Thursday 10 October 2013

We are Confused - Are we really?

Mr. Narendira Modi is the most searched politician in (GOOGLE) India. People in the last six months have started searching news related to election.

While Mr. Modi is said to be a politician who follows the dictates of the RSS which advocates fanaticism, still he is seen to be a charismatic leader. The citizens of the country know that his silence in the killing of many innocents in the riots. However even the secular citizens wish this time to be on the side of Mr. Modi because he is seen to be a wonderful, powerful, and a productive chief minister in Gujarat - in Gujarat they talk about job opportunities, lot of foreign investments, etc. What is hidden in this illuminated Gujarat is the fact that many things are veiled from the eyes of the public. For example, they say that every third child in Gujarat is underweight.  One can add many more things like this. One may look to clear one's prejudice or to know the fact. People search the internet for all sorts of things - unfortunately this may be credited to the favour of Modi - as the most searched politician. 

Jokes apart, any state, any country which runs on debts, will be a country that seems richer, brighter and modern. one can think of America - the most sought country in the world - the most advanced country in the world, the measure of the world; It had to shut down all of its public offices, parks because it does not have money to pay to its workers. Every month it borrows and pays - well this is how the economy works. Experts will advise me to shut my mouth - they will say everything will be alright soon... This is how I think Gujarat works. This is how Mr. Singh wants it to work for India!

Well Gujarat is like this... what has this to do with the confusion?
We confuse advancement, modernity, with technology and capitalism and foreign investments. We forget that every country has to develop its own modernity. We think that development has to be in the same way as it happened in America or it happened in Britain. For us economy means, multinational companies, markets, ultimately capitalism. America and other multinational companies come to India not as 'Good willed people' who want to help the Indian economy but to improve their wealth. The fact is that these multinational companies take money from the developing countries to their homeland. Without realizing the fact (at least masking it in the name of development) the government welcomes them with a red carpet, gives them hundreds and thousands of acres of land, gives them water, etc... but for what? - well that is another area that has to be explored.

Imitating the western modernity, we want to see our country develop. All of us want to see our country to develop. But the politicians are in the hands of the West, in the hands of the media, in the hands of the corporate companies. They fund the party and in return the politicians welcome them without ever creating job opportunities for its citizens. 

When Mr. Prime minister opened the gates to the corporation companies, the media, the america and everybody saw that he was the man who is ready to help the multinational companies to enter India, now that he has completed his two terms and not much (in spite of all that he has done to the USA and its corporate companies), everybody starts projecting Gujarat's Modi as the efficient leader who can still open the borders for free marketing.
We are blinded by one type of development - we do not see any other.

Mr. Singh was seen to be one of the 100 most influential figure in the world by TIME. Later when he has not reduced (?) subsidies, not done the reforms as they expected it to happen to India, sing becomes an unwanted figure.


The same people who cast doubt about Modi and his innocence in the riot, think that Modi means business.. (One has to ask whose business? and What business?).

The western mind is fed up with the present prime minister for not letting them as they expected to be. The Indian citizens are not in favour of the present prime minister not because he has not developed the country but because he was not able to provide work, not able to reduce the price hike for food, gas, and light. Therefore the citizens see Mr. Modi and Gujarat as models for the country. 
The Westerners and capitalists look for Mr. Modi.

If we as citizens of the country look for Mr. Modi because of price hike, we will have it still higher, because Modi will follow more intense globalized economy than that of Mr. Singh.
Mr. Modi does not have any economic policy that is different from Congress.
Even when secular Hindus, Christians and Muslims look up to Modi to avoid congress, they do not understand that the country will be darker still, not mainly because of religious fanaticism but because of capitalistic fanaticism. 


Friday 13 September 2013

NO WAR - IT IS A BUSINESS



War has always been devastating. only those who have been affected by it (leave alone the millions who have been buried by the bombs). Those in the white house can never understand the brutality that it can cause. comparatively Europe normally opts for dialogue and peace where as America's first attempt is war and never negotiation. When it comes to Middle East America's first choice is to threaten...
(Middle East is something special to America - When thousands of women and children brutally murdered by the Sri Lankan Government, and it was shown to the world by BBC - the whole world kept silence but when it comes to the Middle East; America says that there is no proof... and yet it wants to threaten...)

America has been selling, offering ammunition to the rebels... they sell to the governments... they want to keep their industry alive...
Let the world close its ammunition industry...
If there is no war, then then there is no need for guns and tanks...
If there are no need for them, then the government cannot profit ...

The best way to keep american economy alive is to create opportunities for war... Because the first country which profits more than anybody else in the world is America - it occupies the first place in the selling of ammunition.

It is time for the citizens of America to raise voice against their own government - If they believe in Democracy!

Sunday 8 September 2013

Yes, We can - Yes, It is Possible - A new Direction

Obama became very famous and became the president of the USA with the slogan Yes We can. The slogan was used differently in different countries. Modi used the same slogan on August 12, in Hyderabad. Obama was seen as a new president who will give a new direction to the policies of the united states. Recently his initiative to take military action against Syria has shown that the US presidents are not different at all - Obama is no different from Bush. The US Presidents' cry have been to establish peace only through war. They claim to be peace makers of the world by initiating more violence and more conflict. 
[taken on 07/09/2013 at 6.45pm]

The contemporary world needs another direction with regard to the issues of conflicts both within countries and between countries. Pope Francis raised his voice very strongly to change the direction. On the 1st Sunday of this month, the Pope expressed his concern for peace in the world, particularly in Syria. The pope said that ‘war begets war and violence begets violence.’ The pope spoke from his heart. I can only admire the sincerity and the openness with which he spoke and invited everyone to fast and pray for peace in the world on the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary – Queen of Peace.


Today millions of people, united with Pope Francis, prayed for peace in the World. The pope said that we are as human beings have to care for others. Our indifference towards others and the acts of violence only indicate that we bring back to life Cain who murdered his own brother.  He also said that war is the language of death and not of peace.one can only break the language of death only through forgiveness, dialogue and reconciliation.

The Pope said: "I ask myself: Is it possible to change direction? Can we get out of this spiral of sorrow and death? Can we learn once again to walk and live in the ways of peace? Invoking the help of God, under the maternal gaze of the Salus Populi Romani, Queen of Peace, I say: Yes, it is possible for everyone! From every corner of the world tonight, I would like to hear us cry out: Yes, it is possible for everyone! Or even better, I would like for each one of us, from the least to the greatest, including those called to govern nations, to respond: Yes, we want it!"

The politicians need to change their attitude – military action can only worsen the situation. One cannot bring about unity through guns and tanks.

Tuesday 30 July 2013

Church on Fire

A church, near our living quarters, was burnt leaving only the external walls and Ashes...
I have been coming to this city for three years residing here more than three months.
I had the desire to visit that church, but never made an attempt to enter it.

This morning hearing that the Church was burnt, I went at last but I saw nothing but ashes...
the smoke is still on






Don't postpone anything... Visit something or somebody when you want to do so...


Monday 22 July 2013

Amartya Sen on Secular India

Nobel laureate Amartya Sen confirmed his hope in secular India that he wishes that a secular person who can make all the citizens of the country feel more secure in the country. He complained that Modi, who is said to the be next prime minister candidate for the BJP in the forthcoming national election in India.

Sen said: "“No, I don’t approve of it... I don’t think the record is very good. I think I don’t have to be a member of the minority in order to feel insecure... We Indians don’t want a situation where the minority feel insecure and could legitimately think that there was an organised violence against them in 2002. I think that is a terrible record and I don’t think Indian Prime Minister as an Indian citizen... Of who has that kind of record. No, I do not.” [the Hindu]

While there are lot of political scientists were critical of secular India, Sen has been on the other end that India should be a secular country. He has confirmed his hope in secularism once again.

Thursday 18 July 2013

What is the good that a ‘good’ business does?

What is the good that a ‘good’ business does?[1]

Although the title of the book is the good that business does, Robert G. Kennedy in the sixth chapter develops an idea of ‘a good business’.  He is also developing the idea that how business is aiming at the collective or the common good to the people at large. Although the book is aimed at seeking further intercourse between the catholic teaching and business, it also leaves an open space to raise some questions with regard to the theme developed.
It is true that when a business is called good and bad, the same distinction can be applied to other spheres of human endeavor too:  in the field of aesthetics one could speak of a good art and a bad one; in the field of ethics one could speak of a good act and a bad act; in the field of medicine one could speak of a good treatment and a bad treatment or a good medicine or a bad one, at a more larger and wider context one could speak of a good religion and a bad religion as well. I think that it is a good idea [!] to make distinction between good and bad.
I think that there is a difference between asking what is business and a good business. One of the fundamental features of a business is profit-making. Hence one can speak of good that comes out of the profit-making; even within profit making how certain good is contributed to the society.
I am sure that the substantial difference lies in the answer that one gets to these questions.



[1] This article is just a reflection on reading the following book. Cf. Robert G. Kennedy, The Good that Business Does (Acton Institute, 2006). This is not a response to the book. The questions raised here are some spontaneous questions that came to me. It is never intended to review the book, nor to refute what is suggested there.

Wednesday 10 July 2013

Floods... France, India, Germany, Canada - JUNE 2013

Almost a month is over after the floods in Lourdes...

In India the destruction is devastating..



In Germany in the first week of June...


Canada in June last week


Floods in other countries and India are different...
In European and North American countries, water came into the cities and villages
But it did not take many lives as Indian Floods...

JUNE 2013.... Flood Month?


Monday 20 May 2013

Pantheon, Pentecost and Petals

On the Pentecost day one witnesses showers of rose petals passing through the eye of Pantheon. Pantheon itself a wonderful pieces of architecture and petals come down it seems wonderful. I have heard of them but did not see them. Today I happen to be close by although without a good camera...

My cellphone captured at least the three firemen on the top of Pantheon who were thrwing petals....


Sunday 5 May 2013

Publications: Knowledge - Business 2

Publications - Knowledge - Business 1 continued...

This attitude of the publishing companies tells us that it has become a very good business like the pharmaceutical industry. One of the flourishing and money making businesses is the pharmaceutical industry which claims to the safeguard the health of the people and makes money. Publication has become an unavoidable business in capitalistic societies. When societies were warring societies the business was, let us assume that it was certainly – iron tools. When the societies were civilized, the costliest business still is something connected with ammunitions, but they have become all the more become business behind the scenes. Every country spends millions of dollars on the buying, ammunition, maintaining its mechanisms for the military. But it has become business among the states – the governments. They either sell them or create opportunities that the buyer may continue to buy ammunition from them etc. This leaves the citizens of the country to deal with other business that does not involve the bullets, missiles, bombs. Because physical power is not considered to be worthy in civilized societies, we think of another power, a worthy power that one can attain – ‘Knowledge is Power.’
Once one cannot use any more nuclear bombs, no markets can have profit over it. If it creates other ways of using it then it can have life. Hence apart from the military then one could think of the atomic power energy etc. The same idea is found among the publications. One makes it a business. Once physical power is replaced by the intellectual power what do we do? We want to establish that we are more talented in writing. Some use argumentative skills like the soldiers using the sword. Some use the guns to destroy the whole arguments and some use the bombs in order to destroy the whole school of thought. We have different schools of thought, different philosophers, some followers of philosophers, followers of followers, and everyone thinks that we have the final word on the issues and probles of the human world. the universities, the grades, researches augment the writing and publishing… it has become impossible to have a comprehensive view not on a very big issue but a very narrow and particular issue as well.

We have millions and millions of books – thousands and thousands of publications.  Whether we have elevated ourselves from the warring societies to peace loving societies or not, but what we can say is that the publications established themselves as unavoidable profit making firms. One example to show that this is a business and only a ‘business’ one can think of the e-books. The cost of the e-books should be less compared to printing books. If the cost of printing is included in selling the printed books, the e-books should cost less compared to the printed books. But one can check the price list and see the difference between the e-book and the printed book is almost nothing. The printed book and the e-book are the same. I am not ready to believe that the publishers do not include the cost of the printing in selling the printed books and therefore the price of the e-books are the original price of a book.
Think of another example: If one wishes to buy a single article published in a journal – to download an article from the publishers, one pays minimum twenty dollars, sometimes thirty, while the price of the whole printed journal may be less than that.  Let the publishers flourish, the book sellers grow, because knowledge is power and the publishers help to grow in knowledge. By only seeing the number of books available on a particular subject I am only reminded of my ignorance… everybody is ignorant – some learned ignorant – some specialist ignorant –.

What are books if not profit making?

Sunday 28 April 2013

Publications: Knowledge - Business! - 1

The photos of Benedict XVI, Bishop Emeritus of Rome, are removed and the photos of Pope Francesco are now decorating the Church offices, Bishop’s houses, Presbyteries, colleges and schools. The same endeavor of ‘removal and replacement’ is seen in the bookshops around the Globe.  Every bookshop in catholic countries will have by now at least 10 different books on Pope Francesco. Ii is a good sign because the Church, apart from the Diocese of Rome, will be in touch with the thought of the Bishop of Rome - Pope Francesco. I only wish that people around the world not simply buy the books but they read them and follow them in their Christian life. Will they be able to buy all the books that will be published in the name of Pope Francesco, because the books will be published one after another claiming to offer a unique view on the pope or his thought?

I have more questions. Why did not Cardinal Bergolio attract the publishers’ world as Pope Franceso? Did not cardinal Bergolio say these things already in Argentina? Why were the publishers uninterested in the words of Cardinal Bergolio and are very interested in the thought of Pope Franceso? Does this mean that Pope Fransceso has radically altered his views from that of Cardinal Bergolio? [If he had not changed his position and thought, does it mean that whatever the Pope says become a radical thought?] However, when these words come from the bishop of Rome they are definitely radical. However, even if somebody else had been elected the Pope, by this time there would have been at least seven books if not ten.



Well - The thought of Pope becomes crucial and radical for the publishers because the books on pope will make money and Pope Francesco is only a name of reference for citation! I do not claim that the different popes’ views are the same, I am only pointing out what the publishers do. Utilizing the opportunity they create ideas, different perspectives, and interpretations of the same speech of the same person.

To be continued...

Monday 22 April 2013

Religiosity and Richness


Why do people go to the Temple or praise God? May be, because they have everything in life. We praise God because we have all the wealth and enjoy all the benefits of the human world and therefore we are concerned about the higher life. This would mean that the rich praise God or that praising God becomes possible when we become rich. In other words, only when our lower needs are fulfilled we will be concerned about our higher needs.  Abraham Maslow had talked about the hierarchy of needs. If religious belief is concerned with the higher or fuller life this means that one’s belief is to be concerned with the higher life. It should mean that only the rich are very particular to praise God. We hear and read that people throw gold and money in some famous temples and Churches. The offering can be seen as the sign that they do not value money so much compared to God and his magnanimity. They are able to tell God – Money or gold is nothing in front of God –.
On the contrary we also know that the poor people are more religious than the rich. Jesus valued the small coin thrown in the offertory box. He also said that there will be always poor with you. Although he had said this in a different context, it seems to me that the passage can be interpreted to mean that these poor will always be there visiting the temple and they will be always faithful. It is obvious that the poor outnumber the rich in marching towards the temples and Churches. When one compares a country like India with the Western countries which are quite well off one can very well understand that they do have less believers and church attendance.[1]
It seems then that the claim that the rich will seek God seems to be false. God is not sought only when one is rich but there is something more to belief and not simply the material welfare. It can be argued that the poor rush to the Churches in order to seek the material welfare, seeking the help of God to attain human welfare. If the poor praise God only to receive material goods, then basic need is not God but my hunger, my clothing and house, in this sense Maslow may seem to be right. I doubt whether this can simply be associated with human needs of hunger. There seems to be more to this. The regular attendance, the affinity to religion can be awakened and one’s explicit identification with a particular religion can also have sociological or political reasons.[2] This affinity to religion can be also seen to be inherent in the human person. That is what some like Paul Tillich called faith as the ultimate concern of the human person.[3] In this sense it seems that the economic relations have nothing to do with the religious beliefs. Poor may be more religious (concerned about the higher life that is inclusive of the ordinary life) not because they lack wealth but in spite of lacking wealth. The rich can also be religious in spite of the wealth they have if they are poor in spirit otherwise the immersion in the world can block the awareness of the ultimacy. Therefore the awareness of one’s need of higher life has an easy access in the poor whereas it seems difficult for the rich.


Does it mean that the poor are really and spontaneously concerned about the ultimacy and the rich are not? Was Job religious because he was rich – or because he was poor in spirit? Or he was rich because he was religious? Did he praise God even when he was poor because he was already poor in spirit – or he became poor because he prayed?




[1] I restrict myself here to Europe. I do not want to talk about the United States now. It is true that the United States has more believers and regular attendance of the liturgical celebrations. There are reasons for the differences.
[2] In India the celebration of vinayaga sathurthi has become very popular that can be seen to be associated with the political reasons rather than religious reasons. The question here is about believers therefore the question is raised in the religious context and not others.
[3] Paul Tillich calls the faith as the ultimate concern of the person.

Wednesday 17 April 2013

FIRST STONE and RESPONSIBILITY



René Girard’s book - Violence and the Sacred - displays some of his important themes such as the mimetic desire, rivalry and scapegoat mechanism. I need to read the book again. His research is very interesting. More interestingly his article entitled “The First Stone”[1] beautifully explains his important themes on the reflection of the passage where Jesus asks the crowd (Jn 8: 3 – 11).
It is a very interesting article in which Girard analyses the importance of the significance of the ‘first stone’. Since the Gospel passage does not talk about the stoning – because stoning’ never occurred – Girard goes on then to compare another passage in which Apollonius of Tyana motivates the people of Ephesus to stone at a stranger. When someone is surrounded by a furious crowd, the first stone is the very important one. All have stones yet all hesitate to be the first to stone at the culprit or the stranger. When the first stone is thrown then stones follow – one after another non-stop. This is what is ‘mimetic’. The first stone has no model whereas all other stones have a model to follow.[2]
Girard explains how Apollonius does not mention about the first stone at all. He only motivates them to stone at the beggar, Whereas Jesus talks specifically about the ‘first stone’. He exposes the importance of the first stone since it is associated with responsibility. Jesus calls for introspection. Those words of Jesus and his action put an end to violence. It calls for seeing the stranger as I am because he has the same flesh and heart like mine and I am in sin like the stranger. The call reminds that the act is associated with responsibility. At the end the life of woman is saved whereas in Ephesus the significance of the first stone was not spoken and the beggar was killed leaving him under the heap of stones. The gospel then calls for justice which drops the stoning altogether.[3]
He then also pays attention to action of Jesus who bends down to write comparing him to the beggar – the victim in the narrative of Apollonius. It is a very interesting interpretation. The interpretation can be best understood only when one reads Girard’s “The First Stone.”   



[1] René Girard, “The First Stone,” Renascence: Essays on Values in Literature, Vol. 52, No. 1 (Fall 1999): pp. 5 – 17.
[2] Cf. Ibid., pp. 8 – 9.
[3] Cf.  Ibid., p. 14.

Friday 12 April 2013

Difference between Christmas and Easter

We had a break in the library. Four of us came out and discussed about the Church, Documents, Pope, Festivals. In the course of the discussion, one of my friends was sharing with us about his conversation with an altar boy during the season of Christmas.

He asked the boy what is Christmas? The boy seemed to have answered - "Christmas means that Child Jesus is risen ."



If that is so what is the meaning of Easter? - one could very well say - "Easter means that Adult Jesus is risen."

My friend was very sad and angry and said how badly we transfer our faith to the younger generation. We don't really pass on the faith narratives to the kids well.

Could any theologian tell me whether that kid, who said Christmas is the celebration of the resurrection of Child Jesus, expressed an important truth about God?
If Jesus as God died to his Godhood and was born to a woman - Could this be considered as resurrection? If Resurrection is dying to one life and being born to a new life, can the birth of Jesus be considered as resurrection?

I am trying to rescue the baby who said that Christmas is the celebration of the resurrection of child Jesus? Do I blaspheme?

Sunday 7 April 2013

THOMAS' DOUBT


St. Thomas is often seen to be doubting Thomas as though all other apostles never doubted. However Thomas has become the figure of the doubt of the apostles themselves. He is seen to be the personification of the 'doubt and suspicion' of our own.

Why did St. Thomas doubt? One could see St. Thomas to be a representative of the empiricist tradition of philosophy - unless I see and touch I will not believe. This seems to be as simple as that. But there is something more to it. When does one believe what someone says? Think of a situation in which you have witnessed something spectacular in your life. You convey this wonderful news to your colleagues that you had witnessed something great without any felicity, gladness as though you are a news reader. Do you expect the other to believe that you had witnessed something spectacular?

This is what happened with Thomas. He sees his own friends in the same way as he left them after the death of Jesus. Thomas was like all others in a closed room. In his absence Jesus appears and all the other apostles were present and Thomas was missing. When Thomas returned to join the company of his own colleagues, he did not see anything different in the room. The room was still closed. There was no enthusiasm. The fear that surrounded them still seems to be there. And they tell him that they had seen the master. Would anyone believe that they had seen the master?

Think of another situation where the room is wide open. The other apostles are very happy. They have become courageous. They want to go out and preach the truth about the Master. They want to go to the streets. Thomas enters and wonders what had happened in his absence. They tell him that they had seen the Master. Would anyone doubt that they had seen the master? Do you think that Thomas would doubt it?



This is the situation that happens with the apparition of Jesus again – when he asks Thomas to touch him. Not only the doubt of Thomas disappears but also that of all other apostles. They open the doors – go to the streets. Thomas can be seen to be the one who transformed the life of the apostles by his doubt.
It is not enough that one witness something wonderful and extraordinary, but it should touch you, it should transform you. It is not enough that it transforms one’s life but he shares this wonderful joy with others.
It means  that it is not enough that you see Jesus but you should allow him to touch you, to transform your fear into courage, courage to proclaim the truth.

Thursday 21 March 2013

MODERN CONDITION


There was an advertisement about an Automatic sex shop that ran like this 
– non importa se un angelo o diavolo: totalmente anonimo – 
[it does not matter whether you are an angel or devil:  totally anonymous]. 
This advertisement captures the present condition of the modern man.

Freedom today is understood to be one without constraints.[1] This is the world that has created an ambience in which one can do what one likes to do when one is being watched by the other. It is a kind of total freedom that one enjoys or wants to enjoy. This culture of freedom is expressed by many activities done by men facilitated by modern science. The automatic shops are one of the symptomatic expressions of this phenomenon. But this can also be seen to augment the condition of the modern man in which one can do what one likes freely, even without an iota of inhibition of what the other would think of it. Anybody in the liberal world can choose to buy what he or she likes to without external constraints, invisibly. I am only reminded of the mythical ring of Gyges.[2]

Further, the advertisement also captures the condition which insists on the detachability of a person’s being from his acts.[3] Modern world concentrates on what one has to do rather than what one is: it does not matter whether you are an angel or devil but you have the freedom to choose and act anonymously. This can also strengthen the view of those who are angels – to be angels and act as angels even when no one sees. In this way, this autonomy can also lead to what we call to be authentic self-realization.

Additionally, the advertisement also indicates that there are people who still feel ashamed of certain acts being done in public. This is to say that the human person has an inherent notion of the other’s credibility. Even nobody in the auto-bus knows me; I do not behave wrongly due to the fact that it can endanger my identity. My identity is also shaped by others that transcends beyond my freedom of doing. But it is not merely because the law forbids. For example no law forbids poking one’s nose with his finger, yet one does not do it in public because it does relate to his character and with his identity.


In spite of the fact that after the construal of the human person as the individual by the contractarians and liberals who appeal to the rationality of the individuals, the advertisements only appeal to the consumers emotionally. Emotions can be triggered more easily than rationality. While the business world today encourages and appeals to emotionality for its profit, it is ridiculous to say that religion appeals to emotions and therefore leads to fundamentalism. If the statement about religion is true, then it is doubly true that the capitalistic business world is more fundamentalist than religion.




[1] Freedom today is understood in the sense of ‘negative freedom’ that is defined by Isaiah Berlin who distinguished it from ‘positive freedom.’
[2] Cf. Plato, Republic, Book II, 359d – 360c. Glaucon makes a strong case that people act justly precisely because of the law or what others think of them. Therefore when one becomes invisible with the magical ring, the claim is that even a just would act unjustly. In this advertisement, even an angel would behave in devilish ways!
[3] This can take us to further reflections. Charles Taylor is right when he says that the moral domain has given more importance what to do rather than what to be. He says we are more worried about determining our actions in terms of rules rather than the good to be.

Saturday 16 March 2013

God and Evidence - Love and Evidence


I watched an interview – Richard Dawkins was interviewed by Mehdi Hasan for al-Jazeera television which was telecast in December last year. In watching this fifty minutes video, one is pulled in both directions – that of Dawkins and that of Hasan.

Dawkin's main argument is that science is the best method available to us to know the truth: If ‘science’ cannot answer some questions, no other way then is it possible to know the truth. Dawkins made it very clear that we lack evidence with regard to God. Evidence… and … evidence … 

Years back in southern India where the atheistic movements grew strong, they held public meetings to conscientise people of their rights and powers. In between, the speaker would speak about the non-existence of God. Their atheism can be said to be founded on the emancipation of man. They were practical atheists who worked to liberate the common man from the oppressing caste Hinduism. The main arguments were based on the inconsistencies found in the scriptures, oppressive elements and the structures of the religion. At times they would also challenge God – the speaker in a meeting would say: ‘If there is God, let there be no light (Electricity) in ten minutes.’ He would give five or ten minutes to God and seeing that there was light still would conclude – ‘see now, there is no God.’[1]
That is not a very serious argument at all. However, in making this claim was he making himself a God, as an absolute and all powerful Master who could predict the future? May be. One could interpret that way. But I do not think so. If electricity goes off in 10 minutes he would still claim that how can a ‘good’ and benevolent God become a ‘cheap’ god who responds to an ordinary man, one in billions of humans. How could that God be great at all? Or he will claim that this is not because of God but x or y were the cause or some mechanical failure etc. Basically what they were aiming to show is that there is no ‘evidence’ to show that God exists.
In one way or the other what connects an illiterate in south Indian land who embraces atheism for emancipation of humanism and scientists, theoretical atheists Like Dawkins, is Evidence. Apart from the fact whether I disbelieve or not, I will place humanist atheists in a higher rank than scientific atheism.


Well. One of the questions by Hasan to Dawkins was about the possibility of placing evidence in every aspect of human life: Dawkins rephrased the question and answered - How do you know that your wife loves you? He replied – ‘evidence’. I can see love in her eyes, in the voice… – although this is not a scientifically testable.
One could love his wife if she shows that love in her eyes, in her voice, etc. There are also cases where because evidence suggests otherwise, husbands hate wives – divorce them – in some places like in India kill them. Charles Taylor in his A Secular Age speaks of Desdemona analogy when he talks about the validity of the claim ‘science defeated religion’. He says that Othello had a chance to speak to her without being deceived by evidences fabricated by Iago. If Othello had opened his heart to Desdemona he would have known the truth.[2]
Once I am deceived by the evidences, I will not be ready to be open to the alternative view at all. The alternative view is totally hidden from me. The only way is that I have the evidence. The truth value is always something external to me. The alternative view of knowledge is cut off from me.

I only pray that there are no persons who act that they love the other to produce false evidences – and I wish that the there are no persons who like Othello be deceived by the ‘brute’ evidences. I wish that people give 'love' its place and not keeping it within the frame of evidence.
...............................................


The video can be watched online in the following link:




[1] [To wit: Today no body in Tamil Nadu will take up this challenge or they may reverse the challenge – If there is God let there be light in 10 minutes].
[2] C. Taylor, A Secular Age, pp. 567 – 568.




Thursday 14 March 2013

POPE FRANCIS



The Catholic Church has a new Pope – Pope Francis. I was having fever and I could not go out of my room for three days. These days I was telling myself that I should be there in St. Peter’s Square when the new Pope makes his appearance. The privilege to be there in the basilica is not given to everyone. Many who want to be there cannot be there. I was motivating myself that everything will be allright. The white smoke appeared on 13.3.13 around 7.05pm. 
It was raining and I had cold and fever therefore I was in a dilemma. Would not it be better to watch the whole event clearly in T.V. rather than being in the piazza without getting able to go any way near the pope - I asked myself. I was hesitant to go out but I should say that I was almost drawn towards the Basilica. The motivation came from a priest. We reached the Basilica around 7.35pm. We found a place at the center of the Piazza.
The drizzling slowed down as though helping the people to gather in peace. The piazza and the street were full…around 8.10 the senior cardinal announced the good news that we have the Pope – Cardinal George Bergoglio who will take the name of Francesco. I was amazed – I am sure others too. His name did not make an appearance in the newspapers and television. I was thinking that he is from Italy, the name suggested it. Somewhere from the crowd someone said – Argentina.
The Pope appeared – the crowd shouted – the Pope stood still – unmoved, at least I thought he was. When he started speaking I was moved literally. He said: “My cardinal brothers have found one from the other end of the earth to be the bishop of Rome” – He laughed and we too. He then called everyone to pray for the Pope Emeritus. The most important and moving part was this: he said: before I give my blessing, please pray for me that lord bless me. I was astonished to see him bowing his head – No wonder he chose the name Francis.




I am sure that the Church has a very humble, simple pope who will be a living witness to many. He seems to be the ‘first’ in many ways – I hope it continues.
Prayers for You Always – Viva il Papa.

Wednesday 6 March 2013

Language and Identity - A Joke!



An e-mail is being circulated which also came to me yesterday about the possiblity of English as the official language of the European Union. This may not be true, because the following has been taken from  www.ahajokes.com which is not found anymore. one can find this in http://www.nairaland.com/1053641/european-commission-adopt-english-official 

It seems to be interesting how certain changes in english would look like:
Enjoy the joke.

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the EU rather than German which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five year phase-in plan that would be known as 
"Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of the "k". This should klear up konfusion and 
keyboards kan have 1 less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be ekspekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent "e"s in the language is disgraseful, and they should go away.

By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.

After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil finali kum tru! And zen world!


Language certainly has an important role to play in human culture and identity. It would be hard for many to give up and think that language is only a tool for communication. The contemporary world should learn to live  with multilingusitic communities and diversity. The liberals often speak of rights and understanding humanism plainly based on human dignity. The strict secular regimes often claim that multiculturalism is no good to maintain human dignity but only narrows down our vision. The choice of one language as official can only result in misrecognition...... 

But why do also people in the liberal state become so fundamentalist about language? Nine months ago, the European was accused that it faours English by the French Press.[http://www.euractiv.com/culture/commission-denies-english-langua-news-513705] The problem may still continue... who knows?

Wednesday 13 February 2013

Secularism Hanged !


India is known to be a secular country which does respect all religions, their worldviews. The ‘neutrality’ can be seen to be the best options available for a secular state. Many events in Indian politics have shown that this neutrality of the government is in theory rather than in practice. One could argue that it is better to be in papers than nothing at all. Confidently some may argue that a ‘kind totalitarian’ is better than a ‘ruthless secular state’. However, it is unthinkable for a modern man to think of monarchy, or totalitarian regime however kind and loveable the rulers are. It is a [?] historical impossibility to throw away the democratic elements of our polity. It is then important that we constantly purify the brutal aspects of theoretically democratic and practically undemocratic elements of the State.

One issue to show how sometimes most respected secular states can fail to establish its own secularity is the case of Afzal. Afzal Guru was hanged recently in Tihar Jail in India without the knowledge of his wife and his son. What is important here in the case of Afzal Guru is to pay attention to the verdict: “In its over300 page judgement the apex court said, ‘The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties, had shaken the entire nation and the collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if the capital punishment is awarded to the offender.’”[1]

The invoking of the collective conscience is important because it means that whole nation is traumatized at what happened in December 2001 – an Attack on the Parliament when the B.J.P. was ruling the country. Afzal Guru was seen to be the culprit although there were no evidences to suggest that he was either directly or indirectly involved in the attack. The judges invoked the ‘collective conscience of the society’. The collective conscience of the society does not definitely include the Muslims of the nation but mostly of the Hindus. The point is when one raises voice against the verdict or the brutal hanging of Afzal, those citizens will be seen not to belong to the ‘collective conscience’ and therefore not as members of the country. Should I consider myself to be part of the collective conscience? It was invoked because the case was one of the rarest of its kind in the country – an attack on the pillar of the nation and Democracy.

In order to satisfy the majority collective conscience, the government / Court has executed the verdict soon after the refusal of the mercy petition by the President of the country. The B.J.P. leaders had earlier raised slogans like “Desh abhi sharminda hai, Afzal abhibhi zinda hai", which means (in stirring rhyme), "Our nation is ashamed because Afzal is still alive.”[2] The B.J.P cannot raises slogans like this in the coming election, because Afzal is no more. The congress will gain popularity also among the Hindus. While all others will keep silence since it will be against the collective conscience. What has been done openly by the B.J.P is done quietly by the Congress: the difference between both kinds of ‘Hindutva’ is the mode of operation – open and secret.

Going beyond evidence and to invoke collective conscience is not new. In the Ayodhya case the honorable judges invoked ‘faith and belief’. To this many like Ashgar Ali  have responded who said: “Tomorrow other judges motivated by their faith may use this judgment as a precedent and deliver other judgments invoking faith….Thus, stretching the argument … in a democracy after all numbers count and so faith of majority community will play greater role than faith of minority community and court of law will thus become majoritarian in their attitude and all the legal values and protection of minorities and their faith in the constitution may be ultimately subverted.”[3]

This raises the question whether a secular state can really be secular forgetting one’s own faith at all in the functions. Will it be possible for the citizens or the responsible office holders to use ‘the veil of Ignorance’ of John Rawls? It seems not... Our deep and ultimate concerns keep coming in different ways.
Although there were gaps in the evidences and arguments, the country needed a perpetrator who will be hanged and in whom the vengeance can be thrown. It can mean that what is stake is the ‘scape goat mechanism’. Girard says: “In the evolution from ritual to secular institutions men gradually draw away from violence and eventually lose sight of it; but an actual break with violence never takes place.”[4]

For the unity and to satisfy the collective thirst for revenge a perpetrator was hanged and our thirst is quenched. May be joining with Arundhathi Roy, one may rightly ask: “Now he has been hanged, I hope our collective conscience has been satisfied. Or is our cup of blood still only half full?”[5]




[3] Asghar Ali Engineer (2010): “Ayodhya judgment – triumph of faith or constitutional legality?” accessed on 19th October on http://www.csssforum.org/default.as… As quoted in http://www.lebret-irfed.org/spip.php?article450
[4] Rene Girard, Violence and the Sacred, trans. Patrick Gregory (Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1972 [4th 1984]), p. 307.