The Indian Focus

About four decades ago, the American theologian Harvey Cox, had already defined secularization as an inevitable process.[1] Almost a decade prior to that, Bryan Wilson, in his book Religion in Secular Society (1966) had considered it to be irreversible.[2] However, history has a different tale to say. The scepter of philosophy is hard to cast away. Somewhere or the other it holds its reins and pulls history on. In the 1920s a small group of scientists, mathematicians, sociologists, and economists, (not philosophers) had gathered together in Vienna to develop a unified philosophy that embraced science and attempted to destroy philosophy.[3] Their new philosophy came to be known as Logical Positivism. It, of course, suffered a natural death soon. But, what the empiricists then did not realize was that philosophy may be philosophically denied but not scientifically annihilated. In less than a decade, the world saw the angry reins of philosophies on the chariots of the nations as political philosophies collided, clashed, and combatted with weapons that science had produced to shock humanity with the Second World War. There had to be some other stronger ideology that had to deal with the issue of justice corrupted by corrupt philosophies such as Nazism that tried to base themselves on the evolutionary model provided by the scientific community. The Nuremberg Trial tried Judges who had committed the crime of obeying the unjust laws of their own regime. Some legal philosophy, and not science, had to decide the question of right or wrong during these trials. The definitions and directions were laid down in the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal.[4] The Trial, of course, was subject to much criticism; however, it did open a new chapter in legal history when it defined justice not merely as a domestic political affair but in relation to the notion of natural human rights; thus, the head of a state can’t just merely dictate any law under the pretense of positive lawmaking; he was accountable now to the international community. This also entailed individual responsibility of any person whosoever, irrespective of the laws prescribed by a particular nation. Thus, the ILC’s Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind declared in Article 2(1):[5]

A crime against the peace and security of mankind entails individual responsibility,

Article 3 continues:

An individual who is responsible for a crime against the peace and security of mankind shall be liable to punishment . . .

A deeper probe would question the basis of such a law that claimed superior and absolute status above all laws and demanded conformity to it. From the scientific perspective, didn’t the principle of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest look quite natural? In that sense, wasn’t Nazism quite close to nature? But, what science defined to be a principle of nature and what philosophy recognized to be just and right were two different things. The very reversal of the evolutionary natural principle is uplifted as the virtue of greatness: viz., benevolence and compassion. However, only a philosophically valid method can determine if a philosophical contention is tenable.

The above elaboration was essential as there is a tendency among educators to neglect the primary things altogether and focus on more tangible areas that cater tangible results only. However, the age long scheme cannot be broken so easily. The practical man can’t go on for long without the theoretical man; and, there certainly will come a point when the practical man will have to turn to the theoretical man. The British thinker G. K. Chesterton, over a century ago, had dedicated a whole chapter to this issue in his book What’s Wrong With the World (1910). He called it, “Wanted: An Unpractical Man”. One can’t talk of politics without considering the philosophical roots. Chesterton’s observation is appropriate:

Now our modern politics are full of a noisy forgetfulness; forgetfulness that the production of this happy and conscious life is after all the aim of all complexities and compromises. We talk of nothing but useful men and working institutions; that is, we only think of the chickens as things that will lay more eggs. Instead of seeking to breed our ideal bird, the eagle of Zeus or the Swan of Avon, or whatever we happen to want, we talk entirely in terms of the process and the embryo. The process itself, divorced from its divine object, becomes doubtful and even morbid; poison enters the embryo of everything; and our politics are rotten eggs.

An interesting example of contradictory interpretations is borrowed by G.P. Deshpande [1] from Indian philosophy to evaluate the ambiguous nature of the play and its production.

"There are two texts by Shankaracharya: one is called Sarirakabhasya while the other bhasya is a commentary on Gaudapadakarika. There is a basic contradiction in both....drishti-srishtivada and sristidrishtivada.... These two terms represent the schools within which the Vedantins are divided. The problem is whether what you see defines reality (drishtisrishtivada) or whether what exists defines your vision (srishtidrishtivada).

"It is a typical theatre problem.... Suppose you take that text to be a srishti. Then the director looks at it in a particular way, and the actor looks at it in a particular way. When happens next is the case of drishtisrishtivada. The vision or the way the text is looked at ultimately decides its character. And that is why you have different productions of the same play, productions apparently using the same text but so different that they appear to be based on different texts."

"But is it really the case of drishtisrishtivada? That, after all, it is the drishti that determines the srishti? Perhaps not quite. The srishti also made that drishti possible. There is always enough room in a given text to make it so..... The interrelationship between the text and play I am talking about can be related to the contradiction in Shankaracharya's to bhasyas, and the contradiction between the two vadas. Vendantins also could not come to terms with them. Drishti or srishti taking prominence remained an unresolved question."

Honorable Director, Respected Chief Guest, Principal, Teachers, and Dear Friends:

It gives me great honor to speak on the occasion of the 66th Independence Day Celebration of India.

As we know, our country went through various phases of foreign domination, finally falling subject to the British Crown, before we saw the Sun of Freedom rise over our nation. But we were never slaves to anyone. In our minds we were always a free spirit. Mahatma Gandhi said, "The moment the slave resolves that he will no longer be a slave, his fetters fall. Freedom and slavery are mental states."

Freedom begins within, first, then comes in action externally. The Austrian psychologist Viktor Frankl said, "Forces beyond control can take away everything you possess except one thing, your freedom to choose how you will respond to the situation." This sense and life of freedom, subject only to the Law of God, to the Law of Justice, Equality, Liberty, and Fraternity, is the spring and fountain of Independence.

Today, we are faced with an even greater enemy that is far fiercer than all the foreign rulers of past history put together. This enemy, the monstrous beast bent on destroying us from inside, is the demon of CORRUPTION. We at School must fight it for we are the future of this nation. We are the ones who will become the officials, leaders, and politicians of the coming India. Let us resolve to keep that demon out of our cities, our villages, our families, and our lives. Let us pledge to keep our nation clean, pure, and free!

JAI HIND!

“Love…keeps no record of wrongs.” (1 Corinthians 13:5)

(Written for a Youth Magazine forthcoming)

The scenic valley of the Satpura range in Central India bustled with fresh streams, chirping birds, grazing cattle, and woodcutters chopping wood in the forest. A few women were gathering the yellow flowers that fell from the Mahua (Madhuca Longifolia)trees that were all over the forest. The nearby fields were all ready for harvest and one could see little boys and girls, with school bags on their back, singing and hooting and hurrying along the hedges of the fields to the little Government School in the village.

But, little Ashruti, seven years old, walked very slowly with head bowed down, a frown on her face, and swollen cheeks. She didn’t seem to be in a very happy mood. From her little shack in the distance, made of mud walls and a thatched roof, her mother watched her walk very sadly away. She was, evidently, sad about her daughter that day. She had been angry with Ashruti and had spanked her this morning for two reasons. Firstly, she didn’t get up very early though her mother had called her many times – it was her duty to collect the sticks and light up the fire in the oven and it was late this morning because she failed to wake up soon. Mother had to look after Shyam, her two year old son, that is, Ashruti’s brother. The boy had fever and didn’t sleep all night; so, mother had to really be very busy looking after him. When Ashruti wasn’t waking up despite many callings, mother had to go up to her and pull her from the bed she was sleeping on. Ashruti sure was not very happy about it because she wanted to sleep a little more. And, then, when she had lit up the fire, cooked some rice, and had now got ready for school, mother asked her to hold Shyam for some time while she went and fetched rice soup for him. Ashruti, unwillingly, went and held Shyam. The boy had been crying and now as soon as he was switched place from mother to sister, he grew furious and very irritated, crying all aloud and beating his legs to get off her lap. Ashruti tried to hold him tight, but he was furious. When she tried to hold him in, he curled his teeth around her left wrist and bit her. Ashruti cried out loud and he released. But, she had lost control. She began screaming wildly at the boy and began shaking him furiously. He was stunned and became quiet for a moment, quite frightened and confused, then began to uncontrollably cry to her surprise. Mother came running in shouting, “What has happened, what has happened?” Ashruti was speechless. Mother took Shyam from Ashruti’s hands and cried, “You naughty little girl! Can’t you see that he isn’t feeling well? Couldn’t you hold patience for a moment?” Ashruti trembled and her mother gave her a slap on her cheek. She cried. Mother did feel sad, but she now turned to the boy and began trying to calm him down. Ashruti went to a corner and slumped there sitting with her back against the wall. She was crying. She was very sad. “My mother doesn’t love me anymore,” she thought. She put her right hand around her left wrist and began to turn it smoothly around it. She felt very sad and angry at her brother because he bit her though she had done nothing to him.

After some time, the brother calmed down and having become tired went to sleep. Mother now looked her daughter sitting alone in the corner and came down to her. “I’m sorry, my child,” she said. “But, you shouldn’t be angry like that with your brother, you see. He is too young and he is also not feeling well.” Ashruti didn’t look up. Mother took her hands in her hands, then noticing the red dent that Shyam’s teeth had made on her wrist, she remarked, “Oh, did he bite you?” Ashruti answered nothing. Mother went and brought some ointment and rubbed it around her wrist. “See,” she said, “I only have both of you for me now; and, you are elder, you should be taking care of your brother! Forgive him, he doesn’t understand anything now.” Ashruti looked up without any expression on her face. She stood up, went near her bed, picked up her bag and wore it on her back as mother watched sadly.

“Come, have some rice!” mother said. She dropped her bag, and went and sat on the mat on the ground. Mother served her some rice. She ate, then rose, picked up her bag and, then silently walked off in the direction of the School through the fields. She did understand that mother did love her, but was sad about all that happened this morning.

At School, her friends all greeted her but she didn’t feel like greeting them back. As she sat on her bench, her bench mate, Priya looked at her wrist and exclaimed, “Hey, what’s wrong with that? Why is it so red and what is that oily thing around?” Ashruti said nothing. She began to cry. She felt very sad. But, she knew her mother did love her. “Oh, don’t cry, don’t cry,” Priya said, “Let’s just forget it. It’ll be alright anyway!” Just then the bell rang and the teacher came in as Ashruti wiped her tears, though she didn’t dare to raise her head up. The teacher began calling names of the students from out of the attendance register as each answered “Yes Ma’am!” in answer to the call of his or her name. It was the Hindi Language class and the teacher began teaching them a poem today. She read:

Bizli dhar dhar (Lightning flash flash)
Baadal gar gar (Clouds thunder thunder)
Boondey parti par par (Drops are falling, drop drop)

As she was reading that one boy started laughing, then all the children started laughing. The teacher stopped and signaled all to be silent; and then asked why they were laughing. All became silent. After a while, the boy who first laughed stood up and silently said, “Ma’am, last night my didi (elder sister) was telling to me “Mohit, par par (i.e. read, read) or else you’ll fail!” All the kids were laughing. The teacher laughed too. Then, she said, “There’s a difference, Mohit. Your sister might have said parh not par. Par means “to drop”; parh means “to read”!” They were all silent. Mohit looked here and there, all around the class, then smiled and sat down. The teacher smiled at all of them too. Ashruti also smiled.

They all had lunch at School at noon (as the kids are provided day meals at School every day). After that they had a little rest, and then had playtime for the rest of the afternoon. The kids played hide and seek, merry go round, and a lots of games. When, the last bell rung, every one grabbed their bags and rushed towards their homes. They all walked together in groups of three or four went chatting along. Ashruti and Priya also came chatting and playing with friends.

When Ashruti reached home, she had so many stories to tell her mother; so many that her mother had her eyes wide open in surprise. Mother embraced her and hugged her very much. She told her that she was her gem and the apple of her eye and she was very proud of her. She told her that one day she will become a very great person, perhaps a doctor or an engineer; or perhaps a great teacher. Ashruti was very happy. Just then, Shyam woke up from his sleep. He was feeling better now. He looked at Ashruti and called, “Didi! (Elder Sister!)” She turned to him, jumped off her mother’s lap and rushed towards him. Then, taking him in her arms, she hugged him and kissed him all over. He kissed her too. He wanted to play and sister was his best mate that evening. Of course, they had to stop because she had to do her homework and the dim lantern wouldn’t hold for very long.

Next morning, she did wake up very early.

There is an Indian saying that says that one shouldn’t ever snap off the thread of love; for once snapped off, it can never be joined, and even if joined it will leave a knot. But, true love, God’s love, doesn’t let anything snap off. There’s never a reason for a knot.

© Domenic Marbaniang, 2012

"The singlemost important intervention that colonialism made in the cultural life of India over the last two centuries was the establishment of Fort William College in Calcutta in 1800... The College, established by the East India Company to train its administrators in the languages of India, provided facilities for teaching Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, Hindustani, Bangla, Tamil, Marathi, and Kannada.... Close to Calcutta, in Srirampur, missionaries had established the first printing press and begun publishing theological works such as the Dharma Pustak, a Bangla translation of the Bible.
"Any account of literary movements in colonial India will have to give due credit to the role played by these institutions in the new literature and theatre that grew and developed in the whole of India in the nineteenth century."
[Dialectics of Defeat, Calcutta: Seagull, 2006, pp.12-16. ISBN: 81-7046-279-7]

The College of Fort William emerged as both a centre of research and a publication unit, a cradle of creativity as well as scholarship. Planned originally to train probationer British civilians in the languages and cultures of the subjugated country, the college rendered services tantamount to those of a university in promoting modern Indian literatures, Bengali in particular… Under the leadership of William Carey, the College could also claim credit for drawing together Sanskrit pandits and Perso-Arabic munshis to reshape Bengali prose… The variety of the College’s publication also deserve note. From colloquies and popular stories, chronicles and legends, to definitive editions of literary texts.
[Calcutta, the Living City, Vol. I, edited by Sukanta Chaudhuri, p. vii, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-563696-1. As found cited on Wikipedia article "Fort William College" today]

"British intervention in the field of literature, therefore, could not have come at a more appropriate time. Fort William College began its work by standardizing the languages it was teaching--it first compiled and published dictionaries in those languages.... British rule contributed to the growth of the Indian vernaculars by turning them into useful and usable instruments of statecraft.... The dominance of Persian in most parts of northern India as a language of high culture and high administration finally came to an end. The British started schools in the native languages.... by the middle of the nineteenth century there were more Marathi medium schools in Maharashtra than ever. Fort William College also worked on rendering the Hitopades, the Panchatantra, the Vetal Panchavimsati and other popular Sanskrit works into Indian vernaculars. In so doing, the pandits in its monopoly opened new vistas before the 'natives' in the use of their languages.... India was forced into a new era...."