Pain, but Divine!

Brass, pots, grinding stone, the sacrificial fire, 

millets all essential to symbolise the threadbare

of our existence and the power of the Universe 

over our every action. Till death do us apart 

this irrevocable union for continuity of the 

species. ©FG.

It is that time of my life when friends and relatives start inviting me to their children's wedding. Sometimes I wonder why they do that. Me, a cynic, one who derives schadenfreude by just watching the world go by from the background. The one who sneers within himself which of the weddings that he attends is going to be in the doldrums, which loving couple is going to two-time, which lovey-dovey couple is going to be at each others' throat and much more.

Maybe because of my status of being married, staying married for a reasonable period of time whilst dodging all the curveballs that were hurled my way in my lifetime (thus far) makes qualified to bless the newlyweds. The family may wish me to part with a bit of wisdom to that effect. Maybe, I, being the eldest in the family, had to represent my recently demised father to do the necessary deeds. He, however, was not a great fan of it either and would scoff all the unnecessary displays of fake niceties and falsehoods seen at these functions. Perhaps, the groom's family just wanted the numbers to show their in-laws that they had the manpower and numbers to defend if accusations of shortchanging or shortcoming should arise.

The ancestors knew that people were the worst of eyewitnesses. That is why a Hindu wedding, unlike others, is irrevocable and irreversible as it was done with the elements of Nature as the presiding judge. The sanctity of the occasion is vouched by the elements of Nature - water, fire, wood, wind. The approvals of the spirits of Nature is invoked through the rituals of symbolism and sounds. For good measure, a camera with its watchful eyes is placed amongst the paraphernalia essential in the cajoling procedure. If onlookers in the human form do not stand up if the sacred union were wronged, leave it to Elements. Offenders to the dharmic order would be dealt with and straightened up in their impartial ways.

The couples' intentions may be private but private intentions involving the privates need the approval of the Higher Forces. Within its act, are disseminated the seed of life. Somebody ought to take responsibility for it. Something so good cannot be without a catch. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Somebody has to clear the mess!

You may get away in the mortal world through legal wrangles but beware of the Void. Even video recordings can be brushed aside as fake, Nature, the silent observer would remain anything but quiet. It will definitely get you. If it does not, the guilt and the forces within you would. ©FG

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

After life, what?

Personal Shopper (2016)


Almost halfway through the movie, clueless of its genre, I remained lost. I did not understand why the protagonist, Maureen, was buying expensive clothes and jewellery but not wearing them or rather is forbidden to don them. Maureen is a personal shopper of a celebrity who cannot possibly be seen in public shopping!

Maureen has a genetic heart condition which was shared by her recently demised twin brother. She had not come in term with her loss as he was apparently healthy before his heart attack. Maureen, who considers herself a clairvoyant, tries to communicate with her brother for personal closure. In the interim, she moonshines as a seer to ascertain whether a house is haunted before it is sold. She also gets a mysterious text from an unknown number. The situation gets murky when her employer is murdered brutally, and she is muddled in the police investigations. After she is cleared of any wrongdoings, she continues her pursuit of contacting her dead brother.

Mankind has always wondered at the vastness of the Universe and the waste of space around us if we were the only living beings around. The whole Big Bang could not have happened just for us. People started toying with the idea that, perhaps, lifeforms dwelled in different realms. The ending of life in one plane just transports them to another and another. The 'soul', having unfinished businesses on Earth, may wander around for psychics to be a conduit for the living to say their peace. Whether these experiences are real or quackery is of personal choice. Is it that the dead are desperately trying to relate through obscure methods or are existing ones just convincing themselves that such a thing is actually happening? Are some just too insensitive to observe the subtle changes around them and the others just making something out of nothing at all? 

Are the dead souls out there really looking out for us? Like a guiding star, like a guardian angel. Do they 'scream' at us trying to prevent us from doing something so wrong? Or is life just 'Game Over' and everything goes BLANK! Like a TV station that has stopped transmission.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Life, without Divinity but Intellect!

Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life (Documentary; 2012)

Different from many of his presentations, here Richard Dawkins portrays an image of sobriety as he tackles one of the many unanswered questions of life. Rather than being ballistic against the many dogmatic beliefs and seemingly meaningless rituals of organised religions, he is willing to engage in his attempt to understand their many practices and how it maintains sanity in Man.

Studies have shown that everyone sins including people from a religious background. Unlike their non-believing counterparts, believers carry a considerable amount of guilt. The incidence of cheating, lying, fornicating and watching porn is the same across the board. In fact, some figures show suppression brings the worse in us.

On one aspect, we act and behave like animals. On the other hand, due to development in our neocortex, we are capable of rational thinking. We have the capacity for reasoning and able to differentiate right from wrong. 

Animals think within the cocoon of satisfying their personal needs, of food, mate and territorial space. Humans, however, have been bestowed with the ability to empathise. Perhaps with this feature, they can be kinder towards each other and are able to judge what is morality. This mindfulness must be the precursor to spur the goodness that is buried within us. 

If so much of decency is embodied within us, why do things go wrong? The same mental faculty must be at fault. Our capacity to imagine, to concoct a potentially disgusting or fearful situation may make us wary o the others. We need to safeguard ourselves from a potential collapse of the other. Hence, the justification of self-indulgence and self above others.

Faith gives us a reassurance that a third party will be a guiding light and a protector of sorts as we allay our fear and recruit our resources to meet the challenge of the day. Without this conviction, life would be a bigger struggle than it already is.

If life is just all about our lifespan, it will not make much sense. There would be nothing more to look forward to. The fear or bliss of an afterlife must be a good enough motivator to put law and order in place. Earth would then be a home not only for the big and strong but for the weak and incapacitated. Simply put, life on Earth is just for the continuity of progeny. Centurions live long live probably thanks to their longevity genes. On a related observation, they also have fewer offspring. Is that Nature's attempt to give them a longer time to sow their wild oats?

Many religions of the world talk about souls being immortal and the body just being a vessel to carry the soul. The only thing that seems to continue generations after generations is the passage of genetic material. And the blueprint of this template must have started from our sea-living ancestors (or Adam and Eve), and its traces are ongoing. So that it must the Atma or the Soul. But that, however, does not explain the re-births in different species based on your karma.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Truth, as we see it!

My Gita (2015)

Devdutt Pattanaik

The author drew a lot of flak from the so-called Sanskrit scholars and Hindutva protectorates for his inaccuracies in its translation, factual 'errors' and understanding of the scriptures. The purist, the defenders of the Hindu inscriptions assert that he is not a qualified person to give his interpretation of the revered holy book. Bhagavad Gita, the poem of the God, is sacred scripture. They assert that one has to be a Brahmin or ordained to do the mammoth task of interpreting the Gita. In short, not every Tom, Dick and Harry can tell his views. I thought it reeked a lot like many of the fundamentalists and religious zealots amongst us who insist that there is one way to the Truth and it is their way. There is no compromise in religion.
Pandits (not pundits) like Rajiv Malhotra and Nityanand Misra also take offence to classifying Bhagadvita as a myth. Most intellectuals today accept happenings in Gita as historical occurrences, not a story.

That is the exact thing the writer is to dispel. The Gita is a discourse that happened between a charioteer who happened to be Krishna himself and a warrior of the Pandava clan, Arjuna, who had cold feet on the eve of a decisive battle. This conversation was apparently telepathically intercepted by the enemy medium, Sanjaya, who informed the blind Kaurava King, Dhritarashtra. So what is written in the Gita is essentially the interpretation of Sanjaya as he told the King. What Krishna meant to say may not seem to have been what Arjuna understood. What Sanjaya inferred from his tapping from his understanding may be hampered by the jargons. What Dhritarashtra, the father of his sons who were to go war, would like to hear would have been about the safety of his sons. The take-home message is that a narration may appear different to different individuals. It is all one's viewpoint. Hence, Pattanaik feels justified to give his take on the text. No one has exclusive rights to God's poems. 

Our way of thinking is thematic. Over the years, over generations, our priorities vary. For this reason, our perception of the Truth, the solution to problems in life and our outlook on life changes with time. There is no single right or wrong answer to any question. There are no right or wrong actions. Everything is perspective. Arjuna's slaying of his cousins, uncles and nephews may appear unjust, but it may be a necessary evil to the continuity of the kingdom. On the other hand, the whole war is just a familial dispute over worldly things like property and pride. Unfortunately, sometimes painful events have to happen. It is the order of Nature.

Although the answers to all these dilemmas are not given on a platter, it provides us with a platform to discuss, argue and justify our moves. The scriptures are not dogmatic on what is the correct action but give different perspectives on things - all roads lead to Rome or nine ways to skin a cat.

The message put forward in the Gita is one for the householder, one who does not lead a hermetic life but one who embraces relationships within a family unit. At the time of writing, the flavour of the time was incorporating family life in seeking the Truth. The times were changing from one of a recluse and celibate, as advocated by Buddhists' scholars to one inclusive of conjugal relationships and the by-products. From one of wanting to reach eternal bliss (moksha), the society must have morphed to one that emphasises good governance and order (?dharma). War is not for vengeance or ambitions but is about equilibrium.

With a social order, the law will help the helpless and provide justice; without it, the law is just a tool for control, oppression and sabotage.

The author goes on to talk about the importance of exchange in the Hindu rituals. The rituals done here are a mean of exchange. The practitioner of act offers his offerings to Nature and receives what is given back; not with the intention to demand.  

In my opinion, our obsessive journey to seek the Truth will surely meet a dead-end. It is what we make of it. It may come in slices. We need to use our behaviours, emotions and intellect to find a solution.

© chandrugidwani

The symbolism of life. The chariot, the reins, the horses, 

the charioteer, the wheels etc.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Still learning...

Hanuman and Suvarchala
Credit: Pinterest

I used to frequent temples quite a bit in my younger days. My mother probably thought that by loitering God's home, maybe He would take pity and throw a bone to us to chew. She must have put her trust in God believing that He would not disappoint. Be it, Thaipusam, fire-walking ceremony or billy-goat slaughtering ceremony, she would be there, and I would be passively taken along. It was her sincere belief that through divine intervention, her children would live a better life than her and that God would peel open the inner eye of Consciousness. We still await but hope, but we cannot say we did not get in abundance. But what is too much and when is it enough, anyway?

As a child, my mind used to wonder a lot. Rather than doing the things I was supposed to do, I found pleasure as an observer of things and people around me. Sometimes, I ask myself what they thought and why they did the things that they did. Occasionally, Amma gives explanations that made sense to her. During other times, I drew my own conclusions. Periodically, I drew blanks. 

Like the time when I pondered why worshipers would pray to demigods and not the main deity. Since the real McCoy had more clout to grant wishes, why go through intermediaries? Why prostrate to the fearsome Muniswaran when Shiva is just around the corner? I realised later that there were entry restrictions into temples once upon a time. That could explain the reason for people in the lower rung of the society to settle for lesser Gods as intermediaries.

Angry Hanuman - An icon of aggressive Hindutva
Credit: Karan Acharya

But I could not comprehend was why congregants would bow and exhibit so much reverence to Hanuman who is, in fact, less a being in his primate form when Rama and his consort are the real bosses. I thought it was the celibacy of the Brahmachari pose that he displayed. But then there is a temple in Telangana where Hanuman is seen as a couple with Survachala (Lord Surya's daughter).

If Hanuman was enlightened by his proximity to Rama, why are there no Arjuna temple as he had a one-to-one pep talk with Krishna, a more complex avatar of Vishnu? The whole song of the Lord (Bhagavad Gita) is the testimony of His attempt at psychotherapy of a commander who turned cold feet on the eve of a decisive combat.

Firstly, Hanuman is no monkey but of a member of a clan of hirsute people from the southern part of the subcontinent. He is cocksure that his dharma is to serve Rama. He chooses his wars carefully. He observes and learns from the sideline like a third person. This attribute must be the one that draws people to salute him. Knowing exactly what to do in any adversity is one quality Man yearns to have. He does not base his decisions on emotion or creed. He even refused to help fellow Monkey King, Sugriva, as Hanuman thought his course was not just. Devotees hope that His nature of doing the right thing at the right time without fear or favour would rub off on them. His tenacity and undevoted loyalty to the task at hand is another plus point. HanuMAN, the world's first superhero.

The learning process goes on...

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Just another exchange of vows!

https://scroll.in/article/879633/hidden-under-meghan-markles-givenchy-veil-was-britains-bid-to-hide-its-bloody-colonial-history

COLONIAL HISTORY

Embroidered into Meghan Markle’s veil was Britain’s bid to celebrate its bloody colonial history

The bride’s dress is being praised for its floral motifs of the 53 Commonwealth countries. But colonialism destroyed the lives of India’s weavers.

Danny Lawson / AFP

May 20, 2018 · 12:01 pm
Aparna Kapadia

Meghan Markle wore a beautifully simple, ivory silk dress at her wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry on Saturday morning. The royal wedding has been a global media event though of not much relevance even to the British crown. After all, Harry is the sixth in the line of succession to the throne. And given the pressing world news from just the past week – the killing of dozens of Palestinians in Gaza, North Korea’s threat of withdrawing from nuclear talks – a celebration of the monarchy, of a country barely able to keep itself together, appears strikingly overwrought.

Markle’s wedding dress was created by Clare Waight Keller, a British woman and the first female designer of Givenchy. The garment’s most dazzling feature is its 16.5-foot silk tulle veil that has been hand-embroidered with flora representing the 53 countries of the Commonwealth. The media was all praise for the dress as a sartorial choice that represents a break from tradition. The New York Times’s fashion critic raved that it “placed the woman proudly front center and underscored Ms. Markle’s own independence”. The simplicity of the dress was also widely praised for upholding feminist values rather than those of a fairy-tale princess.

Missing in the commentary was what seems to be an obvious point – the arrogant representation of 53 Commonwealth countries is a celebration of colonial rule. Another reminder, if one was needed, that the true reckoning of the unfortunate history of colonialism in Britain is far away. It is important to restate what that was – a violent period of centuries when the hapless Commonwealth, nearly 25% of the world, suffered under an extractive alien power’s rule.

A conscious choice

Markle’s dress was not a designer’s fanciful faux-pas but a conscious choice. The BBC reports that the bride suggested the design because the Commonwealth will be an essential part of her and Prince Harry’s official work after they are married. Clearly, the sad truth of Britain’s imperial history eludes the Prince and the new Princess. The media too, especially British media, abets this glossing over. And this matters, as recently as 2014, a YouGov survey, for instance, found that most people in Britain still think the British Empire is more something to be proud of (59%) rather than ashamed of (19%).

To add insult to injury, the dress is being celebrated as a hand-crafted work, the creation of a local designer. If one just looked at India, the largest of the Commonwealth countries, of the many British-era atrocities, none were more consequential and impoverishing than the destruction of the local handloom and textiles of India. In the early days of the British East India Company’s trade with the subcontinent in the 1600s, chintz, the hand-printed and natural-dyed fabric with floral designs, was the rage in Europe; first as decorative household furnishings and later for fashionable garments. Known as palampores in Britain, these fabrics and other fine Indian textiles gained so much popularity that a parliamentary act was passed prohibiting their sales.

From this time, until India’s Independence in 1947, the Indian artisan and weaver’s livelihood and skills were systematically destroyed. It was no accident then that Gandhi chose the charkha, the Indian weavers’ basic cotton-spinning tool, as the symbol of India’s struggle for independence.

Markle’s British-designer dress and its veil with the hand-embroidered flora of the 53 Commonwealth countries overshadows this dark past. It should not surprise us, given the new age of denialism, that the royal family and the British media thought nothing of reclaiming the bloody history of colonialism as a point of celebration.

Aparna Kapadia is a historian of South Asia at Williams College in the US.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

It used to be good to be King

© daily telegraph

In 1981, the televised event was easily the most watched event of recent times. The institution called marriage was still looked upon as a beacon of hope to keep the family unit intact. When they said that it was a public declaration of private intent, they meant it. It still had respect. The one act that solemnised the union of male and female was treated with due respect. Young girls went agape looking at their idol whose hairstyle they would soon be aping. They too wished that their wedding dress would be as glamorous. Forget the fact that groom stuck out like a sore thumb; his royal status would nullify all other deformities. How they adored the horse carriages, the guest list, the guests' wardrobe and the flowers. But see how it all turned out - the two-timing, the depression, the possible contamination of bloodlines, the accident, the conspiracy theory.

Much has happened since then. It is all water under the bridge now. The confluence of hearts is no longer only legitimate between members of different sexes. The bond that holds this threadbare link is no stronger than the paper that it is inked on. The preoccupation with self and hedonism has created a mockery of the man-sanctioned pledge of loyalty and responsibility. Infusion of genetic juices is no longer sacred. Offspring may have two males for parental duties. Divine approved decree is given legal status. Why the mockery if legality is the prime aim?

© Crazy History of the World

This time around the royal wedding did not garner that much excitement, at least in Malaysia, the once most of the most profitable colonies in the Commonwealth. Come to think of it, the natives' wealth was pilfered and divided amongst the self-proclaimed superior race of the world. Perhaps it is the heap of scandals upon scandals that the local media is churning by the minute, after the local elections that the function remains a non-event to the ordinary Malaysian.

Values change. If just about half a century ago, a king had to abdicate his throne to marry a woman of similar stature - a divorcee, actress and American; now it is a non-issue. Maybe it is because the groom is quite low down in the pecking order of ascension to the throne.

Over the years, the idea of a monarch who is bestowed by genetic make-up to decide on the direction of the country does not excite people anymore. Starting with the French Revolution, then the Bolshevik uprising and the World Wars, the royalties have fallen down like a house of cards. Now, it seems like they have to sing for their supper. They have to re-invent themselves to stay relevant. The British royal family have to keep quiet while exhibiting the share of their loot, The Kohinoor, shamelessly, without creating any more controversies. The Bulgarian dynasty was revived after winning the Presidential elections as a commoner. The Spanish have to fight out the long arms of the law. It is not easy to be a King anymore!

 © Danny Lawson / AFP

The dark cloud that hung over the matrimonial garb; 

the motifs of flowers of the former colonies of the bygone

Empire rekindles the dark past the colonial masters.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.