enlightened One, Siddhartha Gauthama, the Buddha. This is the third of a five-part explication, first published three years ago in 'The Nation'.


The commentary on the Pagnamakkanuvattanasutta (‘First on the turning of the wheel’) in the Raja Vagga (discourses referring to kings) of the Anguttara Nikaya (Numerical Discourses) proceeds to the third attribute that a Chakravarthi or ‘Universal King’ is endowed with, according to Siddhartha Gauthama, our Budun Wahanse, that of mattagngnu.

‘Mattagngnu’ refers to appropriateness or a sense of proportion, the right amount or correct dosage in all matters pertaining to governance.  This I believe is of particular significance in the spheres of law and development in today’s context, both in Sri Lanka and in the world. 

‘Knowing limit’ is the key to this element of the Sutta.  This is not as easy as it seems.  It requires, first of all, a sound understanding of all relevant factors.  It requires sound judgment.  Wisdom needs to be applied to all deliberations.  Facts need to be considered dispassionately.  Prejudices need to be retired or suspended.  The yesterday, now and tomorrow relevant to the matter, or the thun-kal dekma, have to be factored in.  The leader, in other words, should ‘read’ the moment at hand in terms of its antecedents and evaluate each option in terms of possible consequences.   

For example, a leader who treats a problem without considering the history it evolved from increases the possibility of failure and moreover renders the future vulnerable to unpleasant and unintended effects of the chosen course of action. If a more here-and-now example is required, treating the ‘ethnic-conflict’ (so-called) by considering only the configuration of forces at the present time and the ‘prerogatives’ of political expediency without taking into account the genesis of the problem and the veracity of all relevant claims in terms of historical, geographical, demographical and economic realities, can very well generate further rupture down the line.  That’s what misdiagnosis does. 

‘Knowledge,’ a leader has to keep in mind, is not value-free. It is often fettered by ideological baggage.  A leader is often handicapped by a felt-need of advisors, aides and loyalists to keep him/her happy.  The leader is often kept in the dark and operates blindly, believing erroneously that all is well and that the information provided is reliable and true.  When knowledge is lacking, deciding ‘limit’ becomes arduous and error-prone.  A lack of humility, likewise, can stop a leader from reminding him/herself that the sum total of human knowledge is just a speck of dust compared with the universe of our ignorance.  ‘Mattagngnu,’ therefore imposes upon ruler a need to equip him/herself with mechanisms that cut through these clarity-compromising impediments.  Such a leader would constantly guard against censorship and self-censorship, deception and self-deception and seek ways of circumventing the twin curses of ignorance and arrogance. 

A reasonable understanding of the weight and contour of all relevant or at least the most pertinent factors is a necessary but not sufficient condition for making decisions that enhance overall profitability.  This is where mattagngnu comes into play.  Perhaps comment on a couple of examples would help shed light. 

Let’s begin with law or the dispensing of justice, the latter referring to word as well as spirit.  Suraj Randiv bowling a no-ball to give India a win in a match that was lost in all but name and simultaneously denying Virendra Sehwag a century (he was 99 not out) was legal but violated ‘sense of justice’.  What is important is that the word should celebrate the idea of equality.  No one should be above the law and everyone should be equal before the law.  The law should not be referenced and applied selectively.  Violation of law should be met with punishment appropriate to the infringement.  Notions such as ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ and ‘due process,’ as well as adequate corrective mechanisms to safeguard against error such as the right of appeal all fall into the ambit of ‘appropriateness’. 

A leader who abides by the principle cannot punish one person for theft while letting another person get away with it. Neither can such a leader be arbitrary in determining severity of punishment.  Punishment as well as punitive action should follow reason and not emotion. Neither should political convenience be a determining element.  There should be clarity at all stages of the process and the decision as well as the justification should be open to scrutiny.  A leader cannot demolish a house claiming that an occupant is hiding a gun therein, reducing everything to rubble and killing or maiming other occupants who are innocent of any such infringement of the law.  There should be adequate proof and moreover the accused should be offered a chance to defend him/herself against the charge.  A leader cannot bomb one such house (even if this can be justified based on the fulfillment of the above criteria) and leave another house (where an occupant guilty of the same ‘crime’ is resident) untouched.  That’s arbitrary, selective and in clear violation of the principle of mattagngnu.   

‘Development’ is a discourse, a set of ideas (and indeed an ‘ideology’) and a practice in the modern world where mattagngnu has been cast aside as irrelevant, obstacle and irritant.  Sense of proportion is a notion that is either footnoted (grudgingly) or is largely absent(ed) in/from the development discourse.  The prerogatives of ‘modernity’ took for granted that things past are irrelevant and indeed needed to be erased altogether. History and heritage were made to take a backseat.  What mattered was what was at hand.  Traditions and customs were considered relevant on in terms of their market value.  ‘Irrelevanced’ simultaneously was the ‘future’.  Whereas some cultures extrapolated seven generations into the future to ascertain the worth of a particular course of action, ‘modernity’ and modernist development paradigms was far less far-seeing and utterly impatient. The future could wait, it was thought.  Saving for a rainy day was out of question. The value of all things was ascertained in the marketplace.  Tomorrow would take care of itself, it was thought.  It was the era of the ‘er’.  BiggER. BettER. TallER. RichER.

The lack of concern for appropriateness is clearly shown in the mindless mining of all resources and until very recently the callous disregard for the impact on the environment and therefore the overall health of the planet.  We are pushing countless species to extinction.  The seas have been over-harvested.  We are champions of desertification.  We are running out of carbon fuels.  In short, the earth’s capacity to regenerate and renew itself has been severely compromised.  We have precipitated natural disasters and scripted our own tragedies as well.  We have not only abandoned that thing called ‘sense of proportion,’ we’ve lost our bearings as well.

Development was in an almighty hurry.  We ran along.  At breakneck speed. We are panting now.  We’ve run out of steam. Running out of petroleum. Running out of answersto the problems we’ve created.   A leader cannot run away. He/she must stand and fight.  That fight cannot be won if the leader refuses to acknowledge, among other things, that modernism and the modernist drive got the dosage all wrong.  We took more and more and didn’t think of giving back.  We were so fixated on ‘the moment’ that we forgot about the future.  We borrowed so much from our children, their children and generations yet unborn that we may very well have condemned them to impoverishment. 

Our leaders, in the matter of development, have shown that they’ve not factored in mattagngnu in their deliberations.  Neither did the development gurus. Nor those who made careers out of development – academics, NGO operators, advisors and other blueprint-makers. 

Any standout leader needs to be sober. Mattagngnu is a quality that exemplifies sobriety.  Be it in constitutional enactment, application of the law, designing development, imposition of taxes, granting of subsidies, exercising presidential prerogative or any other governance element, the leader who has the wisdom to exercise restraint and determine appropriateness will stand tall. Others can stand tall too. Not for long. 

Sabbe aatta bhavantu sukhitatta.  May all beings be happy.

msenevira@gmail.com

Read more

The quality of righteousness and its prerogatives

Elections are about representatives. Leaders.  Candidates believe they are leaders or at least that they can be leaders.  Maybe they know everything there is to know about leaders.  Some, though, may benefit from some salient points made more than 2,500 years ago by the Enlightened One, Siddhartha Gauthama, the Buddha. This is the second of a five-part explication, first published three years ago in 'The Nation'.

 Last week, in this column, I wrote about the quality of Atthagngnu (‘acting with full understanding of meaning’) in relation to the ideal attributes of a king (leader) as laid out in the Buddhist discourse on matters of state and governance.  The second attribute that a king ought to possess or cultivate, according to the Pagnamakkanuvattanasutta (Ref Raja Vagga, Anguttara Nikaya; ‘Grouping on kings’ in the Numerical Discourses of the Buddha) is Dhammagngnu or the quality of being conscious of the righteous.

The great monarch (or leader) would necessarily be endowed with the quality of understanding the dhamma and acting accordingly, i.e. as dictated by the prerogatives of righteousness.  ‘Dhamma’ in general would refer to the core teachings of the Buddha. ‘Righteousness’ (in this context) therefore would have to draw from the recommended distinctions of right and wrong, good and bad as expounded by Siddhartha Gauthama, the All-Knowing, in terms of the interests and wellbeing of the larger polity, sustainability of lives, livelihoods and indeed the particular state.   While conceding that the term is culture-bound, a privileging of the righteousness article (if you will) in matters of governance clearly denotes a willingness or desire to err in favour of the public good. 

Given the overwhelming centrality of things Buddhist pertaining to history, heritage, culture, social organization and political process in Sri Lanka it would not be inappropriate to flag those elements of this dhamma or this particular corpus of principles and guidelines of righteousness in order to shed light on what is appropriate, what is absent and what needs to be instituted.  It must be mentioned that this dhamma as relevant to this particular subject in no way contradicts nor proposes superiority over any other edicts espoused by any other major faith that has adherents among the citizenry. 

The beauty of the Buddha Vachana (The Word of the Buddha) is its applicability in multiple contexts and moreover the encyclopedic proportions of relevant material on a wide range of subjects.  The overwhelming quality has a drawback in that it makes for picking and choosing in order to buttress particular line of argument or justify particular decision or course of action.  I propose that a privileging of fundamental tenets is what would give us the dimensions of ‘righteousness’ relevant to this exercise.

First and foremost a righteous leader would subject him/herself to the discipline associated with the Panchaseela (would not kill, would not steal, would not engage in inappropriate acts of lustful nature, would not lie and would not avail of alcoholic substances) and this discipline would find articulation in all laws enacted and thereby find reflection in the structures of governance.  A righteous leader would not sanction capital punishment, for example, and would ensure that the barbarous practice is outlawed.  Neither would such a leader pilfer the Treasury or leave any room for any and all acts of theft. In short, he/she would correct all systemic flaws that compromise the full and effective functioning of law and order.   

A righteous leader would be fully cognizant of the Ashta Loka Dharma (profit-loss, joy-sorrow, praise-blame and fame-vilification) and relevant vicissitudes.  Cognizant also of the transient nature of all things, he/she would exercise circumspection at all times and treat all these ups and downs with equanimity.  Such a leader would not be swayed by or have ego inflated in times of triumph nor be despondent and helpless when misfortune strikes.  Such a leader, endowed thus with fortitude, would earn the respect and trust of the citizenry. 

A righteous leader would strive to act with fidelity to the Sathara Brahma Viharana (kindness, compassion, equanimity and being joyful at another’s happiness).  Such a leader would earn the affection and support of the citizenry because he/she would be seen as just, good, strong and humane and devoid of qualities such as greed, envy, ill-will and tendency to be extreme in response. 

A righteous leader would embody the qualities that constitute the Sathara Sangraha Vastu (the four kinds of hospitality).  Such a leader would be pleasant in speech, would be generous and giving, benevolent and helpful in conduct and at all times affirm the principle of equality. Such a leader would therefore be just and gracious and accordingly will win the love, affection, trust and support of his/her people. 

A righteous leader, furthermore, would be conversant about the Noble Eight Fold Path to the extent that he/she would use it as a guide to fashion thought, word and deed, refer to it when in doubt or when forced to choose among several options.  A leader benefits much from striving to abide by the following (in their elaborations and interrelationships): Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration (where ‘right’ could meet ‘perfect’ or ‘ideal’).  In reflecting on any issue prior to making pronouncement or intervening and also in retrospection the Noble Eight Fold Path can operate as guide as well as benchmark against which a particular course of action can be assessed.  

It is in this manner that a leader acquires the right to be called righteous.   The Dhamma is replete with innumerable insights, points for reflections and guidelines for action, all of which the wise ruler who wishes to remain righteous can draw heavily from.  A leader who takes the trouble to understand and internalize these ideals would be better equipped to deal with adversity.  A leader who in thought, word and deed gives on-the-ground meaning to these notions would find that power accrues to him/her almost without solicitation. 

Conversely, a leader who is ignorant of and consequently violates these fundamental tenets of being and engagement risks losing everything or else will remain in power illegally or on account of coercive instruments at his/her disposal.  It would be a brief reign at best and never one that history will record with anything except disdain.  Such are the conclusions arrived at upon reflecting on the quality of dhammagngnu proposed by the Buddha as a requisite trait for a good king and of course the implications of its absence.    

Sabbe Satta Bhavantu Sukitatta.  May all beings be happy.

msenevira@gmail.com

Read more

This Roy-Tho belongs to Rajitha Dhanapala

The Royal-Thomian is not just a cricket match between two schools.  It is, but that’s only a small part of the story.  For Royalists and Thomians, both young and old, it is about reunion, reminiscing, re-living the past, envisioning future battles and heroics and a moment to relax, revel and cheer regardless of the status of the match, regardless of the result. 

And yet, the Roy-Tho is a dream for many a schoolboy, a dream one wants to be real.  As it was and as it will be, it was a dream that one young boy did his best to turn into reality, over 30 years ago.  He did his best.  He made it to the First XI.  He even scored a century during the school season, which also happened to be his last year in school.  He was among the top four in the batting averages. He was not selected.  Lesser players made it for reasons of ‘ties’, influence and who knows what else.  Neither were the other three selected, one of whom of course was ‘out’ by default because he was touring Australia with the Sri Lanka Under 19 team.  He was devastated as were the other two.

The big-match came.  They watched from the pavilion.  We can only imagine what was going through their minds.  Years passed. Decades passed. Now we are in the year 2014.  That’s thirty years since that Roy-Tho which is remembered by that boy’s batch mostly (and even only) for the fact that Rajitha Dhanapala, Chandana Panditharatne and Assajith Ranasinghe were dropped to make way for ‘favorites’.  This year, thirty years later, there’s relief and redemption. It comes in the form of a young boy who not only dreamed the dreams his father dreamed, but will see them turning into reality. His name is Thiran Dhanapala.

Thiran will do the keepers’ gloves for Royal.  Throughout the early part of the season when Royal struggled it was Thiran who turned imminent debacles into respectable totals, working hard with the tail.  The season turned somewhere down the line and Royal will go into the big match with confidence, especially after  a moral boosting win over Trinity which came after a bold lunch-time declaration with one batsman unbeaten on 99.  Team comes first, and that point was emphatically made by the captain and embraced by his boys who bundled out the opposition for a little over 100 runs. 

Team comes first, but for the men who were boys in 1984, this match will be special.  Not just because Rajitha gets to smile in a way he hasn’t smiled in 30 years, but another son of another batchmate (Randev, son of Ranil Pathirana) will also be playing for Royal. Randev has emerged as the top allrounder with excellent performances with bat and ball. Indeed, he might be the best allrounder in the schools this year. 

They have both made their fathers proud. They’ve made their fathers’ friends proud too.  They have, as the saying goes, ‘earned the palm’ [Palmam Qui Meruit Ferat].  They will no doubt bear it with grace.  They will be cheered all the way.  And, in the case of Thiran Dhanapala, it’s a cheer that’s could be said to have been held back for thirty long years.  This Roy-Tho does not belong to Rajitha Dhanapala, as asserted, but it is extra special to him.  Not everyone will know why, but that does not matter. 

msenevira@gmail.com 

Read more

Reflections on the quality of atthagngnu in the matter of leadership

Elections are about representatives. Leaders.  Candidates believe they are leaders or at least that they can be leaders.  Maybe they know everything there is to know about leaders.  Some, though, may benefit from some salient points made more than 2,500 years ago by the Enlightened One, Siddhartha Gauthama, the Buddha. This is the first of a five-part explication, first published three years ago in 'The Nation'.

In the Raja Vagga (discourses referring to kings) of the Anguttara Nikaya (Numerical Discourses) is recorded some very interesting observations by Siddhartha Gauthama, our Budun Wahanse, about the ideal attributes of the Chakravarthi or the Universal King.  In addition to the more widely discussed discourses on governance such as the Dasa Raja Dharma, there are two sutras that are extremely instructive. 

The first, Pagnamakkanuvattanasutta or the ‘First on the turning of the wheel,’ lays out five characteristics of the (successful) universal monarch and can be applied in the modern context to any ruler or indeed any leader of any institution, public, corporate or cooperative.  The second, Dutiyaccakkanuvattanasutta or the ‘Second on the turning of the wheel’ is an elaboration of sorts referring to succession, i.e. is the qualities that the monarch’s son ought to acquire and as such applicable to a person designated or aspires to replace a leader. 

The monarch is required to know about profitability, be conscious of the righteous, tempered enough to ascertain appropriateness of action, have a sense of timing and take cognizance of the gathering or the public.  Beginning this week, I shall offer comments on these five attributes with a view to throwing light on issues of governance which, sadly, seem to borrow uncritically from notions developed in other countries by scholars and practitioners who are naturally inclined to draw from location and time specific examples in their formulations and which are not necessarily adequate or even useful in understanding our context and advocating for the same. 

That which in translation is called ‘profitability’ has very little to do with the general meaning of the term in current usage.  It is not necessarily about rupees and cents. The Pali term is Atthagngnu, which means ‘acting with full understanding of meaning’.  In the matter of governance, the ruler is required to operate, weigh options and make decisions, after availing him/herself of all relevant information so that the logic of a particular course of action is informed by previous experiences and moreover there is reasonable understanding of possible consequences.  In this manner, a ruler will issue edict and pass judgment in a manner that has a superior chance of producing a greater collective good.

How does a leader acquire such qualities?  We have to assume, first and foremost, that the leader is fundamentally disposed towards doing whatever necessary to ensure the well being of his/her people.  The greedy, the self-seeking, the thieving, the arrogant and the power-hungry are therefore not relevant to this discussion.  It is not about politicians, then, but about statesmen and therefore not about those interested in the next election but those who focus on the next generation and beyond. 

In this sense Budun Wahanse’s formulation can be called an ideal type.  However, to the extent that ideal type is benchmark and a destination, though not reached, nevertheless can take one from here to somewhere instead of turning here into nowhere, these eminently cultivable attributes make for self-assessment (on the part of those aspiring to be more than just another petty politician) and for evaluation of representative or representative wannabe in today’s election-oriented, let’s-make-a-revolution and let’s-change-regime context. 

 In the case of a leader of say a maranaadhara samithiya (Funeral Donation Society) or a Dayaka Sabhava of a Temple (a lay committee associated with and devoted to the proper conduct of all matters pertaining to a temple), a leader or an aspiring leader, if he/she is of the community and possesses basic intelligence, has an analytical mind and is willing to work with and learn from the rest of the community, obtain a decent score on the matter of embodying the quality of Atthagngnu.  As group size grows, as the areas of jurisdiction expands and becomes more and more complex, a leader cannot with casual survey and reflective engagement alone obtain a data set that is statistically and otherwise significant.

The true or approximate meaning of things pertaining to the full gamut of issues that a leader has to contend with, especially in the case of governing a country or a large polity or a large and complex sector of the economy, cannot be obtained without proper and reliable information channels.  Certain things compromise information flows.  First, arrogance on the part of a leader can lead to horrendously erroneous readings of things and processes.  A ‘know-all,’ history has shown, knows little and typically is made to pay for it.  This can be further aggravated by a tendency to give ear to sycophant and treat all criticism as malicious and exaggerated articulations of enemies with agenda that have nothing to do with ground realities. 

A manifest insecurity about position and political future, itself an indicator of unsuitability to lead, can persuade leaders to impose censorship, direct and indirect.  While this could obtain respite from political pressure for a while, today’s information technology has made censorship untenable. Information will reach people somehow and those who want to know will find ways of knowing.  The other negative of censorship is that it blocks information flows in both direction.  The leader would then hear no evil and assume that evil (pertaining to position and future) does not exist. 

A successful leader will keep all channels of communication open, exercise intellect in assessing truth value of claims, and have the humility to acknowledge error and correct relevant flaw.  He would not only say ‘do not sing hosannas of praise, instead offer constructive criticism,’ he would do everything possible to ensure that the dimensions pertaining to the privilege of criticizing are expanded to encompass as large and varied a portion of the population as possible. 

How can a leader extrapolate on the matter of consequence, if he/she does not have a sound grounding in relevant histories and a thirst for examining to the extent practicable given time-space constraints the nuts and bolts of similar scenario?  No leader can be expected to be well versed on all matters.  This is why in the modern context a leader needs to avail him/herself of the best advice possible. This is why there needs to be a mechanism which ensures that the most competent and knowledgeable persons have a greater chance of occupying positions relevant to expertise.  For this to happen, a leader must ensure that the structures are in working order or else do what it takes to get them in place and operating smoothly.  In addition, the leader should make sure that the system of education is appropriate to provide for the human resource needs of the particular economy. 

In the matter of ‘knowing’, a leader must have a strong sense of history.  If a leader does not know much about what made a civilization, what turned a population into a people and a nation, then he/she will not have a sense of appropriate direction when considering ‘better futures’.  The chances are that directional decision will not be congruent to the relevant yesterday or the ground reality of today.  All policies are for people.  People are not individuals with physical attributes alone.  Resident in a people, as individuals and as a collective, are cultural sensibilities that have been ingrained over centuries and generations.  These are not erased easily.  A leader who is determined to erase history gets evacuated him/herself.  It has happened and not very long ago either. 

All of the above is relevant, I believe to the operationalization of a leader’s vision.  It is relevant to presidents, leaders of the opposition, pradeshiya sabhikas, corporate heads and even those in civil society organizations.  History matters. Information matters.  Arrogance, greed and a penchant for self-aggrandizement compromises all this and does not produce a contented polity.  It hastens the end of a ruler, a regime, a system of governance or a corporate entity. 

I am humbled yet once again by the continuing and amazing relevance of words spoken by Siddhartha Gauthama over 2,500 years ago and moreover by their applicability to multiple contexts.

Sabbe Satta Bhavantu Sukhitatta.  May all beings be happy.

msenevira@gmail.com

Read more