Knowing limits

There are times when you need to be told the most obvious things. Advice is not always the esoteric or the deep things that only the wise may know. Sometimes, wisdom lies merely in applying that most uncommon of things - commonsense.

Like, this advice by Tiru would seem almost silly, except if you think back on how often you have failed to live by it.

Peelipey saakaatum acchirum appandam saala miguththup peyin - Tirukkural

Light though the peacock feather is, loading too many of them can break the axle of a cart - Loose Translation

Think of it how you will. I mean, like, you can think of the jobs that you can do in a jiffy without any feeling of strain. Even such jobs, when you take on too many of them to be done day in day out can cause you insurmountable stress. You know that tale about the last straw that breaks a camel's back? This Kural talks of very much that thing...only it uses peacock feathers instead of straws. So, yes, each individual job may cause no great pressure but if you keep piling them on, you WILL hit your breaking point.

Or, you could think in terms of alienating people. You may be strong and each individual enemy you make may be just a peacock feather. Make enough of them and the sum total of them all may prove to be strong enough to destroy you.

You can consider the applicability in a variety of ways. Like not engaging with a friend for a day...no big deal. Allow the days to pile up and you'll hit a point when the friendship has ceased to exist. And so on...

You CAN take things lightly when they come singly. But allowing them to accumulate...THAT's a problem. (AH, that reminds me of another application of this kural. In my procrastinating days, postponing one small job was no big deal. It would only add 15 minutes to the next day's work. But when the postponed jobs keep adding up...) AND, yes, it is oh so easy to keep accumulating those peacock feathers.

So, there. Even if it is peacock feathers, keep a count of how much you are accumulating so that you keep it within limits. Else they could end up breaking your back.

Fortune magnet?

Who does not want to attract good fortune? It is all fine to tout the merits of sacrifice and the benefits of renjunciation. BUT, even when it comes to that, you prefer that you have it first and renounce it yourself; not to never have it OR have it snatched from you. So, yes, you do prefer to have the good fortune of possessing things and of having the choice to hold to them or renounce them.

AND Tiru says this about how to attract good fortune

Aakkam adharvinaaych chellum asaivilaa ookka mudaiyaa nuzhai - Tirukkural

Good fortune seeks out the man of unfailing enthusiasm/unflagging energy - Loose Translation

There ARE these words which can mean two things. Ookkam is one of them, which could either connote enthusiasm or energy depending on context and, here, it could mean either OR both. Essentially, what Tiru seeks to describe is one of your eager-beavers who not only are full of enthusiasm but are also always active.

We tend to understand such things in snapshots and as manifestations of how people behave. Like, at the moment, the chap seems abuzz with both ideas and energy and you just see him that way. But remember those words 'unfailing' and 'unflagging'. AND then delve a bit deeper into that eager-beaver.

To have unfailing enthusiasm is easy when you meet with success all the way. IS that how life is, though? What if this chap is still trying to succeed and has only met with multiple failures so far? You see his enthusiasm and energy of the day in a different way, now, don't you? The character of a man who can still maintain his enthusiasm after multiple failures...THAT's what attracts good fortune eventually.

To have that unflagging energy, you need to have self-belief; you need also to have passion for your goals; and you need to have the perseverance to keep up the pursuit of your goals regardless of stumbling blocks. With all these, it is unlikely that you will be frittering away your energy uselessly. Your passion for your goals will ensure that your energy is targeted in the right direction.

AND, thus, good fortune shall come eventually to he whose enthusiasm is unfailing and whose energy does not flag. To the others, like me, come OTT series and french fries!

The worst sin?

There are times, though, when you would feel that philosophers are not alway blathering fools; that what they say can, every now and then, make sense. You may not agree with them entirely especially when they go overboard with their metaphors. I mean, like, they tend to say that THIS is the greatest virtue but you may disagree simply because they would say the same thing about the next virtue they talk about. ("I bet you say that of all virtues" is something that you could legitimately say to them.) But, there are times when you do agree that what they are talking of IS a virtue (or vice) and, probably, an important virtue (or vice).

Like, when Tiru says this...

Patrullam ennum ivaranmai etrullum ennap paduvathon drandru - Tirukkural

The miserliness that refuses to part with its possessions stands apart as the worst of sins - Loose Translation

Miserliness is not the same as avarice. Avarice is the need to acquire wealth or possessions or position regardless of whether it belongs to another person. AND, in the process of such acquisition, the greedy person does not care for any rules or morality. But, the acquisition of such wealth can also be for the purpose of spending it to lead the sort of life that is coveted by him.

Miserliness, on the other hand, is to keep hold of the wealth that one has and refusing to part with it no matter what the need. The miser will begrudge spending his money on his own food, on the food and health of his own family and, needless to say, not spend a penny to benefit society. If avarice is one side of the coin, miserliness is the other.

Tiru places miserliness as a greater sin than avarice or any of the other sins. THAT comes from a place of pragmatism, one supposes. The avaricious man is still a man of society, willing to engage with the world around him and, thus, capable of being useful to others if only to maintain his ability to acquire more wealth. The miserly man cares two hoots for society; his only goal in life is to safeguard his wealth. Thus, the miser is not even controlled by the pressure of social opprobium.

But, then, since the miser is disengaged from Society, is it not true that he does no harm? Not necessarily true. In the very nature of things, living in a Society entails costs on the individual, especially the rich individual. AND the miser would go to any length to avoid costs. So, yes, a miser CAN do harm. The miser is likely to underpay his employees, make them work in horrible conditions, employ child labor and so on. The distaste to part with his money can cause untold hardship to those who depend on him in one way or the other.

His very miserliness costs society. When wealth is hoarded, that wealth is not deployed in the economy, which leaves Society poorer than it needs to be. AND do not think Tiru has no idea of economics. As I have had occasion to say before, he has devoted hundreds of kurals to economics alone.

Miserliness may or may not be THE worst sin; but we will all agree that it IS one of the sins.

Unless, of course, YOU are yourself that miser!

Chasing the ephemeral

There are times when philosophers actually seem to live in a totally different universe from the one you inhabit. (I have said that before? Privilege of age to keep repeating oneself. After all, one needs some compensation for being called names like boomer and so on.) In fact, there are occasions when you feel that the time to follow philosophers once you reach their universe. Yet...they are also like an itch that you cannot scratch. They stick like a burr in your mind.

Take this thing from Tiru...

Nillaadha vatrai nilaiyina endrunarum pullari vaanmai kadai - Tirukkural

Those who take the ephemeral to be permanent live the basest of lives - Loose Translation

Now, what IS this transient thing that you should not take for permanence? THAT is open to interpretation. In Tiru's times, even life itself was considered a transient thing and, thus, all that you achieve in THIS world is ephemeral; the only permanent thing that you should aim for is Nirvana or the equivalent thereof. So, that could be what Tiru means in this Kural.

Those were the times when wealth was not given the exalted position that it now has attained. So, it could well be that Tiru means that the acquisition of wealth is ephemeral and not to be compared to other goals in life. Remember, though, that Tiru IS the chap who devoted hundreds of kurals to the ways and means to acquire and distribute wealth. So, it is not like he looks down upon wealth per se. IF this is what he means, about wealth being transient, it is probably a more nuanced view. To treat the acquisition of wealth as the goal of life is to chase the ephemeral; wealth can come and wealth can dissipate as readily. (In his times, export meant depending on sailing ships which could be lost at sea and ruin the merchant. No marine insurance, see!) The worthy man concentrates on what he DOES and treats wealth as a byproduct; OR concentrates on wealth as a MEANS to achieve his real goals.

But, then, Tiru did not live in modern times, so his world-view is dated and, possibly, useless. I mean, how can he even know the transcendent importance of 'Likes' and 'Shares' and having your posts go viral on Insta or X? He would treat this whole thing as chasing the transient and mistaking it for the permanent.

I mean, come on, what's good for the president of the USA is good for all of us, no? Who cares what some sort of super-boomer uncle said in his ancient times?