A human tortoise?

There is really no point in blaming philosophers for only preaching that which you do not want to practise. I mean, seriously, if you truly wanted to do something and a philosopher eggs you on to do that exact same thing, would you treat him respectfully as a sage? Like, if someone were to tell you, 'Eat, drink and be merry', do you treat him with the respect due to a wise man? (Ah, No, No, No! Don't tell me you do because you can use him to counter all those others who push you to abstinence. For him to BECOME someone worthy of being pushed as a counter-argument, he has to have done something ELSE.) So, yeah, what the philosophers say generally tend to be unpalatable.

So, here goes Tiru with his

Orumaiyul aamaipol aindhadakkal aatrin ezhumaiyum yemaappudaiththu - Tirukkural

Like the tortoise which pulls in its five protrusions into its shell in times of trouble, if you can control your five senses in the face of illegitimate temptation in one birth, it will benefit seven births - Loose Translation

In a way, I have taken liberties with the translation. See, the Kural would only say, 'Like the tortoise, if you can control your five in one birth, it will benefit your seven births'.

But if the tortoise permanently shrunk its limbs and head into its shell, it is hardly likely to live, is it? The tortoise does that only in times of danger. So, if YOU are to do the controlling of your senses, WHEN should you choose to do that? It's not like Tiru is asking you to wilfully play blind or deaf or whatever. So, then? It's only in times of temptation.  But, then, are ALL temptations likely to be dangerous? Perhaps not. I have taken the position that only illegitimate temptations are a problem. (But, yes, if you will classify as temptations ONLY those desires that are illegitimate, then you can forego the adjective.)

Controlling anything does not necessarily mean stopping it. When you control the flow of water, you do not necessarily always completely close the tap, do you? Tiru is not a saint, only a philosopher. AND he is a practical chappie. So, what he means is only that you should control the ways in which you use your senses, not that you should apply total restraint and become a Rishi.

But, yes, he does not say you should NOT apply the restraint, either. He does prescribe restraint though not abstinence. But the restraint he prescribes here will only benefit you for seven births. Whereas the abstinence of a sage is supposed to take the soul to nirvana and thus escape the cycle of births and deaths in toto.

If you do not believe in this theory of reincarnation, you can apply it like the whole world seems to be applying the theory of karma. 'Karma will get you', 'Karma is a bitch' and so on, meaning that, even if there is only one life, karma will keep lurking around and 'get' you, sooner or later.

Nowadays, Karma is in a hurry and does not have the patience to wait around for the next birth. This kural, being a spin-off of the karma theory, will also mean that the benefits of the karma it prescribes will redound to you in this birth. IF, however, you fail to live by it...

BEWARE. Karma will get you in this birth! Makes me feel better that I actually believe in reincarnation, after all!

Judge not by size?

The easiest way for people to judge is by size. 'Small equals weak; weak equals insignificant' is about the most simple and, possibly, unconscious judgments that people make. Obviously, that's among the more stupid judgments that can be made but, hey, when has the fear of being seen as stupid ever stopped anyone from doing anything? Especially when the majority of the world agrees with you?

Of course, philosophers are not stupid and, thus, Tiru has this to say about it.

Uruvu kandu eLLaamai vendum urupperumthaerkku acchaani annaar udaiththu - Tirukkural

Do not despise the small; they could be very important, like the small linch-pin of the wheel of a large chariot - Loose Translation

Without the linch-pin, the large chariot will be useless. Thus, the small man who you meet may be the key person in a large enterprise/endeavour. Judging his importance by his size would be folly.

'Small', however, is very easy to interpret in terms of physical size alone. But, perhaps, Tiru was not necessaily being that literal. When people talk of 'small people' derogatorily, it is not always the height of the person that they consider; it could, and most probably is, their position in the organisation/society. A short rich man is not met with this contempt in comparison with even a tall poor man.

That, too, is folly. It could well be that that person, lowly though you may think him to be, may be a key person in his own capacity, like that linch-pin. Such people end up being ignored when they are present but be missed badly when they are absent.

A 'lowly' person may carry the seeds of greatness in him which has not yet had time to flower. What would you have seen in a Dhirubhai Ambani in his early days? So, even if someone is in an insignificant position and not a linch-pin in any activity, he may have the strength and determination to hold up a chariot, given the opportunity. AND could well search for and seize the opportunity in time.

Judging a person based on what he is at the moment can be folly. Instead, judge everyone on his potential.

Easier said than done? Of course! Why else am I dispensing advice instead of acting on it?

A plastic mind?

The problem with being human is that, most of the time, we really do not know who we are or who we ourselves want to be. Like, so you yourself love partying or do you do it because you cannot digest the idea of being left out of the activity of your colleagues? Do you feel joy in screaming at the top of your voice in a quiet place or are you conditioned to think that screaming IS joy? How much of what you like is liking for that activity and how much is merely not liking the idea of being the outsider?

Tiru has this to say:

Nilaththiyalbaal neerthirin dhatraagum maandharkku inaththiyalba dhaagum arivu - Tirukkural

Like water takes on the characteristics of the land it is in, the minds of people get molded by the company they keep - Loose Translation

There is hardly a need to belabor the fact that water can become muddy, marshy or flow clean depending on the nature of the land it flows (OR stagnates) in. Tiru says that, in like fashion, your mind adapts in tune with the company you keep.

So, yes, if the chaps around you are into the esoterica of dark matter and black holes, you'd perforce be interested in such things. Else, obviously, you'd change your company because their conversation would put you to sleep. If your company is deeply into applying rocket science to predict the gyrations of the stock market, you'll need to dance with the best of them or jump out of that group into another that is more interested, say, in the gyrations of El Nino. And so on...

It is not merely in WHERE you apply your mind that peers are such an influence. They can also be a big influence on WHETHER you apply your mind at all. As in, ANY political grouping or grouping based on a strong ideology, will perforce have limitations on how you can think. You are absolutely proscribed from any thought that sees the other party as possibly right in any given issue; and, likewise, prohibited from seeing anything wrong in whatever your side has chosen to support. So, yes, you'll slowly realise that the only way to avoid being canceled is to follow the leaders and NOT to think for yourself.

In like manner, whether you treat life as a stern and earnest thing where you ought to spend every hour of every day in making money; whether you treat life as a ball and sponge on friends and relatives as necessary; whether your leisure is spent in activities like hiking or skydiving or scuba diving OR in the time honored tradition of the couch potato lying around eating popcorn while watching the IPL; whether...you get the point. The way you lead your life can well be the effect of how your thought processes were molded by the company you keep.

In other words, Tiru has presciently presented the idea of how your own personal echo chamber will mold you. It behooves you, therefore, to be careful in picking the right sort of company so that your personal echo chamber works in your favor.

Otherwise, you'll probably be dancing to your doom to the music of your own Pied Piper!

The foremost strength?

I don't know how it is in general but Indian philosophers tend to think of their current idea as the 'foremost' idea. Or, perhaps, it is just a linguistic...umm...idiosyncracy. You know, like the 'mother of all battles' etc sort of hyperbole. So, at any point in time, one finds that the foremost virtue is the virtue under discussion only to discover that there is another 'foremost' virtue a couple of sentences down the manuscript. You need to brush it aside much like you brush aside this GOAT (Greatest Of ALL times, in case you have just crawled out from under your rock) reference to cricketers that varies from one IPL match to another.

So, then, when Tiru says this, you need to stop mentally judging him for scattering his 'foremost's across his Kurals. THAT 'foremost' maybe a linguistic style issue but what he is saying is not untrue.

Vinaiththitpam enbadhu oruvan manththitpam matraya ellaam pira - Tirukkural

The foremost strength needed for executing a task is firmness of mind; all else comes a distant second - Loose Translation

Tiru sets aside even talent and knowledge as secondary to a firm and determined mind when it comes to effectively finishing a job. To conceptualise a task, to strategise and plan it, to have the abilities to do what is necessary to carry it out - all of that, in his opinion, is secondary to the will of the person to do it.

AND why would he not consider it so? I mean, have you not met with people with great talent for, say, writing, AND who have honed their craft to perfection but who do not finish a single book. Where would, say, a Stephen King be without his determination that kept him rewriting his first book over and over again?

How many good public policies stay in the files of government because the rulers do not have the will to pursue them to conclusion? The greatest plans and strategies will languish in moldy papers (in decaying chips? Perhaps!) without a determined person who will see to their implementation on the ground. The perseverance to overcome all obstacles, to course-correct where necessary and complete the job would not exist without that firm will. The weak of mind will abandon the job at the first obstacle.

A meticulously planned strategy will be seen as such ONLY when it is implemented. Otherwise it will only be laughed at as Mungerilal ke haseen sapne.

I read something somewhere which encapsulates this very well - 'Vision without implementation is mere hallucination'. AND implementation requires the firmness of will which Tiru sets above all else.