REJECTING ENGAGING

VIOLENCE VIOLENCE

There is not one but two

recognized ways of
looking at violence …
We are in the midst of violence,
and it is increasing. We need
desperately to make sense of
this violence. In order to do so
we must first make sense of the
way we think about violence.
This is because unknown to
ourselves the way we think
about violence may in fact be a
contributory factor towards it.
Everything in Sri Lanka is
connected. It is more so because
we are an island. The actual
parties to the violence are
connected by a web of human
relationships to all other human
beings who live and work here.
This connection is not a mere
matter of imagination but a
reality that must be felt deep
within us.
It seems to me that there are
two views on violence – one
dualistic and one holistic.
According to the dualistic view
we have ideas of good and bad;
right and wrong. We understand
the world by dividing it. This is in
fact a childish mode of
processing information. Normally
when a child grows up he or she
learns to appreciate the shades
of grey; the sophisticated idea
that people and events are
neither wholly good nor wholly
bad but a mixture of both.
The ‘shades of grey’ approach
comes under a lot of pressure
when it comes to moral issues,
like abortion, violent crime,
violence against women, child
abuse and terrorism.
What we do in such cases is to
revert back to the childish mode
in order to make sense of what
we really cannot understand.
In this way the only explanation
that can be given by dualist
thinkers for violence is that it is
‘bad’ or ‘wrong.’
In short we judge what we
cannot understand. From this
view, peace and violence are
opposites. One assumes the
absence of the other. There is a
sharp line between them and
they cannot coexist.
According to the holistic view of
violence the world is seen, not in
compartments of good and bad
but as a whole. This whole
includes the past and the
context. Relationships are
appreciated so that actions are
viewed and understood in
context.
From this perspective an action
is not maximized or blown up
due to its ‘sensational’ nature.
We know that when this happens
the context gets minimized.
According to this view violence is
looked at non-judgmentally; as
an objective fact. It is a message
of nature, and like all messages
of nature it is based on a set of
causes.
From this perspective violence is
neither good nor bad but an
objective fact based on objective
causes. Likewise peace too
would be an objective fact based
on objective causes.
Moreover peace and violence are
not opposed to each other. They
are partners that give way to the
other in the same way that day
gives way to night, sun gives
way to the moon, land gives way
to the sea and vice versa. There
is no sharp line, for example,
dividing the day from night.
What we need to understand is
that there is a flow, a universal
scheme of things that we cannot
turn back. When the conditions
are ripe, when the time is right,
things happen naturally. Our
ability to change things
therefore requires us to know
where things are right now and
which way they are heading. It
is by understanding these two
things that we can learn to
gradually undermine the
negatives and enhance the
positives.
We can love the day and hate
the night. This is our personal
preference. It does not change
the fact that there are reasons
underlying both. If we don’t
really see or understand these
reasons it is our problem; not
that something is inherently
wrong with the night.
If we are in the middle of the sea
there is no point in asserting that
we should be on land. We need
to acknowledge that we are at
sea as an objective fact.
Secondly we must work out the
distance to land and the
conditions that would enable us
to travel that distance.
The man who takes a dualistic
view by dividing that which is
whole does violence to himself in
thought. This same violence can
be translated to words and then
deeds and ultimately become
habit that forms, or let us say
deforms character.
The connection between violence
in thought, word and deed is
significant. By uttering careless
words another equally careless
man may be provoked to
violence. In this case there would
be a causal nexus between both
acts. It is sheer speculation to
wonder which act of violence
deserves more censure.
This short composition does not
seek to censure any one. It
merely seeks to point out that
there are two views on violence;
and that we need to work out
which view is being articulated
by the speaker.
It may also be noted that the
holistic view does not really
challenge the dualistic view or
deny the obvious reality that
many people cling hard to it. It
simply takes a higher or broader
view – and most importantly
does not prevent its holder from
sympathizing (though not
agreeing) with the dualistic view.
Moving away from
violence requires us to
 move away from insecure. The key proposition
here is that human suffering is
monologues … the result of flawed
communication where
Violence is the product of a monologues replace dialogue. In
fragmented and alienated extreme cases this leads to
society which shares a dualistic physical violence and a
state of mind. Divisions are real. continuing series of negative
Even though these are consequences.
constructed barriers fear and
mistrust ensure they remain to What is interesting to note is that
block a genuine dialogue – the violence is not only caused by
pre – condition for breaking the monologues between the
vicious cycle of holistic violence relevant parties. It also leads to
i.e. violence in thought, word and further monologues. There is a
deed. lot of talking done by all sides,
but they have different
Words are the vehicles of objectives, different jargon and
thought and we need to use essentially different languages.
language skillfully to move away So we end up with an orchestra
from this culture of violence. gone crazy; all the players are
playing to their own tunes and
Violent language is an there is no conductor to
indispensable part of any culture harmonize and balance the
of violence. This is much broader music.
than language which is obviously
violent in a physical sense. It Some of the clearest examples of
encompasses the full range of insensitivity and dualistic speech
dualistic thought and expression emanate from the religious
of human beings. Let us go to sphere. In times of violence we
the beginnings of human look to the religions for guidance.
communication to understand Instead of help what we normally
this. get is egoistic, self affirming and
self serving jargon which
Most of our communication assumes that only ‘my religion’
lessons are learnt as infants in has the answers and ‘only the
our interactions with our founder of my religion has got it
immediate caregivers. These right.’ This kind of speech, apart
lessons are carried over to from failing to address the real
adulthood. Where there is issues at hand also alienate the
connection and empathy in these listeners and eventually make
communications needs are them anti-religion A or B. The
understood and met and we baby is thrown out with the bath
become happy, balanced and water and whatever good can be
secure people. If not, we become obtained from religious teachings
unhappy, imbalanced and
are also shut out in this sea of humanists and leaders,
monologues. professionals must engage with
society and human rights
The same goes for politicians, advocates must also work on the
lawyers and human rights side of human relationships.
advocates. They all come out
with their own professional The present monologues, apart
jargon. No one really steps out to from dealing with issues at a
engage with the reality of biased political and
violence – as a human being. conceptualized level seek to
Mahatma Gandhi once said: cover up this subjective and self-
serving act under the guise of
There are so many religions as there objectivity.
are individuals …

Let me explain what I mean by religion.

An assessment of the objective
It is not the Hindu religion … but the evidence and an objective
religion that transcends Hinduism, conclusion is not the end of the
which changes one’s very nature, which matter. This is what criminal
binds one indissolubly to the truth courts do. Let us stop pretending
within and which ever purifies.
to be judges and Gods. There is
something more that we need in
We have traded our humanity for
any assessment of the causes of
a professional identity and then
societal violence. This is a
got trapped in it. Within an
deeper level of subjectivity at a
institutional structure which has
personal and collective level. We
separated and
need to search our own souls
compartmentalized issues as
first.
political, economic, social, legal,
religious, psychological and the
Violence ultimately originates in
latest category thrown in –
the self. If we shut out the
human rights, our roles are
knowledge that comes from deep
confined to what we are
personal experience in a quest
professionally competent to
for ‘scientific evidence that can
speak on and do. Venturing out
be objectively verified’ our
to engage with the reality is
understanding will be impersonal
unorthodox, subjective and
and impoverished by a lack of
‘unprofessional’.
personal insight. We need a
balance between personal and
This is the very structure which
impersonal view points –
has bred and nurtured violence;
between spiritual and scientific
and we look to it to provide
approaches to form a truly
solutions! This is our tragedy.
holistic conception of the causes
Breaking out involves re-defining
of violence.
and re-interpreting personal,
professional and institutional
This is what Truth and
roles. Politicians must become
Reconciliation Commissions have
done in other countries. However
they cannot succeed where a
whole blanket of deception has
been thrown over our public and
private lives.
We Sri Lankans have been
deceiving ourselves for a long
time and we have never really
shown any capacity for humility
and honesty. Given this national
weakness and moral failure we
must be ready to face more and
more violence till that day dawns
when we fall on this earth and
seek forgiveness for our
collective sins.
We are all guilty of violence.
Even if we have not descended
to the physical level we have, as
ignorant human beings
committed violence at the level
of thought and words. In a little
island like ours these three levels
of violence – spiritual, verbal and
physical are inextricably inter-
linked. Let us now share the
blame, as men and women of
nobility and courage. And let us
share the responsibility for
ending violence together.