Poula and English

( In Poula) 4 Siidonou rekounou Johan Baptist nou mah khailu peire le dayu vei dziikhao dayu nasii paodoupoa vere. 5 Alia Judea teidei hinou ea Jerusalem nuhdu hinou mai alaosou Johan ko keire donou tave. Alia puletao nou mah paopa-a puhnou peletaoye Jordan Rei hinou dziikhao dapeie.

6. Johan hai racho mainou souyu sahnii nou banouwe, alia souhee khyakho nou puh khyahi khopfiie, alia puh touso nou rekou khahzii ea laivoudziie.

( In English) 4 John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And there went out to him all the country of Judea, and all the people of Jerusalem; an they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 Now John was clothed with camel's hair, and had a leather girdle around his waist, and ate locusts and wild honey. (Mark 1:4-6 RSV)

RSS' Mohan Bhagwat and Mother Teresa

The saffron brigades have once again made an unkind remark on the Christians in India. This time specifically by saying that Mother Teresa's work is not as worthy or valuable as theirs because the former had conversion as the motive while the latter's motive is just to serve. 

There are so many Christian educational institutions and healthcare centre in the country. Millions of people have benefited from the services provided by these institutions. The motivation for these institutions is the love of Christ Jesus; no doubt there But what is the purpose for their existence? Why is there an educational institution -- to provide education or to convert people to Christianity? Why is there a hospital -- to provide healthcare or to convert people to Christianity? For RSS, the answer is clear -- to convert people to Christianity. 

Christianity is a missionary religion and so there are so many organisations that work to bring people to Christ. But institutions that are set up to provide healthcare, social service or education are there to provide for what they are set up. Mother Teresa set up a home to care for the poorest of the poor, and that institution is to care for the poorest of the poor. There are those who may ask why the cost is so low there when it's just so high outside or why such a  well qualified person is working there when an outside job would fetch so much more money. Well, you have to tell the truth there-- the love of Christ motivates. If a person is impressed by the answer and want to follow Christ, he is welcome to do so. However, these institution or the workers will not say ' become a Christian, and you will be given a job or better service'. Christians don't do that and ought not do that. 

What is there that is so difficult for RSS to make sense of this aspect of 'service'? Hatred or ignorance? The religion that RSS follows teaches against hatred. So though there may be a few of them who are driven by hatred, this may not be pervasive. So I would think that it's due to ignorance -- Ignorance of what Christianity is or who Christ is. But ignorance is not a bliss. The longer time RSS spends in ignorance, the more frequent its blunder will be. RSS may as well be doing so much of community service. But understanding why Christians too are providing service will not be harmful. I think it would rather help every one. 

God and Science

Justice Katju in his blog on 25th Feb. 2015 made certain comments against God's existence. Being a self-confessed atheist, he has made similar comments even before. In this particular post, he made five points. Point number 4 has been asked for ages, made famous by Dostoyevsky's novel the Brothers Karamazov. In the novel one of the characters, Ivan, asked something to this effect: If there is a God why all this suffering? Why war, starvation, natural disaster etc that killed millions of people? Is God bad or is God not powerful enough to prevent these things? This particular one Justice Katju raised is different from the other four, which I think are more similar to one another. These four questions are about God and Science, and the reasons for atheism.

He says religion believes in God and Science in matter -- matter which is in motion in accordance with certain laws which can be discovered by scientific research. The apparent point is that religion's God cannot be discovered unlike Science's matter. But does Science really deal with matter alone? How about energy? One may answer 'but you see E=mc^2' . Besides, energy's presence can be inferred! Scientific research can't be done without 'inference to the best possible explanation'. One does not have to see the Big Bang, but from the present data you infer to that conclusion... because that conclusion explains best the data being observed. But this way of reasoning is not confined to scientific inquiry alone. This is done in Philosophy and this is done in Theology. You don't have to be able to touch God, taste God or see God. From the observable things, you infer God's existence. This is what cosmological argument for God's existence is about! This is what teleological argument for God's existence is about.

But yes, there is a difference between scientific inquiry and a theological inquiry. But there has to be a difference because the disciplines are different; the questions they deal with are different. The nature of the answer to the question ' What is the meaning of my life?' has to be different from that of 'what  all elements constitute water?'  Scientific inquiry will not deal with the former kind of question and theological inquiry will not deal with the latter kind of question. Science has been able to cure small pox. Justice Katju thinks that Science will answer more and more of the questions in time... just as it is learning how to harness atomic energy or solar energy in time. Alas, Political Science will not help us in achieve World peace nor will Economics help us get rid of world's poverty. Geography will help us understand more and more about weather and Astronomy will help us understand more and more about the galaxies. But Physics will help us produce more and more powerful Nuclear Bomb and Chemistry Napalm. Science cannot domesticate human heart! This is the reason to look to scientific progress as THE answer to human predicament will be a disappointment.

A person can be a scientist and also a religious believer. Why not? The two are not mutually exclusive. Science and Religion can be complimentary. Science and Religion interact at certain points, but the two also deal with two different kinds of question. True, that scientific inquiry deals with matter. But is human life all about matter, collocation of atoms and their dancing? Is parents love for the child just dancing of atoms and nothing else?  This does not mean that material aspect of human life is false. Human being is made up of matter. Yet this explanation of human life is not a complete picture of human life. We need a different layer of explanation to capture the wholeness of human life and the reality of this world.

But regarding the question against God raised in Brothers Karamazov, Dostoyevsky also gives his response in the same novel. Not a straightforward answer, but an answer, nevertheless, to the challenge of Ivan. I think that's the kind of response Dostoyevsky would give to justice Katju... and I wonder the kind justice has not provided a rejoinder to the response of Dostoyevsky! 

Freedom Fighters or Terrorists

There is a saying that is often repeated: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. At the superficial level, there appears to be truth in the statement. However, if one digs deeper there are at least two reasons why the statement is problematic. This is important to be set right because faulty idea such as this can have a life of its own and later on hurt the larger society. Arriving at a globally agreed understanding of what consists terrorism has been elusive for various reasons. However, as of today a credible case can be built that defines terrorism as 'employing terror as a political tool by state or non-state actor in a deliberate, systematic and sustained manner upon non-combatants in order to attain certain political objective'.

From time to time Imphal valley has witnessed bombs being planted in public places by non-state actors, resulting in several civilians being killed and wounded by the bomb blasts. Barring an incident or two – like the one where a bomb was planted at Mini Secretariat, Senapati, recently – bomb culture is largely absent in the hill districts of Manipur or even in the entire Naga-land. This suggests that the principle with which some of those in the Imphal valley and the hill districts operate are different. All the non-state actors operating in the Imphal valley or in the hills would insist that they are fighting for self-determination, for political space where they can exercise political autonomy. One important distinction, however, is the way the different parties pursue their political objective.

Given the frequency of bomb blasts in public places, it is hard to miss the point that certain non-state actors are resorting to terror to achieve their political objective. Even in a full-blown war, maximum restraint has to be maintained to avoid civilian casualties. Gun-fights and bomb blasts that target the rival armed forces will occur in battlefield. Yet a distinction must be observed between combatants and non-combatants. Bombs in public places that target non-combatants is terrorism. This is a poor reflection of a group that is pursuing self-determination. Even when the political objective is just, the strategy to achieving the goal can damage the cause. Planting bomb in public places is just the kind of strategy that will invite international and local outrage – a perfect recipe for political disaster; a freedom fighter having become a terrorist.

The same concept of terrorism applies to para-military forces as well operating in the region. Fake encounter killing is not an unusual story being circulated among the general public. 'Friends of the hill people' undertaking active effort to befriend the hill people get nullified with an instance of fake encounter killing. Given the history in the state or the region, significant number of people grew up thinking of the armed forces as Devil's stooge. With an instance of fake encounter killing, it is so easy to typecast the entire security personnel with the age old impression. Even without any effort to reach out and befriend the hill people, 'friends of the hill people' might as well look within and try to curb any kind of fake encounter killing and harassment of innocent public. This will be more productive in creating a friendly outlook. Yet the more important reasons is because of the moral implication such an action bears and guilt associated with it – or ought to associate with it.

The North East in general has a sense of historical movement which is rather different from the mainstream Indian society in several ways. For example, the mass uprising against the British Raj did not take place in the North East just it happened in other parts of the country in the 1930s or 1940s. This kind of mass movement or the lack has a bearing on the present political scenario. No wonder there is some sort of a political faultline between the North East and the rest of India. Given this reality, the way these different entities – state and non-state actors – respond to the ever evolving society will determine the course of political future and its speed of change. Let no one take the general public for granted!

( For the Hornbill Express for 23rd Feb. 2015)   

Getting Things Right for Marriage

It is better to remain single than to walk out of a failed marriage. Given that marriage involves very deep physical and emotional union, walking out of a marriage is a painful experience. And when a child is already involved in that failed marriage, it adds lifelong issues and more pain to the child, the woman and the man. It is also better to walk out of an engagement than walk the aisle with the wrong person. It is less damaging for both the persons to take different paths, even after engagement, than share the path for a while and split up later or live with the wrong person all of one's life. But if one has got things right in the first place, marriage is beautiful. With the right person beside you, your joy is amplified and your burden halved.

Living with another person as spouse is about, knowingly or unknowingly, unmasking yourself before another person. One's thoughts, habits, desires and other components that are part of the individual are shared with the spouse for weeks, months and decades. And if there are deep and basic differences between the two persons, conflicts will arise. Depending on the issues, the conflicts can be superficial or bad. Conviction on religious belief and moral values are generally more deeply rooted than preference for certain food habit, dressing style etc. A fairly religious believer will find it difficult to be happily married to a person who is fairly superficial – if not anti-religion – with regard church going, tithing etc. In fact, if one person is a fairly committed church member and the other a fairly committed member of a Temple/Mosque, conflict will soon arise. No wonder biblical teaching restrains a Christian from getting married to a person of different religious persuasion. Thus, for a successful marriage, shared conviction on religious and moral belief is the first key point to be noted.

Second key component for a successful marriage is communication. Communication includes the medium as well as the content being communicated. Living together as couple will mean talking about all kinds of issues – from the mundane to the sublime. So when the educational gap is too wide between the two, certain content being communicated across gets only partly taken in or, worst, lost. If such communication gap accumulates over a period of time, chance of conflict between the couple increases. With wider cultural gap, chance of flashpoint increases. Without proper communication channel – medium and how content gets across – marriage will descend into a disaster.

Third key point is about maturity. Legally marriageable age for boys is 21 and for girls 18. But physical maturity does not necessarily follow emotional and financial maturity. Even at 25 a person could be just as old as 15 – irresponsible, dependent and unprepared to build a home. It is physically, emotionally and financially draining for the parents when a child is ill. With much care, illnesses can be minimised; but it is hard to completely prevent it. Without physical, emotional and financial preparedness an unforeseen but likely event such as an illness can damage any prospect of a happy home. Most marriageable Nagas are physically and emotionally stable, but many are financially unprepared. One does not need to begin a marital life with a fat bank balance or a huge asset. However, it is needed to start life with no debt besides having a stable source of income to run the family. Without these three components of maturity in place, it is more prudent to delay marriage.

If these points are essential to take note of, then it is important that one gets to know the person fairly well first before getting into a romantic relationship. Once a person gets into a romantic relationship, it is difficult to maintain objectivity – you refuse to see the negative side of the person. Moreover, to ditch a person after getting to know his/her weakness after being emotionally entangled is not as good as not getting emotional entanglement with such a person in the first place. But to get things right – from preparation to getting married – parents and the child must learn to talk and discuss about such issues. To that end, the culture to talk and talk on all issues between parents and children must be appreciated and encouraged. As an individual and a society, let bygones be bygones; let a new chapter begin for us all. And may God help us all in establishing a stable home and a flourishing society.

(This article will appear on 16th Feb. 2015 @ Hornbill Express) 

Feast of Merit in Marriage

In the ages gone by, our ancestors did not have wealth so much so that sharing a meal with his fellow neighbours was a costly affair. Going to the field was not safe; headhunters from the neighbouring villages might launch an ambush. Nature was harsh, and he did not have medicine to get back his health whenever an illness strikes him; he has to wait and let natural course have its way towards recovery or death. Rivers and monsoon rain were not domesticated and therefore irrigation system was poor. When taken little more of rice beer, that drunken state makes him unfit to plough his field. All of these factors made our ancestors poor. In such widespread shortage of wealthy ones, to have earned the status of a generous man who could feed the whole village was indeed an honour. It was truly a feast of merit.

It seems that the hangover continues; the search for honour lives on. But this times the feast is dished out during marriage. Not every marriage feast is about seeking honour, but not every marriage feast is also about generosity. The individual knows best the motives behind the action. The bigger question, however, that requires reflection is whether marriage feast that is fast developing into a culture merits affirmation or otherwise. Surely, in any marriage guests, friends and relatives specially who come from afar must be provided a comfortable stay. But the idea and practice of marriage feast goes beyond this.

Depending on the size of the groom's village and the of the bride, if she is from another village, the expense varies. Given the general economy of the district residents, anything around five lakhs is a significant figure. Bigger programme would go beyond five lakhs and modest ones below this figure. But the truth is that even one lakh is so high for most of the households. Many families run into debts as they strive hard to provide education to the children or as an illness hits hard one member of the family. Many more are just about sufficient to meet their needs. Most people would be emptying their life long saving if two lakhs get withdrawn from their purse. Only a small percentage would remain unhurt with few lakhs spent to provide a marriage feast. No wonder even long ago feast of merit was such a rare occasion!

A benevolent giver should be affirmed. Seeking honour is not bad in itself. But when marriage feast becomes a pattern such that it begins to create pressure on those who are unable to afford it, then this honourable action becomes questionable. It begins to put pressure on the society at large when a young man or his relatives begins to feel being 'left out' without such a feast. Feast of merit was optional for our ancestors; marriage is not quite like that. Marriage is widespread across different economic strata. Once it begins to emerge as a cultural practice such that being 'left out' is a shame for the family or the groom, the rich ones cannot just shrug it off and say the poor need not follow the cultural pattern. The rich and the poor have both contributed to the emerging culture, and therefore for the sake of the larger society, a different pattern would have to be set by all the parties.

It is time to make marriage ceremony less expensive – particularly without a feast. The occasion is special. Yet what makes it beautiful and joyful is not necessarily the cost. Simplicity has its own charm. Seeking an honour in a pervasive occasion like marriage, and which only a tiny section could achieve it without getting financial hurt is not a desirable path to earning fame and honour. If generosity is the motive, giving on another occasion that will not develop into a harmful culture in the near future is more desirable. In today's age, hosting a marriage feast is not necessarily the most creative way of showing generosity or sharing one's joy. If generosity is truly the reason, why not pay off someone's debt or the school fees of those children whose parents labour hard in the rain? This is unlikely to materialise because generosity may not quite be the single reason or even the main reason – something else too is involved. Yet at the end of the day, given that the emerging culture of hosting a feast in marriage is becoming more of a burden for most families, it would be more appropriate for a responsible citizen to set a different trend. May the tribe of those who are willing to set a different culture increase! 

(This article appears on 9th February, 2015 at Hornbill Express) 

Politicising the Womb

In recent times, there has been an attempt by certain social and political figures to use womb to further the religious faultline that is now reappearing after NDA returns to New Delhi. Sakshi Maharaj, a Member of Parliament from Uttar Pradesh and who was selected by the then General Secretary of BJP Amit Shah to contest the election, had recently said that Hindu women should have four children. It was this same person who had said that Nathuram Godse, the one who murdered Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, is a patriot. VHP working President Praveen Togadia went further by urging Hindu couples to produce 8-10 children each in order to ensure that the religion he adheres to survive for years to come. These two are joined by other members of the Saffron brigades who urge Hindu women to produce more children. Given that the preliminary leak of the Census 2011 report suggests that the Muslim's percentage in India has gone up in contrast to Hindus' percentage having gone down, one should not be taken by surprise if the rhetoric heats up.

It is true that Muslims have higher birth rate than most other religious groups, and that Muslims are more conservative about use of family planning measure and that their children specially the girls get married at an age lower than the girls of other religious groups. However, it cannot be established that the growth is due to deliberate plan to emerge as the biggest religious group in the Indian sub-continent or the world and dominate over the rest; nor is it due to imagine threat or insecurity the community perceived from others. The growth can be mainly attributed to religious doctrine, ignorance, lack of access to family planning measure etc. The point that the sharp increase is possibly best attributed to porous border with Bangladesh, however, cannot be missed here. But this is also unavoidable because right within Bangladesh there are 111 Indian enclaves. The people in these enclaves are Indian, but since they are right within Bangladesh Indian Govt. has not set up Police Station, Post Office, etc. for the people. So legally they are Indian, but practically they are more like Bangladeshi. Similarly, there are 51 Bangladeshi enclaves within Indian states – Tripura, Assam, Meghalaya and West Bengal. These people are legally Bangladeshi but practically more like Indian. Given this kind of situation in the border, strict regulation of crossing the boundary is never easy. If the saffron brigades do not want to see Muslims from across the border coming into India, resulting in Muslims' population increasing, then the more appropriate measure is to tell Modi to settle the border issue quickly. Urging the Hindu women to reproduce more to compete with the religious minority specially the Muslim is more of a crude and irresponsible call.

In sharp contrast, the Pope tells his flock not to produce so many children, but shows responsible parenting. All religions would insist that having so many children is not necessarily wrong. However, responsible parenting requires that you produce children not more than you can raise. Having produced so many children, and yet failed to provide decent education or home for them is not an ideal situation. It is even worse if the untrained and uncorrected children grow up to make life difficult for the parents and the society. There are possibly those who are, due to poverty in training or resources, unable to demonstrate responsible parenting and the result boomeranged on them. But the point that the Pope makes deserves paying attention to across different religious lines.

At a time when communalisation of politics is on the rise, politicising the womb not only disrespects the women but also prepares the ground for polarising the religious communities further. Interpreting the call in the light of what all have been happening – undermining secularism, forceful reconversion to Hinduism, praising assassin Godse, pseudo-scientific remark from Vedic era etc. this is another salvo from the quarter close of the ruling dispensation that tries to threaten the rights of the religious minorities and well-being of the larger society. If RSS and its affiliate are given free hand, our society is doomed. In all of this, one can take comfort in the fact that an idea that is destructive will eventually self-destruct. If politicising the womb is a bad idea, the idea and those who advance it will not be able to sustain it for so long. The larger society will eventually realise the futility and chaos that such idea give rise to. After all sustaining a civilisation and taking it forward requires an idea that does not threaten the rights of the other to flourish.

(This article appears @ the Hornbill Express on 2nd February, 2015)