As I See It All

There is no fairy tale and there is no fairy world

there are only PEOPLE unfurled

some with knives to do the damage
and some with the cuts plus a message

Messages which echo till eternity

With broken hearts and damaged spirits
we make walls, islands, mountains and our limits
We soon forget the lost hope we once treasured
let anger and sorrow permanently anchored

Amongst all this, I forget the basic rule of life

Fairy world is my imagination of my undamaged self
All imagination needs a reality with physical shelf
I shelf up that imagination in me and walk all around
Try to run very fast with my hands bound

And i fall down and realize

Life is more than my despairs and fallouts
Its actually the referee of my boxing bouts
If i bow down and let IT hit me hard
I will never get the HAPPYNESS green card

So i must collect my broken fragile piece

And i will rise bigger than my sorrow
Taste the sweetness of every tomorrow
Because i am not a bloody coward
I may be hurt but i ain't countered

I still hold my image in the mirror with pride and smile back to it

Come next time and i will be here
waiting for you all, reading Shakespeare :)
I will not take these blows easy now
what do you expect me, to bow! :P

No sirs and madams, i will stand tall

Because now i am myself and i am a whole
I tamed time and learnt art of wormholes
through these i travel back and learnt my true worth
I phoenix-ed each time after the damage, my new birth

I made myself more than what i was

And i learnt that things happen for good and bad
but i should only take them as experiences to add
Fuck that cuts of yours you gave me and my life
Now I do not fear you coming with your knives

Because I AM FREE and I AM.

-------------------------

Note:

wormhole is a concept in physics where we can make a hole in time and travel back and forth

HAPPYNESS is deliberately misspelled to emphasize the concept shown in the movie "pursuit of happyness"

Beyond Barbie Dolls

As humans, we make relationships. Some of them come  (so called) natural to us when we are born, but some of them, we make over the course of our lifetime. They makes us happy if they flourish the way we wanted them to and makes us sad otherwise. Happiness makes us feel good about things around us and sadness makes even a grand comedy movie look dull. Experiencing these emotions is directly proportional to the intensity of conviction we have/had. As i see, life is sum total of the experiences with relationships that we had with humans as well as ideas.

For me humans always represented ideas. Here the idea of the Barbie Doll(s) comes up. 

Its pretty, It touches good, can smell good, can make us feel good too. But the "real stuff" is missing.

What the hell is this "real stuff"...

The real stuff is unexplainable in words...its best felt/experienced...

Its the aura. Its somethings which charges the day. It shoots up hormones but at the same time instills calmness. Its eternal. Its permanent. Its a company which understand without words. Its a hand to hold on and a hand worth offering a helping hand of yours. Its the inspiration to "be good". Its the unstoppable fire which burns inside. Its the stuff which makes the relationship go beyond hurdles of testing times. Its the confidence in each other. Its the good face of humanity. Its the strength of the identity of your existence which is shared with the partner. Its simply EVERYTHING...

I am glad i know some of them who are beyond Barbie dolls. Sometimes they try hard to fit in this Barbie world and fail and I hope they will realize the reality of thier core idea of being inherently different than masses.

May the insanity and romance never die :) Amen \m/

Note: i hope that readers can understand that the term Barbie Dolls represents more than just the opposite sex. One of my review for the movie American psycho which talks on the same lines.

Right to suicide

The idea for this post came out from a conversation with a dear friend Lizzie who is training as a nurse, and i must confess that i never thought about this issue as much as i now think which i believe is important to think about.


Generally, suicide is accepted as BAD idea. Reasons vary from religious and social morality to the argument in favor of living the tough life instead of giving it up. To analyze this ideas, I prefer a game which i call "why and why not", which will be clear further down the post.


Almost all religions accept suicide as a bad idea since life is given by god and hence should be treasured. Society wants individuals/society to grow and hence would term suicide as a bad idea. Individuality of an individual give him/her right to do whatever with his life including ending it.


Being an individualist, I will go with the third idea above. But i  would also like to add that, like any other decision in life, one must explore all the possibilities against it. A thorough investigations "for and against" a particular decision is the key to right decision.


Majority of humanity goes through at least one situation when we do consider suicide as an option. Stepping off from the train of "painful" experiences seem to be the only way out. But, is that the ONLY way! This must be judged carefully. This is particularly difficult in an emotionally charged state at that time. But so are most of the decision making times and when it comes to life and death, why not give this thought a chance.


Sometimes, we do ignore our own potential (consciously and unconsciously) and this makes us feel weak. Here the well wishers (family, friends and in general people you love) must be sought to advise (not to dictate decisions!). Maybe they can introduce you to a hidden value which might be useful for you to eject out of the mental trauma. You can always find at least one human being, fit enough to talk to and you must talk to him/her.


In the case of incurable physical sickness (as judged by medical science), if a well informed patient decides to end the pain, i see no reason for anybody else to stop him from that. Either cure him/her by all possible means or let him go off if (s)he wishes to.


I changed my opinion that suicide is always an act of cowardice, thanx to Lizzie. But i still fail to imagine (maybe because i lack first-hand experience of an extreme situation) a situation, whose solution can't be found and it seems that there is no option. To me, suicide is honorable to myself and hence acceptable, only when i break my own honor code for myself.


BTW i remember a great Iranian movie on this subject by Abbas Kiarostami called "the taste of cherries". see the trailer below:







and one more sequence from the movie "Rog"

Half baked siddhartha effect

Past few months have been quite illuminating for me since witnessing Maoist insurgency at India, footilla incident, Bhopal gas disaster's judgement etc. I have been part but mostly a mere witness to a lot of debates, both online and offline. My natural instinct to study the debaters which funds my study of patterns of their mental process (which generated their ideas) led me to conclude about a phenomenon which I termed "half-baked-siddhartha-effect"

Siddhartha,who later became Gautama Buddha,went through a process which starts from starling "new" revelation and ends up devotion of ones life to an idea generated by the new revelation. The process encompasses following steps:
1) observing a new revealing incident/ phenomenon
2) getting curious about this new observation
3) cross checking for existing solutions from personal knowledge database
4) observing that this new observation do not have a known solution to either person or immediate family and friends
5) deciding to find answer
6) experiencing great urge to devote full time to find the answer
7) leaving behind personal comfort zone to be objective and dedicated to find the answer
8) issuing all efforts at all costs to find answer
9) finding the answer
10) personal interpretation of great truth

So now that we have categorized the "siddhartha effect", we can proceed what's an half-baked or incomplete siddhartha effect and it's personal and social consequences.

Incomplete process simply means leaving the process in-between. The motivation to do so is usually inconvenience package which attached to the process. For example, many people who debate about Maoist movement in India would like to do so in a cozy environment. The main flaw in these debates is that they are far from ground realities and should be acknowledged as mere conversations between arm chair philosophers.
Apart from generating a tendency to adopt arm chair philosophy as a way of life at a personal end, this act also have a grave social consequence. When majority of decision makers fall into above mentioned category, thier solutions follow thier philosophy and hence generate more misery in the population concerned. Kashmir is a recent live example.

But then the question arise: "everybody can't become siddhartha" :)

Why not?

Don't give me a convenient answer and don't expect to have cozy life with harsh answers. Siddhartha wasn't super human. He was merely the person who did
what he was after and engages into the dogfight until the last. :)

Inconvenient corruption

This post started with an interesting article at TOI which was mentioned at a post at google buzz...I suggest you first read the article to get a grasp of the contents of this post...


cmon read it :)


ok so Pritish Nandy did a pretty good job in illustrating the problem...We do have a problem and we all know it and most of the times i had discussions with friends, colleagues and family, they stop at the acknowledging the problem...what about solutions?


Within a democratic system, solutions aren't easy because they can't be "unique"...solution must entertain variety which is the essence of true democracy...rationalization of laws (social and legal) and their practice will always be challenged by non/semi/classical intellectuals for obvious reasons (gives them a kick of satisfying their status seeking ego)...A military state isn't a solution too since there is nothing worse than a corrupt military state...you dont have a choice to oppose since you can be shot for opposition...Religion has failed to moralize people in true sense and rather provided them opportunity to be double-faced hypocrites...so where does our solution lies which could be practical...

To seek solution we have to dig deep into question: what makes certain people honest even at the cost of their life...it has to be more than their belief system...it has to be more than what they were taught...it has to be : what and how they understood whatever fact were presented to them...it has to be more about their choices about not putting the pant down in severe situations....


Some people reason that awareness is the key and i say its just part of the solution and not the actual solution...we all are aware of the above mentioned problem...even after reading this article (which i think millions must have read since TOI is most circulated Indian daily newspaper), readers can't claim lack of awareness now, but they will still go along with the corrupt system


why?


the keyword is CONVENIENCE...its inconvenient other way...this is how i reached the conclusion "religion has been the only religion of humanity ever"


So the key is to remove the convenience with corruption...if it is inconvenient to be corrupt, we wont be corrupt...


How should we achieve that...


A very common answer i usually get is by making tougher laws...It does not work...in fact it makes the case worse since it violates the law of "spring reaction" for human behavior...the more u suppress, the more it springs back at given opportunity...Also the laws breeds loop holes which seed corruption...the law to check the corruption in monetary process of any government organization makes them employ a large group of people to check the money flow and it is these people who then takes bribes to ensure a proper money flow to a desirable end which is mutually beneficial for them as we as the asshole who bribes...so u see, it doesn't work that way and in fact fails miserably.


Morality cant be taught...Fear based systems like communism and religion for example, ended up more corrupt than any other counterparts...


We have to recognize the simple fact that humans react to environment presented to them and they will choose a most convenient way to get a most convenient state (minimum energy path and minimum energy state in physics)...corruption is a convenient social interaction path and hence its preferred...If it can be made inconvenient, it will not be preferred...


Without brute force and fear, how can we make humans go incorruptible?


I still dont have a complete answer. I better discuss the answer when i complete it. But suggestions are always welcome. :)

Society

Well this post originated from a discussion at another blog 

Then i gave it some more serious thought and finally got convinced that this should be a new blog post here...so here it is....

What exactly is society and what place should it have in my life...few months back this question came back at my face and stood staring at me very strong, since this time it was my near and dear ones who were part of this question...the people i loved and admired all my life...it was finally time to conquer this conquest once for all...

As i see it, Society is an idea which arose out of need to find security (of most forms, physical, emotional, financial etc). “Laws” transforms this mental (idea) into a physical structure which we then term as a society. This is true for human as well as most of the terrestrial life we see on earth.

All through history i could see that societies were made in the name of kings, race, color, nations, books (termed holy), gods (termed holy), environment (recently) and all the notions that could differentiate humans beings. To “maintain” this structure (so called society) some “laws” come into existence by “common minimum intelligence” (analogy of LCM-least common multiplier in mathematics i.e something which almost everybody will agree to). This is why these laws are usually “unsaid and unwritten”; like most (not all) societies developed with a notion that women are inferior to men in most terms, homosexuality is a sin, marriage should be the only symbol of a loyal sexual relationship and likewise, families should be raised within societal standards and values should be instilled in young generation for the same, punishments tend to decrease undesired tendencies etc.

There is a hidden aspect to the idea of society and that is about laws and people who initiate, makes and maintains them. I will term them “leaders” as they are the ones who initiate the nucleation of society. They could be religiously, politically, socially or just personally motivated. 

FIRST leader randomly decided to be the boss and using his/her superior skills (mental/physical/psychological or social), (s)he starts dictating the terms thus laying the foundations for the LAWS (i would refer readers to see the movie “blindness” to get more insight into this idea).

Leader(s) has to submit to LCM level to maintain his/her position and hence most laws as mentioned above can be found in ancient as well as modern societies in almost same raw form. 

Family being the basic unit of societal system, sons (usually!) take over as future leaders and even if he does not match his fathers and forefathers in leadership, if he can maintain LCM laid down by them, he is usually accepted (example : royal families around the world present to this date) even in modern times. Ladies have found place in royalty only when "they" could not find a suitable male.

The “mob” (which accepts leaders) behaves like a shit-scared individual who is ready to buy security at any cost (freedom, individuality etc.) and the leader who promises to provide that, is welcomed as a savior.  This is as much true for kings of ancient kingdoms as its is for modern day CEOs of big corps, presidents of nations and religious leaders. The leader promises to maintains the “status quo” in the societal structure formulated by previous generations. This structure is made and maintained by LAWS.

There is a very common confusion about laws been divided in two separate sets: Social and Legal. I do not see the difference. Legal laws are defined by constitution which is considered to be a modern product and professing progressive thoughts which would avoid conflicts and solve past problems. Social laws on the other hand are considered to be born out of nowhere just like society. Social laws or better termed as social norms are set of rules which everybody obeys to be part of the society. Social laws have local character whereas legal laws are said to have humanitarian and global character. But i fail to see any objective implementation of legal laws. The illusion of different legal and social laws is a modern phenomenon. None of societies in past and present could afford to have a complete set of “objective” laws (All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others – George Orwell in Animal Farm). In practice social and legal laws have never been different. If a society is made to feel that capital punishment is bad, it enters legal system within few years. If a society is made to feel that Aryans is a superior race, then it enters legal system over some time. Legal laws are reflections of social laws with a time delay 

As i see it, laws are reflections of our fears (We have laws for each possible fear). We say that laws are necessary to maintain peace whereas in effect we actually covertly mean that we fear the changes we might have to face if we remove these laws. 

Duplicity in notification of our fears, enable the leaders in any system (fascist, democratic, aristocratic etc) to rule by making laws to satisfy our fears and makes us feel comfortable and hence they get acceptance to their existence as the protectors.

This “fear based grouping” of humans as well as other non-human systems has enabled them to be alert and more fit for physical survival but also pulled down the majority of the population’s mental level to a common minimum and any attempt to go beyond it is/was usually perceived as threat to own existence.

How about those who dont follow laws?

Can all of them can be termed as rebels?

I would like to elaborate in detail in this regard because this is the most misjudged and loosely quoted term i have heard. 

The “true” REBELS are the misfits. I added the word “true” to signify the ones who “could not be tamed” and those who went on new path out of their own passion (which will exclude the “ambulance chasers” obviously). For example, the true rebel in single mother-ship are the women who did that when it was considered a bad notion, not the ones who “chose” to be one since its no more uncomfortable. 

By this philosophical standard, rebels have always broke LAWS for which they suffered but when fruits of these broken laws tasted good, then “mob” makes them a law instead (since they don’t know anything better to do with them other than mindlessly asking everybody to conform to the new rule which few of them understand). This illustrates why the thickness of the book called constitution expands each year. Sins of past becomes acceptable with time and turned into laws. What was unimaginable for one generation, now becomes the obvious reality for the new one. I see this pattern repeatedly in almost all societies, ancient as well as modern. 

I concluded about a year back that “convenience has been the only religion of mankind ever”. The concepts of society, religion, science, technology, family are towards one end: convenience. It can be convenience of not been alone or been able to do more than ones capacity or convenience of feeling to control others and hence satisfying own insecurities etc. I guess convenience will be the keyword which an intelligent alien life will associate us.

To conclude, i would say Laws (legal or social, to me they are same) and society represent our fears and love for convenience. It has an Darwinian advantage which enabled us to survive effectively, produce in mass numbers and rule the earth but it also has an draconian disadvantage of limiting human mental potential by bounding it with limits (since laws are limits).



Of course there is no better music and song than Pink Floyd matching here :)

मेरा अपना रावन

मेरा अपना पर्सनल रावन आज थोड़ा थोड़ा जल जाएगा
मेरा राम ही उसे जलाएगा

सो आज शाम मैं मनन  करने बैठूंगा
लेखा जोखा खोला जाएगा
एक पूरे साल के कारनामो को
राम और रावन में बँटा जाएगा

राम अपने हिस्से से रावन को मारने का समान खरीद लेता हैं मुझसे
और रावन मरने से पहले पूरी टक्कर का समान जुटा लेता हैं
मरना तोह हैं पर युद्घ जरूर करता हैं

क्या रावन को मालूम हैं की वोह मरेगा ?
जब मैने रावन से यह पुछा तोह वोह हँस के बोला,
अबे, अगर पिछले साल मैं मर गया होता
तोह इस साल तू राम को याद करता!
अगर मैं मर जाता तोह राम भी ख़तम हो जाता
राम का अस्तित्व मुझसे ही हैं
मुझे जिस दिन पूरा मार दोगे तोह राम की जरूरत ख़तम हो जायेगी
और अगर मैने राम को मार दिया तोह
तुम्हें रामायण फिर लिखनी पड़ेगी और
हिंदुत्व के ठेकेदारों को मेरी आरती उतरनी पड़ेगी
फिर लंका में मेरा मन्दिर बनाना पड़ेगा
इसलिए बस चुप चाप यह मान लो
की "राम ने रावण को मार दिया"
मिठाई खाओ और खुशियाँ मनाओ

मैं बोला की सुन रावण, यूँ चुप चाप बात मानने का आईडिया मुझपे नही चलता
सच सच सब कुछ बता की यह खेल क्या हैं

वोह घम्भीर होके बोला, की बेटा खेल समझना हैं तोह अपने अन्दर देख
मैं दिख रहा हूँ ?
मैं बोला हाँ, तू दिख रहा हैं
और यह क्या!
तू तोह राम का हाथ पकडे बैठा हैं
तुम दोनों में यारी कब हो गई?

वोह बोला की बेटा अब तू राज़ समझ गया
हम दोनों तोह भांड हैं
हर साल खेल खेलते हैं
लोगों का मन बहलाते हैं
लोग भी खुश की रावण मर गया
उनको भी कुछ न कुछ तोह मारने को चाहिए
बेजान ज़िन्दगी की भडास इसी बहने निकल जाती हैं

पुतले नही जलते दुशेहरे पे
हमारे ही कुछ हिस्से जल मरते हैं
ताकि नए सिरे से रावन को राम में बदल सके
अगले दुशेहरे के लिए ...

Stockholm syndrome

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

Above link explains Stockholm syndrome in psychological context. I feel it can be extended to almost all part of human behavior, mob as well as individual. Let me explain a bit.

1. GOD

Biggest reason to write this article was to investigate how does GOD got so popular, even after we have witnessed so many dark consequences in his/her name.

This concept abducts and hostages individual usually in childhood. But as we grow up, we starts to question. Here comes the crucial stage when it becomes more and more inconvenient to question existence of GOD. Isn't this a glaring example of Stockholm syndrome. Most of us, join the others supporting the existence and reap the benefits of being within the mob event at the cost of our own reason. This is done after recognizing the irrationality in the whole argument against the existence. What else can explain this behavior if not Stockholm syndrome. Religions, Classes, Castes etc etc , these are just the projections of this behavior and we all have seen the consequences. Still masses disapprove to get out of abductor. They feel enraged to talk against the hostage taker. Hostages go for war in the name of their abductor. We learned from history that we never learned from history. Mass human behavior has no significant evolution along with physical evolution. Faith-based-hijacking of reason has dominated all ages of human history.

2. SCIENCE

When science is treated as religion (blind following, no questioning!), this phenomenon is observed amongst scientific community. Followers of Pre-quantum mechanics, opposed the new-science as vehemently as any religious group. Love and respect for the abductor which has been nurtured over the schooling and university years made them so adamant to disapprove the new inconvenient concepts that they ridiculed and opposed it even after understanding the truth. Even so-called men of reason hide behind faith-based arguments when confronted with an opposing view and then to make things more worse, they try to impose authoritarian hierarchy into scientific community. This behavior clearly indicated the infection of Stockholm syndrome.

3. PARENTS

This ideas also applies to the parent-child relationship. When we are children, we usually idolize our parents. Slowly we realize that they are also full of faults. Here comes the major turn towards maturity. Whether we give in to our irrationality due to our deep love for them or whether we turn the tables upside down and come to terms that they CAN BE WRONG, makes a hell lot of difference the way we approach our future. West boast about getting away from this problem but do they actually manage that, or do they become the same for their own children unknowingly. If not then that society must have become entirely rational by now. It didn't.

4. JOBS

Many of us are stuck with jobs we don't like. We keep convincing our self against freedom. Again the hostage taker (The Job) wins most of the times, except for few who manage to pursue what they like the most.

5. FAMILY

Same arguments as in section for parents. But I must clarify that there is a difference between these two cases. We don't choose our parents but we do choose our family. We decide who to marry and how to continue with the family making process. It does not behave as a hostage-taker if the decisions has not been based on compromises and instead based on true mutual understandings. Since i consider friends within the family so the argument goes the same for them.

6. MONITORY PROFIT

This is the case of business institutions. Most of them are established by creative men in search of inventing better tools than existing at their time. But soon the mirage of monitory profit acts as a hostage-taker and people who have no idea of real production, MANAGES and decides the market strategies for the new inventions. Almost all business houses end up striving for monopoly using patents, sabotaging competitors and whoring law/governments. What started as a game for being creative and advancing human civilization ends up in doing opposite and they also show great resistant towards any attempt to free from their hostage. They would make more money doing opposite but probably that's tougher choice and hence not smart enough :)


So then the main question which arises is that, Why do we observe this behavior? What does abductor fill up which satisfies hostage?

As i see, following is the list of attributes being filled up for different abductors:

1. God fills up greatly the identity crisis. It also fill up to great extent the feeling of companionship in hard times. It gives aid to the sense of belonging to a mob for mutual security [social, political, economical, psychological and many other...als :) ]

2. In the case of Science, It fills up the false notion of having respect from others for what we know. If a new science has to change that then they feel threatened to loose their status and the respect associated. Feynman gave an excellent interview in this regard.

3. Parent's case is much more straightforward. Childhood learning period shapes the whole personality and its most difficult to reverse/turn some other away. In many cases the nature of this phenomenon is entirely innocent.

4. Job gives security in many senses and hence this case is very obvious.

5. This has same arguments as the section for Job. Compromise based family is nothing but a series of Stockholm syndromes in succession and inter-twinged so heavily that after some time, people start to ignore it since its too heavy to recognize and live with.

6. Monetary profit secures future and satisfies the individual desire of superiority amongst fellows.

To get out of this loop and see a birds eye view of this whole situation, it took me whole 3 months...Now that i know it, i am free off it :)

आज बारिश हुई हैं

आज बारिश हुई हैं
मेरे आसमान ने जी भर के पानी बरसाया
और मेरी ज़मीन ने भी सारा का सारा अपनाया
कुछ फूल खिलने के इंतज़ार में थे
कुछ सूखे पत्ते बहने की इंतज़ार में थे
और मैं बारिश की सुगंध की राह में बैठा हुआ था
वोह महक जो ज़िन्दगी वापस लती हैं
वोह महक जो माहोल महकती हैं

बारिश हमें शायद यह ही सिखा जाती हैं की
ज़िन्दगी नए रूप में बार बार आती रहेगी
अपनी जिंदा फुहार बरसाती रहेगी
हमें बस उसके लिए तैयार रहना हैं
और बारिश में झूम झूम के कहना हैं
"बारिश तेरा शुक्रिया"

बारिश की बूंदों की बातें सुनने और समझने की कला
हमें ज़िन्दगी से मिला जाती हैं
और सिखा जाती हैं की
ज़िन्दगी बार बार बहार लगेयी
हर जीत का जशन बारिश की बूंदों की तरह
पुराने गिले शिकवों को धो जाएगा
और मैं फिर तय्यार हो जाऊँगा
एक नई ज़िन्दगी के लिए

मेरा आज

मौसम बदलते रहे 

हम सरकते रहे

और यहाँ पर आ पहुंचे

जहाँ पर मेरे अलावा बस एक और इंसान की जगह है

एक इंसान जिसे ज़िन्दगी के मायने समझाने नहीं पड़ते 

जिसके साथ हिसाब किताब नहीं करना पड़ता

जिसकी रूह की खुशबु से दिन महक जाता है 

और मैं पूरा हो जाता हूँ

वोह भी पूरी हो जाती है

और एक पूरी ज़िन्दगी बन जाती है कुछ ही पलों में

मौसम तोह फिर भी बदल जाते है अब

पर अब सरकना नहीं पड़ता

गहरा सच्चा रंग

कौन सा रंग अपनाओ मैं यह सब बताने को
इतने सारे किस्से, और इतने कम रंग

सवालों के लाल रंग क्योंकि
इन्हें देख कर लोग भाग जाते हैं

जवाबों के कई रंग होते हैं

सच्चे जवाब का रंग पारदर्शी
झूठे जवाब का स्याह कला
मन बहलाने वाले जवाब का रंग पीला
मन मचलने वाले जवाब का रंग नारंगी
जो जवाब होश उडा दे उसका रंग नीला
और जो जवाब होश वापस लाये वोह रंग हरा

बाकि जवाब इनके ही मिले जुले भाई बहन होंगे

हम हर रोज़ होली खेलते हैं
रंग में अपनी ज़िन्दगी को रंगीन करके
खुश होते और मुस्कुराते हैं

मेरे लिए जरूरी यह हैं की
जो रंग हो मेरे जवाब में, वोह सच्चा हो
वोह जवाब अपना रंग न बदले
समय के साथ अपना चरित्र न खोये

हे रंगों, मेरा प्रणाम स्वीकार करो
अपने इन्द्रधनुष से दुनिया को रंगबिरंगा रखो

--- संदीप नागर

CHE

I extensively examined the literature about Che Guevara during past few days. For sure he was an individualist and honest man: to be put correctly he was the "right" man. I say this because he hated the concept of one man taking advantage of other. Men, whom i rather term parasites (organisms which live at the expense of other immorally), were his problem.

3 movies give more or less a complete picture of who Che was. Motorcycle diaries+Che part1+ Che part2.

Che turned red eye to capitalism because, world at his time, only saw parasites germinating from capitalism (another form of collectivism). So communism was the only way he could turn to. Had he lived long enough, he would have seen how communism breeds worst strain of parasites. He was more right than any other leader of his times. Any kind of oppression was unbearable to him.

Those who blind-worship Che for communism fail to recognize that he was an individualist. A free spirit. Otherwise why should he leave a cozy life in Cuba and go to Congo or Bolivia. He didn't went there not to relieve the country out of dictators. He went there to satisfy his inner self (hence an individualist) which abhorred any censor on freedom to a man.

I wish his spirit of freedom lives long. I wish people love his ideals more than his symbols. I wish people understand true Che.

Human 2.0

Recently i read an article(click here) which gives a beautiful insight to actual facts put up rationally without any favourism of any kind. This is particularly important with refernce to recent terror attacks in Mumbai. Though its about Muslims but fundamentalism isn't patented for a particular religion. With the evidences of Hindu terrorists seeking the line of terror laid by their so-called enemies, its has now become very important to debate the role of RELIGION in present human society. 

It is important to debate the about the "character of all religions" when its evident that majority of crimes against humanity are committed using different religions as an excuse. Obvious and instantaneous logical solution is to CRUSH ALL RELIGIONS; which might not be practical. 

The evidence is clearly visible if one picks up any history books and start finding an excuse to go for war in any part of world. Religion was used to bind a certain group of people who were taught that "others" must be killed for thier opposition to your religion. 

But even if we suppose that all religions are crushed away ,then an important question arises :are humans prepared for the vacuum created by absence of religion? 

Don't we need a mental evolution apart from physical one which made us a dominant organism on this earth. 

We should prepare for human 2.0 version which will understand and maintain logical pathways to live life on this earth.

Against endoresement of Hindu Terrorists by general Hindu public of India

(written after malegaon blasts)

Finally fundamentalist Hindus come face to face with thier dualities.

Uptill now they have been very comfortable about illustrating how Islam is fundamentally violent but now they find themself in the same gloves. Uptill now it was so conveinet to associate the word "terrorism" with Islam and hence lash out on its violent teaching and feeling the pride in proving that "we are better".

Now it is not.

This will be inconveneint ofcourse.

This inconveneince can result in two kinds of reactions.

First, find excuses and try to justify that "what we did is not terrorism".

Second, Identify the fact that "we did the same as we have been blaming others but now we gonna stop behaving stupid".

I guess its not difficult to clearly see one of the point of view in any discussion around this topic.

While one reaction allows "double standards", the other one meausres facts objectively using the slogan "support for acts of hatred is terrorism". Simple enough.

Malegaon accused were driven by "hatred". So are kashmir terrosists and LTTE, PLA, HAMAS, Ku Klux Klan and numerous others around the world. To be precise,ALL OF THEM.

All are alike in thier aims, operation and final end.

All terror organizations started with "local" problems. All of them justified thier acts of violence as an end to justify the revenge against "others" who have been killing "thiers brothers and sisters" since years.

Then in later stages they go out of control. India lost control of LTTE. Pakistan lost mujhaheddin groups. CIA lost Taleban. RSS will soon loose control on Hindu terrorists.

This is simple to understand because the poeple who start this violence are very deeply committed to thier "cause" and to certain extent, they have a sense of morality, but people who follow up, are those who crave only for "power". The ambulance-chasers. Also when the above mentioned "cause" is based on hatred, then one gets tremendous public support in a majority irrational society. Bigger the casue of hatred, bigger the demon.

The "new Hindu awakening" will have disastrous effects in future because every society based on hatred for "others" collapse under its own weight, since it presents a fertile ground for people who misuse this power for thier own personal gains.

I dont see any political party at present which is capable of preventing this catastrophy unfortunately.

The root cause is the concept of religion when interpreted as a means of living rather than as a philosophy in its purest form. Every religion preaches dharamyuddh, crusades and jehad under various covert names.

Try out answering this one: No religion preaches violence but more than 99% cases of collective violence are based on religion. Why?

I wont give answers. Answers lie deep inside where we are rational. Where we are pure. Where we love humanity. Where we do not distinguish humans based on irrational systems made by our forefathers. Where we do not shun reason and dance on irrationality. We all have answers and we must find it soon if we wanna live in prospering India instead of having a civil war soon.

झंडा ऊंचा रहे "हमारा"

हिन्दुस्तान किसका हैं?
एक झंडे ने दूसरे से पुछा

एक था लाल और दूसरा था हरा
जैसे ही दोनो को टकराया गया
दोनो ने एक ही सवाल पुछा
तू बड़ा की मैं बड़ा
और यह हिन्दुस्तान आख़िर हुआ किसका

लाल बोला की मेरे लोग कहते हैं
हिन्दुस्तान हिंदू का
बाकी सब "बाहर के लोग" हैं जिन्होने इसे लूटा
तभी हमें सिखाया गया की इनको सबक सिखाओ
सदियों का बदला मिनटो में लेना हैं
इसी बहने थोडी राजनीति भी हो जायेगी
मन्दिर मस्जिद बने या उजडे
कम से कम कुर्सी तोह मिल जायेगी

तभी हरा झंडा बोला
अरे! यह तोह मुझे भी सिखाया हैं
बिल्कुल "इसी अंदाज़" में समझाया हैं
की हम हिन्दुस्तान के मालिक हैं
हमनें हिन्दुस्तान को यह रूप दिया
वरना हमसे पहले यह छोटे टुकडों में आपस में लड़ता था
अब वही शान्न्दार और जान्न्दार ज़माना वापस लाना हैं

तभी वहां से एक सफ़ेद झंडा निकला
बिल्कुल सफेद
इनके पास आया और बोला
हिन्दुस्तान तोह मेरा हैं
तेरा भी और तेरा भी और बाकि सबका भी
किसी एक का हक कैसे हो सकता हैं
कौन कह सकता हैं की वोह आदम की पहली संतान हैं

तब सब झंडे चुप होके सुनने लगे
पहली बार लाल और हरे झंडे साथ साथ खडे थे
और लड़ नही रहे थे

सफ़ेद वाला बोला की कोई बताएगा की पहला हिन्दुस्तानी कौन था
सारे झंडे सोचने लगे
काफ़ी सोच के एक लाल वाला बोला
शायद आर्य पहले आए थे
तोह हरा वाला बोला, ओये द्रविड़ तोह उससे भी पहले थे
तब सफ़ेद वाला बोला की पहला इंसान तोह अफ्रीका से कहीं पहले ही आ चुका था

फिर सब चुप
एक "समझदारी" भरा सन्नाटा
फिर "नासमझी" ने उस सन्नाटे को तोड़ दिया जब
एक लाल वाला झंडा बोला तोह क्या हुआ
संस्कृति तो हमारी ही सबसे पुरानी हैं
बाकि लाल वालो ने ज़ोरदार हामी भर दी
तोह सफ़ेद वाला फिर बोला
संस्कृति तोह हजारो सालो से बदलती रही समय के साथ
क्या यकीन के साथ कहोगे की
अपनी जंगलों में रहने वाला पूर्वजो की संस्कृति
और तुम्हारी संस्कृति में फरक नही होना चाहिए
क्या हजारो साल में कुछ नही बदलना चाहिए

फिर एक हरे वाले ने हूक लगायी
यह सब बेकार की बात हैं
हमें तोह आज से मतलब होना चाहिए
आज में जीना हैं कि बीते कल की कबर पर लेटना हैं

कुछ हरे वालों ने हामी भरी और हैरानी की बात
कुछ लाल वाले भी बोले की शायद बात सही हैं

फिर सफ़ेद वाले ने कहा
तोह आज में जीना तय हुआ
कल जो बीत गया सो बीत गया
कल के बेवकूफो की गलतियो पे आज क्यो नाचें हम

तब एक लाल वाला बोला की
लेकिन एक सवाल तोह फिर भी रहेगा
"लाल और हरे का अन्तर कैसे मिटेगा?"

फिर सब चुप
काफ़ी देर चुप्पी रही
यह चुप्पी एक जवाब बुन रही थी
वोह जवाब जो सारे सवालो का हल होगा
बस सी एक जवाब को ढूँढ रहे हैं अभी तक वोह सारे झंडे

पर इतना सब समझने के बावजूद
अभी तक लड़ रहे हैं लाल और हरे झंडे

-- संदीप नागर

वार्तालाप

आजकल कुछ अजीब सी हलचल हैं जीवन में
पीछे झाँक कर देखता हूँ तो पिछले हालत मुझसे बात करते हैं
मुझसे कान में फुस्सुसा कर बोल जाते हैं
सारे ख्वाब जो मैने देखे थे उस समय
कुछ पूरे हो गए और कुछ अधूरे रह गए
और वोह पुरानी बातें जिन की वजह से
मैने अपनी ज़िन्दगी यूँ बनायी और यहाँ तक आया

पर एक सवाल ने पिछले कुछ दिनों से घेरा हुआ हैं
की इस सब के बीच
कब और कैसे मैने अपनी आप को दुनिया से काट दिया
वोह सब जरूरी भी था क्यूंकि
बुरे हादसों की याद भुलाने के लिए
और आगे बढ़ने के लिए
मुझे ख़ुद को काटना पड़ा
पर अब इस मंजिल पर
कुछ अकेलापन महसूस होता हैं

पर फिर भी अकेलापन तो हैं पर "अधूरापन" नही हैं
यही सबसे बड़ा सच हैं जो सहारा देता हैं

अगर मैं सब समझोते कर लेता तोह अकेला तोह नही होता पर अधूरा जरूर हो जाता

साथी मिले न मिले
पर पूरा होना बहुत जरूरी हैं

शायद सबसे जरूरी हैं
खालीपन एक खोकला इंसान बनता हैं जो किसी और का सही मायनों में साथी भी नही बन सकता

अकेलापन अभिशाप नही हैं पर खालीपन जरूर होता

भाई कहता हैं की मैने अपनी सब तरफ़ काफ़ी कड़ी दीवार बना रखी हैं

सही कहता हैं, पर हैरानी यह की कोई नही जो इस दीवार को भेद सके
पूरी दुनिया में क्या कोई नही

ऐसी भी कोई ख़ास दीवार नही हैं
सीधे साधे से उसूलों का ढांचा हैं जो एक सीधा साधा सा इंसान चाह रहा है भेदने को
मुखौटे वाले इंसान नही भेद पाते

एक पूरा इंसान जो अकेला भले ही हो पर अधूरा न हो

एक ऐसा इंसान जो दोस्ती और रिश्तों को दुनियादारी से अलग कर देख पाए
जो सिर्फ़ ईमान से ख़ुद से यह कह सके की मैं ख़ुद में पूरा हूँ
की भले ही मैने गलतिया की हो कभी
पर मैने उन्हें ख़ुद सुधरा हैं
और फिर नही दोहराया हैं
और यह कह सके की मैं समझता हूँ की "मैं अपनी आप में एक पूरा इंसान हूँ"
और एक पूरे इंसान को "और पूरा" बनाने की औकात रखता हूँ

खैर, अब अधूरापन काम की जिद्दो जहत में डूब कर ख़तम हो जाएगा

और मैं फिर से ख्वाब सजाने में लग जाऊँगा

पर यह सवाल वही का वहीँ रह जाएगा

Making of a rebel

We all encounter mysteries in our life. Life itself is a mystery for most. Then i start to question, whats certainity? We are certain about many things. I have been certain about everything that i have done uptill now. But what's certainity in the light of so many mysteries.

To answer this question i went back to the days when i didnt "knew" many things, that is childhood. I idolized my father and took whatever he told me as the final word. He taught me about the ideals, the way to live life etc etc. Also my mother never objected to any of them so i guessed that both meant same. These concepts went in deep to the core. They eventually made me when i grew up. I grew up a truly secular person in all respects. Secularity here means "not distinguishing" differences based on irrational concepts. 

But then somethings chaged over a short period of time when i left my home.

I became athiest when i could not find any "reason" for existence of the concept of God. I became rebellious when i was expected to "follow trends". I opposed any form of non-secular ideology which was supported by my family during gujarat riots. I became independent when it concerned my own life. 

I started learning psychology to understand humans and the way they behave. It was a great surprise to me that there existed patterns in human behaviour. They key word was "security". Humans, irrespective of geographical, national, ethnic affiliations strive for security. Whoever promises them security, they would go after him. 

The troubling part is that every security has a price. Most often its individual liberty. To be precise, its Individuality.

This is where I started to get my final conclusions. I started to get to know why i could never assemble in thier groups, why i always felt that there is something different between them and me.

This was the making of a rebel.

अन्दर वाला बन्दर

आज एक अजीब बात हो गई
कई दिनों बाद ख़ुद से फिर बात हो गई
अन्दर से वोह बोला, वाह बॉस खूब खेला यह खेल
मस्त रहा अब तक तुम्हारे फलसफे का ज़िन्दगी से मेल

दुनिया को खूब चलाया तुमने पर कब तक चलोगे
कभी न कभी "उन" जैसे ही बन जाओगे
मैं बोला की तुझे लगता यह मुमकिन हैं
तुझे कभी लगा तू मुझसे अलग है

वोह बोला की बॉस मान या न मान
एक दिन तू पकडेगा कान
और बोलेगा की मैं थक गया हूँ
फिर यह बेकार का झमेला क्यों

क्यों न अभी फ़ैसला हो जाए
क्यों बाद में रोया जाए

मैने भी सोचा की बात ठीक करता हैं
आदमीं एक बार ही मरता हैं

तो क्यों न आज ही बात साफ़ कर लूँ
या तोह जी भर के जी लूँ या अभी मर लूँ

उसने समझाना शुरू किया की भाई दुनिय में बड़ा झमेला हैं
तू २२ साल का था तब समझता था की यह सब मेला हैं
और तू खड़ा खड़ा तमाशा देख लेगा
ताली बजायेगा और चवन्नी फेक देगा

पर अब जब जमाना आखिरी चवन्नी उठा कर भाग चला
और तू रह गया खड़ा का खड़ा

अब खली जेब और खली पेट कैसे जियेगा
जीने के लिए क्या अपनी फलसफे का पसीना पिएगा

मैं बोला की बात तेरी बड़ी सही हैं
मेरी भी अब सुन जो मैने कही हैं

जीना सिर्फ़ शरीर का नही होता
हर आदमी ख़ुद अपना फलसफा हैं ढोता

ढोने से पहले ही यह बात साफ़ हो गई थी
वोह तारिख भी हिसाब से ४ मई थी
जब मैने ख़ुद से वादा कर लिया था
ख़ुद अपना फलसफा सिया था

खूब सोचा था उस दिन की आज के बाद पीछे नही देखना हैं
बस आगे जो आए उसे पीछे धकेलना हैं
जितना शक्क और शुबा करना था उस दिन कर लिया था
अन्दर जो भी था सब मार लिया था

उस दिन तुने जनम लेकर मेरा नया स्वरुप बनाया
पुराना चोल फेक यह रूप बनाया
उस दिन से आज तक अपनी ही धुन में हूँ
दुनिया से क्या करना जब मैं सिर्फ़ अपने ही मनन में हूँ

दुनिया तोह सिर्फ़ जरिए हैं अपने आप को खुश करने का
"वोह" जो कहते हैं "जीने" का
खुशी के लिए जिया और गम को मार भगाया
जो सही लगा उसे गले लगाया

यह सही हैं की दुनिया बेवकूफी की पूजा करती हैं
उनका उल्लू बनाओ तोह आप पर मरती हैं

पर यह सब तब जरूरी हो जाता हैं
जब दुनिया के लिए जिया जाता हैं

यहाँ तोह अपने से ही फुर्सत न मिलती
मनन में दुनिया की कोई कलि न खिलती

ख़ुद से ही सारी आरजू और ख़ुद से ही सारे इनाम मिल जाते हैं
दुनिया को बस मेरी चवन्नी और कुछ ताल मिल जाते हैं

तोह अब बता की दुनिया कैसे मुझे तोड़ पायेगी
कैसे रुलाएगी और कैसे सताएगी

वोह कुछ बोला नही बस मुस्कुराता रहा
मेरा चेहरा बस मुझे आइने से निहारता रहा

उसे और मुझे यह बात समझनी बहुत जरूरी थी
यह जंग अंदर की हैं बहार की नही

-- संदीप नागर (१ सितम्बर २००८)