Weekend notes

Upgraded to IE 8 this weekend. Comes with lots of nifty features. Liking it....

Suddenly realised that i haven't likened any new hindi/tamil songs after "Rehna Tu" from Delhi 6. So browsed the latest Top 10s from Bollywood/Kollywood. Nothing impressive except for "Chor Bazaari" from "Love Aaj Kal". Pritam's continuously surprising - "Life in Metro", "Jab We Met" and now "Love Aaj Kal". There are people who accuse of him being a copycat. But he is turning out to be likeable copycat. This song is peppy and enthusiastically sung. Neeraj Shridhar from Bombay Vikings group and Sunidhi Chauhan have sung this song really well.

Talking of copycat, there is an entire thread in youtube on the songs AR Rahman has copied....Hmmm...

Talking of AR Rahman, watched in youtube the felicitation function in which the entire South Indian music fraternity was present and lots of good words to tell about ARR for winning two Oscar awards.

The Pussycat Dolls version of Jai ho is interesting....

Purchased "Breathe Right" nasal congestion strips y'day and tried out y'day night itself. And i must say it worked pretty well.

A haircut and coloring is long overdue. Hopefully will get it done today.

Weekend chores are pretty demanding...cleaning vessels which had piled up in the sink, grocery purchase, clothes purchase, vacuum cleaning the house, throwing the bags in the bin, ironing clothes, washing clothes, etc, etc....

Thiruvalluvar's Religion

Let me start this posting with the rationalistic thundering of Thiruvalluvar:

113: "EpporuL yAr yAr vAi kEtpinum apporuL meipOrul kAnbadu arivu".
meaning "Whatever you hear from whichever person, think about the truth of it and then accept it if it is the truth."

I remember reading the late Kanchi Seer quoting extensively from Thirukkural in Deivathin Kural essentially to prove two or three points - a) The vedhic religion is not alien to the Dravidian culture b) The brahmins have alway been part of the Dravidian culture and c) there never was an Aryan invasion of India.

It's interesting that he quotes "marappinum othuk kolalaagum paarppaan pirappu ozhukkam kunrak kedum". Paarppan by the way is Brahmin. The meaning of the kural is
"The Brahmin who has forgotten his scriptures could read them up again;But if he neglects right conduct he will lose his birth-right."

Let us look at some of the other kurals where references to Andhanar or paarppan or Aruthozhilalar or to Vedhic religion are made in Thirukural.BTW, different schools interpret the meaning of the words Andhanar, Paarppan and Aruthozhilalar in different ways.

25: "aIndhavithaan aatral agalvisumbu LaarkOmaan inthiranE saalum kari "
meaning "Indra, the king of inhabitants of the spacious heaven, is himself, a sufficient proof of strength of him who has subdued his five senses"
Indra by the way is a vedic god.

30: "ANDHANAR enbor aravor,marraveyuirkkum sendhanmai poondolukalan"
meaning ""The virtuous are called as bhramins,since they help all living beings""

413: "Seviyunavir Kelvi YudaiyAr Aaviyunavin AandrArO doppar nilathu"
meaning "Those who in this world enjoy the instruction which is the food of the ear, are equal to the Gods, who enjoy the food of the sacrifices".
Sacrifices by the way are central to vedhic religion.

543: "ANDANAR noorkum arathirkum athiyayi nindrathu mannan kol"
meaning "The Brahmins's scripture and virtue spring from the sceptre of a stately king"

560: "aapayan kundrum,ARUTHOLILOR nool marappar, kavalan kaavaan enin..."
meaning "If a king doesnt guard properly cows will stop secreting milk and bhramins will forget vedas".

610: "Madiyilaa Mannavan Eithum adiyalanthAn thA AyadhellAm orungu"
meaning "The king who never gives way to idleness will obtain entire possession of the whole earth passed over by that God who measured the worlds by His foot"
a reference to thirivikraman – incarnation of lord narayana.

617: "madiyuLaaL maamugadi enba madiyilaan thaaLuLaaL thaamaraiyi naaL"
meaning "They say that the black Mudevi (the goddess of adversity) dwells with laziness, and the latchmi (the goddess of prosperity) dwells with the labour of the industrious". Vishu's wife latchmi dwells in the lotus.

1103: "Thaamveezhvaar Menrol Thuyilin inidhukOl thamarai kannAn ulagu"
meaning "Can the lotus-eyed Vishnu's heaven be indeed as sweet to those who delight to sleep in the delicate arms of their beloved ?"

These might indicate that he tacitly acknowledges the then prevalent caste system where what one does was determined by birth and that he was acknowledges the gods and practices of the vedhic religion. However, the following couplets bring out his true stance on what we truly inherit by birth:

133: Ozhukkam udaimai kudimai izhukkum izhindha pirappAi vidum
meaning "Propriety of conduct is true greatness of birth, and impropriety will sink into a mean birth"

351: Porulalla Vatraip Porulendru unarum maruLANAM MANAp pirappu
meaning "Inglorius births are produced by the confusion of mind which considers those things to be real which are not real"

409: MerpirandhA Raayiynum kallAthAr Kizhppriandhum katrAr anaithilar pAdu
meaning "The unlearned, though born in a high caste, are not equal in dignity to the learned; though they may have been born in a low caste"

The killer ones being:

972: "Pirappookum yella vuyitkkum Sirappokkum Seythozhil vetrumai yaan"
meaning "All human beings are one in circumstances of birth. Diversities of works give each his special worth"

973: "Melirundhum Melallaar Melallar Kizhirundhum Kizhlallaar kizhal lavar"
meaning "The men of lofty line, whose souls are mean, are never great. The men of lowly birth, when high of soul, are not of low estate."

Plenty of articles are written to figure out which religion Thiruvalluvar belonged to. It is worth noting that the ASI has recently declared that Thiruvalluvar to be staunch follower of Jainism of Dravidian time.

My reading tells me that it's difficult to tell which religion Thiruvalluvar practiced. Amidst the lofty ideals, he seems to reflect ideas of the religions
that prevailed during his time. Different couplets can be interpreted in different ways. So, to take refuge in Thirvuvalluvar to make a point won't travel a long distance.

MS Bug

Every now and then MS bug bites me. And I’m amidst once such spell.

I at times try to figure out what’s my most favorite rendition of hers. And it just keeps changing, never the same.

Is it “Rama Rama Guna Seema” or is it “EnaaTi nOmu phalamO” or is it “Deva Devam Bhaje” or is it “dEvi brOva” or is it “Manjudai Putti” or is “Yaaro ivar Yaaro” or is it “palintcu kAmAkshi” or is it “Sri Rangapura vihara” or is it “sArasAksha paripAlaya” or “kanakashailavihariNi” or is it “AkilAndeshwari RakshamAm” or is it “Nagumomu ganaleni Naa jaali thelisi” or is it “Vadavarayai Mathaaki” or is it “pakala nilabaDi” or is “O rangashayee” or is it the much sought after “kurai ondrum illai”?

At different points in time different songs of hers have taken over me. Some of these songs end up sticking in my head for days together. During such periods in trance, I see myself singing inside, at times singing aloud in a weak voice and at times showing lotta emotion as most of the songs are a plead to the lord to liberate oneself from this drudgery of life.

Staying alone and fighting all kinds of battle in an extremely intense project for almost an year now has left me weary. And during these weak moments, listening to my favorite MS renditions in youtube and that too some of them with video is a great source of relief.

This morning watching in youtube to her monumental niraval in the third part of the song “pakala nilabaDi” left me with Goosebumps (ref: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58Sjs1LzIF0).

Just watch her rip Kharakhara Priya between 2:40 and 7:00, esp. reaching the crescendo between 6:00 and 6:48. The niraval is on the line “Tanuvuche vandana monarinchu chunnara” in which Tygaraja questions Lord Lakshmana - Do ("monarinchu-chunnaaraa") you prostrate ("vandana") with your body ("tanuvuche") before Him?
What a song!! What a singer !! What a composition!! Divine!!

Camp Dawkins & End of Fair Society

Two articles in this week Sunday Times caught my attention:
The first reports on Richard Dawkins's attempt to set up an atheist camp in UK for young children.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6591231.ece

This one has a decent joke as well which brought out a smirk:
How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb? Two. One to change the bulb and the other to film the work being done so the fundamentalists won’t claim that God did it.

The second article is a brilliant one. It tries to see how a cross section of the British society view the gap between the haves and have nots in these times of recession. Some telling lines,

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6591250.ece

Rowntree’s research, among more than 1,000 adults of all income groups, shows that more than two thirds of them admire the rich, and assume that their high salaries are a proper reward for ability, effort and performance. On the other hand, they are largely contemptuous of the poor, especially those who live on benefits. Those people are routinely described as scroungers.

And though most people described themselves as very concerned about inequality, it wasn’t the gap between rich and poor they cared about. It was the gap between the top and themselves that they wanted to see narrowed.

We’re told we live in a meritocracy, so despite the evidence around us, we pretend it’s so. Anything else would be too painful to bear. We can tolerate the comfortable or luxurious lives that some people live only by telling ourselves that they are deserved. These people must work much harder than we are prepared to, or have skills we cannot dream of.

In the research sessions, participants projected all kinds of virtues – dedication, private study, willingness to tolerate stress – onto those with high salaries. Equally, we might find the grim poverty or simple limitations of others’ lives indefensible unless we told ourselves that these people had a choice, and it’s wilfulness or laziness that keeps them as they are. The idea that our life chances are radically unfair is more than we can admit.

Our need to believe in the worth of those above us might give us a different explanation for the anger over bankers’ salaries and MPs’ expenses. It isn’t the fact of their high incomes that enraged us. It was that their selfishness and incompetence destroyed our illusions about their worth. Our faith required us to believe that they deserved what they got. Having their faults exposed has made us uncomfortable.

This mass delusion doesn’t mean that attempts to make Britain more equal are doomed, but it does show that those who think it desirable have to take a different approach. Expecting most people to care about inequality as an abstract concept is pointless: they don’t. They think that quite a lot of it is fair. But the Rowntree research does show a way forward.

The research group were asked which of three societies they would rather live in – a traditional free-market one, with few protections; an egalitarian one that cut the gap between rich and poor; or one that gave priority to improving everyone’s quality of life.

Almost nobody, not even the rightwingers, opted for a society that made economic growth and standards of living a priority, especially if these were accompanied by greater insecurity. Yet this is pretty much what Labour has offered in the past dozen years – increased wealth but much more precarious lives. If that bargain ever was appealing, it isn’t any more.

Only a small number opted for the egalitarian choice. The overwhelming majority chose the third.

Under the banner of quality of life, people were happy to work and consume less, and pay more tax, if it meant they had less pressure in their lives and better public services. They agreed that they wanted to “reduce social dysfunction and move away from market values”, live in a less divided society, experience less crime, and invest in preventive help for children and young people in need. In other words, the kind of society most people thought would make them happier also happened to be a rather more equal one. But that was a byproduct, not its central appeal.
The political party that can recognise this mood and respond to it will be facing an open goal. People can see the point of a fairer society if it’s principally something that will improve their lives too. Tragically, new Labour never had the imagination to seize this ground; it was too busy counting targets and letting markets rip. Is it even remotely possible that the Tories can make enlightened self-interest a powerful cause?

Indian English

Having worked in UK for a reasonably long period of time, i have a fair measure of the differences between UK English and Indian English. As brought out wonderfully by this Wikipedia article, the divergent evolution of Indian English has enriched English with its unique grammar quirks and local language influences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_English

Unfortunately, we Indians feel small when these so-called "mistakes" are pointed out by people, including few fellow Indians, who profess to speak "Standard English". On the contrary, we should be feeling proud for continuing the tradition of this language which has been enriched from cohabitations and liberal borrowings.


By the way, I personally have caused a laugh or two for using phrases such as "Solid lunch", "Gone for a Toss", "Kindly do the needful" :-) These three are mentioned in the article referenced above as usages unique to Indians.

Nasaadiya Suktham

Few days back i accidentally read few quotes in the Times of India from Nasaadiya Suktham.

Then i started searching the net to get different interpretations and commentaries on it.

It turned out that the Nasaadiya Suktham (after the incipit ná ásat "not the non-existent") is the 129th hymn of the 10th Mandala of the Rigveda. It is concerned with cosmology/creation and talks about the origin of the universe. The key point is ‘Not ever’. Nothing here is ‘ever’. Everything changes. Everything changes fast. That is the nature of this universe. There is nothing ‘ever’ including the primordial purusha.

What interested me most was the questioning and contemplative spirit of Vedic Rishi who wrote this Suktham. The Rishi who wrote this Suktham comes out as one with childlike curiosity and is probably awestruck with grandeur of creation. The standout line is "He surely knows, or may be He does not!”

I mean what a refreshing change from the dogma pursued by later day religions, and it is immensely appealing to the modern, scientific mindas he allows spirituality to coexist with science.

What's most likeable about the Rishi who wrote this Suktham is that he doesn't sound like the final authority on this subject, a subject which is still being debated after 3500 years he wrote this Suktham.

BTW, this Suktham is supposed to explain the conditions before the Big-Bang.

Given below is the translation of the Suktham (Partly taken from Radhakrishnan& Moore's Indian Philosophy and partly taken from the translation by Raimundo Panicker)

nAsadAsIn no sadAsIt tadAnIM nAsId rajo no vyomAparo yat
kimAvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmannambhaH kimAsId gahanaM gabhIram

At first was neither Being nor Non-Being.
There was not air nor yet sky beyond
What was it wrapping? Where in? In whose protection?
Was water there, unfathomable and deep?

na mRtyurAsIdamRtaM na tarhi na rAtryA ahna AsItpraketaH
AnIdavAtaM svadhayA tadekaM tasmAddhAnyan na paraH kiM canAsa

Neither death nor immortaility controls it;
And it does not have the appearance of one who dwells in darkness.
That one fetched all the fires/heat till the end to conciliate (make peace) with itself.
Hence there was nothing outside of this rich being whatsoever.

tama AsIt tamasA gULamagre.apraketaM salilaM sarvamAidam
tuchyenAbhvapihitaM yadAsIt tapasastanmahinAjAyataikam

Darkness was there, all wrapped around the darkness,
Without distinctive marks, this all was water.
Then that which was hidden by Void,
that One, emerging, stirring,
through power of Ardor (Tapas), came to be.


kAmastadagre samavartatAdhi manaso retaH prathamaM yadAsIt
sato bandhumasati niravindan hRdi pratISyAkavayo manISA

Desire entered the one in the beginning:
It was the earliest seed, of thought the product.
The sages searching in their hearts with wisdom.
Found out the bond of being in non-being.

tirashcIno vitato rashmireSAmadhaH svidAsI.a.a.at
retodhAAsan mahimAna Asan svadhA avastAt prayatiH parastAt

A crosswise line cut Being from Nonbeing,
But was the one above or was it under?
Creative force was there, and fertile power:
Below was energy, above was impulse:

ko addhA veda ka iha pra vocat kuta AjAtA kuta iyaMvisRSTiH
arvAg devA asya visarjanenAthA ko veda yataAbabhUva

Who knows for certain? Who shall here declare it?
Whence was it born, and whence came this creation?
Even the Gods came after its emergence.
Then who can tell from whence it came to be?

iyaM visRSTiryata AbabhUva yadi vA dadhe yadi vA na
yo asyAdhyakSaH parame vyoman so aN^ga veda yadi vA naveda

None knoweth whence creation has arisen:
And whether he has or has not produced it:
He who surveys it in the highest heaven,
He surely knows or may be He does not!