QUANTUM PHILOSOPHY - 1

The vision of bringing about a Holistic Religion over an increasingly globalising world order is not new,and the principle is not at all an unhealthy one,especially when one questions the contemporary relevance of the existence of a varying multitude of religions when every other aspect of human life is getting globalised by the day.Yet the idea gets pegged back by a few factors that still predominate sociological dynamics.Man,despite all the advancements taking place in stride with evolution of universal consciousness,has not been able to come out of the escapist comfort and security which religion offers to him in the face of increasingly unstable and volatile social profile-an after-effect of the same process of rapidly accelerating globalisiation.

 
A theologist might not like it if I attempt to peel away the accretions of the myths,dogmas,and sacraments that cloud the origins of his chosen faith.He may be liable to accuse me of syncretism,of  trying to combine all religions into one big holistic ocean of faith,and for the orthodox theologist that is as anathema as the idea of a single global government is to the extreme political right.When one seeks common threads among the world's religions(which I would prefer to rephrase as spiritual doctrines),he may be chided for following a 'cafeteria' approach-a little from this,a bit from that.

It is true enough that some New Age belief systems do little more than uninspired devotional dabbling,backing off quickly whenever a spiritual discipline becomes too incompatible for one's lifestyle.(One cannot really be a part-time Budhhis any more than a self-described Christian can purchase salvation with one hour a week in Sunday church).Yet the irrefutable truth is that at the heart of each great religious tradition lie three small words: God is One.

The common ground of all great faiths is to be found in their essence:mystical insight and introspection.Insight,by its very nature,is experiential.It cannot be effectively taught or preached except through analogies and allegories,and bit clumsily,dogmas.But the testimony recorded by the mystics seems convincing enough.Whatever the religion may be,if one gets down to the level of religious epiphany,the experience seems to be the same: dissolution of egos,a merging of the observer and the Observed,a Union with the primal source of all.Contrary to the prevalent scientific bias that tends to paint mysticism with metaphysical vagueness,the universal mystical experience itself is evidently of great clarity;otherwise how could so many from such diverse schools of religion describe it in such similar terms?

The philosopher-scientist may personally disagree but science as an official philosophical subject,seems to cringe at the mere mention of mysticism.Yet with each new discovery in quantum physics,and disciplined insight into both the micro and macrocosm,science is backing into the cosmic sea. The more the scientist penetrates to deeper levels of reality through quantum physics,he seems to come across an undivided totality,an "Emptiness" that is,paradoxically,full.The more he learns,the clearer it becomes that the precepts of mysticism differ those of modern physics mainly in linguistics and methodology.This continuously whips up a relentless questioning-could it be that experience of the mystics has an analogue in the "unbroken wholeness" of quantum physics?

The greatest obstacle to the reconciliation of science and philosophy has been the Personification of God.The prophets and the priests of all religions have historically offered their followers a wide latitude in their depiction of the Almighty.They realised that man has tremendous difficulty in conceptualising things beyond the pale of his own senses,and they have traditionally kept the "secret" to themselves,that God is not a person or a symbol which man may worship,but abstract.And at one point of time,even the priests fell prey to their own sleight-of-hand and began to believe their own press,just as the mathematicians have too often mistaken their elegant equations for the truths they represent.  Einstein famously remarked that science has grown out of refinement of our own thinking.In its infancy,science was a close cousin of philosophy.Nweton's Principia bears the title "The Mathematical Principles Of Natural Philosophy".But ever since Relativity Theory and Quantum Physics described a reality strikingly at odds with our perception,physics has become the province of mathematicians predominantlyThis is because Mathematics furnishes the only vocabulary to precisely describe this reality

 

Can't man find a way now to appreciate the reconciliation of Science and Spiritualism?We will be more closure to the Truth then,I believe.

 

I hope the discussion continues…

BEING BORN AGAIN : A DREAM

Yesterday I had this strange dream..

I dreamt that I was being born in this planet,in this time-space,but remembering everything.And my mother was giving me a discourse of what all things I shall have to forget to grow up into a 40yr.old man again.

 

Before she made me forget everything-those few seconds before I would become the helpless child newly-born with no memory ,I had flashes of information wracking my head.

I remembered that I have no official religion and it doesn't even have a name.It shall never have one.But it is not an organised religion.Organised religion is God-in-a-Web, the Great Spider in the centre of a thousand doctrines and rituals and mandatory beliefs.And people die in that web.So I have a nameless disorganised religion.I must have Something then.

I have a way of finding what is true for me.It is an experimental personal philosophy.And it will never have a name.Because a name is just a label.As soon as there's a label,ideas disappear and there is label-worship and label-bashing. And instead of living by a theme of ideas,people begin dying for labels.That the world needs a new religion is the last thing I wish for.

My experimental privacy does not have a symbol.If it did have one,it wouldn't be an Om ,a star,or a crescent.If it were to have one,it shall be a cross without the bar-because I don't like 'bars'.

A cross without the bar is the number One.One in binary arithmetic means Not-Nothing, an Is instead of Isn't.One is the number of Life,no matter how many dreams I have,of Life.

A cross without a bar is the Capital 'I'.It reminds me that this nameless path is my personalised thinking-not to be suggested by circumstances.

A cross without the bar is a Little 'i'.It reminds me there's a test,with a question that awaits the end of every dream I have.

 
And I was born again in time-space.How strange it felt,being born!Hours ago I was safe,floating, happy,systems working warm and well.Now the mind is a control room at nuclear breakdown-full emergency.A hundred terror-bright, death-red warnings flashing:"Breathe now or die.Eat now or die.Falls kill,fire kills,water kills,enemies in the dark."

Never before have I seen so many bright precautions, and now I am wide-open,vulnerabl e and powerless,and I can't even sob the word for "HELP"!

I felt my mother reassuringly close to me.I wanted her to stay close till I've checked out on the fears of danger."Tell me Ma what was I doing here?Did I pick this life for me,or did you?"

Ma had answers,but all my questions were cries of a wailing new-born.The choice seemed to be to close my eyes,shut down all systems,and sleep.So this was space-time,Land of no Other Choice.It is all blurs now but the more one sees,the worse it gets.Here is hunger,and thirst,and cold.

She stroked my head,as she said,"Little one,the dragons outnumber you,and they lie.You can choose.You have two choices..One- call their bluff,don't listen to their limits.Close your eyes,lift your spirit,remember who you are,beyond space,beyond time,never born,never dying..."
I relaxed,and let go.

"..and the physical world will raise a fist in victory-Dead! All eyes to swear your tiny body unbreathing, all flingers agree no pulse,sign a scroll to call your victory death."

"Another Choice: Win by losing.Defore your outer walls break,as break they must,if you are to stay,build an inner place to protect your Truth.Protect the fact that you are infinite life.Protect that the world you know exists with your consent and for your good reasons..Protect that your purpose and mission is to shine love in your own playful life."

"Wow! Great to be here!And so much to learn"-I thought."Good.Yes,mortals love to learn.And I shall always love to learn.This seemed to be my first learning."

Appearance is reality.

 

Reality changes with time and space.

 

Nothing lies beyond space.

 

Atoms form,rule and end life.

 

Destiny is chance.Some people are lucky,some are not.To live is to win,to die is to lose.

Nothing exists until it is created physically in space-time.Everythi ng that is created,is destroyed.It is all a matter of time.

 

And Nothing exists after time.

 

Force is power.

 

Anger is the only warning one ever gets.

 

Fear is no defense.

 

Origin is luck.

 

Body is machine,of carbon,hydrogen, oxygen,running on organic fuel.Body controls mind.

 

Mind is random electrical activity through brain.

There is one physical reality.It does not need one's consent for existence.One' s thought has zero effect on the reality of the physical world.There is no such thing as non-physical reality.Refuse these ideas and one shall die.

Everything does not have an answer.The universe is un-knowable. Nothing important makes sense.

I am the captain of my hidden space-ship,waiting to take me home.The crew we sign aboard our inner ship are navigators and helmsmen.We all meet them the moment we are ready or needful or curious to touch.

We wait all these years to find someone who understands us,someone who accepts us as the persons we are,someone with a wizard's power to melt stone to sunlight,who can bring us happiness in spite of trials,who can face our demons in the darkest of nights,who can transform us into the soul we choose to be.Yesterday I found out that the magical Someone is the face we see in the mirror.It is us and our home-made masks.

All these years,and at last we meet….

Well,it was just a dream yesterday night..

MEMETICS - PARASITES AND VIRUS

 I still find it difficult to fathom the ontology of memes. Comparing them to words is incorrect. Words have a nominal existence with a fate that is completely identical with the social and political circumstances of the culture that gave birth to the language that incorporates them. Memes are purported to be substantial and have 'attitudes'.

A meme is a package of information.It can be a childrens song, the thought that product x can best be bought at store y, the thought that jezus could really walk on water, etc. The memes who have the least probability to be proven, are the most rigorously fought about, thats a strange correlation there.Human brains can be subject to,or hijacked to parasitic ideas.Many people have led down their lives for 'causes'-communism,capitalism,different religions. The ideas are infectious.

 Most of cultural spread that goes in not really novel,brilliant thinking.And the hosts work hard to spread these ideas to others. One set of ideas,in essence,have simply replaced biological imperatives in our own lives.This is a profound,yet missed or unrecognised,biological effect.It is a subordination of genetic interest to others.It is unique to us,no other species does anything like that.If one wants to theorise this,one shall seemingly come across a host of theories.Yet we need a common factor,the thread of relevant continuity of essence in all these possible theories. And we hit upon memetics,which stripped to its bare essence,signifies an idea-the idea of replication of ideas when they pass from brain to brain.
 Now when we do that,we are all responsible for not just the indented effects of our ideas,but for their possible misuse,which in today's world,is becoming easier and faster.We clearly perceive it around us.People become scared of these ideas being caricatured,and they run off readily from one dire purpose or another.If we are increasingly becoming conscious hosts of spreading memes,we have a responsibility to undertake.We have to keep on plugging away,trying to correct the misapprehensions so that only the benign and useful variants would spread.

 Richard Dawkins,the official father of memetics,once declared: Memes are like viruses,as unassuming in structural content and as potent to replicate rapidly and better than competition does.A meme is so similar to a virus(which is nothing but a string of nucleic acids with an "attitude",an information packet with an attitude. Ideas can continue to exist and thrive without genetic passing over.The way to fight against 'toxic' memes is to also spread 'medicine' memes, like 'only believe proven things.

 When the Conquistadores invaded the American continent to flourish and rule there,the local tribes were wiped out not only guns and metallic swords.The Europeans brought with them the germs to which they,themselves,had become immuned over hundreds or even thousands of years,living with domesticated animals,who wore the source of pathogens,alien to the American natives who had no immunity.
 Similarly,memes while spreading out cross time and space(thanks to our rapidly advancing technologies)do consist of ''toxins'-ideas that can threaten conservatively closed socio-religio-cultural communities who become apprehensive of losing their self-identities and exhibit social behaviour on a mass scale,that is potentially harmful to humankind as a whole.Terrorism based on fanatic ideologies is an easily identifiable example.The way to fight against 'toxic' memes is to also spread 'medicine' memes, like 'only believe proven things.

It is not the spread of ideas that is dangerous. The repression of ideas is what's dangerous.
So-called toxic notions can only really take hold in a vacuum. The more information one has at his disposal, and the more open one's culture is, the less likely it is that one would be willing to die for a country or a religion. In other words, open information is what produces an "immunity" to the less "liberal" communities and religions.In fact, that is precisely why, throughout history, there have been attempts to censor or repress information.
And suppression of information doesn't just happen in dictatorships.Ideas can be suppressed by direct means, such as throwing people in jails for writing certain books. But more insidious is the indirect suppression, such as corporate control of the TV and newspaper media that result in the marginalization of anti-capitalist notions.

With rapid globalisation with increasing consumerism,these memes are in essence,wiping off boundaries,cultures,languages and ethnic identities. We,the carriers of memes,have become morally immune(the 'healthy' and positively active section of society)to the bad elements of our culture by marginalising them to the edge of social and moral profile of our entities e.g. Drug abuse,pornography,paedophilia(the list is quite long)and keep them off our basic existential units,our families.But we should be alert and conscious while spreading technology and education should be aware of these veiled social negatives. When we are the innocent vectors of memes,devoid of malintent,we are in effect subjecting the next line of vectors who might be identifying the memes as a counter-threat to their own memes,for which they are preparing to die for.

Following the theory of Discourse that Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe have been expounding over two decades now, I believe there is a more parsimonious and rigorous explanation about the spread of ideas and ideologies. Their explanation does not reside in non falsifiable entities like memetics does. I also find the 'neutrality' thesis not only dubious but ideologically suspect.As Richard Dawkins theorised,memes are morally neutral,as morality is a relative concept.I feel it is theoretically correct,but potentially unhealthy.Yet it is an absolute reality.Morality simply refers to an ideal code of conduct..We live in a society that is empathetic to others within our group. That is why we have the morality that we do.And we exhibit  EMPATHY. This was developed within apes through darwinian evolution by natural selection.

 

Globalization puts us in ever greater contact with memes that cause us anxiety because they undermine our respective cultural worldviews. And as recent history has shown, some people are all too willing to kill to overcome or avoid this anxiety. This accelerating process of "conflicting memes" will either make (through evolution, assimiliation, tolerance) or break our species. Thinking of the capacity for self-annihilation we now possess in the form of nuclear weapons, I am not unequivocally optimistic about the eventual outcome.

Globalisation,which is inevitable(and necessary)should be done with delicate caution so that the memes,which we are vectors of,can appear less threatening to communities which are less open and as a result possess less immunity,showing more reactionary behaviourial patterns to those aspects of our culture that we have made ourselves immune to,and marginalised to the periphery. If one catches AIDS,we don't hate the person.We hate the HIV virus,and while it is seemingly impossible to wipe out of the strain,less virulent mutations can be brought in.I hope the reader catches the analogy.As memes are morally neutral,man can never wipe out their negative elements.But he can show a more responsible approach while interacting with communities in such a way that these negative elements can be ''detoxified' of cultural aggression to a large extent,and appear less threatening to relatively closed cultural groups.

Maybe the answer lies in better qualitative perception of the possible effects of memes on communities which possess a relatively restricted interactive potential as far as culture and morality are concerned. Sociological research seems to overlook this factor.We have to look back on history and put stress on identifying new parameters of social behaviour.
Otherwise I don't see any perceptible change in the world-wide-war of fanatic ideologies,intolerance and senseless loss of human lives.

How I wish I was a social scientist.

PERCEPTION IN A WORLD OF TAGS

I have always been fascinated by human perception. I marvel at metamerism where the same color under different lighting appears different (or different colors appear the same!). We can look at a person and see if they look flush even if they are under incandescent lighting, fluorescent, or even daylight. But this makes me even more impressed that our minds are able to make sense of things that are constantly changing.

Life is all about change.Here I am using the word LIFE in a broader sense of the term,a perception which does not have well defined boundaries at most places if one seeks to comprehend teleologically.

We change as time goes by,the change being,at times,natural(or pre-destined from a fatalistic point of view) irrespective of any event that might take place arbitrarily in one's life,and,at times,conditional-the changes we undergo by our experience and perception by arbitrary events.A specific change or a set of changes can be 'for the better' or 'for the worse' on a scale calibrated by social standards of morality that exists with temporal concomitance.(Even this scale changes along both temporal and spatial axes-across decades,centuries,millenia and across ethnic,socio-cultural and religious spectrum at any given time).However all changes are evolutionary(if of course one believes in a uni-directional arrow of time).

Our surroundings,both immediate and remote,independant of human existence,change too,again naturally(independant of any arbitrary phenomenon that might take place) and conditional(which is getting more and more diversified,being affected by human existence and interference.On a bigger scale,the universe,with all its stars,planetary systems galaxies,changes too-this is almost natural,following the scheme of things and again conditioned by arbitrary cosmic phenomena.

I went into this seemingly repetitive details while talking about Change as the change varies subjectively.How we experience and react to Change is absolutely dependant on our objective  perception of things.A single event of change,along with its cause-and-effect properties,differs from man to man,depending on individual perception.

What one sees around him,is what one perceives it to be and is not what that is actually out there.We perceive it through our sense-organs,noting and tagging it with a specific colour,smell,temperature,taste,texture.We also tag it with feelings-happy or sad,safe or dangerous,good or bad,likeable or abhorrant-the list of parameters is endless,depending on the entire spectrum of human emotions and instincts.
The world around us is,for us,nothing but a combination of 'tags',which we attached ourselves since we became capable of cognition,the ''information' being carried within us through the generations down to what we are today,shaping our instincts,beliefs and attitudes.Thus the world today is an amalgamation of diverse ethnicities,social models and religions which we have created ourselves with time,and with which we identify through tags.

At a conference about ideas, it's important to step back and consider the engine that creates them: the human mind. How exactly does the brain -- a three-pound snarl of electrochemically frantic nervous tissue -- create inspired inventions, the feeling of hunger, the experience of beauty, or the sense of self -- and how reliable is it?I at times contemplate the mind as an ecosystem in which a new class of entities -- memes -- can compete, coexist, reproduce and flourish, and asks what sorts of nefarious things these entities might be up to.

Sometimes what we think 'ought to' be or even, 'normality' in general', is ambiguous. What's normal isn't just what's 'logical' but also what (probably) works, whats typically practical given the way we interact with the (our) world according and relative to our bodies, our history, or what is the same according to the meaning generated by our being-in-the-world.Every flick of the eyes, every new gestalt, is resemblance and difference, transformation and continuation, discovery from ambiguity.

Of course, our view of the world is extremely distorted by how our brains are shaped (what we have learned before).Many philosophers have said similar things before, starting with Plato and Pythagoras. But even if the originality of his ideas can be disputed, I think It has always been an idea worth sharing. 

At the age of 8 years, when making color judgments using only one eye at a time (covering the opposite eye), I discovered a mild difference in my perception of cyan/magenta between my right & left eye.Could this slight perceptual difference combined with varying levels of colour blindness (perception) noted amongst different ethnicities, explain some of the differences in cultural style & design tastes?( For example, what's garish or over-saturated colour to one population is considered normal in another population.)

How many other things do we perceive incorrectly due to context with our senses and thoughts? This also opens up the thought of the vast differences in human perception of the same problem and how that "colors" our actions. That is why we must be conscious of what context we are put in when exposed to new ideas, or the same idea that only "looks" new. 

It is about how we see the world, our country our "enemies" our friends, our ability to live and make changes in our daily life and in the life of the planet. Our perceptions drive our actions and dictate how we act in the world. And yet as we have seen, perceptions are sometimes arbitrary and conditioned. Context is often defined by others. To see truly we need to understand and challenge the context. And when we understand the context, and the validity of our perception, then perhaps we can change how we act in the world, and perhaps ,,, change the world.

 

FESTIVE ACOUSTICS

Wishing you all a Very Happy Diwali.

It is a big festival here as a Lakshmi Puja is also concurrently performed with marvelous arrays of bright lights with vibrant colours,brightening up one's abode with festive illumination with a prayer to usher into the family a new phase of happiness and wealth blessed by the traditional Goddess of Prosperity.

Though the concept of Sound is intrinsically linked with spiritualism and possesses an ontological significance in the metaphysics of Primal Creation,as elaborated by our ancient philosopher- sages in the country's earliest grand Texts of Wisdom - particularly the Rig-Veda,I do not think that our 'spirited worshipper brothers' possess any grand acoustic insight while celebrating the festive spirit with Utter Noise,through explosive concoctions which seem to come up every year with newer innovations of environmental noise pollution.Why a festival of Lights should have a parallel noisy soundtrack(and irritably so)is beyond my comprehension. It simply kills the spirit of joyous festivity.

Philosophical deliberations by meditative realisations in the Vedas imply that the Energy behind primal creation arose out of the vibrations of the thought-process of the Superconscious One.This mystic Sound of Silence emanating from the Supreme One is called the Anahata Naad(the Unheard Sound).It is said to form the basis of the astral plexuses(the Chakras)located in the flow of existential energy in our spine-the Sushumna. The Anahata Naad emanates from the Anahata Chakra,the cardiac plexus which is centre of the Vayu Tattva(The Wind Element).

The Primal Sound formed out of the surreal cosmic acoustics is the AUM.

This cosmological theory is reflected in the Gayatri chant in Sanskrit from The Rig Veda,dating back to 1500 BC.The 10th.mantra of the 16th.sutra in the 3rd.mandala of the Rig Veda states in Sanskrit with a translation based on that of The Great Spiritual Masters.
The most sacred of the Vedic mantras or chants; is that of the Gayatri. It is the "mool"/root mantra of the Vedas and hence it is considered to be of pre-eminent importance. Its virtue is said to be great and its japa or repetition has been enjoined from a very early age.

Aum bhur bhuvah suvah (Muttering the sacred syllable "Aum" rise above the three regions (Physical, Astral and Causal).

Tat savitur varenyam  ( And turn your atttention to the All-Absorbing Sun within).

Bhargo devasya dhimahi ( Accepting its influence let you be absorbed in the Sun ).

Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat ( And it shall in its own likeness make you All-Luminous! ).

The Gayatri Mantra (Gayatri comes from the root "sing") is considered among the most powerful of the yogic incantations. In the yogic tradition,Light equals Knowledge.This particular chant is about linking the "sun" with our thoughts and enlightening ourselves by means of higher knowledge.The object of veneration is not that which provides us with light in the outside world but it is a principle that transcends the three planes of existence, the physical, the astral and the causal, and is the source of inner illumination.
This principle is referred to as AUM.

 Pronounced Aauuuummmmmm. ..... it consists of four basic components of human consciousness:

 1. Aa = Awake State; 

 2. Uuuu = Dream State ;  

3. Mmmmmm = Deep Sleep State ; and  

4. ............  .........  .........  ....... (The Silence that follows Aum) = Total merger with pure silence, free of all mental oscillations, via union with the Absolute, which is the indescribable source and end of everything, the Supra Universal Consciousness. It is the Par Brahman or Beyond Universe, the All-transcending One, whose prime attribute is effulgence in manifestation, but which is even beyond the effulgence.( Hence the mantra in its original Rig Veda form has another line added to it, which is given out only to renunciates and chosen disciples according to The Great Spiritual Masters:Paro Raj-asal Savad Aum/He who transcends the effulgence is this Aum).

Prayer/meditation essentiates the presence of Silence and serendepidity.While worshipping ,some of us seem to be oblivious to this.

Let the Light of Knowledge pervade.

CRAZY QUESTIONS PERSIST - NOW WHY ?

"I think we are all robotic creations created by forms of consciousness that evolved from simple to complex. In essence our creators have always been simpler than us.Also the robots we create shall be more complex than us. We shall off course continue to live in their memes. That is how our creators also became immortal ( our creators that began with the single gene that wanted to collaborate to create a bigger and more complex consciousness)."

So my learned friend observed after reading the previous blog,"CRAZY QUESTIONS – WHY NOT"

I fully agree with him as to HOW we ended up to be the conscious entities we all are today.That primordial,functionally self-sufficient bio-organic structure with a specific orientation of organic molecules is The Ancestor and its meme still exists within us which we have carried forward with evolution getting structurally and consciously complex with each major step of evolution.
However my query still remains unanswered.And it is about the Intention behind the scheme of things.

Functioning of Science is restricted by an absolute precondition-that of Conservation of Matter and Energy.And if one looks upon how science has unravelled the story that started from the Big Bang,one cannot miss a prominent 'Matter Before Mind' hypothetical undertone.Since all the cosmological interactions and reactions started at random from the point of the singularity at Time-0,there were practically a near-infinite possibilities(theoretically infinite)for those primeival molecules of the cosmic soup to explore and interact.(From here I am intentionally taking a geocentric,biocentric and then specifically anthropocentric for simplicity's sake,which my points of query and discussion necessitates).
Through thermonuclear fissions and fusions of these molecules under the influence of the Strong and Weak Forces,stars and gallaxies of varying densities-the entire universe was 'born' expanding temporo-spatially.
Somewhere in time,specific configurations of molecules came into existence(at this stage,I dare to introduce the word 'organic' which had certain potentials which would be followed later to begin the history of cosmos,and somewhere down the line,of us.The potential I am talking about is of repetitive specificity,in a chaotic surrounding with the randomness of molecular interactions being at its peak.'Consciousness' still hadn't arrived yet.
At one stage,something which I like to personally perceive as 'The First Crossover',a singularity consisting of a specifically unique configuration came into existence,the unique property being to Survive for an arbitrary quantum of time,in the surrounding of random creation and destruction of molecules.It could survive to sustain and retain its structural specificity which now added the element of specific functions,one of them being to form a second generation of similar structures with the same molecular structure and function.It survived,sustained and reproduced.Can I dare to push in the term 'bio-organic' here,if I am free to hypothetize for the sake of this discussion here?

Concised,the line of events(not necessarily linear),the primordial molecules interacting at random starting from the Big Bang singularity --> A new singularity of Organic molecular configurations,still interacting randomly --> yet another singularity of Bio-organic structures with specific intra-corporeal interactions(the randommess omitted) and resultant ability of specific functioning to survive,sustain,and multiply retaining all their specificities. What happened after is well elaborated by evolutionary theories,and we all stand Here and Now.

A link is missing however.Though our science is not at all related to pre-Big Bang singularities,it has comfortably accommodated something in the very beginning to rationalise everything,which it doesn't agree in principle and which would nullify all scientific pursuits and results in an instant.It weirdly seems to accept-SOMETHING GOT CREATED OUT OF NOTHING.Here the rational theoretical physicist shall attach a fanatic ontological hypothesis to the First Singularity around the Big Bang.Or somebody might plainly hypothetize to necessitate the absolute pre-existence of energy Before or At the moment of the Big Bang.But should science ethically start with a hypothesis to proceed and develop through strict rationale of theories to reach its present stage?This seems like an effort to justify the means in the very beginning to rationalise everything that happened afterwards.

I am asking the question WHY?Even if one blindly accepts the Matter Before Mind concept (once again I am intentionally anthropomorphic)and doesn't dare Science to explore the absolute pre-existence of primordial energy at Time-zero with rationale,there lies a ontologically significant space to drop questions.Was this the only way the universe could have began from the Big Bang?And it took a path in course of which organic molecular configurations emerged the interactions of which were permuted and recombine to produce bio-organic singularities which survived against intrinsic entropy,our actual ancestor from which evolution took place both in the organic  and the conscious domain of things.And here we are,the personified memes of the primordial times,more complex in form,evolutionally conscious enough to ask about the very events,trying to understand the initial macrocosmic and microcosmic singularities from which scheme of things evolved with time,trying to theorise possible transient events of harmony in the midst of entropy,from which time-space jumped from one stage to another.

Did the Creator/Supreme Consciousness/the First Singularity with a timeless past have other choices through which the interactions of energy-matter would have proceeded with different subatomic and cosmological constants?Or did the initial singularity have a singularity of choice,and perhaps with a singularity of intention?Theoretical Physics and Religion share one common platform(pardon me for this audacious contemplation)to declare that at Time-Zero(or In The Beginning),cosmos moved from a state of nothingness to the existence of matter.WHAT created matter out of nothingness?Science has nothing but hypothetical speculations to comment on this.Scientists seem to be divided on whether all the matter in the universe was created at once or whether it continues to be created. 
"Unless you have chaos inside you,you cannot give birth to a dancing star.Man would never have been able to make mistakes,and to see things as other than they are and to believe things to be other than they are." – Frank Nietzsche.

Was there any Intention behind the Choice of Creation?

My question is perhaps a mistake.But it still remains.

CRAZY QUESTIONS - WHY NOT?

I dithered a lot over whether to write this in public,the restrictive element coming from my natural social inhibitions.Well then I thought something like,"Ok,go for it.What big do I lose?"

'Bear with me' is my request.Apart from getting bored,the bonus element of being entertained or having some harmless fun is always there-I can assure you this.
Being crazy at times is fun.And so you all will say.After all we need some degree of craziness around us to balance the disciplined sanity with which we all try to go about,living our respective little family lives from one temporal locus to another.

I am going to propose some crazy points today which have dwelled in my mind for quite some time,taking nourishment from personal observation of the way things seem to run around me,both near and remote.

I have been following closely Dr.Kevin Warwick,Professor of Cybernetics,Reading University,and a famous name as a leading creator of Artificial Intelligence.He has created robots which are able to interact with their environment,learn and adjust their 'behaviour' accordingly.These robots exhibit a level of intelligence that matches that of worker-bees.He has also theorised to engineer a new generation of robotic computers that can potentially design and manufacture other robotic computers,each level designing the lesser level beneath it.
Dr.Warwick, in his presentation about his work updates at the Royal Institute in 2001,proposed(not to be nullified)that these robots' intelligence seem to grow in an organic way.They form 'personalities',interact with each other and make choices Beyond what has been programmed into them.
Now think of this.These robots,of course,do not exhibit consciousness with humane characteristics,but neither do,for example,dogs(who can be said to have a 'doggy' consciousness).Let's say these robots have a robotic consciousness.After all,from one angle,robots display a consciousness while computing massively complex mathematical calculations in an instant,a digital consciousness that is superior to our own,at least as far as these calculations are concerned.

Now think of this.Over the last few decades,computers have evolved from being able to simulate basic simplistic patterns to being able to create virtual worker with utmost details.If this trend were to continue,then why can't we imagine computers which will able to simulate worlds perhaps as complicated as the one we think we are living in.THIS raises a philosophical question:Could we ourselves be in such a simulation and could what we think is the universe be some sort of 'vault of heaven' rather than the real thing we perceive and analyse?In a sense,could we ourselves be the creations within that simulation? - This 'question' was proposed by Sir Martin Rees,Britain's Astronomer Royal,in a headline article in THE SUNDAY TIMES in February 2005.
The wider story is that leading astrobiologists are,with every newer discovery in the microcosmic and macrocosmic worlds,becoming increasingly fascinated by the extraordinary degree of fine-tuning that has been necessary for us to evolve.And this is making them question what is Really Real.
Although modern physics has little patience with metaphysics,with what might look like high-minded,recherché abstractions piled up on each other,ancient cosmology seems to be a philosophical machine.In its account of inter-locking evolving dimensions,the clashing,morphing and intermingling of great systems,in its scale,complexity and awesome explanatory power it rivals modern quantum physics.

 

We cannot simply declare that physics has replaced metaphysics and made it practically redundant.There is a key difference between these systemer which shall exist forever.Modern science explains How the universe comes to be as it is.Metaphysics explores the question How Our Experience of the universe comes to be as it is.For science,the great miracle to be explained is the physical universe.For esoteric philosophy,the greater miracle is human consciousness.

Scientists are fascinated by the extraordinary series of balances between various sets of factors that have been necessary in order to make life on earth possible.Grossly speaking,one talks in terms of balances between heat and cold,wetness and dryness,the earth being so far away from the sun(and no farther),the sun being at a particular evolutionary stage(neither hotter or cooler),or at a more fundamental level,the balance between particular degress of forces of gravity and electromagnetism that necessitates the coherence of matter.
From an esoteric perspective,one can begin to note that an equally extraordinary series of balances has been necessary to format our subjective consciousness to be what it is,or speaking simply,to give our experience the Structure it has.

When I meditate on what is needed to make possible the internal narrative,the collection of 'incidents' we string together to form our basic sense of self,I always seem to hit upon one answer-MEMORY.As Italo Calvino has precisely observed:"Memory has to be strong enough to enable us to act without forgetting what we wanted to do,to learn without ceasing to be the same person,but it also has to be weak enough to allow us to keep straying into the future."
We have to be able to perceive our surroundings through our cognitive senses,but it is equally important for us not to be overwhelmed by sensations which could other occupy all our mental space,or else we would not be able to reflect or imagine.Also we seem to have the freedom to choose what to think about.For the necessitation of stable sanity of our consciousness,the Perfect balance of attachment and detachment from our interior impulses as well as from our perceptions of our surroundings,the outside world.

Here I can dare to propose-if the most fundamental states of human consciousness were not characterised by this set of exceptionally fine balances,there would be no possibility to exercise free thought and free will.

Human consciousness seems to be a Miracle.And when I ask about the meaning of life,or the universe,I am not really asking How it came about by the cause-and-effect scheme of things,the right elements and preconditions coming together to form matter-stars,galaxies,planets,organic molecules and life.I am asking about the Intention behind it all.
The 'string theory' promises us to give an answer,a Grand Unified Theory(as Stephen Hawking put it)which will combine laws of gravity with laws of the quantum world.Perhaps one day,man shall be able to relate the reasonable laws that governs objects and phenomena we can sense with the radically 'different' behaviour in the sub-atomic realm.Everything shall be accounted for,because neo-physics seems to propose there is Nothing Else.

When science presents before us,us ourselves and the universe around us as 'meaningful or mysterious,it uses these words with a little intellectual dishonesty.An atheistic universe can only be meaningful or mysterious in a secondary,and rather disappointing,sense-in the same sense as a stage conjuror is a 'magician'. And really,when it comes to considering the Great Questions,of life and death,all scientific equations are little more than difficult,long-winded ways of saying,"We Don't Know."

I really don't know whether I am the creation I think I am,or a 'robotic' creation within a bigger simulated set of conditions,by a higher consciousness.This makes me ask more,to be more crazy in the regulated,sane world.

TOLERANCE AND INDULGENCE

M K Gandhi's birth anniversary this year was a day of extreme emotions for me.I should mention here that my friends who read my blogs,patiently tolerating my grossly amateur efforts at composing non-fiction literature,and send me fond words of encouragement(words that I have literally begun to treasure digitally),should not err to conclude that yours truly,who seem to swear by Gandhi and shout 'Empathy' at the drop of a hat or rather an incident,passionately follow the philosophy of the great man in intent and action.I am no saint or budding social reformer and there remain to take place a million evolutionary changes in my consciousness before I reach anywhere near being so.The grossly impulsive man that I am,I still shoot off my lips,words of intolerant anger(at times fuelled by true hatred) when I confront situations dominated by these very emotions.(I sincerely hope I haven't passed on this deplorable trait to my daughter who seems to be an ever-smiling,all-forgiving little lady,at least till now).
 

An old friend of mine,(right from my school-days),a dedicated member of the country's Defense Services,got kidnapped and killed(a bit brutally)by 'militants for a cause' in Jammu & Kashmir on 2nd.October,2009. The mild-mannered gentleman that he was,I shall remain indebted to him forever for all the days of innocence and unbound joy that we have shared,and for drilling the wisdom of music into my spirit at a very early age.
 I do not know how sad the poet was by the tragic death of a musician,but right now I deeply feel to mean every word as I write:
 "I don't know if I cried,
 When I saw his widowed bride,
 But something touched me deep inside,
The day the Music died."

 His widowed bride(who was incidentally in Mumbai when the devastating news came) is my friend too since we all were 4 years old.
 After the empathetic(and sympathetic)words of condolence that I stammered out with a choked heart as the bereaved lady wept silently,the immediate emotions that engulfed my senses were Anger and,surprisingly(I confess in an effort to come clean),Hateful Vengeance.

Trying to retire to silent privacy amidst the condolent crowd,I ran through a series of images.Flashes of childhood in worn out colour now fading fast,musical moments a many that always gave me goosebumps escorting me to altered states of bliss,images of an awkwardly happy couple in adolescent love - sweet and tender,the graceful radiance lighting up a mother's face as she looked down at her newly-born baby..it all run through the darkness behind my closed,wet eyes like a kaliedoscopic slide-show randomly arranged.And it all ended in recoiling pain,as I tried to visualise the death that had been,as graphic images of brutality flooded my senses as I knew by now that the happy face that I loved so much had been systematically mutilated.The death had been a sadistically planned and prolonged one,as a message left behind by flagbearers of 'The Holy War'.

 I had shot off angry letters to two friends(who hold fond but different positions of relevance in my heart by the beautiful minds that they are),begging answers to some crazy questions that immediately arose in my mind.Speaking with poetic audacity,I was following thoughts born out of John Keats' Spontaneous Emotion.Gratefully for me,prompt replies of sincere and tender empathy reached me,softly trying to coax me to a state of much needed tolerance.But one of them that had crossed the seven seas had the glaring question,"But what

 is the way forward ? we are tolerant and should continue to be.Satyameva Jayate.."

 Later on,when I was numbly meditating upon the entire episode,through Wordsworthian Emotions Recollected in Tranquility,I asked myself about the practical limit of consistent tolerance that I should be preaching and practising as a responsible Indian.
Satyameva Jayate.Let Truth Prevail to win the war against The Holy War that has its seeds in a religion distorted by fanatic fundamentalism,that is leaving my beloved country more and more grievously wounded each day.
Yet I shall end today,still contemplating if our tolerance is turning to indulgence,and whether certain practices is truely indulging in an ever-growing fanaticism,giving a respected religion a bad name.Taking into account the Hurt it may cause,I cannot refrain from writing-allowing the audacity to proclaim via loudspeakers right on the face of the spiritual space of secular India,5 times a day that there is no other God except the Chosen One mentioned in the religious books of the flagbearers of The Holy War,doesn't exactly make our India a secular country.Praying is fine.But praying through loudspeakers to force everybody around to listen Five times a day to an audacious declaration regarding the nature of God is NOT JUST ACCEPTABLE.

 

There was a time not so long ago when I used to bathe in the mystique melody of the early morning prayer.It belonged to me,it belonged to India.But after 9/11 and 26/11,the entire practice has gained a unhealthy(unfortunately so)relevance.While we shall continue to be tolerant,if the tolerance is percieved as Weakness,my brothers under the same umbrella that is being used as a hiding place by their Holy Warriors,have got a significant responsibility.They better act now. 

GOD OF ALL MEN

 

Earlier this week,while we were discussing the Indian casteism,newspapers ran a story about an article in the latest issue of NATURE,discussing Indian genetic similarities and variations.The press seemed to infer that all Indians share common genetic codes(from an anthropomorphic aspect)from the ANI( Ancestral North Indians)and ASI(Ancestral South Indians)genetic pools and that there are no "pure" North or South Indians-which was the common belief till now.

 This is however grossly incorrect (as what commonly happens with the lay press,trying to deduce its own inference from a scientific research paper,always looking for an opportunity to come out with 'sensational' headline).This chronic "distorted comprehension" disorder of the press seems to arise from ignorance,irresponsibility and a hundred year itch for distorted deductions for the sake of sensationalization.

 

What David Reich et al actually discovered from the 19 groups they studied was that though there was a 39-71% ANI ancestry in all of them,the groups themselves did not show marked variations for at least 35 generations,and in case of the VYSYA group,for 105 generations.
This essentially means that the caste system has been actively dynamic for a long period of time without any marked change in the genetic pool,essentially due to endogamy(in-breeding).
One might seriously question the practical significance of this study result which does not seem to affect the flow of life now and tomorrow.
Endogamy can potentially lead to an increased incidence of genetic disorders caused by genetic mutation e.g. genetically inherited heart disease,caused by genetic mutation,is present in approximately 4% of all Indians,and notably ONLY in Indians.(It surely would be fascinating to trace the transmission of skin colour with its variations down the generations,given our frenzied,illogical fetish for Fairness!)
 

When bad things happen to us,we seek answers.When there are no answers,we turn to non-rational sources.(Like the prehistoric hunter-gatherer tribes used to blame the Fire Spirit,or the Water Demon,while the agrarian tribes would appease "Beings" for the success of their harvest crops.)
As humankind progressed to form more complex anthropological subgroups,these pagan "spirits and beings" eventually coalesced into monotheist religions with strict codes of conduct,and the single "God".
 

It's an unfortunate trait but it surely existed and still does.When there is nothing better to look forward to after death(heaven,hell,Universal Consciousness,rebirth etc),man tends to descend into a terrible downward spiral of questioning pessimism.Mencken,the philosopher put it best-"Its single function is to give man access to the powers that seem to control his own destiny,and its single purpose is to induce those powers to be friendly with him..Nothing else is essential."
If one studies the evolution of monotheist religions like Judaism,Christianity or Islam,after tracing back to their primal roots,it is enticing to believe that no religion or God is static and all these concepts have gradually evolved over time,depending on circumstances-social,political,economic and technological.
This is a balm for the souls of us,atheists,who believe that humankind has always shaped its own destiny.I would rather personally hypothetize that the only powers that control man's destiny are the ones he himself allows to do so.And that is why religion,even within a religion,is so personal and open to misunderstanding. Of course one can choose to differ vastly from my personal hypothetical belief.
We create illusions and structures,rituals and patterns based on what is most convenient in prevailing circumstances.Those who are 'charismatic' and convincing end up with possession of more power and influence.I would peacefully conclude that religion,God,castes are all made by us.Tell me if I am totally wrong.Any takers?

 

I do not intend,in any way,to disturb man's belief in God. But maybe sometime,somewhere down the line as homo erectus became homo sapiens,we turned a Spiritualism into Religion,a Universal Superconsciousness to a privatised,personalised commodity named God.

Observing the coexisting fraternal bonhomie and tolerance between contemporary religions and the resultant 'Peace' which is pervading the human spirit and passion,maybe it was a bad investment we made.Now to continue to live with that or to try to change a couple of things is the bard's question.
I have patiently waited for a voice to answer this question.Maybe I,myself,shall start to lend my own voice.Maybe.

 

HOLY INDIAN CASTEISM

 

Whatever I might be writing here today might seriously offend a lot of my friends and relatives,close and distant. I had never thought that I would be seriously writing on this socio-cultural issue,which was essentially a non-issue for me till today.Yet something compels me to write here,and I am curiously willing to look at the responses I might be getting because personally I need to 'feel' the sociological status an important aspect of contemporary circumstances,common to me and the reader.I need to know where we stand.

 Sleepily cursing,over a mug of cold coffee,through the front page headlines of The Times Of India,dated 29th.September,2009-Mumbai edition,I felt a tight slap on my face,the persisting echo of the moral resonance of which I am still reeling under.
"Nepal ditches India,says caste system is akin to racism",screamed one headline.

"..despite Indian opposition,the United Nations all set to dub it a Human Rights violation",continued the headline in smaller fonts.

 

 Nepal has emerged as the first country from South Asia to declare full support to the principles of a draft of guidelines expressed in a document issued by the United Nations Human Rights Council(the UNHRC)in May,2009 for "effective elimination of of discrimination based on work and descent"-the United Nations terminology for caste inequities.The fact that a conference-session of the UNHRC is going on in Geneva at the moment is of significant relevance here. The United Nations document seeks to activate"regional and international mechanisms" through the UN and its organs to negate all forms of caste discrimination.

 India has always expressed formal aversion to internationalisation of its inherent caste problem ever since the issue was actively drafted in the UN platform.A close look at the documented draft guidelines announces that discrimination based on work and descent is associated with the notion of a purity-pollution antithesis,practices of untouchability,and that approximately 200 million people in the world are affected by it,which is deeply rooted in societies and cultures-a clear pointer towards India.

 We all know that strict demarcation of castes in social interactions and untouchability are still unabashedly practised in rural India with medieval zeal,perhaps in dominant majority,both in Northern and Southern India.Significantly,the political dynamics has been markedly intricated with caste-based policies,particularly the Dalit issue taking centrestage.

We read about the "upper and lower clan" clashes of violence,mostly in the Hindi belt-Bihar,Madhya Pradesh,Uttar Pradesh(and the new states squeezed out of this region-Note:this new geographical configuration is the result of regional politics favouring casteim to a large extent),Rajasthan and Haryana.Gujarat and Maharashtra are no holy exceptions of course.
 While the Hindi belt is afflicted with Thakur-Yadav mutual hatred,the sub-Deccan states which throw up pictures of advancement in all fields,better quality of academics and neo-intellect with higher literacy rates,present a paradoxical picture when it comes to casteist demarcation.We hear some of the cruellest stories of degradation of humanity,with 'superior' Brahmins(especially from the 'pristine' segment) oppressing the Untouchables in an vulgarly medieval way,seemingly taking inspirational references from ancient,holy texts that have lost their sacrosanct status long back in front of the educated and the learned.Quite a combination though - neo intellect and medieval casteist oppression! Shameful as they are,this picture of our country is nothing new.

But does this demographical picture round off the issue of casteism completely?I don't think so at this very moment.

 When I look back upon my own bloodline,I discover some of the most shameful episodes of casteism a comparatively educated lot can manage to offer.I have seen marriages being arranged Strictly on the basis of caste(the attitude being matter-of-factly),ostracisation of people who got married outside the "permitted standard",and comments of sneer and demeaning jokes about people with particular surnames or apparent social backgrounds in everyday common-talk blossoming in kitchens as well as sitting rooms.In fact I have grown so used to this shameful carteist undertone(overtone at times)reflecting itself in my own blood in varying degrees,that I hardly bat an eyelid when I brush my eyes over advertisements of matrimony in newspapers and magazines of of intellectual distinction. I find casteism Everywhere. 

 

Before I look around to identify casteism elsewhere, I should to look at the tradition of my own blood-line otherwise I shall be the biggest hypocrite in my own eyes.To identify distasteful episodes of casteist demarcation,I don't need to go back beyond 2 generations,both in the maternal and paternal lines.While certain ethics prevent me from specifically pointing out relatives( whatever goodwill is left between blood brothers and sisters in this age of fragmented relationships will simply bite the dust the moment they read this,and I am too coward to be ready enough to forego that ),I cannot deny the fact that they are guilty-of bluntly practising social exercises that have encouraged caste discrimination,of setting a poor example for the next generation,and of being blatantly ignorant of the fact they have been committing the same Social Sin of which they have had the gump of criticising more blatant discrimination which they might have observed to feel.Now that is Hypocrisy at its most pathetic personification.
 Their children have observed the same right from childhood,and grown up to do the same without a tinge of guilt.So have I in a way because since I became a mature young adult,I have never felt in myself the urge to denounce the 'familial tradition' and come out with strong vocal protests.I have gone along with the tide,and might have even laughed with and enjoyed the sarcastic sneer relatives might have exhibited during informal conversations of frivolous moods. I have seen very close relatives fixing up matrimonial bonds after long periods of "omission and commission",purely on the basis of caste and even sub-caste(if that can replace GOTRA/GOTRO in English).
 Today I am angrily speechless at my own past actions when I have gone on to attend to such ceremonial displays of blatant social discrimination of caste and class.I feel all the more angry and pathetic because I never felt that those social interactions were wrong when at the same time I have never refrained from criticising with hatred,incidents of social oppression on casteist lines elsewhere in India which I came to know of from newspapers and television.

An alter-ego of mine is seemingly voicing a meek protest against my belated realisation."India,with its glorious Unity in Diversity,is different from the entire world.You are wrong to correlate your bloodline's familial and social prejudices in the same bracket as the coarsely risque prejudice that underscores the social oppression of humanity along the line of caste in unenlightened rural India",it says. I am afraid I can no more agree with this voice which is perhaps an escapist fragment of my conscience. Ignoring everything else,I cannot aesthetically support anymore,the matrimonial texts highlighting Preconditions of Caste Equity in the "classified columns".If these are not gloriously examples of the caste-apartheid that continues to exist comfortably in our own educated minds to express itself in family attitudes over generations and resultant social interactions,what do they stand for to reveal?
And this is not the only example.I can immediately identify scores of behavioural episodes of discrimination that my ownbloodline has/had displayed as 'naturally traditional,and continuation of family heritage'.

Today I am likely to draw angry criticism from relatives and friends with hurt or offended sentiments.I am sorry for that.But I need answers which can make my own conscious self feel better.The coffee tastes too bitter.

TAGORE ON NATIONALISM

---

This blog is dedicated to the luminous wisdom of Dr.(Prof.)Rakesh Biswas,a physician,a scholar,a teacher,a philosopher,a visionary,a non-compromising humanist,and above all a truely great human being.Years after sharing,in our medical college,six long years of frienship that was restrained by cultured sophestication,he continues to Lead Kindly Light and inspire me in all walks of life as a guiding philosopher to this very day.

 

A couple of  days back he mailed to me the following lines. 

--------  -----------  ------------------   --------------   ---------------    ---------------      ---------------   ---------------     ----------------      ------------------     ---------------    --------------    -----------    -------------    --------------    --------------   -------------     ------------

 

"A nation, in the sense of the political and economic

union of a people is that aspect which a whole

population assumes when organized for a mechanical

purpose . . . it is merely the side of power, not of human

ideals . . . but when with the help of science and the

perfecting of organization this power begins to grow

and brings in harvests of wealth, then it crosses its

boundaries with amazing rapidity. For then it goads

all its neighboring societies with greed of material

prosperity, and consequent mutual jealousy, and by

the fear of each other's growth into powerfulness. The

time comes when it can stop no longer, for the

competition grows keener, organization grows vaster

and selfishness attains supremacy. Trading upon the

greed and fear of man, it occupies more and more

space in society, and at last becomes its ruling force

. . . when this organization of politics and commerce,

whose other name is the nation becomes all-powerful,

at the cost of the harmony of the higher social life,

then it is an evil day for humanity . . . This abstract

being, the Nation, is ruling India . . ."

 

- Rabindranath Tagore,

 Nationalism, (1916)

 

 

 

 It is a feeling of haunting bewilderment that grasps me when I read and re-vise Tagore's lines again and again,written almost a century back.I remember reading this prose-piece in vernacular named "Jatiyotabodh" in a series of articles grouped together in a literary piece called "Shobhyotar Shankat"(of which my poor translation would be somewhat like "The Crisis of Modern Civilisation").Written in a confused socio-political environment in India(which was changing with rapid dynamism in relation to a proactive nationalist movement against colonial rule)and against the backdrop of a mindless war that had engulfed the entire world with frenzied desparation,it is amazing to note how correctly Tagore had noted to qualify the innate psychology of Indian humanism and the prognostic picture of its dynamic interactions.

 
 Tagore is not particularly famous as a political observer and I'm sure he would have loathed at the prospect of being tagged one by commoners like me. Yet I just cannot help but rue the fact that while we(again mostly commoners like me)have continued to bathe blissfully in the sublime brilliance of Tagore's artistic creations,we have not evaluated to the full,the philosopher in Tagore.Of course,we do 'feel' the philosopher in his musical compositions,verses and prose-pieces and keep on contemplating on his personna on a personal and social level on a daily basis,our appreciation seems to fall grossly short of the superlative adjection that should have been there,then and now.And we still need a 'push' from sudden exposures to literature like these dug out of the subconscious mind in a moment of inspired vigour ,to wake from a vain,collective stupor which seems to have engulfed the Indian mind(and the universal mind too),resulting in humanistic values(of which Tagore must have dreamt while writing these words)being degraded to a frustrating inert state,and which seems to hold back an evolution of consciousness as a whole.

 It seems to be an utopian exercise now but had we read Tagore's lines correctly,dentifying the visionary that he was,today's situation wouldn't have been exactly similar to what the great man had thought of,a 100 years back.He seems to have dissected the story of pre and post-Independant India to the core,and today as a nation India has managed to position herself qualitatively in the exact state globally that Tagore had identified then. It clearly exposes the utter futility of the philosophy underlying the socio-political exercises that the country has taken part in since then,both nationally and at the global level. It would be grossly wrong to assume(if one reads this article and looks around today) that the revered fore-fathers who had grafted the foundations of independant India and those who have taken up the responsibility of guiding the nation forward,had done so with a self-less humanist ideal. We have always tended to visualise a nation as just a formal integration of  individually diverse social,ethnic and economic entities forced by non-scrupulous politics,to stand together with a distorted definition of nationalism under one flag.

 

 This,unfortunately,does not hold true for India alone.All countries,developing and developed,have retained/or developed the same distorted pseudo-nationalistic pattern in mind to earn their respective places on the global map.The cause-effect profile of the international scene is there for everyone to see.Countries have grown into units of 'power'.We have diplomatically made friends or become enemies of others,we have aligned ourselves with diametrically opposite axes of power for selfish benefits and(shamefully so)for mere survival. Scientific and economic progress have resulted in wars and battles which have left not an inch of habitated world space unscarred.Nuclear arms proliferation,biochemical warfare,militant movements guided by distorted ideals ultimately resulting acts of violent terrorism,illegal international trading of arms and substances of addictive abuse,periods of cruel dictatorship with black records of mass genocide under the guise of governance have dominated the global scenario through the 20th.century only worsening to flourish in the new millenium.

 

 All the benefits advancement in knowledge has endowed upon human civilisation tend to get significantly nullified when 40 million people are wiped off the face of earth by a pre-planned,calculated act of genocide which gets imprinted in the pages of history as a World War.Yet we don't seem to learn from history still. 4 years after the Second World War in which genocide in one of its most brutal forms was facilitated by volitional use of nuclear technology,2 countries coaligned in the war became polarised into 2 global 'superpowers' with concepts of democracy which annihilate each other in theory and in practice - exactly what Tagore theorised to write(here I am wilfully refraining from using the word "Predicted"as we are talking about Tagore and not Nostradamus,and we shouldn't be in the mood to marvel over and glorify the results of prediction-intellectual or by divine interference.We've had enough of morbid
glorification!) 34 years before human history attained the shameful landmark of an event.

 One of the foremost and most direct results of this political polarisation(under the excuse of differences in Nationalistic Approach!)was that we engaged ourselves in developing more lethal devices of mass destruction by thermo-nuclear kinetics in the form of hydrogen bombs et al.The Cold War followed which saw through the abject surrender of nationalistic philosophies of countries in front of political empowerment of identities,the major countries madly aligning themselves with the power axes for survival and control-again exactly echoing Tagore's lines to the very word. And since then,nations continue to stand as pawns in a global game of chess played by elements of power,jealousy and corrupt greed.

 

 Nobody,not even Tagore,has ever dared to dream of a world as one nation.But in his lines Tagore wanted to underline the concept of Humanism as the basic element to build a nation.He clearly shows the potential results if humanism could not be imbibed into our consciousness with evolved spontaneity while we were building our nation. But we have smugly kept humanism away from our consciousness,from our daily lives,from society and from our philosophy of nationalism.(And India is not the only country).We have proceeded mechanically to put to practice,policies interacting between sociology,economics,human resources,politics and military power.And one has to just look around,or open the daily newspaper to see the result.

 I seem to be satisfied with the state of affairs.Because my little retreat was not bombarded  yesterday.I do not want to think of tomorrow.If  I've woken up now,this time I better not go back to sleep.

 

DEATH BY CHOICE

It was definitely an eerie sensation when I opened the papers a few days back to read about the suicide of a 32yr.old housewife.She had taken her own life because she couldn't face her own conscience after watching an episode of 'Sach Ka Saaamna',the TV reality show I had written about last week in my blog,coincidentally just 2 days before this reported suicide.She had taken the stupid yet drastic step after writing in her suicide note that "she had failed as a mother,as a housewife and as a daughter",pretty much in the same line as I had written myself about being(not failing though,though an episode of the same show had stirred up my own conscience to a significant extent),"a father,a husband and a human being".No doubt this TV show is really making people face themselves.I hope the above-mentioned mishap doesn't stop the TV show from being aired,it already being dubbed Controversial and throwing up a stormy debate.
It is not my intention today to keep on writing about the TV show or the social storm it keeps on throwing up.

It is always good when man,intentionally or unintentionally,faces his conscience from time to time.Simply speaking,it is a healthy way 'rinsing one's soul' of possible guilt feelings and start living life from tomorrow on a healthier note.But this woman had not done so.Without showing any sort of sympathy or trying to empathise with her psychology,I shall bluntly brand her unfortunate death as Stupid,Senseless and Selfish.I write Selfish because the woman was a mother of 2 children.Giving birth to a child and then living it in the lurch in the mercy of the frenzied world is definitely not an act of charity.

I was in 2 minds whether to write publicly about a suicide,as the subject is morbid and apparently a dissection does not seem to serve any purpose other than exposing the eager reader to dark emotions,completely unwanted.But I decided to write finally,as the topic is somewhat related to my own life and I want to draw attention to the mindless fallacy of such an act,whatever the excuse might be.

I strongly believe Nobody has got the moral right to take his/her own life.A premature,selfish death is definitely not the reason man is gifted a life to live by nature(or God).I,personally,do maintain a drastically opposite opinion in the subject of euthanasia - another controversy which man hasn't quite come around,decades after mercy-killing took the fancy of the philosopher,the physician and the common man,and a million sentences having been written about it over the years. It is difficult to come to a moral consensus about euthanastic death 'by choice',and one of the reasons we have not been able to come to a consensus on euthanasia is that we have tended to reflect upon the process of euthanasia as a subject with moral and objective homogeneity which certainly is not the case. The question of mercy-killing arises case-wise and every case is different from the other just as every soul is different from one another.It is not at all fair to relate one case to another on grounds of meaningless suffering where there is no practical possibility of preserving a life the way it is meant to be lived.

 A few days back,an Australian gentleman in his late 40s died months after he won his case challenging the reason behind continuation of total parenteral nutrition where he,in his full senses,was totally quadriplegic,unable to perform a single physiological function apart from staying alive,and conscious enough to observe and feel the frustration of not being able to 'Live' the way he wanted to(or rephrasing it - the way he was supposed to live when he was born a healthy child).He would have gone insane-a point the deciding judiciary took special note of.(An insane quadriplegic is worse off than a conscious,level-minded quadriplegic in any given situation). He was not brain-dead - a situation where the topic of euthanasia arises with well-publicised vigour. Every case deserves to be treated by individual merit and I doubt if we shall ever be able to come to a universally moral consensus as long as we keep on looking at euthanasia with subjective uniformity.Yet we Have to,as once man has become conscious of the concept of mercy-killing,he shall continue to dabble with it at random which underlines a dangerous state of affairs and which must be curbed by Law-the only way at the moment to control proceedings on such a sensitive issue. No doubt,it shall be a near-impossible,harrowing task for lawmakers to come out with a 'Perfect' law.

Death by choice(either one's own or by connected responsible people)does not comprise of euthanasia alone. In India,the concept of Sati has survived for thousands of years,allegedly mentioned in the Holy Scriptures(Ancient spiritual literature in my opinion)though I have not come across any such topic in the Vedas,the Vedantas(or the Upanishads)and the Gita.(I do not know of any other existing literature which can be qualitatively mentioned in the same breath). In medieval Rajasthan,queen Padmini became a 'Sati' with a hundred royal maids when she faced the threat of being captured by Alauddin Khiljee who had defeated her husband in the battles of Chittore.Indians continue to glorify the associated historical narrative for reasons that are beyond rational comprehension,apart from a clear intention to dominate women and keep them socially chained under the guise of 'holy' acts. Though the respected queen took a conscious decision to
take her own life(with a cruel non-sensical decision to force a hundred more women to do the same,taking undue advantage of royal authority),her act cannot be justified in any way,even taking the socio-cultural and religious profiles of medieval India into account.

On the other hand,it left behind a shameful legacy which man would exploit to murder a million freshly-widowed women by forcibly burning them at the funeral pyres of their dead husbands for the next 450 years under the pretext of 'Divine Will and Order' until it was legally stopped in the 19th.century in Bengal by Ram Mohan Roy with the help of the British colonial government which had just taken up the reins of ruling India from the British East India Company.(Shamefully it exists still,not to forget the infamous case of Roop Kanwar of Rajasthan in the mid 1980s.) Sati is not death by choice.It is brutal murder-the same brutal fervour with which Queen Padmini had got a hundred women murdered during her own suicide.

The act of suicide has been 'glorified' all over the world,for thousands of years.This is one of the reasons that the concept of this senseless act continues to romanticise the human mind morbidly to the day,strongly embedded in the subconscious mind and people of all shapes and sizes continue to take their own lives. The people who had romanticised the idea of suicide were clearly not aware of the long-lasting repercussion it would have on the human society and on the human mind. Even William Shakespeare cannot be absolved of this 'artistic sin'. Nor can be Don Maclean who composed the immensely popular song 'Vincent'(on Vincent Van Gogh) where he romanticises(and glorifies) Van Gogh's suicide through the lines – "And when no hope was left inside on that starry,starry night,You took your life as lovers often do;But I could have told you Vincent-This world was never meant for one as beautiful as you." - a seemingly
'beautiful' justification all right! While the song excels artistically and continues to be one of my favourites,I cannot but rue the irresponsible absence of vision of Don Maclean.Everytime one will listen to the song,man shall continue to romanticise the idea of suicide in the darkest depths of his mind until one day someone shall take his/her own life.The idea is quite unacceptable.

Sensitive beyond measure to any sort of suffering,I know first-hand the numbing effect of tragedy by choice on a family,a family which just broke to pieces once.And as long as people like this 32year old woman will continue to take their own lives,I shall continue to unemotionally antipathise with them.Most importantly,I do not think that the 2 children will ever forgive their mother for the senseless,selfish act of pseudo-lunacy.The woman doesn't deserve any respect. Neither does my own mother. At least I won't be able to forgive her lifelong,for reasons best known to me,since she took her own life.