Words, Words!

                                     POEMS AND POETS

                          16. Words,Words!

While in College, I heard these lines:

Words are wise men's counters, they do but reckon by them;

but they are the money of fools!

This was said by Thomas Hobbes. It points to an inherent difficulty in determining the precise sense of words. Words acquire meaning according to the wisdom of the learner. Children study Blake's 'Tyger' in school. But a philosopher would see no physical tiger at all!  Words are for the wise like the finger pointing at the moon; the finger is not the moon.

With the explosion of information, and spread of literacy, huge books are routinely written. One wonders if the same things could not be said in fewer words. I wonder if the profusion of words does not hide poverty of thought,or clarity. Brevity is the essence of mastery of a subject, not just the soul of wit. This is also the real beauty of poetry, compared to prose! 

When we take up scriptures, we find a few words to be of exceptional importance. Ramana Maharshi used to point out that in the whole of the Bible, only the words I AM THAT I AM was printed in capital letters! Lot of confusion is caused by translating words from one language to another. Bible, the largest selling book in the world, came from  Hebrew (Aramaic) to Greek to Latin to King James to Modern English and meaning of words has changed. Msgr.R.A .Knox who like Chesterton ( and later Bede Griffiths) embraced Roman Catholicism translated the Bible from the Latin, closely comparing it to the Greek and Hebrew versions, and is reported to have pointed out the differences in meanings of many words. Even so, Knox was a theologian and scholar, not a spiritually realised person whose take might be different.

I find that in regard to ancient Hindu scriptures, scholars and academics who have no practical touch with  a living tradition go off on their own on a fanciful journey putting their own interpretation on important words. There is always substantial difference between what they write and what is understood by the traditional followers and expounders. But since the latter do not write elegantly, and do not find international publishers, their work is neglected.

These foreign scholars do not understand some simple things, apart from lacking genuine sympathy for the subject. They almost always have a hidden agenda in attempting to translate Hindu works. If they observe the practical habits of orthodox Hindus, they will find that Hindus use certain things only for certain purposes or on specific occasions. The mug they use in the bathroom, they will not use in the kitchen. They will not draw water from the bathroom    for use in the kitchen, though in the modern residential complexes, they have a common source in the same overhead tank. The utensils they use for the Sraddha ceremony will not be handled daily. It is the same with regard to words in the scriptures. 

Sanskrit has not escaped the fate ancient languages  have suffered in translation at alien hands.. Fundamental words like "Arya","Varna",  are given fanciful interpretations. Arya means 'one of noble conduct'. Is there a one word English equivalent? Would 'gentleman' do? No. The Sanskrit original indicates a state of high self-culture, result of consciously chosen, self-imposed discipline, involving  instinctive application of the highest standards of unimpeachable conduct. In the Ramayana, Sita calls Rama "Arya putra". In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna opens his dialogue, chiding Arjuna for his  " anarya jushtam"  ie non-Aryan like conduct. 2.2 It does not indicate social status at all. But the English word indicates a person of certain social status. So we have the verse:

"When Adam delved and Eve span,

Who was then the gentleman?" 

Westerners have made 'Aryan' stand for race! 

"Varna" means colour. But what colour? How come four colours? Why only four? It is clear that colour here has a  psychological or symbolic significance. But the Portuguese rendered it as 'caste' and so it has stayed.

Our own scholars are not free from this influence. They habitually defer to the views of Western scholars. Marco Pallis once said that even Vivekananda was not  entirely free from this.

I want to consider a few important words in the Gita which are interpreted rather superficially : Sreya:, Kripana; and Smritir labda. Of these, Shreya has been covered in an earlier post.(No.3, On Duty)

The whole Gita discourse is triggered by the following words of Arjuna:
"Karpanya doshopa hataswabhava prucchami tvam dharma 
              sammudha cheta:
Yat shreya: syan nischitam bruhi tanme
             sishyasteham sadi mam tvam prapannam" (2.7)

Meaning: With my nature overpowered by weak commiseration, with my mind confused about duty, I supplicate You.Say decidedly what is good for me.I am Your disciple. I have taken refuge in You. Please instruct me.
Karpanya dosha is rendered here as 'weak commiseration'.

Later Arjuna also mentions his intense agony:"ucchoshanam indriyanam shokham"= intense sorrow blasting my senses.

I recall the words of Master Shakespeare:

'Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased,
Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow,
Raze out the written troubles of the brain,
And with some sweet oblivious antidote
Cleanse the stuffed bosom of that perilous stuff
Which weighs upon the heart?                              (Macbeth)

Kripana is the word we take up here. It is rendered as "mindless commiseration" 
This word is also used in one other place in the Gita:2.49. Here, Krishna tells Arjuna: "kripana: phalahetava:". This is rendered as 'wretched or pitiable are those who work  ( exclusively) desiring fruits'.At one level, this is apt: commiseration is the feeling of sympathy for someone when something unpleasant happens to them. But this does not exhaust all possibilities. Like in the case of Shreyas, we have to appeal to a higher authority- the Upanishad.

 In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad occurs a passage, where Yajnavalkya, the doyen of Teachers, instructs Gargi:

" Yo va etad aksharam gargi aviditvasmallokat priiti sa krupana:
meaning : O Gargi, he who departs from this world without knowing  ( ie realising) this Immutable, he is kripana.
Krupana is rendered here as miserable.
This too is apt; but if we reflect, we may find it inadequate to describe all that is meant.

The highest one may achieve in life is to know God, the Immutable. If after taking this human birth, one does not achieve this- he is not just miserable, but misses the whole purpose of life. It is a fall.

Arjuna has this kind of inner feeling or fear. He knows he is facing something momentous, extraordinary. Almost all the kings of India are ranged in battle array- on either side. Even the Tamil kings were there. It had not happened before. Arjuna is the hope of the Pandavas. He has to deliver. At such a time, he is overcome by some weakness. He is not new to war or violence- he is a Kshatriya by birth, temperament and training. So, he is expressing the inner apprehension that he is facing an event of mighty import, for whch all his life has been but a preparation, but he is about to miss that . In short, all that he stood and lived for is turning futile. His life is rendered meaningless. He has lived in vain.
All his conventional learning and training are of no avail. He wants fresh light and insight. So he  turns to Krishna.
But this is extraordinary: Krishna has so far been a sakha- dear friend, comrade, a close relative. What makes him look up to him as his Teacher? What prompts him to seek refuge with Him? 
 It is both Arjuna's ripeness and Krishna's proximity- both together! It is this which makes him feel a kripana-someone about to miss a mighty fortune!
Such is the significance I read in the word Kripana- not just commiseration, wretchedness or pity.

We now come to the other word: Smriti. It occurs in verse 18.73, at the end. (It occurs in two more places: 10.34, and 15.15, but there the context is plain, as also the meaning). Here, after listening to all that Krishna said, Arjuna exclaims:
" nashto moha: smritir labda tvat prasadat" meaning: By Your Grace, my delusion is destroyed, I have regained my memory. 
Memory of what?

Krishna began his instruction by reminding Arjuna of the immortal nature of the Atman- how it is not destroyed when the body is. The body has to go through its motions, but the Enlightened is not to confuse his Self with the body or the ego.. This kind of knowledge alone will provide a sure foundation for correct action in the world.The body takes many births; the Atman is never born,never dies. These are the first direct instructions of Krishna-from 2.11 to 2.25. There is a change of track from 2.26. Krishna leaves the lofty heights and comes down to Arjuna's level, probably prompted by some facial expression of Arjuna which indicates his inability to comprehend these highest thoughts, expounding the unmanifested, unthinkable, and unchangeable. (avyaktam, achintyam, avikaryam, 2.25)  Krishna tells Arjuna at 4.5: 'Many are the births that you and I have passed through. I know them all; you do not'.
So at the end, when Arjuna exclaims, " I have regained my memory", it can only mean the memory of his own immortal nature, about which Krishna spoke first at the beginning. True spirituality is based on the immortality of the soul. Everything  else is  dogma and theology. It is also to be noted that in the Gita, the very first word used by Arjuna to address Krishna is "Achyuta"- one who does not change or resile from his real nature! (1.21)

It is indeed the function of any great teacher: he reminds us of our own innate greatness. Spiritual Realisation is not the attainment of anything new- it is recollection of the awareness of our eternal nature! This is the memory that Arjuna has regained!

We thus see how careful we have to be in dealing with the words in the scriptures. They have deep meaning and cannot be caught in a hurry. I suppose this applies to all scriptures. 

All this seems to be religious stuff. Where does poetry come in?
Take this memory. If you observe an infant in the cradle, you will find  frequent changes in  its facial expressions , and it laughs on its own. Or suddenly cries aloud. What causes these? And why do children invariably cry at birth- a  cry which for once makes every one else happy? The popular belief among Hindus is that the child remembers its past and sees sights too, which make it laugh or cry. And the crying at birth is due to its unwillingness to be pushed into this world-once again! But as it grows, the world catches up with it and the child forgets the past.
 Memory and forgetting!
Let Wordsworth tell us about it.

William Wordsworth
From: Intimations of Immortality.

The earth, and every common sight, 
To me did seem
Apparelled in celestial light,.......
But yet I know, where'er I go,
That there hast past away a glory from the earth.
.......
Whither is  fled the visionary gleam?
Where is it now, the glory and the dream?

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:
The soul that rises with us, our life's Star,
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And cometh from afar:
Not in entire forgetfulness
And not in utter nakedness
But trailing clouds of glory do we come,
From God, who is our home:
Heaven lies about us in our infancy!

Shades of the prison house begin to close
Upon the growing boy.
But He
Beholds the light, and whence it flows,
He sees it in his joy......
At length the Man perceives it die away,
And fade into the light of the common day.

Thou little Child, yet glorious in the might
Of heaven-born freedom on thy being's height,
Why with such earnest pains dost thou provoke
The years to bring the inevitable yoke
Thus blindly with thy blessedness at strife?
.......
Our Souls have sight of that immortal sea
Which brought us hither,
Can in a moment travel thither..

Wordsworth has seen something, known something. But is it everything?
Child's happy state of innocence- is it a state of Knowledge or mere memory? Immortality embraces life in the whole of universe; our earthly existence is just one part of it. Once here,  nature fills us with her pleasures and we forget our origin. We don many roles and our life becomes a vocation of endless imitation. 

 Mankind as a whole has forgotten its origins. Man has forgotten his  true identity. Our souls have come from God, our home. That we have to find our way there, is our work here. That we can- is our hope. Does it happen only at death?
No. Life after death is not going to be different from life before it- in the level of enlightenment. Our leaving the body does not make us more enlightened, if we are not enlightened already> One has to strive for it, consciously. The effort has to be made now, here while we are alive: ihaiva.

 Utthishtatha: Jagrata; prapyavaran nibodhata; calls the  Upanishad.   Get up,Wake up,  approach the teacher who Knows and get enlightened. Death is not the end of existence, but it  is also not the automatic entrance to the state of Knowing. 

Psychologists like Jung have written that humanity as a whole has collective memories, submerged deep in their psyche. But modern man has forgotten his soul and is in search of it.Writes Jung:

"Among all my patients in the second half of life-that is say over 35 years-there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one  of them fell ill because he had lost that which the living religions of every age had given to their followers, and none of them had been really healed who did not regain his religious outlook."

( Quoted in : "Repacking Your Bags, p.128 )

Religious outlook does not of course mean joining a formal religion.

Poetry can lead us there no less than philosophy or theology!
 In Hindu religious teaching, the highest level of teacher is one who can teach without words! We have conception of such a form of God in Dakshinamurti - usually rendered as the South-facing One.
  (It has deeper connotations) He sits under the banyan tree. He is a youth, but the disciples are old! His explanation is by Silence and the disciples have all their doubts dispelled! Acharya Sankara sings :

Oh, what a strange sight, yonder under that banyan!
The disciples are old, the guru is youthful;
The language of the guru's explanation is silence!
And the disciples have  no doubt at all!

 The great Tamil mystic teachers  like Tayumanavar. Arunagirinatha, etc also longed for, attained and praised such a state, recorded in immortal poetry.

Just as the best teacher communicates in silence, the best student is supposed to catch the hint from the teachers eye! This is celebrated in a brilliant song by Saint Tyagaraja, the poet-composer, illustrating an incident from the life of Rama. Rama the prince is led by his teacher Vishvamitra to the assembly of King Janaka. Janaka had announced that he would offer his daughter Sita in marriage to the prince who would lift the mighty bow of Shiva he had. Many had tried, and failed. Vishvamitra asks Rama to 'have a look' at the bow. Rama approaches it and looks at it. What next? He looks at his Guru and knows what he has to do! He just lifts it, and in the attempt to tie the string, the mighty bow is broken! He got his orders from the Guru's very look!

Another celebrated situation where words are unnecessary for communication is when old lovers meet! The mighty Tamil poet Kamban sings of this , again from the life of Rama! Rama and Sita are old lovers- the universal parents, who lived on the milky ocean. They came to the world and got separated. But when they looked at each other now, it was love at first sight! So Kamban exclaims: When old lovers reunite, do they need speech? Our modern celluloid poets are more down to earth. "Let us just keep looking at each other; make no sound", sings Rajinder Krishan. "Dekh hamen aawaz na dena". Who can say how right the poet is, unless one experiences it? 

Another situation of wordless instruction was once recounted by a brilliant Hindustani classical musician. She was recalling her days with her Guru in his establishment, along with other students. It was monsoon time, moon-lit night. The teacher was expounding a Raga, our musical scale. Suddenly he said " let us go to the terrace" and thither they repaired. There they saw the moon; there were clouds about, moving over the moon. He pointed to it and said "Look". They had to understand! The clouds were moving- not stationery! So the note they were being taught should not be 'caught and held' but just 'touched  and allowed to float or roll away'! Can words explain this beauty? Only those who have actually  observed moon on  such a night can really understand this!

A classic illustration comes from our Upanishads. There the gods, demons and men - all children of one God- approach their father and seek instruction. He points to the thundering cloud and says "Listen". "DA, DA, DA" sound the rolling  clouds. The father says that is the instruction! The Devas (gods) who are always given to enjoyment, interpret DA as meaning "damyata"- moderation ; the demons who are by nature prone to cruelty , take it to mean "daya" or compassion; men, who are ever tight-fisted, think it means "dana"- charity! So be it , says the father-teacher!
Where exactly do we moderns figure in this?

Who can assert that words are indispensable for communication?
Mountains speak-we do not understand: did not someone say that?
There is another story of one who had 24 teachers- not one of them human! May be, another time!

God Is!

                                     POEMS  AND  POETS

                            15.God Is!

What is our idea of God? We have absolutely no idea! That is why we have named that state God!  'God' stands as a convenient label for all that we do not know! If something happens, and we do not know why, it is an act of God! Somehow things go on in this world . We can no more think of it without God than we can think of an orchestra without a conductor.

" President of the Immortals" wrote Thomas Hardy.What an expression! Not at all complimentary, from the context. Or helpful.

We Hindus are more practical. If you think you can never know  or say anything about it, call it Brahman! If you think the world must have a creator, as a pot must have a potter, call him Ishwara! If you think he hears your complaints and listens to you and hastens to your succour, call him Bhagavan! If you think he comes to the world from time to time to set a crooked world straight, call him an Incarnation- Avatara! If you think you can have a God all to yourself, call him Ishtadevata! Why call "Him" at all? it could be She- Mother, who can do no wrong by a child! And should it be only Father or Mother? It could be Son too! Though not all sons are so honoured- the sons of Rama and Krishna, for example! We do not put all our eggs in the same basket.

In the Tamil land, almost the first word for God taught by non-sectarian families to their young children is "Ummachi". It is a modified,colloquial form of "Uma Maheshwara", the universal parents of all children of the world, of all ages! Great Kalidasa sang:

" Vagarthaviva sampruktau vagartha pratipattaye
Jagata: pitarau vande Parvati Parameshwarau"

Like the word and its meaning, the universal parents Parvati-Parameshwara ever are one! They cannot be separated. Nor can they be separated from the  world-jagat! It is always together-God and His power, but the mother always comes first. Sita Ram, Lakshmi Narayan, Uma Maheshwara, Girija Shankar, etc. The Veda asks us to honour mother first, before mentioning father: Matru Devo Bhava, Pitru Devo Bhava.

It is remarkable how educated Hindus use the  English word God nonchalantly, even though no one knows what it means!  Even though it does not correspond to any of the Hindu names or conceptions! Yet the same Hindus would be allergic to the word Allah which just means embodiment of perfection, what is called in the Upanishad "Purnam", or Malik, which means, Master!

Ideas relating to God are developed elaborately in Hindu theology. Each cult has its own take, its own slant or angle. The modern Ph.Ds are as nothing  compared to our theological disputants! Through this maze, some concrete ideas emerge, common to all.

One is advised to have a personal relationship to God. One must relate to him as one would to an actual living person.

Four possible relationship types are held out. 

• the parent or child
• the friend
• the master-servant
• the majestic, detached admirer (Santa Bhava)

Above all comes the attitude of the beloved. Some saints go to the extent of extolling the model of illicit love! For in this case, the feeling is so intense that even though the person is with some one, he/she is constantly thinking of the illicit lover! One should read the explanations given by the 19th century saint Sri Ramakrishna for a clear account of these attitudes. Various historical/

legendary  figures are held up as the models  for each type. Arjuna is the best type of friend.

In following devotion to God,the general method is to follow some set rules, practices; but as one matures, external rules yield to pure intention and emotion. The former is called vaidi- or rule based, and the latter,raga- deeply emotional.

When it comes to intense practice or sadhana, two attitudes are extolled: the monkey way and the cat way. The baby monkey firmly holds the mother, while it jumps from tree to tree, or runs around. So must we hold on to God. But here the onus is on us. We may slip. Not so in the cat way! Here the mother cat holds the kitten in its mouth, and goes about! So, we must let God do with us what he would! The mother cat may put the kitten on a roof top, on some fine bed , or in the rubbish heap! It cannot be complaining, for it knows the mother knows best! Various historical examples are given.

Modern Tamil poet Subramanya Bharati was a revolutionary. He conceived of God as our servant! Yes, he comes and helps us even as our faithful domestic servant relieves us of our hard chores and ensures ease! How much we suffer at times for want of a good domestic help! Bharati sang of Krishna as the servant- a hilarious and at the same time moving account! I confess I cannot attempt to give a translation- or even a gist. It is for some great one like Mrs. Prema Nandakumar!

If monkey and cat are found, what about man's best friend? It is not left out! We have Francis Thompson singing of God as the very hound- not any dog!

Mysticism is perhaps the extreme state of pure devotion, though it can also result from direct perception of Truth. It is a state where the person is in communion with Reality of God. It is an experience of non-differentiation, of unity or Oneness.  It can be permanent- lasting a life time, or of short duration , or just flashy, lasting  but a few moments, but leaving a lasting impression or memory. It is difficult to classify, and to understand. This is a phenomenon experienced by people across nationalities, faiths and time. But the result has not been always happy. Christianity encourages rule-bound devotion, and has not looked upon mystics with  favour.They persecuted and even killed them.  eg Giordino Bruno and Meister Eckhart.Islam has been even more intolerant. Most mystic elements go underground -which is a sad thing , because so much of undesirable  practices may masquerade in its name, or live unrecognised.

A true mystic is indifferent to his circumstances, hardly even aware of the external world. Most live in seclusion, at least avoid society and its conventions.  When they speak or write, the language would appear rather strange. So, as a class mystics have been subject to much misunderstanding.

Mystics are not metaphysical or didactic: they do not set out to teach or establish anything. They may only be describing what they saw or felt in words which are peculiar to them. Conventional words are at times used to convey something unusual.

Francis Thompson: 1859-1907

Francis Thompson meets our ideas of a mystic rather fully. Enrolled to pursue medicine, the library found him reading poetry and not physiology.He left his studies, and came to London in rags but with one chief possession: a volume of Blake's poems. Though a Roman Catholic, he was interested in mysticism and found like minded people with whom he lived in miserable conditions, cleaning boots and selling newspapers. Fortunately for him , his poems impressed  Wilfrid Meynell who was running a magazine; he and his wife Alice took him to their home,in 1888, for the rest of his life. They helped him publish his poems.

The Hound of Heaven

This is Thompson's greatest poem. It has few parallels in richness of imagery, loftiness of thought. Its greatest achievement is the infusion of hope for the dejected soul.

Ordinary religious teaching is that man should seek God. This is where we go astray, lured by the world, and our own mind and its ways! Enchanted by the magic, we forget the magician! Thompson tells us that no matter what we do, where we go, the Divine does not leave us- he pursues us , till  he catches us! It is rather like the cat taking the kitten!

I fled Him, down the nights and down the days;

  I fled Him down the arches of the years;

I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways

  Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears 

I hid from Him, and under running laughter

                      Up vistaed hopes,I sped;

                      And shot, precipitated

Adown Titanic glooms of chasmed fears,

  From those strong feet that followed,,followed after.

                      But with unhurrying chase,

                      And unperturbed pace,

  Deliberate speed, majestic instancy,

                     They beat - and a voice beat

                     More instant than the feet-

  "All things betray thee, who betrayest Me."

In this very first stanza, Thompson conveys almost everything he has to say. Man runs away from God through the yearsie his life time and faculties are wasted.. The chief culprit here is the mind- with its 'laybyrinthine ways'.  Mind is the chief cause of both liberation and bondage, says the Gita. Upanishad   (Indian philosophy or is it psychology?) holds that the senses are created with an outward moving tendency. They look outward. But even when  they look inward, it is not truth that it perceives.

 In the Indian conception, what is called 'mind' in English has no exact equivalent. It is a composite entity-consisting of manas, buddhi, chitta and ahankara.  They are together called antahkarana- the inner faculty.These layers respond to different aspects of external nature, called prakriti.Our mind is of the stuff of prakriti- so they are allied.

But what we call mind is not a tabula rasa. It is a repository of previous impressions- called vasanas. So it moves in a pre-determined grove, picking out those elements from prakriti which nourish it. This accounts for the different talents and tendencies at birth even of children born of the same parents and raised in the same background. So, the mind has to be trained to seek the truth. This is the sole purpose and secret behind all the thousand and one disciplines  prescribed by all religions. They are to save our self from our own mind!

God pervades the whole universe, as the Isha Upanishad declares. So where can we go away from him? And how? It is just a matter of time before he catches us. May be, He will let us run about a bit like the mother cat does with her young one, but she will catch us in the end , by the very scruff of our neck!

Why do we run away from God? God is a sole concern- he will not be one among the many! This every genuine  devotee realises :

" having  him I must have naught beside."

"Ananyas chintayanto mam ye janah paryupasate

Tesham nityabhi yuktanam yogakshemam vahamyaham", declares Krishna in the Gita. 9.22 (Those who worship Me without any other thought- I supply what they lack and preserve what they 

have)

"Ananya cheta: satatam yo mam smarati nischaya:

Tasmaham sulabha: partha"  8.14

(He who remembers Me daily, constantly, without any other thought- I am easily attatainable by him)

So, what the Lord wants from us is our undivided mind- and this is what we are not willing to offer! We are not prepared to give up the world, for the sake of God.

Thompson tempts God's servitors but in their constancy to Him, they are fickle to Thompson! What can shelter him who turns away from God?

"Naught shelters thee, who wilt not shelter Me"

Why not turn to Nature?

But nature is but "poor stepdame". It will not do.

"Naught contents thee,who content'st not Me"

"All things fly thee, for thou fliest Me."

What is then one to do?

All religions teach us to seek God. They prescribe many disciplines. But can God be won by any tricks, however named?

We never can deserve God. It is his mercy that He chooses us. Did not some one say: Lord, what is man that Thou art mindful of him?'

This is what in the end the struggling soul has to realise. We do not merit God- He comes down on his own. "Avyaja karuna"- grace without cause-as the Sanskritists say. 

At last Thompson hears the voice of Grace:

"And human love needs human meriting;

         How hast thou merited-

Of all man's clotted clay the dingiest clot?

         Alack, thou knowest not

How little worthy of any love thou art!

Whom wilt thou find to love ignoble  thee

         Save Me, save only Me?

When we study the life of Saints and mystics, we do not find them walking the path of roses all the time. Many of them were indeed poor. Whatever may be the external circumstances, they do not complain, or grumble. Krishna even says in the Bhagavatam that when he wants to save some one, he takes away his wealth! People seek earthly riches from Him, when He is ready to give Himself! Did not Christ tell the rich man who wanted to follow Him, to get rid of  all his possessions and then follow Him? We all want both  the world and God ( or the world through God) and so end up getting neither! Can we travel two paths at the same time?

"All which I took from thee I did but take,

           Not for thy harms,

But just that thou might'st seek it in My arms.

           All which thy child's mistake

Francis as lost, I have stored for thee at home:

           Rise, clasp My hand, and come."

This is the ultimate message of true mysticism. God alone is real. Realising Him is true fulfilment. We can realise Him only when we seek Him exclusively. We can certainly approach God for anything- say a second house, a third car! But how wise is the person who gets an audience with the King to ask for  apples?

Sri Ramakrishna used to say: the mother keeps the child at play with many toys, when she has to do her household chores.. But when the child wants the mother, it throws away all the toys, and just cries for the mother. The mother then stops whatever she may be doing, and rushes to the child. God, the Universal Mother is also like that! She has allowed us to amuse ourselves with the toys in the world. But if we want her, we have to discard all the toys, and cry for her! She will come!. "O Lord, if I cry I can get you", sang the 8th century Tamil poet-saint Manikkavachakar.

That we should seek God , and God alone, is illustrated by a telling incident in the Mahabharata. When it becomes certain that war cannot be avoided, both sides decide to seek the assistance of Krishna who is a power centre, besides being related to both, Duryodhana representing Kauravas and Arjuna for the Pandavas reach Krisna's place, more or less at the same time, but Duryodhana arriving first. He finds Krishna asleep, and sits at his head. A short while later, Arjuna arrives, and sits at his feet. When Krishna wakes up and opens his eyes, his sight falls first on Arjuna. Then he realises that Duryodhana is also present. They state the purpose of their visit. Krishna says he has a large army but he himself will not take a weapon and fight. It is for them to choose between him and the army. Duryodhana claims the first choice as he came first.. But Krishna says he saw Arjuna first; besides, he being younger, should get the first choice. Arjuna chooses Krishna, to the immense relief and delight of Duryodhana, who gets the army. True to his word, Krishna becomes Arjuna's charioteer. But Arjuna's side wins the war.

This very clearly illustrates the principle. Even God's grandeur is nothing before God himself. It shows Arjuna wanted  Krishna himself, not his army. It also illustrates the humility necessary to approach God- Arjuna sits at the feet, which  is so symbolic in Hindu lore. Duryodhana sitting at the head indicates his ego. In any case, in Krishna's presence, each got what he wanted! But he who chooses God alone gets victory!

The Hound of Heaven is sublime poetry. It cannot-should not- be read at a time. Mysticism is such that it may not appeal to all, or always.. Over the years, as we evolve and mature, we see new meaning in it. 

I do not think it teaches any particular philosophy or theology. But we can interpret it many ways. People have seen in it the mystical experience of the old Jewish Prophets. It has reminded people of Psalm 139. I as  Hindu am touched by its personal approach. I am also thrilled by its mention of 'feet'. Hindus especially venerate the Feet of God. We are asked to sit "at the feet" of Teachers to learn. In the standard Hindu temple icon, almost all deities point one hand to the Feet, showing that is the final Refuge. "Lord, Your Feet are even more Hallowed than You", eulogises one ancient Tamil verse of the Sangam Age! (Pari Padal)

Thompson points to one more  Hindu nicety. He refers to the voice more instant than the feet. Yes, in the dark,we can determine our direction by the voice,even when we can't see! So, the voice of God acts as our light and sight!

This image of the hound is a grand addition to the monkey-cat imagery. The young monkey has to catch the mother and hold her firm; the cat has to carry the kitten; but the hound will pursue and catch the victim! Yes, God will not leave and abandon us, even if we run away!

Organised religion  has made the quest for God a matter of institutional formality. Here is Francis Thompson telling us that we may experience it personally, individually, uniquely. Does not  this message carry tremendous hope in modern times?

     

                    

Light and Bright!

                                  Poems and Poets

                   14. Light and Bright!

Must we concentrate only on heavy or didactic poems? Can we not enjoy some lighter moments?

I belong to the old school, brought up on a diet of study and discipline. If in a Catholic college you tried to laugh too often ( in their opinion, that is) or made  a remark out of context, or even made a sound not considered appropriate, you had it! I remember while reading Christabel, when I read aloud the words:

'T is the middle of night by the castle clock,

 And the owls had awakened the crowing cock;

Tu-whit!-- tu-whoo!,

And hark, again! the crowing cock,

How drowsily it crew!,

I could not contain myself. Our lecturer asked us to read the poem aloud. I hailed from a semi rural area, where we heard the crowing cock every morning. When I uttered the words "tu whit, tu whoo'  I tried to imitate the cock and the whole class burst out laughing. But our lecturer  took me to the principal, may be to be on the safer side! The principal was an English father and a lover of literature. He asked me to repeat the performance. When I did, he too burst out laughing, saying if I intended to imitate, I should learn to do it well! He turned to the lecturer, and told him: "Abraham, he only had a little fun. He didn't make any sound behind your back! So, it is o.k." 

     That I was taken to the principal's room, but came back in one piece, and laughing too, was something! I became somebody. But it led to other things! The boys expected me to do more such acts. When we took up Much Ado About Nothing and we came to the poem:

Sigh no more, ladies, sigh no more,
   Men were deceivers ever;
One foot in sea, one on shore,
   To one thing constant never.

Then sigh not so, but let them go,
   And be you blithe and bonny;
Converting all your sounds of woe
   Into hey, nonny,nonny.

Sing no more ditties, sing no more,
  Of dumps so dull and heavy;
The fraud of men was ever so'
   Since summer first was leafy.

Then sigh not so, but let them go,
  And be you blithe and bonny;
Converting all your sounds of woe
   Into hey,nonny,nonny.



the boys wanted me to 'sing' this! I could not afford to allow my reputation to suffer! I managed to set it to the tune of a Hindi movie song which was then popular ( hai apna dil), and some how made it, but only the first two stanzas!


This was in 1959. Years earlier, I was expelled from the Sanskrit class for trying to read a passage, after the manner of the pandit. I lost the chance to learn the language of the Gods formally in school! Oh, what a great loss to the world of Sanskrit scholarship! 

One can enjoy many lighter moments immersed in poetry. But in those olden days we were taught a verse in Tamil, based on Sanskrit original which said:

Learning is limitless, life is  short.

Even that is reduced by illness and such afflictions.

So, learn with discrimination like the Swan 

Which separates the milk from the water, and takes only the milk.

The swan is a legendary bird in our lore which has this ability. The absence of such discrimination is the accumulation of so much useless information. Which led T.S.Eliot to exclaim:

T.S.Eliot    

From "The Rock"

O perpetual  revolution of configured  stars,

O perpetual recurrence of determined seasons,

O world of spring and autumn, birth and dying

The endless cycle of idea and action,

Endless invention, endless experiment,

Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness;

Brings knowledge of speech, but not of silence;

Knowledge of words, and ignorance of the Word.

All our knowledge brings us nearer to our ignorance,

All our ignorance brings us nearer to death,

But nearer to death no nearer to God.

Where is the life we have lost in living?

Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

The cycles of Heaven in twenty centuries

Bring us farther from God and nearer to the Dust.

We wanted to consider something light, but here we are- with something serious! No matter. A great mind like Eliot may trick us to attempt a few lines:

Where is the simplicity we have lost in technology?
Where is the peace we have lost in power?
Where is the value we have lost in utility?
Where is the comfort we have lost in fashion?
Where is the justice we have lost  in law?
Where is the meaning we have lost in modernity?
Where is the innocence we have lost in education?
Where is the education we have lost in schooling?
Where is the God we have lost in religion?
Oh God, where is the humanity we have lost in society?                     
                                                     (R Nanjappa)

 Even great poets at times want to lay aside the serious poets, and take up something light. Let us hear Longfellow.

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

The Day is Done

The day is done, and the darkness

Falls from the wings of Night;......

A feeling of sadness and longing,

  That is not akin to pain,

And resembles sorrow only

  As the mist resembles the rain.

Come, read to me some poem,

  Some simple and heartfelt lay,

That shall soothe  this restless feeling,

  And banish the thoughts of day.

Not from the grand old masters,

  Not from the bards sublime,

Whose distant footsteps echo

  Through the corridors of Time.

For like streams of martial music,

  Their mighty thoughts suggest

Life's endless toil and endeavour;

  And tonight I long for rest.

Read from some humbler poet,

  Whose songs gushed from his heart,

As showers from the clouds of summer

  Or tears from the eye lids start;

Who, through long days of labour

  And nights devoid of ease,

Still heard in his soul the music

  Of wonderful melodies.

Such songs have power to quiet

  The restless pulse of care,

And come like the benediction

  That follows after prayer.

Then read from the treasured volume

  The poems of thy choice;

And lend to the rhyme of the poet

  The beauty of thy voice.

And the night shall be fill'd with music,

  And the cares that infest the day

Shall fold their tents like the Arabs,

  And as silently steal away.

"Music be the food of love", said Shakespeare. Longfellow prescribes the rhyme of the poet clothed in the beauty of the voice as the antidote to sadness. Though he does not want the 'heavy' stuff of the sublime bards, nevertheless, he wants the poetry to  be the product of inspiration- which was heard in the soul of the poet. Oh, yes, if it is not from the soul, it is not poetry, light or heavy. The heart should rule, if not the mind!

Oliver Goldsmith

An Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog.

Good people all of every sort,

Give ear unto my song;

And if you find it wondrous short,

It cannot hold you long.

In Islington there was a man

Of whom the world might say,

That still a godly race he ran--

Whenever he went to pray.

A kind and gentle heart he had,

To comfort friends and foes;

The naked every day he clad-

When he put on his clothes.

And in that town a dog was found,

As many dogs there be,

Both mongrel, puppy, whelp, and hound,

And curs of low degree.

The dog and man at first were friends;

But when a pique began,

The dog to gain some private ends,

Went mad and bit the man.

Around from all the neighbouring streets

The wondring neighbours ran,

And swore the dog had lost its wits

To bite so good a man.

The wound it seemed both sore and sad

To every Christian eye;

And while they swore the dog was mad, 

They swore the man would die.

But soon a wonder came to light

That showed the rogues they lied-

The man recovered of the bite,

The dog it was that died! 

What do you make of this poem? Man's best friend is not shown in good light here. But then, it bit only when it went mad, but many are the people who bite with their tongues, when perfectly sane! Recent analysts see  the man to be a hypocrite -eg he ran a godly race only when he went to church, or clothed the naked only when he put on his dress. They take the dog as the 'underdogs' of society, who turn bad due to the treatment they get. No poem can be enjoyed as a mere poem now- it has to be interpreted according to Feminism, leftism, Freudism, post-modernism, deconstruction, etc. Poem has become anything but a poem!

Alvin Toffler wrote that delightful book Future Shock over 40 years ago. One of the paradoxes of modern life he pointed out was that while travel in general had become fast ( in terms of miles/hour) the actual time taken for travel for any one within the cities is much more than it used to be- that we actually cover less distance in an hour, and travel slower. I realised this when the new international airport opened in Bangalore. It took three hours  to get to the airport to catch a flight to Chennai, which took just 40 minutes!. We are all engaged in some hurly-burly all the time, but are left with no time for anything! We are in good company!

Thomas L. Masson

When I Get Time

When I get time-

I know what I shall do:

I'll cut the leaves of all my books

And read them through and through.

When I get time-

I'll write some letters then

That I have owed for weeks and weeks

To many, many men.

When I get time-

I'll pay those calls I owe,

And with those bills, those countless bills,

I will not be so slow.

When I get time-

I will regulate my life

In such a way that I may get

Acquainted with my wife.

When I get time-

Oh glorious dream of bliss!

A month, a year, ten years from now-

But I can't finish this- 

I have no more time.

Judged by the Company One Keeps!

Anonymous.

One night in late October,

When I was far from sober,

Returning with my load with manly pride,

My feet began to stutter,

So I lay down in the gutter,

And a pig came near and lay down by my side;

A lady passing by was heard to say:

"You can tell a man who boozes,

By the company he chooses,"

And the pig got up and slowly walked away.

Those of us who have lived three score and ten years have seen lot of changes in every sphere, in wave after mighty wave, simultaneously. As Toffler described, it was a cultural shock. We Indians know of the force of Kala,Time , but theoretically! India at present is alienated from its own ancient self. Not only the forms are crumbling,  even the spirit is departing.

Many of the things which were landmarks or icons, or psychological supports, have gone. Relationships based on mutual personal obligation have gone- it is pure business now. The family  doctor,tailor, grocer, milkmaid, the corner pen-repair or watch repair shop has gone. The school teacher is no more the informal guardian and guide to good conduct. Even the postman is not so visible now. Many services have disappeared- the itinerant workers who would change the roof tiles, mend your umbrella, or some old copper utensil, etc are gone. The steam locomotive used to be a romantic thing-it is now replaced by the electric or diesel  ones. But somethings remain- like the man who comes to your doorsteps and sharpens all your scissors, knives ,etc. But these are now made of stainless steel and have to be thrown away, to be replaced by cheap Chinese imports!.What is gone is not replaced by something lasting or durable. Obsolescence and transience rule everything. Again, as Toffler said, we have instant celebrities, like instant coffee.
 I was trying to get some poems in our vernaculars on these disappearing trades, but could not. But I have two poems in English.

Mary E.Coleridge

The Train.

A green eye -and a red- in the dark,

Thunder- smoke- and a spark.

It is there- it is here- flashed by,

Wither will the wild thing fly?

It is rushing, tearing through the night,

Rending her gloom in its flight.

It shatters her silence with her shrieks,

What is it the wild thing seeks?

Alas! for it hurries away,

Them that are fair to stay.

Hurrah! for it carries home

Lovers and friends that roam.

The last two stanzas are particularly dear- I have experienced what is described there!  How many of us had imagined, on first seeing the train, that there was no job on earth more thrilling than that of the loco driver- the hardened muscles of his hands, coal stain all over, the colourful ( or plain dirty?) scarf tied round his head- all firing our imagination! We used to stand by the track in the village, and salute the driver, boy scout fashion!. Most returned the greeting, with a smile! And in some villages hard hit by water shortage, the goodly driver would stop outside the station, unscheduled, and allow the poor women to collect some water from the engine!

Madeleine Nightingale

The Scissor-Man

Sing a song of Scissor-men.

  "Mend a broken plate,

Bring your knives and garden shears.

  I'll do them while you wait.

Buzz-a-wuzz! Buzz-a-wuzz!

  Fast the wheel or slow.

Ticker Tacker! Ticker Tack!

  Rivets in a row."

Sing a song of Scissor-men,

  Sitting in the sun.

Sing it when the day begins,

  Sing it when it's done.

Be it hard or be it soft,

  Here's a jolly plan;

Sing to make the work go well,

  Like the Scissor-man.

This too is a familiar scene to us. Even now, even in the suburbs of Mumbai, one comes across them. There is a song in a 60-year old Tamil movie on this .I have not been able to get it, and look at the lyrics. Incidentally, the Scissor-man reminds me of the Pedlar of some Louis L'Amour Westerns!

Am I becoming too tied to the past? Am I trying to call back yesterday? By no means. I am only trying to hold on to something of the future. I am not sure what will hold.

G.D.Roberts
New Sights.

I like to see a thing I know
  Has not been seen before,
That's why I cut my apple through
  To look into the core.

It's nice to think, though many an eye
  Has  seen the ruddy skin,
Mine is the very first to spy
  The five brown pips within.


Not that we can stop the world from moving on. But being human, we want to have something familiar all along!

Charles Kingsley
When all the World is Young

When all the world is young,lad,
  And all the trees are green,
And every goose a swan,lad,
  And every lass a queen;
Then hay for boot and horse, lad,
  And round the world away;
Young blood must have its course, lad,
  And every dog his day.

When all the world is old,lad,
  And all the trees are brown;
And all the sport is stale,lad
  And all the wheels run down;
Creep home and take your place there,
  The spent and maimed among;
God grant you find one face there
  You loved when all was young. 


We are all longing for that one face, which will not change, through all the other changes!

Let our master Shakespeare have the last word.

Shakespeare
The Merry Heart

Jog on, jog on, the footpath way,
  And merrily hent the stile-a;
A merry heart goes all the way
  Your sad tires in a mile-a