ಏಳು ನೂರು ಅಡಿಯ ಬುದ್ಧನ ಮೂರ್ತಿ ರಾಮನಗರದ ಬಳಿ

ಈಚೆಗೆ ಶಾರುಖ್ ಖಾನ್ ಮತ್ತು ಇನ್ನಷ್ಟು ನಟನಟಿಯರು ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ಷೋ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರು. ಅದು ನಡೆದದ್ದು ಸಂಘಮಿತ್ರ ಫೌಂಡೇಶನ್ ಎಂಬ ಸಂಘಟನೆಯ ಅಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ. ಇದರ ಉದ್ದೇಶ ಒಂದು ಮಹತ್ವಾಕಾಂಕ್ಷೆಯ ಗುರಿಯಾಗಿತ್ತು. ಆ ಗುರಿಯೇನೆಂದರೆ - ಏಳುನೂರು ಆಡಿಯ ಬುದ್ಧನ ವಿಗ್ರಹದ ಸ್ಥಾಪನೆ.

ವಿಗ್ರಹವೆಲ್ಲಿ ಎಂದು ಶೀರ್ಷಿಕೆಯಲ್ಲೇ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ಬಳಿಯಲ್ಲಿರುವ ರಾಮನಗರದಲ್ಲೇ. ನಿಮಗೆ ಜ್ಞಾಪಕವಿರಬಹುದು - ಶೋಲೆ ಎಂಬ ಭಾರೀ ಹಿಂದೀ ಚಿತ್ರದ ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಣ ಇಲ್ಲೇ ನಡೆದದ್ದು.

ಮೂರ್ನಾಲ್ಕು ವರ್ಷದ ಹಿಂದೆ ತಾಲಿಬಾನ್ ಆಡಳಿತದ ಅಫ್ಘಾನಿಸ್ತಾನದಲ್ಲಿ ಬಾಮಿಯಾನ್ ಎಂಬ ಸ್ಥಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಬೃಹತ್ತಾದ ಬುದ್ಧನ ಪ್ರತಿಮೆಗಳನ್ನು ಮದ್ದನ್ನಿಟ್ಟು ಸಿಡಿಸಲಾಯ್ತು. ಇದೀಗ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಇದರ ಪುನರ್ಜನ್ಮವೆಂಬಂತೆ ತೋರುತ್ತಿದೆ.

ಹೊರಗಿನಿಂದ ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಆಲೋಚನೆಯೆಂದೆನಿಸಬಹುದು. ಗೌತಮ ಬುದ್ಧ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ದಾರ್ಶನಿಕಶ್ರೇಷ್ಠರಲ್ಲಿ ಅಗ್ರಗಣ್ಯ. ಅವನ ಶಾಂತಿ ಸಂದೇಶ ಪ್ರಪಂಚದಾದ್ಯಂತ ಹರಡಿದೆ. ಅವನ ತತ್ತ್ವಚಿಂತನೆ ಆಳವಾಗಿದ್ದು ವಿಶ್ವದಲ್ಲೆಡೆ ಅವನ ಅನುಯಾಯಿಗಳಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅವನ ಜನ್ಮದ ದೇಶವಾದ ಭಾರತದಲ್ಲಿ ಅವನ ಗುರುತಿಗಾಗಿ ಏನಿಲ್ಲ. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಈ ಮೂರ್ತಿನಿರ್ಮಾಣದ ಕಾರ್ಯ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದೆ ಎಂದು ತೋರುತ್ತದೆ.

ಆದರೆ ವಸ್ತುಸ್ಥಿತಿ ಬೇರೆ. ರಾಮನಗರದ ಪ್ರದೇಶ ಹಲವು ಸಸ್ಯ ಹಾಗೂ ಪ್ರಾಣಿಸಂಕುಲಗಳಿಗೆ ಸ್ಥಾನವಾಗಿದೆ. ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಇವರ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮ ನೋಡಿದರೆ - ಒಳ್ಳೆ ಡಿಸ್ನಿಲ್ಯಾಂಡ್ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬುದ್ಧಲ್ಯಾಂಡ್ ಮಾಡಲು ಹೊರಟಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಬೇಕಾಗುವ ಸ್ಥಳ ಹಲವು ಎಕರೆಗಳಷ್ಟು. ಇವೆಲ್ಲವನ್ನು ನೆಲಸಮಮಾಡಿಯೇ ಬೇರೆ ಕೆಲಸ ಸಾಧ್ಯ. ಈ ಸಸ್ಯ ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಾಣಿಸಂಕುಲಗಳ ನಿರ್ನಾಮಕ್ಕೆ ಬುದ್ಧನ ಒಪ್ಪಿಗೆ ಎಂದಿಗೂ ಸಿಗುತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ.

ಇದನ್ನು ವಿರೋಧಿಸಿ ಪರಿಸರಾಂದೋಲನ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳು ಸರ್ಕಾರಕ್ಕೆ ಪತ್ರಗಳನ್ನು ಬರೆದಿವೆ. ಇದರ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮಗಳನ್ನು ಕೈಗೊಂಡಿವೆ. ಆದರೆ ಸರ್ಕಾರವನ್ನು ಈ ಸಂಘಮಿತ್ರ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆ ತನ್ನ ಬುಟ್ಟಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಾಕಿಕೊಂಡಿರುವಂತಿದೆ.

ನನ್ನ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ ಹೀಗಿದೆ. ಇವರಿಗೆ ಬುದ್ಧನ ಪ್ರತಿಮೆಯನ್ನು ಮಾಡುವಷ್ಟು ಭಕ್ತಿಯಿದ್ದರೆ - ಬರಗಾಲ ಪೀಡಿತವಾದ ಉತ್ತರಕರ್ಣಾಟಕದ ರಾಯಚೂರು, ಗುಲ್ಬರ್ಗ, ಬೀದರ್ ಜಿಲ್ಲೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾಡಬಹುದಿತ್ತು. ಇದರಿಂದ ಅಲ್ಲಿನ ಜನಗಳಿಗೆ ಉದ್ಯೋಗಾವಕಾಶ ದೊರೆಯುತ್ತಿತ್ತು. ರಾಮನಗರ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ತೀರಾ ಸಮೀಪದಲ್ಲಿದೆ. ಇಲ್ಲಿನ ಜನರು ಉದ್ಯೋಗಕ್ಕೆ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿಗೇ ಬರಬಹುದು. ಆದರೆ ಈ ಸ.ಸಂ ನ ಉದ್ದೇಶ ಅಷ್ಟು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದಲ್ಲವೆಂಬಂತೆ ತೋರುತ್ತದೆ. ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ಬಳಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ತಂಡೋಪತಂಡವಾಗಿ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ಜನರು ನುಗ್ಗುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಯಾವುದೋ ದೂರದ ಹಳ್ಳಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಪ್ರಯೋಜನವಾದರೂ ಏನು?

ದುರದೃಷ್ಟವಶಾತ್ ಅಂಬೇಡ್ಕರ್ ಅವರು ಬೌದ್ಧಧರ್ಮವನ್ನು ಸ್ವೀಕರಿಸಿದರು. ಇದು ದುರದೃಷ್ಟ ಹೇಗೆಂದರೆ - ಇವರ ಬೆಂಬಲಿಗರಾದ ದಲಿತರನ್ನು ಸುಲಭವಾಗಿ ಈ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆ ಮರುಳು ಮಾಡುತ್ತದೆ. ಈ ಪ್ರತಿಮೆಯನ್ನು ವಿರೋಧಿಸುವವರನ್ನು ತಮ್ಮ ದಲಿತ ಜನಾಂಗದ ವೈರಿಗಳಾಗಿ ಕಾಣಲು ಸ.ಸಂ ಕುಚೋದ್ಯ ಮಾಡಬಹುದು - ಮಾಡಿಯೇ ಮಾಡುತ್ತದೆ. ಇದನ್ನು ತಿಳಿದೇ ಹಲವು ದಲಿತ ಮುಖಂಡರು ತಮ್ಮ ಪಂಗಡಕ್ಕೆ ಹೆಸರು (ಪಬ್ಲಿಸಿಟಿ) ಬರಲಿ ಎಂದು ಇವರ ಜೊತೆ ಸೇರುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಆಗ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿ ತೀರಾ ಹದೆಗೆಡುತ್ತದೆ. ಪಾಪ, ಅಂಬೇಡ್ಕರರು ದೇಶಭಕ್ತರು. ಜಾತೀಯತೆಯ ಸೋಂಕಿಲ್ಲದ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಮೂಲದ್ದೇ ಆದ ಬೌದ್ಧಧರ್ಮವನ್ನು ಸ್ವೀಕರಿಸಿದಾಗ ಇದರ ಅರಿವು ಅವಿರಿಗಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ದಲಿತರಿಗೆ ಬೌದ್ಧ ಧರ್ಮ (ನವಬೌದ್ಧರೆಂದೇ ಇವರು ಕರೆಯಲ್ಪಡುವುದು) ಕೇವಲ ಒಂದು identity ಆಗಿದೆ. ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಬಂಡಾಯದ ಸಂಕೇತವೂ ಆಗಿದೆ. ಆದರೆ ಅದರ ತತ್ತ್ವಶ್ರೀಯನ್ನು ಅವರೆಂದು ಕಂಡಾರೋ!

ಸರ್ಕಾರಕ್ಕೆ ಬುದ್ಧಿ ಬಂದು ಇದನ್ನು ಮಂಜೂರು ಮಾಡದೇ ಇರಲಿ ಎಂದು ಬುದ್ಧನನ್ನೇ ಪ್ರಾರ್ಥಿಸುವ.

|| ಇತಿ ಶಮ್ ||

The New Yorker: Darwin's Enemies

The New Yorker: Fact

This is a great article that brings out the badness of the new "intelligent design" theory. Well, I shouldn't say it is new for it has been around since time immemorial.

In the US, parts of which are extremely conservative, attempts are being made to project "I.D" as a valid explanation for the way things are.

This article brings out the crux of the ID theory and then goes to show why these ideas are faulty. A very thought provoking article.

Something that is similar to this is happening in India too - the truth is not being taught in classrooms and theories that are closer to the truth are getting suppressed.

The Aryan Invasion Theory has now been widely discredited. Why, scientists and historians are even speaking of an out-of-India theory wherein after a very early migration from Africa, which is supposed to be the place where all life began, into South Asia, man then migrated to other parts of Europe and the world.

Contrast this with the theory where "fair skinned Aryans" rode on their horses from the Eurasian steppes, conquered the "dark skinned natives" and drove them to South India. This theory, popularly known as the Aryan Invasion Theory, has been discredited for the past twenty years and more. But this unfortunately has caused a lot of harm - Hitler's Aryan myth had disastrous results. The DMK's half-baked self-hating ideology is also rooted in this Invasion theory. Even though this theory has been well discredited, secessionists, Islamic militants, Marxists and Christian Evangelists of various hues hold on very dearly to this theory as it serves their selfish needs.

As a result of all this, "Aryan Invasion" is what I studied in school. After "growing up", I now have developed a theory agnosticism. History is good - but should not be used for petty political and social gain. But the Truth, whatever it may be, is important and should not be subordinated to a pet political idea.

Acknowledging the "Aryan Invasion idea" as just a theory should be enough for children. Politics should not enter the classroom. But in India, as in the US, political attempts to brainwash a generation, have entered classrooms. This situation is indeed deplorable.

It is interesting - whatever government comes to power, the pet ideas of that Government are foisted on the people. Bush's Christist agenda is amply reflected in the ID vs. Evolution debate. The Congress party's anti-Hindu and anti-truth agenda and the BJP's pro-Hindu agenda are clearly reflected in their text book policies.

The article is thought provoking. But, though I am not an atheist, evolution still seems a viable theory to me.

Another idea that seems funny in Christism* is that God made Man in His own image. Why ? The dinosaurs probably thought that God was like them! The cats and dogs probably think that God made themin His image! Don't Christists fight against idolatory? Isn't making God a human shaped being idolatory? By restricting God to a human like appearance, they essentially limit what God is and isn't. This, according to me, is blasphemy. sanAtana dharma, Buddhism and most non-Semitic religions don't have this problem. Some parts of Hinduism like the Hare Krishnas, dvaitins and other devotional sects believe in a personal physical form of God, in spite of God being transcendental. But Advaitins place no such restriction on God. For God is what is and is free of attachment to any form. God can take a form or may not.

Darwin's theory is remarkable for its scope and simplicity. It is not a sacred cow but it looks like it is a very plausible theory. (As for Marx and Freud discussed in the article, the Christists are my friends)

*(not Christianity - as they derogatorily refer to other religions as 'isms and so I'm paying them back in the same coin. This terminology is courtesy Prof S Kalyanaraman)

The Complete List - ALL-TIME 100 Movies - TIME Magazine

The Complete List - ALL-TIME 100 Movies - TIME Magazine

An interesting set of movies. What makes this more interesting is that a few Indian movies are present here - the Apu trilogy (Pather Panchali, Aparajito and Apur Sansar), Nayakan (yes?!!) and Pyaasa. Pyaasa is a great movie. I haven't watched the Apu trilogy - but judging from the rave reviews - it is probably a good set of movies. Nayakan is great too - but the reason I don't want it on the top 100 list is because it was a remake (well, almost) of Godfather. You don't want "inspired" movies on this list, do you? Indianizing a movie like Godfather is certainly a daunting task and kudos to Maniratnam for doing that. But, sadly, Nayakan remains his best movie to date. Pallavi Anupallavi - his first movie in Kannada is beautiful and more importantly original - but it is nowhere close to matching the intensity and drama of Nayakan. Maniratnam has done well - but he needs to go one notch up. Bad ideas like Dil Se (actually, I liked this movie) and Yuva (this one sucked) should not come up. Maniratnam needs to make one movie for himself and we want to watch it. He has immense potential and I hope he begins to fulfill a portion of it soon.

This list has quite a few movies I've watched and liked. More importantly, it will now serve as a good guide for my movie collection.

'US still open to India's UNSC bid'- The Times of India

'US still open to India's UNSC bid'- The Times of India

Is the US really open to India's UNSC bid ? I don't think so. Of course, they want India to be a permanent member of the UNSC without giving India the crucial veto power. What is the use then?

As somebody elsewhere thought, I think India should threaten quitting the UN. Indian peace keepers have given their lives for unknown people halfway across the globe in exchange for nothing. I agree that the UN gives a forum to India to present its concerns and all that, but does the present UN have any power to enforce the decisions taken ? The disturbances in Africa are too numerous to mention and the UN has been a bit helpful in handling those, but not a lot.

It looks like the UN is going the way of the League of Nations. "Might is right" seems to be the way in spite of the UN's existence. Only powerful countries like the US can have their say in the UN. And if they can't have it their way (remember Colin Powell's pathetic WMD presentation?), they don't care. If all countries go this way, why does the UN even need to exist?

The Security council seat is definitely prestigious and will mark India's ascent to the status of a world power. India is a bigger and more powerful country than France and Britain, both of which seem to be spent powers (correct me if I am wrong). China got its seat because of Jawaharlal Nehru's misplaced magnanimity - but it is definitely a country to reckon with and is no push over. Russia is still there but is no match for the cold USSR that was an able counterweight to the mighty US of A. So, IMO, the US and China deserve to be in the Security Council as permanent members because of their clout. India deserves to be there more than France and probably Britain too. Brazil deserves to be there as the most powerful country in South America. Japan and Germany - I don't know.

But without a veto, these 'permanent' members will be no more than flags on the wall. Recently some nut case Indian minister said that it would be OK if India got in without a veto. No, not at all. You either are a permanent member with a veto or you are as bad as any other non-permanent member.

You can ask what a common man like me gets from India being a veto-powered UNSC member. It is a question of patriotism for people like me who like to see their countries recognized as world powers.

We come back to the question of the utility of the UN. Some countries probably get a lot of value from it - but for most of the others, it is just a place where you can meet with diplomats of other people and brag. If countries were humans, you would need a place for the people to get together and talk - like a pub or a coffeeshop. In that way, I think the UN is a little more than a glorified coffeeshop. Am I getting carried away because of the raw deal India seems to be getting? Probably.

From my textbook learning of history, it seemed like the UN was the best thing to have happened to the world. WWF, UNESCO, UNICEF, WHO, FAO are all (probably) worthy agencies of the UN. But in the present world, does this still hold?

Also, how good is the UN a place for getting your job done? More than a coffeeshop or not? A coffeeshop still has value - but the member countries should realize that the UN is what it really is - a coffeeshop.

To a God Unknown - John Steinbeck

I don't know when I began reading Steinbeck. It definitely was during my stay in the Bay Area. San Jose State University has a recently built huge library in downtown San Jose and it was there that I somehow got interested in Steinbeck. I knew he was a 'local' author. So to get to the real history of the place, I would have to read Steinbeck.

Since then I've read a few Steinbeck novels - The Cup of Gold, The Winter of Our discontent and Of Mice and Men. When we moved back to India, we bought almost all of Steinbeck's books as I had begun liking Steinbeck. He has this slow measured writing - which can be called lyrical (and I found out that others feel the same too). You can't honestly read a Steinbeck very fast. Of Mice and Men is small - any other book of its size and I could have finished it in a couple of hours at the most. He has nuggets of experience liberally sprinkled throughout the book. He uses simple words for profound concepts and images and respects the reader's intelligence by not going overboard with the descriptions. My having lived in California, albeit briefly, is most definitely another reason why I tend to like Steinbeck a lot.

Last month or so, I began reading - To a God Unknown. I didn't get around to finishing it till around now. After reading it, I feel overwhelmed. It is a mystical story (as stated in the book cover introduction) and very deep. It talks about Man and the symbols of events or people in his life that he sees in the external world. Another thing I like about Steinbeck is his wonderful description of nature. He describes storms, mountain ranges, groves and streams so beautifully that - amazing and beautiful - are all I can say. In the novels I have read (I haven't even read his magnum opus - The Grapes of Wrath - and which came later in Steinbeck's career), he writes with profundity - without the wordiness. I have had to ponder over certain lines for a long time. Was the imagery intended ? Or was I reading too much into it ? Actually, I found out later that Steinbeck took five years to write "To a God Unknown". So it seems to be the case that the images he presents are intended.

An interesting thing in this novel is that Steinbeck explores the concept of sacrifice (yajna in the Vedic tradition) which is pantheistic (not yajna but Steinbeck's interpretation of sacrifice) and also beyond any label you can apply to such a concept. Interestingly, Steinbeck prefaces this work with a section from the Veda (in Skt. it is kasmai devAya haviShA vidhema - To which God shall we give sacrifice). Man's relation with his environment and family is brought out profoundly again (this is the word I seem to be getting everytime). Man's resolve, fear, concern, love, raw bestiality, and other things are presented in a thought provoking manner. I am writing in abstract terms so that people (if at all) reading this won't get the complete story (if they haven't already read it..).

Set probably in the early to mid 19th century, Joseph Wayne is the main character and he comes from Vermont to a tract of land in the Valley of our Lady in California. Joseph's deification of trees and rocks is definitely a kind of animism - but Steinbeck does not ridicule it. He allows the reader to make his own decision. It is pretty interesting for some one who is Christian by birth. Actually, we see the response of orthodox Christianity to this behavior later. Hidden beliefs - characterized as 'pagan' by the Church - come to the fore in times of extreme strife and great happiness. The extent to which a man can obsess over his land and environment is brought out very well. This novel seems to bring out the thesis that Man is fundamentally spiritual in nature and is a part of his environment. It also seems to be making the point that a 'pagan' belief is truer to Man's heart than organized religion. The incident in the last chapter seemed to be emphasizing this. The social structure is also brought about well. Steinbeck knew so well about California, its weather patterns and climate that he seems to know each piece of land personally. He also seems to be quite knowledgeable in matters of agriculture.

This novel wasn't very well received when first published (1933). But I personally love it and will come back for a second helping later. If somebody hasn't read it, I urge them to go read this wonderful book.

Tipu Sultan again

I am almost done reading a well researched book on Tipu. It is by Prof HD Sharma - the original being in English. I read a Kannada translation - which was good but the translation of the letters written by Tipu are difficult to read. There is a translation touch to it - you can feel that it is a translation. The author has done some extensive research and has a good reference list at the end of the book. He has referred to the India Office archives in London where most of Tipu's correspondence and effects lie.

The book is not big at all. It is close to 200 pages. A simple gist of the book is as follows.

Tipu was a bigot on the same level as Mahmud Ghazni, Aurangzeb, Mohammed bin Tughlaq and Alla-ud-din Khilji. So, if we already know what the others have done, Tipu has matching deeds.

According to the book, Haider Ali, Tipu's father surprisingly comes out as a good leader and a king, in spite of some of his bad deeds. I was surprised as a lot of people from Chitradurga (where Haider Ali defeated Madakarinayaka, the local chieftain) loath Haider while being indifferent about Tipu.

Tipu's political life is in two phases one from 1767-1792 and the second one from 1792-1799. The phase break came because of Tipu's defeat in the Third Mysore war after which he became neurotic.

In the first phase of his life/rule, Tipu comes across as a ruthless, tyrannical despot with a level of bigotry that would make even Osama bin Laden look to Tipu with awe. Haider Ali for all his faults had a few merits. He hired the local Hindu people to look after his army and administration. Diwan Purnaiah was the most important of the lot. Haider was clever enough to recognize talent and use it and not be clouded by affiliation to religion. He kept religion and politics separate and in that aspect he was truly a secular ruler.

There are claims to Tipu's having many Hindu officials. They were the ones who remained after Haider's death and Tipu's ascent to the 'throne'. Tipu actually removed several Hindu officials and replaced them with Muslim ones, even though they were illiterate.

Tipu perpetrated horrors in the Malabar region and in the state of Travancore where he forcibly converted thousands of Hindus and Christians to Islam. The rest were killed. In fact, a note written by Tipu orders one of his commanders to kill 5000 people to instill fear in the people. It is estimated that Tipu destroyed at least 8000 Hindu temples. He was a very religious Muslim and read from the Quran every day and followed its edicts quite literally.

Haider Ali had at least bothered to put on the mask of a regent while pretending to serve the Wodeyar King of Mysore. With Tipu, even the mask was lost. Tipu imprisoned the Royal Family of Mysore and ill treated them. He even took a few Hindu women associated with his administrative officials and other royal families forcibly into his harem. In fact, he had Diwan Purnaiah's niece in his harem. This is to show the 'good' feeling Tipu had for his ministers.

He had a lot of people killed in Srirangapatna and Melkote also because they seemed to support the Wodeyar family. It is believed that he had the supporters of the royal family hanged (at least 800 families including women and children) from the trees in a tamarind grove close to the Sri Ranganatha temple. To give an idea of the horrible punishments Tipu meted out, he had a commander very close to Haider Ali, Krishna Rao, killed by dropping him alive in a pan of boiling oil. Tipu then took the wife of Krishna Rao forcibly into his harem. To compound it, the execution of Krishna Rao was based on flimsy reasons. The royal family of Travancore was subjected to similar ignominies when the bodies of the royal family members were subject to humiliating treatments.

However, there are records to show his devotion towards Hindu Temples. This happened because of the change in mind after his defeats to the British - which was more out of fear than any wisdom. He consulted astrologers and sought their advice more readily than from his maulvis and imams. Even then, Tipu did not stop to solicit help from several Muslim rulers around the world. These messages had a common refrain - "Let's make India a Muslim country and let's kill the "atheists"". Atheists referred to non-Muslims and Muslims like the Nizam of Hyderabad. In fact, the inscription on his famous sword expresses similar emotions.

There were a few positive qualities of Tipu also. 5'8" in height (not a positive quality, just mentioned it), he was a simple dresser and loved his wives and children a lot. He was a brave warrior and very energetic and enthusiastic. He actually banned the sale of intoxicants in his kingdom. He was well trained in Persian, Arabic, Urdu, Kannada and the other local languages and loved to engage in letter writing very frequently. He even kept a journal of his dreams. He was supposed to be an excellent horse rider. He respected his mother a lot and made at least a show of listening to her.

Towards his end, we see Tipu becoming a nervous wreck requesting for many pujas and yajnas to be performed to ward off evil. He continued to write letters to France, Egypt, Turkey and Afghanistan requesting for help - but none arrived. He died on May 4 1799 when he was trying to retreat to his palace from the Srirangapatna fort. He did not die fighting as expressed by many historians. He was buried next to his father and mother. The British, the Marathas and the Nizam of Hyderabad proved to be real enemies to Tipu.

To sum up, Tipu was not a freedom fighter and neither was he secular because he did not have such ideas at all. He was quite a selfish ruler who could stoop down to any level if permitted by the political conditions. He was a bigot heavily influenced by Islamic theological training at a young age (In fact, Haider Ali deplored this teaching). Also, Tipu was never trained in any religion other than Islam contrary to what is reported in TV serials and popular books. His tyrannical rule adversely affected tens of thousands of families in Kerala and the Malabar region and even in his own kingdom. His death gave a lot of relief to families across South India. That probably is the reason why the British were welcomed in Karnataka.

One of these days, I will go to Srirangapatna and spend the entire day there looking at the different places associated with Tipu's life.

TT: martin gardner on David Bohm and Krishnamurti

TT: martin gardner on

I first heard of J Krishnamurti more than ten years ago. At that time, the impression I had of him was that of a man who respected no tradition and generally that of an iconoclast. As I grew older, I came in contact with people connected to the Theosophical Society and Krishnamurti. His books seemed definitely interesting. It was difficult for me to characterize JK as belonging to any particular faith or stream of thought.

I've gone through a couple of his books. One of them - "On Fear" is a collection of speeches and writings delivered by JK on fear. His thought seemed clear. Forget what Martin Gardner says in this mentioned article, but JK seemed clear enough to me. I kind of envied him for being 'free' of fear. Because only one who is free of fear could honestly truthfully write a book on the mechanism of fear and how to overcome it. So I had thought of JK as a fearless man.

But this particular article and a bunch of others seem to convey something else. There is a letter that JK wrote to his long time associate Raja that shows everything. That letter can still be construed to be from a fearless person - but it generally seemed to convey an otherwise impression. JK, while not bound by any tradition, also seems to fall in the class of charlatans and mountebanks, fooling people with his verbosity and a facade of wisdom. So, if this article is true, JK was like any other guru - the kind that he detested and well trapped in the web of human frailty.

Martin Gardner, for his part, has been needlessly harsh in criticizing JK's teachings, I feel. Also, I would like to know where JK said that a man's brain would undergo mutation upon realization.

Before I ended up on this page, I was googling for Martin Gardner, whose achievements are quite remarkable for a non-professional mathematician and scientist. Gardner, who is a ripe 91 as I write this, loves to junk parapsychology. His belief of philosophical theism is interesting. I loved his work on Recreational mathematics and want to read his "scrivener" work when I can get around to it.

MG refers to JK as "one of the most peculiar gurus ever to come out of Mother India". Is he sarcastic here? I felt more than a hint of it. Do others feel the same?

The linked article is quite interesting as a person hailed by someone like Doug Hofstadter (author of GEB) as one of the prominent intellects of America has expressed his views on a brilliant physicist and a guru. (a title that JK detested)

Timesofindia Limited Edition

Timesofindia Limited Edition

This article talks about assault by Lucknow "brats". My question to the clueless TOI editors is - do you guys know what a brat is ? A brat is a spoilt child - look at any dictionary. Please don't reduce the gravity of the incident by labeling it as perpetrated by brats. It sounds like a bunch of kids stole mangoes from a tree.

Brats do not indulge in causing harm of this kind. I even looked for a place to comment and they haven't provided one. TOI is really "toilet paper of India"..

Flyover project hits roadblock - Deccan Herald - Internet Edition

Flyover project hits roadblock - Deccan Herald - Internet Edition

This is the kind of thing that is happening in Bangalore. This particular flyover should have been completed in April 2004 and it looks like it won't happen for another year.

Arggh ! Why don't both the UP-Bridge-building-whatever and BDA see the hardships that people are going through? Or, should the people just threaten them?

The completion of this flyover will save 20 minutes of time for people travelling across Airport Road as well as for the people going from Koramangala to Indiranagar.

'Bangalore crumbling'

'Bangalore crumbling'

This is very true. Bangalore is crumbling. In the last 6 months I've been here, I have complained endlessly about the traffic jams and the bad infrastructure that plagues India's most technologically advanced city.

The problem is simple and complex. Simple because its explanation is simple. Complex because of its solution.

The root cause for this problem is politics, of course. How can it be anything else? SM Krishna was the US-educated tech-savvy chief minister of Karnataka (it has been quite some time since the exit of Krishna and Chandrababu articles on whom were regularly accompanied with cliches such as tech-savvy, cyberabad etc.,). His goal in life was to make Bangalore a Singapore (as advanced as that, at least). Then the inevitable happened and his party lost the majority. A combination of unlikely parties was cobbled together on the condition that Krishna be kept out of power. And thus the new uneasy Karnataka Cabinet was formed. It appears forever to be in a pre-alpha version. I don't know when we will progress to the beta; forget the release version!

This cabinet while wanting to get rid of everything that hinted SM Krishna's work threw the baby away with the bathwater. Devegowda - who after being a former PM - cannot come down to be the CM of Karnataka (his predicament is very funny) mouths shrill left rhetoric at every given opportunity. He blames liberalization and privatization as the banes afflicting India. This son of the soil who, unfortunately for Bangalore, calls the shots (or basically ensures that nothing worthwhile gets done lest the Congress party get all the credit) in the current state government has effectively caused the infrastructure work to come to a grinding halt (I seem to be in a cliche mood today). So, the work on the Airport Road flyover along with a dozen other projects across the City are not progressing at all.

Essentially, in this clash of egos the victims have been Bangalore and its citizens.

I am personally affected a lot by this as I have to cut across the busiest parts of town to get to work. Nowadays I am quite relieved when my commute of around 13 km gets over by an hour! If the roads were fixed, I could easily shave 20 minutes off my commute - that is 33%! Everything else would improve with that change.

Anyway, the political stalemate has caused the work to go no further.

So I wasn't surprised when the writer of the mentioned article referred to Bangalore as crumbling. Bangalore has become "one-way city". If these problems don't get fixed, Bangalore will still be a one-way city with all roads leaving town.

I fervently hope that this situation changes soon (I am sure it will only be for the better - it can't get any worse than this).