Saints and sadhus

Once I asked my father what is the difference between a sadhu and a saint? He smiled and said that a sadhu renounces the world and penances to attain moksha. A saint seeks wisdom, truth, and knowledge and need not necessarily renounce. He told me an old saying, which says if you meet a person with lean body and pure eyes you met a guru, and if with a broad waist and obese abdomen then you have yet to meet a guru. So, a saint or sadhu is a guru too.

When young your naivety privileges you with the ability to understand things sans complexities. But my understanding became more entangled while browsing a magazine that spoke about a conflict between the saints for the succession. What bewildered me was the conflict for power by the people who were ‘saints’, the illuminated ones. The most imperative fact was they were hugely obese, so were they not ‘guru’ while they were claiming to be the ‘jagatguru’?  The desire for power and rights was incomprehensible; as for me ‘saints’ do not need one.

Secondly my father never explained me saints and sadhus on the pretext of religion, he told me they were ‘sanatana’. We find numerous sadhus, saints, or prophets affiliated to a religion. Have they really renounced the world or ever penanced? Or have they fashioned it as an alternate way for their survival. It is bemusing that they can preach religion and rituals but not the truth, wisdom or compassion. They appear to be the custodians of the religion that is in an incessant threat and will succumb to if, not being their armor. Does religion a millennia-old tradition needs protection from the people or it can extend protection to the people?

The enchantment of being revered by the people as saints and sadhus have breeded new crop of entrepreneurs, the self-imposed ‘godman’. They appear in their publicity pamphlets meditating and they make water holy by dipping their great toe. They devour on the vulnerability of innocent in the name of penance. I believe in the tradition of saints and sadhus, but only when they alienate from asserting religion and contemplate for the liberation of the soul. 

Let's pay our homage

Subhash Chandra Bose affectionately remembered as Netaji was a devout patriot who strived his entire life to make his homeland free from the shackles of slavery. Bose’s vindication in Indian National Congress (INC) came in 1939 when he defeated a Gandhian rival for reelection. The ‘rebel president’ felt bound to resign because of the lack of Gandhi’s support. This aftermath formed Forward bloc and then Indian National Army. In August 1945, Bose, fleeing Southeast Asia, reportedly succumbed to the burn injuries of the plane crash in a Japanese hospital in Taiwan.

Lal Bahadur Shastri was second prime minister of India better remembered for his slogan ‘jai jawan, jai kisaan’ during the war of 1965 with Pakistan. The war officially ended with the Tashkent Agreement of 10 January 1966; he died inexplicably the following day, still inTashkent. The cause of death has been a subject of conspiracy theories. Government of India never took interest in pursuing the matter, investigating it and punishing the perpetrators of crime.

The issue why is Indian government is so reluctant about the death of its leaders. Three commissions were appointed to investigate the death of Netaji, apart from Taiwan neither British, Japan, Russia nor Indian government seemed to co-operate. The reports claim the plane crash of August 18, 1945 to be a hoax, but Indian government rejects the idea. The documents dealing with Netaji are claimed to be highly sensitive. Its revelations will jeopardise India’s relations with other ‘friend’ nations. On the same grounds, death of Mr Lal Bahadur Shashtri had its own share of controversies where in spite the family of Mr Shashtri demanding a probe, were denied. Government did not oblige to form an inquiry commission besides all the irregularities. It refuses to declassify the documents as they may impact the foreign relations, cause a disruption in the country and a breach of parliamentary privileges.

These two incidents present a very grim picture of Indian self-worth. It reflects the Indian society where when the known people are involved in the domestic harassment, the victim is endowed with the moral responsibility for protecting the family honour and the relationships. Is this the way we are paying homage to our leaders who laid their lives dreaming a Majestic India. Are we a victim as a nation, timorous to raise our voice for the fear of being alienated? Is a population of 1.2 billion sustaining on the alms of developed economies? Can’t we flourish by ourselves?

Government requires the determination of honouring its legends and the whole nation will stand by it. We need to earn our self-respect and if we don’t know how then presume the consequences if a US president gets killed on an official visit to other nation.

Survival of the fittest

We live in an artificial system? By saying artificial system, I mean a system where the struggles are fashioned, the paradigms are proposed and we rely more on presumed knowledge than the experienced one. The most startling fact about this setup is that we are made to believe that it is real. But is this real?

Darwin proposed the theory of the “survival of the fittest”. The context was species that survived the evolution, but we often use the term with our own interpretations. Survival of the fittest was an instinct based effort to survive the nature’s adversities. It was not pre-meditated, but the only way to ensure survival. Nature handpicked the best and the reward was Right to live. The selection pressure never diluted, the obsession to survive never died. Consequently, a relentless struggle for survival, with the sole aim to live.

Today often the phrase is used to persist in the social, political and economic ecosystems where the threat to life is rare. Rather, it is used to validate the immoral and treacherous ways adapted to be in the race to excel. We humans are surviving because we are the fittest is the half-realized truth. We are surviving because fittest amongst us organized to protect the unfit. Had it been the nature’s way many of us would have perished long ago. The question is why we always try to associate our endeavors with the nature? Does it provide a cover for us or we want to deduce that we are still part of nature?

Nature has always mesmerized humans, but we seized to be a part of it since we tried to manipulate it, correct it or upgrade it as per our wishes. We can make artificial rainfall, snow or make artificial body parts hence we are no more natural. We are trying to style a life on other planets, which is unnatural. It’s time for us to owe our actions and prevent crediting nature for our dubious ways.

Let’s think before supposing our ways to be natural and saying survival of the fittest.

Let me learn - II

Do you remember the famous caption ‘padhne likhne ki koi umar nahi hoti’ launched under the National Literacy Mission? It was initiated with the aim of creating a learning society. It promoted functional literacy amongst the population who were deprived of the elementary education. This initiative of Indian government is a confirmation of its pro-educationist perspective. But is this the absolute truth?

In India, education is meant to provide livelihood. Good governance had invariably encountered the challenge of employing the educated youth. Owing to the huge population, governments have tried to evade this responsibility cleverly by incorporating age restriction as the criteria for job eligibility. This aims at reducing the competition amongst the aspirants, not on the basis of their intellect but because they have attained the prescribed age.

This disheartens me, as even if I want, I cannot continue with the academics because in that case I might attain the age of restriction and end up being jobless. Fear of being ineligible for a government job creates a dilemma; whether to further pursue studies or to delve in a job hunt. Therefore, being more educated can be ruinous as it might leave you being unemployed, besides, that you have the experience and a vast knowledge at your disposal.

Another surprising aspect of government’s incompetence is to deny a student to study Master’s twice from the same university. Meaning one studying Master’s in Commerce cannot be enrolled in Master’s in Economic’s (this happened to me). The reasons are better known to the Education department. Is this not a violation of my Fundamental right to education? Sorry, that too is for the children between 6-14 years of age.

However, a ridiculous outcome of this education versus government job equation is the fabrication of birth details of the students when they are enrolled in schools. I believe all of us will agree to this, as many of our friends, siblings or our own documented year of birth is altered (rather reduced). The only reason attributed to this is, it will give us the viability to stay in the competition for the government job for some more years. Will India ever treat its population as an asset than a liability? Will ever we be allowed to immerse ourselves in the world of knowledge without the fear of being outraced for a position? 

Also, the inception of National Literacy Mission was to impart functional literacy to population between 15-35 years of age group that are in productive or reproductive phase of life. What to say about this atomistic insight? Can I conclude that the government feels it is more befitting for youth to work than study or rather I should not ask government for a job?

Are you a Fan?

Cambridge dictionary proposes two definitions of the word ‘fan’, first one is a device used to move air around thus offering us respite from heat, and the other one is ‘someone who admires and supports a person, sport, sports team, etc.’ thus infusing heat in the enthusiast. The first noun is a thing whereas the other noun is a person. What grips my curiosity, is the way later one is being mutated to the former one.

In the past one decade, the fan mania has soared new heights where the verge of dedication is mind boggling. It has redefined stardom where the object of desire is elevated to whole new status which they themselves might have never dreamt off. Most often it reinvents the life of the star, wielding them with the power of motivating people. To accept that the entertainment industry thrives on this phenomenon will not be an exaggeration.

Of late the complete lack of consciousness on the behalf of the fans is a subject of worry. They attempt to be a replica of their idol to the extent that they opt for a reductionist attitude for their idol’s adversaries. The imitation is holistic, without an iota of brain used. It is popularised as this craziness garners a lot of capital, immaterial of the fact that it reduces fans to things who can be manipulated. This trend impacts people as it alters their way of life to a limit.

However, I am skeptical about this trend treading in the political arena which can have unanticipated ramifications. Politics designs the future of an entire nation and such fan-mania there, directly means concentration of power in a person than it the institution. If practised in a democracy it simply erodes the very soul of it leading to an authoritarian governance which may metamorphose into a dictatorship.

Politics is about consciousness, sensibility, decision-making, and deliverance as an entire nation is at its receiving end. It should hold no place for such frenzy as it deviates people from the concurrent issues, and the challenges of a better life, it rather converges at the charismatic persona of the icon. The icon is glorified, heralded as the epitome of revolution, a savior who diminishes everything else to the background. Can be popularly stated as “Indira is India, India is Indira.’’

Please let’s keep politics away from these fan-frenzies……

Nature and Science

I may have misinterpreted the intent of science, but what I inferred is, it aims to make human life healthier, comfortable and most importantly lasting. The lifespan and population size have improved considerably with the advent of technological superiority of science. However, as the quality of human life and moreover its population increased, the price paid for it is, the amplified pace of mass extinction. Can science assure us this luxury of domination and survival?

Does science has the intention of global welfare or it is a tool meant for serving human self-esteem who have enchanted themselves to be nature. I believe the deepest intent of science must have been the curiosity to know the wonders of nature or simply to know the cause of its existence. The transformation from an observer to a researcher and to an intruder has been gradual and unintentional.

However, the problem arises when we start playing with the intricate balance of the ecosystem. The only respite in this situation is threshold up till which nature will accommodate our intrusion. The term ‘disaster’ means ‘a sudden accident or a natural catastrophe that causes great damage or loss of life’. A disaster for us is an indigenous course for nature’s forces. A change in course of the river is a natural event but is a ‘disaster’ when it impedes human interests. Although rivers have always changed their courses and in doing so nourished world’s most famous, splendid and strong empires in their cradles.

The big question is can we always stay harmoniously with nature? The possible answer is ‘no’. Transformation is the only constant phenomenon on earth, it yields diversification and prevents the earth from being overpopulated and ripped of it’s resources. Our past suggests that nature has its own way where it stays unattached and is brutal in wiping thing’s off its face. However, if it catastrophe is inevitable then how is science responsible for causing impairment to our civilisation? Yes, we can as it is increasing the pace of the calamity and arousing the monster in nature which guards its equilibrium passionately. Most of all, it instills us with the lustiness to dominate and to exploit the resources for our exaggerated and irrelevant needs. 

It has replaced a nature worshipper with a destroyer....