Rahul Writes

Got this wonderful forwarded email from a friend:  

Professor began his class by holding up a glass with some water in it. He held it up for all to see & asked the students “How much do you think this glass weighs?” 

‘50gms!’ ….. ‘100gms!’ …..’125gms’ …the students answered. 

“I really don’t know unless I weigh it,” said the professor, “but, my question is: What would happen if I held it up like this for a few minutes?” 

‘Nothing’ …..the students said. 

‘Ok what would happen if I held it up like this for an hour?’ the professor asked. 

‘Your arm would begin to ache’ said one of the student 

“You’re right, now what would happen if I held it for a day?” 

“Your arm could go numb, you might have severe muscle stress & paralysis & have to go to hospital for sure!” ….. ventured another student & all the students laughed 

“Very good. But during all this, did the weight of the glass change?” asked the professor. 

‘No’…. Was the answer. 

“Then what caused the arm ache & the muscle stress?” 

The students were puzzled. 

“What should I do now to come out of pain?” asked professor again. 

“Put the glass down!” said one of the students 

“Exactly!” said the professor. 

Life’s problems are something like this. Hold it for a few minutes in your head & they seem OK. 

Think of them for a long time & they begin to ache. Hold it even longer & they begin to paralyze you. You will not be able to do anything. 

It’s important to think of the challenges or problems in your life, But EVEN MORE IMPORTANT is to ‘PUT THEM DOWN’ at the end of every day before You go to sleep.. 

That way, you are not stressed, you wake up every day fresh &strong & can handle any issue, any challenge that comes your way!

In his autobiography, Gandhi ji tells about a Gujarati stanza which was his guiding principle. Here is its translation:  

Return Good for Evil 

For a bowl of water give a goodly meal;

For a kindly greeting bow thou down with zeal;

For a simple penny pay thou back with gold;

If thy life be rescued, life do not withhold;

Thus the words and actions of the wise regard;

Every little service tenfold they reward;

But the truly noble know all men as one,

And return with gladness good for evil done. 

Is not it wonderful?

दिन जल्दी-जल्दी ढलता है!

हो जाय न पथ में रात कहीं,
मंज़िल भी तो है दूर नहीं -
यह सोच थका दिन का पंथी भी जल्दी-जल्दी चलता है!
दिन जल्दी-जल्दी ढलता है!

बच्चे प्रत्याशा में होंगे,
नीड़ों से झाँक रहे होंगे -
यह ध्यान परों में चिड़ियों के भरता कितनी चंचलता है!
दिन जल्दी-जल्दी ढलता है!

मुझसे मिलने को कौन विकल?
मैं होऊँ किसके हित चंचल? -
यह प्रश्न शिथिल करता पद को, भरता उर में विह्वलता है!
दिन जल्दी-जल्दी ढलता है!

लो दिन बीता, लो रात गई

लो दिन बीता, लो रात गई,
सूरज ढलकर पच्छिम पहुँचा,
डूबा, संध्या आई, छाई,
सौ संध्या-सी वह संध्या थी,
क्यों उठते-उठते सोचा था,
दिन में होगी कुछ बात नई।
लो दिन बीता, लो रात गई।

धीमे-धीमे तारे निकले,
धीरे-धीरे नभ में फैले,
सौ रजनी-सी वह रजनी थी
क्यों संध्या को यह सोचा था,
निशि में होगी कुछ बात नई।
लो दिन बीता, लो रात गई।

चिड़ियाँ चहकीं, कलियाँ महकी,
पूरब से फिर सूरज निकला,
जैसे होती थी सुबह हुई,
क्यों सोते-सोते सोचा था,
होगी प्रातः कुछ बात नई।
लो दिन बीता, लो रात गई,

कहते हैं तारे गाते हैं

कहते हैं तारे गाते हैं!
सन्नाटा वसुधा पर छाया,
नभ में हमने कान लगाया,
फिर भी अगणित कंठों का यह राग नहीं हम सुन पाते हैं!
कहते हैं तारे गाते हैं!

स्वर्ग सुना करता यह गाना,
पृथिवी ने तो बस यह जाना,
अगणित ओस-कणों में तारों के नीरव आँसू आते हैं!
कहते हैं तारे गाते हैं!

ऊपर देव तले मानवगण,
नभ में दोनों गायन-रोदन,
राग सदा ऊपर को उठता, आँसू नीचे झर जाते हैं।
कहते हैं तारे गाते हैं!

था तुम्हें मैंने रुलाया!

हा, तुम्हारी मृदुल इच्छा!
हाय, मेरी कटु अनिच्छा!
था बहुत माँगा ना तुमने किन्तु वह भी दे ना पाया!
था तुम्हें मैंने रुलाया!

स्नेह का वह कण तरल था,
मधु न था, न सुधा-गरल था,
एक क्षण को भी, सरलते, क्यों समझ तुमको न पाया!
था तुम्हें मैंने रुलाया!

बूँद कल की आज सागर,
सोचता हूँ बैठ तट पर -
क्यों अभी तक डूब इसमें कर न अपना अंत पाया!
था तुम्हें मैंने रुलाया!

साथी, सब कुछ सहना होगा!

मानव पर जगती का शासन,
जगती पर संसृति का बंधन,
संसृति को भी और किसी के प्रतिबंधों में रहना होगा!
साथी, सब कुछ सहना होगा!

हम क्या हैं जगती के सर में!
जगती क्या, संसृति सागर में!
एक प्रबल धारा में हमको लघु तिनके-सा बहना होगा!
साथी, सब कुछ सहना होगा!

आओ, अपनी लघुता जानें,
अपनी निर्बलता पहचानें,
जैसे जग रहता आया है उसी तरह से रहना होगा!
साथी, सब कुछ सहना होगा!

आदर्श प्रेम

प्यार किसी को करना लेकिन
कह कर उसे बताना क्या
अपने को अर्पण करना पर
और को अपनाना क्या

गुण का ग्राहक बनना लेकिन
गा कर उसे सुनाना क्या
मन के कल्पित भावों से
औरों को भ्रम में लाना क्या

ले लेना सुगंध सुमनों की
तोड उन्हे मुरझाना क्या
प्रेम हार पहनाना लेकिन
प्रेम पाश फैलाना क्या

त्याग अंक में पले प्रेम शिशु
उनमें स्वार्थ बताना क्या
दे कर हृदय हृदय पाने की
आशा व्यर्थ लगाना क्या

हरिवंशराय बच्चन

As we read this, one top Maoist leader has taken responsibility of killing Swami Laxmananda Saraswati [Link]. It can't go more interesting than this: they don't want government to do any investigation and are sending scapegoats to accept all the blames! Think how much exposed and globally embarrassed the missionaries will be if government carries out an honest investigation and finds out the role of Christian missionaries in his murder? And hence the acceptance

Just when I wondered why only a single voice of condemnation is coming from all quarters and no one is caring to think about the root causes, I got to read this article. A very balanced one, asking us to think fairly at the times when we are busy being politically correct:

Borrowed

Coverage of Orissa, Karnataka trouble: Balanced approach wanting

All the reports and commentaries on the attacks in Orissa and Karnataka sidestep the original sin of extreme provocation and the consequential long-simmering discontent among the Hindus. Would such scurrilous observations about what is regarded as holy and sacred be tolerated by any community anywhere else in the world?

B. S. Raghavan; The Hindu Business Line, Sep 3, 2008

It is a hallowed principle of jurisprudence that justice should be even-handed, and both sides to a dispute must be given a full hearing before conclusions are drawn. The media coverage of the disturbances in both Orissa and Karnataka and the action taken by the Centre are so one-sided as to make any fair-minded person feel extremely worried.

I am not a practising Hindu, perform no rituals and have no religious hang-ups. Further, having worked directly under Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi for nine years (1961-9) as the secretary of the National Integration Council from its very inception, (besides my other duties in the Political Division of the Union Home Ministry), I have savoured from close quarters the spirit that animated the heroes of pre-Independence era. Hence, in sharing my uneasiness with readers, I have tried my best to rise above prejudices or preconceptions, and appraise events on the touchstone of fairplay and freedom from bias.

To anyone for whom the print and electronic media were the only sources of information, it would seem that Hindu fanatics, behaving like dreaded terrorists, had been making killing fields of both Orissa and Karnataka, by indulging in murderous attacks on Christian minorities, and the destruction of sacred religious places.

The emerging picture of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal (BD) ? all subsumed under the pejorative rubric Sangh Parivar, or the Saffron Brigade (why not, by the same token, call the Congress the Quattrochi Brigade or the Left the Hammer-and-Sickle Brigade?) ? is that, encouraged from behind the scenes by the communal 'monster', the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), they are going on a ruthlessly violent spree, just to vent their hatred of minorities.

In short, the impression given is that swarms of totally insane thugs are on a rampage, without any provocation whatsoever, holding both States to ransom, and the State Governments, in open sympathy with them, have done little to prevent their excesses.

Not the best way

God knows there have been condemnable incidents, making innocent Christians fear for their lives. There can be no wishing away of the despicable and wilful desecration and destruction of places of worship in Kandhamal in Orissa and in some places, including Bangalore, in Karnataka. Certainly, any wanton resort to violence should be put down with an iron hand and peace and harmony among all sections of the people restored at all costs.

Only a dispassionate and disinterested inquiry can credibly establish whether in the particular cases of attacks on churches, the respective State Governments acted with due sense of urgency and concern for the well-being of the affected communities. Sending on a hurried visit some functionaries from the Home Ministry toeing the official line, unfamiliar with local conditions and listening to only the slanted version is not the best way of getting at the truth. Also, it must be remembered that it is, and will always be, a matter of judgment whether more or less could or should have been done by the State or Central authorities to enforce the law, round up the ruffians and quell the disturbances in any particular set of circumstances.

Such cases cannot be weighed on a fine scale. I say this having dealt with a number of instances of violent outbreaks and insurgency during my nine years in the Home Ministry and two years as Chief Secretary of a north-eastern State.

Journalists and columnists, enjoying the good fortune of never having to manage crisis situations, should, therefore, think many times before showering their verdicts on the happenings, and especially guard against saying or writing anything approaching character assassination. All the reports and commentaries on the disturbances in Orissa and Karnataka neatly sidestep the original sin and the consequential long-simmering discontent among the Hindus. They make it look as if the attackers, who were readily assumed to be members of the 'Saffron Brigade', were madly running amok without any justification.

Real cause ignored

Reams have been written and billions of sound bytes have gone on air describing in lurid detail all that has happened to the churches and the Christian community, with no equal space given for the real cause of all the trouble.

Swami Lakshmananda was a revered figure in Orissa who was engaged in service to the weaker and vulnerable sections of the population. Allegedly, the local Christian votaries of conversion saw him as a thorn in their flesh. Whatever that be, the fact was that some time ago, he was the victim of attack by a gang bent on doing away with him. Luckily, he escaped at that time, but his enemies had their way the second time.

The Centre could have set all speculation at rest if, with all the mighty and extensive intelligence and investigative machinery at its disposal, it had ascertained the truth behind the murders of the Swami and his associates and unhesitatingly named the desperadoes. Its own inability, or unwillingness, to expose the forces that were behind the killing should be taken to have contributed to the flare-up that followed in Kandhamal.

Extreme provocation

Similarly, as regards Mangalore and Bangalore, those who are quick to castigate the State Government gloss over the extreme provocation contained in an obnoxious pamphlet, Satya Darshini, in Kannada language, circulated in the name of an outfit called the New Life Church, scathingly denigrating Hindu gods and goddesses in the foulest of language.

Since all the manifestations of anger from the side of the so-called Saffron Brigade have been set out in graphic detail day after day, fairness in maintaining balance calls for revealing a few samples from the pamphlet to illustrate the revolting nature of its vilification of Hinduism:

"When the Trinity of Hinduism (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva) are consumed by lust and anger, how can they liberate others? Their projection as Gods is nothing but a joke. (page 39).

"When Vishnu asked Brahma to commit a sin, he immediately did so. How can such an 'evil Brahma' be a Creator of this Universe? How is it possible for both the sinner and the entity that provoked the sin to be gods? (Page 39)

"God, please liberate the sinful people of India who are worshipping false Gods that believe in the pleasures of illicit relationships (Page 39)."

Perversity

I want to ask the holier-than-thou commentators to place their hands on their hearts and tell me whether such scurrilous observations about what is regarded as holy and sacred would be tolerated by any community anywhere in the world?

One need not even go as far as gods and goddesses: Suppose one's wife or parents are the targets of such scatological stuff distributed far and wide? Would one smile it away? Or, suppose one exhibits in a public forum paintings of particular individuals and their kith and kin in the nude, will those individuals celebrate it as an ex-pression of artistic freedom?

Why, then, show this perverse support to sacrilege perpetrated against Hinduism alone and work overtime lambasting the spontaneous reaction of largely simple and pious people who are sustained in their quotidian hardships by their faith in their gods and goddesses? To me, somehow, it does not stand to reason or common sense.

There is yet another aspect of this perversity. It gives a handle to foreign governments and busybodies to bad-mouth India as a den of fanatical Hindus who love nothing better than being at the throats of persons of other faiths.

A country which rained death and destruction on Iraq by flaunting a tissue of lies, indulged in unspeakable atrocities in Abu Ghraib and for the last eight years, has kept Muslim detenus in Guantanamo Bay without trial, treating them worse than vermin, denies a visa to Narendra Modi to the resounding applause of self-styled secularists who do not realise the egregious nature of the insult to the entire nation.

In sum, the secularism as practised in the country is letting it down, besides polarising the population. It is time a body of persons reputed for their objectivity and erudition went into the meaning and implications of secularism and communalism.

Nehru set up a Committee in 1961 for this purpose under the chairmanship of Asoka Mehta, of which Indira Gandhi, Atal Behari Vajpayee and Prof Mujeeb were among the members. Unfortunately, its labours were interrupted by the Chinese invasion of 1962, and it was wound up. Getting going from where it left off is eminently worthwhile.

Picture: Peace is everybody's prerogative, not that of any particular religious group.

I am a huge fan of Salil Tripathi and I wait for his fortnightly column 'Here, There, Everywhere' in Mint. After reading him, I came to realize the meanings of wise and otherwise. No debates, no arguments, no claims, no hypocrisies; simply Salil :)

Do not miss this week's article:

Borrowed

Admiring a flawed Gandhi

I am glad many Indians whose pride trumps their sense of humour don't read advertisements for Danish newspapers. Otherwise they'd be out protesting an ad of the daily Morgenavisen Jyllands Posten. That newspaper became famous for publishing controversial cartoons of Mohammed in September 2005. Its recent campaign reminds us of what makes it unique.

The ad says: Life is easier, if you don't speak up. The ads show the Dalai Lama admiring the Himalayas while preparing to ski down a slope; Nelson Mandela relaxing on a beach, carrying a surf board; and Mohandas Gandhi, smiling with a beer bottle in one hand, with the other, he is barbecuing sausages, empty beer bottles at his feet.

This is admirable chutzpah, for these ads are meant to make us think. They challenge the self-righteous among us ? South Africans (and others who opposed apartheid), Tibetans (and their global supporters), and Indians (and Gandhi fans worldwide), telling them not to rush to judgement, but to reflect on the message. Far from ridiculing these exceptional men, the ads show how Mandela, the Dalai Lama and Gandhi could have led cushy, comfortable lives if they had not stood up for what they believed in.

The ads also challenge the world's Muslims ? and those who believe that one must treat Muslims, and Islam, as distinct from other faiths or cultures, needing special protection (because their reaction can turn violent). If Indians, Tibetans and South Africans don't go berserk and demand apologies, bans, or attack Danish embassies, what lesson should the Muslims draw? That the others are cowards? Or that their visceral response is wrong?

We will learn soon, but I am not sanguine. The ads are already on the Internet ? on Amit Varma's blog, India Uncut, he has observed: "I suspect that if the Gandhi ad was seen in India, there would certainly be so-called Gandhians getting upset by such a portrayal and demanding an apology from Jyllands-Posten ? thereby missing the point entirely."

When Sir Richard Attenborough was filming Gandhi, some historians quibbled ? rightly ? over liberties taken with historical sequencing. But there were other protests against portraying Gandhi on screen, with one suggestion that Gandhi be shown as a shining light, or halo, instead. Sir Richard said his film wasn't about Tinkerbell. I was a student then, and for our college magazine, with a classmate (now a distinguished banker), we interviewed noted Gandhian Usha Mehta at Mani Bhavan, Gandhi's home on Laburnum Road in Bombay. She said: "We are not prepared to give our Gandhi to anyone." To her credit, after the film was released, she praised it, agreeing it would introduce Gandhi to a new generation. She was right.

But there was a halo around him, something a Telecom Italia ad reaffirmed in the mid-1990s, showing people using different communication gadgets, listening transfixed as Gandhi spoke.

That was a legitimate concern about Sir Richard's film: It made Gandhi into a saint, and in so doing, it made Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Maulana Azad and Muhammad Ali Jinnah seem inadequate. Subhash Chandra Bose, who challenged Gandhian notions of non-violence, did not even feature.

Indian directors responded in a fascinating way. Jabbar Patel showed us what made Babasaheb Ambedkar unique, Ketan Mehta highlighted Patel by focusing on his South African years, Shyam Benegal showed us what made Gandhi mahatma, and he later turned to Bose's life. More recently, Feroze Khan's Gandhi, My Father explores Gandhi's role within his family. In his play, Mi Nathuram Godse Boltoy (It is me, Nathuram Godse speaking) Pradip Dalvi gave voice to Gandhi's assassin. (For years, Godse's defence statement in courts was not accessible in India, because it justified the assassination). When Ashok Row Kavi made critical remarks about Gandhi tangentially, the cable network had to end that popular show following widespread protests. I'm not suggesting that those comments were right, or that I approve Godse's statement, or his foul deed.

But we understand our leaders more if we explore them in all dimensions. That is why Rajmohan Gandhi's biography, Gandhi: The Man, His People and the Empire, matters. It shows Gandhi without the halo, and we learn why we admire him more without getting blindsighted by the floodlights. The Dalai Lama is imperfect, too: Pico Iyer's thoughtful The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama shows us the limits of his activism. While Mandela has championed progressive causes before and after his presidency, when he ruled South Africa, he often acquiesced with others' tyranny.

The flaws don't diminish these men, they make them more interesting, revealing their complexities. Ignoring that and seeing them only as icons is our flaw. That turns men into idols ? ironically, that's the effect of Muslim protests against the cartoons. 

The Jyllands-Posten ads make us think differently. That's the point: remember Apple's remarkable campaign, Think Different, from the 1990s, a take-off on IBM's slogan, Think. One of the memorable posters in that campaign showed ? Gandhi.

Source: [Link]

Dear Naina,

I don't even know why I am taking the pain to write this to you, because I have been seeing how inconsequential this discussion always turns out to be. The way things have been developing, I doubt whether you would even care to read this. But still if it doesn't hurt much, extract five minutes from your precious time to hear me out.

You surely don't need to know what you have meant to me. Be it the times when you were a source of support and encouragement through my lows, or when I spent with you some awesome moments during the highs, my admiration for you and for the relation that we share had reached a level that I cannot articulate.

But somewhere down the track, things did go wrong. It's pointless trying to pass the blame or cite instances, but the underlying fact is that gradually and inadvertently, I felt a distance develop between us, which got worse by the day. I still can't figure out the reason; did I err somewhere on the way, or was it just a bunch of expectations I did not deserve to keep? Whatever it was, it's too late now to analyse and amend.

But before we part ways, I want to make clear a thing or two. Don't mistake my attachment to you as my weakness. In better times, your friendship was my strength. But today, the lack of it doesn't make me weak by any measure. I always thought our need for each other's friendship was mutual. But now when I see that you need me no more, let me tell you that I don't need you either. I jolly well understand that an excessive dependence on someone can jeopardise my self-reliability, and I am not ready to do that. But at the same time I must inform you that the justifications you have always given me in terms of we being different people never went down as a good excuse for your indifference. It's very easy to get the monkey off your back by saying that you are a different person and hence find it difficult to live up to the expectations of your friend. If you think that is a great excuse, then I have a piece of my mind to share with you. However different two close friends may be, they are, more often than not, able to gauge each other's feelings right. In that view, then, your unresponsiveness to my need most of the times only suggests that the closeness I once thought existed was just a figment of my imagination, a mirage which I desperately tried to convert into a reality. But alas! I was wrong.

There were times in the recent past when I desperately needed to talk to you, when I was low, when things just didn't seem right, and where I felt that I needed the same Naina who had once been the sole friend I believed I could rely on whenever needed. I don't know if you have ever experienced this treatment, but suddenly when such a person turns his back on you, the soreness is very severe. I can hardly blame you for this, because come to think of it: you are not answerable to me for anything you do. You have a life of your own, and I can't expect you to change just for my sake. But, the least you could have done is to have been honest; if not with me, then at least with yourself. Instead, you kept reiterating that you valued our friendship. And each time you did that, it reinforced a hope in my mind that there was scope for things to get better. You'd rather have told me upfront that I was a bug you could no longer bear. It would have made things much simpler for both of us.

Please don't even bother to reply to this letter, especially if you are going to repeat the clichéd argument that your ways of showing your concern are very different, and that I have not been able to understand them. Even if that is true, I am sorry to say that I don't subscribe to your explanations. If you think I am a kid whom you can convince into believing otherwise by way of such feeble arguments, you are sadly mistaken. I am a simple person who interprets things as he sees them, and then forms an opinion based on them, which can't be changed by merely mincing words. You can tell me a million times that you hold our friendship in high esteem, and I will disregard your words as many times, simply because it does not reflect in your actions any more.

If you wonder why I never said this to you earlier, it is just because somewhere down in my heart, I still hold a lot of respect for you as someone who had once been one of my closest friends. And I know for a fact that this respect can never die.

So smile, Naina, for you have nothing to lose even after all that has transpired. For even if you disregard this letter as just another piece of paper and move on, you can rest assured that I will never fail you as a friend, in case you should ever need me again. Much as I might try, my reverence for you can never fade away.

I would only be extremely delighted if I were to believe that there could be a solution to this deadlock that we reached. But I know this deadlock is here to stay, and I am ready to reconcile to this situation. All that I can do at this stage is to assure you that I will always be there for you, no matter what. And I ask for no reciprocation in return any more.

Love,

Nakul  

(Page 253-256, 'Watch out! We are MBA', by Nishant Kaushik)