      |
|
|
|
The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 — dangerous high-wire act
Excerpts of the Richard Dimbleby Lecture: Principles of Peace given by Senator George J. MitchellI’ve been asked to speak about my experience in Northern Ireland. I’d like to begin by mentioning two other places which influenced me and my role in Northern Ireland: they are London and the United States.
The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 traces its lineage to the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985 and the Downing Street Declaration of 1993. Despite much difficulty, and over many setbacks, the governments persevered. For that, they deserve more credit than they have gotten. That was particularly true of John Major. I have been disappointed that his contribution has not been properly recognized, especially in the U.S. Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern were brilliant in bringing the process to conclusion but they would be the first to acknowledge that it was their predecessors who set the stage. To those predecessors, British and Irish, and especially to John Major, who kept the process going in exceptionally difficult circumstances, I say well done.
Present in the audience this evening is Lord Mayhew, who served under Major as the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I thank him, and his successor, Mo Mowlam, as individuals and as representatives of the many secretaries, ministers and civil servants, British and Irish, who worked for years in the cause of peace.
Primary credit, of course, must go to the political leaders of Northern Ireland - the men and women who demonstrated great courage and commitment.
After years of effort, the British and Irish Governments finally were able to get peace negotiations underway in June of 1996.
The prime ministers invited me to serve as chairman. I had been involved in Northern Ireland long enough to realize what a daunting task it was. In making my decision I reflected on my own life.
My father was the orphan son of Irish immigrants, who was a janitor. My mother was an immigrant from Lebanon who worked in a textile mill. They had no education. My mother could not read or write English. But because of their efforts, because many people gave me a helping hand along the way, and most importantly because of the openness of American society, I, their son, was able to become Majority Leader of the United States Senate.
So when I, who had been helped by so many, was asked to help others, 1 could not refuse. That the people I was asked to help are in the land of my father’s heritage was just a coincidence. That I could help was what mattered.
The negotiations were the longest, most difficult I’ve ever been involved with. Often, no progress seemed possible. But somehow, we kept going.
There was an especially bleak and dangerous time in the Christmas season of 1997 and the early months of this year. There was a determined effort by men of violence on both sides to destroy the process.
In early December we had tried to get agreement on a statement of key issues to be resolved and on a process for resolving them. Despite intense effort no agreement was possible. When we adjourned for the Christmas holiday the prospects were bleak. If they couldn’t agree on a definition of the key issues, I thought how will they ever agree on solutions to those issues?
Two days after Christmas, a prominent loyalist was murdered in prison. That touched off a sharp increase in sectarian killings, as a vicious cycle of revenge took hold. The negotiations were moved to London in January and to Dublin in February in an effort to encourage progress. But the opposite occurred. The London meeting was largely taken up by the temporary expulsion of the Ulster Democratic Party. The Dublin meeting was taken up by the expulsion of Sinn Fein. The process was moving backward.
It was in mid-February, on the flight from Dublin back to the U.S., that I began to devise a plan to establish an early deadline for an end to the talks. I was convinced that the absence of such a deadline guaranteed failure. The existence of a deadline couldn’t guarantee success - but it made it possible.
It took me a month to put the plan together and persuade all of the participants. By late March they were ready.
I recommended a final deadline of midnight, Thursday, April 9th They all agreed They wanted to reach an agreement. They recognized that there had to be a deadline to force a decision.
As we neared the deadline, there were non-stop negotiations. Blair and Ahern came to Belfast and showed true leadership. There wouldn’t have been an agreement without their personal involvement. When Blair took office in May, 1997, his first trip outside of London was to Belfast. There he demonstrated keen knowledge of the situation and the courage to take risks for peace. In April of this year, in the final stages of the negotiations, he and Ahern took a huge risk when they came to Belfast. There was no assurance of success and most political consultants would have urged them to stay away. But they came and they had a decisive impact. The delegates were particularly impressed that Ahern came to Belfast twice on the day of his mother’s funeral, returning to Dublin at midday for the service and burial. I spent much of that day and night with him, and I don’t recall ever seeing a man at once as exhausted and determined.
Blair and Ahern didn’t just supervise the negotiations. They conducted them. Word by word, line by line, they put together a compromise that attracted support from a broad spectrum of Northern Ireland’s political parties.
It was a dangerous high-wire act. A single misstep meant disaster. But slowly and steadily, with great skill and assurance, they got safely across the divide. President Clinton made an important contribution, as well. He stayed up all night at the White House, telephoning several of the delegates at critical times in the final hours of negotiation. In a tight time frame, a powerful focus was brought to bear and it produced the right result. But the very fact that getting an agreement took such extraordinary effort was a warning signal of the difficulties that would follow as the agreement was implemented.
Finally, in the late afternoon of Good Friday, an agreement was reached. It’s important to recognize that the agreement does not, by itself, guarantee a durable peace, political stability, or reconciliation. It makes them possible. But there will have to be a lot of effort, in good faith, for a long time, to achieve those goals.
I believe the agreement will endure because it’s fair and balanced. It requires the use of exclusively democratic and peaceful means to resolve differences, and it commits all of the parties to the total disarmament of paramilitary organizations. It stresses the need for mutual respect and tolerance between communities. It’s based on the principle that the future of Northern Ireland should be decided by the people of Northern Ireland. It includes constitutional change in Ireland and in the United Kingdom.
It creates new democratic institutions to provide self- governance in Northern Ireland and to encourage cooperation between the North and South for their mutual benefit. It explicitly repudiates the use or threat of violence for any political purpose.
Most importantly for its survival, the agreement was overwhelmingly endorsed by the people of Ireland, North and South, in a free and democratic election. On May 22, in the first all- island vote in eighty years, seventy one percent of voters in the North and ninety five percent of voters in the South voted for the Agreement. That is a strong statement by the people. It sends a powerful message to political leaders that the people want peace and they support the agreement as the way to get it.
In the past few months, I’ve been asked often what lessons Northern Ireland holds for other conflicts. I’ll try to answer that question now.
I begin with caution. Each human being is unique, as in each society. It follows logically, then, that no two conflicts are the same. Much as we would like it, there is no magic formula which, once discovered, can be used to end all conflicts.
But there are certain principles which arise out of my experience in Northern Ireland that I believe are universal.
First, I believe there’s no such thing as a conflict that can’t be ended. They’re created and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings. No matter how ancient the conflict, no matter how hateful, no matter how hurtful, peace can prevail.
When I arrived in Northern Ireland I found, to my dismay, a widespread feeling of pessimism among the public and the political leaders. It’s a small, well-informed society where I quickly became well known. Every day, people would stop me on the street, in the airport, in a restaurant. They always began with kind words: "Thank you Senator." "God bless you." "We appreciate what you’re trying to do." But they always ended in despair. "You’re wasting your time." "This conflict can’t be ended." "We’ve been killing each other for centuries and we’re doomed to go on killing each other forever."
As best I could, I worked to reverse such attitudes. This is the special responsibility of political leaders, from whom many in the public take their cue. Leaders must lead. And one way is to create an attitude of success, the belief that problems can be solved, that things can be better. Not in a foolish or unrealistic way, but in a way that creates hope and confidence among the people.
A second need is for a clear and determined policy not to yield to the men of violence. Over and over, they tried to destroy the peace process in Northern Ireland; at times they nearly succeeded.
In July, three young Catholic boys were burned to death as they slept. In August, a devastating bomb in Omagh killed twenty-nine people and injured 300, Protestant and Catholic alike. These were acts of appalling ignorance and hatred. They must be totally condemned. But to succumb to the temptation to retaliate would give the criminals what they want: escalating sectarian violence and the end of the peace process. The way to respond is to swiftly bring those who committed these crimes to justice and go forward in peace.
That means there must be an endless supply of patience and perseverance. Sometimes the mountains seem so high and rivers so wide that it’s hard to continue the journey. But no matter how bleak the outlook, the search for peace must go on.
Seeking an end to conflict is not for the timid or the tentative. It takes courage, perseverance and steady nerves in the face of violence. I believe it a mistake to say in advance that if acts of violence occur the negotiations will stop. That’s an invitation to those who use violence to destroy the peace process, and it transfers control of the agenda from the peaceful majority to the violent minority.
A third need is a willingness to compromise. Peace and political stability cannot be achieved in sharply divided societies unless there is a genuine willingness to understand the other point of view and to enter into principled compromise. That is easy to say, but very hard to do, because it requires of political leaders that they take risks for peace.
Most political leaders dislike risk-taking of any kind. Most get to be leaders by minimizing risk. To ask them, in the most difficult and dangerous of circumstances, to be bold, is asking much.
But it must be asked of them, and they must respond, if there is to be hope for peace. I know it can be done, because 1 saw it first-hand in Northern Ireland. Men and women, some of whom had never before met, never before spoken, who had spent their entire lives in conflict, came together in an agreement for peace. Admittedly, it was long and difficult. But it did happen. And if it happened there, it can happen elsewhere.
A fourth principle is to recognize that the implementation of agreements is as difficult, and as important, as reaching them. That should be self-evident. But often just getting an agreement is so difficult that the natural tendency is to celebrate, then go home and relax. But as we are now seeing in Northern Ireland, in the Middle East, in the Balkans, getting it done is often harder than agreeing to do it.
Once again, patience and perseverance are necessary. It is especially important that our citizens, British and American, both busy at home and all across the world, not be distracted, or become complacent by the good feeling created by a highly publicized agreement. If a conflict is important enough to get involved in, it must be seen through all the way to a fair and successful conclusion.
This week I met in Cork with the Irish Prime Minister, Bertie Ahern, and in Belfast with the leaders of the new Northern Ireland Assembly and the political parties.
As you know, so far they have been unable to resolve issues relating to formation of the executive and the decomissioning of arms. There is uneasiness among some about the continuing release of prisoners. Next year there will be further controversy when reports are received from independent commission on policing and the criminal justice system. Policing is especially sensitive. Chris Pattern and his colleagues or, that commission have an important and difficult task.
It will take extraordinary determination and commitment to get safely through all of these problems. But I believe it can be done and will be done. It would be an immense tragedy were the process to fail now. The British and Irish Governments and the political leaders of Northern Ireland have come too far to let peace slip away.
The people of Northern Ireland deserve better than the troubles they’ve had over the past several decades. Peace and political stability are not too much to ask for. They are the minimal needs for a decent and caring society.
There’s a final point that to me is so important that it extends beyond open conflict. I recall clearly my first day in Northern Ireland, nearly four years ago. I saw for the first time the huge wall which physically separates the communities in Belfast. Thirty feet high, topped in places with barbed wire, it is an ugly reminder of the intensity and duration of the conflict. Ironically, it’s called The Peace Line.
On that first morning 1 met with Catholics on their side of the wall, in the afternoon with Protestants on their side. Their messages had not been coordinated, but they were the same: In Belfast, they told me, there is a high correlation between unemployment and violence. They said that where men and women have no opportunity, no hope, they are more likely to take the path of violence.
As I sat and listened to them, 1 thought that I could just as easily be in Chicago, or Calcutta, or Johannesburg, or in the Middle East. Despair is the fuel for instability and conflict everywhere. Hope is essential to peace and stability. Men and women everywhere need income to support their
families, and they need the satisfaction of doing something worthwhile and meaningful with their lives.
The conflict in Northern Ireland is obviously not exclusively or even primarily economic. It involves religion and national identity: the majority identify with and want to remain part of the United Kingdom; the minority identify with and want to become part of a united Ireland. The Good Friday agreement acknowledges the legitimacy of both aspirations. And it creates the possibility that economic prosperity will flow from and contribute to lasting peace.
My most fervent hope is that history will record that the Troubles ended on August 15 of this year at Omagh, that the bomb which shattered the calm of that warm summer afternoon was the last spasm of a long and violent conflict. Amidst the death and destruction, there was laid bare the utter senselessness of trying to solve the political problems of Northern Ireland by violence. It won’t work. It will only make things worse.
Two weeks later, I accompanied Prime Minister Blair and President Clinton to Omagh, to meet with the survivors and the relatives of the dead. There were hundreds of people present. Among them were two with whom I spoke and who I will never forget. Claire Gallagher is fifteen years old, tall and lovely, an aspiring pianist. She lost both of her eyes. As we spoke, she sat, with two large white patches where her eyes used to be, an exemplar of grace ant courage.
Michael Monaghan is thirty-three years old. He lost his wife, who was pregnant, their eighteen-month old daughter, and his wife’s mother; three generations wiped out in a single, senseless moment. Michael was left with three children under the age of five. One of them, Patrick, two years old, asks his father every day: "When’s Mommy coming home?"
Despite their terrible and irreparable loss, both Claire and Michael urged that the peace process go forward. Their courage gave me hope. Their determination gave me resolve.
I am not objective. I’m deeply biased in favour of the people of Northern Ireland. Having spent nearly four years among them, I’ve come to like and admire them. While they can be quarrelsome and too quick to take offence, they are also warm and generous, energetic and productive.
They’ve made mistakes but they’re learning from them. They’re learning that violence won’t solve their problems; that unionists and nationalists have more in common than they have differences; that knowledge of their history is a good thing, but being chained to the past is not.
There will be many setbacks along the way, but the direction for Northern Ireland was firmly set when the people approved the Good Friday Agreement in referendum. The people there are sick of war. They’re sick of so many funerals, especially those involving the small white coffins of children, prematurely laid into the rolling green fields of their beautiful countryside. They want peace, and I hope they can keep it.
When the agreement was reached, at about six o’clock on the evening of April 10, we had been in negotiations for nearly two years and continuously for about the last forty hours. We were elated and exhausted. In my parting comments I told them that the agreement was, for me, the realization of a dream that had sustained me for three and a half years, the longest, most difficult years of my life. Now, I said, I have a new dream. It is to return to Northern Ireland in a few years with my young son. We will roam the country, taking in the sights and sounds of that lovely land. Then, on a rainy afternoon, we will drive to Stormont and sit quietly in the visitors gallery in the Northern Ireland assembly.
There we will watch and listen as the members debate the ordinary issues of life in a democratic society - education, healthcare, tourism, agriculture. There will be no talk of war, for the war will have long been over. There will be no talk of peace, for peace will be taken for granted. On that day, the day on which peace is taken for granted in Northern Ireland, I will be fulfilled and people of good everywhere will rejoice.
Coal power at Mawella will cost 40% less than at Kalpitiya
by D. P. Chandrasinghe
Former Chairman, C.E.B.After 50 years of independence it is very clear that the natural resources of this country were not properly used to uplift the quality of life of the majority of the people. For the reasons outlined below the proposed Kalpitiya Coal Power Project should be substituted by a Coal Fired Power Station at Mawella to provide the enormous quantity of electricity at lower cost. A 900 MW Power Station will be generating about 5400 Million units electricity each year. At Mawella the cost of electricity will be about 40% less taking into consideration the saving in transmission losses and annual capital costs. The Mawella site will therefore tend towards sustainable development by reduction of electricity cost. It is therefore incumbent on Her Excellency the President of Sri Lanka to also do what President Premadasa failed to do. On the other hand there is opposition to Coal Power at both Kalpitiya and Mawella. So it is reasonable for the C.E.B. to force itself to Mawella for cheaper electricity. A monopolist Institution failed to understand what is good for the country by their declaration that the Kalpitiya site as ‘Least Cost’ while it is the most expensive and obstructed Grid Connected Small Water Power Development for a very long time. The writer explained in the Island that the 1996 crisis was avoidable by Grid Connected Small Water Power. The people of the country cannot permit the C.E.B. to do all what it likes to do in their own way.
According to the Ceylon Electricity Boards policy any Power Project has to be ‘least Cost’ to qualify for execution. A Project can be described as least cost without a clear understanding of the physical aspects. A person who got a Doctorate on Electric Motors and Generators not on design or operation of Steam Power Stations categorised it as ‘Least Cost’ in ‘The Island’ of 6th April 1998. Mr. E. Carlo Fernando a Civil Engineer who has a general understanding of the physical aspects of Coal Fired Power Stations explained at length many aspects regarding the unsuitability of the site in the Island of 13th May 1998 on ‘Coal Power on the West Coast’. Dr. A. P. K. De Zoysa also wrote under the caption ‘Costing the Coal Option’ in the Island of 22nd May 1997 and explained that the Kalpitiya site is certainly not advisable. The following which are major causes explained by the writer makes the project most expensive and not ‘Least Cost’. The writer had hands on experience in operation / maintenance of Oil and Coal Fired Power Stations. His experience is backed by Power House Design by Sir John F. C. Snell, Past President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, Member of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Member of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Fellow of the Geological Society, Past President of Incorporate Municipal Electrical Association. The writer is pleased to offer the following information for the benefit of all.
Kalpitiya site
More snags about this site are as follows:(a) Transfer of coal by conveyor belt exposes the coal all the time to moisture from the sea spray, and also from torrential tropical rain.
((b)) There are no silos for storage of coal. Therefore the coal gets wet by torrential rains during both monsoons. When wet coal is fed to the furnace the efficiency of extracting the energy from coal falls deviating from Least Cost. To remedy this, it is necessary to dry the coal before entering it to the furnace. Provision for coal drying raises the cost of the Power Plants deviating further from "Least Cost". Why purchase 900 MW now ?
(c) As fresh water is not available at the site for feed water to the boilers, the Project provides for using energy generated by coal to evaporate sea water to obtain fresh water. The large Evaporating Plant reduces further the overall efficiency of the Power Station and also raises further the capital cost. The cost of electricity is raised, further drifting away from "Least Cost".
(d) Additional Heat Exchangers are required for Condenser Cooling as fresh water is not available at Kalpitiya at additional cost for using sea water for the raw water circuit. The cost of cleaning and replacement of heat exchanger tubes will push the project further away from " Least Cost ".
(e) Special pumps are required for the raw water (sea water) pumps for the Heat exchanger. The Heat Exchangers and auxiliaries cost more than the Condensers as a higher quantity of water has to be handled. To reduce down time of the Generating Plant a spare Sea Water Heat Exchanger, By-pass valves and pipes will be required. The cost of Steam Turbine & Condenser is 20% of the total cost of the power house. These also push the project cost further away from "Least Cost ". Items (d) & (e) are major components of the Power Plant and would cost about 20% more of the entire plant cost. With all the other losses, electricity from the Coal Powered Power Plant at Kalpitiya would cost about 40% more than from a Power Station at Mawella. How come Least Cost?
From the above it is clear that local talent was rejected and the project is certainly not "Least Cost", as the physical aspects have not been properly considered. The best already investigated site is Mawella in the South of Sri Lanka, where no Sea Water Evaporators and additional Heat Exchangers are not required, as the Nilwala Ganga is available for feed water. Dr. T. Syambalapitiya skilfully dismisses Small Water Power which entail a gigantic contribution for reduction of fuel costs when they feed the grid during torrential rain and energy is stored in the Reservoirs. Fuel to the value of Rs. 2,000 Million could have been saved in 1996/97.
The Trinco Site
In 1986 a proposal was made by the C.E.B. to build a Coal Fired Power Station up to 1000 MW at Trincomalee. At the first meeting on the subject, the writer was the only person to speak out that the best site should be in the South for both economical and environmental benefits. At that meeting the writer stated, if the Power Station is established in the South, it will be possible to reduce the cost of Electricity as capital costs on transmission and transmission losses will both be reduced. Moreover the loss by damage to the environment for agricultural production will be avoided. This was an on the spot statement without any computer studies. This was on account of many years of reading and Hands on experience.The Mawella Site in the South
This is so far accepted as the best site. This site was fully studied and found very satisfactory from the point of view of economics and environmental considerations. There was public opposition to this site for establishing a Coal Fired Power Station and President Premadasa was not able to convince the Southern boys. This does not mean that any other President cannot convince the South. The young generation is now better educated and it should not be surprising if our present President succeeds in getting the South to agree to what is best for this country. President Premadasa was not allowed to go beyond Beruwala during the General Elections.In contrast to ever rising cost of electricity in Sri Lanka, Electricity Costs in U.K was reduced by 16% to 23% in 1997. Mr. David Jefferies, Chairman of National Grid Group was responsible for this. I had the opportunity of having a long chat with him when he visited Sri Lanka in December 1997, as President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, London.
In England Power Planning is not done by the W.A.S.P. Computer Software which was introduced to Sri Lanka by the money lenders of the World Bank. In England they do not consult the World Bank. Competent Engineers make decisions and implement them. In Sri Lanka Engineers cannot turn right or left without the W. A. S. P. Computer Software. To select a Grid Sub Station Site, they do not determine it by application of Kirchoffs Law which holds good for ever; but, they have to rush to World Bank in Washington for that ! In Sri Lanka most Engineers are used as Computer Operators and not in the art of engineering by originality of thoughts. Mr. Jefferie’s advice was to use the available Run-Of-River Hydro Power to the fullest extent while Thermal Power is extended. Unfortunately development of Run-of-the River Grid Connected Hydro Power was delayed until the Samanalawewa Project failed resulting in the 1996 crisis.
Religion
It forces us to accept the BibleBook Review
Author: Michael Drosnin
Publisher: Simon & Schuster
by J. CarpenterThis is a remarkable book written by a secular, and objective investigative reporter about a remarkable discovery ascribed to a front rank Israel mathematician, an expert in Group Theory - a discovery which, purportedly, has passed peer reviews by leading mathematicians in the US as well as elsewhere and, as it appears, remains unchallenged to date. As summarized in the first cover page itself: "For three thousand years a code in the Bible has remained hidden. Now it has been unlocked by computer - and it may reveal our future." This discovery, now popularly known as The Bible Code, owes its origin to a seminal paper researched and co-authored by Eliyahu Rips - Associate Professor of Mathematics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Doron Witztum and Yoav Rosenberg - researchers at Jerusalem College of Technology. The paper was published, we are told, in Vol. 9, No. 3 of the U.S. scholarly journal, Statistical Science which is published by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
The Rips paper is strictly an essay of significant originality in the cold, objective and sober field of statistical analysis. In the short space of 9 pages Rips and his co-authors have subjected the Hebrew Bible to a serious, objective, and secular study far removed from the realms of faith and theology. To explain the Code’s statistical significance in lay terms, for the purpose of a popular review, is not easy but I will try.
The first step is to show by an example what the Code is not. Take any piece of writing at random from any source - book, journal, magazine or whatever - and perform a simple exercise. I choose the Daily News Editorial of Saturday July 18, 1998. Call it E. Next devise a sentence of your own. Take the sentence : "The Bible is true". Call it S. Now it is plain that by choosing any particular letter "L" which occurs in E, to start from, and moving forward sequentially and selecting the required letters in due order, I can construct the words to make up S.
Let us start with the first word of E which is the first word of S.
The 4th letter is b
The 14th letter is i
The 24th letter is b
The 33rd letter is l
The 39th letter is e
The 40th letter is i
The 53rd letter is s
The 60th letter is t
The 73rd letter is r
The 136th letter is u
The 147th letter is e
This completes the sentence building exercise, but, you will note that I have not achieved anything significant in the sense that there is no consistent pattern in the number of letters I have to skip to get from each selected letter to the next. It is true that due to the manner of my choice, the first four letters occur consecutively, but from then on I have to skip, 10, 10,9,6,1,13,7,13,63 and 11 letters to build S out of my random choice, E.
Now suppose that instead of choosing the start letter as I have done. I were to choose any other letter ‘t’ in, E to start with, and, moving forward sequentially, I were to find that the rest of the letters in S occur in equidistant letter sequences (ELS). In popular language, I am supposed to discover that by skipping, say, 8 letters each time, I am able to build S out of E from the starting point in E chosen by me. Intuitively, what I have supposed, I cannot achieve, because it is highly improbable that I could find any written source be it E or any other, wherein, by starting with any letter ‘t’ and skipping 8 letters at regular intervals, the sentence S can be so built. Such an outcome as that which I have supposed could be called impossible, improbable, highly improbable, very highly improbable or even miraculous.
The question is whether what l have supposed in the last paragraph or something similar has been found in any written source. The answer apparently is yes. The Bible Code, it has been discovered, is embedded in the Hebrew version of the Bible. To master the processing or selection of letters and words out of any mass of words, however large, Rips and his co-authors have developed a computer program - call it P. Using P, and taking one at a time out of a randomly-chosen sample of famous historical names of persons from the past, P purportedly gives a precise location of the chosen name and associated words that occur in ELS to point Precisely to historical meaningful events that have actually happened in man’s historical-past.
Perhaps the most sensational event in recent times that was located by the Code about a year before it happened was that of the possible assassination of Israeli Premier Yetzhak Rabin. In September 1994, Drosnin flew to Israel with a written message for Rabin which was delivered to him by a close friend of his, the poet Chaim Guri. Extracts from the message merit reproduction here: "An Israeli mathematician has discovered a hidden code in the Bible that appears to reveall the details of events that took place thousands of years after the Bible was written .... . The reason I am telling you this is that the only time your full name - Yitzhak Rabin - is encoded in the Bible, the words "assassin that will assassinate’ cross your name. That should not be ignored, because the assassination of Anwer Sadat and both John and Robert Kennedy are also encoded in the Bible - the case of Sadat with the first and last names of his killer, and the date of the murder and the plan and how it was done. I think you are in real danger, but that the danger can be averted." When Guri received the message for delivery to Rabin, he had told Drosnin, "He won’t believe you. He’s not at all a mystic. And he is a fatalist." We all now know what happened on 4 November 1995 - a little over a year after the warning was given. Drosnin’s intellectual honesty is revealed in this further statement which was also included in his message to Rabin: "No one can tell you whether an event that is encoded is pre-determined, or is only a possibility. My own guess is that it is only a possibility that the Bible encodes all the possibilities, and what we do determines the actual outcome".
Two interesting questions arise. Why is the Rips paper unique if, as it appears, the Code was embedded in the Bible all these thousands of years, and, is the Code uniquely to be found only in the Bible. In other words, why could not a preacher, evangelist or theologian discover this code earlier? The general answer that can be given is that the majority of Bible scholars and enthusiasts don’t know mathematics and the majority of those who know mathematics don’t know the Bible! But one man who knew his mathematics and the Bible in equal measure was that supreme English genius, Sir Isaac Newton. Why did the Code elude him if, as we are told, he pursued the Code with a passion no less intense than that which led him to his discoveries and inventions in mathematics and physics which transformed an epoch. For information on the theological labours of Isaac Newton and in particular his search for the Bible Code, Drosnin has referred us to three sources: John Maynard Keynes’s Essays and Sketches in Biography (Meridian Books) pp 280 - 290, Richard S. Westfall’s, The Life of Isaac Newton (Cambridge University Press, 193 p 125) and Westfall’s earlier 1980 biography of Newton, Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton (Cambridge University Press - 1980 p 346 et seq). The answer given by Drosnin which seems plausible but heretical to admirers of Newton, is that Newton lacked the advantage of a computer! Does this mean that even an average person of today, who can cleverly twiddle at the keyboard of a computer possesses powers potential exceeding those of Newton?
The other question is whether the Code is, uniquely, to be found only in the Hebrew Bible. Evidently, Rips applied the Code - which is essentially a computer program - to Tolstoy’s War and Peace but could not uncover any persons or events from man’s past; evidently there were no predictions of man’s future either.
But I do not think that the negative outcome from the application of the Code to War and Peace is a sufficient answer. We all know, at second hand of course, of the purported existence of recorded scripts in India which evidently contain personal details of every individual who would like to consult such sources, for a payment of course! There is nothing to rule out the possibility that an Indian mathematician might some day give Rips treatment to the ancient Indian religious scriptures and come up with a code which might put paid to the magical presences of those who make money out of seemingly accurate "Kaandam" readings. But these remarks are not meant to derogate from the credit which is rightly due to Rips for unlocking by computer what it seems, eluded even the great Isaac Newton.
Drosnin’s book opens with two quotes which are far separated in time. One is from the Book of Daniel 12:4 - ‘But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book until the time of the End". The other is from Einstein . The distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, however persistent." The central theme of the hook is that the unlocking of the Code towards the end of this millennium affords Man the opportunity to avoid the coming Armageddon. This appears to render Revelation into a bundle of possibilities. The world’s power leaders, acting in unison can avert the clash of arms and the destruction of civilization, because Man has uncovered the Code just in time to know such possibilities and avoid such of them which, if ignored, could prove disastrous,.
One last question which can be raised is: What kind of genius could have devised the Code and hidden it behind the Hebrew Bible for three thousand years. If he was a mathematician, he was obviously great and clever enough to hide this device even from the mighty reach of Isaac Newton. Is this last question the same as asking what kind of person is God? Is God after all a Supreme Mathematician and not the simple Big Daddy in the sky? In the last paragraph of what I always found to be the most difficult, challenging and ennobling chapter in his timeless classic, "Science And The Modern World" the great A.N. Whitehead summed up his chapter under the heading GOD thus; "Among medieval and modern philosophers, anxious to establish the religious significance of God, an unfortunate habit has prevailed of paying to Him, metaphysical compliments.
He has been conceived as the foundation of the metaphysical situation with its ultimate activity. If this conception is adhered to, there can be no alternative except to discern in Him the origin of all evil as well as of all good. He is then the supreme author of the play, and to Him must therefore be ascribed its shortcomings as well as its success. If He be conceived as the supreme ground for limitation, it stands in His very nature to divide the God from the Evil, and to establish Reason within her dominions supreme." That was Whitehead thinking and writing in l925. Five years later, in 1930, the great English astro-physicist Sir James Jeans in his memorable Rede lecture delivered before the University of Cambridge - later published in book form under the title "THE MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE’ said or wrote thus in the last chapter: "Into The Deep Waters": (Page 115 - beginning with line 16) "In the same way, a scientific study of the action of the universe has suggested a conclusion which may be summed up, though very crudely and quite inadequately, because we have no language at our command except that derived from our terrestrial concepts and experience, in the statement that the universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician."
Fifty years or so later, in 1987 to be exact, Stephen Hawking - considered by many to be Einstein’s heir - concluded his most famous and popular book "A Brief History of Time" with this remarkable turnaround from the pronounced atheistic stance adopted in the earlier part of his book.".... then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be asked to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -for then we would know the mind of God."
Buddhism, religion and hypocrisy
by Kingsley HeendeniyaI have read a discussion in the newspapers relating to the first of the five Buddhist precepts about abstaining from killing living creatures, eating meat, the ban on slaughter of cattle on certain days - and the hypocrisy of it all! The following points have so far emerged:
• Buddhists have no guilt in eating fish, prawns, chicken etc.
• Doctors and patients are killing germs etc. with antibiotics
• Plants too have life
• Eskimos cannot become Buddhists and this is unfair.
There is validity - and absurdity - in this line of thinking. To pursue would be like unwinding a ball of thread recklessly and get entangled. The inference is that something is wrong in the teaching of the Buddha in this regard. This is ignorance or misunderstanding of the central theme of his doctrine. There is however validity in the accusation of hypocrisy. So I shall at the outset quote from a radio talk of the famous German monk, Nyanatiloka Maha Thera, late High Priest of the Island Hermitage, Dodanduwa, Sri Lanka, he gave more than 50 years ago I have read in the Wheel Publications No. 394/396, Buddhist Publications Society.
Quote. Belief in the moral efficacy of mere external rite and ritual (silabbata-paramasa) constitutes, according to the Buddha’s teaching, a mighty obstacle to inner progress. One who takes in mere external practices is on the wrong path. For, in order to gain real inner progress, all our efforts must necessarily be based on our own understanding and insight. Any real progress is rooted in right understanding, and without right understanding there will be no attainment of unshakable peace and holiness. Moreover, this blind belief in mere external practices is the cause of much misery and wretchedness in the world. It leads to mental stagnation and intolerance, to self-exaltation and contempt for others, to contention, discord, war, strife and bloodshed, as history of the Middle Ages quite sufficiently testifies. This belief in mere externals dulls and deadens one’s power of thought, stifles every higher emotion in man. It makes him a mental slave, and favours the growth of all kinds of hypocrisy.
Elsewhere in this slender book, he says that it is in the teaching of anatta (No-soul) by the Buddha that his teaching either stands or falls. Buddhist doctrine is unique only in this and in the teaching of Paticca Samappada or Dependent Origination. For example, belief in rebirth and the ceaseless flux of existence has been held from Heraclitus, probably by all people on Earth long before the Buddha.
The five precepts are outlined in the Anguttara Nilraya III 40: Killing, stealing, adultery, lying, backbiting, harsh speech and empty prattling, practiced, cultivated and frequently engaged in will lead to hell, the animal world or the realm of ghostsÉ Whose kills and is cruel, will either go to hell, or if reborn as a human, will be short lived. Whose tortures other beings, will be afflicted with disease. The hater will be hideous, the envious will be without influence, the stubborn will be of low rank, the indolent will be ignorant.
The discourses of the Buddha, as written several hundred years after his death show that he was essentially a teacher of the common man and used colloquial language, simile, metaphor, analogy, reasoning and elucidation at various levels, going deep when talking to persons who could tune into his wavelength. After his Enlightenment, from his own relentless effort, he briefly hesitated to declare what he found because it was abstruse and transcendental. Prof. W. S. Karunaratne in his lectures on "Buddhism Its Religion And Philosophy" 1988, says that the Sutras (discourses) were given by the Buddha in a discursive style, rambling and repetitious. The Buddha has not defined anything. Semantics began with the exegesis of his teaching long after his death. The Rabbi wrangle over the Torah. Jesus often spoke in parables. Mohammed intoned the suras in words that rise and fall with the voice. The Vedas, the Bhagavatgita and the scriptures of the Hindus use imagery and cadence. None of the Teachers used words say, like Russell or Wittgenstein.
When the Buddha spoke about abstaining from killing living creatures, he was not referring to microorganisms, plants and food that people ate. Bacteria etc were not then discovered. Even now no one knows where life begins and ends because the distinction between the living and the non-living is blurred. Retribution or kamma-vipaka is not quantifiable as for example, if you kill an ant and I an elephant, is my share elephant-times that of the ant? The key to the understanding of this (and all issues in the teaching) is the state of mind or cetana or volition. " Volition (cetana), monks, do I call kamma (action). Through volition one does the kamma by means of body, speech or mind". The Buddha does not mention ‘writing’ simply because the language he spoke, Prakrit, was only spoken. In this age of multimedia, one can therefore justify immunity from retributive action for indulging in video- pornography and the Internet!
Prof. Karunaratne has written a detail discussion and analysis of the mind (Citta) and the mental states (Cetasika) from deep study of commentaries and exegetical works of ancient thinkers such as Buddhagosa, Buddhatta,, Anuruddha, Yasomitra, from the dissident sects Yasomitra, Sauntrantikas, the literature of the Mahayana etc and there is no agreement about the definition of the mind or mental states. No one is certain about the locus of the "mind". Only Buddhists of the Theravada in Sri Lanka claim it is in the heart! There is a forest of words and I doubt if most persons know what they mean or see the wood for the trees. There are many tautologies.
Perhaps that is the reason why the late Walpola Rahula advised me to stay away from study of the Abbidhamma (Buddhist metaphysics) because it is composed after the demise of the Buddha, there is more than one version, and metaphysics is not essential to understand and practice the teaching of the Buddha for ordinary persons like me. Unfortunately, it is this stuff that is expatiated by persons who pontificate to make us assume that they make weekend return trips to Nirvana! Rahula told me that these concepts are transcendental states of mental discipline, training and development in which experience is not communicable and there are no words to express them. The doctrine of the Buddha is personal and experiential. My friend Nyanavira of Bundala about whose life and death I wrote sometime ago told me that "the picture is not complete without the doctrine of re-birth" and that was enough for him. Sir Arthur Clarke who was intrigued by attempts to explain it in terms of quantum physics wrote to me that the pursuit should be given "a few decades of benign neglect!". Before long someone will dig the mathematics of Stephen Hawkins, black holes and singularity and claim that physics is a nanosecond away from Nirvana!.
All religions have acquired abundant hypocrisy in dogma, practice, priest-craft. The Pope who started to build St. Peter’s Cathedral and had to raise money sold indulgences, until Luther protested. Excommunication did not worry him. The Thugs adopted one of the thousands of Hindu gods, Kali the goddess of death, robbed and strangled wayfarers. Shiites and Sunni Muslims are yet murdering each other because they cannot agree about the heir of Mohammed. There is a young Buddhist priest who is campaigning to cleanse Buddhism from Vishnu and ancestor worship and straining to become a Delphic Oracle. In a recent TV chat show I saw him with a specialist in diabetes disguised as a psychiatrist! A few days ago a friend, a judge of the Appeal Court, reminded me that when the presence of parading the Tooth Relic is made annually in Kandy, they do it to the rhythm of tom-toms beaten on the hides of cattle. And so on, and so on.
Religions are politicized to play to the masses. As the late Balangoda Ananda Maiitriya said, Buddhism is for about 5% of the population. (incidentally, a sea captain from Finland was a pupil of Nyanatiloka at the Island Hermitage but he could not stand up to the rigour of the mental training and left. I met him but do not know if he is an Eskimo trying to practice Buddhism as it should be understood]. A lawyer might next argue that because the discourses of the Buddha as written in Pali begin with the words "Thus have I heard...", the teaching is hearsay. It is stupid to quarrel about mere words.
 |