| Plus |
|
|||
|
Going against
the stream Not a matter
of modesty but of principle Dear Mr. Durai
Singham: A. K. Coomaraswamy's
father was Sir Muthu Coomaraswamy a Vellala Tamil from Jaffna, Sri
Lanka who married Elizabeth Beeby an Englishwoman. Ananda was their
only child and he was born in Lanka on August 22 1877. His father
died when Ananda was less than two years of age and his mother raised
him in England. In all he wrote
some 913 papers and articles in a period from 1908 to 1947. He lived
in Sri Lanka from 1902 to 1905, which marked a period of transformation
for him. His monumental work Mediaeval Sinhalese Art was written
at this time. He returned to England in 1907 and moved between India
and England till 1917 and finally he settled down in the United
States of America till the time of his death, on 9th September 1947. Today's lecture
is based on an early Coomaraswamy article. This will take up 95%
of our time. I refer to: Individuality, Autonomy and Function, the
last essay from The Dance of Shiva, Fourteen Indian Essays, published
in 1924. Individuality is sva-bhava; autonomy is sva-rajya; and
function is sva-dharma. Clarity
of thought Idealism
of the young Coomaraswamy We must reflect
upon 'government'; which is not the same thing as 'politics', although
politics effects government. The Buddha and today's scientists have
one thing in common … that they both recognize and proclaim
that there is no effect without cause. Everything that we see about
us, anything that we can think of, without exception, is the effect
of its own set of causes. Violence, hatred, division are all effects
with their own causes, as are cooperation and amity. The law
of cause and effect Ananda Coomaraswamy
uses this traditional knowledge to impart to us westernised orientals
a new insight into the present political and social problems, which
are of most concern to us: autonomy, human rights, and social integration
of disparate groups. These involve the very principle of government,
namely the exercise of rulership. Let us borrow a concept from modern
physics, and apply it to the sociopolitical situation in Sri Lanka,
and in the areas with which we are most concerned at present: India
and the Middle East. The concept we are borrowing is called relativity.
It has to do with frames of reference. That is, the mental position
from which we see ourselves and others. Let us call them systems,
which exist relative to one another. For example - the frame of
reference of the Muslim community is different relatively speaking
to the frame of reference of the Kandyan agricultural community.
The principle that we are applying makes clear that no one can claim
to be absolutely right with regard to all the other frames, unless
of course, he is a Buddha, logos or prophet. For anyone else, the
most they can claim is a relatively valid view of other frames.
Wisdom however, is the understanding of the total interactive system.
Of course, all frames of reference have much in common. These things
that they do have in common may be called constant proportions,
and they apply in all social-inertial frames of reference. Just
as the speed of light is constant in all physical frames of reference.
But in fact, while the constants seem to unify, it is the differences
that separate. The instinct
to defend A right
to rule This does not
mean that the government should not defend its own conceptual foundations
with armed force … if one or more of the other frames of reference
are subjected to armed attacks at the point of a gun. This is roughly
the situation as it obtains at the moment. The social
sciences tell us that the repudiation of tyranny must ultimately
involve the repudiation of majority rule. The reason that majority
rule is rejected can only mean that the seceding communal frame
of reference is seeking autonomy. That is, freedom to run its own
affairs entirely, independent of any other community in the nation. It feels that
there can be no entirely just solution to its special interest problems
without this autonomy. If we ponder this for a moment, it becomes
clear that this is no less true for nations in this day and age
than it is for the individual. In light of this, we must take into
consideration the evolving concept of human rights. Arrival
of an individual autonomy By these I
mean the virtues and skills inherent in each community, which are
of benefit to all. Government, as a model, should want true Islamic
culture to grow… so that its virtues may benefit and bless
us all. This does not mean that this government is pro-Muslim at
the expense of other communities. Likewise, with Buddhism, Christianity,
Hinduism, etc…. all should grow and flourish and be recognized
through both 'fruit and flower'. This can only
occur when the various frames of reference lose their fear and more
importantly, mutual suspicion of each other. This then, is the paradox:
government can do nothing else other than rule, upholding that right
by force if necessary. But wise government knows that it cannot
rule or keep in subjection by force of arms any cultural group without
creating an unstable equilibrium in the whole fabric of society.
This instability
will become the rule rather than the exception. In these days of
modern light arms often given to children "communal self-assertion
built on limited self-interest, however seemingly justified, leads
to the anarchy of chaos The very opposite of 'good' government!"
Indeed, the very opposite of any government at all, comes to govern!
This is the present situation in the North, in certain areas of
the East and in Colombo as well, with suicide bombers lurking even
around Cinnamon Gardens. This type of
disintegration will not stop here. According to Coomaraswamy, the
opposite of all of this social disintegration the path to reintegration
can only be founded on the common identity of interests of all our
communities. The countries
of Europe, by way of illustration, deadly enemies for centuries,
with far more trouble than ourselves, have founded the European
Union because they have the wisdom to recognize their own best interests.
These lie at the opposite pole to war, chaos and conflict. Europe
knows war - thank God, so far we in Sri Lanka only know about it.
Twenty thousand British soldiers died during the first hour of the
Battle for the Somme, there were two million deaths in all for a
field of mud. Having had these experiences Europeans have chosen
peace and co-operation among themselves. This is truly wise - and
in its own way, quite magnificent determination of future destiny,
on the part of this most influential continent. If we are to
follow this path we must first understand ourselves, not as a multi-communal
nation but as a multi-cultural nation. This is the planet Earth.
And here we are on our island nation called Sri Lanka. We are a multi-cultural
society and we are in the year 1999, with the year 2000 fast approaching.
This is the reality. We must go into the future as we are, not as
we might like to be. Among ourselves,
we do have a common identity of interests and we do have a common
unifying philosophy within which to assert these interests. The traditional
Sri Lankan art of living with its special attitude towards land,
water, and air is still a living heritage. This is what we must
build on, according to Coomaraswamy. There is nothing at all at this moment to prevent us recognizing these common interests and there is nothing to prevent us from co-operating to achieve them.
|
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
