Beyond amusing... birth certificate of cows

 Couldn't but ignore following headline and hence read the news article: 

Show birth certificates of cows...

Now in Bengal, under the new regime, some legislators are demanding birth certificates of cows to be issued, to prove their age!  While livelihood of Bangladeshis and voting rights of muslims are being snatched, the political system is keen to ensure calves are issued birth certificates. Rather than focus on educating and integrating knowledge with values, our political system is out to drag us back to the pre-human era. 

In another news photo that I by chance came across in the morning, some scientists dropped the carcass of a cow into the ocean. Of course, the photo was AI generated.  Luckily, this was in China, not in India, or else, it would have been the most debated and discussed news item of the decade!  

Religion as personal or private?

Another note on the differences between religion as personal and religion as private.  Again, a very subjective distinction. 

In viewing religion as purely private affair, one tends to feel as one 'in charge'.  Just as in the case of property owned by an individual, 'private property', one feels that one has authority over it, so in the case of treating religion as private, one feels that one is in authority.  Unfortunately not every aspect of religion can be so 'subjugated'.  There are aspects of religion wherein one cannot be considered to be in the driving seat.  Being open to that possibility, in a sense being passive, is part of the nature of religion. 

Furthermore, any experience of the supernatural cannot be actually 'contained'.   If genuine, it naturally flows into every aspect of one's life.  Any attempt to contain it, restrict it merely to oneself, is one of the offshoots of viewing religion as private.  In the same vein, viewing religion as private tends to exclusivity (my religion and me; or my God and me) whereas when viewed as personal, there is greater openness towards inclusivity (my religion, me and all of us within a larger reality; or my God and me in the world).  

Openness

Another aspect of my 'conviction bank' being brought into the docks in recent times is the notion of openness.  While I understand that having an open attitude in life is more beneficial than a closed or rigid attitude.  However, is it really possible to be open-minded all through?  I used to chuckle at the quote I came across many years ago

Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out!  

But the point is that at sometime or the other we form a view and then stick to it. One cannot always be open to all and every different opinion or view on any matter.  Once we have taken a stand, we then can be open minded by letting it stand the test of ... whatever.  If it stands, good. If not, adopt a new stand?  If so, we'd go on changing views and convictions to no end.  So we have something fixed and other aspects flexible?  On the spectrum of fundamentalism at one end, and openness at the other, where does the middle lie? 

Or perhaps, I'm confused! 

Belief permeates everything

Reflection for April 27

In a theistic context, any accusation against God or His works is treated with great anger and resentment. Everyone is up in arms… do defend God. However, one needs to ask oneself, 'Does God need protection?… that too from us mortals?' Can He not stand on His own?

The apostles, when challenged by the political and religious authorities, boldly give witness to God and prefer to follow His commandments than human dictates. They were mostly true to this declaration: preference to God over human thinking. However, most of us, who take up cudgels against those who denounce God or in defence of God, are only like the dressed up soldiers at a fort, not the real soldiers. For when it comes to living by the word of that God, we fail – miserably, at times. Our whole vehement defence of God and His works, fails to inspire us to live by them, especially in our personal lives.

Belief, if true, permeates our entire being, our entire life, not merely our public life.

What has religion to offer?

The recent outbursts against Islam - camouflaged under the term 'terrorism' - is not a very healthy sign of things to come.  Every action, yielding a reaction which again becomes the source for a reaction.  Sooner than later, there would be violence and hatred and suspicion and most dangerously anarchy everywhere.  No one would trust anyone.

This brings me back to the question that I've been battling with myself: The relevance of Religion? Responding the reactions to the murder of the cartoonists in France, a person has this to say:

When we get stuck in a religious debate we are never going to win, we miss the point, which is that extremists are offering young people a sense of belonging, an outlet for adventure, and some kind of enhanced status. To combat this, we have to appeal to them as young people more than we have to appeal to them as Muslims. (Here's the source). Emphasis added.

So what does religion offer? Merely a sense of belonging, an adventure, an enhanced status? Then anything that offers these is a 'religion'...?

Theology or Anthropology?

As I was updating - or rather, reworking - my class notes for Modern Western Philosophy, I came across the dilemma of one of the writers, while speaking about some early philosophers.  He states that most of what is spoken of God is basically a human perception.  Philosophy of God actually offers a good insight into anthropology! 

What we actually perceive about God and all things related to God, is more about ourselves than about something supernatural.  Even in the movie, PK, if one focusses only on the God-talk or religion banter or about theology, one is certain to make a fool of oneself.  Instead if we focus our attention on what does the movie speak about us human beings, especially those who vehemently claim to be disciples or followers of a ´good and great´ God, then we stand to learn a lot.

Another thing that strikes me about the protests against the movie: when religious leaders speak of sacrifice, renunciation, brotherhood and all those virtues spoken of by true religion, there is hardly anyone paying attention, leave alone living up to those ideals.  But when there is something very fundamental and challenging that is posed about religion, every Tom, Dick and Harry becomes a ´religious´ person, a ´true devotee´.  

Faith and Religion (2)

As I sat for the adoration this evening, my thoughts on faith, religion and spirituality began to haunt me. I found asking myself, what is it that I answer when people ask me which religion do I follow? I certainly answer, Christian/Catholic. But does that answer stand for my closeness to Christ, being His disciple or is it to mean that I belong to the Church. Well one might say that it is the same but not to me. I might very well 'belong' to the Church: baptised, participating in all the practices of piety, regularly paying my subscription... but that does not necessarily imply me being close to the person of Jesus Christ. Thus, the answer is 'Christian'... but most often we limit ourselves to the latter explanation or realm of meaning. The former meaning - and the core - of Christianity is not what is indicated in our response.

So then, back to my dilemma: Is faith and religion the same?

Faith and Religion: the same?

During the last staff meeting, one of the points for discussion was the subjects for next year. When it came to Modern Western Philosophy, there were no takers at all... 'it is the most craziest of all subjects' was the final comment. I was the one who taught that last year and I will certainly love to teach it this year too. When it came to Medieval Western Philosophy, it was suggested that the Regent (Practical Trainee) could teach it. But then immediately it was rejected on grounds that someone with a clear Christian foundation and theology should teach the subject, since it is the 'real Philosophy'. I laughed out loud. Though the others were not amused, I had made my point clear.

Everytime we throw out Philosophy as a 'secular' undertaking or 'unholy', we go against the very grain of our 'Catholic' belief. Religion has done great good to humanity, but not always! Fundamentalism, an offshoot of religion, is perhaps the greatest terrorist in modern times. Why is it that we always end up having to choose between religion and philosophy (or for that matter anything). Why is it that we cannot see both as God's - or even human - creation for the betterment of humanity? Why then do we have to 'pick-and-choose'? Can we not gracefully blend these two?

I have my suspicion about the recent euphoria about the movie Cristiada. I do not say that it is bad (I haven't seen it at all), but when 'faith' is sacrificed at the round table of politics and religion, for upholding the latter, I have serious objections to it. One needs to see the movie Agora to only understand what havoc blind faith, puritanic belief and crazy religion can do!

All this makes me wonder if faith and religion are inseparable? For if not, then ...

May Christ show us the way!

When humanity is endangered...

The inhuman treatment of the Jews through eviction from their homes, separation of families, torture, labour camps, death ... makes one wonder how a human being can stoop to such a bestial behaviour. The worst is that it was not of one person (Hitler alone), but so many who perpetuated it (the Nazis). There may be several reasons why each individual choose to be so and not stand up against a system of dehumanisation. Yet, the fact remains, a whole nation, a whole race was targetted and almost annihilated. And their only crime? Being born a Jew!

The same story continues, more or less, when security forces storm and destroy three villages on Dantewada, Orissa. Their crime? Being labelled Maoists. If this is how each one tries to settle and eliminate every threat, there would be no one left. Each action of one would eliminate some but give rise to more. Everytime a jawan is killed, there are several who are inspired by his bravery and hence willing to join the armed forces. So too, everytime an innocent tribal is tortured and dehumanised, there will be several who would join the Maoists, not for its ideals but as against the armed forces!

Debasing ourselves!

The vandalisation of the statues on Tank Band, Hyderabad on the day of the 'million march' was perhaps the most foolish act that those involved could do. A clear proof that those involved in this desecration were hooligans who have no regard for anything good and noble. Those statues which they attacked were of great poets and writers, men and women who helped Telugu reach its prestigious place in literature.

Such acts do nothing more than debase ourselves and show how low we can stoop.

At Muniguda, Orissa

Walking through the ransacked convent and Church at Muniguda, Orissa I was trying to picture to myself the actual day. As Aquinas showed me the video and led Fr Wilson and myself through the destroyed Church and convent, I found myself rather calm and resigned. It was easy to get agitated and angry but somehow I could not. The hatred that led to that riots in December 2007 is still difficult to comprehend. To review them years later in a peaceful atmosphere was another experience: one of retrospective evaluation, of trying to find out the real 'why'?

The Church debris has been cleared (the photo is of last year) and plans are underway to renovate the Parish Church which has now been handed over to the Salesians. However the convent has been untouched since that day in December 2007. The burnt records, jeep, cots, chapel, kitchen, rooms and the corridors still bear a silent witness to what happened that day in broad daylight. However one may walk through those corridors or watch videos, the agony of those who lived that day there and had to flee for their dear lives can never really be fathomed or understood.

Shutting others out=imprisoning ourselves

The whole drama being enacted by the Shiv Sena about Mumbai belonging to the Marathi manoos is going overboard! The only thing I don't understand is how come people take pride in parading their stupidity, that too so 'bravely'? The more dividing lines we draw, the greater we imprison ourselves. The Shiv Sena fails to realise that the walls they build to keep non-Marathas out of Mumbai are the very walls that will imprison them and shut them out of the rest of the world!

Terrorism and partriotism

Last night I watched The Rock. The movie has Nicholas Cage, Sean Connery and Ed Harris... all three great actors. Ed Harris plays the role of a disgruntled General in the US Army demanding compensation for the soldiers who lost their lives in covert operations round the world under his command - he does so holding 81 people hostage on the Alcatraz and threatening to annihilate major US towns with some poisonous gases. Though it is truly an act of terrorism and blackmail, Ed Harris is never a terrorist. He does not intend any benefit for himself, rather it is for those who truly deserve merit and honour. Furthermore, during the course of the movie, he deeply regrets the death of the marines sent in to regain the Alcatraz. The best part is when he changes his plans and decides to leave the island without any of his demands being met, for he realises that he cannot kill innocent people to gain what he thinks is right. Connery too adds this line: He will not launch the rockets, he is not a terrorist, I've seen it in his eyes.

That draws me to ponder as when does not really become a terrorist. It is not when one aspires to do good, even if it means the loss of a few innocent. It is not when one passionately is ready to live and die for a noble cause. It is not when one is willing to risk everything for the sake of others benefit. But if one is willing to hold at stake the life of innocent people, people who have no idea of what his intentions are or what reason they are dying, then he is a terrorist.... however good and noble the cause maybe!

Take for instance, the Sri Lankan-LTTE crisis... whoever be the hero and whoever be the villian, for me, the one who plays with the life of the innocent is the terrorist. (Surprising, The Hindu often has the last page fully dedicated to this crisis, while DC rarely mentions anything about this whole issue - I realise, The Hindu is basically a Chennai based paper and surely the tempers there run very high these days!).

Who defines a terrorist?

The editorial page of The Hindu contains an interesting article (of course, against congress party men) and rightly so exposing those who now being glorified after having done heinous crimes in the past! Titled 'Immunity for mobs in the war on terror', the article by Siddharth Varadarajan, makes a point when he states: Bearing silent witness to injustice, as Bhishma and Dronacharya did, makes one morally culpable. Modern jurisprudence tells us that allowing the commission of a heinous crime that one was in a position to prevent makes one as guilty of the offense as actual perpetrator. Throwing a stone at a gurudwara or emptying a Jerry can of petrol on a helpless man or inciting others to do these terrible things are not the only way of committing a crime. Walking away when all of this is happening or about to happen makes a leader or police officer just as guilty.

He goes on to rightly say that we are in a way lob sided in our view of terror and violence. Terrorists blowing up people with bombs and splashing bullets are indeed great criminals (some one for whom no lawyer is even permitted to defend). But individuals guilty of inciting and orchestrating mass murders in the shadow of religion and caste, enjoy effective impunity.

Fundamentalism and courage

That Ms Anjali Waghmare's house was attacked and she threatened if she would take up the defence counsel of Kasab is indeed a shameful situation. It only shows that we are no better than Kasab who, guided by fundamentalistic ideals went about doing what he did in Mumbai. By attacking those who are taking up the legal fight on his behalf, we are sending a totally wrong signal to the world outside: we are equally fundamentalisitc!

The straightforward and balanced article of Ms Antara Dev Sen in Deccan Chronicle (Disrespect for truth is the real insult April 2, 2009) denouncing the growing culture of disrespect towards the 'other' is very refreshing. Whether it be the support BJP extends to Pradhan in Orissa, or Modi in Gujarat and worse of all, the much-tainted Advani as the Prime ministerial candidate, they all smack of fundamentalism where we play ostriches to truth. While being ignorant of truth is excusable, hiding or openly challenging truth and replacing it with self-proclaimed truths is a real crime. Hats off to DC for publishing such balanced articles too. The Hindu seems to be too much under pressure to speak the truth openly. So it ends up saying lot of good things but not all the true things!

We cannot afford to let the whole nation be bullied or brain-washed into believing this crap. The silent majority ought to make their minds clear and take a stand - lest the noisy few rule the roost!

Excercising will or power

The latest attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team while in Pakistan and the subsequent accusation of one of the Pakistani ministers that it is the handiwork of Indians (Pak minister blames India for attack on Lanka team) is a strange twist to the whole debate of terrorism. We Indians have always thought of Pakistan as a terrorist state and viewed every Pakistani as a terrorist. Statements accusing Pakistani infiltration come easy to us. Now for once we are on the receiving end. Of course, the first reaction is to brush it off as 'bullshit'. But all the same it is good to introspect and see what it really means - and feels - like to be accused of something. Whether the accusation is right or wrong is another issue. I think we need to be fair enough to be open to such a criticism and introspect rather than jump the gun.

Our strength lies not in the amount of ammunition we have or we use but in the will power we exercise in retaining the ammunition in our stores - long enough for it to decay!

Waiting for V'day!

The challenge of Renuka Chowdhury's daughter to the Rama Sene guys is something to look out for. More than watching the fun, I wish the media gets involved, especially the English dailies. I say this for the simple reason, that media is quite powerful today. Anyone antagonising the media is sure to get is hard and strong back on his face. And finally I wish the self proclaimed 'moralists' of the country sting some media people!

That this whole drama is unfolding in Karnataka is another good angle to watch out for. What happened in Gujarat in 2002 was overlooked by many because it was not a 'forward' state. But here's one of the most literate and 'in-the-news' state for all its intellectual and academic achievements. What the government does or says will be closely watched by one and all. All involved have to take sides.

Let the real colour of everyone be revealed to the bare eyes - and ears - of the nation.

Something wrong everywhere!

The self-proclaimed guardians of culture and tradition and really making a nuisance! But I really appreciate the master brains behind these innocent youngsters who go to any extent to follow the dictates of those above - the 'enlightened'. With what great ability they are able to motivate and enthuse these groups of people to boldly go down the wrong path, with such vigour and certainty is worth analyzing.

Contrasting this with our formation for so many years, with such an amount of input and sweat and blood, the result is hardly anything worthwhile!! On the one side, there are such motivated - even though wrongly and for destructive purpose, but motivated they are - youngsters who are willing to do anything and for no personal gain and on the other hand, we have with us youngsters who would not feel anything if they have to sit and do nothing for days together!

Something wrong everywhere!

Bombs, religion and renunciation

The news bit about online support for sadhvi, who is accused to be part of the Malegaon bomb blasts is alarming. With all the evidence pointing to her involvement, people are still ready to vouch for her - either she is a true saint or a real crook who has the manipulative power to move masses.

I wonder how many of those hindu brethren who have lost their beloved in bomb blasts support her in this matter.

Its all that blame game and parochialism! Something happens in Sri Lanka and Tamilnadu is on fire. Christians are attacked in Orissa, and Christians all over the country cry foul. Some Muslims create havoc on 9/11 and the world over, all Muslims are branded terrorists. Why is it that only when I am touched do I get so passionately involved. Such occasions really show the breadth of our relationship circle - the real depth of our humanity.

On the other side, with the arrests of some significant group of people in the Malegaon blasts throws light on some important issues. That the MTS could lay hands on some top guns - be it in the army or in religious circles - is praiseworthy. Justice for all! What's surprising as said by one good friend of mine in all this terror blasts and arrests and all is that army officers who have sworn to protect the country are also involved in spilling innocent blood. He said that religious leaders and others who have renounced life being involved in such crimes is no big surprise. But that surprises me - a religious myself! Perhaps these "religious" people never really understood life and its true meaning at all - leave alone have an encounter with the Divine! The question of renouncing life then, does not arise at all!

Religion and fear...

The memorandum submitted by Bp Jala - of which I came to know from austraLasia! - in a way puts on the table one of the most tricky questions avoided thus far. If we Christians are willing to introspect, then I suppose the question posed by Bp Jala would be a pointed question for the Hindutva groups to ponder upon: Does not the Hindutva opposition to Christian activities come rather from the fear that many of the deprived communities may be so empowered as to assert their own rights and resist exploitation?

This is truly something that everyone needs to introspect. I remember Claudi asking me the same question some years ago during a session: "What are you afraid of?" Then, it caught me unawares but it lead me rightly to the core of the matter and address that rather than go around beating the bush.

I often keep asking myself this question since then. Done well, this really hits the nail on the head as to what exactly is the issue at hand.