On Old Age-an essay

Petrarch in his ‘Epistle to Posterity’ after lifetime of literary creativity, in his ninetieth year could say thus, “My works are many, and I am old; yet I can still fatigue and tire myself with writing more.” David Hume, the philosopher found in his old age that only death could interrupt the pleasure he was receiving from Lucian. He summed up his feeling of old age thus, “ Happily on retiring from the world I found my taste for reading return, even with greater avidity.” For Edward Gibbons writing the History( The Fall and Decline of the Roman Empire) was even more reason to change his tack and immerse himself in the writings of Homer, Aristophanes and Plato. Adam Smith who made his fame secure with Wealth of Nations also found great pleasure, with same ardor of a student, in the tragic poets of Greece.
Is it possible to rekindle the same passion for literature as in youth? Petrarch who not long before his death had written to a friend “I read, I write, I think; such is my life, and my pleasures as they were in my youth. Death came finally while he was busy with making notes on a book he wanted to take up next. His servants found him slumped over his books as before and they didn’t think it amiss. It was long before they discovered he was no more.
The life of Sir. Robert Walpole (1676-1745), the first Prime Minister of England offers us another insight into ‘the hoary age that cracks the weak- / Life holds for them no meaning yet/ What is left for them but seek/
Death that is slow in coming?’
When the first minister of the crown was, in a cloud of scandal, dismissed from his position he returned to his library at Houghton. Looking at his collection, which was his pride he pulled out one book and he pored over the page, then another. He put it back in its place and took out another. After handling them in this fashion he turned away and burst into tears. “I have led a life of business so long, cried he, that I have lost my taste for reading and now,- what shall I do?”
How sad it is to see lives of some of the brightest and fertile minds joining the crowd that want to make a success and leave what is their real bent. They make a killing at the stocks or play up to the power so they may also display their symbols of success like every one else and dispense favors to seekers of power and status. Yes they succeed and then they realize the road less traveled could have added to their lives the very key that was to the true riches. It is easier to trivialize life than adorn it with the true greatness of character. It is what you may find in your youth and invested wisely so it has power to move those who are around you and also open others to alternatives to letting life lead you where it will.
The irony of life is wisdom of old age come from certain intimations of youth that is a hunch proved right.
benny

Read Full Post »

On Reading- an essay

The Pleasure of Books

Books are one way of communicating with the dead and the past. It is a mystical experience pure and simple.
There are those who are, as Isaac Disraeli the father of the British Prime Minister would describe, men with one book. Sir William Jones read the works of Cicero every year. Demosthenes felt such delight in the history of Thucidides, and in order to obtain a familiar and perfect mastery of his style he copied his history eight times. Selim the Second had the commentaries of Caesar translated for his use; and it is recorded that his military ardor was heightened by his reading. (Ack: Curiosities in Literature-vol iv)
Charles Laughton in recent times was known to write down in long hand the specimen works of an author before he played the role for the screen. By this method he had spiritually put on the mantle of Rembrandt or any other as it were.
Napoleon in his youth read Plutarch so extensively that it showed. When he visited his homeland on a furlough he had long chats with General Paoli, whose adjutant his father had been long ago. At the end of their conversation once, the old General shook his head and said, ’There is nothing modern about you, Napoleon, you come from the age of Plutarch.’ Harry Truman as a fledgling senator found use for Parallel Lives by Plutarch,- and human nature being such, he found Greek and Roman counterparts in the modern senators he came to deal with,- and thanks to his reading, he was forewarned to survive the Washington political jungle.
ii.
Reading an autobiography has all the charm of conversing with a mind that is very much before you and whether he has come down to your level or you have been lifted to his does not spoil the mood. You are open for impressions of his time and his train of thoughts. It is no wonder a book, imaginary or true when it is well written has the power to break down the illusion of time and place. Even after Arthur Conan Doyle’s death, letters have come in for his brainchild, the immortal sleuth Sherlock Holmes. Much earlier when Samuel Richardson wrote Clarissa it created a sensation.
One day Mrs. Barbauld was going to Hampstead in the stagecoach, she had a Frenchman for her companion. In chatting with him she realized he was making a trip to Hampstead for the express purpose of seeing the house in the Flask Walk where Clarissa lodged.
Recently Dan Brown’s bestseller The Da Vinci Code made droves of visitors follow the route that the hero had taken to crack the code.
An appeal of books whether formatted in electronic ink or on paper is what it contains. Life of man and woman may be a constant search for meaning around which each may arrange his or her days in order. Unfortunately reality allows no such easy way out. Powerful books serve as a mirror where we see our lives reflected back to us complete with much needed insight, even though much of details have undergone some changes. Balzac’s imagination was such he could invest in them reality needed enough. When an admirer, one day brought news of a common acquaintance who was ill Balzac heard him for a while and asked, ’But let’s get back to reality. Who is going to marry Eugenie Grandet?’
Oscar Wilde in his own characteristic way summed up effect of Balzac’s books on a reader. ’A steady course of Balzac reduces our living friends to shadows…;who would care to go out to meet Tomkins, the friend of one’s boyhood, when one can sit at home with Lucien de Rubempré(one of Balzac’s characters)? It is pleasanter to have an entrée to Balzac’s society than to receive from all the duchesses of Mayfair’.

2
An alderman of Oxford religiously read Defoe’s classic each year and believed Robinson Crusoe was a real person. Great was dismay to be told by a friend it was not so. He also said it was based loosely on a true incident which befell a Scottish sailor by name Alexander Selkirk.
He replied that he wished that he were not informed the truth ‘for in undeceiving me, you have deprived me of one of the greatest pleasures of my old age.’
3.
Benjamin Franklin
At a dinner party where Benjamin Franklin was one of the distinguished guests he was asked by Abbe Raynal, ”What kind o f man deserves the most pity?”
Franklin answered, ”A lonesome man on a rainy day, who does not know how to read.”
4.
Harry S. Truman had a lonely childhood, made worse by his physical debilities. He took to wearing glasses since he was six years old. He was a voracious reader mostly of history. Later in life he would say much of his political acumen and understanding of people he had gathered out of Plutarch.
In 1957 Truman during an interview asserted that Alexander the Great died as a result of drinking 33 quarts of wine.
The interviewer was puzzled at the figure and checked up with the Library of Congress. With great difficulty the researcher unearthed in an obscure and long out of print volume of the Ancient Greeks he found that the President was right after all.
5.
John Dryden(1631-1700)the Poet Laurate was unhappily married and his literary pursuits annoyed his wife all the more.
Once she faulted him,’Lord Mr. Dryden,how can you always be poring over these musty books? I wish I were a book and then I should have more of your company.’
‘Pray my dear,’ was his answer, ‘if you do become a book let it be an almanack, for then I’ll change you every year’.
Their conjugal life must have been strained for the poet to compose the following epitaph for her.
‘Here lies my wife: here let her lie!
Now she’s at rest, and so am I’

6.
Mark Twain was traveling through Europe and at one point he had an Englishman in his compartment. Having introduced himself Mark Twain turned his attention to his reading. His companion startled him by saying,’ Mr. Clemens I would give ten pounds not to have read your Huckleberry Finn.’
And when the author looked up, awaiting an explanation of this extraordinary remark, the Englishman smiled and added: ’So I could again have the pleasure of reading it for the first time.’

benny

Read Full Post »

What Ails Kashmir?

Introduction
Kashmir has become the petri dish of the 21st century and thus it shall be viewed by political scientists of the future. What would challenge their concepts of a modern state is not where state and religion may cohabit neither detracting from the other, but to what extent a state may let religion its free exercise of its hold on their believers. Religion is self expression of belief and it must remain where it belongs as springboard for impulses and actions that which could be best expressed for the common good of the society. If prayer is a cornerstone of one’s belief- system praying to his god or Allah or whatever that he may be instrument of peace to all and conducting himself to live at peace makes him serve his private belief and the requirements of the state. Instead to use certain passages from here and there and sow discord and disaffection to all and sundry must be practicing a religion of hate. Looking at what goes on in Kashmir I wonder if a mixture of state and religion have not been applied wrongly. As a preface I only need to compare her early history and now.
Kashmiri culture,melting pot of many faiths
Historically The Muslims and Hindus of Kashmir lived in relative harmony, since the Sufi way had much in common with the Rishi tradition of Kashmiri Pandits. Hindus and Muslims revered the same local saints and prayed at the same shrines in the former times and this was but one example that their culture didn’t require man’s belief as a hurdle for acceptance. Their culture, I mean Kashmiri culture, had absorbed from various belief-systems Hinduism, Buddhism. Later in 1349 Shah Mir became the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir. For the next five centuries, Muslim monarchs ruled Kashmir, including the Mughals, who ruled from 1526 until 1751, then the Afghan Durrani Empire that ruled from 1747 until 1820. That year, the Sikhs under Ranjit Singh, annexed Kashmir. In 1846, upon the purchase of the region from the British under the Treaty of Amritsar, the Dogras—under Gulab Singh—became the new rulers.
We can see fortunes of this state followed the turn of history as followed elsewhere- and the only pivot that history revolves upon in true sense of the word, is on changes.
If under the rulership of Hindu kings were grievances by any particular section the aggrieved parties had recourse to change what was evil. History shows Kashmir tolerated their rulers both good and bad and their culture, arts and literature were never in danger of annihilation. From all records set down by the historians, travelers and officials we do not see systematic extermination of the minorities and their way of life in the state as we have seen of the Jews and Gypsies under the Nazi Regime.
Law is paramount-The Act of 1947
It is true Jammu and Kashmir has a Muslim majority population. As with changes being the only course of history it is neither special if at present Islam is practiced by about 67% of the population of the state and by 97% of the population of the Kashmir valley,. Against this in order to put the demographical changes in perspective, we need to account for Buddhists and Sikhs as well. According to political scientist Alexander Evans, approximately 95% of the total population of 160,000–170,000 of Kashmiri Brahmins, also called Kashmiri Pandits, (i.e. approximately 150,000 to 160,000) left the Kashmir Valley in 1990 as militancy engulfed the state. According to an estimate by the Central Intelligence Agency, about 300,000 Kashmiri Pandits from the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir have been internally displaced due to the ongoing violence. The state of Kashmir under the union of India cannot be treated as altogether another entity since the Indian Independence Act 1947 gave rise to the creation of two new nations: the Union of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. This Act had validated Pakistan and India as well as voided the British suzerainty over the 562 Indian princely states. According to the provisions of this Act these states were left to choose whether to join India or Pakistan or to remain independent. Jammu and Kashmir, the largest of the princely states chose India and the provisions laid in the Act have been met. Period. The fact that there is a predominantly Muslim population or it was determined by a Hindu ruler (Maharaja Hari Singh) do not invalidate the union. To sum if Pakistan is a nation so is India and the state’s choice also legally correct.
In October 1947, Muslim revolutionaries in western Kashmir and Pakistani tribals from Dir entered Kashmir intending to liberate it from Dogra rule. Unable to withstand the invasion, the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession that was accepted by the government of India on 27 October 1947.
Shifting focus
Now in order to understand what ails Kashmir we need to separate those players who have no right to be there whether in the form of ideologues or as fighters. For example what is the interest of Al-Qaeda in a purely internal issue? If they want to organize a campaign of terror in Kashmir the only way that can be done is with the help of Pakistan. Apart from the majority of Jammu and Kashmir being Muslims there is nothing that legally binds India to entertain the interference of Pakistan. When Mujahiddins were being armed and trained in Afghanistan against Soviet Russia in the Eighties it was known that the Talibans were largely helped by Pakistan. We see its repercussions even now. Only that Pakistan is forced into a false position where they have to fight Al-Qaeda elements hiding in northwestern Pakistan. (Their collusion with Taliban in Afghanistan then has now created homegrown Taliban forces.) Therefore Al-Qaeda wants Pakistan to fight India on the issue of Kashmir. Thereby they reason it will force Pakistan to move its troops to the border with India and relieve pressure on them. (US Intelligence analysts say al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives in Pakistan-administered Kashmir are helping terrorists they had trained in Afghanistan to infiltrate Indian administered Kashmir. There is nothing that can verify reports from the media of Al Qaeda presence in the state. As it seems now it is a proxy war waged by Kashmir militant groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed in Pakistan. It must be noted that Waziristan has now become the new battlefield for Kashmiri militants who were now fighting NATO in support of Al-Qaeda. Kashmir issue has now owing to run of events that originally had nothing to do with Kashmir state or India as a Republic have become free for all. It is not politics but religion as interpreted by some that hogging up the headlines.
After Islam what then?
From experience it has been brought home with regards to the Kashmir issue in a chilling manner, terrorism has completely kept away the focus so a new trail is impacted into the sub-continent where religion may if allowed would do away with geographical boundaries that was sacrosanct earlier. An Islamic crescent from Europe to Russia straddling Asia is what some extremist Islamic groups harbor in depths of their hearts. (Instead of tolerance and harmony that were natural impulses in the hearts of Kashmiris irrespective of their religion we see hardening into set opinions and ill will. Under such a mindset mischief of extremists is easier done than cured.) What happens to such nations wrenched out violently from their political history when Islam finally becomes a spent force as Christianity is now. ( It is my belief that religions may have two millennia to run their course). This is what would interest the political scientists in future.
I hope the present Indian government will take the lesson of the blunder of the Vajpayee government when on Dec 24th, 1999 Indian Airlines IC 814 from Kathmandu to Delhi was hijacked to Taliban-controlled Kandahar airport in Afghanistan. The drama lasted a week exposing the weak kneed approach of BJP led government and it has caused more serious damage in the years to come. Five high profile terrorists in Indian prisons were released to secure the lives of the Indian passengers on the flight.
One of the released terrorists, Masood Azhar, went on to start the terrorist outfit Jaish-e-Mohammed, that killed hundreds of Indians — security personnel and innocents — in later years. Also it gave another innocent victim, the American journalist Daniel Pearl. India need to know that appeasement of terrorists is not an intelligent option.

Finally much has been said about validity of Jihad as legitimate Islamic requirement to turn the world into Darul Islam. Al Koran do speak of Jihad but its interpretation as intended would mean different for different people. My essay is with special reference to the state of Kashmir enjoying special privileges under the Union of India as no other states enjoy. On what basis shall these know-all apply? Is Jihad to be waged against the past and for hospitality of the host nation? Those who are sure of their Koran may ask if hospitality of people,- Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and their way of life that allowed Muslims to prosper and live in amity are to be paid back with ill-will and rancor?
(ack:wikipedia)
benny

Read Full Post »

Man, His Fame-US Presidents

Nothing ever remains static: the face of the earth changes with seasons and continental shelves move. Such changes take place in matter of time and it goes without saying man is of no exception. How relevant is a man who holds the most powerful job on the earth? History does that while tastes of the masses may be manipulated to certain extent. History however has the last and more enduring word on him.
What with the mass media and TV we have become a visual generation. Recalling the Andy Warhol quote each of us holds the right to fame though it may be for some fifteen minutes. It may be through reality shows or as a witness in TV coverage for 6 o’clock news. Television has killed the art of conversation and instead we have talking heads whose style and contents are what matter for the ratings. Yes fifteen minutes of fame is enough for the audience whose attention span is correspondingly becoming shorter.
Looking at the appeal of the US presidents history judges them as tastes govern the appeal of fashion art and literature.
The Presidency of Andrew Jackson(1829-37)has undergone swings in popularity. Jackson presided over American expansion as well as subjugated the American Indians. The New Englanders and the Eastern gentry despised him as a frontiersman and a dangerous demagogue about money and banking. The historians of the early 20th century saw him as a democratic hero, coming out of the West to fight the moneyed Eastern interests. Thomas Jefferson is another. Jefferson, had his bitter critics to whom he was ‘Mad Tom. Of his prodigious mind and its wide sweep no one had doubts. John F. Kennedy once invited a group of Nobel Prize winners to the Executive mansion and said thus: ‘the most extraordinary collection of talent… that has ever been gathered together at the White House-with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.’ His personal stature or his qualities are not what makes his relevance count. His policies or what he stands for must mesh with the mood of the times like teeth of gears so history on its march keeps his relevance as obvious. No president or king is as relevant as to be in step with mood of the times all the time. Ronald Reagan came to power on the belief ‘Politics is just like show business. You have hell of a opening, coast for a while and then have hell of a close’. He edged out Jimmy Carter from the Presidential race with the promise of getting the nation out of depression. ‘I am speaking of depression in the human sense. A recession is when your neighbor is out of work. Recovery is when Carter is out of work.’ Reagan was elected the President. His covert interference in Afghanistan to arm the Mujahiddins and break the back of the Soviets seemed to succeed. History however shows its terrible consequences even this day. As for his economic policies paved the way for the economic meltdown and recession of 2008.
Power is always a potent tool in the hands of a President in the US or anywhere else to shape destinies of people; and politics is the means to get the policies across but then they are on their own.(Ack:Hedley Donovan-Time/essay Nov 9,1981)

benny

Read Full Post »

Sweet Smell of Success

Representational Man-essay ©

It is said no man is a hero to his valet and those whom we look up as extraordinary betray their ordinariness when caught off guard. It is a truism not even a Caesar could escape from. Julius Caesar may have to all and sundry seemed ‘like a Colossus who bestrode the narrow world’ but to Cassius he really was ‘ a man as I myself.’ Caesar is a Representational Man despite of it.

A Representational Man is one who by his life holds key to our own nature. Some made their mark in the history of mankind by fire and sword. The names of Alexander or Napoleon come to mind. Some chose less violent methods to impress upon many or change lives. Their fame as printed in newspapers must have been limited to the finance, entertainment or art section yet no matter. They represent us to the extent their drive, – in ambition no less focused than Alexander, and their fame allowed them to reach a higher level than we. Representational Men hold a key, a symbol to us. It is not without merit the name Waterloo is still in usage: ‘the little corporal’ became too big for his boots so hubris had to cut him to size. In short anyone who has met his Waterloo has Napoleon for a symbol.
A Representational Man is one who by his life has set a standard for others to take measure from. Diogenes stripped his life of all superfluities so he could live in a tub. On the other hand Andrew Carnegie amassed great wealth in order to give it all away. Alcibiades cut the tail off his spaniel just to spite the Athenian folks who made much of the animal. Richard Brinsley Sheridan, the dramatist went in the adjoining pub and could calmly drink a glass of wine by the smoldering ruins of his Drury Lane. Despite the great financial loss he chose the occasion to make a joke of it. He observed in his characteristic humor, ‘A man may surely take a glass of wine by his own fireside’.
The representational man holds a mirror to our nature: he has his uses whether alive or dead. He serves as a guide and key to understand mankind.
Granted that man find it easier to analyze his own nature because another representing him did great things. Does that speak much? After all success is not to be reckoned to one because he had a far greater canvas to work with but how he added to the whole with the piece that was no bigger than a postage- stamp size.. Even an unseemly speck of defect could spoil the overall effect of the whole. Besides in judging mankind with a scale that has an inherent flaw will only multiply when used to judge the whole species.
It is in our nature to point out with pride our rich relations than those who are poor. Of course the Greats are also key for us. Alexander of Macedonia found the kingdom he inherited too small for his over-sized ego. So he set out to conquer a large part of the globe. Lives of you and I are no less real on account we stayed on our familiar ground. A woman who runs her hearth is as great as Catherine the Great. Her world may be considerably reduced that only speaks of her circumstances. Even so the Empress of Russia is a representation of Everywoman.

A Representational Man is one who has had control over circumstances far more than you and me. We spend our lives to unravel the skeins of our limited resources; Credit is hard to come by because the times are bad. So what we do? We tighten our belts and hope to go with the flow. When faced with the Gordian knot Alexander cut it as if it were the most natural thing to do. We work within our circumstances not daring to cut the knot of our times. Alexander was a genius in that he opened up possibilities after his own fashion. Vasco da Gama who opened a sea route to the East was another. We are armchair seafarers while he braved the stinging spry of sea and untested dangers to set foot on a fabled land of unlimited opportunities. The Portuguese mariner is a representational man for the reason he made it possible for many to follow him.

A Representational Man is a genius in that he can purposefully give in to many defeats in order to win one victory that he counts as his due.
“The centipede said to the snake, ‘with all my legs I do not move as you with none. How is that?’ ‘One’s natural mechanism,’ replied the snake, ‘is not a thing to be changed. What need have I for legs?’
The snake said to the wind, ‘I wriggle about by moving my spine, as if I had legs. Now you seem to be without form, and yet you come blustering down from the North Seas to bluster away to the South Sea. How do you do that?’
‘’Tis true,’ replied the wind, ‘that I bluster as you say. But anyone who sticks his finger or foot into me excels me; on the other hand I can tear away huge trees and destroy large buildings. This power is only given to me: out of many minor defeats I win the big victory; and to win big victory is given only to the sages’”. (Chuangtse -tr: Lin Yutang)
There is a kind of success that you have the whole world breathing down your neck and when you see their fawning manners you think, ‘O boy, is success this cheap to make their rank breath fall on me?’ Whereas success for some is that they can hear their own thoughts and do as they please and are not called to account at the end of the day. Only that we need to decide well ahead what success means to us.
benny

Read Full Post »

Nation or individual?

It was Adolf Hitler who once posed the question: “What is life?” He himself answered it thus:”Life is the nation.The individual is the nation. The individual must die anyway. Beyond the life of the individual is the Nation.”( Shirer:The Rise and fall of the Third Reich. p.933) I owe this article to Wm. Shirer’s excellent analysis of the Collapse of the Third Republic.
Individuals make up the nation and a House divided itself cannot last. So individuals do matter. Which is more important? a chicken or the egg? Or the city or a citizen? There is nothing that can stand by itself as far as anything that is organized to serve a purpose. Man makes the city and is in turn changed by it. One need only visit a city like New York to see the frenetic pace that keeps her denizens moving about. Whereas if I were to set the same pace in a place like Perar, a village in the Hills, Tamil Nadu, India I would be viewed by the locals as one wanting in intelligence. Man exudes a certain energy level, call it his intrinsic worth and when it connected with another it raises him to an altogether level. One only needs to watch a young man trying to interest a young woman. Seen how their making out hits an altogether new patch when another young man appears in the scene?In short synergy of an individual is infectious and it makes all provide their own and lo, the rules of the game will be changed once and for all. A New Yorker if he were to go back to his roots say a hick town will he not feel out of place? He has given his energy for a common purpose and has benefited from the common pool so much that he is changed forever.
The Nation is set up by so many individuals who may be migrant workers, citizens and ethnic groups absorbed into the mainstream for the development,maintenance and support of the Nation. No matter a Nation is doomed in the long run if these bodies of individuals are divided and pressed down by laws that are aimed to protect a a particular group.
benny

Read Full Post »

Indian Identity

The beginnings of human society in the Indian subcontinent for the lack of a writing system can only be restricted to archaeological evidences. What artifacts we have, predominantly deal with fertility symbols, which are not unique to this subcontinent: for example Mother or Earth Goddess is common to many other cultures. There were datable artifacts in Mesopotamia to cite one example prior to those of Indus Valley civilization. Given such similarities where man in primeval past conceived notions of a religious idea on the basis of manifestations of Nature, it is hardly surprising. Cults based on symbols, prayers and rituals, – religious ideas are often characteristic to a region. But these must also account for human migrations by which there are clear evidences of ideas that are pre-Aryan and Aryan sources. In such co-mingling the identity of Aryan or non Aryan elements are somewhat blurred.
The label Aryan means people whose original homeland may have been around Caspian Sea and have spoken Indo-European language. Is religion the sure basis for determining the identity?
If the supporters of Hindu identity settle for this Aryan source as the starting point are they not being arbitrary?
Indian subcontinent is awash with countless waves of human migration each an event in point of time as the continental drift is and when a piece of Eastern Africa became detached from the African continent and attached to the Asia. It happens gradually but in point of time. Tibetan plateau and Himalayas bear proof to it. India as part of the Asian subcontinent and not of Africa has also bearing on the make-up of our national identity. Indian subcontinent straddling between Europe and China is on the crossroads of migratory route, which later on would be known as the Silk route.
Human migrations have impacted original inhabitants as mighty torrents grind the riverbeds in course of time. This would change the shape of the existing terrain. Do they not also bring blessing to the land in their wake?
Civilizations as we see from history first sprung up around rivers. The steady stream of peoples has left their influences on the original inhabitants and such fusion of cultures has all added to give civilization in the Indian subcontinent its own special flavor. As a result we have drawn from mythological sources and traditions that existed in Iran, Greece and Rome. These are like yeast working into the whole lump of dough: it is a fool’s business to apportion contributions of any people apart from what is common in such a give and take. To sum Indian identity based on religious ideas or worship is an error.

This subcontinent has had the Moguls and later the British in power. Each has impressed its own stamp into the Indian consciousness that still reverberates for good or bad in our lives. The demolition of Babri Masjid (1992) is one and the outrage in Kandhammal village in Orissa(2007) against Christians is another example. Are these two strictly a reaction to the foreign rule or do these hide some agenda from some quarters to reimpose those hidebound caste politics of the middle ages? Given such rich diversity of impressions rendering Indian culture a movable palimpsest how shall one make a clear indisputable case for Hindu identity? Certain political parties playing religious card to achieve their own ends cannot be the expression of a national will.
Such a question of identity would not have risen as it is today but for two great momentous events. India came under the alien rule one after the other. But neither the Mogul invaders nor the British came with the sole aim of importing its religion. Wealth, – and power derived from it, is the stuff on which are empires are founded. Islam as well as Christianity owe their roots for other reasons. Of course the power wielded by Moguls and the British provided a climate for growth of the religion practiced by the ruling elite. It was not religion per se but in the manner the British administration worked with the existing caste system and the religion that has given ammunition to some mischief-makers to view national identity in terms of religion. As with any alien rule the British overlords used a divide and rule, the simplest trick, – and as old as shell game to achieve their ends, least concerned with its long-range consequences and it worked.
The Indians saw the secularism of the West as insidious move and their reaction to hold on to orthodoxy and their accustomed ways was natural. Dominant religions have always had their impact on others: Buddhism and later Sikhism were reaction to Hinduism. If Buddhism found the Brahminical hold over Hinduism as intolerable the Sikhs could not stomach the idolatry of Hinduism. Such reactions are natural as Reformation in Europe came as a rejection of corrupt practices in the Catholic Church. Nationalism that took roots was a reaction to the Colonial rule. Within this burgeoning Nationalist movement there were elements, which equated the British with their religion, and also within Hinduism and Islam were attempts at synthesis with Christianity. It is but a natural reaction in the face of a threat from outside but these do not create a national identity. What does then define Indian identity?
2.
‘The peoples of this (Indus Valley) civilization whatever their caste or creed called themselves ‘Bharatvasis.’The word Hindu was used for them only by foreigners…It was the Greeks who used the word Indu for the river Sindhu and its people.’
The Indian identity that distinguishes peoples in the subcontinent must be seen as their shared experience irrespective of religions or faiths; the natural interaction where there is a common ground be it festivals, commerce or exchange of ideas to which none is excluded. Above all tolerance, which is cultivated when each individual has a common interest as the goal that keeps such harmony for the common good. Thus different cultures sharing a common history and goal must be seen as the touchstone for Indian identity say as different from that of Bangladesh or Pakistan. Their goal and our goals are not the same although we have a shared experience.
(Sources of Indian Tradition.volume-1/RN Dandekar-Penguin
Quote from SP Hindu-Our Hindu identity/The Hindu 1997).

benny

Read Full Post »

Man,his vision-Galileo

Science and Religion, as we look back into our past, have had a very uneasy relationship. The life of Galileo is a case in point. In his case he upturned an Edict, the Church had laid down on untested grounds: the Church position that the earth is the center of the universe. Authority of the Holy See springs from the Scriptures and it is plain for any right thinking person the Church, historically, has never had a single interpretation. Divisions in the Church in most cases have arisen, – from Quarto-decimen controversy to infallibility of Popes, on the reading of the Scriptures.
In 1633 Galileo at the age of 69 was judged by the Inquisition to have violated the Church edict. His crime? He validated the Copernican view that the sun, not the earth was the center of the universe. Galileo had succeeded in lifting the veil a little, past the prevailing understanding of the universe. Science, thanks to Galileo could look still further into space, standing from the shoulders of his findings. We know now that the Milky Way to which our sun is but one star and the Earth is not flat as believed once. Truth travels slowly as a child comes to man’s estate by many trial and errors. Mankind similarly has to pass through stages where Science is but one tool to test the quality of Truth.
When Truth speaks it has its own majesty that resonates in every man (who has sensed truth ever so little) and in the myriad manifestations of Nature. Science is merely man’s attempt to understand Nature a little better. As early as the 13th century Thomas Aquinas, a theologian had warned of the danger of literal interpretation of the Bible. Galileo using the newly invented telescope studied the universe. He made his discoveries (written in vernacular Italian than in scholarly Latin) and had a broader public.
In 1616 Robert Cardinal Bellarmine warned him. He cautioned the scientist that the Copernican view of the heavens should be treated as a hypothesis and nothing more. When his old friend Mafeo Cardinal Barberini became Pope Urban VIII in 1623 Galileo felt confident enough to write his controversial book in the form of a conversation. During the Inquisition Galileo seems to have said, ‘The intention of the Holy Spirit is to teach how to go to heaven and not how go the heavens.’ Galileo was found guilty. In an age when heretics were burnt at the stake he was treated relatively lenient. In 1980 Pope John Paul II appointed a commission of scientists, historians and theologians to reexamine the evidence and verdict. The report concluded that ‘the judges who condemned Galileo committed an error.’ (Ack:Frederick Golden-Time/ science-March 12,1984)
Church was all too powerful but its solidity was its undoing. The church had no room for manoeuver whereas ideas of man came thick and fast and in all shapes. The church that relied on set dogmas and interpretation, lost the battle when causes so vast and powerful came from all directions. Born out of ideas that had no concrete shape but given a form in the way man put these into. Like the coat of arms rampant lion on the shield which made the bearer act as valiantly as lion. These ideas smelled new and vibrant while that of the church had only the comfort of something so old and fixed. Faith of the church could not shake the proof of events.
Think how mind of man was invigorated by dissemination of ideas! The printing that came with movable types spread them around and the popularity of coffee shops brought those who lived in ivory towers,and man on the street meet. The Church held man by Sundays or special events in the church calendar. Whereas ideas went on every hour of the day,months and year.
The church never knew what hit her. The rabble was much more relevant than the cloth of the clergy. Their ideas of incense and incantation impacted the hearts less than the everyday speech of blood,sweat and tears. The big causes the Church espoused, like inquisition and crusades the World Wars were the very examples that made them irrelevant to the masses whose causes were all small as their daily bread.
Galileo may have been frightened out of his wits because of what the Church could do to his body but truth of his times was on his side. Having put his vision down all he needed was to let it fight his battle for all time to come.

benny

Read Full Post »

Reflections on the Golden I

A Spartan of Ancient Greece did not fight merely for himself. But also for others. His Spartan living began from the day he was born and his whole life was spent in service of the city-state. What moral sense one can hold without giving the individual his due?
A nation may hold me under its obligation this much and no further. It may be the most enlightened and noble. Even so I must never sell myself to its bondage.
Coming back to Sparta, the city-state with its scant regard for individual liberty did a terrible mistake. There was no dissenting voice to make it take a warning or reexamine its perilous path. The state that let the weak and sickly to perish and admitted only fighting men, and women to give birth to more of the same could not have known democracy; The Spartans never learnt to govern by consent but instead spent their lives to fight wars. It earned them victory and slaves. They thrived on slave labor on a massive scale that was a pointer to the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century.

I do count in the scheme of things: on the anvil of time human society is hammered by time and I may not escape the hard blows and shape may be changed, drawn or made into some ingot. These are outward forms of my destiny as to be part of the whole but there is still me as part of it all. I may have been tested by fire or dipped in cold water of chance. I still count. Since I have imparted something of my own to the whole lump I shall be present in whatever society may finally end up. Should I care as to what shape? Not exactly. Had I while there was time and power to understand my place in the scheme of things and could rise above my limits I have reinvented myself. If once it stands to reason there shall be many more such changes.

2.

To reinvent and to hold my own is the excellent goal I have set for myself. For what purpose? My answer is simple: I please myself. What would the world care if I rose like a phoenix above every circumstance? The world seeks its own pleasures to understand the values I have set for my own world or motives. Strangely enough every change that you and I make alters the existing status quo. It matter not in the least whether it is noticed by others or not.  If not for that there would not be such a thing as progress. In the stone age a flint must have been the state of the art. But iron age made it outdated and inadequate. It is thus human society is made up where human excellence is never lost. like the proverbial leaven any one may affect the whole. Sparta or Rome or any other may be breached by any individual who has not compromised to ride the coattails of others.  I consider any such compromise is suicidal.

benny

Read Full Post »