#WHOKILLEDGANDHI?

First, here are excerpts from the statement of Nathuram Godse, during the trial:

“His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence, which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to these slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a dream if you imagine the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day. In fact, honour, duty and love of one's own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust........

The official date for the handing over of power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what the Congress party calls 'freedom' and 'peaceful transfer of power'. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called it 'freedom won by them with sacrifice' - whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country - which we considered a deity of worship - my mind was filled with direful anger.......

He was fully aware from past experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi. Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he has failed in his paternal duty in as much he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power, his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled against Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless........

I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30th January 1948, on the prayer-grounds in Birla House. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually, but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy, which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.”

[Source: https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/nathuram-godse-defence-mahatma-gandhi-assassination-57320.html]

Now, compare the above with what the leader of Khaksars wrote to Gandhi:

“In your so-called prayer meetings which you so hypocritically begin with Koran and Gita ther is not a single utterance of yours about political matters not streaked with bitterness, perversion of truth or revenge against the Musalmans...and it is double clear now...that you are the enemy...of the entire ten crore Muslims of India.  My two months’ personal investigation of the State killings of Bihar conclusively proved that these were planted under your immediate and sole direction.”

Gandhi wrote to M.A. Abdullah from Noakhali, “When all parties become displeased with one it is generally a sure sign of one’s having done one’s duty.”

Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins have recorded in their famous work ‘Freedom at Midnight’ that Gandhi had tried to convince Nehru and Patel to have Jinnah as the Prime Minister for a united India, to avoid partition.  But they would not listen and a broken hearted Gandhi had to report to the Viceroy that he had not been able to carry his colleagues with him. (p-124). 

“Gandhi did not oppose partition simply out of some mystical devotion to Indian unity.  His years in the villages of India had given him an intuitive feeling for the soul of his country.  Partition that intuition told him, was not going to be the ‘surgical operation’ Jinnah had promised Mountbatten.  It would be a sickening slaughter that would turn friend on friend, neighbour on neighbour, stranger on stranger, in thousands of those villages he knew so well....Gandhi’s tragedy was that he had that evening no real alternative to propose beyond his instinct, the instinct those men had so often followed before.  This night, however, he was no longer a prophet.  ‘They call me a Mahatma,’ he bitterly told a friend later, ‘but I tell you I am not even treated by them as a sweeper.’ (p-149)

The authors also record that Mountbatten himself was aware of this rift. ‘I had the most curious feeling,’ Mountbatten declared, recalling that period, ‘that they were all behind me, in a way, against Gandhi.  They were encouraging me to challenge him, in a sense, on their behalf’, they record. (p-195)

And if Gandhi was to keep silent against the partition plan, it was because he felt weak, depressed and forced to accept an argument by Mountbatten that if the assemblies vote for unity, it could be established. (p-205-206).

On 26.09.1947 Gandhi records in his Diary thus:

          “There was a time when India listened to me.  To-day I am a back number.  I have been told I have no place inthe new order, where we want machines, navy, air force and what not.  I can never be a party to that.  If you can have the courage to say that you will retain freedom with the help of the same force with which you have won it, I am your man...”

On 21.10.1947 Gandhi records in his diary thus:

          “...Man has not the power to create life, hence he has no riht to take it.  Yet the Muslims murder the Hindus and Sikhs and vice versa.  When this cruel game is finished, the blood lust is bound to result in the Muslims slaughtering the Muslims, and the Hindus and Sikhs slaughtering themselves.  I hope they will never reach that savage state.  That is their fate unless both the states pull themselves together and set things right before it is too late.”

The recording dated 12.01.1948 by Gandhi in his diary:

          “...When on September 9^th I returned to Delhi from Calcutta, it was to proceed to the west of Punjab.  But that was notto be.  Gay Delhi looked a city of the dead,  As I alighted from the train I observed gloom on every face I saw.  Even the Sardar, whom humour and the joy that humour gives never desert, was no exception this time.  The cause of it I did not know.  He was on the platform to receive me.  He lost no time in giving me the sad news of the disturbances that had taken place in the Metropolis of the Union.  At once I saw that I had to be in Delhi and ‘do or die’....

I yearn for heart friendship between the Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims.  It subsisted between them the other day.  To-day it is non-existent.....I never like to feel resourceless; a satyagrahi never should. Fasting is his last resort in the place of the sword-his or other’s... My impotence has been gnawing at me of late.  It will go immediately the fast is undertaken.  I have been brooding over it for the last three days.  The final conclusion has flashed upon me and it makes me happy. No man, if he is pure, has anything more precious to give than his life.  I hope and pray that I have that purity in me to justify the step.”

How prophetic were those last words.

It was this Gandhi who had already been felled by his own comrades in arms that Godse ultimately brought down with his bullets.  And for what reasons...

On the assassination of Gandhi, Albert Einstein wrote:

“He died as the victim of his own principles, the principle of non-violence. He died because in time of disorder and general irritation in his country, he refused armed protection for himself. It was his unshakable belief that the use of force is an evil in itself, that therefore it must be avoided by those who are striving for supreme justice to his belief. With his belief in his heart and mind, he has led a great nation on to its liberation. He has demonstrated that a powerful human following can be assembled not only through the cunning game of the usual political manoeuvres and trickery but through the cogent example of a morally superior conduct of life. The admiration for Mahatma Gandhi in all countries of the world rests on that recognition.”

[Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahatma_Gandhi]

          When press reporters are said to have approached Sri Ramana Maharshi on the day next to the assassination of Gandhi, Maharshi is said to have stated thus:

“ For the Mahatma’s death in this tragic manner, every person’s heart is mourning.  What is there in particular that I could say?  Who is there who is not grieved?”.

From : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahatma_Gandhi, we also gather that not only after the partition of India, but much before in 1934 also an attempt had been made on Gandhi:

“A prior, unsuccessful attempt, to assassinate Gandhi occurred on 25 June 1934 at Pune. Gandhi was in Pune along with his wife, Kasturba Gandhi, to deliver a speech at Corporation Auditorium. They were travelling in a motorcade of two cars. The car in which the couple was travelling was delayed and the first car reached the auditorium. Just when the first car arrived at the auditorium, a bomb was thrown, which exploded near the car. This caused grievous injury to the Chief Officer of the Pune Municipal Corporation, two policemen and seven others. Nevertheless, no account or records of the investigation nor arrests made can be found. Gandhi's secretary, Pyarelal Nayyar, believed that the attempt failed due to lack of planning and co-ordination” 

[Pyarelal Nayyar, Mahatma Gandhi – The Last Phase,Navajivan, (1956)]

What is wrong with Hindutva?

Identification of oneself with a particular group, clan, community, nationality, language, etc are unavoidable until one has reached a stage when one can live and think beyond these boundaries.

That indeed is a tall order and creates a lot of difficulties in ones socio-economic fronts.

So essentially, these are team building exercises to create communes with identities of mutual trust and benefit so that there is an easy route for various life transactions.

But, as long as these community building exercises remain as mere groupings for ones own survival or the economic success of the members of the group, they do not create much problem, except that others outside the group could feel envious about their success.  But no law on earth can protect those who are not able to build strong teams themselves.  Such methods are called cartelisation and work in the best interest of the group - most often a closed group.  These are primarily with economic success in mind.

The old concepts of cast, community, etc have essential the cartel concepts embedded in them.

When religious groups found themselves under threat or in minority in certain places, they also have had to take upon this exercise for their betterment or survival.

However, whenever there is one cartel formed and found to be thriving or creating problem for the others, there is a tendency for another or more number of cartels to be formed to beat them at their own game.

This game takes place in a continuum.  To find out the root cause, one has to answer whether the egg came first or the chick.

The grouping that is being attempted in India at present, particularly in the past decade with more intensity to create a Hindu identity is a reaction to the identity created in the name of Muslim and Christian religions, in this country.

The groups that have identified with the Muslim religion or the Christian religion may have their own reasons.  But, the fact that their cartelisation has been creating a social stir is undisputed.  Their tendency to give open declaration to their faith and cult, demanding the right to conversion, etc are basically against the accepted norms in this country where it is expected that one is left to be happy with his own faith and that is his or her personal affair.  But to make it into a socio-economic cult has created divides in the society.  This is accepted even in circles of non-believers or atheists.  And there are some people within those denominations also who do not accept these loud mouthed approaches.  But as usual they are not heard. And the present situation does not give much room for discussion on that too.

This polarization is being made use of by some other interests to create a counter polarization in the name of Hinduism.

But these people fail to understand that Hinduism as a concept is allergic to such an identification and is too unwieldy to be compressed into a cartel.

Any one feeling sympathy for a person with a Hindu identity, for his poverty or difficulties due to not being part of a cartel, has to essentially build mechanisms and structures to help him or give him solace. Simply calling upon them to group and form into a party or elect some one to power will not do. For that the primary thing to be done is to do away with cast discrimination. With the major dividing wall of caste, creed and wealth dispositions, there is no meaning in talking about a unity in the name of Hinduism.

The leaders who worked for the rejuvenation of the Hindu faith and who brought back dignity and self respect for those who belonged to that segment and helped the fight against alien rule, again and again stressed the need for this.

If Ambedkar and Periyar preferred the British rule to self rule, it was out of a profound understanding and fear that the change of guard would help only transfer of power into the hands of the powerful section within the Hindu community who were still feudal in mind set.

The leaders who really felt that the people of the country who did not have a system to fall back upon for their survival, engaged in building such institutions.  The Ramakrishna order, Aurovile, the Sathya Sayee trust, etc were commissioned in that direction.

However, some later organisations which also professed such ideals, have become prey to the political climate and have started chanting the mantra of Hindutva as an omniscient panacea for all evils that the society is facing today.

In the process, they fail to understand that they are only giving room for more polarization on the other side, while without caste-based discrimination being abolished, their own intended polarization would not take place at all, in real terms.

This then is going to do more harm than good for their own folks.

At least the 'folks' should understand this, before it is too late.

SRIKALAHASTHI AND THE BREAKING OF THE COCONUT

          When I had booked tickets for me and my son to go to Tirupathi, in a conducted tour, I did not know that we were to be taken to #Kalahasthi temple also.

          Only after returning from Tirupathi, some persons in the bus started talking about whether to go to Kalahasthi or to return to Coimbatore, because it was already very hot.  From the discussion only I came to know that Kalahasthi was a Siva Temple.  Somewhere during my school days, I should have read it, but had not cared to remember it for the details. 

          Then when we reached Kalahasthi, the Guide gave us a brief about the temple premises, that it was known as RaghuKethuSthala and that we should take care to note the gate through which we were entering so that we will return by the same gate to return to the bus.

          On going inside, I saw a board ‘Patala Ganapathy’.  Lord Ganesa Idol was kept in a tunnel more than 20-25 feet below ground level for which there was a window like entry.  One had to crawl through it and then take steps down.  There was a board saying that only 10 people at a time should enter.  But since there was no one around to state whether there were 10 people inside, we had to wait for the persons to come out.  On entering there, I felt even the number 10 was too much.  Because only 3 persons could stand in the place (where the deity was kept) and only one could climb up or down at a time. 

          After coming out and while standing in the queue to have darshan of the main deity, Siva or Kalathinathar, I saw a statue in a sitting posture, with a lot of decoration, to which pooja was being conducted.  I did not remember that it was a Thursday, and hence did not immediately realize it was Dhakshinamurthy, the south facing aspect of Siva.  But a painting above that idol caught my attention.  It was the painting of #kannappanayanar.  

         On seeing that painting, suddenly there were tears in my eyes.  I did not understand the reason.  This painting I have seen in many other Siva Temples also.  But there was some great emotion surging in me, which I could not understand.  When the queue started moving, I also started moving, pushing aside the emotion. 

          After worshiping at the altar of the main deity, when I came across a statue of a king like person with a Siva Linga before that, there again I felt the same surge of emotions and tears were flowing from my eyes.  I restrained myself and then came across an inscription there that it was the statue of Kannappa nayanar.  I thought that it was some king because in my mind Kannappa nayanar was only a hunter.  Then I noticed that it was also written there that it was at that place that kannappa nayanar had worshiped the Lord.  Again I became emotional.  Then I told my son that the statue was that of Kannappa nayanar.  He did not know who it was.  When I started telling him the ‘story’, he remembered it to some extent.  (His second language was Hindi).  As I described him the ‘story’, when I said, Siva came and said ‘Kannappa Stop’, my voice chocked, eyes brimmed again and I could not complete the words. 

I could not understand these emotions.  It was all purely illogical.  I have not given much thought to that ‘story’ of Kannappar.  I can never accept that one would pluck one’s own eyes, that too if a stone was seen bleeding.  Then to attempt to pluck the other one too would be pure madness.  It could not have happened.  That is how my rational mind still thinks. 

But after returning, I read the verses related to Kannappa Nayanar in the #PeriyaPuranam.  

A child called Thinnan was born to Nagan and Thathai after they worshiped Lord Muruga or Subramaniya because they did not have a child for a very long time.  Nagan was the chief of the hunter-tribe of that area.  After Thinnan took over from his father, he came across the siva linga at Kalahasthi and became very emotional and attached towards it (him).  He felt that the Lord was unprotected there from wild beasts of the forest.  So he undertook to take guard.  He found that the Lord was made to starve because there was no trace of any meat provided to him.  So Thinnan, a hunter and who primarily had meat of different animals as his food, could not understand how the Lord could be left hungry without meat.  So he went to prepare meat, ensured that they were tasty by tasting them in his own mouth first and then with water in his mouth, flowers on his tuft, bow and arrow in one hand and the tested and tasted prepared meat on a leaf in another hand, he proceeded to the Siva linga and after sweeping away the flowers decked around the linga by someone else with his chappal clad feet, spat on the linga (conducted purification with water from his mouth),  placed the meat before the linga and decked it with flowers kept in his tuft.  He stood guard throughout the night and with day break, again went for hunting and for preparation of food for his Lord.  He started preparing meat with honey also liberally showered on them so that it will be more sweet and tasty. 

   In the morning, Sivakosariyar, the Brahmin priest who used to worship the same Linga with flowers came and was aghast at seeing meat and bones strewn around his Lord. Cleaning them away, he again poured water on the Linga, worshiped him with flowers and fruits and left.

  In the meanwhile, the other hunters reported the matter of madness of Thinnan to his father.  His father and mother came and tried to take him away.  He refused and stayed back, to protect his deity.

The alternative methods of worship by both these persons continued for some time.  Sivakosariyar was very much disturbed that someone was coming and desecrating his Lord with non-vegetarian stuff.  [After all ‘saiva' meaning 'vegetarian' was itself getting derived from Siva].  So how is the Lord permitting someone to desecrate his premises with such unholy stuff?  He was very much disturbed with these events.  One night, the Lord appeared to the Brahmin in his dream and asked him to be present at the place and watch who was doing it so that he will understand.

As the Brahmin hid himself behind some trees, Thinnan came with his preparations for worship as usual. Then, he saw that one of the eyes of the Lord had started bleeding.  He thought someone had hurt the Lord.  On not being able to find anyone or anything around which could have possibly hurt the Lord, he started trying to cure the wound with some herbal medicines.  (That the Brahmin could not be traced by a hunter is a puzzle to my logical mind).  Then when the wound did not heal and blood continued flowing, he remembered that healing could be done by replacement.  (OonukkuOon).  So he scooped out his own eye with his arrow and placed it on the bleeding eye of the Lord.  The bleeding stopped and Thinnan was exported to the heaven with ecstasy.  He wept with joy and jumped between heaven and earth, that he had been able to cure the Lord’s ailment.  Then the other eye started bleeding.  Thinnan now knew the cure.  So he decided to replace that eye also with his remaining other eye.  But how will he replace it? So to identify the spot he touched the eye of the Lord with his chappal clad feet and was about to scoop out his other eye with his arrow, when the Lord caught hold of his hand saying, ‘Stop Kannappa’. 

*******

This ‘story’ I had felt, was only a treatise regarding how the Lord does not discriminate between his devotees, whether they were vegetarians or not and whatever method of worship is involved.

But the emotions that gushed through me at Srikalahasthi, have made me understand that it was ‘love’ for the Lord himself, deep and unadulterated, which is the fundamental of the so called story. 

And the coconut breaks – it may not have been a story after all.  That was the reason that the emotions were still around.  The emotion of true love - gushing out in the form of tears.

For, what logic does enable us to understand how lush green life emanates out of ‘mundane earth’?

Detachment and compassion

From ‘Fruit Gathering’ by Rabindranath Tagore

“Far below flowed the Jumna, swift and clear, above frowned the jutting bank.

Hills dark with the woods and scarred with the torrents were gathered around.

Govinda, the great Sikh teacher, sat on the rock reading scriptures, when 

Raghunath, his disciple, proud of his wealth, came and bowed to him and said, “I have brought my poor present unworthy of your acceptance.”

Thus saying he displayed before the teacher a pair of gold bangles wrought with costly stones.

The master took up one of them, twirling it round his finger, and the diamonds darted shafts of light.

Suddenly it slipped from his hand and rolled down the bank into the water.

”Alas,” screamed Raghunath, and jumped into the stream.

The teacher set his eyes upon his book, and the water held and hid what it stole and went its way.

The daylight faded when Raghunath came back to the teacher tired and dripping.

He panted and said, “I can still get it back if you show me where it fell.”

The teacher took up the remaining bangle and throwing it into the water said, “It is there.”

*****

One would think whether such behaviour is possible.

We read in the life of people like Sri Ramakrishna where money or wealth or any other entanglements were anathema. Jesus cried, ‘either mammon or God’. He again emphasised, ‘the camel could go through the eye of a needle, but the rich cannot reach heaven’. Still, we consider that these are impractical.

In the life of Sri Ramana Maharshi, there is an incident, reported somewhere, I do not remember where.

A person comes to the Maharshi saying that he has brought a walking stick made out of sandal wood, to be given to the Maharshi.

Maharshi says that there was nothing called his in the ashram and hence asks the person to keep it himself.

The person insists that he has brought it for the Maharshi.

The Maharshi once again tells him that he does not keep any belongings there and the person who has brought it for his (Maharshi’s) exclusive use may feel dejected if someone else takes it.

The person does not still understand the import.  He also does not say, no matter whoever uses it he will leave it with the Maharshi. He again insists that he has brought it for the Maharshi.

While reading this I thought that Maharshi will snap at him saying, don’t you understand?

But Maharshi, still says, ‘since you have brought it for me you may feel sorry if someone else takes it.  So please keep it with you’.

Then the person who has brought it makes a request that Maharshi should at least receive it and bless it.

Maharshi takes it in his hand with a smile, smells it, says ‘it is good’ (nanna irukku) and returns it to that person.

What a compassion!

The Human predicament

On the topic of ‘Nationalism and Extremism’, Aurobindo Ghosh wrote in April 1907 thus:

“The Moderate view is that India may eventually be united, self-governing within limits and prosperous, but not free and great.  The Nationalists hold that Indians are capable of freedom as any subject nation can be and their defects are the result of servitude and can only be removed by the struggle for freedom; that they have the strength, and, if they get the will, can create the means to win independence.  They hold that the choice is not between autonomy and provincial Home Rule or between freedom and dependence, but between freedom and national decay and death.”

          Reading it, one is set to think, how far the argument is logical.  Whether doing away with alien rule itself could bring about development of a nation.  Whether the alien rule itself had not been brought about due to weakness of the personality of the nation as such?  Then, without acquiring the necessary skills for self governance, what worth would be the freedom so earned?

          In fact this question dogged the debate between Gandhi and Tagore in subsequent decades too, when Gandhi gave a call for civil disobedience and Tagore wanted some alternatives provided before pulling down available institutions.

          At the turn of every movement in public and social life, this debate continues- whether we should disown or destroy the existing things to earn or create new ones?  Then how far can be one sure that the to-be-created new models would be really fool proof?

“It is only a partial truth”, says Desmond Morris in ‘The Human Zoo’, “to say that power corrupts.  Extreme subjugation can corrupt equally effectively.  When the bio-social pendulum swings away from active cooperation towards tyranny, the whole society becomes corrupt.  It may make great material strides.  It may shift 4,883,000 tons of stone to build a pyramid; but with its deformed social structure its days are numbered. You can dominate just so much, just so long and just so many, but even within the hot-house atmosphere of a super-tribe, there is a limit. If, when that limit is reached, the bio-social pendulum tilts gently back to its balanced mid-point, the society can count itself lucky.  If, as is more likely, it swings wildly back and forth, the blood will flow on a scale our primitive hunting ancestor would never have dreamt of.”

          The essential question that lies below this debate is as to how long one would tolerate injustice. This question is also discussed by the Hisotorian Dr. Yuval Noah Harari, in his book ‘Homo Deus’. He differentiates between animal behavior and human behavior in respect of fighting for equality.  He shows that in the experiment shown on youtube, the monkey refuses to be administered a different deal than that is provided to his neighbor in the next cage.  Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo

In contrast to this sense of fairness of the monkeys, Harari states about the ‘Ultimatum Game’ that is set between two humans with conditions that (1) Whatever is given to the first person is to be shared by him with the second person (2) It is up to the second person to accept whatever is given or not. (3) If the second person rejects it, both of them do not get anything. (4) These conditions are known to both persons.

He goes on to state that it was found that humans did not behave with the same sense of fairness displayed by the monkeys.  Even if the first person gave away to the second person only a small fragment of what he had actually got, the second person had accepted it. He did not reject it, though he knew pretty well that his denial would also deprive the first person of anything at all. 

The intelligent human thinks that by refusing he is going to lose whatever he has got, even if the first person would lose much more.

Thus we see, that the sense of self protection or gain, weighs more against the sense of justice or the instinct to protest against injustice, in the human.

This brings us to the parable in the Bible where Jesus Christ says in a what the Kingdom of heaven is.  Labourers are hired in a vineyard.  In the evening, when they return after work, each of them are paid the same amount, irrespective of whether they had come in the morning itself and worked all day or had come in barely an hour ago only.  When the persons who came first protest the inequality, it is said, “Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go;” (Mathew 20:14 & 15)

Mistaking the above parable as one pertaining to Economic philosophy, Comrades had condemned it.  But it has been qualified as pertaining to the Kingdom of heaven right at the beginning.  In the Hindu mythology, there is the story of Ajaamila, who was delivered even if he came to the ‘path’, at the fag end of his life.  For that matter, Hindu mythology has been gracious in granting ‘moksha’, even to the opponents of God, just because they came into contact with the ‘God’, even by way of antagonism.

What is true for mundane and earthly matters are not true for other planes.  That brings us to the famous poem of Khalil Gibran on the ‘Two Hermits’.

“Upon a lonely mountain, there lived two hermits who worshipped God
and loved one another.

Now these two hermits had one earthen bowl, and this was their only
possession.

One day an evil spirit entered into the heart of the older hermit
and he came to the younger and said, 'It is long that we have
lived together. The time has come for us to part. Let us divide
our possessions.'

Then the younger hermit was saddened and he said, 'It grieves
me, Brother, that thou shouldst leave me. But if thou must needs
go, so be it,' and he brought the earthen bowl and gave it to him
saying, 'We cannot divide it, Brother, let it be thine.'

Then the older hermit said, 'Charity I will not accept. I will
take nothing but mine own. It must be divided.'

And the younger one said, 'If the bowl be broken, of what use would
it be to thee or to me? If it be thy pleasure let us rather cast
a lot.'

But the older hermit said again, 'I will have but justice and mine
own, and I will not trust justice and mine own to vain chance. The
bowl must be divided.'

Then the younger hermit could reason no further and he said, 'If
it be indeed thy will, and if even so thou wouldst have it let us
now break the bowl.'

But the face of the older hermit grew exceedingly dark, and he
cried, 'O thou cursed coward, thou wouldst not fight.'

Thus, it is a human predicament - whether to fight against injustice and inequality, with the same zeal and self-forgetfulness of the animals or whether to continue on a mercantile path considering that what one gets is better than not getting anything at all. 

The most intelligent among men, try to find out someone amidst their lot with strong animal instincts, to fight their battle, so that, they can themselves sit cozily in their assured comfort zone and await any favourable results in the event of the other one wining.  If the attempt misfires, they will remain unfazed and unaffected.

         

 

 

 

 

 

JUDICIARY UNDER THREAT OR JUSTICE IN PERIL?

Every now and then would come a case of #JusticeLoya or the case of #thedelayedverdictinJayalalithacase or a similar issue to generate debate on the independence of the Judiciary in our country.

          Cho Ramasamy had long ago remarked that to get a favorable verdict in the Court, one has to know the Judges than knowing law. 

          Very many times, it has been pointed out that Courts are called Courts of law rather than as Courts of Justice. It is more so in India. And a very famous Chief Justice of India once remarked candidly, 'we are not final because we are necessarily right, but right because we are final'.

          Even the complications in interpretation of the provisions in the Constitution of India have been blamed on the numerous lawyers who were deployed for the purpose, instead of lay men who could have put it in simple terms.

          But experience teaches us that even simple things could be complicated by intelligent minds.

          First the print media, then the visual media and now the social media have created such a polarization among people that a majority have taken sides and want to argue only the side chosen by them, with brazenness, without an iota of guilt or shame and perpetuate their beliefs to endless  measure.  Thus a considerable number of persons involved in these debates have become lawyers themselves, though not necessarily holding any formal degree permitting them to do so.

          While the very concept of taking sides is anathema to arriving at truth, the judicial principles enabled one to put forth all possible angles for proper consideration.

          In this process employment of competent persons became a sine quo non to win one’s argument. Judicial principles started faltering at this very point.  Because, one who has more resources at one's command can get hold of a better lawyer, who can put forth his side in a better manner than the other one and truth became a prisoner of circumstances and submissions and at God's mercy directly.

          The higher judiciary has become more costly with Senior Advocates becoming an essential requirement if arguments have to be even heard.  The cost of the Senior Advocates ranges from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 15 Lahks - per appearance.  It is carefully worded as appearance because it does not mandate that the advocate may have to even stand up or open the mouth.  Mere appearance when the case is called – even if adjourned by the Court itself, or at the request of the other party/parties.  And such appearances could be endless. Also do not miss the number of Judicial forums and procedures, in every single case.  While for the Government, it would mean only the cost of paper on which the decision to litigate is taken, for the common man, it bleeds the life out of him.  It is the same in the case of a common man's litigation against a corporate also, because the corporates have legal eagles empaneled.  

          When considered that famous Senior Advocates appear in 20 cases on an average per day, one could estimate their earning.

          Compared to the salary of the Judges, these fees are several times high. 

          That would point out the basic pit falls in judicial mechanism.

          If judgment process is so costly, what is the cost of justice?

          If judicial process becomes so complicated and costly, it invariably would become corrupt.  A corrupt judiciary will only enable a corrupt investigation system to thrive. 

          A small step towards solution of the above problem would be to allow the parties to present their side in person, if need be with the assistance of the advocates.  Like in the RTI Act, litigants should be allowed to argue their own cases, without restrictions.  Legal formalities should not come in the way.

          That reminds me of the attempt by the Advocate community trying to step into the RTI Proceedings also, some years ago. Luckily that attempt failed.  But the mechanism of RTI itself became whittled down.

          Along with public education and public health care, police/judicial reforms are urgently required for a just state to exist.

          Otherwise, any number of laws enacted would be of no help.

         

For my Communist brethren to think

Ever since the crisis that started in the USSR in the early 90s, Communism has been on a steady decline all the world over.  India is no exception.

The reason was that they failed to keep their ears to the ground.  They failed to apply reason to politics and indulged in empty demagogy.

Just like the proof of the pudding is in the eating, whether the Communists stood for the welfare of the downtrodden was up to the downtrodden to feel.

Whatever media or other influential classes can propagate, the native intelligence of the people can easily see through.  If the real feeling is there, it would percolate.  The hearts have a language, which is universal for all living beings.  The rational minded persons fail to understand that.  Strategies will not substitute real feeling and intention.  What started as a peoples movement had denigrated into a party politics.

As a result what happened is that instead of real feeling for the masses, those who came to power using the ideology to save the exploited, started chalking out strategies to keep their hold on the power.  The continued hold on the power was expected to deliver the results – in the long run.

But in the long run, power only corrupts and more power corrupts all the more.  Hence, by the time they were not yet satisfied with the increasing and widening of their power base, their descend had already started.

Before they could open their doors to the heaven of their own dreams, they had been toppled. That took away in its Tsunamic sweep, even what ever had been built for common good.

Time and tide wait for no man.

Those powers which have gained from the toppling of the Communists have also the same in store for them.  As long as they do not deliver and keep their sight only in conquering new horizons, they will not be able to assess the sand that gets swept away from under their very feet.

The nemesis for every life is embedded within. It does not join enroute.   

Communism as a philosophy will not die.  It stands against exploitation, of all kinds.  It shall re emerge in some other form, in some other name.  If only people can re-invent themselves and be true to that philosophy. 

And when the people who thought that a free economy is free, come to their real senses and understand that nothing is really free.

Till such time let the ideal rest in our hearts.