Saturday, October 08, 2011
Monday, December 31, 2007
The end of religion and of God
We have enough religions and we have had enough of religions. Doomsayers, since Nostradamus times, have been predicting the end of man. Let me, for a change, predict the end of God.
After all, what will God do without men to pray, without men to sin, without men to punish, without men to create religions and perform rituals. Without man, God cannot exist. She (let me balance my male-chauvenist repeated-usage of the word 'man' by attributing femininity to 'God' - no, it is not meant as an insult to femininity or to God; it is quite common in most non-Judaic traditions) will be bored to death fixing the fate of monkeys and mangroves.
It is disgusting to see religion cause disruption to every form of decent civilised life. Global anti-Islam campaign masquerading as anti-terror campaign, Gujarat bloodshed given complete legitimacy by repeated electoral victories, anti-Sikh riots still remaining unresolved, Taslima Nasreen and MF Hussain on the run for offending left-wing and right-wing politicians - oh, the list is endless. Why all this tragi-comic tussle over something that doesnt exist. If God was there and if She was as sensible as religions make us believe, would She have scripted such horrendous bloodbaths in her name. Creating a Hitler and Modi and Osama and Bush would not have been my idea of fun. A sensible God could not have presided over such foolishness for centuries. Existence of an insensible God is difficult to rationalise, even for the hardcore irrational believers.
For the rational mind, the solution for this conundrum is simple - there can be no God, sensible or insensible. The truth is simple but hard to believe and impossible to prove. The castle of lies built over millenia is so impregnable and has been unconquered. The very lie that the rational mind wants to annihilate, consumes and obsesses the mind so much that there is no escape from it for believers and non-believers both. The rational mind is also fickle - in times of adversity or death, when the fear of unknown overcomes it, it takes the escapist route and surrenders in the castle of lies. The known lie is easier to digest than the unknown truth.
Education has no correlation to with rationality. There are doctors and scientists who not only believe in God, but also submit themselves to religion, rituals and riots. Increased levels of literacy and education, as we know it, do not guarantee the end of superstition and religion. But still, I hope, with a certain sense of irrational strength of belief, that there will be a day when man will run out of patience for religion, religion will run out of its utility for mankind and Gods will cease to exist. That day, a new humanity will bloom and man will advance to the next stage of evolution.
After all, what will God do without men to pray, without men to sin, without men to punish, without men to create religions and perform rituals. Without man, God cannot exist. She (let me balance my male-chauvenist repeated-usage of the word 'man' by attributing femininity to 'God' - no, it is not meant as an insult to femininity or to God; it is quite common in most non-Judaic traditions) will be bored to death fixing the fate of monkeys and mangroves.
It is disgusting to see religion cause disruption to every form of decent civilised life. Global anti-Islam campaign masquerading as anti-terror campaign, Gujarat bloodshed given complete legitimacy by repeated electoral victories, anti-Sikh riots still remaining unresolved, Taslima Nasreen and MF Hussain on the run for offending left-wing and right-wing politicians - oh, the list is endless. Why all this tragi-comic tussle over something that doesnt exist. If God was there and if She was as sensible as religions make us believe, would She have scripted such horrendous bloodbaths in her name. Creating a Hitler and Modi and Osama and Bush would not have been my idea of fun. A sensible God could not have presided over such foolishness for centuries. Existence of an insensible God is difficult to rationalise, even for the hardcore irrational believers.
For the rational mind, the solution for this conundrum is simple - there can be no God, sensible or insensible. The truth is simple but hard to believe and impossible to prove. The castle of lies built over millenia is so impregnable and has been unconquered. The very lie that the rational mind wants to annihilate, consumes and obsesses the mind so much that there is no escape from it for believers and non-believers both. The rational mind is also fickle - in times of adversity or death, when the fear of unknown overcomes it, it takes the escapist route and surrenders in the castle of lies. The known lie is easier to digest than the unknown truth.
Education has no correlation to with rationality. There are doctors and scientists who not only believe in God, but also submit themselves to religion, rituals and riots. Increased levels of literacy and education, as we know it, do not guarantee the end of superstition and religion. But still, I hope, with a certain sense of irrational strength of belief, that there will be a day when man will run out of patience for religion, religion will run out of its utility for mankind and Gods will cease to exist. That day, a new humanity will bloom and man will advance to the next stage of evolution.
Books unread
Everytime I step into a bookstore - and that is quite often, I have to buy something. The urge is insurmountable. The books, thus accumulated, are lying in a cluttered book shelf waiting to be devoured by me one day. If you judge me by the books that I have, I must be a voracious reader with delectable literary taste. Voracious reader, I once was. My delectable taste cannot be disputed either - it is something that I pride myself on. Unfortunately, my reading has not kept pace with the longingness to read. Lost in the corporate world, busy fighting everyday battles and recuperating when not busy, it is not easy to read. The more exotic one's taste gets, the tougher it is to satiate it with a quick read. Most good literature deals with depressing topics and a depressing literary voyage is not the ideal recipe for a weekend rest for a mind already ravaged throughout the week.
However, little by little, I do get to undertake those literary voyages once in a while. In sudden spurts of inspiration or desperation (when I see a mountain of books that I have bought new), I manage to cover good ground. The latest books to be converted from my 'books unread' column to 'books read' catergory are two 'Indian' books - Identity and Violence by Amartya Sen and Khushwant Singh's Train to Pakistan.
Amartya Sen's book was a new attempt for me. I have never been a great reader of non-fiction outside of newspapers and magazines. This book told me why. It is a great book, no doubt. I agreed with most of what he said and there were some deep insights which leave a lasting mark on you. But, the book could have been compressed into a quarter of what it is - there is so much repitition of ideas that can help you pass an exam on the book. Amartya's core philosophy or theory is intriguing - famines are caused not because there is not sufficient food for everyone but because sufficient food is not (made) available for everyone. Democratic governments, however irresponsible they are, will prevent famines to a great extent. Having seen Krishna and Chandrababu Naidu governments getting toppled because of farmer suicides, one has to agree with this view. Democratic societies will not allow people to die of hunger even while being blind to millions living with hunger.
Amartya also touched on the woes of partition. Khushwant Singh painted a complete picture in his novel. A very powerful story, simply told - interspersed with a few unnecessarily explicit narrations of sexual encounters (one must expect this in a Khushwant Singh book) and commentary on India (for the Western readers). A linear story told without plainly any jugglery of literary techniques. Raises questions on whether literature has been lost to technique in the last century. Even for my 'delectable' literary taste, a powerful story based on real life, narrated in a simple style, does have its attractions.
However, little by little, I do get to undertake those literary voyages once in a while. In sudden spurts of inspiration or desperation (when I see a mountain of books that I have bought new), I manage to cover good ground. The latest books to be converted from my 'books unread' column to 'books read' catergory are two 'Indian' books - Identity and Violence by Amartya Sen and Khushwant Singh's Train to Pakistan.
Amartya Sen's book was a new attempt for me. I have never been a great reader of non-fiction outside of newspapers and magazines. This book told me why. It is a great book, no doubt. I agreed with most of what he said and there were some deep insights which leave a lasting mark on you. But, the book could have been compressed into a quarter of what it is - there is so much repitition of ideas that can help you pass an exam on the book. Amartya's core philosophy or theory is intriguing - famines are caused not because there is not sufficient food for everyone but because sufficient food is not (made) available for everyone. Democratic governments, however irresponsible they are, will prevent famines to a great extent. Having seen Krishna and Chandrababu Naidu governments getting toppled because of farmer suicides, one has to agree with this view. Democratic societies will not allow people to die of hunger even while being blind to millions living with hunger.
Amartya also touched on the woes of partition. Khushwant Singh painted a complete picture in his novel. A very powerful story, simply told - interspersed with a few unnecessarily explicit narrations of sexual encounters (one must expect this in a Khushwant Singh book) and commentary on India (for the Western readers). A linear story told without plainly any jugglery of literary techniques. Raises questions on whether literature has been lost to technique in the last century. Even for my 'delectable' literary taste, a powerful story based on real life, narrated in a simple style, does have its attractions.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
When perfection is in motion…
A genius is a glorious concoction of perfection and imperfection – the imperfections, most often, the outcome of striving for perfection. It is not often, when common man gets a glimpse of a genius and it is even less frequently that common man recognizes a genius when he sees one. The genius in a painter or a poet or a writer goes unappreciated by the masses. Unfortunately for the great artist,in the eyes of the world, the proclamation of his genius happens only when the audience understands the art. It requires half-a-genius to even comprehend the work of a genius.
Sports is an exception and occasionally cinema. The closest a common man comes to understanding a genius is when he watches a Federer in action or a Sachin in motion.
Federer is a symphony on court, poetry in motion. You give a set of words to a great writer, someone like Naipaul, and he knows how best to phrase them. You throw a ball at Federer and he knows how best to place it. It is sheer exhilaration that one feels, when Federer is at his best. The best part is that he never needs to be at his best to better his closest rival. One common argument that is thrown against acknowledging the greatness of Federer is that he never had great rivals. The fact could well be that Federer never gave that opportunity to anyone, of becoming a great rival. He just steamrolled over every opponent, never permitting anyone to grow in confidence and pose a challenge to his supremacy. Except Nadal, at French Open. Had Nadal or Safin and Roddick for that matter, been playing in any other era they would not have been ordinary mortals.
My firm belief is that the day Federer decides to win the French Open, he will win. How often have we seen him drift into a period of nothingness, then suddenly decide it is time to go home and majestically wrap up the match in no time? How often have we seen Federer serve more aces than his reputedly-big-serving opponents? When Federer steps onto the court, he fights against himself. The day he decides to lose, others can win. Otherwise, ‘don’t even try, pal!’ (Federer might have been joking – but was he? Every opponent knows he meant it and sadly for them, he was stating the truth). Federer’s genius is defined by one word – invincible.
Sachin’s genius is composed of a different concoction. His flaws and vulnerabilities are there for everyone to see and exploit, whenever he permits them to. His flaws have been analysed by so many experts so many times that if you add them all and if an ounce of truth is there in them, Sachin would have been relegated to the archives of cricket statisticians’ laptops. There are very few people who have kept a billion hearts throbbing and fluttering for seventeen years. When Sachin first walked into the international arena, every heart was secretly praying for the kid to succeed. If you had thought that it was because he was a kid – pause, the hearts are still praying. Sachin doesn’t need any prayers though. There is something right about every stroke he plays and he plays every stroke. The balance, the timing, the grace all make time stand still. Even when he ducks awkwardly under a searing bouncer, his determination is stamped over it.
Sometimes Sachin is an intelligent bowler’s easy prey. If he had fallen to a particular ball playing a particular shot, he is most likely to play the same shot off the same ball and sometimes fall again. The intelligent bowler doesn’t realize that Sachin will keep playing the same shot not because he can’t play it differently but because he wants to play the same shot that failed him and succeed. He will keep failing till he succeeds. Once Sachin masters his failing, the intelligent bowler will have to start raking up his brains again to spot another flaw, not knowing that Sachin will probably be more eager than him to know the next flaw – so that he can fix it. Haven't we seen him paddle-sweeping straight to the fielder repeatedly till he gets the stroke right and beats the fielder by an inch - looking past the spectator's frustration (oh! why cant he try some other shot), it is the same obsessive urge for perfection on display.
Sachin has many detractors. But will any of them dare not to watch him when he is in action. He may not match a Lara or Steve Waugh in snatching victory from jaws of defeat. But when Sachin plays, winning or losing become secondary in its truest sense. There is nothing to exceed the sheer joy of watching the sheer genius in action. There is nothing to match the sight of imperfections being ironed out right in front of your eyes and perfection emerge ultimately, every time.
Luckily for bowlers like Warne or Murali, unlike Federer’s rivals, they could build their fames by bowling at others.
Sports is an exception and occasionally cinema. The closest a common man comes to understanding a genius is when he watches a Federer in action or a Sachin in motion.
Federer is a symphony on court, poetry in motion. You give a set of words to a great writer, someone like Naipaul, and he knows how best to phrase them. You throw a ball at Federer and he knows how best to place it. It is sheer exhilaration that one feels, when Federer is at his best. The best part is that he never needs to be at his best to better his closest rival. One common argument that is thrown against acknowledging the greatness of Federer is that he never had great rivals. The fact could well be that Federer never gave that opportunity to anyone, of becoming a great rival. He just steamrolled over every opponent, never permitting anyone to grow in confidence and pose a challenge to his supremacy. Except Nadal, at French Open. Had Nadal or Safin and Roddick for that matter, been playing in any other era they would not have been ordinary mortals.
My firm belief is that the day Federer decides to win the French Open, he will win. How often have we seen him drift into a period of nothingness, then suddenly decide it is time to go home and majestically wrap up the match in no time? How often have we seen Federer serve more aces than his reputedly-big-serving opponents? When Federer steps onto the court, he fights against himself. The day he decides to lose, others can win. Otherwise, ‘don’t even try, pal!’ (Federer might have been joking – but was he? Every opponent knows he meant it and sadly for them, he was stating the truth). Federer’s genius is defined by one word – invincible.
Sachin’s genius is composed of a different concoction. His flaws and vulnerabilities are there for everyone to see and exploit, whenever he permits them to. His flaws have been analysed by so many experts so many times that if you add them all and if an ounce of truth is there in them, Sachin would have been relegated to the archives of cricket statisticians’ laptops. There are very few people who have kept a billion hearts throbbing and fluttering for seventeen years. When Sachin first walked into the international arena, every heart was secretly praying for the kid to succeed. If you had thought that it was because he was a kid – pause, the hearts are still praying. Sachin doesn’t need any prayers though. There is something right about every stroke he plays and he plays every stroke. The balance, the timing, the grace all make time stand still. Even when he ducks awkwardly under a searing bouncer, his determination is stamped over it.
Sometimes Sachin is an intelligent bowler’s easy prey. If he had fallen to a particular ball playing a particular shot, he is most likely to play the same shot off the same ball and sometimes fall again. The intelligent bowler doesn’t realize that Sachin will keep playing the same shot not because he can’t play it differently but because he wants to play the same shot that failed him and succeed. He will keep failing till he succeeds. Once Sachin masters his failing, the intelligent bowler will have to start raking up his brains again to spot another flaw, not knowing that Sachin will probably be more eager than him to know the next flaw – so that he can fix it. Haven't we seen him paddle-sweeping straight to the fielder repeatedly till he gets the stroke right and beats the fielder by an inch - looking past the spectator's frustration (oh! why cant he try some other shot), it is the same obsessive urge for perfection on display.
Sachin has many detractors. But will any of them dare not to watch him when he is in action. He may not match a Lara or Steve Waugh in snatching victory from jaws of defeat. But when Sachin plays, winning or losing become secondary in its truest sense. There is nothing to exceed the sheer joy of watching the sheer genius in action. There is nothing to match the sight of imperfections being ironed out right in front of your eyes and perfection emerge ultimately, every time.
Luckily for bowlers like Warne or Murali, unlike Federer’s rivals, they could build their fames by bowling at others.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Nandigram - The Left hand of violence
After the right wing violence in Gujarat comes the left handed punch in Bengal. Gujarat violence was easy to understand and classify - religous hatred and an orchestrated communal outburst. But Nandigram is difficult to comprehend. Partly because media coverage has been patchy. There have been allegations and equally strong counter-allegations in press coverage that has negated the impact of the gory violence in Nandigram.
Communist violence is no less disgusting than communal violence. A fertile well-literate Bengal has been kept under the poverty line by the communists for decades. But nobody seems to bother. Jyoti Basu walks high among politicians even as, say, a Lalu is villified for the same crime. It is a never-ending wonder, how communists have been able to be perched on to their moral high grounds despite their dismal records in Bengal and even in Kerala.
At the end of it all, I know nothing of Nandigram violence. Was it the fault of communists or the alleged-Maoists? What is the difference between the two clans - are they not supposed to be bound by the same idealogy? But there has been something brewing in Nandigram that has made the air putrid there - the stink left by the violence can be sensed though not proven.
Misplaced faith in any idealogy - be it religious or political, be it right wing capitalism or left wing socialism, seems to yield the same result. Hatred. Violence. And finally loss of faith - in anything.
Communist violence is no less disgusting than communal violence. A fertile well-literate Bengal has been kept under the poverty line by the communists for decades. But nobody seems to bother. Jyoti Basu walks high among politicians even as, say, a Lalu is villified for the same crime. It is a never-ending wonder, how communists have been able to be perched on to their moral high grounds despite their dismal records in Bengal and even in Kerala.
At the end of it all, I know nothing of Nandigram violence. Was it the fault of communists or the alleged-Maoists? What is the difference between the two clans - are they not supposed to be bound by the same idealogy? But there has been something brewing in Nandigram that has made the air putrid there - the stink left by the violence can be sensed though not proven.
Misplaced faith in any idealogy - be it religious or political, be it right wing capitalism or left wing socialism, seems to yield the same result. Hatred. Violence. And finally loss of faith - in anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)