Silence is wisdom?

There are times when you really realise the gulf between the society that was and the society we live in. Ah, no, no, no! I am not about to wax eloquent on what AI is going to do to us. (I couldn't even if I wanted to, considering how little I know about AI? So?) THAT's for another day and for other generations (Z, AA, AB, whatever). Me, I'm still stuck on what social media has done to society.

AND how Tiru has become dated merely because he lived in times when Social media did not exist. Take this for example...

Kallaadhavarum naninallar katraarmun sollaa dhirukkap perin - Tirukkural

Even the ignorant can appear worthy if they keep silent in the presence of the wise - Loose Translation

Well, first of all, we live in times when we do not entertain such elitist ideas as being 'wise'. I mean, what is more elitist than knowing more than others? AND, for Heaven's sake, I am not allowed to share my opinions, loud and clear, merely because the other guy knows the subject and I don't? THAT is precisely the sort of thing that we are fighting against. What about Freedom of Expression, then?

AND what is this 'in the presence of the wise'? I mean, it all depends on which echo chamber you are in, right? You can always find an echo chamber where YOU count as the 'wise', even if you are vehemently propounding the flat earth theory, no? AND, to keep silent on the frivolous grounds of being ignorant will ensure that you never find the right echo chamber and, thus, can never be considered wise. What rubbish.

But, maybe, Tiru's advice has a limited application. In the organisation where you are working, for example, you are not always free to find your own echo chamber. After all, it is your boss/peers who you have to impress and, alas, they are not always cooperative in fitting into your echo chamber. That still does not translate to the company of the 'wise' necessarily. How many of you consider your boss and your peers wise?

True, Tiru probably was well in advance of the chap who said, "It is best to keep your mouth shut and be taken for a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.' THAT chap, too, did not account for Social Media, did he?

Thoughtful remembrance

Did I mention earlier about forgetting people? One of the greatest wonders of the world is how everyone, but everyone, will go gaga about how the most important thing in the world is relationships. AND relationships automatically means people. (Yeah, yeah, I know, but not everyone can create a Microsoft or Twitter OR rename the latter as X, you know. OUR jobs do take second place to relationships...eventually (when you chuck us out) if not now.) AND then, on the heels of sharing twenty memes about relationships, you snap at your significant other about being disturbed when you are answering an oh-so-important email.

Tiru, while on the subject of forgetfulness, has this to say...

Izhukkaamai yaarmaattum endrum vazhukkaamai vaayin adhuvoppadhu il - Tirukkural

Nothing yields as much good as unfailing thoughtfulness towards all people at all times - Loose translation

THAT is what Tiru says. To remember all the people you have interacted with and what they have done for you; to remember what they need and what they care for; and to remember to TELL them that you remember them...THAT yields the greatest of good to you, as per Tiru.

For example, nothing breeds loyalty as much as the 'big man' remembering you and wishing you on your birthday. No? Nothing makes a person as joyous as to have his past achievements mentioned and lauded when he leasts expects it. I can go on and on about how remembering people in a thoughtful manner makes them enthusiastic supporters. (Oh! HR sending out birthday emails is not exactly the same thing. Sorry!)

The point is that when you display that you see them as PEOPLE (and not resources!) and also see them as special in their own way, you cause them to feel that YOU are human, after all, and not just the 'boss'. THAT's when you develop a strong relationship. Two cogs in a wheel only develop friction; it's only two humans who can develop a relationship.

So, yes, Tiru does talk specifically about thoughtfully remembering people. AND calls it the greatest good.

HR, of course, will call it EQ.

Forgetful fame

There are times when I really do not want to write on a topic. I mean, like, if you loved sweets what would you feel about writing about the 'devil sugar'? Or, when you have always boasted about how you are the world's greatest procrastinator, how would it suit for you to be waxing eloquent about a stitch in time saving nine? It is times like that when you feel you missed out on the greatest of human characteristics - Hypocrisy!

What set off that diatribe is coming across this kural from Tiru...

Pochchaappuk kollum pughazhai arivinai nichcha nirappukkon draangu - Tirukkural

Just as poverty destroys knowledge, forgetfulness will destroy one's fame - Loose Translation

You can understand how a person who opens the refrigerator and keeps wondering about what he intended taking out from it...such a person wondering about whether he has a right to be talking about how bad forgetfulness is.

By the way, Tiru is not against the poor. Rather, he makes the point that living in continuing poverty is what keeps them concentrating on the getting of food to the exclusion of any acquisition/retention of knowledge. AND, just as poverty destroys knowledge, forgetfulness will destroy your fame in his opinion.

Actually, elsewhere in these pages, I have mentioned how fame itself may cause forgetfulness. To win fame is to achieve a significant amount of success. THAT success can cause you to forget a lot of things. You may forget those who supported you in your dark times till you achieved this success; you may forget those who were also instrumental in the achievement of this success; you may forget to do the things necessary to KEEP the success once you achieved it. (Like, come on, if you achieve a market success with a product, you think you can just coast on it forever?) and so on.

In other words, forgetfulness can put you on the accelerated slippery slope back to failure. Even if you do retain enough acumen to sustain your financial success, your forgetfulness about people may leave you leading a barren life with none to consider close to you. And THAT, believe me, will eventually feel like failure to you, no matter how many strangers may laud your every tweet. The biggest of failures is to not have a single person to lean back on if you fail.

Tiru is not talking of how you forgot where you left your glasses or your inability to remember the day of the week. He is talking about forgetting the more important things in life. Mislaying friends not mislaying things; forgetting to thank, not forgetting the date; and so on.

THAT forgetfulness could well result in your fame being forgotten by the world. So there.

Knowing limits again

When one talks of anything, there seems to be an idea that there is only one meaning to it. I have had occassion to talk of it before on a different subject. "Don't you trust me?" is a question, for example, which automatically gets answered on the basis of trusting the integrity of the other person. But, it could mean that the distrust is on the knowledge of the other person - as in, I may trust my child not to steal from me but do I necessarily trust him to invest well? It could mean a distrust of some other characteristic than honesty as in, say, do I trust the other person to keep a secret? Generally, this idiotic idea that a word has only one meaning is the reason why people get manipulated very easily.

Take this limits thing for example. In the previous post I had discussed how you need to know the limits of your own capabilities. But IS that the only limit you face in life? Tiru has this to say to prove that there ARE others...

Nunikkombar erinaar aqthiranth thookkin uyirkkirudhi aagi vidum - Tirukkural

To try to climb beyond the tip of the topmost branch of a tree could end your life - Loose translation

Tiru indicates that you need to understand another set of limits. The limits imposed by the environment. If you are in mining and exploration, say, you need to stay within the geographical limits within which you are allowed to explore. Going beyond them may not exactly kill you but it could kill your company. (OR, in this modern world, kill a great many people in that country depending on which country owes allegiance to your company...ouch...which country your company owes allegiance to.)

Which brings me to that other point...the limits imposed by the laws of the country. (AGAIN with the caveat that, perhaps, your company is not big enough to have the laws rewritten) You may find that growing beyond a certain size makes it less profitable for your company; flouting the labor laws of the country causes your company intolerable losses; and so on.

Even when you DO think that you can rewrite the laws, you still need to assess the limits imposed and the cost of having the limitations removed. There HAVE been cases where those costs have been incurred and, thanks to those costs, the company has ended up bankrupt.

In life, it is alright to think of pushing the envelope. The point IS to know WHEN you are pushing it and what is the cost of doing so. Rushing about rashly hither and thither is NOT pushing the envelope. It is to tear it into pieces and later on whining that you did not even know it existed!

Knowing your limits

There is always this tug of war between those who would prefer to work within their limits and those who would try to push the envelope. When it comes to the latter, if they succeed they will be lauded as bold pioneers. If they fail, they will be castigated for being rash fools. And the former? Whether they are playing it safe or being sticks in the mud...THAT decision will depend on their success as well. Like, it WAS playing it safe to stick to film photography as a main-stay business but it was not safe for Kodak, was it?

Tiru is advocating the staid play it safe school of thought here...or is he?

Udaiththam valiyariyaar ookkaththin ookki idaikkan murindhaar palar - Tirukkural

Many have fallen because their enthusiasm made them run ahead of their capabilities - Loose Translation

Tiru is asking you assess your capabilities and plan for what is possible. Which IS conservative advice, yes, but is not exactly a blueprint for sticking in the mud.

The first thing that you should understand is that it is QUITE possible to be rash even when you are sticking in the mud. AND equally as possible to plan conservatively when your business is innovation. Like, a grocery store can overextend itself by trying to become a mall by borrowing hugely. AND a start-up can try being frugal with its finances even while operating at the cutting edge of technology.

In other words, the fact that you are taking a risk by trying to develop a business in an, as yet, unproven area is not a license to splurge capital on huge salaries and plush offices. Fiscal prudence does not mean that you stint on research...but that you squeeze every rupee till it squeaks. Yes, it could well mean concentrating initial efforts on one line of innovation instead of splurging it on various experiments that peter out.

In like terms, just because a business is being conservative in its core areas does not mean that ANY expenditure that they make is necessarily conservative. If such were indeed the case, such companies would only die of technological obsolescence and not because of fiscal imprudence. Well...the commercial landscape is littered with examples to the contrary.

So, yes, when someone advices prudence, it is an idiot whose hackles will be raised even as he screams, "I am a risk-taker!" There ARE such risk-takers - in casinos and dangerous sports and the like - but those are not the ones that the world of commerce chooses to laud.

In general, the practical world prefers those who take calculated risks. AND the foremost calculation you need to make is about the limits of your capabilities.

Precautionary attitude?

There are things that are actually easy to do as well as important. Yet, people suffer, and suffer badly, because of not doing them. You know the stitch that saves nine? So easy to do but, often, so ignored that you kick yourself for not doing that one stitch only when the whole line of stitches gives way when you are in a party. Does that mean that the next time you will take care not to skip doing it? Not really, as experience proves.

And thus when Tiru says this seemingly easy thing to do, all you can do is groan.

Varumunnark kaavaadhaan vaazhkkai erimunnar vaiththooru polak kedum - Tirukkural

The life of he who guards not against misfortune/faults shall be destroyed like a haystack near fire - Loose Translation

Tiru gets cryptic quite often. This 'Varumunnark kaavaadhaan' translates merely to 'He who guards not before the coming'. The coming of what? Voldemort? Ragnarok? Left to interpretation. But, yes, it translates to some evil or the other. AND it is not necessarily always external evil.

Like, say, usage of addictive substances. It is easier to forbear from using them. Harder to give up even when you are a desultory user. Near impossible, depending on the substance, if you have become addicted. So, this kural will mean that it is best to 'stop before the coming of addiction' in this context.

Take the case of a credit card bill. It is easy to pay off in full every time (OR, of course, use it only to the extent where it is easy to pay off.) More difficult when you have maxed it out and are paying off just enough to keep it live. Near impossible once you have started defaulting. (Now THAT is a problem associated with ALL financial debt.) Tiru, therefore, says...

You can go on and on. 

About how small jobs timely done are easy but once you accumulate a ton of them...

About doing small wrongs (like, say, forgetting birthdays) and failing to apologise each time till...

About missing talking to your children all through their childhood till they hit their teens and...

It is easier to push yourself to do those things at the time they are required to be done. THAT is guarding off the evil that can come.

Failing that, your life will crash and burn like that haystack in front of a fire whether or not you realise why it is happening to you. THIS will be the answer to the question that you will then scream to the universe...

WHY ME?

Faultless critic?

Have you seen this thing with people? If there is some meme about the characteristics of a good friend, everyone rushes to apply it to their friends to find out if they are fit to be called friends. If there is a WhatsApp forward about how to test whether a partner is right for you, they'll happily try it out. (AND come out sad at the end of it. Fie you pessimist, this is an optimistic blog.) In whatever circumstance, you'll always see people put themselves in the seat of the critic.

Tiru, though, seems to think that it is not the way to do things. He says...

Thankutram neekkip pirarkutrank kaangirppin enkutra maagum iraikku - Tirukkural

You cannot fault the leader who first cleanses his faults before scanning for faults in others - Loose Translation

So, this leader who Tiru lauds...if he comes across a meme, he will first apply it to himself. He sees a meme about characteristics of a good friend, he applies it to himself to see whether HE fits description of a good friend; if not, he changes himself to suit the description; THEN he applies it to his friends. IF he comes across a forward that is about testing a partner, he...well, he will first see if HE likes the idea of his partner testing him like that before he rushes to test the partner. I mean, yeah, you want your partner to care for you if you are ill; but to act ill and make your partner do your errands...THAT can be seen as manipulative behavior. Tiru, therefore, wants you to sit on the other side first and only then become the critic.

Why only 'leader'? Well, it applies to all people actually. But the one who seeks to lead needs to be better than the rest. To REACH a position of leadership includes making others willing to accept criticism from you. I mean, a leader sets the path for others to follow which, automatically, includes explicit or implicit criticism of whatever paths that they are already on.  A leader has to change thoughts and behavior. If HE fails to correct his own faults, then he lays himself open to serious criticism. (Oh, yeah, you can ALSO become a leader by loudly espousing what people want to do. But THAT would only mean that you are walking ahead of the crowd, not leading them.)

The problem with this is that you need to become faultless first before you become a critic, else you'll be faulted. Big deal! I cannot live without trolling others. So what if I also get trolled?

Hidden desires?

As long as there are societal rules that seek to ensure a moral behavior that does not vibe with human desires, there will always be some desires that remain hidden. This, alas, is NOT an exploration of such desires. For that you will need to look elsewhere in the web. There are, however, times when it is best to hide even your legitimate desires. That is what we seek to explore here. ('When did I seek to explore it?', you ask? IF you have no interest why are you still here? Just for the pleasure of heckling?)

Tiru says this about hiding desires...

Kaadhala kaadhal ariyaamai uykkirpin yedhila yedhilaar nool - Tirukkural

No foe can harm he who does not publicise the desires that he seeks/enjoys - Loose Translation

This was a toughie to translate really. I mean, it is quite easy to say 'hide your desires' but that is not exactly what Tiru means here. You know of people who are private, right? Ask them if they liked the food and, from their reaction, you cannot make out exactly how they felt. Enigmatic...that's the word. 'Hiding' comes from a position of weakness. It indicates a fear of being found out. The enigmatic guy...you just cannot read his mind. Not even to find out whether he intends hiding his emotions or whether it is just you who are failing at interpreting them.

Tiru feels that it does not pay to be too open about what you desire. I mean, yeah, in a negotiation it is very easy to understand, no? If you are sitting across the table with all your cards face up, you are bound to end up with an agreement with measures up to the barest minimum that you are willing to accept. Knowing your desires strengthens the hands of your opponent for then he knows how far he can push the negotiations.

But, it is as much of a problem in other areas. Almost all of life seems to be made up of small and big negotiations. 'Get an 'A' and I'll buy you this gaming device' and the likes are open negotiations. Subtler ones involve non-explicit reward systems i.e satisfying your desires if your actions meet with the other person's approval without any explicit stated linkage between the two. All of social life works on such interactions whether it is intended as manipulation OR it is a natural reaction to the happiness caused by your actions.

The bottomline is that a knowledge of your desires makes it possible for you to be manipulated. The enigmatic man is better positioned to avoid manipulation and, in fact, will prove the better manipulator. Thus, it actually IS best to be enigmatic with enemies/antagonists.

Should you then apply the same across the board? Depends on whether you want to treat the whole world as antagonistic to you. IF you do, if even those around you never know your desires, how can you ever expect them to voluntarity satisfy them? If you keep your desires to yourself and, yet, seek to get them satisfied, you'll need to manipulate everyone to satisfy your desires, thus becoming the toxin in all your relationships. Tiru, here, is only talking of keeping your desires a secret from enemies/antagonists, not that there should be no openness and trust with those close to you.

In short, being an enigma to antagonists is the way to succeed. Being an enigma to EVERYONE is the way to convert everyone into antagonists. Whether that's the life you want to live is your choice.

What remains?

Philosophers will be philosophers. They may have their practical side but, when it comes to the goals of life, they are unlikely to accept what you and I aim for as worthwhile goals. (Yeah, yeah, even you do not accept lolling around in my sofa surfing OTT channels as a worthwhile goal. So?) Even when they ARE being practical, they tend to mix in ideals so that you do not feel too complacent about the life you are leading.

So, Tiru says this...

Echchamendru enennung kollo oruvaraal nachchap padaa dhavan - Tirukkural

What does a person think that he leaves behind when he has helped nobody and thus leaves behind none who love him? - Loose Translation

All that you own ceases to be yours when you die. And, thus, none of it will be associated with you after you have passed. Anyway, THAT association - his house, his land etc - has to be done by people. Once you leave behind no people who want to remember you, all the marks you left on the world will be wiped out.

Tiru is making exactly that point. The only mark you make on the world is the memories that you leave with the people around you. If you have been a miser, hoarding your wealth to yourself and not parting with it to help those around you, there will be nobody who will WANT to remember you. Which means that your memories will be wiped out very soon indeed.

I told you. Tiru WILL get you sooner or later. I mean, yes, if you had spent the money reveling by yourself, you may count as being alive but...

Once you are dead, as far as Society is concerned, you will be dead and gone and...forgotten!