Tolerance

There are those days when you sit at the laptop and find nothing funny to say (Not all the time, thank you.) Then you see a friend's status about tolerance and what he says strikes a chord in you. The sort of things people want you to be tolerant about is, indeed, amazing.

I mean, suppose you hit your new school for the first day and your classmates say, "You are skinny and black while we are well-built and fair. Never mind. We will tolerate you", do you really feel all warm and fuzzy, and friendly with the lot of them? Or you move cities to take up a new job and your boss says, "Well - your English accent is kind of funny. But we will tolerate you, nevertheless", do you feel that THIS is the place where you want to work for the rest of your life?

The word 'tolerant' somehow gives me a feeling of a person holding his nose and swallowing his bile, while manfully trying not to scream out his dislike. The very word 'tolerance' gives me to understand that there is something to be 'tolerated' - as if it were something obnoxious and the other person is generously putting up with it. If someone did show 'tolerance' to me, I rather think that he will not endear himself to me.

But, surprisingly, it seems that the best that we humans can do, when it comes to interacting with people who are in some way different from us, is to be 'tolerant'. There is this quality of 'open-mindedness' - of being able to look on differences and embrace them, unless they are immoral, illegal or both, that seems to have been relegated only to the dictionary as being unfit for practical use. Hence, we all need liberal doses of tolerance to even deal with different dietary preferences and sartorial inclinations. So, it is not surprising that our 'tolerance' gets tested to the limits when skin color differs or, horror of horrors, the other person calls on the Divine by a different name.

I have always felt that the very word 'tolerance' holds within it the seeds of intolerance. The moment you talk of tolerance, someone or the other pops up and says, "How long and how much are we supposed to tolerate?", sooner or later. THEN, even a Rip Van Winkle, who had been in a coma for the last twenty years, realizes that he has been gritting his teeth and swallowing his bile, in addition to being in a coma. The fact that you were not even aware of all the suffering that you put up with adds insult to injury and you start looking around for the nearest cudgel to bash up these sly people who so troubled you.

The world can do with more understanding - and, above all else, the understanding that people, who are different in some way from you, are not merely to be tolerated but accepted. Tolerance, I suppose, is much better than intolerance but, if tolerance is the best that Humanity can aspire to achieve, it does not exactly say volumes about the goodness of human beings. I mean you are not really held up as an example of goodness if all you can do is weakly protest, "But I never did anything bad".

But, then, are we still living in times when human beings thought that they had it in them to be or become noble?

Dependence?

Paradhinam prana sankatam

Loose translation: Dependence on others is distressing to the soul

This is one thing that put paid to my budding career as a Wodehousian character - you know, the sort of guy who leads a carefree life cadging funds from his friends and family. There I was, merrily planning for a life in which I neither toiled nor spun but gently flitted from friend to friend, lightly nicking a thousand here and a five hundred there to accommodate my modest needs. Then, some busybody friend (prescient and taking preemptive action against my cadging from him? Maybe...people are SO devious) shows me this saying. Huh! Distressing? THAT is not quite what I want for a life.

I was not willing to take it as true, right away. One does not just abandon one's pet projects like that. When he explained, I could sort of get his point, though. I mean, if I had only one friend and the chap went away on a long holiday, whether or not it would distress my soul, it would distress my stomach - if I ran out of money before he came back. Besides, even with many friends, if they wanted nothing from me (if they wanted something, it would be inter-dependence, not dependence, right?) they could just refuse to give me my money. (These modern people are SO ungenerous). One would then have to go find new friends, tap friends after carefully checking whether they are feeling generous (or weak-minded) at the moment and all that. Too much hard work and THAT would certainly distress my soul.

You know what, I have found that people can get dependent even when it is not a matter of survival. Some depend on one person for affection, love or friendship and are forever hungry to get it. Have you seen someone hug a child too tightly? Does the child smile, hug back and dribble all over his shirt or does it squirm and try to get away? (If you think it will be the former, you have never hugged a child in your life or are only trying to pick a quarrel with me) Precisely the same thing seems to happen when one person so hungrily depends on the other for emotional sustenance. The situation gets so claustrophobic, that the other person tries to escape in any way possible. AND, if it would not be distressing to see that chap run away at the sight of you, you would not be smothering him with your presence in the first place.

The funniest thing, though, is the way people depend on others, whom they never see or even put a face to. I mean, pleasing someone you know is difficult enough, but pleasing a nameless, faceless multitude is impossible. On top of it, if you decide that your happiness rests in pleasing this nameless, faceless multitude, then you ARE doomed to distress. Yet, you decide on a career, even your spouse at times, a style of living, what you eat, how you eat, where you go, how you travel in order to get what you call 'social respect'. Exactly who constitutes this 'Society' I am yet to discover, other than, perhaps, a multitude of other people who are also trying to please 'Society', which apparently includes you. And, yet, none of you actually seem to decide what it is that should please you. There you go, hanging your happiness on 'others', and whether you are happy or distressed by having to pay all those EMIs for the house, car and appliances that you bought to get this 'social respect', only you can say. I, in your place, would certainly be distressed, if I let my personal goals for happiness be dictated by unknown people, who would seldom bother to praise me when I succeed in achieving the goals, criticize me when I fail, and even reset those goals at whim.

But, then, I would not be in your place, would I? After all, if I were the sort to bother about achieving 'social respect', I would not have set out planning to live a life cadging off friends. Alas! Fate sent me that idiot, who spoiled it all for me by telling me this quote!

P.S: A response to a 3-quote challenge, tagged by Rachna

This is intelligence?

EpporuL yAr yAr vAy kEtpinum apporuL mey poruL kAnbadaRivu - Tirukkural

Loosely translation : True intelligence discerns facts based on what is said and not based on who is saying it.

Have you seen this thing about these sayings and quotes? They seem to be designed to make life difficult for you. You go to them, thinking that they will help you to make life easier for yourself, and they send you out with a flea in your ear, and a conviction that life looked a lot easier before you were foolish enough to take recourse to them.

Take this one for example. There you were thinking of life much like it was at school. You sit in class, the teacher squiggles on the blackboard and says this is 'A'. Did you spend time thinking whether it was really 'A' or not OR did you take it for granted that it would be 'A' because the teacher said so? And now this chap TiruvaLLuvar pokes his nose in and says that you cannot lead your life assuming things to be true just because they are said by some people (teachers or otherwise) and not true just because they are said by others (your juniors, the school peon...). Well, you can, but you ought not to consider yourself intelligent if you do.

Being considered intelligent is sort of nice. So, you think that, maybe, you should apply his concepts. Maybe there is an exception only for schoolchildren and adults have to operate by different rules. The problem with it is that it seems to involve too much...err...thinking.

You just cannot take it for granted that pigs can fly, just because your friend says so, and start building nests for them. Nor can you sneer at your foe when he says that pigs prefer sties to live in, at least in comparison to nests on top of tall trees. Just as you were relaxing and thinking that you cannot go far wrong if you believed everything your friend said and disbelieved everything your foe said, this old man from the past pops up and upsets your harmony.

That's fine as far as friends and foes go - they are largely your age group and can hardly be expected to know any more than you. Teachers are all right - they can be trusted to know, or so you think. Then up pops your neighborhood kid - a nerd to end all nerds - and proves her wrong about what she thinks is possible with a Tablet. Huh? You revise your rules and say that if it is Infotech, the young are right and the old are wrong - and your octogenarian grandpa helps you out when you are stuck operating a spreadsheet! This old man from the past really does muck up your life. Centuries gone since he last took a breath, so how did he know about your neighborhood nerd or your octogenarian grandpa or even about Infotech that what he says proves relevant today?

If that were all, it would not be so bad. The problem with the guy is that what he says also means that you cannot assume that a woman dressed differently is 'asking for it', merely because your grandpa said that such was the case. You cannot assume that anyone ranging from a newborn babe to a doddering old man, belonging to a different religion, is out to shake the very foundations of your own, and that killing them will guarantee your own quota of houris in Heaven, merely because your religious leader says so. You cannot assume that there is no value in whatever has been developed or conceived in a different culture, merely because your own leaders have told you that all that is good is only there in your own.

In short, this chappie - TiruvaLLuvar - makes it very difficult to live. Being considered intelligent is nice, all right, but it involves too much hard work - thinking! Being an idiot is so...stress-free.

It is a no-brainer as to what I chose to be and, I am sure, most of humanity agrees with me.

P.S: A response to a 3-quote challenge, tagged by Rachna

Learning teaches humility

Vidhya dadati vinayam - Hitopadesa

Loose translation: Learning bestows humility

Huh! This is truly one for the books. What would be the point in putting in all those hours of work into learning something if you cannot even lord it over others who do not know as much as you do? Imagine being a doctor and not being able to say, "Am I the doctor or are you?" If you had to be humble, you might as well have remained ignorant.

Oh! So you were talking about the fact that the need to be arrogant would be lesser? That if I were learned, then people would automatically look up to me and I would not have to keep telling them how superior I am? So, when I speak to them, I could appear humble and still get respect without having to coerce respect from them by throwing my weight around? If that is what you meant, I am fine by it. I am not all that insecure a person that I would doubt getting respect and would preemptively throw my weight around to ensure that I get it.  Though, if someone fails to give respect...

What??? That was not all that you meant? So, exactly what did you mean? Learning would open my eyes to what is known; what is only believed; what is assumed; what applies only subject to certain conditions, and what those conditions are; and all that? That, knowing all this, I would not be assured of the fact that I am always right and would have the humility to listen and learn from other people? Rot! Your idea of learning seems to consist more of getting to know what you do not know than of getting to know things. Yeah, I know, I know, you will mouth off about "Knowing that you do not know is the first step to wisdom" and all that. Nonsense, I tell you. If that is your idea of learning, then you are a fool. I certainly do not agree and, what is more, almost the entire educational system of the world supports me - so there!

You really rise from height to height, do you not? Learning would expose me to the ocean of knowledge that is out there and would teach me that I had but drunk a drop or two of it? That it would make me feel that having drunk a drop more than the next guy would not feel like such a huge achievement that I would feel pride? Which is how Learning will teach me Humility? THAT shows how little you know about Human Nature. Who is going to bother comparing himself with this ocean of knowledge? I will only compare with the next guy and find that I have drunk double the drops that he has. Of course, it is a matter of great pride!

WHAT??? As long as I continue to feel like that I cannot consider myself wise? That Learning does not merely mean knowing things but to develop my personality, my character - to acquire wisdom? You...ah, why do I bother? You are incorrigible!

P.S: A response to a 3-quote challenge, tagged by Rachna

Tomorrow never comes

A decade and a half, nearly, of working together daily. Of practically living in each other's pockets for days on end. Of finding, thanks to his company, that life can be lived with irrepressible joie de vivre. Of observing, though not learning, that provocation can be brushed away as less than pinpricks. Of finding that, if you are capable of ignoring the prickles, most people can be sweet.

Of shifting to Bangalore, leaving behind, geographically, someone close to you, with the firm thought that absence shall not mar the friendship. Of finding that friendship does last, though we do not meet. Of meeting, once a year, with the same warmth that we used to share when we were together. Of keeping the friendship alive in the mind, but losing yourself in the day-to-day activities of your current environs.

Of learning from someone else that your friend has been diagnosed with cancer in the third stage. Of knowing, shockingly, that he had known it the last time you met and had not let you know by word or gesture. Of talking to a man, still full of cheer, who did not want his troubles to mar your enjoyment. Of vowing to call up more frequently.

Of trying to call up a few times and not being able to connect. Of lapsing back into the routine of the day and letting things slide.

And, now, knowing that THAT lamp of joy is guttering out, to be extinguished some time soon.

When Yudhishtir said that the greatest miracle was that people, seeing others die around them every day, still lived as though they would live forever, he was effectively saying that people ought to prioritize their actions based on the assumption that they may not live to see tomorrow.

The bigger tragedy is to live as though you will be able to connect with the people close to you some time in the future - and finding that THAT is not possible. Regrets and guilt are for the living to experience - and not all the regrets will bring back all those lost opportunities.

His family's will be the greatest loss. Mine is loss enough - and I wish that it were a loss not tinged with regret. Regret that I left for tomorrow what should have been done today.

And a lesson I hope not to forget again.

For some things, sometimes - Tomorrow never comes.

What makes me tick

(My 300th post. Why is it that when you hit a milestone, you suddenly feel that you have to share some wisdom? Though, my wisdom is a sort of oxymoron)

"What makes me tick?" is a question that most of us do not really find an answer for, possibly because we are too busy trying to find out what makes other people tick. When I tried for myself, I find that I do have a few answers but whether they are correct - and, more to the point, lasting - remains to be seen.

Let me first get one thing out of the way. Why I am single is a question easily answered and has no deep insights embedded in it. The most common answer I have heard from other singles is that, "The ones I wanted would not have me and the ones who would have me I did not want". Not true of me. I would have wanted any woman who would have me and, maybe, I would have remained single anyway since, possibly, none of them would have me. I never put it to the test, though, since I never wanted anyone badly enough to have to work for it - and, not being the son of a rich man, I would have had to work for it.

I tried for the answers to my attitude to money, to being a productive member of Society and to my purpose in life. Deep questions, people say, but since I am not a deep person myself, I dredged in pretty shallow waters.

Money

Back in school, we kids used to cluster around the local sweet-shop to buy in the toffees of our choice. We all ended up buying what we liked eating and we would have found the idea ridiculous that we ought to like something else, either because more people were buying it or because it was more expensive. The problem with me is that I never grew up and, thus, I still am immature enough to find the idea ridiculous that I ought to like the food at a 5-Star hotel and not the local eatery. Effectively, therefore, my need for money was seriously lesser than most.

At school, again, there was this great admiration for winning a cup and in one of the competitions. THAT was what we used to think of as success. In a choice of the following options for having a 100m race cup, only the first was considered Success.

1. Win a cup by winning the race.
2. Bet on the results of the Long Jump with the winner of the 100m race and win the cup by winning the bet.
3. Find a couple of lost cups on the road and pick them up.
4. Inherit six cups from your dad.

When I grew up, I found that all of them were considered SUCCESS and the more cups you had, the bigger a success you were, regardless of HOW you ended up with the cups. Of course, you substituted 'money' instead of 'cups' and 'work' instead of 'race'.

Lacking in maturity as I was, I could see that I needed money for my needs but was unable to correlate money with success BECAUSE I was unable to see all these options as being equal measures of success.

Productivity

Being a member of society and using the products that someone in Society was producing, it seemed to me that I should also be producing something of value to Society. My stint at work as well as my observations killed this notion also. Given that the money one earns ought to be a measure of how valuable Society thinks your contributions are, I came to the following conclusions:

1. Growing wheat is less valuable than betting on future prices of wheat.
2. Teaching children is less valuable than selling cosmetics.
3. Teaching students at IIT is less valuable than teaching people how to get into IIT.
4. Producing goods and services is less valuable than trading in stocks of companies that produced goods and services.
...
...
...

The problem for me was that Society valued the least what I valued the most and vice versa. In short, I FELT unproductive when Society thought me productive and Society felt I was unproductive when I thought myself productive. The net result was that I decided to enjoy myself without regard to 'productivity'. Who knows, one fine day, Society may decide to pay me humongous sums for lying around in bed and, then, the world would laud me for my immense productivity.

Purpose:

A lot has been said of the quest for a purpose to life. I am one of those gifted with a complete disregard to having a reason to live. 'I exist, therefore I deserve to exist' sums up my philosophy. Having no pressing desire to DO something with life AND no angst about the purposelessness of life, I am quite content to please myself. AND, since I have escaped all the thickets of thinking that pleasing myself inter alia involved pleasing others, there is little problem involved.

In short, the only person who you can be sure of pleasing is your own self. Provided you really know what pleases you!

The importance of hypocrisy

It is customary, I know, to pick a dictionary and define the word before you go ahead giving out your unique ‘wisdom’ about it. Since, however, I have this irresistible urge to find out whether I have a common-sense, let me go ahead based on the common-sense definition of hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy is understood to mean behavior that is at variance with the stated moral position of a person. We consider a person a hypocrite when his thoughts and actions do not match his words. In other words, a hypocrite is a person who does not ‘Walk the Talk’. A further exception to this definition is that we are not outraged by the hypocrisy of a person who talks like a sinner and behaves like a Saint. You accuse someone of Hypocrisy only when the reverse is true. 

All of us hate hypocrites and want people to shed their hypocrisy. I am afraid that this feeling that the world would be better off if people were not hypocrites is erroneous. We tend to tacitly assume that if people were not hypocrites they would end up ‘Walking the Talk’ i.e their behavior would be as moral as their words. What if they started “Talking the Walk’? 

I know you tend to feel that, even if they did speak out the immorality of their thoughts, you would be better off since you would know where you stood with them. If that were all there was to hypocrisy I would agree with you. The thing is there are a lot of things that get done because of hypocrisy which would never get done otherwise. 

Assume that most of the Companies in a sector actually care more for their bottom-lines than for customer service. As long as everyone keeps mouthing ‘Customer is King’ and does not vent their true feelings, they would not even know that the majority of the Companies feel this way – and the fear of losing market share to competitors keeps them paying lip service to customer care. What if this veil of hypocrisy is torn and someone speaks out about it? Your customer care service – if there is still one – would probably return an answer like this 

Do you think we can hire an army of people to run around at your beck and call? We are in this for profits and are not a Social service. Our people are busy and will get around to your complaint in five or so years time. 

I know everyone is very worked up with Khap Panchayats and their diktats about women. Whatever you may say about them, they are people who ‘Walk the Talk’ – their morals and actions are in sync. Assume that most of the political classes think and act like these people. Now, please tell me, would there even be a discussion on reservations for Women in Parliamentary seats? Would it be better for you to hear the political classes say, “As per our culture, the place of a woman is in the home. It would be against our culture to allocate seats for women in Parliament”? 

I mean, it is only the fact that they need to pay lip service, at least, to women’s rights that is still keeping that Bill alive. If, once, that veil of hypocrisy is torn and they all start talking with no hypocrisy - like the Khap Panchayats – bang goes any miniscule chance of getting that Bill through. (Ah! Do not talk of their being voted out and all that rot. That assumes that there is, at least, one party which honestly believes in Women’s rights or has continued to be hypocritical! In the latter case, it would be hypocrisy that won the day for you) 

Take this burning issue of corruption. Once again, it is hypocrisy that is enabling the legislation that, at least, can attempt to curb it. Assuming that most politicians take the sub-rosa earnings as their right and assuming that they feel free to talk of it, would you not hear them say things like, “You get your stock options and bonuses. We take it by allotting de-notified land to ourselves and in kick-backs. So what is the big deal?” If they started talking like that, do you really think that the RTI act could ever have been passed or would they have shot down the idea saying, “What nonsense! You guys keep your salary details confidential and you expect us to hand over the details of our sub-rosa earnings to the first-comer?” Need they even have thought of paying lip service to the Lokpal Bill? 

The great service that hypocrisy is doing to our social set-up is immeasurable. So, till the time you can ensure that the elimination of hypocrisy will only lead to people “Walking their (current) Talk”, long live hypocrisy.

Disclaimer : I make no claims about the validity of the assumptions in the examples above!

If you liked this you may like to check out the index of other posts of this genre or read a selection of similar posts.

Of Pride and Arrogance

“Don’t expect me to be rising up when the sun rises in the East” 

“The sun does not rise in the East. It is the Earth that rotates” 

From the tone of his voice, I felt for a moment that I had missed out on learning this valuable nugget of information at school. I delved into my mind and found, surprisingly, that this was one of those few bits of knowledge that was still clinging precariously on the slippery slopes of what passed for my brain. 

All of you, I am sure, must have met people like my acquaintance. People to whom every single bit of knowledge seems like a divine revelation exclusively granted to them which they bequeath to you with all the condescension that Moses could have felt in handing down the Ten Commandments. 

To feel proud of what you know is to acknowledge the fact that you are better than you were yesterday. If that pride needs to be bolstered by the assumption that others do not know what you know, then it veers off into arrogance. Arrogance, I have normally found, comes from out of a personality that is so lacking in self-respect that it has to look on the others as being inferior in order to feel worthy of existence. Pride, on the other hand, looks inward for self-respect. 

“I think that this word has been mistyped here” 

“You need to learn to properly spell words” 

When you prima facie presume that the other person knows what you know, you give him the benefit of the doubt and assume extenuating circumstances. This is particularly when you have no reason to know the capabilities of the other person yet. A person secure in his own accomplishments – a person with pride – does not feel the need to put down the other person. It is the arrogant that normally have to assume that the other person is necessarily at fault because it gives them that special glow of being better. In other words, a man of pride assumes the other person to be capable unless proved otherwise; the arrogant man assumes the other person to be incapable and would rather die than be convinced otherwise. 

“Look! We both had the same sort of education. Now I have twenty-four green marbles, sixty-seven yellow ones and even a large red one. What does he have? Two white marbles and a pair of tops” 

Change the numbers; put in cars, houses, stocks whatever for marbles and tops. That, in effect, is the arrogant man’s litany. It does not strike him at all that both of them may not have even been running the same race. 

That, probably, reminds most people of ‘Chatur’ of 3 idiots – the man with the car, bungalow and all and what had ‘Rancho’ achieved? Teaching A-B-C to kids! It does not strike the arrogant man that teaching was probably what the other man wanted to do anyway. And, yes, like Chatur, most arrogant people are weak – it takes a lot of lying to themselves about the inferiority of the others to keep their self-respect going. “Loser” is a word of contempt only in an arrogant man’s dictionary – a man of pride never feels the need to put down anyone else. 

Arrogance comes in many guises. It may show itself at the level of looking on other individuals as inferior. It may show itself as looking down on another gender, people of another community, color or nationality as inferior. The latter is even easier to do – since you can adopt received wisdom from others like you who came before and stick to it as true. 

Pride comes out of who you are and how you have grown as a person. Arrogance relies upon fables about what other people are and resolutely closes its eyes to any evidence to the contrary. 

When you feel a sense of accomplishment when you compare yourself today to what you were yesterday that is Pride and you should embrace it. When you get your self-respect out of comparing yourself to others to your advantage you are on the slippery slopes of arrogance. Keep away from me, please!

If you liked this you may like to check out the index of other posts of this genre or read a selection of similar posts.

Middle Age Blues

I had never really understood this concept of middle age blues till, of course, I hit middle age myself. Isn’t that true of all of us that only the problems that can afflict us are worth considering while problems that may or may not afflict other people may as well not exist?

Now if you are all agog to hear about hypertension and cholesterol, please skip over to another blog. If you are eagerly scanning this piece for nuggets of wisdom about how to deal with rebellious teenagers, I am afraid you are digging in the wrong mine. Nor, indeed, am I about to satisfy the thirst for knowledge about how to attain Nirvana. For all such trivial problems you can approach a doctor or a psychologist or the nearest guru – for none of them can be granted the exalted status of Middle Age Blues.

Put simply, Middle Age Blues refers to that state of angst where the middle aged man feels the purposelessness of his life. (I shall not debate that stupid idea that it refers to the quest for a problem where no real problem exists!). The young always have a purpose even if it is only to get the autograph of the latest starlet to shed her clothes on the Silver screen (or the latest hunk to do the same, lest I be accused of sexism). The old know the purposelessness of purpose – since there is no purpose to be achieved by their having a purpose, given the shortness of their remaining stay on Earth. So, this is something that peculiarly afflicts the middle-aged.

I classify people with Middle Age Blues in three categories. I make no pretense of having made a comprehensive classification of all middle-aged people who are so afflicted and, most certainly, this classification does not encapsulate all middle-aged people.

The first category – call it MAB1 – comprises of those who had worked towards a goal and achieved it. Now, they suddenly find that they are unable to think of another achievable goal to work towards for the rest of their ‘productive’ lives and find themselves moving around aimlessly. To illustrate, assume someone had set himself the goal of becoming the Chief Rat-catcher in his town. Let us say, he does become the Chief Rat-catcher in the town by age 45. Now he sees an endless vista of life chasing the rats and rat catches of his town; no viable possibility of hitting Chief Rat-catcher for the State within his working life – so feels blue. In short Middle Age Blue 1!

The second category – MAB2 – comprises of those who have been working towards a goal and find themselves so far short of it at middle age that they have no conceivable way of reaching it by the time they come to the end of their ‘productive’ lives. Consider another person, who has also yearned with every fiber of his being to become Chief Rat-catcher of his town, and has only managed to hit Assistant Apprentice Rat-catcher by 45. The exalted station of Chief Rat-catcher is so far ahead of him that he cannot conceivably aspire to reach those wondrous heights before he is chucked out of the work-force and, thus, feels blue. In short Middle Age Blue 2!

The last category – MAB3 – comprises of those who have been working towards a goal and, regardless of how close they are to the goal, they suddenly discover that they actually liked a different goal after all and working towards this goal was a colossal waste of time that had denied them the opportunity to try to achieve their real goal. Like a person who wanted to become Chief Rat-catcher; is currently Additional Chief Rat-catcher; and discovers that he really does not want to spend lives chasing rats but wants to chase butterflies instead but it is too late to become competent at it. This type of Blueness is MAB3 (maybe MAB3A since a person who has been floating with the tide without a goal may suddenly be afflicted with that goal achieving disease and become blue thereby falling in MAB3B).

If you start citing old people who are afflicted by one of these or young people afflicted by one of these, the problem is not with the analysis but with their mental age. As for the middle-aged who are not afflicted by any of these, it must be because they have used all their thinking faculties on those silly problems I mentioned at the beginning; or because they stick to their goals and achieve them only close to the end or because they find a new goal that seems achievable to them or because they have learned to enjoy floating with the tide.

You cannot give any dissertation of this nature without someone poking his nose into where you belong in the above categories. Actually, in none! There is one last category – people who float with the tide and continue to float with the tide happily since no-one told them that Life should have a purpose!

If you liked this you may like to check out the index of other posts of this genre or read a selection of similar posts.

This ‘Green’ thing

I must admit that I really do not understand this Green thing. It may seem like one small item in the vast sea of my ignorance and I would have been content to live without knowing about it but for the fact that it keeps intruding in my daily life.

Time was when I used to go to the mall pick up what I wanted and when I checked out they used to silently pack it in plastic bags and send me on my way. Now, all of a sudden, they ask me if I want carry bags and charge me for it. Seek the reasons and they claim that they have gone Green. Can anyone tell me why packing each type of vegetable and fruit in separate plastic bags is more green than getting carry-bags to take them home? Or why paying a couple of bucks for the carry bag makes their usage Greener than taking them away for free? Is it that they seriously think that someone paying a couple of thousand bucks for his purchases will balk at paying a couple of bucks for the carry-bag and, thus, bring along his own bag?

If there was any serious intent to go green, they would put in place a system where they weigh vegetables and fruits without needing them packed in plastic – and would sell jute bags at the counter instead of plastic carry-bags. But, then, since when has any business failed to use any and every interest of Society to add to its own revenues? Like that mobile manufacturer who wanted you to dump your old mobiles in their showrooms for free  in order to, what else, go Green when your local shop was willing to pay a hundred bucks in order to be able to scavenge the phone for parts.

Why do we feel that we are being Green when we eschew plastic bags while we can, without qualm, dump a six month old serviceable mobile for the latest model with a few more features which we will seldom, if ever, use? Do we think mobiles are made of bio-degradable substances and no energy goes into making them? And, of course, when we gorge on packed potato chips and aerated drinks the only problem is with people who talk of empty calories – the plastic in which the one is packed and the other is bottled just cannot to be talked of in the same breath as plastic carry-bags!

The previous generation, of course, were totally uncaring about the environment! We can feel superior about how Green we are while taking the elevator down to the ground floor, driving our SUV a couple of kilometers to the gym in order to exercise on the stepper and the treadmill while those non-environmentally minded folks go walking. How little they cared about the environment when they bought those marbles and wooden tops for their children while we raise our own on plastic toys to video games.

Looks to me like all that Green means is to follow what you think is the fashion of today. As long as it does not affect my day-to-day life and comforts I shall be Green. Not much different from the past and shall not be too different in the future. The only thing that has been added is a ‘Holier than thou’ attitude!

Of Communication

The one thing that we human beings – the so-called ‘social animal’ – rely upon is Communication. Surprisingly, this is the same thing that we seem to be extremely bad at, at least most of us. There is not a single thing that we can say that is not open to misinterpretation.

Take as simple a thing as the routine greeting “Good Morning!” I have had responses ranging from the routine “Good Morning” (or ‘Morning” from the super-bosses!) to the combative “What is so good about this morning?” to the ill-willed “So! You think I will not even know it is morning unless you tell me so?” It seems like this ordinary phrase can mean a pleasantry to some, a statement of incorrect fact to others and an insult to the ultra-sensitive few!

What, then, can be said about the longer sentences? When a husband says, “Today the meal was really delicious” one can imagine reactions ranging from pleasure to “So it was not good all this while?” to “Am I your cook that I should satisfy you?” depending upon whether it is taken as praise or as implied criticism or as a patronizing gesture. The way it is taken seems to have scant little to do with the words that are used.

When you call up a friend and he responds, “I am busy now. Can we talk later?” what do you think? Do you take it literally to mean that he is stuck with something or that he is acting pricey or that he is trying to avoid you? Every communication seems to communicate a lot more than the mere words – because it is interpreted through a prism of past history, the circumstances of the people concerned as well as the expectations that they have of each other.

If from sentences that are, in and of themselves, inoffensive there is so much offense that can be taken, what then can be said of words of criticism? “You do not look good in this hairdo!” is simply an invitation to responses ranging from “If you think I am ugly, why did you marry me?” to “So, you do not love me nowadays” to “Who is that other woman?”

I always wonder why people will do this to themselves. It seems to me that the meaning read into words is invariably the interpretation that causes the most hurt to the person doing the interpretation. It seems to me that people hate the idea of being happy – considering that they invariably seem to bend all their capabilities to find their way to misery!

Agony Aunt

Two stacks of letters lay in front of her. “Love Marriage” said one and “Arranged Marriage” said the other.  After years of writing the “Ask Grandma” column, it seemed as though all love marriages happened without parental guidance and all arranged marriages got done without inputs from the bride and bridegroom. But then, it was precisely in such cases that the preponderance of problems arose.

Where the love marriage happened either against parental wishes or with parents totally – and, perhaps, foolishly – in awe of their progeny’s judgment, the probability of problems seemed to be high. As, indeed, was the case when parents either totally ignored the possibility of their progeny having their own ideas for a spouse or where parental judgment was considered infallible, life turned out to be not so rosy either.

Today she found herself in an awfully cantankerous mood – not the best of times for her to deal sympathetically with other people’s problems.  Work was work, however, and took no cognizance of her moods. She sighed with frustration and turned first to one stack.

* * * * * *

Dear Grandma,

I fell in love with my husband and married him after two years. While we were in love, he was perfectly groomed and loved to go to parties with me. Now, when I look at this unshaven slob snoring by my side, it is difficult to believe that it is the same person. His idea of a good time seems to be curling up with a book or sitting glued to the television. When I chide him about his grooming, he says, “I can’t be looking as though I stepped out of a beauty parlor 24x7.” When I want to party with him he says, “I hate parties! I only went out because that was the only way to be with you.”

        Tell me what to do, pleaseeee!

Yours in distress,

Disappointed Lover

Dear Disappointed Lover,

You have made the mistake of not realizing that the human peacock can preen with borrowed feathers. It is the nature of the male animal to attract the female of his choice by seeming to be all that she wants him to be. Had you exercised your judgment, you would have found that the feathers were borrowed and not his own.

If your love was also based on other things than these and if he is satisfactory otherwise, it is best to reconcile yourself to living with the ‘slob’ as you call him. If you stopped pestering him about it maybe in time  you could get him to groom himself better and even come with you to the occasional party or two.

Yours in sympathy,

Grandma

Dear Grandma,

I fell in love with this madcap bike riding boy and married him. The problem is that he is like a little boy and I spend the entire day cleaning up after him. When he is not messing up the house he is messing with his bike – so much so I do not even know if he remembers that he has a wife in the house. Every time I try to talk to him seriously he makes a joke of it. I don’t know if I can stand it any more to live with someone so totally irresponsible.

            Do you think you can help me?

Yours harriedly,

Worried Wife

Dear Worried Wife,

You have failed to understand that when you want to go jogging you do not wear stiletto heels. You fell in love for qualities that make for an interesting companion but can be a recipe for disaster in a husband particularly for someone of your inclinations. It seems to me that you are the sort of person who likes an orderly house and takes her responsibilities seriously. A happy-go-lucky person like your husband was probably not the best of choices for you.

Having said that, you could still be happy if you can learn to enjoy his pursuits with him; lighten up a bit and ask your husband for help rather than shoving it down his throat as a responsibility. It could well be true that for the rest of your life you may have to make all the responsible decisions and you will have to reconcile yourself to the idea.

Yours in sympathy,

Grandma

More letters with similar issues!! She was irritated. Why will these young people marry based on how a person looks or what he does without a single thought to what sort of a person he is? They seemed to be people who bought a house for the view and discovered only after moving in that there was no running water, electricity or convenient shopping facilities! She smiled to discover herself using the idioms of her architect husband.

A huge chunk of the letters was related to problems with in-laws. She wrote about them on a case-by-case basis though, it seemed to her, that a lot of her complainants seemed to be mildly taken aback by the fact that a family came as an enclosure along with their lovers.

Today, thankfully, there had been no letters about Mama’s little boys. She had always been skeptic about such letters. More often than not, it was a case of the daughter-in-law being surprised that her husband actually loved his mother enough not to take his wife’s side every time she had an argument with her mother-in-law or the son passing off his own desires as dear old mom’s wishes. There were some cases of the termagant mother ruling the household with a hand of iron but not as often as TV seemed to project.

She was glad, too, that she did not need to deal with the girls married to wife-beaters, who continued to live with him because they were afraid of facing an unsympathetic I-told-you-so from their parents, or the ones that are abandoned by their 'lovers'.

Thank God for small mercies! Letters relating to women having married a poor man - and finding that poverty was not as genteel as the movies would show you and love was not a sufficient substitute for bread – had dried up. Maybe the girls of today were more pragmatic about choosing their lovers at least insofar as financial status went. More to the point, they probably knew that what they would get from her was an earful of advice when what they really needed was a pocketful of money.

Half the work was done. Now she turned to the other stack

* * * * * *

Dear Grandma,

I had an arranged marriage. My parents were very satisfied with the alliance. My husband and his family want a child soon and they do not care that my career prospects shall get affected if I opted for one at this time. No amount of argument is getting the point through to them.

What can I do?

Worriedly yours,

Dutiful Daughter

Dear Dutiful Daughter,

It seems that you have fallen into the usual trap of thinking that changing your diapers equipped your parents with a complete insight into your soul. These issues should have been discussed before marriage. Parents may know what is necessary to run a family but they cannot be expected to know your every single taste and every single desire. You should either have made it clear to them as to what you looked for in your future rather than giving a dutiful you-know-best answer!

Now that you are married, I would suggest that you point out the advantages to your husband’s family of your advancing your career rather than focusing on what you want. People tend to be reasonable normally if you do not take a confrontational posture. If, however, they remain adamant you can always adopt ways of not conceiving including telling them outright that you refuse to do so.

Yours in sympathy,

Grandma

Ah! The naiveté of the young dutiful daughter! As though her parents were the avatars of Solomon and gifted with his judgment! She looked at her reply to see if she had made it too tart. It did seem a bit harsh but she decided to leave it as it was.

Dear Grandma,

My marriage was arranged and my husband’s family is also quite nice. The problem is that my husband is dull as ditch-water. He seems to know nothing other than his office, home and sleep. There is hardly anything to talk about with him. Life has become such a bore!

What do I do to make life more interesting?

 Yours in ennui,

Bored Wife

Dear Bored Wife,

You can trust your parents to take care of your security provided you trust their judgment but you cannot depend on them to make life interesting for you. Parents may ensure security; it is for you to ensure companionship. It seems like you never interacted with your husband before marriage, which you ought to have done to check for compatibility.

Your problem, however, does not appear very serious since your husband’s family seems congenial. See if you can get your husband to take part in the activities that interest you. More often than not, it is lack of imagination and not lack of interest that keeps such men in the rut. If he is not interested find a means to engage yourself interestingly.

Yours in sympathy,

Grandma

Thank God it was a light day. No issues of really bad people or horrid situations like dowry harassment or cheating spouses – only the usual mundane problems of the everyday world. Only issues of parents having been unable or unwilling to take into account the specific tastes of their children just as the lovers had failed to take into account the fact that the qualities that made a man a good companion did not necessarily suffice to qualify him as a good husband.

* * * * * *

Dear Grandma,

Do you think that Arranged Marriage is better or Love marriage is better?

Yours in doubt,

Confused soul

She had to laugh! As though it mattered whether the child introduced the future spouse to the parents or the parents introduced the future spouse to the child – except of course that arranged marriage offered the child the convenience of blaming her parents for her problems! Too much importance was being attached to the ‘going weak in the knees’ feeling and not enough attention paid to the fact that the rosy dreams of romantic love actually built unrealistic expectations! If you ignored romantic love, there was not much difference between Love marriage and Arranged Marriage as long as both parents and children involved themselves in the decision. The love that grew old together may spring out of romantic love as it happened with her son or could grow out of living together companionably as had happened with her.

Dear Confused Soul,

You seem to think that a good life comes out of the way you get to meet your spouse. What makes a marriage good or bad is the way you live after marriage.

Whether or not you love the person, you should LIKE him. It means that, apart from going weak in the knees and finding your heart melting like an icicle in a furnace, you should be compatible with him as well as care for him and he should care for you as well. By caring I mean that both of you should not be thinking only of how happy the other will make you but should also be able to take pleasure in making the other happy or in soothing the other’s hurt. If the care is all on your side be prepared to be a doormat.

After marriage, you should be willing to Compromise. Things are bound to be different from when you were not married and, thus, you may have to give up some things or do some new things – both of which may displease you. If you truly cared for the other, only such compromises should become necessary where the pleasure you derive from making your spouse happy should outweigh the displeasure of the compromise.

The most important thing is Communication. Any problem that you have must be clearly communicated. “You do not love me” does not tell the man that you are hurt about the fact that he forgot your birthday or that you hate his ogling that bimbo across the street. If you find it difficult to openly express your vulnerability, you are either married to the wrong person or you are unwilling to risk hurt to your ego even to attempt a loving married life. To marry someone when you are not open to communicating is selfish and to marry someone who does not communicate openly is martyrdom.

If you can truly set your ego aside and can compromise and communicate with your spouse, you will find that your married life can be far richer than you thought it could be. If your spouse repays your trust with disdain you will at least know that you are better off without the marriage and act accordingly.

Life is far simpler than you think. All it requires is sufficient courage.

Yours clarifyingly,

Grandma

Atheism is also only a belief

Too often have I heard atheists proclaiming that Theism is unscientific and irrational. It seems to me that Atheism being an, as yet, unproven concept anyone who believes it should not be throwing stones at other people’s beliefs. The only rational belief, as yet, is Agnosticism. We do not yet know what is true.

Let me first clarify what I mean by Theism. We talk of the existence of God as the Creator of the universe. There is a great deal of other attributes associated with God in our minds – ranging from the Brahman of Advaita, the granter of boons in the practice of Hinduism, the varied attributes given to God in Christianity and to Allah in Islam. I am, here, restricting myself to the Creation part and, thus, all the charges of irrationality thrown at the various other attributes of God are irrelevant here.

Even when it comes to Creation, let me clarify that I am not opposing Darwin. If a scientist cultures bacteria in a Petri dish, it does not mean that he is actively intervening in every step of the way. Thus, if a bacterium can find the logical means by which it came into being, it does not negate the existence of the scientist. Thus, I am not discussing the modus operandi of the Scientist but whether the Scientist has been proven not to exist.

Any conclusive proof of the absence of God in the scheme of things can come only when Man has unraveled all the secrets of the Universe. This means that we should know how the Universe came into being; what life is and how it came into being; all the processes by which the Universe became what it is today; and what would happen to the Universe going forth. As long as there is something unknown about the process one cannot conclusively say that God had no role to play in that unknown area.

Science has evolved innumerable theories only to find them deficient in the context of either observed reality or by anomalous results in experimentation. Thus, the mere postulation of a theory explaining everything would still not be conclusive proof. Only when the theory is applied and a Universe created and observed to work as predicted by the theory could we scientifically conclude that there is no God.

Or can we? If we manage to create a Universe ourselves, then we would be Gods! How could we then say that there is no God?

Guest Post in the -NRI: Colonial Hangover? Not Really

Not content with inflicting my views on the unsuspecting populace through my own blog, I have also taken recourse to the-NRI to inflict my views on their unsuspecting readership. What is more, they have posted it at the following URL.

http://www.the-nri.com/index.php/2012/05/colonial-hangover-not-necessarily/

Any of my readers, with more masochistic leanings than most, are welcome to treat themselves to a further dose of my writing there. I must warn you, however, that this post is not what passes for humour in my lexicon. It is, believe it or not, intended to be a serious post and any humour you find in it is purely unintentional!

Don’t you trust me?

“Don’t you trust me?”

This is a question that is mostly asked by either the naïve or the manipulators.

You do not trust that something you drop will fall down, you know it. (We are talking about mundane living and not about free fall in a spaceship). Proven facts do not require trust. It is only when you do not know that something is true that you have to trust in it. Thus, the very fact that you have to trust in something means that there is an element of doubt about the truthfulness of the thing that you trust in. Trust, therefore, carries the seeds of distrust embedded in it.

How true then that trust in any human relationship exists only on the grounds of trust in your judgment about the other person. Being but ordinary mortals, we do not possess infallible judgment and, thus, it is natural for us to feel doubt when things happen that seem to contradict our trust. It is only the naïve who can think that their own honesty is so apparent that the other person cannot have the least smidgen of doubt about it.

If someone dear to you seems to have some doubt about some facet of your character or actions, getting all wounded about it and plaintively asking him/her this question is actually no help. To trust you beyond a shadow of doubt the other person has to trust his/her judgment beyond a shadow of doubt – which is close to impossible for most ordinary mortals. It is best to explain the situation. Else, you could well shut the other person up from pursuing the question but, in any long term relationship, such silences will only end up killing it. Over a period, there will be more knowledge and, thus, less reason for distrust. If the distrust is persistent and inexplicable, it is still naïve to be asking this question – it is probably better for you to kill the relationship yourself.

More often than not, this question is asked to manipulate the other person’s thoughts or actions. The manipulation may be unconscious, minor or even benign but manipulation it would be.

“Hey! You are keeping this secret even from me. Don’t you trust me?”

The intent here is to get to know what you are keeping from him. When he asks about trusting him the question is - Trust what? That he will not use it to blackmail you? That he will not start tweeting it to the rest of the world the moment you leave him? That he will not share it with someone and say, “But you guys are so close. I thought you would have told him yourself”? That he will not say, “He told me that long back” when you choose to share the secret with the rest of the world? That he will not part with it to save his life?

“Come on! I need this money for my new business. Don’t you trust me?”

Trust what, again? Trust that she will not run away with the money or deny having borrowed it from you? Trust that she has the ability to successfully run her business and be able to return the money to you? Trust that she would have made provisions to return your money, in the event that something untoward happens to her?

We, invariably, end up considering this question as one of trusting the other person’s integrity. Any time an act of trust is required of us, there are multiple things to be considered in addition to the other person’s integrity. A doubt on any of these facets may cause you to prefer not to fall in with the other person’s wishes.

Being asked the question, however, puts you in the position of either telling the other person exactly what you are doubtful about – something you do not want to do with a person you care for, normally - like for example, telling your business-woman friend that you do not think that she would do well in business. This puts you in the position of falling in with the other person’s wishes while not inclined to do so.

When not used by a naïve person, this is a question that has been liberally used by manipulators to get their way. What, to me, is reprehensible is the fact that it works only on the people who really care for you and, to me, a person who will cheerfully manipulate people who love him/her is not the sort of person I really want to know.

“Don’t you trust me?” is one of the most insidious manipulative questions in the world. Trust me!

Do you have the courage to face going slowly blind?

Tunnel Vision! The first time I heard of it as a physical ailment was in one of my early day at IFFCO. There was this young chap, working in the Library, who had come over to our section and the other guys were talking to him in a concerned manner. Naturally curious, I overheard the conversation.

This librarian was, apparently, afflicted with Tunnel Vision. What was worse, his ailment was such that the doctors had told him that he would progressively lose his vision till he became completely blind. (Retinitis Pigmentosa, is the term, I think!). It was apparently a congenital condition and there was no known cure for it though some courses of treatment could retard the progress of the problem.

The chap was describing his issue in such a matter-of-fact manner and outlining the stages that he would go through progressively that I was thunder-struck. Apparently his night vision was close to nil and he had lost nearly all his peripheral vision as well. How could any human being discuss the possibility of slowly losing his vision entirely without a trace of self pity?

God knows what slough of despond he must have passed through from the first time he was informed about his condition to the time he made peace with the idea. How he must have railed against a destiny that had completely destroyed all the hopes and certainties of his life and replaced it with a long uphill climb to achieve any semblance of normalcy in his life? How he must have tried to take his mind of the issue – watch TV, read a book, look on the beauties of nature, whatever – only to be reminded of the fact that all these things would become impossible for him soon? How every single simple act in day-to-day life must have reminded him of the fact that each of them would require either help from others or arduous retraining of his faculties to carry out? How he must have hoped against hope that there would be some remission and that someone would find a cure soon?

It is not like we have a society that is particularly empathetic to people with problems. Oh! We all learn to say ‘visually challenged’ instead of ‘blind’ and feel quite virtuous about it. Say ‘visually challenged’ with as much contempt as you used to say ‘blind’ and I really cannot see much difference. A society so full of people with so little a sense of self-worth that the only thing they can feel proud about is the fact that their eyes are functioning when the others’ isn’t - and feel the need to express it by being patronizing to or contemptuous about the person with the problem.

I have no idea from what deep well of courage he drew to get over that abyss of gloom and achieve such serenity in his life. I tried to put myself in his place and I could not find it in me to say that I would have had the courage to have all physical, financial and social security destroyed and still continue to retain hope in life. It takes incredible courage to face up to something as devastating as this and still find some stability in your soul. I wish I could say that I have it. This man – a ‘lowly’ librarian – towers over me in the sort of courage that he evinced and I can only salute that courage without really hoping to emulate it.

On the day I heard him my instant reaction was, “And I think I have problems?” Sometimes it seems to me that it is we who have Tunnel Vision!

Change the way you value yourself

It is tempting to say that the thing most requiring a change is Society’s resistance to change. That, unfortunately, is not quite the right change to seek. Not all change may be for the good and sometimes a proposed change may require to be changed itself. Society’s resistance to change can act as a necessary brake though you could always argue as to whether the resistance is unwarrantedly high.

A change in Society’s attitudes to its constituent citizens, though difficult, is easier than an internally driven change of people. Society has various rewards that it can confer – awards, publicity and the like – which can drive attitudes. This is why my earlier post ‘Change the way you value people’ concentrated on what, in my opinion, were changes necessary in societal attitudes. An internal change of people has to be self-motivated and, maybe, driven against societal disregard and, thus, far more difficult.

When society values people it has to go on deeds. When an individual values himself he can go on character since he is the best judge of what motivates him to do what he does, if he can be honest with himself. Nothing new needs to be said about what constitutes good character. The problem, however, is that we do not practice what we preach (Nothing new I am saying here either but, then, the fact that it has been said so often has not changed much!).

Honesty is the Best Policy

All of us are in agreement, of course we are! We do live by it, as far as it is practicable to do so. Really?

‘No-one can say that I am not honest. Well, if I know my company is getting this huge order and I can buy up the shares at a low price today and clear a profit enough to fund a foreign vacation for my family, why not? I know there are rules against insider trading but who cares about them anyway?’

Looks like your pride in your honesty is less valuable to you than a foreign vacation.

‘This is the problem with being honest. Look at our neighbor. He clears about twice what I make in bribes. I have to make do with an Indica and he can buy a SUV though we are in the same position’

I’d rather you said, ‘How can a man opt for a more expensive life-style at the cost of his character’. The way you say it, it seems like you are honest merely because you are afraid of getting caught. If you say it in front of your children, you are teaching them that honesty leads to unhappiness. Not exactly what I want the children of today to be learning.

I love giving happiness to the people I love

Where is the joy in life if it were not for the people we love? If there is anything I can do to keep them happy, what greater pleasure than that?

‘Listen! I have to go to the boss’ party tonight. The CEO is coming and my boss says that if I can make it he will introduce me to him.’

‘You promised Seema that you would stay over at the hospital with Ajay tonight. How can you make it now?’

‘I know. Tell Seema that I can’t make it. They will understand.’

Right! How can you let go the opportunity of getting the eye of the Supremo? Is this a one-off or are Ajay and Seema to always understand?

One should work where one can be passionate about what he is doing

Of course! I’d love to work in an area that excites me.

‘I thought you always wanted to teach. Why this shift to IT?’

‘Where is the money in teaching, dude?’

‘College teaching is not all that bad, is it?’

‘Maybe! Quantum difference in life-style, dude.’

Ah! Yes! Your joy in working in the area you are passionate about comes a distant second to an up-market flat, car and clothes!

The point I am trying to make here is that our value systems – that are the building blocks of our character – come a distant second to social prestige. Thus, what we are doing is the replacement of all the internal drivers of self-worth with dependence on society for providing you all your sense of self-worth.

There is a Sanskrit saying ‘Paradhinam prana sankatam’. Dependence on others is distressing to the soul. What we are doing is handing over the entire keys to our happiness to others, for where can you find happiness without a sense of self-worth?

All the measures that society provides involves your comparing yourself with others much like young kids standing against each other and competing for who is taller. If you find yourself falling short and you are unwilling to accept it, then you take recourse to your race, caste, religion or gender to prove your ‘inherent’ superiority much like a short kid standing on a stool and claiming that he is taller. The problem is that you have to keep lugging the stool everywhere you go and keep getting suspicious about whether people with smaller stools are trying the saw the legs off your own. Also, anyone who, in your opinion, has a bigger stool automatically makes you feel inferior!

If there is one change that I wish every individual would make then it is that he respects himself for his values and how courageously he has stood by them rather than for what he would call his position in society. Otherwise, we could end up like the biblical character who exchanged all that was valuable to him for a mess of potage.