Table, Temple, Temperament
Chapter eight of Varaahapuraanam (date approximately 10th Century A.D.) gives a very interesting story. A righteous and pious hunter lives in a forest. He kills just one animal a day for food for himself and his family. After cooking it, he makes offerings first to the Gods, then to the departed souls in the family, then to his guests and shares the rest with his family and servants. He has one son and one daughter. He brings up these two as ideal children, instilling in them the virtues of good and righteous conduct and religious beliefs. When his daughter grows up to be a fine maiden of upright character and conduct and well educated, he decides that she deserves a husband equal to her in learning and virtues. He seeks alliance for her with the great Rishi (Sage) Mathanga’s son Prasanna. The sage readily agrees because the hunter’s noble qualities are known far and wide. After the marriage, the hunter’s daughter goes to live with her husband at the sage’s residence. She endears herself to everyone by her intelligent and helpful conduct and everyone is happy.
After some time, the atmosphere is suddenly vitiated. For some trivial lapse, the sage’s wife teases the girl that, being the daughter of animal killer, she does not know how to practice penance or to attend on her husband. The girl returns to her parents in distress. The hunter, after getting an account of what transpired, goes to the sage, who is unaware of the background. The sage welcomes the hunter with all affection and respect and invites him for food. The hunter prefers to cook his own food and asks for some rice. When it is given to him, he looks at it and immediately says “ I refuse to have food with you. Do you know how many living beings are destroyed when you prepare your food? And you do not offer your food to the Gods and others as prescribed. After all, I kill just one animal a day and take my food prepared out of its meat only after I offer it to the Gods, departed souls, guests and family including servants”. Then he narrates to the sage the manner in which his daughter is abused. Finally, he throws a curse “there shall be no mutual trust and amity between mothers-in-law and daughters-in-law”. Curious isn’t it that this has been by and large true over the ages!!
Well, this left me wondering because, our elders never told a story, especially in the form a Puraanam or Ithihaasam without a message, often discernible only to the inquiring mind. Probably, the stress was on incompatibility of food habits, sense of values or lack of tolerance as some of the major causes of domestic discontent. In the current scenario, we may add a few more factors to this list i.e., the problems created by generation gap, excessively possessive attitude and fast changing social set up.
I remembered an incident, which occurred in my life almost two decades ago.
I had a very good friend (a South Indian Brahmin), much older than me, who would come to my assistance at any time most willingly. A confirmed optimist and always radiating goodwill and jubilant mood as he was, I was surprised to find him totally confused and downcast when I visited him one day. The atmosphere in his house, which was otherwise very lively, often punctuated with peals of laughter at the jokes, which he used to crack, was gloomy. The problem was that his daughter was insisting on marrying a boy from a different State and caste and linguistic group. They had developed attachment when they were working at a place. They had moved away to different towns about five years previously and did not have any chance to see each other, nor did they correspond with each other. In spite of this, their mutual affection had increased and both had decided to remain celibate if they could not be united in marriage. The factors against the alliance, according to my friend, were the caste difference, divergent practices and possible problems in social acceptance. I do not know what happened to me, but I just told him “ uncle, if they could nurture their mutual affection though they had not seen each other for over five years, do you think anyone has a right to obstruct the union? So long as their TABLE, TEMPLE AND TEMPERAMENT (food habits, religious faith and sense of values and likes and dislikes) are compatible, not necessarily congruent, they will be happy”. My friend jumped up and embraced me very emotionally. The marriage was performed and the couple is happy.
I got a copy of Varaaha Puraanam much later, for reference in connection with another work. I was surprised to find that Chapter Eight supported my statement by referring to the converse. I am not, even for a single moment, advocating that we throw our old customs and entire social structure overboard, lock, stock and barrel. After all,
there must have been some reason and justification for our traditions. While it is easy to distort and destroy these, such a step, without a viable, stable and enduring alternative, will lead to chaos. Even the most cosmopolitan parents become conservative when it comes to marriage of their sons and daughters. Pearl S. Buck has amply demonstrated this through her novel “Come, My Beloved”. Yet, let us also remember that times have changed; technological advancement has revolutionized not only the way of life, but also the outlook. Grown ups of both sexes are thrown together in academic pursuits, work situations and social and religious gatherings and nature plays cupid by instinct rather than choice. Of course, marriage as a bond, must be enduring and should be based on mutual understanding and support through thick and thin. What instinct promotes must be put to test through reasoning and assessment of compatibility. All over the globe, intellectuals struggled to raise human species far above the rest of the animal kingdom. Marriage as an institution has to survive trials and tribulations and the couple should remain in permanent bond which only death can separate. Society has to survive on the basis of permanent commitment in certain important spheres of human existence. Submission to fleeting infatuations will only destroy the social fabric. All over the world, even animals look after their progeny till they become self sufficient, capable of getting their food, etc. This period ranges from just a few minutes to a few months. In the human specie, it used to be about 12 to 15 years. With the advancement of education and technology, dependence of progeny on parents in our society (Indian background) extends to even 20 to 25 years. A few years back, a parent in his sixties, confided in me that he has to continue to work because he had to finance his son’s post-doctorate research. He lamented “ the poor boy is only 28 and he is ambitious”!!! This is probably an extreme case of possessiveness and misconceived sense of responsibility. Probably in such cases, acceptance of a daughter-in-law as part of one’s family will also be difficult as the parent is likely to mistake her as an intruder in the relationship between himself and his son.
Leaving this digression apart, in our set up, parents will be bound to counsel and guide their children in the selection of life partner. But to become over possessive and get excited if the choice is not theirs, destroying the peace of several and one’s own self, is, I am afraid, totally uncalled for. Graceful acceptance of what happens under the circumstances will probably be the best course. I hope the story in Varaahapuraanam will lend authenticity to this view.
In my personal experience, there are many families where children have married outside their groups and still the atmosphere is cordial and happy. There are also many cases where marriage within the same community or groups have failed. This proves that ultimately, it is the compatibility, the spirit of tolerance that makes a marriage successful.
Society should also have a broad outlook and should not look down upon a family merely because one of its members has married a person outside its religious, linguistic or geographic group.
I wrote the basic structure of this article for consoling a family who were distressed that their social group looked down upon them for their daughter marrying a person outside their linguistic group. I thought I should put it on my blog as I find that even now people are not ready to accept such marriages.
I am sure that at least some people will benefit by this.
P.G.Krishnamoorthy
Monday, August 16, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
A LESSON FROM THE DISTANT PAST
A lesson from the distant past
My grandmother, whose capacity as a story-teller was matchless, narrated to me this incident, which occurred in our village when she was very young. That would put it about 150 years ago. In those days, there were no proper roads and transport and communication were very deficient. Still people used to travel long distances for purposes such as pilgrimage, learning, and participation in debates conducted at courts of native kings and Lords. It took months and sometimes, years for such persons to return. Sometimes, they never did. Often, when they did return after long periods, their own relatives in the village would not be able to recognize them. There would be no proof of the relationship either. All the same, they would be accommodated as guests and treated well on the basis of their statements or dropping names of common relatives or friends, or mention of particular incidents which occurred in the village.
In those days, as a custom, there would be practically no long conversations between husband and wife in the presence of outsiders. None addressed his wife by name. It was only “adiyei” and a woman was not allowed to utter her husband’s name – not to speak of addressing him by name. Women in general had no say in the management of properties, finances or social contacts. Their role was confined to running of the household such as cooking, looking after children and upkeep of the house. This tradition was common to all Indian communities.
It was in this setting that one man descended on a fairly well-to-do family in our village. They were just husband and wife (let us call them Krishnan and Lakshmi), living in harmony and peace. The visitor (let us cal him Ramu) claimed that his father was Krishnan’s great uncle, who had gone to Kaasi (Varanasi) on pilgrimage, got married and settled there. Ramu said he had been told about his native village and many anecdotes involving people and incidents in the village and he developed an urge to see his ancestral place. He learnt that his cousin was living in the village and it was thus that he landed at Krishnan’s house. Ramu had gathered a lot of information about the village and his conversation left no room for doubts on the authenticity of his statements.
So Krishnan welcomed Ramu to stay with him. Special dishes were made for his lunch, evening repast and dinner. Ramu enjoyed the hospitality for a couple of months. He befriended the villagers and regaled them with tales of Varanasi and other place, which he claimed to have visited. He would often talk to Krishnan when they were sitting on the verandah of the house or visiting their farm. Likewise, he would talk to Lakshmi when Krishnan was away on some work. He had a mischievous mind and tendency to ask too many personal questions or veer the conversation to embarrassing topics.
Ramu’s hosts and the villagers had their own daily chores to do while Ramu had nothing. Over a period of time, their attention to Ramu became less and less and Ramu was getting bored. He decided that it was time to depart.
One day, during his chat with Krishnan, when they were alone, Ramu dropped a hint that probably Lakshmi belonged to the canine family in her previous birth as she had the habit of licking her hands too often during meals. One practice in south India was that no wife would eat with her husband or in his presence. For that matter, ladies in general would not sit with gents for any meal; men-folk would eat first and then ladies had a separate batch, even at functions. So what Ramu told was a revelation to Krishnan because he had never watched her during meals.
Closely following this, one day, Ramu found an opportunity to talk to Lakshmi when she was alone. He told her in whispers that Krishnan was probably a vendor of salt in his previous birth. He must have been carrying salt bags on his back as he had a tendency to sweat excessively. It was likely that his skin would taste salty even in the current birth. He casually repeated these a few times. Then he left with some gifts kindly offered by his hosts.
The drops of venom administered by Ramu started working and Krishnan and Lakshmi began watching each other for telltale signs of vestiges of their previous birth. The happy couple, devoted to each other and united in their life and activities, became morose and suspicious of each other. A stage was reached when they could not suffer it longer.
The lady was more affected. So one night, when she felt that Krishnan was in sound sleep, she licked his back. Krishnan was actually wide awake and he had been wondering how to verify Ramu’s observation. Lakshmi’s action confirmed to him that she belonged to the canine family in her previous birth and was habituated to licking. Lakshmi, on the other hand felt that Krishnan’s skin tasted salty and that he was a salt vendor in his previous birth. They started fighting and screaming at each other in the dead of night and came out on to the street. Neighbours gathered and somehow quietend the couple. It took a lot of effort to convince Lakshmi that sweat and blood are salty in taste and that there was no correlation between this and previous birth. Similarly, Krishnan had to be persuaded by elders to accept that the crook Ramu had deliberately destroyed their peaceful and happy life by playing upon their gullibility.
Grandma concluded saying “Beware of whom you admit into your household and take their statements with a pinch of salt. Beware of unsolicited and unwanted advice dished out by others. It is very difficult for us to know whether such persons are genuinely interested in our welfare or not. Even if such advices are well meant, it is quite likely that the person giving it does not know all the circumstances. It is always best to sort out differences with others by direct dialogue. Carrying our quarrels to outside world and seeking advice of others may be counterproductive.”
Then she told me of a very wise lady who had a simple method to deal with quarrel between her son and his wife. (In those days children were married off when they were in their teens and joint family culture prevailed) Her larder or pantry, (whatever we may call the place where eatables were stocked in the house), was well- stocked and there were plenty of tit-bits and cookies inside. Whenever the young couple quarreled and the fight seemed endless, she would lock up both inside this room. When left alone like this, they found that they had to sink their differences of views and pull on together. The old lady would open the door only when they promised not to quarrel again. Of course, her cookies would keep off the children from starving if the lock up was too long. P. G. Wodehouse has described Bertram Woosters’ boyhood nurse locking him up and another in a clothes cup-board when they quarreled. A few minutes inside the cupboard saw a change and each one started blaming own self for the misunderstanding and craved pardon from the other. I am not able to recollect which of his novels it was, but the fact remains that the wisdom of the old all over the world was great.
My grandmother’s story may sound gross and absurd. But very often truth is ugly and unbelievable.
That brings me to a related issue. While the story shows us how a mischievous mind can drive a wedge between the husband and wife or for that matter, two close relatives or friends, there are instances where, even well-intentioned, but misconceived or erroneous interference by outsiders (I call them interested third parties) like parents or in-laws or even loyal servants brought the same effect. Classic examples are the roles played by Manthara in Ramayana and Sakuni in Mahabharatha. They believed that they were actually protecting the interests of their loved ones namely, Bharatha in Ramayana and Kauravas in Mahabharatha. But the result was disastrous. A few minutes of counseling (in reality, brainwashing), changed Kaikeyi from her adoration of Rama, to treating him as her bitter enemy and usurper of Bharatha’s fortunes. She wanted him to go immediately. It was like someone flogging a top class horse, already galloping fast, to go faster. And Kaikeyi turned so ruthless that she wanted even Seetha to shed her ornaments and wear the bark of trees, which she herself brought and handed over to Rama. She did not heed the pleas of elders to spare Seetha. It took a volley of abuse from the usually soft-spoken Guru Vasishta to make Kaikeyi relent and allow Seetha to wear clothes befitting her status as a princess. Such is the power of mischievous counseling. The only justification for this, if at all one wishes to exonerate Manthara, is the strong attachment which Manthara had towards her mistress Kaikeyi and her son Bharatha. Her concern, viewed in the narrow perspective of a menial, was their welfare and not the larger interests of the nation.
Opposed to this is the mischievous mind like Ramu’s in our story, where one interferes just to satisfy one’s ego or purely for sadistic pleasure. Most of us would have read or heard the story of the washer-man, his son and their donkey. They listened to gratuitous advices given by every passer- by and came to grief.
Looked at from the other side, let us admit that the tendency to give advice is a general trait among our population. Some such “wise” people even go to the extent of warning us that we would repent if we do not act on their advice. One has to be very circumspect when listening to or acting on other peoples’ advice. I too have incurred losses and gone through unnecessary trouble, by accepting unsolicited advice, though on some occasions even unsolicited advice turned out to be for good. That is why I said one has to be circumspect in accepting it.
At the same time, let us not forget that our scriptures like Upanishads are full of words of wisdom. Thirukkural is another treasure. We have to differentiate between general words of wisdom for the well-being of humanity and those given by individuals to us whether solicited or unsolicited. The greatest and most precious piece of advice which our Ithihaasas and Puraanas contain is Bhagavathgeetha. Even here, Lord Krishna does not voluntarily pour out his advice, unsolicited. Arjuna is confused and refuses to do his duty because of a misconception and indulges in self-condemnation, at a juncture when his inaction would bring total disaster and miscarriage of justice. He seeks the Lord’s advice “Sishyastheham Saadhi maam thvaam prapannam”. It was equally incumbent upon Lord Krishna as the relative, friend and of course, the Lord of the Universe and protector of Dharma, to give Arjuna, a clear vision of his role and duty. A lengthy and meaningful dialogue follows and every point is cleared.
Even then, at the end the Lord says “Ithi the gjnaanamaakhyaatham Guhyaathguhyatharam mayaa/// Vimrisyaithadasheshena yatthhecchasi thatthha kuru” (thus knowledge has been imparted to you by me, knowledge that is most mysterious and secret which is not to be revealed to all and sundry. Please ponder over it critically and thoroughly and act as you please). The Lord does not ask Arjuna to follow the advice blindly. He desires Arjuna to exercise his discretion and decide. Arjuna’s reply is also noteworthy “Nashto mohah Smrithirlabhdha Thvathprasadath mayaachyutha / Stthhithosmi Gathasandehah Karishye vachanam thava” (I am disillusioned. My doubts have been cleared. I shall act according to your advice). Verses 63 and 73 Chapter 18 of Bhagavathgeetha.
We should know exactly when we really need advice, we should know whom to approach for advice, we should know what we should disclose and what not to disclose, for giving too much will only confuse the thinking and cloud the perception, and we should pin-point the aspects on which we need advice. In other words, it should be a language of specifics and haziness should be avoided. No aspect pertinent to the issue should be left in doubt.
I hope this piece will not be consigned to the trash can, but it will be accepted as a useful note, emanating from past experiences of an old man and lessons he learnt.
P.G.krishnamoorthy 8 A/12, Brindavan, Thane West – 400601, Maharashtara State, India.
My grandmother, whose capacity as a story-teller was matchless, narrated to me this incident, which occurred in our village when she was very young. That would put it about 150 years ago. In those days, there were no proper roads and transport and communication were very deficient. Still people used to travel long distances for purposes such as pilgrimage, learning, and participation in debates conducted at courts of native kings and Lords. It took months and sometimes, years for such persons to return. Sometimes, they never did. Often, when they did return after long periods, their own relatives in the village would not be able to recognize them. There would be no proof of the relationship either. All the same, they would be accommodated as guests and treated well on the basis of their statements or dropping names of common relatives or friends, or mention of particular incidents which occurred in the village.
In those days, as a custom, there would be practically no long conversations between husband and wife in the presence of outsiders. None addressed his wife by name. It was only “adiyei” and a woman was not allowed to utter her husband’s name – not to speak of addressing him by name. Women in general had no say in the management of properties, finances or social contacts. Their role was confined to running of the household such as cooking, looking after children and upkeep of the house. This tradition was common to all Indian communities.
It was in this setting that one man descended on a fairly well-to-do family in our village. They were just husband and wife (let us call them Krishnan and Lakshmi), living in harmony and peace. The visitor (let us cal him Ramu) claimed that his father was Krishnan’s great uncle, who had gone to Kaasi (Varanasi) on pilgrimage, got married and settled there. Ramu said he had been told about his native village and many anecdotes involving people and incidents in the village and he developed an urge to see his ancestral place. He learnt that his cousin was living in the village and it was thus that he landed at Krishnan’s house. Ramu had gathered a lot of information about the village and his conversation left no room for doubts on the authenticity of his statements.
So Krishnan welcomed Ramu to stay with him. Special dishes were made for his lunch, evening repast and dinner. Ramu enjoyed the hospitality for a couple of months. He befriended the villagers and regaled them with tales of Varanasi and other place, which he claimed to have visited. He would often talk to Krishnan when they were sitting on the verandah of the house or visiting their farm. Likewise, he would talk to Lakshmi when Krishnan was away on some work. He had a mischievous mind and tendency to ask too many personal questions or veer the conversation to embarrassing topics.
Ramu’s hosts and the villagers had their own daily chores to do while Ramu had nothing. Over a period of time, their attention to Ramu became less and less and Ramu was getting bored. He decided that it was time to depart.
One day, during his chat with Krishnan, when they were alone, Ramu dropped a hint that probably Lakshmi belonged to the canine family in her previous birth as she had the habit of licking her hands too often during meals. One practice in south India was that no wife would eat with her husband or in his presence. For that matter, ladies in general would not sit with gents for any meal; men-folk would eat first and then ladies had a separate batch, even at functions. So what Ramu told was a revelation to Krishnan because he had never watched her during meals.
Closely following this, one day, Ramu found an opportunity to talk to Lakshmi when she was alone. He told her in whispers that Krishnan was probably a vendor of salt in his previous birth. He must have been carrying salt bags on his back as he had a tendency to sweat excessively. It was likely that his skin would taste salty even in the current birth. He casually repeated these a few times. Then he left with some gifts kindly offered by his hosts.
The drops of venom administered by Ramu started working and Krishnan and Lakshmi began watching each other for telltale signs of vestiges of their previous birth. The happy couple, devoted to each other and united in their life and activities, became morose and suspicious of each other. A stage was reached when they could not suffer it longer.
The lady was more affected. So one night, when she felt that Krishnan was in sound sleep, she licked his back. Krishnan was actually wide awake and he had been wondering how to verify Ramu’s observation. Lakshmi’s action confirmed to him that she belonged to the canine family in her previous birth and was habituated to licking. Lakshmi, on the other hand felt that Krishnan’s skin tasted salty and that he was a salt vendor in his previous birth. They started fighting and screaming at each other in the dead of night and came out on to the street. Neighbours gathered and somehow quietend the couple. It took a lot of effort to convince Lakshmi that sweat and blood are salty in taste and that there was no correlation between this and previous birth. Similarly, Krishnan had to be persuaded by elders to accept that the crook Ramu had deliberately destroyed their peaceful and happy life by playing upon their gullibility.
Grandma concluded saying “Beware of whom you admit into your household and take their statements with a pinch of salt. Beware of unsolicited and unwanted advice dished out by others. It is very difficult for us to know whether such persons are genuinely interested in our welfare or not. Even if such advices are well meant, it is quite likely that the person giving it does not know all the circumstances. It is always best to sort out differences with others by direct dialogue. Carrying our quarrels to outside world and seeking advice of others may be counterproductive.”
Then she told me of a very wise lady who had a simple method to deal with quarrel between her son and his wife. (In those days children were married off when they were in their teens and joint family culture prevailed) Her larder or pantry, (whatever we may call the place where eatables were stocked in the house), was well- stocked and there were plenty of tit-bits and cookies inside. Whenever the young couple quarreled and the fight seemed endless, she would lock up both inside this room. When left alone like this, they found that they had to sink their differences of views and pull on together. The old lady would open the door only when they promised not to quarrel again. Of course, her cookies would keep off the children from starving if the lock up was too long. P. G. Wodehouse has described Bertram Woosters’ boyhood nurse locking him up and another in a clothes cup-board when they quarreled. A few minutes inside the cupboard saw a change and each one started blaming own self for the misunderstanding and craved pardon from the other. I am not able to recollect which of his novels it was, but the fact remains that the wisdom of the old all over the world was great.
My grandmother’s story may sound gross and absurd. But very often truth is ugly and unbelievable.
That brings me to a related issue. While the story shows us how a mischievous mind can drive a wedge between the husband and wife or for that matter, two close relatives or friends, there are instances where, even well-intentioned, but misconceived or erroneous interference by outsiders (I call them interested third parties) like parents or in-laws or even loyal servants brought the same effect. Classic examples are the roles played by Manthara in Ramayana and Sakuni in Mahabharatha. They believed that they were actually protecting the interests of their loved ones namely, Bharatha in Ramayana and Kauravas in Mahabharatha. But the result was disastrous. A few minutes of counseling (in reality, brainwashing), changed Kaikeyi from her adoration of Rama, to treating him as her bitter enemy and usurper of Bharatha’s fortunes. She wanted him to go immediately. It was like someone flogging a top class horse, already galloping fast, to go faster. And Kaikeyi turned so ruthless that she wanted even Seetha to shed her ornaments and wear the bark of trees, which she herself brought and handed over to Rama. She did not heed the pleas of elders to spare Seetha. It took a volley of abuse from the usually soft-spoken Guru Vasishta to make Kaikeyi relent and allow Seetha to wear clothes befitting her status as a princess. Such is the power of mischievous counseling. The only justification for this, if at all one wishes to exonerate Manthara, is the strong attachment which Manthara had towards her mistress Kaikeyi and her son Bharatha. Her concern, viewed in the narrow perspective of a menial, was their welfare and not the larger interests of the nation.
Opposed to this is the mischievous mind like Ramu’s in our story, where one interferes just to satisfy one’s ego or purely for sadistic pleasure. Most of us would have read or heard the story of the washer-man, his son and their donkey. They listened to gratuitous advices given by every passer- by and came to grief.
Looked at from the other side, let us admit that the tendency to give advice is a general trait among our population. Some such “wise” people even go to the extent of warning us that we would repent if we do not act on their advice. One has to be very circumspect when listening to or acting on other peoples’ advice. I too have incurred losses and gone through unnecessary trouble, by accepting unsolicited advice, though on some occasions even unsolicited advice turned out to be for good. That is why I said one has to be circumspect in accepting it.
At the same time, let us not forget that our scriptures like Upanishads are full of words of wisdom. Thirukkural is another treasure. We have to differentiate between general words of wisdom for the well-being of humanity and those given by individuals to us whether solicited or unsolicited. The greatest and most precious piece of advice which our Ithihaasas and Puraanas contain is Bhagavathgeetha. Even here, Lord Krishna does not voluntarily pour out his advice, unsolicited. Arjuna is confused and refuses to do his duty because of a misconception and indulges in self-condemnation, at a juncture when his inaction would bring total disaster and miscarriage of justice. He seeks the Lord’s advice “Sishyastheham Saadhi maam thvaam prapannam”. It was equally incumbent upon Lord Krishna as the relative, friend and of course, the Lord of the Universe and protector of Dharma, to give Arjuna, a clear vision of his role and duty. A lengthy and meaningful dialogue follows and every point is cleared.
Even then, at the end the Lord says “Ithi the gjnaanamaakhyaatham Guhyaathguhyatharam mayaa/// Vimrisyaithadasheshena yatthhecchasi thatthha kuru” (thus knowledge has been imparted to you by me, knowledge that is most mysterious and secret which is not to be revealed to all and sundry. Please ponder over it critically and thoroughly and act as you please). The Lord does not ask Arjuna to follow the advice blindly. He desires Arjuna to exercise his discretion and decide. Arjuna’s reply is also noteworthy “Nashto mohah Smrithirlabhdha Thvathprasadath mayaachyutha / Stthhithosmi Gathasandehah Karishye vachanam thava” (I am disillusioned. My doubts have been cleared. I shall act according to your advice). Verses 63 and 73 Chapter 18 of Bhagavathgeetha.
We should know exactly when we really need advice, we should know whom to approach for advice, we should know what we should disclose and what not to disclose, for giving too much will only confuse the thinking and cloud the perception, and we should pin-point the aspects on which we need advice. In other words, it should be a language of specifics and haziness should be avoided. No aspect pertinent to the issue should be left in doubt.
I hope this piece will not be consigned to the trash can, but it will be accepted as a useful note, emanating from past experiences of an old man and lessons he learnt.
P.G.krishnamoorthy 8 A/12, Brindavan, Thane West – 400601, Maharashtara State, India.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Acchande Peru Nannakki
Acchande Peru Nannakki
(He earned a good name for his father )
I do not know whether you have heard this story. In a village in Kerala there was a river. There were houses and farmlands on either side of the river. The market place, a small school and a post office, etc were on one side. People had to commute daily to these. There was no bridge on the river. A boatman was operating a ferry He was very good-natured and considerate to travellers. He even used to physically assist the old and infirm commuters. When he died, his son took over and started operating the ferry. Seniors in the village advised him “Nokku Mone, acchande peru nannakkanam kitto” (look, son, you should earn a good name for your father i.e. be a good son and keep up your father’s tradition). The young man said “Oh theercchayaum cheyyam “ (I shall certainly do so).
The young boatman would never wait for anyone if he had enough passengers to get a minimum profit. He would not give any concession to the poor and sick persons. He would moor his boat in knee-deep water and expect people to wade out to the boat. He would never chat with or exchange greetings with the passengers. In fact he did not even respond when greeted. Initially, people began murmuring and later started telling him openly that he was not behaving in a manner worthy of his father. They started extolling the virtues of his father and told him that he should mend his ways. This went on for some time and almost every passenger said it in one form or other. He never responded.
One day, a woman who was very weak, found it difficult to wade out to the boat and she was about to fall. The onlookers caught her and shouted at the boatman for being totally unhelpful. They said his father was a gem of a man and it was a pity that he should have produced such a worthless fellow. The young boatman looked at the passengers for a long time, heaved a long sigh and said “look, all of you told me repeatedly “Mone, acchande peru Nannakkanam Kitto” and I have seen to it that every one of you mentioned the virtues of my father every time you got into my boat. Would you have remembered him if I had been as good as he was? You would have started singing my praise. Am I wrong in complying with your requests?”
People like me who are in the evening of our lives find plenty of occasions every day to recall with nostalgia, the conditions of life and the behaviour of people, the materials and services in yester years, right from the morning cup of coffee and the quality of news coverage in the papers and the standards of integrity and efficiency, most of which have deteriorated, despite the giant leaps in technology and material prosperity. The overall sense of contentment which used to be there, is lamentably lacking. People are always in a rush from morning to night and even during the night, forever seeking something which seems to elude them perpetually. Even in so-called spiritual matters, there is a proliferation of institutions, functions, godmen and godwomen, miracle and manthra shops, but where have the happiness and peace, the basic satisfaction and tranquility of mind gone? For us, it just appears that the old order has changed but the present set up has done only what the young boatman has done vis-à-vis his father i.e. “Acchande peru Nannakki” IN HIS OWN WAY. Frustration at its worst comes up frequently. Is it due to problems of perception, wrong priorities, mismatch between ambition and ability, error in value assignment, obsession with sentiments and traditions which do not blend with the modern set up, lack of infrastructure, lack of proper leaders and sense of direction and so on and so forth? Can this trend be reversed or has it gone to” the point of no return”?
All in all, I pity the younger generation, because whatever has happened is not intentional and most of them, in their heart of hearts want to be helpful and peaceful. May be the fast pace of life does not give them time to think in the broader perspective. It is an irony of individual achievements and collective failure !!
*******************************
(He earned a good name for his father )
I do not know whether you have heard this story. In a village in Kerala there was a river. There were houses and farmlands on either side of the river. The market place, a small school and a post office, etc were on one side. People had to commute daily to these. There was no bridge on the river. A boatman was operating a ferry He was very good-natured and considerate to travellers. He even used to physically assist the old and infirm commuters. When he died, his son took over and started operating the ferry. Seniors in the village advised him “Nokku Mone, acchande peru nannakkanam kitto” (look, son, you should earn a good name for your father i.e. be a good son and keep up your father’s tradition). The young man said “Oh theercchayaum cheyyam “ (I shall certainly do so).
The young boatman would never wait for anyone if he had enough passengers to get a minimum profit. He would not give any concession to the poor and sick persons. He would moor his boat in knee-deep water and expect people to wade out to the boat. He would never chat with or exchange greetings with the passengers. In fact he did not even respond when greeted. Initially, people began murmuring and later started telling him openly that he was not behaving in a manner worthy of his father. They started extolling the virtues of his father and told him that he should mend his ways. This went on for some time and almost every passenger said it in one form or other. He never responded.
One day, a woman who was very weak, found it difficult to wade out to the boat and she was about to fall. The onlookers caught her and shouted at the boatman for being totally unhelpful. They said his father was a gem of a man and it was a pity that he should have produced such a worthless fellow. The young boatman looked at the passengers for a long time, heaved a long sigh and said “look, all of you told me repeatedly “Mone, acchande peru Nannakkanam Kitto” and I have seen to it that every one of you mentioned the virtues of my father every time you got into my boat. Would you have remembered him if I had been as good as he was? You would have started singing my praise. Am I wrong in complying with your requests?”
People like me who are in the evening of our lives find plenty of occasions every day to recall with nostalgia, the conditions of life and the behaviour of people, the materials and services in yester years, right from the morning cup of coffee and the quality of news coverage in the papers and the standards of integrity and efficiency, most of which have deteriorated, despite the giant leaps in technology and material prosperity. The overall sense of contentment which used to be there, is lamentably lacking. People are always in a rush from morning to night and even during the night, forever seeking something which seems to elude them perpetually. Even in so-called spiritual matters, there is a proliferation of institutions, functions, godmen and godwomen, miracle and manthra shops, but where have the happiness and peace, the basic satisfaction and tranquility of mind gone? For us, it just appears that the old order has changed but the present set up has done only what the young boatman has done vis-à-vis his father i.e. “Acchande peru Nannakki” IN HIS OWN WAY. Frustration at its worst comes up frequently. Is it due to problems of perception, wrong priorities, mismatch between ambition and ability, error in value assignment, obsession with sentiments and traditions which do not blend with the modern set up, lack of infrastructure, lack of proper leaders and sense of direction and so on and so forth? Can this trend be reversed or has it gone to” the point of no return”?
All in all, I pity the younger generation, because whatever has happened is not intentional and most of them, in their heart of hearts want to be helpful and peaceful. May be the fast pace of life does not give them time to think in the broader perspective. It is an irony of individual achievements and collective failure !!
*******************************
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)