I suppose, penance is the nearest word in English for Tapasya.
The earliest encounter I remember to have had with this word is when my elders, my grandmother, mother, aunts etc referred to my ‘waiting’ patiently and intensely. I was watching them ‘brew’ some unusual item in the kitchen at our ancestral home (not just a house, then) at our village. It was my grandmother's humble way of passing on the baton to the next generation, when she instructed the daughters/ daughters-in-law to revive some ancient recipe which requires elaborate preparation. I could see why these items did not happen in our routine week-ends even in our city dwellings. As soon as I could sense that they are up to something wonderful, unique, unusual, out-of-ordinary-routine, I was all attention, and even failed to notice that my usual mischief prone schedules faded out. I mustered all efforts to be exceptionally obedient, lest I would be asked to keep myself at a safe distance, while I had decided to be at the hub of the activity, not ready to miss anything. My attempts to ask and find out what it is all about, usually gets warded off in a summary manner, since they themselves needed all their focusing.
During all this, all that they know is that I was around there, unusually silent, and carefully non-interfering. They just feel my harmless presence. This docile effort is amply rewarded, when they offer the first sample-taste of the finished product. This is where they also mention that “he has been doing tapas for this all the while”. I knew this much, that it was some sort of a compliment to me, and not the usual dose of admonishments. Yet, I could not grasp as to what I did to merit that dubious word ‘tapas’. All I did was to focus completely on what was going on. I was so absorbed that I even forgot that I was hungry, and the usual mid-day meal time was crossed over, the women folk too failed to notice it, due to the absence of my reminder that ‘I am hungry’.
A couple of decades later, I had a glimpse of it on celluloid, when I saw movies like “Zanjeer” & “Kala pathar” etc, where the hero retained that grim look all the time, to remind the audience that he carried that main purpose of his life all through, irrespective of the situation outside. Many years later, in a spiritual session, I was told that an intense participation could help reducing the time element in reaching the goals. Such practices required years of ‘doing’ regularly to reach a particular notch level. The word itself, means ‘heat’ (Taap, tapah) at its root. So the process of heating it up was the time consuming element. Heating up to such a point, where the shaping takes place instantly, as with molten metals. Slow heating takes time, we know. Becoming very intense about something would itself hasten the heating process tremendously, is what we learnt. An example we can see is the record-shattering-performances by sportspersons at the Olympics. It is here that individual’s own performance matters a lot, in contrast to other fields like academics, businesses, etc where outstanding achievements do happen but the nature of intensity is entirely different.
How to get at this kind of intense-ness is not of much interest to a casual reader, I agree, and therefore suffice it to say that once it is mastered, enough to be able to invoke it at will, not only spiritual growth, but handling of material aspects of routine life becomes almost effortless.
Psn (27th February, 2010)
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Prayer
Right from early childhood, elders around me attempted to teach me to pray (worship was a monopoly of designated priests, who worship, and then make it easier for us to pray/ask). They even told me what to ask for, when praying to the various Gods in the temples around. The funny mind that I carried, I seldom failed to ask the name of the deity in each temple, and the volley of questions included what type of prayers we could offer to that particular deity. My humble idea was that in case that deity did not specialize in the thing that I asked for, that God or Goddess would be needlessly embarrassed (so I thought!). It could also be that there would be a mutual memorandum of Understanding that they would not encroach into each other’s portfolio.
As I grew a bit more, it then occurred to me that all these Gods had a ‘complete’ data base of events that had occurred and was yet to happen. Then, what is the point in my asking for something? More importantly I liked to know, whether these Gods really require to be ‘told’ what we needed? Because it conflicted with our understanding that Gods are omniscient, in addition to being omnipotent and omnipresent.
The stories of faulty prayers scared me. Some body mis-pronounced ‘Nir-deva-twam’ (‘let there be no competition’ from lower powers), while asking for a boon, to the highest One, and in a hurry asked for ‘Nidrey-va-twam’ (sleepiness). It was granted instantly. The asker of this prayer had to compromise with 6 months of deep sleep every year! I now thought of a bug-free prayer, and chose to accept traditional forms. Even they were in large variety.
The best one seemed to be in a story where a begger turns a negotiator, and makes a proposal that the Other One could not refuse (God-Father movie style)! He told (not asked), “O’ God, by myself, I do not covet for any thing, but let not people call me, your best devotee, a person who is in ‘want’ all the time”. This seemed like a life-time tax payment. No hassles thereafter. Now, it is the botheration of the Other One to worry eternally to keep us above wants. But then, later, it occurred to me ‘What if the Great One feels insulted that we had to ask Him, what we need, for him to really gain knowledge about it?” This is something that He would never disclose to the ‘concerned’ person. One has to be fortunate to deduce from experience that we just never happen to get what we ask, and instead, we get what we did not bargain for. A very inconvenient thing…..
Trust had to step in now. All we can do is to go to him (when we feel a bit run out of battery, not for anything else), and stand before Him. Hand over ourselves completely (any way, that is our ‘status’ even otherwise, at all times). If possible, listen with rapt attention, alertness, awareness, and an empty mind. If there is any communication that is worth while, it has to be only from Him, not from us to Him. If we are eligible, we may get to hear or feel it. Otherwise, out of trust, quietly leave the place, with the confidence that only some benefit could have accrued, which we are yet to know about.
Some how, I feel quite contended with this position, even if the bulk of the people around insist on a loud ‘presentation’ of their charter of demands. Clearly, I am not in their way. Trust works for me. And when I could later see that most of the enlightenments happened in places other than places of worship (not just prayer/asking places), it seemed to embolden my inclination to avoid adding to the crowd at ‘popular’ shrines.
Please tell me if I have been on the negative side of the ‘growth’ with these flawed concept, or is it that I am ‘grooved’ into being ‘pray full’, instead of a concerted effort at a prayer .
Regards,
Psn (27th February, 2010)
As I grew a bit more, it then occurred to me that all these Gods had a ‘complete’ data base of events that had occurred and was yet to happen. Then, what is the point in my asking for something? More importantly I liked to know, whether these Gods really require to be ‘told’ what we needed? Because it conflicted with our understanding that Gods are omniscient, in addition to being omnipotent and omnipresent.
The stories of faulty prayers scared me. Some body mis-pronounced ‘Nir-deva-twam’ (‘let there be no competition’ from lower powers), while asking for a boon, to the highest One, and in a hurry asked for ‘Nidrey-va-twam’ (sleepiness). It was granted instantly. The asker of this prayer had to compromise with 6 months of deep sleep every year! I now thought of a bug-free prayer, and chose to accept traditional forms. Even they were in large variety.
The best one seemed to be in a story where a begger turns a negotiator, and makes a proposal that the Other One could not refuse (God-Father movie style)! He told (not asked), “O’ God, by myself, I do not covet for any thing, but let not people call me, your best devotee, a person who is in ‘want’ all the time”. This seemed like a life-time tax payment. No hassles thereafter. Now, it is the botheration of the Other One to worry eternally to keep us above wants. But then, later, it occurred to me ‘What if the Great One feels insulted that we had to ask Him, what we need, for him to really gain knowledge about it?” This is something that He would never disclose to the ‘concerned’ person. One has to be fortunate to deduce from experience that we just never happen to get what we ask, and instead, we get what we did not bargain for. A very inconvenient thing…..
Trust had to step in now. All we can do is to go to him (when we feel a bit run out of battery, not for anything else), and stand before Him. Hand over ourselves completely (any way, that is our ‘status’ even otherwise, at all times). If possible, listen with rapt attention, alertness, awareness, and an empty mind. If there is any communication that is worth while, it has to be only from Him, not from us to Him. If we are eligible, we may get to hear or feel it. Otherwise, out of trust, quietly leave the place, with the confidence that only some benefit could have accrued, which we are yet to know about.
Some how, I feel quite contended with this position, even if the bulk of the people around insist on a loud ‘presentation’ of their charter of demands. Clearly, I am not in their way. Trust works for me. And when I could later see that most of the enlightenments happened in places other than places of worship (not just prayer/asking places), it seemed to embolden my inclination to avoid adding to the crowd at ‘popular’ shrines.
Please tell me if I have been on the negative side of the ‘growth’ with these flawed concept, or is it that I am ‘grooved’ into being ‘pray full’, instead of a concerted effort at a prayer .
Regards,
Psn (27th February, 2010)
Monday, February 22, 2010
Intimidation
The great scientist Dr. Albert Einstein, is reported to have said this : “It [atomic energy] may intimidate the human race into bringing order into its international affairs" (Albert Einstein).
And even in law, the theory of punishments includes one type of punishment as a “deterrent”, only with this hope of intimidating the onlookers.
What is wrong, in exploiting this vulnerability of being prone to intimidation, when we ourselves are ready to be subjected to intimidation day-in-and-out, in all our activities?
“Everybody” is a gentleman, when there is a policeman around the corner”.
People who genuinely tried “Gandhi-giri” in their real life failed, only because they did not notice the element of ‘intimidation’ by the “media effect” in the examples that the movie ‘Lage-Raho-Munnabhai” had depicted.
The fear of death intimidates us, and we die many times before it really happens.
The ‘vacuum’ after retirement, intimidates people who are otherwise clearly convinced that voluntary retirement is the best option when the work place no more supports sincerity, and when financial considerations are no more valid.
We do many things, opt for many things, merely because we feel intimidated of being left out, singled out, etc.
Oh! Even I seem to be indulging in that needless intimidation, reminding ourselves of the situations that trigger intimidation.
I am tempted to look at “expectation”, as, perhaps the root cause of this intimidation.
We expect that we are allowed to live a little longer, and therefore death finds scope to intimidate us.
We ‘expect’ lots of respect from others, all the time, and therefore that forced ‘ethical’ behaviour intimidates a visible adherence from us all the while.
Try to intimidate a three month old baby with anything, anyways, anyhow…. In all probability, at best, it may find your gesticulations/articulations quite an entertaining amusement!
We settle the score with that child, as soon as it acquires a little bit of ‘self-awareness’ and now starts to choose, relinquishing that priceless ‘choicelessness’ that it had enjoyed as nature’s best benediction for that brief, blissful, baby-period. Now, we recklessly intimidate that child, be it our ‘own’ even, with all samples of direct and indirect intimidations, till the child grows up to repay us in our ‘own’ coin!
That is why perhaps, these wandering mendicants choose to beg just one thing, their food, and declare their “abound” nature by choosing “choicelessness” quite consciously, to be least available to intimidation of any sort for the rest of their lives! They choose the ‘death’ even, in evolved cases/instances.
We can try out in small measures, to test its efficacy, if that intimidation and ‘expectation’ are really related.
Regards,Psn(22nd February, 2010)
And even in law, the theory of punishments includes one type of punishment as a “deterrent”, only with this hope of intimidating the onlookers.
What is wrong, in exploiting this vulnerability of being prone to intimidation, when we ourselves are ready to be subjected to intimidation day-in-and-out, in all our activities?
“Everybody” is a gentleman, when there is a policeman around the corner”.
People who genuinely tried “Gandhi-giri” in their real life failed, only because they did not notice the element of ‘intimidation’ by the “media effect” in the examples that the movie ‘Lage-Raho-Munnabhai” had depicted.
The fear of death intimidates us, and we die many times before it really happens.
The ‘vacuum’ after retirement, intimidates people who are otherwise clearly convinced that voluntary retirement is the best option when the work place no more supports sincerity, and when financial considerations are no more valid.
We do many things, opt for many things, merely because we feel intimidated of being left out, singled out, etc.
Oh! Even I seem to be indulging in that needless intimidation, reminding ourselves of the situations that trigger intimidation.
I am tempted to look at “expectation”, as, perhaps the root cause of this intimidation.
We expect that we are allowed to live a little longer, and therefore death finds scope to intimidate us.
We ‘expect’ lots of respect from others, all the time, and therefore that forced ‘ethical’ behaviour intimidates a visible adherence from us all the while.
Try to intimidate a three month old baby with anything, anyways, anyhow…. In all probability, at best, it may find your gesticulations/articulations quite an entertaining amusement!
We settle the score with that child, as soon as it acquires a little bit of ‘self-awareness’ and now starts to choose, relinquishing that priceless ‘choicelessness’ that it had enjoyed as nature’s best benediction for that brief, blissful, baby-period. Now, we recklessly intimidate that child, be it our ‘own’ even, with all samples of direct and indirect intimidations, till the child grows up to repay us in our ‘own’ coin!
That is why perhaps, these wandering mendicants choose to beg just one thing, their food, and declare their “abound” nature by choosing “choicelessness” quite consciously, to be least available to intimidation of any sort for the rest of their lives! They choose the ‘death’ even, in evolved cases/instances.
We can try out in small measures, to test its efficacy, if that intimidation and ‘expectation’ are really related.
Regards,Psn(22nd February, 2010)
Ethics Oversimplified
Ethics is prescribed quite often. But its true intrinsic meaning seems quite elusive. Not because it is complex by itself. We make it complicated, by attaching ‘strings’. Why we do it is, simply because, our mind refuses ‘one-way-traffic’. We expect some kind of reciprocal ethics from the ‘beneficiary’ of our ethics.
Even corporate level institutions have tried out that ‘business-ethics’. It does not seem to work. We have been very clever to trade our carbon emission entitlements, refusing to be truly ethical.
Perhaps that is why a question came up, looking out for non-traditional, unconventional, unique definition of ethics. The real search is to find out what would really work.
I somehow found myself oblivious of the concept of ethics for quite a long time. But, having attempted to look at spirituality, quite intensely too, from that ‘ridiculously-early’ age, I was tempted to offer an ‘own’ definition. The global tender allows such kind of a free-bid. The best part is that there is no ‘third’ umpire, to pass a judgement. But if somebody is really interested, and finds it worth trying out, the results are truly rewarding, obviating any need for external recognition, appreciation, acknowledgement, etc.
Regards,
Psn (22 February, 2010)
The question:
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100221091942AAlsTcW
What is your own definition of ethics?
When I mean ethics I mean doing the ethical thing or not (doing the good or bad thing)
My answer:
"Own" definition is ridiculously simple.
When the finger on our left hand is injured, the fingers of the right hand do not need any ethics to extend help, nor do they complain that this left-hand-finger is unduly 'pampered' with good bandage, complete rest (as if it works hitherto!), etc. Science tells us that there is "cellular level intelligence" functioning a bit independently (that is why it fights back to survive when an insect bites, without waiting for our 'moral-sanction', even if we were on hunger-strike-unto-death).
By the same analogy, what ever rules we voluntarily adhere to, visualising this one-ness with people, and living/nonliving things around, it can be called ethics.
When we make a humble beginning to visualise, with some trust in nature, we would be blessed with the 'experience' that we were not really limited within our-OWN-body, all the time, but really we were all one and part of the universe. Once this experience dawns, no more ethics are needed. Till then, any "similar" rule with a hidden agenda is self-deceit, in the name of "ethics"
Even corporate level institutions have tried out that ‘business-ethics’. It does not seem to work. We have been very clever to trade our carbon emission entitlements, refusing to be truly ethical.
Perhaps that is why a question came up, looking out for non-traditional, unconventional, unique definition of ethics. The real search is to find out what would really work.
I somehow found myself oblivious of the concept of ethics for quite a long time. But, having attempted to look at spirituality, quite intensely too, from that ‘ridiculously-early’ age, I was tempted to offer an ‘own’ definition. The global tender allows such kind of a free-bid. The best part is that there is no ‘third’ umpire, to pass a judgement. But if somebody is really interested, and finds it worth trying out, the results are truly rewarding, obviating any need for external recognition, appreciation, acknowledgement, etc.
Regards,
Psn (22 February, 2010)
The question:
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100221091942AAlsTcW
What is your own definition of ethics?
When I mean ethics I mean doing the ethical thing or not (doing the good or bad thing)
My answer:
"Own" definition is ridiculously simple.
When the finger on our left hand is injured, the fingers of the right hand do not need any ethics to extend help, nor do they complain that this left-hand-finger is unduly 'pampered' with good bandage, complete rest (as if it works hitherto!), etc. Science tells us that there is "cellular level intelligence" functioning a bit independently (that is why it fights back to survive when an insect bites, without waiting for our 'moral-sanction', even if we were on hunger-strike-unto-death).
By the same analogy, what ever rules we voluntarily adhere to, visualising this one-ness with people, and living/nonliving things around, it can be called ethics.
When we make a humble beginning to visualise, with some trust in nature, we would be blessed with the 'experience' that we were not really limited within our-OWN-body, all the time, but really we were all one and part of the universe. Once this experience dawns, no more ethics are needed. Till then, any "similar" rule with a hidden agenda is self-deceit, in the name of "ethics"
"Own"-Err-Ship
Quite often I used to wonder, about the nature of this ‘owner-ship’. When I happened to take up the study of law, I found that I really do not own my own house property for which I paid adequate consideration ‘ in full ‘ and final settlement. The document is registered, and everybody is ready to call me ‘owner’ of this piece of property. And yet, in India, a democratic country, the President of the country is the true owner of the entire country! We are allowed to hold that property only ‘during the pleasure of the President’. Of course, basically, this law intends to facilitate ‘acquisitions’ for public purpose. And if necessary, to oust or outlaw an undesirable citizen, stripping him or her of all the titles to these properties.
Even before that, I found people find it difficult to ‘own’ moral response-abilities for many simple miss-haps that occur in normal routine life. And yet, they find ‘own’ brother, sister, relative, etc being the root cause of their misery in life. They struggle to retain that ownership helplessly. We retain ‘ownership’ to ‘apart-ments’ , though in the very same building.
How to really own something, is in-deed a confusing question.
Some asker finds it amusing to tickle the most intimate relationship of ‘spouse’ with this ‘ownership’ issue, and further nudges it with the child-ownership.
Why not answer it, even if only to further confuse, is what I felt. But the benefit is that some re-look at the concept happens, what ever it ‘takes’.
When we find that we err in ownership-related-issues, we do not find enough time to look at it in detail. Children start disowning their parents when they step into teenage. That is the price the elders end up paying, when they try to exclusively try to own their children, refusing to own up the responsibilities for their own inadequacies in bringing them up.
Welcome to take a look at the question now, if you happen to own a little bit of ‘nerve’ having read this far.
And, no strings attached, for I quite understand how economical and viable it is, to own a stoic silence, instead of venturing comments/view/opinions etc, eitherways!
Regards,
Psn (22nd February, 2010)
The question:
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100221152415AAgIOVh
Are you the owner of your body or the one who you married to? if both own each other then what they fight for?
in this world every body just says that o my husband/wife owns my body and we can not do without each other. BUT when the child arrives the owners starts showing the rights and duties to each other. why ?and time comes when go for separation or devours.ha ha ha .SO WHO OWNS WHO?
My answer:
Until a few decades ago, the small islands of Andaman and Nicobar were used for punishing the freedom fighters. "Kaala Paani ki Sazaa" was the term used. People were tied by chains to their hands and feet, whipped with sharp whips, and dirty water poured over the blisters, so that the tiny wounds and blisters become pus-wounds, and a very slow torturous painful death is caused. The people who were thus chained, seemed to 'enjoy' it, and even mocked at the punishers saying, "we will take birth yet another hundred times, and be ready for similar death. How are you going to make sure to come to do it again to me?"....
Today, many of the tourists report having 'experienced' a strange high-energy in those condemned cells, when they visit those ancient jails.
The punishers physically tried to claim the ownership of those living 'bodies' of the prisoners.
The prisoners declared their freedom for the next hundred similar-torturous-births.
The results are seen today by the fortunate few tourists who are alert, awake, and aware.
..
We own those for whom we are ready to give up ourselves unconditionally. (ourselves too, included).
Even before that, I found people find it difficult to ‘own’ moral response-abilities for many simple miss-haps that occur in normal routine life. And yet, they find ‘own’ brother, sister, relative, etc being the root cause of their misery in life. They struggle to retain that ownership helplessly. We retain ‘ownership’ to ‘apart-ments’ , though in the very same building.
How to really own something, is in-deed a confusing question.
Some asker finds it amusing to tickle the most intimate relationship of ‘spouse’ with this ‘ownership’ issue, and further nudges it with the child-ownership.
Why not answer it, even if only to further confuse, is what I felt. But the benefit is that some re-look at the concept happens, what ever it ‘takes’.
When we find that we err in ownership-related-issues, we do not find enough time to look at it in detail. Children start disowning their parents when they step into teenage. That is the price the elders end up paying, when they try to exclusively try to own their children, refusing to own up the responsibilities for their own inadequacies in bringing them up.
Welcome to take a look at the question now, if you happen to own a little bit of ‘nerve’ having read this far.
And, no strings attached, for I quite understand how economical and viable it is, to own a stoic silence, instead of venturing comments/view/opinions etc, eitherways!
Regards,
Psn (22nd February, 2010)
The question:
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100221152415AAgIOVh
Are you the owner of your body or the one who you married to? if both own each other then what they fight for?
in this world every body just says that o my husband/wife owns my body and we can not do without each other. BUT when the child arrives the owners starts showing the rights and duties to each other. why ?and time comes when go for separation or devours.ha ha ha .SO WHO OWNS WHO?
My answer:
Until a few decades ago, the small islands of Andaman and Nicobar were used for punishing the freedom fighters. "Kaala Paani ki Sazaa" was the term used. People were tied by chains to their hands and feet, whipped with sharp whips, and dirty water poured over the blisters, so that the tiny wounds and blisters become pus-wounds, and a very slow torturous painful death is caused. The people who were thus chained, seemed to 'enjoy' it, and even mocked at the punishers saying, "we will take birth yet another hundred times, and be ready for similar death. How are you going to make sure to come to do it again to me?"....
Today, many of the tourists report having 'experienced' a strange high-energy in those condemned cells, when they visit those ancient jails.
The punishers physically tried to claim the ownership of those living 'bodies' of the prisoners.
The prisoners declared their freedom for the next hundred similar-torturous-births.
The results are seen today by the fortunate few tourists who are alert, awake, and aware.
..
We own those for whom we are ready to give up ourselves unconditionally. (ourselves too, included).
Monday, February 15, 2010
Rebellion
Most parents of the present day seem to have had the ‘bitter’ taste of this, around the same time, the time when their children clock between 15 and 20 of age. And then it ‘settles’ down (either ways)!
I was wondering whether the question would help us re-looking at things that do matter, even in the midst of our busy-packed-life.
I quote two of the interesting questions. Both these are of wide applicability, and so please do not look at the persons asking. It is the questions representing most common minds.
Regards,
Psn(15th Feb, 2010)
Defiance
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AupoERbf7b7kVlJgVF7OSbqQHQx.;_ylv=3?qid=20100213230957AAw6nDp&show=7#profile-info-ed3c4bcf8ff77a0a7f9283f0d3068a39aa
I am father of two kids, girl aged 15 and son 12. we are from a middle class joint family.?
both my kids are good in studies. Off late i have see that my daughter has started answering back and seems to have become defiant. she is still good in studies and when reprimanded about her behaviour even feels sorry but it seems that she wants to defy authority. what seems to be the problem
Contrast
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100213033827AAxqITF&r=w#NbUvWzq9WThW9GWqYeRc
Do you think Logic has no place for Emotions?
Are they poles apart?Thank you.~Smile :)
I was wondering whether the question would help us re-looking at things that do matter, even in the midst of our busy-packed-life.
I quote two of the interesting questions. Both these are of wide applicability, and so please do not look at the persons asking. It is the questions representing most common minds.
Regards,
Psn(15th Feb, 2010)
Defiance
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AupoERbf7b7kVlJgVF7OSbqQHQx.;_ylv=3?qid=20100213230957AAw6nDp&show=7#profile-info-ed3c4bcf8ff77a0a7f9283f0d3068a39aa
I am father of two kids, girl aged 15 and son 12. we are from a middle class joint family.?
both my kids are good in studies. Off late i have see that my daughter has started answering back and seems to have become defiant. she is still good in studies and when reprimanded about her behaviour even feels sorry but it seems that she wants to defy authority. what seems to be the problem
Contrast
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100213033827AAxqITF&r=w#NbUvWzq9WThW9GWqYeRc
Do you think Logic has no place for Emotions?
Are they poles apart?Thank you.~Smile :)
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Hierarchy of Relationships.
Once we settle down into our allotted seats in a train for a long journey, we look around to see what kind of people we are going to put up with, for the rest of our journey. Our mind starts calculating, tabulating the ‘type’ of people, as they appear to be when we just look at them. Now if somebody smiles lavishly at us, just at the first sight, our mind races to find out whether they are going to ask us to exchange for a more comfortable berth, move away our luggage to some other inconvenient corner etc. Some of us even try to restrict our ‘return’ smile within a safe limit. Later on things may change.
Now if the very same person comes to our workplace, where we are playing the role of a receptionist, we offer the first smile, and they return it with a casual acknowledgement, and both know, that there is no big risk involved in this smile.
These are small examples of the beginning of a relationship. At work place, a new comer, a new recruit, finds it the first concern to decide the hierarchy of relationship before even settling down into the job. People who attend to calls during a emergency(fire, earthquake, inundation etc), do not get this chance to pick and choose, and have to rush to save any person they come into contact first, and then look at salvaging the material things, and the building itself at last.
What kind of concepts we hold, in deciding our own private list of hierarchy of relationships would eventually decide the very quality of life! That is why, perhaps, the concept of ‘arranged’ marriages is not able to hold in the present day life. The support of large families to give ‘structural’ corrections when needed, to the ‘smooth’ flow of this relationship is absent, and there is not much scope for amicable adjustments. Or is it that the present ‘pattern’ of nurturing the relationship creeps into the ‘way of choosing’ a life partner?
Then, when a child is born, how does the child begin relating to us. No smile, no language, no self awareness for a while etc. We think we are ready for a healthy relationship. But if the child itself is not quite healthy, then how does this relationship take shape? What about the next child? What about the grand-parent’s view towards the child? How does a kindergarten teacher begin relating with the fresh batch of tiny tots? A nurse had to re-arrange the hierarchy of patients according to the rate of recovery, intensity of ailment, vulnerability of relapse etc (in an ideal situation, if it is an ideal nurse).
Then the social relationships. A friend’s friend remains a friend only till the friend remains a friend, in the normal course. This pattern is common even in case of relatives through ‘family’ relationships (in-laws, cousins, likely-claimants-of-share-in-property, ‘non-performing-assets’, etc).
When we suddenly find an insect taking a casual stroll over our body, the first thing that occurs to us is whether it is going to cause any harm, injury, hazard etc. Our mind looks at our ‘established’ list of relationships we have stored in our memory to ‘judge’ how fast we are going to react (in fortunate cases, act).
Technically, the meaning of ‘hierarchy’ runs as …… (the dictionary meaning):
“A hierarchy is an arrangement of objects, people, elements, values, grades, orders, classes, etc., in a ranked or graduated series.”
My point here is, are we aware, what is happening within us, when we lay down a ‘procedure’, a structure, and, do we re-assess’ our concepts, to evolve as a better human being, in the process of re-aligning our relationships, its hierarchy, with people and things around?
Regards,
Psn (13th February, 2010)
Now if the very same person comes to our workplace, where we are playing the role of a receptionist, we offer the first smile, and they return it with a casual acknowledgement, and both know, that there is no big risk involved in this smile.
These are small examples of the beginning of a relationship. At work place, a new comer, a new recruit, finds it the first concern to decide the hierarchy of relationship before even settling down into the job. People who attend to calls during a emergency(fire, earthquake, inundation etc), do not get this chance to pick and choose, and have to rush to save any person they come into contact first, and then look at salvaging the material things, and the building itself at last.
What kind of concepts we hold, in deciding our own private list of hierarchy of relationships would eventually decide the very quality of life! That is why, perhaps, the concept of ‘arranged’ marriages is not able to hold in the present day life. The support of large families to give ‘structural’ corrections when needed, to the ‘smooth’ flow of this relationship is absent, and there is not much scope for amicable adjustments. Or is it that the present ‘pattern’ of nurturing the relationship creeps into the ‘way of choosing’ a life partner?
Then, when a child is born, how does the child begin relating to us. No smile, no language, no self awareness for a while etc. We think we are ready for a healthy relationship. But if the child itself is not quite healthy, then how does this relationship take shape? What about the next child? What about the grand-parent’s view towards the child? How does a kindergarten teacher begin relating with the fresh batch of tiny tots? A nurse had to re-arrange the hierarchy of patients according to the rate of recovery, intensity of ailment, vulnerability of relapse etc (in an ideal situation, if it is an ideal nurse).
Then the social relationships. A friend’s friend remains a friend only till the friend remains a friend, in the normal course. This pattern is common even in case of relatives through ‘family’ relationships (in-laws, cousins, likely-claimants-of-share-in-property, ‘non-performing-assets’, etc).
When we suddenly find an insect taking a casual stroll over our body, the first thing that occurs to us is whether it is going to cause any harm, injury, hazard etc. Our mind looks at our ‘established’ list of relationships we have stored in our memory to ‘judge’ how fast we are going to react (in fortunate cases, act).
Technically, the meaning of ‘hierarchy’ runs as …… (the dictionary meaning):
“A hierarchy is an arrangement of objects, people, elements, values, grades, orders, classes, etc., in a ranked or graduated series.”
My point here is, are we aware, what is happening within us, when we lay down a ‘procedure’, a structure, and, do we re-assess’ our concepts, to evolve as a better human being, in the process of re-aligning our relationships, its hierarchy, with people and things around?
Regards,
Psn (13th February, 2010)
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Are we an " ATM " for tolerance?
Very recently, I got into an argument with a lady who works as a cashier at a Bank.
Calling this conversation as an ‘argument’ , I am aware, is a bit of an unjustified allegation on this lady, since we both know very well that she holds me in great esteem, and would hardly think of proceeding beyond a ‘strong protest’, whenever I try to ‘suggest’ some changes in the ‘way of looking at things’.
This time, the discussion was about a very practical problem, which does not seem to have any real solution. The timings for making cash payments were from 10 am to 4 pm. Once the payments are ‘authorized’ on the computer system for payments, it is expected that a cashier should find ‘no reason’ to effect the cash disbursements. But when internal vouchers for sundry payments are kept pending, and released at the very last minute or even a few minutes after that, it amounts to almost a ‘blackmail’ on the cashier (“try and refuse it, and face the consequences” is the subtle message). Whenever a cashier attempts to protest this needless delay, the tactical use of power, the superiority, the linking up of ‘other instances where the cashier would need / depends on ‘sympathy’ of that superior, etc, comes into play! Now even if this cashier approaches a higher authority, this immediate ‘boss’ would whisper “Sir, there was a request from our valuable customer, not to close the cash till they come for an urgent ‘late-payment’, and so I had to use these internal vouchers to hold the cashier back from closing the cash”. It is altogether a different issue as to for whom this customer is really valuable (we know, Diwali comes every year!). There are however, genuine situations, where it is quite reasonable to allow an occasional late payment if somebody’s life, which is indeed universally valuable, is to be saved, with timely purchase of medicines, hospital expenses, with the money withdrawn. Any cashier would readily and proudly respond to such ‘genuine emergencies’. But commercially, this ‘late payment’ tendency is nothing new. It is a kind of sadism. When the accounting was manual, the timings were 10 am to 1 pm, then it was 2 pm, and after the back-office functions got automated, the timings were upto 3 pm, and later upto 4 pm. But irrespective of the closing times, the tendency was to ‘request’ for late payment after the ‘closing hour’, whatever the time be. What would they do, if it is made 24 X 7, to satiate this sadism, I wonder.
My part of the argument arose only after this lady happened to mention about a colleague of hers, who ‘ensured’ that when he was at this payments counter, the internal vouchers came well before noon! And seldom the habitual late coming customers thought of ‘not taking a risk’ with this cashier, and made it well ahead of last quarter of the closing hour! The lady could not become so strict like this colleague of hers, and yet she could not afford her own lenience simply because she could clearly see that her ‘accommodative nature’ was mostly misused or abused.
That is exactly where I had something to say. When we are “indecisive” even about the reason for which we happen to tolerate something, it really adds up to lots of stress, tension, and all that unwanted medical residues in our body over a period of time. The bulk of today’s health problems are owing to the present day situations where fail to cope with our indecisiveness. Please look at the situations…
The bus/train is getting late, and we have to choose between a costlier mode of transport and risk waiting for that regular bus (the auto, taxi fellow knows, with longer delay, he can quote a premium rate!).
The wife brings breakfast only at the last minute, and the spouse ‘utilizes’ the time to wear the shoes even, ties the lace, and reluctantly compromises ‘dry-cleaning’ the eating-hand wiping it hard on a nearby cloth, whether it be his own pant/trousers, before eating (instead of that comforting clean hand wash), before nibbling at that ‘quick’ breakfast (‘quick’ is a generous word to replace that ‘delayed-hence-brief’ breakfast. But the real test is when the breakfast comes in bits and pieces ………. One chappati/dosa after the other, from the tawa…. With that irritating ‘just a minute…’ dialogue with each refill (the hubby is indecisive, choice between getting late, and fighting early hunger. She has her own reasons … ‘did I not put up with your idiosyncrasies, when you chose to invite your friends for a late dinner, when there was a list of groceries yet to be bought since a week ago? The left over vegetables are stale and unfit for guests to be fed.'…
The teenager does not bother to inform when he/she is going to be late reaching home, and the tension is mounting with all the wild imaginations (what could have happened to her/him!)…
The other way, we happen to reach a bit late while visiting an old couple (a courtesy call to that elderly relatives), and the only stupid thing we did is that we informed them of our likely hour of visit. They now ‘use’ it as a weapon, saying “I was WAITING for you right since ‘X’ (so-and-so hour) today …”. Our ‘second track within’ echoes…. “Even otherwise, you were not so preoccupied with anything at this age, so there was no tangible loss, due to your stupid ‘WAITING’…till we came.”
Time is not the only thing that tests our patience. Space also. The person seated next, in a bus, keeps pushing us beyond the seat even, or leans on our shoulder to have a quick nap. Worst is while standing in a local train/bus, … invariably it is the other fellows elbow that finds its sure target our back of the head with that unexpected ‘knock’ (anything else would not have provoked our abrupt outburst, which even we regret, very painfully, later!). In a tight squeezed office, the next-seat-colleague, seems to enjoy nudging the chair, making his way past us from our ‘behind’ , and we end up spoiling that document with an ugly stroke of pen across, due to the unexpected jerk(by that fellow ‘THE jerk’).
Apart from time and space, there is another category which comes under an abstract concept ‘habitual offenders’.. We are tired of helping regular ‘borrowers’(whether it is cash or in kind), who lean heavily upon social norms like close relatives, friends, colleagues etc. They too test our tolerance levels. Once their ‘crisis’ situation is over, they are back to their basic tendencies /pattern /inclination /weaknesses/etc, to yet again create the same/similar crisis, to ‘invoke’ our ‘take-it-for-granted’ type of help. We succumb usually, unwilling to be ‘branded’ as an un-helping/miserly fellow.
There is a long list(we all are reminded of our own unique stock of ‘pet-peeves’).
The point is, how to manage the mounting tension, the accumulated stress/strain, due to countless ‘tolerances’ we are forced into, day in and out, throughout the life?
Not everybody is ‘abled’ to communicate dexterously, to counter the other fellow successfully. So, the ability to put up has to come from within, and end within us, and it has to be quite practical….. Self-deceit would not work. We need ‘strong’ reasons, to be able to put up with such situations. When the reasons are unshakeable, our indecisiveness gets drastically reduced, and adverse consequences on health are far reduced. Our mind would subdue considerably, and not force us to visit a psychiatrist. (The suggestion I offered to that lady constituted a bit elaborate narrative, but it sounded quite convincing to her. I am simply unable to think of attempting here, since it would only end up in testing the tolerance level of your patience yet again!).
I wonder, if that great preceptor “Patanjali” had also thought of this aspect, when he chose to begin that great monumental work “Yoga Sutras” with a strange opening sentence, which means, when translated in English as, “And now Yoga….” (Nothing else seems to work in life……. is the implied meaning!!!).
Regards,
Psn(11th February, 2010)
Friday, February 05, 2010
Working woman
The style of the question, the choice of words is what persuaded me to attempt an answer.
Whether it is happening or not, whether it is practicable in present day situation or not, at least in India, for thousands of years woman has been placed at the highest pedestal and they richly deserved it too. Nature has designed a woman to be emotionally more capable, and perhaps, the ancient Masters, realizing their worth, had assigned them certain way of life (the traditions, rituals, customs etc). The women did perform well. They were the lamp/light/torch bearers of the family in particular, and society at large.
When this is not happening now at that level, for whatever reason, it looks reasonable that why not at least let them enjoy an ‘equal’ footing with her counterpart, by becoming capable to ‘earn’ money? To most people, a working woman seems a win-win situation. I was amazed to find a question which emitted a different kind of fragrance! The asker presupposes that it is only about disadvantages, and seeks to know how bad the situation would become.
Unless somebody seeks to delve deeper, I found it reasonable to just give a passing reference to deeper aspects, than elaborate on concepts that ought to be “a subject matter of solicitation”
Regards,
Psn
The question
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100204043100AA1hO91&r=w#NbUvWzq9WThW9GWqYeRc
Disadvantages of working woman?
what are the disadvantages of a working woman for her family..
My answer:
More than a good answer, it requires a broad perspective to appreciate it.
The simple reason is, the question seeks an answer that can form a bridge between logic and emotion.
Please see, a woman works for income, whether she is going to be the sole bread-winner or to supplement the income of another person in the family, so that the standards of living can be better.
A woman who has to remain as a "home-maker" (whether by some compulsion or choice), has to shoulder the responsibility of nurturing emotional bonds within the family members (by sacrificing herself as a giant shock-absorber of all kinds of adverse situations the family has to face outside and even within the family, due to present day life-style, etc).
We are not trying to look at how far a woman is going to be successful. The question is how to "measure" the worth of both these, and strike a balance. The yardsticks for commercial contracts and emotional bonds are entirely different.
And that is why, the disadvantages need not be there at all, or it could be full of disadvantages only. Emotional bonds are entirely trust based. Commercial commitments are performance based. Each family member has to realise this in depth, if the family has to encourage a woman to work. In fact in an ideal situation, every human being, every citizen should work productively, so that nation prospers. May be we need not insist for 'payment' or compensation for what we work for. But in practical life we see, even families expect a 'milking-cow' (milch animal) as a prospective bride. That is why, it needs a large heart to appreciate the depth of the question.
The question deserves appreciation for its innocence (the question implies "how badly is my family going to miss my love and affection, when I stay away during the working hours")
Whether it is happening or not, whether it is practicable in present day situation or not, at least in India, for thousands of years woman has been placed at the highest pedestal and they richly deserved it too. Nature has designed a woman to be emotionally more capable, and perhaps, the ancient Masters, realizing their worth, had assigned them certain way of life (the traditions, rituals, customs etc). The women did perform well. They were the lamp/light/torch bearers of the family in particular, and society at large.
When this is not happening now at that level, for whatever reason, it looks reasonable that why not at least let them enjoy an ‘equal’ footing with her counterpart, by becoming capable to ‘earn’ money? To most people, a working woman seems a win-win situation. I was amazed to find a question which emitted a different kind of fragrance! The asker presupposes that it is only about disadvantages, and seeks to know how bad the situation would become.
Unless somebody seeks to delve deeper, I found it reasonable to just give a passing reference to deeper aspects, than elaborate on concepts that ought to be “a subject matter of solicitation”
Regards,
Psn
The question
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100204043100AA1hO91&r=w#NbUvWzq9WThW9GWqYeRc
Disadvantages of working woman?
what are the disadvantages of a working woman for her family..
My answer:
More than a good answer, it requires a broad perspective to appreciate it.
The simple reason is, the question seeks an answer that can form a bridge between logic and emotion.
Please see, a woman works for income, whether she is going to be the sole bread-winner or to supplement the income of another person in the family, so that the standards of living can be better.
A woman who has to remain as a "home-maker" (whether by some compulsion or choice), has to shoulder the responsibility of nurturing emotional bonds within the family members (by sacrificing herself as a giant shock-absorber of all kinds of adverse situations the family has to face outside and even within the family, due to present day life-style, etc).
We are not trying to look at how far a woman is going to be successful. The question is how to "measure" the worth of both these, and strike a balance. The yardsticks for commercial contracts and emotional bonds are entirely different.
And that is why, the disadvantages need not be there at all, or it could be full of disadvantages only. Emotional bonds are entirely trust based. Commercial commitments are performance based. Each family member has to realise this in depth, if the family has to encourage a woman to work. In fact in an ideal situation, every human being, every citizen should work productively, so that nation prospers. May be we need not insist for 'payment' or compensation for what we work for. But in practical life we see, even families expect a 'milking-cow' (milch animal) as a prospective bride. That is why, it needs a large heart to appreciate the depth of the question.
The question deserves appreciation for its innocence (the question implies "how badly is my family going to miss my love and affection, when I stay away during the working hours")
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Mirror Neurons
The inclination and intensity of the thought-process contributes to attitude formation, and it largely gives a strong sense of direction, even bye-passing the ‘indicative’ destiny/destination, I would dare to say.
My answer to a question about the possibility of a ‘mirror neurons’ phenomenon seeks to look at a deeper aspect, leaning upon the popular acceptance that philosophy is obviously much deeper than what the eye can behold! Irrespective of whether my answer finds patrons or not, it is an opportunity that I would never like to skip, to indicate something that cannot be put into words, especially when the situation allows me to assume a position of ‘you asked for it’!
psn
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100202031320AAIXBc4
The question:
What is this sudden fascination in philosophy and the meaning of life?
The last 5 years or so I would say that I am quite unmotivated to do much of anything besides being extremely persistent in pursuing the knowledge of truth. I've noticed a sudden trend forming within the last year or two which is only speeding and multiplying rapidly thanks to the discovery of our 'mirror neurons'. I see it coming from everywhere and I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of you reading this are going through the same thing or something similar?
My answer:
Ah! Two things.It looks sudden. But though logically difficult to accept, experience (when perception deepens beyond sensory levels), would reassure that it took quite long enough to 'develop' such inclinations. Yet, if the logic within is restless to 'know', please look at a wider cross-section, and we would notice people slipping too often into short term priorities, and even getting stuck inextricably. A logic of negation ("not this, not thus", and therefore something else) would show the pointer to this truth.Second, the majority is only amongst those who read. We have that 'inbuilt' perception to just look for what we really want to find, and we happen to feel that there is a lot of it around. It is more of a psychological phenomenon. Look for white shirts on a street, and we might get to see a lot of it. Try for blue instead, and we would be seeing lots of it. We get polarised to 'like-minded' when we are intense enough. It is an entire phenomenon by itself. Elaboration takes us across a wide range of deep subjects with tremendous relevance too. But what is happening is quite significant, and 'noticing' it speaks of yet greater significant aspect , "the awareness". Good going.Best wishes.
My answer to a question about the possibility of a ‘mirror neurons’ phenomenon seeks to look at a deeper aspect, leaning upon the popular acceptance that philosophy is obviously much deeper than what the eye can behold! Irrespective of whether my answer finds patrons or not, it is an opportunity that I would never like to skip, to indicate something that cannot be put into words, especially when the situation allows me to assume a position of ‘you asked for it’!
psn
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100202031320AAIXBc4
The question:
What is this sudden fascination in philosophy and the meaning of life?
The last 5 years or so I would say that I am quite unmotivated to do much of anything besides being extremely persistent in pursuing the knowledge of truth. I've noticed a sudden trend forming within the last year or two which is only speeding and multiplying rapidly thanks to the discovery of our 'mirror neurons'. I see it coming from everywhere and I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of you reading this are going through the same thing or something similar?
My answer:
Ah! Two things.It looks sudden. But though logically difficult to accept, experience (when perception deepens beyond sensory levels), would reassure that it took quite long enough to 'develop' such inclinations. Yet, if the logic within is restless to 'know', please look at a wider cross-section, and we would notice people slipping too often into short term priorities, and even getting stuck inextricably. A logic of negation ("not this, not thus", and therefore something else) would show the pointer to this truth.Second, the majority is only amongst those who read. We have that 'inbuilt' perception to just look for what we really want to find, and we happen to feel that there is a lot of it around. It is more of a psychological phenomenon. Look for white shirts on a street, and we might get to see a lot of it. Try for blue instead, and we would be seeing lots of it. We get polarised to 'like-minded' when we are intense enough. It is an entire phenomenon by itself. Elaboration takes us across a wide range of deep subjects with tremendous relevance too. But what is happening is quite significant, and 'noticing' it speaks of yet greater significant aspect , "the awareness". Good going.Best wishes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)