Puzzling Life

I realized quite some time back that wisdom comes with age. After every 4-5 years, we can feel that our thoughts and opinions of the past were impractical or not correct. After worrying about it for some time, I made peace with it. So it seemed we just had to wait till our hair started turning grey, and then everything will be okay. Finally, with age we shall attain wisdom. But now it seems that even wisdom has degrees. What appears wisdom to us now, may appear childish again after 5 years! So where does this end? May be never! 

And if we and our wisdom keep growing and changing, then it would also be true for others. What others tell today may be judged as incorrect by themselves after a few years! The realization is scary. Is everything fluid? 

If everything evolves then what we see today is true only for today and may not be so after some time. That makes life confusing for sure. What is the point of doing anything right, when the 'right' could turn 'wrong' just when our way of thinking changes, when we see some new worlds, or when we attain some new version of wisdom? 

Is this why they turn to scriptures; which hold truths which have survived centuries of evolutionary thinking? All rivers meet the ocean in the end. May be until we can see the end, we may mistake a 'river' for an 'ocean'. 

Sometimes it seems everything changes with time. Sometimes it seems nothing changes fundamentally. Sometimes what we can't understand is called confusing. Sometimes what we do understand is confusing. This life is a puzzle. 

- Rahul

From Feminism to Taking a Stand

For quite some time around my college days, I had thought of myself as a 'feminist'. It suited me because I had two sisters. From childhood, we all studied in the same school, were treated with same respect, and saw the same dreams. Why should not my sisters or all girls be able to make their career well and make their own decisions? I was so happy from inside about my thoughts which I found liberating at that time.

After marriage, my feminism evaporated in a phased manner. Having been proud of of my sisters' careers and education, I saw the downside of it as my wife worked and how it constrained personal life. And for the first time I started seeing a new world. Unless by some lucky charm two persons start thinking exactly alike, in the end either of them has to agree with what the other person says. Best would be to do things which both are fine with, but such an option is not always the case. Now feminism gave way to realism. I realized that women also liked things in the manner which suited them. It seemed that our inclination to do "what suits me" was a generic trait.

Looking from the ground of realism, everything appeared different. As they say, things are not always either black or white. Sometimes we are selfish, sometimes the other person is selfish. And a new popular line of thinking said that in the end we all were humans, prone to flaws. No matter how good you are, still you would have some flaws. I still can't say that it is okay to be at peace with one's flaws, but I think we should definitely be aware of them, acknowledge them and avoid them as much as we can. We are not so powerless.

In general I realized that in most of the things, whenever we are taking sides we are actually compromising somewhere and being unfair somewhere. Think of any decision govt takes - if we agree with it, it might be because it suits us and if we disagree it could be because it does not suit us personally. Coming in terms with the real world was like ice bucket challenge done to me. I miss the old days when I could say, "I support this", or "that is bad" and "this is good". Such youthful yet unwise stands which we could take. It made life interesting and purposeful. Having even some amount of wisdom is so boring.

- Rahul

Irony

Subsidized LPG is bad for our economy and has a stigma attached to it - but 'Free WiFi' is ultimate sign of good governance and we all celebrate it - while both are same.

Women keeping 'ghunghat' on the head is a sign of old-school society; but women wearing full body 'burkini' is about letting women make their own decisions - while both are meant for same.

Asking someone's caste is bad and can land you in jail - but when govt asks our castes to let or not let us have jobs and college admission, it is social justice - while both are same.

If you have 70% males in your company, it is a shameful situation and needs more female hiring - but a 70% women in areas like HRD or nursing is never a problem - while both trends are of same nature.

If a mother-in-law hurts her bahu, she will land up in jail; but if daughter-in-law hurts saasu ma, nothing will happen - while both acts are same.

If you earn 3 lakhs annual salary working in a company owner by someone else, you have to pay tax; but if you earn 13 lakhs doing farming on your own land, you don't - while both are money.

If a private company defaults on loan and goes bankrupt, its owner is arrested, his property sold off to pay back; but if a PSU/govt company makes billions of losses, govt just has to pay them to continue - while both events are similar.

So what is wrong in one situation becomes right for another situation; to a large extent just because of the way it is perceived by people in general. After next 50 years, our perception may reverse and hence things may also reverse. But until then, some of us have to suffer while some others will benefit unfairly.

But someone will ask - when was it that life was fair? It is just that the equation has reversed! That is also so simple to answer. You can't punish the ghosts of yesterday by hurting the humans of today. You can't reward the sufferers of 20th century by doling out red carpet for today's undeserving lot. So, in the end nothing can justify what is stupid.

- Rahul Tiwary

Way to Get Around Entry Restrictions

There have been a few places of worship where females are not allowed inside inner sanctum. So court says that this violates equality of genders which has been ensured by our constitution. 

But equality is not violated when there are job openings, college admissions or monetary help only for women, only for men, only for some particular castes, or only for some religions, right? So what is the catch? Have you ever thought about it?

I think the catch is that when govt offers a job to only a woman, it also offers some other job only to a man, and hence it succeeds in balancing (i.e. confusing) the equality clause. So when it offers some jobs only to some particular castes, it also offers some jobs only to general castes, and hence it is seen as doing fair deal. Similarly, it spends some money for building churches, but also spends some money on protecting old temples. Hence all is fair and does not violate equality ensured by constitution!

So what could the conservative and traditional religious organizations had to do to protect their traditions and yet not get beating from the court? Simple – hire me as consultant! Kidding :) I think what they had to do was this - inside the religious complex, they should have made another shrine and put a board saying “Only women allowed” before it, and then they should have put “Only men allowed” over the original shrine – then since something is on offer to both men and women, equality clause would not get violated! Think!

I am sure someone would challenge this scheme saying the ancient shrine was for men and new shrine is for women, which is unfair. So, confuse them further. Take something out of the ancient shrine, e.g. a stone, or a few bricks, and keep it in the new shrine, and say that since all places of worship have been renovated, rebuilt, restructured across their history, there is nothing wrong in creating another shrine in the same complex, and since it also has some portion of the ancient structure, it should also be treated with equal respect.

In this scheme, since there is something for women (new shrine) and something else for men (original shrine), no one will stop you from keeping the ancient traditions alive while still satisfying all the legal hassles :) How do you like it?

- Rahul

Cousin Vs Bhai

In a train journey I came across families of two brothers traveling together. Elder brother and his wife had two beautiful sons and younger brother had one son who was slightly behind in growth. Younger brother was apparently richer in wealth and elder brother was certainly simpler by nature, if I could guess by watching them. Younger brother’s wife was not so kind towards elder brother’s wife, and sent hidden taunts and veiled ridicules. Then at one point elder brother told them that he had booked a car. “Which car?” younger brother was obviously surprised and curious. When he heard, “Maruti Ciaz” which costs around 9 lakhs, he was confused. “Bhaiya log have booked Ciaz”, he informed his wife and then there was a silence…

There is no scene as ugly as two brothers not behaving warmly. But then they were adults! What happened between their children was even more interesting.

Younger (and richer) brother’s son who behaved freaky very often, was being avoided by elder brother’s two sons. So his mother who was street-smart, thought to proactively do something about it. She said to the older kid, “he is also your brother. You should take care of him”.

What the boy replied shocked me. He said, “he is only my cousin” (wo mera cousin hai).

“But cousin also means 'chachera bhai', so you are still brothers!”

The boy now got visibly irritated and said, “When did I say he is not my brother?”, and then he looked away, stopping that line of conversation.

I remembered our childhood. We had so many cousins and we always introduced them as "bhai" to our friends. It was so confusing to kids counting how many brothers one could have, so they used to ask back, "is he your ‘real’ brother?" (‘apna’ bhai?) And then we learnt to say "chachera bhai" or ‘mamera bhai’. But we were still "bhai". We picked up the term "cousin" very late, only when it was impossible to not pick it up...

- Rahul

India at Olympic Games Rio 2016

The way and extent to which media is guiding our perception and feelings surprises me. Let us take this year’s performance in Olympics. I bet you would say that this year has been worst – or at most one of the worst years; since we have won only 2 medals so far. We are reminded that last time in year 2012 India had won 6 medals – and hence we are expected to feel sorry and disappointed this time. What if I told you a fact that except last time in year 2012, India has never won more than 3 medals in our whole history? Then current tally of “2” can be seen as a much better performance. After knowing this, you would feel less sorry, less disappointed, but wait – media does not want you to be so. Media thrives on our outrage!

Now absolute number of medals is not that all matters. Overall Ranking matters more importantly. How about if I told you that in Olympics 2012 when India did an outlier performance by winning 6 medals, it stood at world ranking# 55, "down" 5 points from year 2008 Olympics when it won only 3 medals but still stood at overall rank# 50? Media bubble of "last time we were better" bursts off.

What if I told you that from year 1956 onward in our history – if we ignore outlier year 2012, there has been only one other Olympic Games when India won more than 2 medals? That was year 2008 when we won 3 medals. With 2 medals already won, if we win one more, we shall match second highest total medal count in our history! Not as bad as we felt, right?

Now Economic Times published an article saying “Dear Mr Modi, India can get you 10 medals in 2020 if you spend Rs 480 crore”. But I believe each rupee spent on sports is a rupee snatched from the poor, the hungry, or indebted farmers. We can live without Olympic medals and this sense of urgency with which we are expected to spend Crores on sports is illogical.

This time India spent Rs 122 Crores on training Olympics participants; which is a shame for a nation which is home to world’s largest poor population. Even with revised poverty line, India is home to 172 million people below poverty line (living on less than Rs 123.50 per day). We need schools, toilets, roads, new railway lines, hospitals, police and army, and sorry, these things won't come of we spend Rs 500 Crores in training our 100 sportspersons for next Olympics, or burning Rs 1000 Crores of electricity or lost productivity watching Olympic games on TV. I don’t mind not winning 10 Olympic medals, until Govt continues its rural push and industrial reforms, to pull people out of poverty.

- Rahul

Happy Independence Day India!!!

"I love my country not "because of" any reasons. I simply love my country and that is pretty much all of it!" - Rahul Tiwary

Happy Independence Day!!!

Why Women Hate Men

It is history’s worst kept secret. It is kept secret so sacredly that if it came out, it could destroy the very nature of life that flows on earth. And yet, it is everywhere. You see it daily, you feel it quite often. But you must deny it. You must forget it. You must destroy it.

For some time I have wondered why women hated men for nothing but just because men were men. If you do not believe they hated, you would either never realize it or else it will come to you at some point of your life. The ‘hatred’ is plain irresistible. To the extent that women have often fallen in love with the men they hated. It is captured in history and in the literature of all times. It is just that it is so subtle and the realization so revolutionary that it could mean to destroy all things we believe in and hence it was better to be denied – to be turned blind eyed to.

I think the roots of this hatred go into some very basic stuff. Men are seen as ‘free’ – free of burdens which women necessarily and inescapably have to carry. It is not only the womb, although it pretty much is almost all of it; or enough of it. The child bearing capacity which is often glorified, celebrated and worshipped in all religions and cultures for obvious reasons, at some level of the female psyche turns into a burden. Why should men get away without it? That is the million dollar question. And then it is not only about it. I don’t know if it is only because of female hormones, which has been repeated in such a simplistic manner in modern scientific world, that we come to think of it and hence divert our attention from the female folks, but women feel the kind of vulnerability and insecurity which no men ever feel. Men can never imagine and guess what women feel. And hence they pay the price for not knowing their enemies well…

Women know that they are weak and need to be dependent on men in some way or the other – and they ‘hate’ it at some level of their psyche. Women hate men’s guts and confidence. There is no horrible scene for a woman than to see a confident and happy man. Such a man represents everything that the women not are – and can never be – and hence they must hate it. Put in this way you may think that women may hate the idea of a man than the man himself. I will not object to it but whenever they see a man – the idea manifests into a shape and they must hate that shape – that creature – that monster – that something which they can never be – that man…

History of the mankind is the history full of hatred which could not always get chance to manifest into something concrete. It is really a miracle that for so long you could avoid getting stung by that hatred. Or, did we?

© Rahul. 

पं. रामप्रसाद बिस्मिल

आखिर वह सन् 1927 की छह अप्रैल का सूर्य निकला। हम प्रातःकाल ही जल्दी-जल्दी स्नानादि प्रातःकालीन क्रियाओं से निवृत हुए। उस रोज सभी साथियों के चेहरों पर एक अजीब गम्भीरता छाई थी। पं. रामप्रसाद बिस्मिल कट्टर आर्यसमाजी थे। वे अपना भोजन अलग बनाया करते थे। उस दिन भी वे अपने पूजा-पाठ हवन आदि से निवृत होकर भोजन करने बैठे ही थे कि पीछे-पीछे मैं पहुँच गया और हाथ जोड़कर डबडबाई हुई आँखों से उनसे प्रार्थना की - "पंडित जी मालूम नहीं आज इस बैरक से जाने के बाद हम लोग दोबारा मिल पाएं - न मिल पाएं... आज मैं अपने हाथ से आपको दो कौर खिलाना चाहता हूँ।" तत्काल अपने भोजन की थाली मेरे सामने करके बोले - "लो भाई, खिलाओ। मैं भी तुम्हें आज अपने हाथ से खिलाऊँगा।"... यह खबर बिजली की भाँति सभी साथियों में फ़ैल गई। सभी साथी दौड़े-दौड़े आए और उन सभी ने पंडित जी को एवं आपस में एक दूसरे को खिलाना शुरू कर दिया। एक प्रकार से एक दूसरे से आखिरी विदाई ली जा रही थी। हम लोगों के हाथ एक दूसरे के मुँह में कौर के साथ जाते थे और उधर आँखों से टप-टप आँसू गिरते जा रहे थे। एक अजीब हृदय विदारक दृश्य था।

जज ने फैसला सुनाना शुरू किया। सबसे पहले अंग्रेज जज ने पं. रामप्रसाद बिस्मिल का नाम पुकारा और उन्हें मृत्युदण्ड सुनाया। दूसरे नंबर पर उसने श्री राजेंद्रनाथ लाहिड़ी को भी उतनी ही सजा सुनाई किन्तु जैसे ही तीसरा नाम ठाकुर रोशन सिंह का पुकारा, हम सब आश्चर्यचकित हतप्रभ से हो गए। ठाकुर साहब और फाँसी की सजा! ... सजा सुनते ही ठाकुर साहब का चेहरा खिल उठा, जैसे कि गुलाब का फूल। तुरंत ही पं. रामप्रसाद बिस्मिल की ओर घूम कर बोले - "क्यों पंडित! अकेले जाना चाहते थे!" ठाकुर साहब का व्यवहार देखकर सब दंग रह गए।

सबसे पहले मैंने अपनी जेब से जेल से लाए हुए फूल निकाले और उन्हें पं. रामप्रसाद बिस्मिल, श्री राजेंद्रनाथ लाहिड़ी एवं ठाकुर रोशनसिंह के चरणों में रखकर प्रणाम किया। उन तीनों ने मुझे कसकर गले लगाया। उसके बाद सब साथियों ने मेरे पास से बचे हुए फूल लेकर आपस में बाँट लिए और एक-एक कर सबने बिछड़ने वाले तीनों साथियों को प्रणाम कर उनके चरणों पर फूल चढ़ाए। चिर विदा के इन क्षणों में उम्र और पद वरिष्ठता की सभी दीवारें ढह गईं। श्री सचीन दा, कर दा एवं सुरेश दा सरीखे ज्येष्ठ साथियों ने भी भावविभोर होकर उक्त तीनों महाविभूतियों के चरण छुए थे।

- रामकृष्ण खत्री

Some Movies

Desperado

God, in some next life I want to look like him. :) Though I don't want to do crime like him, nor do I want long hair; I won't mind playing a guitar! I would also like to have a name like him. Gosh - Antonio Banderas! Can this be the name of a man? It sounds like the name of a novel! I would also like to have his voice and accent! But once you make me him, I won't like to grow old! Because all old people look the same!!! So, deal?

Gone Girl

I watched 'Gone Girl' (2014) recently. Performance wise I don't think this was anywhere actor Ben Affleck's best movies, though Rosamund Pike did a fair job. Its screenplay is based on was based on Gillian Flynn's 2012 novel of the same name.  The story is really interesting.

While experts catagorize this movie as a psychological thriller, I particularly notice its version of 'feminism'. Amy is shown as a psychopath killer, but if we take note of why she kills, it is not completely bad. Thousands of wives all over the world choose to live with criminal or double faced husbands - so why not a few husbands too end up living under the roof with a serial murderer? I am not justifying it at all, but this is just a point to note. If a woman does infidelty, she is considered evil and readily punished in harshest way; but when men do the same, they are seldom punished in the same manner. Ben Affleck's character Nick Dunne does it in the movie but does not appear like a "villian" at any moment. So the manner in which the movie turned up and ended was pretty surprising but understood. 

Nights in Rodanthe

A man's wife dies during operation although not due to the fault of the surgen. The surgen does not talk to him after the operation but asks the nurse to explain to him. He files a law suit against the doctor for negligience. The doctor goes to meet the man who is mourning. The man asks the doc, "do you know what color my wife's eyes were?" The doc does not rememeber. For the doctor, the patient was just a sick body; not a human being.

Monte Carlo

In this movie, there is a scene where the actress while moving around Paris always finds Eiffel Tower visible as she looked up. This scene was very similar to the one in Bollywood movie "Queen". Another resemblance was how one of the girl's lover kept searching for her throughout the length of the movie. 

Little Manhattan

After watching so much TV and movies; having read so many books and stories; it had to take this long to reach here? That is incredible! Can’t describe totally but I never expected this movie to be so great and heart touching… Little Manhattan! When they say “I hate you” to each other and then as soon as he puts the phone down – surge of emotions had to burst into tears! And when he sees her face and with every expression tries to make it “she loves me” or “she hates me” alternately – that was epic! And when she asked for a dance and he puts his head on her shoulder – that was as if the world stopped! That when he sums it up into “all we get are memories” – that is so heart touching… He keeps a plain face but every time he smiles and how his face lits up – that is the magic of pure happiness! They smile looking at each other – that is love… And this is the most romantic movie I have ever watched! 

Conversation about Religion, Cults and God

Friend: The more I see of organised religion and the devotional channels (all faiths), the emptier they appear. Faith is something between the man and his maker and what is the need of third party intervention (read religious leaders) in this?

Me: They guide those who need help and do not feel confident enough. Just like teachers help students learn mathematics which theoretically they could have learnt by reading books. I don't think they are doing any harm. If you don't need them, avoid them. That is all. But a lot of people need them, so let us not ridicule their needs.

Friend: U r very right. But when teachers motives r pure greed & false teachings .saints r really very few, others r katha watchk only

Me: Then let us take them as katha-wachaks only. I mean no one is forcing us to believe they are true saints. What I do is to listen and learn their "teachings" and I do not focus on the "teachers" in person... It helps most of the time. I don't have to become a follower in true sense or to start loving the speaker - I just enjoy their teachings which are mostly very good...

Friend: Rahul, have you ever watched these devotional channels seriously over a length of time?

Me: Whenever I watch a new channel for the first time, I love it for 2 days and then tire out. If I keep watching, I grow to hate them, so having learnt my pattern I discontinue and watch them only once or twice for 15 minutes in a week - then they sound fine. But I know that if I get bored the problem is not with them but with me.

Friend: As a rule, religious men and women are decent God fearing people. Men of religion, on the other hand, from times immemorial are the most conceited, corrupt and dishonest individuals.

Me: It is because "power corrupts". And it is so for all men with power and authority. We can't single out only godmen or godwomen. So let us realize the true cause of their corruption and let us accept that god or religion has nothing to do with it.

Friend: Agreed Rahul. I am a devout but strongly feel that religion is a deeply personal matter and not for display.

Me: But I don't agree that it is "so simply" between god and man - every man without training and initiation can't speak to God unless he is such an extraordinary soul - like the child prodigies. And not everyone is a child prodigy. So what we do need is religion and some initiation. Without it, when we are talking to God, what we are doing is just unburdening our emotional baggage. We may feel relief temporarily but it does not "really" help us rise spiritually. So I do need religious teachings and teachers only share. If I do not read or hear them, how do I learn new things? Books are fine but then there is so much in explanations! Half knowledge is worse than no knowledge some times.

Friend: If a literate person needs a medium -a guru- to seek the path to righteousness, he is not literate. Only a lesser learnt needs a medium. In our country nobody knows how many such persons thrive.

Me: Not so simple. Tell me, without going to school or without any teachers, how would I learn English to be able to read you? I would remain a baby and unless I learn a language I don't get its knowledge. Now the language in which scriptures are written are so deep. I thought I knew all but I read one explanation of a verse of Ramcharitmanas from a writer in a magazine from Ramakrishna mission - and then a whole new perspective, a whole new world opens for me. I would never know it no matter how much I talk to God or with my wife about Lord Ram because both of us are the same level spiritually. We need to talk to those who are better than us, in order to learn from them.

In religious books what I have read is that when one gets wisdom and some spiritual achievement, still his "ego" is his greatest enemy. So many great sages and learned people in history fell for this. They are so wise and enlightened but then ego makes them do weird stuff. Ego and power corrupts them. But we should not focus on their "corruption". We should focus on how much knowledgeable they were (and learn from them). Lord Ram sent Lakshmana to meet dying Ravana and to learn from him. Can we imagine this doing ourselves? Ram sending Lakshmana to learn from Ravana who was dying! If it were all "in the books" and if we were not to learn from wise men, why would he do that?

And btw, scary cults are coming even to India. Weird leaders of these cults being worshiped by their members as "God" himself; forget about "saints" and "gurus" which appear thing of the past. These cults are exclusive groups of brainwashed believers and their theories are illogical unscientific ones built upon existing religions' theories but giving it a twist. So I think antidote for fake religion is original religion. Like Dayananda said - return to the vedas. Otherwise India will also become like the world we see in Batman movies.

Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal. 

Do Not Photograph Bird Nests

Came across this petition against photographing bird nests. Found it educating, so thought to share: National Geographic Channel, please delete nest photo

Today (30th March 2016), the Facebook page of National Geographic Channel shared a picture of a bird nest containing four newly hatched birds.

Photographing bird nests is a big no-no in the community guidelines. This is because a nest is a delicate nascent stage in the bird family. We don't want to disturb the parents into getting stressed and abandoning the babies. Also, we don't want to point out the nest to other predators. Thirdly, using bright flashes into those baby eyes can blind them for life.

While we can be sure that the photographer at National Geographic captured this picture 'ethically', they have made an irresponsible choice by sharing this picture publicly. The comments section already shows many other enthusiasts sharing nest pictures in their innocent ignorance.  National Geographic are world leaders in wildlife content, and are in a position to create awareness about conservation. This act has undermined their position of responsibility.

https://www.change.org/p/admin-national-geographic-channel-facebook-page-national-geographic-channel-please-delete-nest-photo?recruiter=114057195&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_page&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-custom_msg&fb_ref=Default

A friend shared his views on this below:

• This is pretty much wrong. First, birds do NOT abandon nests with hatchlings just because we came near it.
• Second, predators are not going to locate nests depending on humans photographing them – birds do not possess an elaborate brain like we do, and cannot guess that because a photographer is pointing his lens towards a tree, there must be a nest there.
• Third, because a few photographers use flash cannot be a reason for protesting all bird photography. It would be like opposing all two vehicles because a few drivers ride rash.

I shared his points to the bird photographer friend from whom I had reached this petition. He replies below:

• Birds get much stressed if humans/ predators approach near the nest and that in itself is a strong enough reason for us to leave them alone.
• Birds have been known to abandon nest/ eggs due to too much human interference. So drawing a line somewhere makes sense to me.
• And we do not oppose Bird photography. We just draw a line at venturing too near and photographing nest building, eggs and hatchlings.
• Using Flash for all kind of wildlife photography is another No.

Another of his bird photographer friend says:

• I have my own experience, most of the birds abandon their nest and even chicks , in fact some birds throw their eggs if someone come close to them, so I am not agree with what he has said... I think there should be some line for photographers as petitioner has said.

Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal. 

Oh My – Little Manhattan!

After watching so much TV and movies; having read so many books and stories; it had to take this long to reach here? That is incredible! Can’t describe totally but I never expected this movie to be so great and heart touching… Little Manhattan! When they say “I hate you” to each other and then as soon as he puts the phone down – surge of emotions had to burst into tears! And when he sees her face and with every expression tries to make it “she loves me” or “she hates me” alternately – that was epic! And when she asked for a dance and he puts his head on her shoulder – that was as if the world stopped! That when he sums it up into “all we get are memories” – that is so heart touching… He keeps a plain face but every time he smiles and how his face lits up – that is the magic of pure happiness! They smile looking at each other – that is love…