Of Longevity And Death...

Recently, my father lost a very dear friend and colleague. Almost a decade younger to him. Beyond their friendship, our families have shared pretty good times in the past. My heart goes out to the family and I hope they come out of this stronger with resolve.

But I think of my father now. He is all of 78 years of age. His physical health couldn't be better. He eats like an elephant, sleeps like a baby. Laughs, drinks, travels, reads. As if he has cut a decade off his age. He has a caring wife, a loving son and an equally respectful daughter-in-law. Looks like he has a good decade and more to cherish life. So what is the problem you ask?

Oh none, if you ask him personally. But I doubt what lies deep down. Does he feel lonely? Does he believe his time is coming up? What is going on in his mind? It is convenient and reassuring for us to see his ever smiling face. Yet, I will never know what he really thinks when he sees his buddies leave one after another, He may be thanking God for longevity and health. Or cursing him to let him go through the pain of loss of best buddies,

Longevity of life is often desired by all. But few understand the true cost of it. In the Hindu culture I grew up in, death is seen as a transition from one life to another. And so is not to be feared, The ultimate aim is Nirvana - state of pure bliss where the Atma (incorrectly translated to Soul) meets the Paramatma (The Supreme). 

So is death the ultimate aim? If yes, that would mean an easy escape. Let's kill each other and ourselves. There is no life and all Atmas meet the Paramatma. Then why do we live? Krishna relieves us from this confusion. He talks of Karma. A living being must perform his worldly duties. In fact, doing your Karma is one of the ways to achieve Nirvana. We must live our lives to the fullest, doing our duties to the best of our abilities; and then release it when the time is up. That ensures the cycle ends for a new cycle to begin.

However, between the start and end lies our whole reality. We give meaning to our lives through our experiences and emotions. We compare our lives to others' and rate on a scale of Awful to Awesome. We tend to want what our peers have. Education, job, pay, property, partner, kids. But when we start getting older, the mentioned things start losing their meaning. Because, by that time, we would have seen all the awfuls and awesomes there can be. At this stage, we still look to our peers. Some are still there, some are on their way to the other world. And you don't want to be the last person. So, mark my words, you literally start wanting death.

So longevity ensures that fear of death vanishes. Mind craves  to complete the cycle and let go. Wonder if my father is thinking on similar lines. I do not know and I will never ask. But all this makes me think. How long a life is too long? We cannot decide. Only thing in our control is do our Karma, wait it out and pray to God that is should be full - not short, not long, just enough. Someone has said, it is lonely at the top. I add, it is lonely too far as well.

Of Matsyavatara and Noah's Ark - The mythological stories of the great flood

At a time when differences between faiths are being bombarded at us via folks of different religions, it is worth noticing the similarities. There is one such similarity between Hinduism and Abrahamic religions (Judaism / Christianity / Islam) that caught my eye. A  great deluge (flood) that happened years ago....a message sent by God to a human being....a boat that provided refuge to life and knowledge on Earth. Sounds familiar? Going back in pre-history, this is a  specific event we can cite which all major religions speak of. We will look at the accounts from Hinduism and Abrahamic faiths to come to common terms on this event.

One of Hinduism's countless texts is called Matsya-purana. It mentions a story of how Lord Vishnu saved the 'purest of all' Vedas from landing up in the hands of Demons and ended all life from Earth in a bid to cleanse it. The story goes like this:

While Lord Brahma was creating the world, he decided to rest before he continued with the creation again at the start of the next kalpa. He inadvertently let flow the 4 Vedas out of his mouth. A demon named Hayagreeva snatched the flowing Vedas. He ran away with them to Patal lok (mythical third-world which provided refuge to Danavas (Demons).). When Brahma woke up and realized his slip-up, he ran to Lord Vishnu in order to save the Vedas. That moment Lord Vishnu decided to take a form of mortal life and manifest on Earth - something that happened 8 more times since and years later formed basis for Hindu epics Ramayana and Mahabharata. Lord Vishnu took a form of a matsya (a fish) and descended in Kritamala river where Satyavrata (later known as Vaivasvata Manu as first human of the new world) was offering Argya. The fish requested Manu to take itself home as it feared for life from larger fish in the river. Manu took the fish in its kamandalu (a small pot).

The next morning, the fish had grown somewhat and was unable to be accommodated in the small kamandalu. Manu then transferred the fish to a larger pot. The next day, the fish outgrew the large pot. Manu transferred the fish to a lake. The fish outgrew the lake as well. Manu had no option but to transfer the fish to sea. He traveled far and wide to reach the sea. As soon as he transferred the fish to sea, the fish grew even larger. It was time Manu realized he is not dealing with an ordinary being. It was Lord Vishnu himself. Lord manifest himself in front of Manu and narrated the purpose of his avatara as Matsya. Lord Vishnu informed him that on seventh day from then, a great flood will consume all the 3 worlds and nothing will remain. Lord said that he will send a boat in order to save all that is valuable in this world to be carried on to the next creation. He asked Manu to collect vegetables and other food materials and store in the boat along with animals and Rishis. He asked Manu to tie the boat on Matsya's horns to protect from wind. Matsya would drag that ship up to the end of flood. Then Lord Vishnu disappeared.

The story goes on wherein Lord Vishnu kills Hayagreeva in Patala and gets the Vedas back to Lord Brahma. Lord Brahma begins with creation afresh. The gist of this avatara is creation of a new world via cleansing of an older world. There can be no NEW if the OLD is not gotten rid of.

On similar lines is a story from Bible. Interesting fact is that the Biblical story also takes place at the time of Genesis, i.e. beginning of the world. Lets hear the story:

There was a man called Noah (called Nuh in Qur'an) who lived on Earth once. He is one of the chosen prophets in western religions. Noah was a righteous man, But the Earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. So God once said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people. So make yourself an ark of cypress wood." Then God explained how Noah was to build the arc. God instructed Noah to take his family, 2 of all living being - male and female, 2 of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal, every kind of food. God said that flood would begin 7 days from them. Noah did everything just as God commanded him. After the seven days the flood waters came on the earth and it flooded for 150 years.

Story goes on to explain how Noah and family survived and life was revived on Earth once the flood receded. The story explains how God cleansed the world of all evil and recreated life taking with it the righteous Noah;'s family.

Key pointers from the comparison of the 2 events are:
1. There was indeed a flood in eastern hemisphere few thousand years ago that was molded into stories by religious texts.
2. Religions have depicted the event in different stories but same idea - re-creation of Earth after emergence of evil.

While we see extreme differences in idea of God between eastern and western philosophies, it is a good idea to see how historical events that eliminate these differences.

300 Rise Of An Empire - White Man's Burden and Asian Civilizations

"Quiet everyone! This is not a street fight. This is a democracy!" This is said by Themistocles, the Athenian commander to the quarreling members of Greek senate. The senate itself is debating whether to go at, and if yes, the plan of action for the war against 'tyranny' named Xerxes, the king of Persia. Spectacular visual effects and gallons of bloodshed apart, the film also conveys a more than subtle message. It is spelled out in pockets and displayed fervently throughout the movie. Before we go into that, let's, in short, run through the plot of the movie.

Story happens during the same time period as the first part - 300. While Leonidas of Sparta leads his 300 men at Thermopylae against a massive Persian army, another Greek hero, the Athens Commander Themistocles is trying to unite all Greek states against a dreadful backlash from Persians. Reason for this backlash is the fact that years ago in battle of Marathon, Themistocles had killed King Darius of Persia as his son Xerxes looked on. Xerxes' vengeance is guided by a lady called Artemisia - a person close to King Darius and political guide of Xerxes. She is Greek by birth and her loyalty to Persia and reasons for it are graphically displayed in most pungent details. She over the years, converts Xerxes into a God-King with sole objective of crushing Greeks. Themistocles fails to convince Queen Gorgo of Sparta to send Spartan navy to his aide in Straits of Salamis. Remember, King Leonidas is at war with Xerxes at this point. Themistocles takes on Artemisia's Armada and the rest of the movie showcases this epic 'battle of Salamis' till Artemisia dies in the end. Not to forget, Spartan navy joins Athens and the Greeks unite. Hence the name, rise of an empire.

It is said that history is written by the victorious. Few things are clear, story is inherently based on patriotic Greek records and at times rejects history for the need of drama. There are number of historical blunders committed  (eg. Themistocles killing Darius and portrayal of Xerxes as homosexual psychopath are blatant falsehoods) which need not form part of this post. However, I will touch the aspects relevant to today's geopolitics and west's imagination about Asian civilizations.

The film makes numerous overtures to Greece being democratic, patriotic and free. The Greek army is inspired to fight by projecting the Persians as savage, ruthless, uncivilized murderers coming to snatch Greece's 'freedom.' Greeks are shown as torch-bearers of humane practices and strive to protect its free thought. Persians on the other hand do not follow democracy, are rules by a demi-god King. In Greece, there is no practice of employing laborers for war related hard physical labor (like paddling navy boats). Greek soldiers and marines (even children) are natural volunteers. Persians employ bonded laborers and practice war slavery. Greeks respect fallen or failed soldiers. While, Persians kill their failed generals. Bottom line : Greeks brought civilization to the world and made humans a better race. Persians are still animals in disguise of a human body.

Were the Persians really as bad? Not really, they were like any other culture looking to expand. You would have guessed by now that Persians tell a different history. Persian culture was one of the greatest cultures in the world along with few others like Greek, Roman, Indian and Egyptian. Their demonisation is inappropriate.They had excelled in arts, architecture, literature and trade. Persians invaded other lands and practiced slavery just like Greece did. They also shared good relations with neighbors. India and Persia have had historical relations in business, arts and politics for centuries. There were friends and foes in politics for every culture. Greeks were their foes owing to natural resources, proximity and strategic locations. There was nothing evil about them.

It is true that any historical war will have two sides of the story. However, 300 seems to twist history in order to demonize powers other than European. The film makers have purposely eliminated the existence of slavery and barbarism in Greece. They have neglected the practice of forced army service for Spartans - where children used to get killed while training for wars at a very young age. They have ignored countless invasions by Greece on other lands (world conquest by Alexander, fall of Troy and so on) and lack of their democratic principles on these lands. All they want to portray is that Greece (and thereby the western civilization) is the only civilization to have brought sense and sanity to the world. The world was full of barbaric people eg. Persians who needed to be shown the light of democracy. It is laughable to believe. Maybe they should read about various other experiments in governance that came from Asian powers. Take Mahajanapadas from Maurya and Chanakya to start with.

It is important to note that all western powers today consider Greece and Rome as the foundation of their nations and hence tow the same line as depicted above. Rudyard Kipling from Britain, the author of 'The Jungle Book' had mentioned about the White Man's burden in a poem and stressed upon the need to spread the light of democracy and decency to the world. West still sees the powers that oppose it as ruthless savages and offers to sanitize the world of animals. Recent invasions of Iraq and Syria by west and political lecturing by USA to Iran/India/Japan etc. are examples. West still maintains the 'holier-than-thou' approach to world affairs and as a result, end up angering the eastern powers which have now started to develop self confidence. Since the 2 millenia that have passed, Europe has seen Christianisation and Persia (Iran) has seen Islamisation. However, the animosity has not lessened. Movies are mirrors to society (Bollywood is an exception). Hence, it is fearful if the western people believe in the idea even today. A truly equal geopolitical world can only be possible if all nations and cultures respect each other.

Before I end this, it is interesting to know Iran's reaction to the movie 300 in year 2007. They outraged! Officially banned the movie and issued official statement through government! You can adhere to a religion different to your forefathers but cannot take the history of the land out of people's hearts!
Here's the link : http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1598886,00.html

Avatar 2 : After the bloody battle....

James Cameron is busy working on the second instalment of Avatar and it is learnt from credible sources that the story appears lacklustre. I took it upon my self to restore the sanctity of the franchise and offer this - my 2 cents to it - as the second instalment of the story. I have sent the manuscript to James and he is yet to come back to me. However, nothing that stops me from sharing this with you.

This story begins after the miraculous victory of Na'avi people over the relentless invading Humans. Some repetition is inevitable about the battle before we move ahead for he sake of those unfamiliar with the Avatar folklore. The battle was started primarily because of depleting mineral and fuel resources of a once blue planet -Earth. Humans started to do what they know best - seek, attack and loot. They ended up on Pandora - the home of the Blue Na'avi who lead a fairly blissful, spiritual (and affluent by their standards) life. In order to plunder the Unobtainium-rich moon of planet Polyphemus, they managed to basically do every evil they can think of - uproot the holy sites (remember the gigantic tree?) of the Na'avi, kill hundreds of Na'avi people, ridicule their religious beliefs, make them homeless on their own land to name a few. Basically, humans brush aside the Na'avi at their will.

In comes our hero - the mighty human Jake Sully. He prefers his Na'avi Avatar to being a human (can't blame him. He is limping as a human, running as a Na'avi) and lead the Na'avi to an unprecedented assault on the humans. Humans - facing such backlash for he first time - don't know what to do. They put up a good fight but fall prey to Pandoran animals who pay heed to the call from Mother Eywa and come running to cull as many humans as they can.  Helped by strange birds neurologically linked with Jake and others in the Omaticaya warrior clan, the entire Pandoran neurological eco-system wins the epic battle. After which, the Na'avi force the survivors amongst humans to return to Earth.

This is where we start narrating what happened after James Cameron left us. Na'avi, although fierce warriors and by now repugnant towards humans, were kind hearted. So much so that when a few humans requested asylum on Pandora, they agreed. The reasons for seeking asylum stretched from escaping criminal cases to lead a happy life away from a struggling starving planet. Some stayed on for scientific purposes too.Thus began a period of peaceful coexistence. 

Humans and Na'avi had a lot to learn from each other. The Na'avi did learn while Humans, belligerent as they are, did not. The humans conveniently ignored the Na'avi way of life - the neural network, the connection with nature, the flow of energy and simplicity. Nothing could win over humans. The Na'avi believed in taking just enough from the nature and returning it too. Life was a cycle. Destruction led to creation, creation was followed by preservation and after preservation came destruction again. Humans, having lived and forgotten Earthen philosophies of similar nature, were yawning at the Na'avi approach. Na'avi on the the other hand were in the awe of human technology. The man-made objects better than the creators themselves. Defence, agriculture, society, transportation equipment - capable of creation, destruction and preservation were looked upon by the Na'avi as Divine. A being less than half the size of Na'avi was able to create an insurmountable mountain of power for itself. Na'avi held humans in a high regard. Na'avi also studied human philosophies in an attempt to better their own society.

Years went by and how. The new generation of the Na'avi started severing the neural links with their fellow Pandoran beings. They were drenched in the new-found humanity. Na'avi allowed human Gods to be worshipped besides their own. Mother Eywa was the only term they knew for God. However, to avoid hurting the sentiments of humans, they stopped calling out to her publicly. In stead, they said every God is the same and happily accepted human traditions. Some Na'avi were apprehensive of the shift. But the majority, kind-hearted, started curbing all such thoughts. The masks humans had to wear on Pandora to avoid CO2 intoxication were made available free. 20% of the land Na'avi lived on was separately reserved for humans. The Na'avi language was changed to accommodate human words. A new Common Tongue was created to the fancy of humans. The clans reserved some of their authoritative positions for humans despite the fact that humans lacked the Na'avi martial and strategic skills. Humans, initially grateful to Na'avi, swore it to be homogeneous with the Na'avi cause.

Though now Pandoran, humans did not show any inclination to abide by Na'avi spirituality and way of life. Humans demanded for social laws pertaining to themselves different from the universal laws of Na'avi. Eventually, the humans were given their own social laws and with it the control over them. Humans increased manifolds in population per their natural traits. The land became scarcer. Hence, the humans cut forests and shifted there to find more land. Although away, humans in the new location were not disconnected from their original clan. And needless to say, some humans did stay back in the original location. Na'avi, again, did not complain.

Na'avi had very strict laws against crime. That was one of the reasons for the peace and stability. But when it came to punish humans, some of them alleged Na'avi of partiality against humans in cases of crime. Thus began the tiny waves of anti-Na'avi protests. The 'human' identity was exploited fruitfully. The protests reached the human colony. There was widespread show of discontent. It turned into violence over the next few days. The clans were ready to apologize. But the protests did not die down. One fine day, the human colony demanded for outright independence from the Na'avi. There was to be a fully human ruled colony of humans on the same very planet away from the 'clutches' of Na'avi rule. Some Na'avi clans were against the separation citing that the planet was theirs first and humans had promised to abide by the rule of the land. Humans didn't budge and there it was. They declared independence which was eventually agreed upon by Na'avi.

Na'avi were requested for patronage again, from the humans who were unhappy over the separation. They wanted to live with the clans and die by them. Na'avi agreed to them as well. Thus creating 2 societies on the same land - one of the humans and the other belonging to Na'avi and humans together. The new nation for humans was named 'Second Earth (SE).'

Na'avi way of life suffered a thousand deaths. Their peaceful abode was converted in to a battle ground again and by humans again. By the very species Na'avi gave shelter to. As they cursed their past, there was still hope of reconciliation. There was still hope that humans find some humanity after all. 

Of Saligia And Shadripu. How East And West See The Sins Of Mankind And Why Does It Affect Us?

Religions intrigue me. I believe that Religions were started to systematize the society. The fundamental religious beliefs moulded the way the rules were set. Hence, a comparative study between different philosophies might just explain the way certain societies behave. This is an attempt to look at one particular point of convergence between 2 philosophies. Due to paucity of time and space, some relevant details might have been missed or not treated with apt detail. I invite you to this short contemplation while I apologize for slips if any. 

The base thought of religion in general can simply be put as follows :

"Guiding mankind to decide what's good and what's not; what a man should or should not do."

How mankind's vices are described in disparate schools of theologies is a good way to determine the degree of authority religious texts enjoy - thus making us ponder what sect is apparently orthodox and which one is lenient. A quick glance at the '7 Seven Deadly Sins' as explained in Catholicism and 'Shadripu' as enlisted in Hindu texts reveals much about the philosophies that underpin the distinct ways of life; separates, so to speak, the very foundation of the Eastern and Western religions.

Having said that, let's be clear that both ways of life are equally pertinent and have stood test of times for centuries now. Thus, proving one better than the other is neither called for nor intended here. Comparison however is done to make ends meet at the end.

Let's examine the Christian (Catholic to be precise) Deadly Sins first. There are 7 of them together abbreviated to SALIGIA. The Latin name is followed by the English one:

1. Superbia - Pride (Ego)

2. Avaritia - Greed

3. Luxuria - Lust (Lechery)

4. Invidia - Envy

5. Gula - Gtuttony (Eating more than required)

6. Ira - Anger (Wrath)

7. Acedia - Sloth (Discouragement towards work)

Committing these sins damns one to what is called a 'Purgatory' in hell. Purgatory is nothing but a brief (how brief depends on the scale of the sin) period of torment and suffering in Hell. Also depends on the scale of the sin, whether the soul reaches Heaven at all. Some sins are unpardonable and damns one to Hell forever. Thus rife is the belief of some people in what are called 'Mortal Sins' - from where there is no return. 

These 7 deadly sins have inspired in a queer way a lot of fine literature in western countries. One that comes out at the top of the head is 'The Divine Comedy' by an Italian Poet Dante Alighiery  - the theme of the latest book from Dan Brown - Inferno. This piece of grisly art from Dante describes in detail the plight of sinful souls through Hell. Some interesting afterthoughts about Saligia; while 'Alcohol' is not permitted by Catholicism, it is not separately mentioned as a sin. Also, the word Luxuria from Latin lends itself to the word 'Luxury' in English. (It was used originally to mean 'more than what one needs.' In modern terms, it is the most sought after pleasures.) What this evokes is that Lust does not only stand for 'craving for carnal pleasures' but also for 'avarice for all other Earthly pleasures.' - Chocolates included? Maybe.

For more details, here's the Wikipedia page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins

Now let's turn to the Hindu texts. The Sins so to speak in Hinduism are not sins per se. They are explained as Enemies. Shadripu literally translates to 'Six Enemies.' It is also noteworthy that Ancient Hindu religion (called the Vedic Dharma) did not have a concept of heaven or hell at all. Hence the way Hinduism explicates the consequences is different.These enemies are enlisted below:

1. Mada - Pride (Ego)

2. Lobha - Greed

3. Kaama - Lust (Lechery)

4. Matsara - Envy

5. Krodha - Anger (Wrath)

6. Moha - Attachment

If one believes ancient Vedic culture, The 6 enemies are not deadly if committed and do not summon one to hell. (Well concept of Heaven or Hell didn't exist.) Instead, they make living miserable, obviously while one is alive. A remarkable fact here is that Shadripu lack Gluttony (Overeating) as a sin. This could be because the Shadripu were conceptualized to set minds wandering astray from socially amiable paths onto a pious way by offering a benchmark of behavioural traits. Bodily attributes like eating was not assumed important a virtue to be imparted in the social set up where food was abundant.

It is observed that the concept of heaven and hell developed much later in Vedic culture through a natural attempt to counter the arguments from proponents of Western religion. However, the concept of rebirth was not altered in Vedic culture. Instead, an alternate purgatory in the form of low-pedestal lifeform was introduced. A sinful soul from one life would face torment in hell briefly before being dispatched to Earth again to live as a subaltern insect or rodent. Human life life, of course, was reserved for most pious souls with the final aim to achieve salvation once one dies as a human.

The Wikipedia page is a stub, nonetheless, describes bare essentials of Shadripu. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadripu.

Differences in these expositions of sins, though not stark, provide an interesting cogitation. It is observed that 5 of the sins are common to both philosophies viz., Pride, Greed, Lust, Envy and Anger.

Moha (Attachment) has no directly co-related word in Catholic philosophy and not detailed in its texts. As a result, it does not make it to the 7 sins in Catholic literature. On the other hand, Gluttony and Sloth lack apt words in Hindu Literature. As mentioned above, Hindu sins focus more on bringing about mental balance and do not deal with physical attributes of behaviour. The theories of sins per se in both ways of life stem from the fundamental standpoints of resp. religions.

The differences in the sins and their consequences can be a result of one belief central to resp. philosophies. Western thought believes that Humans have a single life; whereas, the Eastern Vedic thought believes that Man has many lives. How this fundamental fact affects the aforementioned would conclude our discourse.

Since Catholics believe there is no rebirth, the duration of striving for salvation or atonement is limited to One Lifetime. This explains the stricter approach it has towards specifying the consequences. 'Mortal Sins' make sure that there is no way to return to the path to piousness. Life is seen as the period of action - good deeds. One's achievements in a lifetime is the sum-total of all subjects. The report card once printed is irrevocable. Thus is seen the urge of people to prove their achievements. Thus a thought is given to each and every action. Thus the sharpening of the axe is prolonged, to not fail when it matters. One might wonder whether this is the cause for taking proverbs like "First Time Right", "First Impression is the Last Impression", "You live only once, Make it count" are stood by. Hence the focus on results, achievements. Linear rules define the course with no room for 'adjustments.' This philosophy also to a large extent explains the western concepts ranging from adhering to traffic lights to business strategies. Western culture's tagline may very well be - 'Life comes once. Make sure you do all good things right here right now.'

Vedic philosophy on the other hand believes in multiple lives till a soul attains salvation. Thus, there is a never ending space for corrections. A bad guy in this life can turn out to be a good insect in next life, hence returning as a good natured horse in consequent life finally achieving humanity in life after that.Life's own torments rather than hell are detrimental to evils. And nothing is a mortal sin here. Thus a life in itself is not an achievement. It is seen just as a step to the next level. The sum-total of achievements in one life only guarantee promotion to next level and need not affect the journey in entirety. One life's sins can be atoned in the next life, or simpler, in this life itself. One bad deed can be balanced by a good one. Daan Dharma, Pooja, Yatra are instant atonements. A monologue with God "Adjust karo. Kal Prashad chadhaunga" it seems is sufficient to clean your slate. Thus are people okay with bending the rules, petty larcenies, disdain towards laws - cos in the end, everything can be rectified. Vedic culture's tagline may be the starkly opposite - 'Life is eternal. Just keep happily doing good things.' 

Pondering over the 2 philosophies, I could not help but reach the aforementioned possible results of the underlying philosophies. These might be correct or way off the target. But what remains the fact is that the 2 religious thoughts under discussion have affected our lives to a large extent. How else do you explain no Indian voyage to foreign lands ever? While countless westerners have touched Indian shores? That is because of the westerns' resolve to make their single life count. 

As I said before, both have stood for centuries and cannot be adjudged correct or false. What can be safely said however is that both have made sure mankind does not derail from the righteous path ever. One confirms it in ONE lifetime, the other for all of them.