Respectable poverty?

There are those times when you feel that the past was a different universe compared to the present. I mean, we all prate (I suppose this is one of those 'Look, there goes Suresh making us run to a dictionary' words. OR, in short, Tharoorism) of unchanging values in a changing world and all that but really? Let us see how many people you can find who will consider ANY type of poverty 'respectable'?

Let us dive right into what Tiru considers poverty that still commands respect.

Keduvaaga vaiyaadhu ulagam naduvaaga nandrikkan thangiyaan thaazhvu - Tirukkural

If a righteous man ends up being poor, he will not be looked down upon by the world - Loose Translation

Now THAT...does that sound like the world you know to you? I mean, come on, how often have you heard, "Vaazha theriyaadhavan" (Chap who does not know life) or some such that castigates such a person as impractical? A person who sticks to his values on a 'let the chips fall where they may' basis is only considered as someone who does not know the 'real' world.

If such a person laments that his righteousness has led him to suffer in life, people tend to be very unsympathetic, telling him that he brought it upon himself. You see, the biggest problem with a righteous man is that he makes you come face to face with your own compromising of your values. So, rather than deal with that guilt, you'd blame that chap for being 'impractical' and, when he laments his suffering, you feel justified in your own compromises.

To actually be respected for being righteous, you need to be self-respecting as well. I mean, if YOU are the sort of person who sticks to your values, come what may, you also need to be the sort of person who can be happy in the poverty that could come as a consequence. In other words, YOU should not be lamenting your poverty but continue to take pride in sticking to your values. THAT is when people could come around to respecting you despite your poverty.

Otherwise, I'd say that the interpretation that some have placed on this kural - that you will not be looked down upon by the wise and, thus, not necessarily all the world - would probably be truer of the reality.

AND the rest of the world will consider YOU unwise!

Self Control

One of the things that most philosophers go gaga about is this weird beast called self-control. AND the way they go on and on about this would make you feel that you have been given a self ONLY in order for it to be controlled.

Possibly true that. I mean, unless there is a huge design flaw (which is also likely), this thing of making all delicious things unhealthy and all healthy things yucky IS, shall we say, insane unless it has been done specifically for the purpose of ensuring that you get an opportunity for this self-control gig. I mean, I am yet to come across anyone who believably says that he salivates at the thought of broccoli and gags at the smells from a bakery or chaatwallah. What sort of design is that, pray, when that green muck is supposed to be healthy and these yummy delights are a strict no-no? Unless, as I said before, someone was trying to ensure that you had ample need for exercising self-control.

Well, then, Tiru proves no exception as a philosopher. He has this to say

Orumaiyul aamai pol aindhadakkal aatrin ezhumayum yemaappudaitthu - Tirukkural

If, like the tortoise which pulls in its limbs and head into its shell, you control your five senses in one life, you shall be protected for seven births - Loose translation

So there. You need to control your sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell throughout life. When Tiru says 'control' what he means is that that your senses are what lead you to temptation and, therefore, you need to either avoid seeing, hearing, touching, smelling or tasting things that can tempt you; OR control your mind from being tempted by what the five senses feed to it. In other words, either avoid the smell of bakeries OR avoid being tempted into trying out those luscious goodies OR both.

Now, this control over your senses and your mind, if you can achieve it over your whole lifetime - or what remains of it - IS what molds your character. You may not carry across births the weight that you put on by giving in to every culinary attraction; but that weakness of character which does not allow you to control yourself WILL carry over. So, this seven-birth protective charm may not be (or may nor JUST be) the karma but also the strength of character that you develop by such self-control. E.O.D Atman meets Paramatman only when it becomes closer in nature to the latter; and it is tough to see Paramatman as a slave to its tongue...no matter how we like to portray and see Ganesha and Krishna. (AND, perhaps, it IS that modak-eating OR butter-guzzling nature, which is given to them, that endears them to us. It makes them seem more human and, thus, more approachable!)

(Oh, yeah, I AM aware that there are other temptation from the other senses as well. The problem is that most such seem to be troll-magnets and, therefore, I'm sticking safely to food. Though, yes, these days one can attract trolls by any culinary ism which is why I avoid the whole lot of them in my post.)

Now, you see, where the problem lies, right? Bingo! It is the belief in these seven births that creates the need for self-control! If you just abandon the belief, if you think that this is your only birth, there you are, free to do what you want.

Alas, not really! THIS birth, generally, happens to be one of the seven when these chaps like Tiru say 'Seven births'. So, if you really want to be protected from trouble even in the current life...

...your five senses need to be under control. Drat!

The greatest joy

The one thing people think they are sure about is regarding what makes them happy. Philosophers, though, seem to be of the opinion that they are wrong about that. I mean, there is even that proverb saying something on the lines of 'When the gods are angry with you, they grant you whatever you desire' or some such. Which goes to show that those gods certainly think that the easiest way to heap misery on you is to give you everything you ask for. Apparently, humanity cannot be trusted even to know what will make them happy.

So, yeah, take recourse to someone like Tiru who tells you what will delight you the most. Even though you did not know that it would. Even though you thought that the exact opposite was what the doctor ordered to make you happy.

Inbatthul inbam payakkum igal ennum thunbatthul thunbam kedin - Tirukkural

When the worst misery - hatred - is vanquished, one gains the best of joys - Loose Translation

Yeah, when everyone knows for sure that to hug hatred to your heart and achieving vengeance is the only way to lasting happiness. I mean, come on, does anyone really think that you can be happy by forgiving and forgetting?

And, yet, think! I mean you developed a hatred because of what? Because someone said or did something that made you happy? No, right? Hatred comes out of something said or done by someone that made you angry. And anger is generally an outcome of hurt.

Then, to hug that hatred to your heart is to constantly remember that moment of hurt. It is akin to clawing a wound continuously and keeping it raw and bleeding. Well, misery of miseries IS right then, isn't it? AND vengeance...when hurt has been kept alive for so long, does ANY retribution seem sufficient? AND will not the perceived insufficiency of the vengeance, keep the hurt alive even after the vengeance is achieved? (Not to mention the fact that the guilt about the acts YOU perpetrated, in the process of achieving that vengeance, kicks in AFTER the dust is settled.)

Not that it is easy to do that. To not seek vengeance does not mean that you can be at peace with the decision. You see, the hatred IS alive, you have only decided to forego the option of acting on the dictates of hatred. So where then is this 'greatest joy'?

THERE, like all philosophers, Tiru expects too much of you. OR, to be more honest, he sets up the ideal for you to aspire to. You see, 'Igal' is not like 'political correctness' as in, being determined by how you behave externally. 'Igal' IS the burning hate you carry in your heart. AND Tiru says you need to vanquish THAT. In other words, you must learn to rid yourself of that hate in your mind.

Now, is it not how we stay unhappy? By storing up all our moments of hurt, periodically taking one or the other off the shelf, dusting it and looking on it in all its pristine glory so that you can relive the hurt? If you could only wipe out those hurtful memories, eliminate all that hate...

A man who can truly cleanse his heart of all hate...THAT is the man capable of the greatest joy. Us mango people, we have to make do with the small pleasures of life.

True delights?

The problem with 'True' as an adjective or adverb is that the moment you see it you know that someone is going to rain on your parade. I mean, here you are relaxing with your single malt (OR beer or tequila or whatever, just so I don't get into an idiotic argument about the relative merits of various liquors...OR about the virtues of being teetotal) and your music of choice, murmuring to yourself, "This is bliss' and someone pops up with "Oh, yeah! Do you know what true bliss is?"; THAT puts paid to the evening, let me tell you.

Invariably, that someone IS a philosopher, yes. It is as though that THIS is a badge that identifies a philosopher - this finding of 'true' this and 'true' that. So, how do you expect Tiru to NOT acquire this badge?

Gunanalam saandror nalane piranalam ennalatthu ulaadhoo-um andru - Tirukkural

The only delight of the wise and good is that of good character; all else is dross - Loose Translation

Let us get the translation issues out of the way. 'Saandror' generally indicates 'wise people'. NOW, in those times, apparently 'wise' also connoted 'good' automatically; 'intelligent' was a whole different cup of tea but 'wisdom' also meant that the person concerned was as good as a saint. I mean, these were the times when 'knowledge' itself meant more spiritual knowledge than worldly knowledge, the latter being relegated to the 'skills' department. In these days when worldly-wise is the only wise there is (AND, no, I start from the day I was born when I say, 'these days' NOT from the day I retired!), I make it a point to add '...and good' to 'wise'.

Further, this 'nalan' or 'nalam' meant 'well-being' which can be translated to physical or mental well-being or both; it also means 'good' when it is used as an...err...adjective or adverb. I call it 'delight' because, after all, it was those times when mental well-being and mental goodness were being considered the acme of delight.

So, yes, Tiru says that the only delight that the wise and good seek is the delight that comes from inside...of good character traits. All else that comes is not of great consequence to them. Which, essentially, has passed down through the ages till it was discarded recently. THAT NOTHING is worth gaining at the cost of losing your character. (As someone in the relatively recent past said, "When Wealth is lost, nothing is lost; when Health is lost, something is lost; when Character is lost everything is lost". Who said it? I take no names for, after all, if I do we will only end up in a long discussion about vilifying OR praising the person and totally forgetting the issue we were discussing.)

THAT was the 'wise and good' and what they do. How nice for us that we are neither!

Incomparable Fame

There is this thing about fame. Everyone wants it but even the famous know not if it is lasting. Especially true these days when a viral video or message can yield fame that lasts only as long as it is not displaced by the next one. Ephemeral is a word that would be in over-use these days, when it comes to fame of this sort, if only people believed that words more than two syllables long really exist and can be used.

Now Tiru has his bit to say about it, as usual. The chap seems to have an aversion to leaving any subject alone.

Ondraa Ulagatthu uyarndha pugazhallaal pondraadhu nirpadhu ondril - Tirukkural

Other than fame, which is incomparable, nothing else is imperishable - Loose Translation.

This particular Kural allows itself to be interpreted as 'Only fame is incomparable AND imperishable'. That, though, seems to me like an incomplete understanding of what Tiru wants to say. I mean, Tiru has time and again proved himself to be a nuanced guy. So, how likely is it that he would mean this, leaving people to assume that ALL fame is incomparable and imperishable? Like, a viral meme of today is overtaken by a viral meme of tomorrow, so what is incomparable about it?

The other, more nuanced, interpretation, would be that the fame which comes out of the person being incomparable is lasting fame. Which means that a person who seeks to be the best in what he does or how he comports himself AND succeeds in it; is famous for it - whether it be as the greatest archer, administrator, man of charity, whatever - has achieved lasting fame, fame that may be considered imperishable. 

You know, you CAN slice and dice it too - like greatest author can be genre-wise; can be the greatest of his time and so on. The point is that he who excels AND is famous for what he excelled in has achieved lasting fame.

All else, as some poet or the other is likely to have said, is dross!