ಸುಮಾರು ದಿನಗಳ ಹಿಂದೆ ನಾನು ಓದಿದ ಒಂದು ಪುಸ್ತಕ John Steinbeck ಬರೆದಿರುವ To a God Unknown ಎಂಬುದು. ಈ ಪುಸ್ತಕದಲ್ಲಿ ಮನುಷ್ಯ ಮತ್ತು ಅವನ ಪರಿಸರದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಇರುವ ಅವಿನಾಭಾವಸಂಬಂಧವನ್ನು ಬಹಳ ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಚಿತ್ರಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಪುಸ್ತಕದ ಮುಖ್ಯಪಾತ್ರ ಜೋಸೆಫ್ ಎಂಬುವವನು ತನ್ನ ತಂದೆಯನ್ನು ಒಂದು ಮರದಲ್ಲಿ ಕಂಡುಕೊಂಡು ಅದನ್ನು ಪೂಜಿಸುತ್ತಾನೆ. ವಿಗ್ರಹಾರಾಧನೆ ಮತ್ತು "ಪೇಗನ್" ನಂಬಿಕೆಗಳನ್ನು ವಿರೋಧಿಸುವ ಅವನ ಅಣ್ಣ ಆ ಮರವನ್ನು ಸಾಯಿಸಿದ ವರ್ಷವೇ ಅವರಿರುವ ಸ್ಥಳಕ್ಕೆ ಕ್ಷಾಮ ತಲೆದೋರುತ್ತದೆ. ಇನ್ನು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಹೇಳಿದರೆ ಪುಸ್ತಕವನ್ನೋದುವ ಆಸಕ್ತಿ ಕಡಿಮೆಯಾಗಬಹುದೆಂಬ ಕಾರಣದಿಂದ ಹೇಳುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.
ಪುಸ್ತಕದ ಮುನ್ನುಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಿರಣ್ಯಗರ್ಭಸೂಕ್ತದ ಕಾವ್ಯಾನುವಾದವನ್ನು ಬರೆಯಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಆ ಸೂಕ್ತದ "ಯಾವ ದೇವರಿಗೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಹವಿಸ್ಸು ಸಲ್ಲಲಿ?" ಎಂಬ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಯೇ ಇಡೀ ಪುಸ್ತಕದ ಬೆನ್ನೆಲುಬು. ಇಲ್ಲಿಯ ಪ್ರಕೃತಿವಿವರಣೆಯನ್ನು ಓದುತ್ತಿರುವಾಗಲಂತೂ ಒಂದು ಸುಂದರ ಪದ್ಯವನ್ನು ಮೆಲುಕು ಹಾಕುತ್ತಿರುವ ಅನುಭವವಾಯಿತು. ಪುಸ್ತಕ ಸಿಕ್ಕಿದರೆ ಖಂಡಿತ ಓದಿ.
ಪುಸ್ತಕದ ಗುಂಗಿನಲ್ಲಿದ್ದಾಗ, ನಮ್ಮ ಭಾರತೀಯರ ಹಬ್ಬಗಳು, ಮತ್ತು ಮಿಕ್ಕ ಆಚರಣೆಗಳು ಪ್ರಕೃತಿಯೊಂದಿಗೆ ಸಂಬಂಧವನ್ನು ಗಟ್ಟಿಗೊಳಿಸಲು ಅದೆಷ್ಟು ಸಹಾಯಕಾರಿ ಎಂಬುದು ಮನಸ್ಸಿಗೆ ಬಂದಿತು. ಪ್ರಾಯಃ ನಮ್ಮದು ಪುರಾತನಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಯಾದ್ದರಿಂದ ಪ್ರಕೃತಿಪೂಜೆ ನಮ್ಮಲ್ಲಿ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಗಿದೆ. (ಮಿಕ್ಕ ಪುರಾತನಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಗಳು ಇಸ್ಲಾಂ ಮತ್ತು ಕ್ರೈಸ್ತಮತವೆಂಬ ದೊಡ್ಡ ಅಲೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಕೊಚ್ಚಿಹೋಗಿವೆ.) ಹಿಮಾಲಯವಾಗಲಿ, ತಿರುಮಲವಾಗಲಿ ಅಥವಾ ಇಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಪಕ್ಕದ ರಾಮದೇವರ ಬೆಟ್ಟವಾಗಲಿ, ಎಲ್ಲವೂ ಪೂಜಾರ್ಹ. ಹಾಗೆಯೇ ನದಿಗಳೂ ಮರಗಳೂ ಸಹ ದೈವತ್ವಕ್ಕೆ ಏರಿಸಲ್ಪಟ್ಟಿವೆ. ನಮ್ಮಲ್ಲಿ ಗಿಡಮರಗಳ ಪೂಜೆಯಂತೂ ಸರ್ವೇಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ. ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಎಂಥ ಕಿಷ್ಕಿಂಧೆಯಂಥ ಮನೆಯಾದರೂ, ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಚಿಕ್ಕ ತುಳಸಿ ಗಿಡ ಇರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅಶ್ವತ್ಥವೃಕ್ಷದ ಪೂಜೆಯಂತೂ ಕಾಂಪೌಂಡ್ ಇರುವ ಪ್ರತಿ ದೇವಾಲಯದಲ್ಲೂ ನಡೆಯುತ್ತದೆ.
ಆದರೆ ಈಗ ಒಂದು ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ. ಸೂರ್ಯ, ಮರ, ಬೆಟ್ಟ, ಗುಡ್ಡ, ನದಿ, ಸಮುದ್ರ ಮುಂತಾದುವನ್ನು ದೇವರೆಂದು ಪರಿಗಣಿಸುವ ನಮಗೆ ಪರಿಸರದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಕಾಳಜಿ ಒಂದಿನಿತೂ ಏಕಿಲ್ಲ? ಪರಿಸರಕ್ಕೆ ಹಾನಿಯುಂಟುಮಾಡದೆ ಬದುಕಲು ನಮಗೆ ಸಾಧ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ನಗರಪಾಲಿಕೆಯು rain water harvesting ಅನ್ನು ಕಡ್ಡಾಯ ಮಾಡಿದೆ. ಇದರ ವಿಷಯವಾಗಿ ಒಬ್ಬರೊಂದಿಗೆ ಚರ್ಚಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾಗ ಅವರು "ರೂಲ್ಸ್ ಪ್ರಕಾರ ಇಂತಿಷ್ಟು ಆದರೆ ಸಾಕು, ನಿಜವಾಗಿಯೂ ಮಳೆನೀರಿನ ಕೊಯ್ಲು ಮಾಡುವವರು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಜನ ಇಲ್ಲ" ಎಂದು ಹೇಳಿದರು. ನನಗೆ ಇದನ್ನು ಕೇಳಿ ಬಹಳ ಬೇಸರವಾಯಿತು. ಇನ್ನು ದಟ್ಟವಾದ ಹೊಗೆಯನ್ನು ಬಿಡುತ್ತಾ emission check certificate ಪಡೆಯಲು ಕೈಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಣ ಹಿಡಿದು ಹಲ್ಲು ಗಿಂಜುವುದು - ಇಂಥ ಪ್ರಕರಣಗಳು ಭಾರತದಂತಹ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾತ್ರ ಕಾಣಸಿಗುವುದನ್ನು ನೋಡಿದರೆ ವ್ಯಥೆಯಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
ನಾವೊಬ್ಬರು ಅಂಥ ತಪ್ಪನ್ನು ಮಾಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲವೆಂದು ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಬ್ಬರೂ ನಿಶ್ಚಯಿಸಿದರೆ ಸಾಕಲ್ಲವೇ?
Friday, March 30, 2007
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
A good way to save trees and widen roads
This Saturday, we visited our village. The traffic was bad, as usual. The heat added to our discomfort. One thing that was very noticeable was the dwindling number of trees on the highway. Yes, roads are necessary, but is there a way to keep the trees and widen the roads?
It struck me today when I was coming by bus on North Road. I saw that trees had grown on the tar road. It was wonderful (though how the roots are able to breathe, beats me). I felt very happy and thoughtful, and that is the reason for this post.
I have not been to Mysore a lot, but I have immensely enjoyed the few visits that I have made. A relative's house was right opposite the court. It was a beautiful place. There was a jackfruit tree in their compound... it was just heavenly. Well, anyways, the point that interests us is that on the road adjacent to their house, trees have been used as a sort of a divider. It is wide, and I remember that there are even benches under the trees, so one can actually sit in the middle of the road and watch the traffic go by. (My last visit to this relative's place was eight years ago, so I do not know the state of affairs now. I only hope that the trees remain.)
There is a similar system near my house in Bangalore, too. A park has been constructed right in the middle of the road. The park runs all the way along the road, and is really a sight for sore eyes.
When I saw the trees on North Road and thought of the park near my house, I heaved a sigh of relief. All is not lost...
It struck me today when I was coming by bus on North Road. I saw that trees had grown on the tar road. It was wonderful (though how the roots are able to breathe, beats me). I felt very happy and thoughtful, and that is the reason for this post.
I have not been to Mysore a lot, but I have immensely enjoyed the few visits that I have made. A relative's house was right opposite the court. It was a beautiful place. There was a jackfruit tree in their compound... it was just heavenly. Well, anyways, the point that interests us is that on the road adjacent to their house, trees have been used as a sort of a divider. It is wide, and I remember that there are even benches under the trees, so one can actually sit in the middle of the road and watch the traffic go by. (My last visit to this relative's place was eight years ago, so I do not know the state of affairs now. I only hope that the trees remain.)
There is a similar system near my house in Bangalore, too. A park has been constructed right in the middle of the road. The park runs all the way along the road, and is really a sight for sore eyes.
When I saw the trees on North Road and thought of the park near my house, I heaved a sigh of relief. All is not lost...
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Public Transport
I love taking public transport. Even in the US, though it was extremely time-consuming, I used to love taking the local bus to school. To get to know a place, one has to take the public transport and walk in busy roads. One gets to see a lot of different kinds of people, and the experience is just great (of course, when you have the time).
I had made friends with a jazz musician and a bus driver, of name Ron ___. He was a Christian American, but of middle-eastern descent. And the point was that he had visited India and Bangalore. I still cherish my long talks with him. We used to discuss Politics, Religion, culture and what not. The local transit in the Bay Area has a service for senior citizens, called VTA Paratransit or something. One day, I asked Ron what that was. He could not hear me properly in the din, and asked me excitedly - "Are you asking me about Paramahamsa Yogananda?". He had actually read 'Autobiography of a Yogi' and said he would lend it to me. Now I was flat. It was really amazing. When we left the US for good, he gave me a CD of 'Yonder Tree' by Gino Vanelli.
I remember the time when I explained the meaning of the red dot on my forehead to an American. Another time, early in the morning, a drunk lady took my book (Oppenheim and Schafer) from me, turned the pages, and remarked - "Do you really understand all this? You must be very smart", and then pointing to her husband/boyfriend, also drunk, said "He has been to college... he might understand this", and then turning to him, said "Don't you, ____?". I was scared! I have not seen many drunk people, and this was like, totally unexpected! I mean, it was early in the morning, and these people were fully drunk! It was nice when they returned my book and said "Good luck", though.
Public transport is not always pleasurable. I have had my share of bad experiences. But sometimes, one can think about the bad experiences later and laugh at them.
One day I was taking 32 to school. Most of us in the bus were foreigners - South Asians and Chinese and Vietnamese. The driver was black. Now a blonde lady got in. Once she settled in her seat, she started mouthing expletives towards people of other races. It was *bad*. The driver got very irritated and told her that if she did not stop, she'd have to get off the bus. Well, she did not, and was made to get off the bus.
Public transport in Bangalore is a wholly different sort of experience. A few days ago I took a BMTC bus to my place of work. A couple of women with a framed photograph of the Mother Goddess, were in the bus. These women are, for all practical purposes, beggars. They show the Goddess's photograph to people and say "give something to please Her". The women did not have money to buy the tickets. The poor conductor was demanding ticket-money from them, and a young girl shouted at him "ರೊಕ್ಕ ಇಲ್ಲ ಅಂದರೆ ಏನ್ ಮಾಡಕ್ಕಾಗತ್ತೆ? ಗೊತ್ತಾಗಾಕಿಲ್ವ ನಿಂಗೆ?"I had half a mind to pay for their ticket, but the other half prevented me from doing so. Finally the conductor exempted them from buying tickets. Or, rather, he was forced to.
It takes all sorts to make a world!
I had made friends with a jazz musician and a bus driver, of name Ron ___. He was a Christian American, but of middle-eastern descent. And the point was that he had visited India and Bangalore. I still cherish my long talks with him. We used to discuss Politics, Religion, culture and what not. The local transit in the Bay Area has a service for senior citizens, called VTA Paratransit or something. One day, I asked Ron what that was. He could not hear me properly in the din, and asked me excitedly - "Are you asking me about Paramahamsa Yogananda?". He had actually read 'Autobiography of a Yogi' and said he would lend it to me. Now I was flat. It was really amazing. When we left the US for good, he gave me a CD of 'Yonder Tree' by Gino Vanelli.
I remember the time when I explained the meaning of the red dot on my forehead to an American. Another time, early in the morning, a drunk lady took my book (Oppenheim and Schafer) from me, turned the pages, and remarked - "Do you really understand all this? You must be very smart", and then pointing to her husband/boyfriend, also drunk, said "He has been to college... he might understand this", and then turning to him, said "Don't you, ____?". I was scared! I have not seen many drunk people, and this was like, totally unexpected! I mean, it was early in the morning, and these people were fully drunk! It was nice when they returned my book and said "Good luck", though.
Public transport is not always pleasurable. I have had my share of bad experiences. But sometimes, one can think about the bad experiences later and laugh at them.
One day I was taking 32 to school. Most of us in the bus were foreigners - South Asians and Chinese and Vietnamese. The driver was black. Now a blonde lady got in. Once she settled in her seat, she started mouthing expletives towards people of other races. It was *bad*. The driver got very irritated and told her that if she did not stop, she'd have to get off the bus. Well, she did not, and was made to get off the bus.
Public transport in Bangalore is a wholly different sort of experience. A few days ago I took a BMTC bus to my place of work. A couple of women with a framed photograph of the Mother Goddess, were in the bus. These women are, for all practical purposes, beggars. They show the Goddess's photograph to people and say "give something to please Her". The women did not have money to buy the tickets. The poor conductor was demanding ticket-money from them, and a young girl shouted at him "ರೊಕ್ಕ ಇಲ್ಲ ಅಂದರೆ ಏನ್ ಮಾಡಕ್ಕಾಗತ್ತೆ? ಗೊತ್ತಾಗಾಕಿಲ್ವ ನಿಂಗೆ?"I had half a mind to pay for their ticket, but the other half prevented me from doing so. Finally the conductor exempted them from buying tickets. Or, rather, he was forced to.
It takes all sorts to make a world!
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Thoughts on Valentine's day
It is Valentine's day today and many millions of couples and wannabe couples are expressing their love for each other in many millions of creative ways. I, for one, do not believe in "celebrating" Valentine's day... I see its promotion by card-companies as a well-planned marketing strategy. I am not against it, either. If people want to express their love on a specific day, then so be it! If they want to celebrate their love all year-round, then let them!
Sepia Mutiny gives an interesting information. Apparently the perennial trouble-mongers, the Shiv Sainiks, want to marry off the couples that are seen together on V. day, if they are Hindu!. I could not contain my laughter for some time! When will they understand that Afghanistan should not be the model for our country? I am all for social health, but to have a healthy society, I think that it is necessary to have some minimum level of open-ness and personal freedom. (In the same article on Sepia Mutiny, there was another, more hilarious bit about some women's organizations working to thwart the sainiks in their attempts to disturb lovers, but let's not go there.)
Near my house, almost daily I see couples (I am sure they are not "just friends") standing and talking for hours together.. Once a policeman shooed a couple away, saying "ಏನು ನಿಮ್ಮ ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾಸು ಕೊಟ್ಟು ಕಾಲೇಜಿಗೆ ಕಳಿಸೋದು ಇದಕ್ಕೇನಾ?".. I had mixed feelings about this incident. On one hand, I felt that the kids did not need to be shooed away so rudely.. As long as they are not in the way of law and order, it is fine.. But, on the other hand, at 15-16 years of age, one usually does not find lasting loves. Gullible and insecure girls may become victims of malicious people, even if only emotionally. In that sense, it is good to have a sort of moral policing (how I hate the term!). At any rate, I am sure that the parents of the two kids would be grateful for the policeman, for giving them a good talking-to.
I think that a good way to solve this problem would be to accept dating as a fact of a teen's life (grrrr! To think that we returned from the US because we thought it was easier to bring up kids here!). Parents should keep track of who their children are talking to, and should set the limits for their kids, and most of all, believe in them. Yeah, yeah, I know this sounds too simple to be of any practical use, but we have to do something like this to keep our kids safe and our society healthy. Clandestine affairs have not done a lot of good to anyone.
I am worried about little biyadiya...
Sepia Mutiny gives an interesting information. Apparently the perennial trouble-mongers, the Shiv Sainiks, want to marry off the couples that are seen together on V. day, if they are Hindu!. I could not contain my laughter for some time! When will they understand that Afghanistan should not be the model for our country? I am all for social health, but to have a healthy society, I think that it is necessary to have some minimum level of open-ness and personal freedom. (In the same article on Sepia Mutiny, there was another, more hilarious bit about some women's organizations working to thwart the sainiks in their attempts to disturb lovers, but let's not go there.)
Near my house, almost daily I see couples (I am sure they are not "just friends") standing and talking for hours together.. Once a policeman shooed a couple away, saying "ಏನು ನಿಮ್ಮ ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾಸು ಕೊಟ್ಟು ಕಾಲೇಜಿಗೆ ಕಳಿಸೋದು ಇದಕ್ಕೇನಾ?".. I had mixed feelings about this incident. On one hand, I felt that the kids did not need to be shooed away so rudely.. As long as they are not in the way of law and order, it is fine.. But, on the other hand, at 15-16 years of age, one usually does not find lasting loves. Gullible and insecure girls may become victims of malicious people, even if only emotionally. In that sense, it is good to have a sort of moral policing (how I hate the term!). At any rate, I am sure that the parents of the two kids would be grateful for the policeman, for giving them a good talking-to.
I think that a good way to solve this problem would be to accept dating as a fact of a teen's life (grrrr! To think that we returned from the US because we thought it was easier to bring up kids here!). Parents should keep track of who their children are talking to, and should set the limits for their kids, and most of all, believe in them. Yeah, yeah, I know this sounds too simple to be of any practical use, but we have to do something like this to keep our kids safe and our society healthy. Clandestine affairs have not done a lot of good to anyone.
I am worried about little biyadiya...
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Karnataka Bandh
Yesterday was Karnataka bandh, called by a few pro-Kannada activists. The news reports say that the bandh was total in many parts of Karnataka. In districts like Mandya and Mysore, where people are more emotionally tied to the river Kaaveri ( I do not like splling it Cauvery), there were some incidents of destruction of public property and violence, but it has been peaceful otherwise.
Near my home at Basaveshwaranagar, there was absolute silence. There were a few stray two-wheelers moving about, but otherwise, the roads were so deserted that children were playing cricket outside, without any hesitation. It was nice to see kids playing outside the house, for a change.
This said, was the bandh really necessary? I would accept a bandh as necessary if and only if I had a legitimate demand, and that demand was not even considered by the government. This bandh would have been necessary if the state Govt. were happy to abide by the orders of the tribunal. Now that the Govt. has already decided to appeal against the verdict, where was the necessity to do all that was done yesterday? Bandh is wrong, think of the implications on the economy! This was like cutting the nose to spite the face! Aren't there more effective ways to let others know the opinion of the public? Like hanging placards outside your houses/shops, etc? Writing about it to the almighty - newspaper? Non-violent protest-marches? I suppose asking people to think, would be too much!
Interesting read here -
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/feb132007/dhforum.asp
Near my home at Basaveshwaranagar, there was absolute silence. There were a few stray two-wheelers moving about, but otherwise, the roads were so deserted that children were playing cricket outside, without any hesitation. It was nice to see kids playing outside the house, for a change.
This said, was the bandh really necessary? I would accept a bandh as necessary if and only if I had a legitimate demand, and that demand was not even considered by the government. This bandh would have been necessary if the state Govt. were happy to abide by the orders of the tribunal. Now that the Govt. has already decided to appeal against the verdict, where was the necessity to do all that was done yesterday? Bandh is wrong, think of the implications on the economy! This was like cutting the nose to spite the face! Aren't there more effective ways to let others know the opinion of the public? Like hanging placards outside your houses/shops, etc? Writing about it to the almighty - newspaper? Non-violent protest-marches? I suppose asking people to think, would be too much!
Interesting read here -
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/feb132007/dhforum.asp
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
ತಮಿಳರೂ ನಾನೂ ಡಾ. ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರೂ
ಕೆಲವು ದಿನಗಳ ಹಿಂದೆ 'ತಮಿಳು ತಲೆಗಳ ನಡುವೆ' ಓದಿ ಮುಗಿಸಿದ್ದೆ. ಅದರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಈಗ ಬರೆಯಲು ಪುರಸತ್ತು ಸಿಕ್ಕಿದೆ.
ಪಾಠ ಮಾಡುವವರು ಎರಡು ಗುಣಗಳನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿದ್ದರೆ ಚೆನ್ನ. ೧. ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ಮನದಟ್ಟಾಗುವಂತೆ ತಿಳಿಸುವುದು ೨. ಪಾಠವು ಕಲ್ಲಿನ ಹೊರೆಯಂತಿರದೆ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳನ್ನು ರಂಜಿಸುವಂತೆ ಮಾಡುವುದು.
ಈ ರೀತಿ ಪಾಠ ಮಾಡುವವರು ಬಹಳ ಕಡಿಮೆ. ಡಾ. ಬಿ ಜಿ ಎಲ್ ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಈ ಗುಂಪಿಗೆ ಸೇರುತ್ತಾರೆ. ವಿಷಯಪಾಂಡಿತ್ಯದ ಜೊತೆ ರಂಜನೀಯವಾಗಿ ಬರೆಯುವ ಕಲೆ ಕೂಡ ಇವರಿಗೆ ಸಿದ್ಧಿಸಿದೆ. ಇವರ ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನು ಓದಿದಾಗ "ಅಬ್ಬಾ ನಮ್ಮ ಸಸ್ಯಶ್ರೀಯ ಅದ್ಭುತವೇ!" ಎಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿತ್ತು. 'ತಮಿಳು ತಲೆಗಳ ನಡುವೆ' ಓದಿದಾಗ 'ಅಬ್ಬಾ ತಮಿಳರ ಭಂಡತನವೇ!" ಎಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿತು. (ತಮಿಳರು ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು ಮನ್ನಿಸಬೇಕು. ಈ ಲೇಖನವನ್ನು ನೀವು ಓದುತ್ತಿರುವಿರಾದರೆ ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ನಿಮ್ಮಂತಹ ತಮಿಳರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತ.ತ.ನ ದಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆದಿಲ್ಲವೆಂದು ಖಂಡಿತವಾಗಿ ಹೇಳಬಲ್ಲೆ).
ನಾನು ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ದಿನ ಇರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದೂ ಮಹಾನಗರವಾದ ಚೆನ್ನೈ ಯಲ್ಲಿ. ಚೂರುಪಾರು ತಮಿಳಿನ ಜೊತೆ ತೆಲುಗು ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಬಂದರೆ, ಬದುಕು ಸುಗಮವಾಗಿಯೇ ಇರುತ್ತದೆಯೆಂದು ಹೇಳಬೇಕು. ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನ ಬೇರೆಡೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾಣಿಸುವ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಚೆನ್ನೈ ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಡಿಮೆ ಎಂದು ಬೇರೆಯವರಿಂದ ಕೇಳಿ ತಿಳಿದಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಆದರೂ ಭಾಷೆಯ ದೆಸೆಯಿಂದ ನಾನು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಪಾಡುಗಳನ್ನು ಪಟ್ಟಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಒಮ್ಮೆ ಪೂಜೆಗಾಗಿ ವೀಳೆಯದೆಲೆಯನ್ನು ಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಹೋದೆ. ನನಗೆ ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಅದರ ಹೆಸರೇನೆಂದು ಗೊತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಆ ಅಂಗಡಿಯಾಕೆಯ ಹತ್ತಿರ ಸುಮಾರು ಸಾಮಾನುಗಳಿದ್ದವಾದ್ದರಿನ್ದ ಬೆರಳಿನಿಂದ ತೋರಿಸಿ "ಅದು ಕೊಡು" ಎಂದೆ. ಆಕೆಗೆ ಅರ್ಥ ಆಗಲಿಲ್ಲ. ತಿರುಗಿ ಕೇಳಿದ್ದಕ್ಕೆ "ತಮಿಳು ಕಲಿತು ಬಾ ಹೋಗು" ಎಂದು ಬೈದು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದಳು. ವೀಳೆಯದೆಲೆ ಕೊಟ್ಟಳೋ ಇಲ್ಲವೋ ಮರೆತಿದೆ, ಆದರೆ ಬೈಸಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದು ನೆನಪಿದೆ.
ಮೇಲಿನ ರೀತಿಯ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾದರೂ ಡಾ. ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ವರ್ಣಿಸಿರುವ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಬೇರೆಯದೇ ರೀತಿಯದ್ದು. ತಮಿಳು ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯ-ಚರಿತ್ರೆ-ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಯ ಬಹುತೇಕ ಸಂಶೋಧಕರು ತಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷೆಯನ್ನು ಬಿಟ್ಟು ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ತಿಳಿಯಲು ಇಷ್ಟಪಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ತಮಗೆ ಬೇಕಾದ ವಿಷಯಗಳೇ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳ ಜರ್ನಲ್ ಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬಂದಿದ್ದರೆ ಅವನ್ನು ಓದುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ತಮ್ಮ ಥಿಯರಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಇವರಿಗೆ ಇರುವ ನಂಬಿಕೆ ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಧೃತರಾಷ್ಟ್ರನಿಗೆ ದುರ್ಯೋಧನನ ಮೇಲಿದ್ದ ವ್ಯಾಮೋಹ ನೆನಪಿಗೆ ಬರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅವರ ವಾದಗಳಾದರೂ ಎಂಥವು? "ತಮಿಳು ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರವಾಗಿ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳ, ಅದೂ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾಷೆಯ ಸಂಪರ್ಕವಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಹುಟ್ಟಿತು", "ತಮಿಳು ಎಲ್ಲ ಭಾಷೆಗಳಿಗಿಂತಲೂ, ಅದರಲ್ಲೂ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾಷೆಗಿಂತ ಪ್ರಾಚೀನತರ", "ಕ್ರಿ.ಪೂ. ೧೦,೦೦೦ ರಲ್ಲಿ ತಮಿಳುಭಾಷೆಯ ಗ್ರಂಥಗಳು ಸಮುದ್ರದ ಪಾಲಾದವು, ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅದರ ಹಳೆಯತನವನ್ನು ನಾವು ಪ್ರಶ್ನಿಸದೆ ನಂಬಬೇಕೇ ಹೊರತು, ಪುರಾವೆಗಳಿವೆಯೇ ಎಂದು ಕೇಳಬಾರದು", ಇವೇ ಮುಂತಾದ ರತ್ನಗಳು!
ಡಾ. ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಹೇಳಿರುವಷ್ಟು ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ತಮಿಳರಲ್ಲಿದೆಯೇ ಎಂಬ ಸಂಶಯ ಬರುವುದು ಸಹಜ. ನನ್ನದೇ ಅನುಭವ ಹೀಗಿದೆ. ನನಗೆ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಹೆಚ್ಚಾದ ಅಭಿಮಾನವೇ ಇದೆ. ಅಮೆರಿಕದಲ್ಲಿದ್ದಾಗ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾರತಿಯ ಕಾರ್ಯಕರ್ತ್ರಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದೆ. ಇದು ನನ್ನ ಜೊತೆ ಓದುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ತಮಿಳಳೊಬ್ಬಳಿಗೆ ಗೊತ್ತಿತ್ತು. ಮತಾಂತರ ಮಾಡಲು ಬರುವ ಮಿಷನರಿಯ ತೆರ ಒಂದು ದಿನ ಅವಳು ನನ್ನ ಹತ್ತಿರ ಬಂದು ತಮಿಳು ಅನೇಕ ಸಾವಿರ ವರ್ಷಗಳಷ್ಟು ಹಳೆಯದೆಂದೂ, ಎಂಥದೋ ಜಲಪ್ರಳಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಗ್ರಂಥಗಳು ಕಳೆದುಹೋದವೆಂದೂ, ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಕ್ಕಿಂತ ತಮಿಳು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಪ್ರಾಚೀನವೂ ಉತ್ತರವೂ (Comparative degree ಯಲ್ಲಿ 'ಉತ್ತಮ' ಕ್ಕಿಂತ 'ಉತ್ತರ' ಸೂಕ್ತವಾದುದು) ಆದದ್ದೆಂದೂ ನನಗೆ ಹೇಳಿದಳು. ಆ ಸಂಶೋಧನೆಯ ಜಾಲಪುಟಗಳನ್ನು ನನಗೆ ಕಳಿಸು, ನೋಡುತ್ತೇನೆ ಎಂದು ನನಗೆ ತೋಚಿದ ಬದಲು ಹೇಳಿದೆ. ಆಮೇಲೆ ನಾವಿಬ್ಬರೂ ಬೇರೆ ತರಗತಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅವಳ ಜೊತೆ ಮಾತನಾಡುವ ಸನ್ನಿವೇಶಗಳು ವಿರಳವಾಗಿ, ಈ ವಿಷಯ ಅಲ್ಲಿಗೇ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯವಾಯಿತು.
ಇಂಥ ಸಂಶೋಧನೆಗಳು ಬೇಸರವನ್ನೇಕೆ ಉಂಟುಮಾಡುತ್ತವೆ? ಬಾಯಿಗೆ ಬಂದ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ, ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-ಪುರಾವೆಗಳಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಥಿಯರಿಗಳನ್ನು ಸೃಷ್ಟಿಸಿದರೆ ಭಾಷೆಯ ಬೆಳವಣಿಗೆಗೆ ಕುಂದುಂಟಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಭಾಷೆಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅಭಿಮಾನ ತಪ್ಪಲ್ಲ, ಒಪ್ಪುವಂಥದ್ದೇ. ಆದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಇತಿಮಿತಿಗಳನ್ನು ನಾವು ಅರಿತಿರಬೇಕು. "ಪುರಾಣಮಿತ್ಯೇವ ನ ಸಾಧು ಸರ್ವಂ" ಎಂಬುದನ್ನು ತಿಳಿಯಬೇಕು. ದೇಶಾಭಿಮಾನಭಾಷಾಭಿಮಾನಗಳು ಅಗತ್ಯಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚಾದಾಗ "ನಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷೆಯು ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರವಾಗಿ ಹುಟ್ಟಿತು"... ಮುಂತಾದ ಧೋರಣೆಗಳು ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹುಟ್ಟುವುದೂ, ಈ ವಿಷಯಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಸತ್ಯಾಸತ್ಯಗಳ ವಿವೇಚನೆಯಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಹೋಗುವುದೂ ಸಹಜವೇನೋ. ಪಾಪ ತಮಿಳರನ್ನು ಏಕೆ ಅನ್ನಬೇಕು, ನಮ್ಮ ಕೆಲವು ಆಧುನಿಕ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಜ್ಞರೂ, ಇತಿಹಾಸಜ್ಞರೂ ಮಾತನಾಡುವುದು ಇದೇ ಧಾಟಿಯಲ್ಲಿ. ಹುರುಳಿಲ್ಲದ ಬಾಲಿಶವಾದಗಳನ್ನು ಮಂಡಿಸಿ ಈ ವಿಷಯಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆಯೇ ಇತರರಿಗೆ ಅಸಡ್ಡೆ ಬರುವಂತೆ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಹೀಗಾದಾಗ, ಆ ಭಾಷೆ-ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಿಜವಾದ ಕಳಕಳಿ ಮತ್ತು ಅಭಿಮಾನವಿರುವವರಿಗೆ ತಲೆ ಚಚ್ಚಿಕೊಳ್ಳೋಣವೆಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.
ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಈ ರೀತಿಯಾದರೆ ಸಂಗೀತದಲ್ಲಿ ಇನ್ನೊಂದು ರೀತಿಯ ತಮಾಷೆ. ಸಂಗೀತದ ತ್ರಿಮೂರ್ತಿಗಳು ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಹುಟ್ಟಿ ಬೆಳೆದದ್ದು. ಆದರೆ ಅವರ ಬಹುತೇಕ ರಚನೆಗಳು ತೆಲುಗಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಮತ್ತು ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತದಲ್ಲಿ ಇವೆ. ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಅಕ್ಷರಗಳು ಕಡಿಮೆ ಇರುವುದರಿಂದ ಮಿಕ್ಕ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ಅದರಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯುವುದೂ, ಬರೆದದ್ದನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವುದೂ ದೊಡ್ಡ ಪ್ರಯಾಸ. ಈಗ ಉದಾಹರಣೆಗೆ, ಭಾರತಿಯರ್ ಎಂದು ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯಲು பாரதியர் ಎಂದು ಬರೆದರೆ ಅದು ಪಾರದಿಯರ್ ಆಗಬಹುದು ಅಥವಾ ಪಾರತಿಯರ್ ಕೂಡ ಆಗಬಹುದು. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ, ತಿಳಿಯದ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ಓದಬೇಕಾದರೆ ಊಹೆಯನ್ನೇ ಅವಲಂಬಿಸಬೇಕು. (ಗ್ರಂಥ ಎಂಬೊಂದು ಲಿಪಿ ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದು, ರಾಜಕೀಯಕಾರಣಗಳಿಂದಾಗಿ ಅದನ್ನು ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸದೆ ಇರುವುದು ಬೇರೆ ವಿಚಾರ.) ಹಾಗಾಗಿ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತ-ತೆಲುಗು-ಕನ್ನಡದ ಕೃತಿಗಳು ತಮಿಳು ಸಂಗೀತಗಾರರ ಬಾಯಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಚಿತ್ರರೂಪಗಳನ್ನು ಪಡೆಯುತ್ತವೆ. 'ನಾರದ-ಬಯಗರ' ಎಂದು ವಿಷ್ಣುವನ್ನು ವರ್ಣಿಸಿದ್ದನ್ನು ('ಸಾರಸಾಕ್ಷ ಪರಿಪಾಲಯ ಮಾಂ' ಎಂಬ ಪಂತುವರಾಳಿಯ ಕೃತಿ) ಕೇಳಿ "ವಿಷ್ಣು ನಾರದನಿಗೆ ಯಾವಾಗ ಭಯ ಹುಟ್ಟಿಸಿದ?" ಎಂದು ಚಿಂತಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾಗ ಹೊಳೆದದ್ದು - ಅದು ನಾರದ-ಭಯಹರ ಎಂದು! ಶುದ್ಧ ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹಕಾರವಿಲ್ಲ. ಈಗೀಗ ಹಕಾರದ ಸೇರ್ಪಡೆಯಾಗಿದೆ. ಆದರೂ ಮಾತನಾಡುವಾಗ ಮಹೇಶ ಮಗೇಸನಾಗುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಇದು ತಮಿಳಿನ ವಿಶೇಷತೆ ಎಂದು ಕರೆಯಬಹುದೇನೋ. ಆದರೆ ಸಂಗೀತವನ್ನು ನೂರಾರು-ಸಾವಿರಾರು ಜನರ ಮುಂದೆ ಹಾಡುವ ಕಲಾವಿದರ ಉಚ್ಚಾರಣೆ ಸರಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಚೆನ್ನ. ಒಂದು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ವಿಷಯವೆಂದರೆ ಯುವ-ಸಂಗೀತಗಾರರ ಸಂಗೀತದಲ್ಲಿ ಉಚ್ಚಾರಣಾ-ದೋಷ ಕೇಳಿಬರುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲವೆಂದು ಕೇಳಿದ್ದೇನೆ.
ಕೇವಲ ಒಂದು ಹಾಸ್ಯಭರಿತವಾದ ಪುಸ್ತಕವನ್ನು ಓದಬೇಕೆಂದು ತ.ತ.ನ ವನ್ನು ಕೈಗೆತ್ತಿಕೊಂಡರೂ ನಿರಾಸೆಯಾಗದಷ್ಟು ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಹಾಸ್ಯದ ಮಧ್ಯೆಯೇ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಹೆಣೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಪುರಂದರದಾಸರ (ಬುರಂತರ ತಾಶರ) ಆರಾಧನೆಯ ಬಗೆಗಿನ ಅಧ್ಯಾಯ ಓದುತ್ತಿದ್ದರಂತೂ ಹೊಟ್ಟೆ ಹುಣ್ಣಾಗುವಷ್ಟು ನಗು ಬರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅವರ ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನಿನಲ್ಲೂ ಇದೇ ರೀತಿಯ ಹಾಸ್ಯ ತುಂಬಿದೆ. ಈ ಹಾಸ್ಯ ಸಹಜವಾಗಿದ್ದು, ಘಟನೆಗಳು ನಿಜವಾಗಿ ನಡೆದವೇ ಇರಬೇಕು (ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬರುವ ಕತ್ತೆಗಳ ವಿಷಯ ಕೂಡ ನಿಜವಾಗಿ ನಡೆದಿದ್ದೇ?... ತಿಳಿದವರು ಹೇಳಿದರೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು).
ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರ ಇತರ ಪುಸ್ತಕಗಳಾದ "ನಮ್ಮ ಹೊಟ್ಟೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಅಮೇರಿಕಾ" ಮತ್ತು "ಕಾಲೇಜು ರಂಗ" ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿವೆ. ಅವನ್ನೂ ಓದಲೇಬೇಕು ಎಂಬಷ್ಟು ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರ ಬರೆಹ ಇಷ್ಟವಾಗಿದೆ. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಸಮಯ ಯಾವಾಗ ಸಿಗುತ್ತದೆಯೋ ತಿಳಿಯದು.
ಪಾಠ ಮಾಡುವವರು ಎರಡು ಗುಣಗಳನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿದ್ದರೆ ಚೆನ್ನ. ೧. ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ಮನದಟ್ಟಾಗುವಂತೆ ತಿಳಿಸುವುದು ೨. ಪಾಠವು ಕಲ್ಲಿನ ಹೊರೆಯಂತಿರದೆ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳನ್ನು ರಂಜಿಸುವಂತೆ ಮಾಡುವುದು.
ಈ ರೀತಿ ಪಾಠ ಮಾಡುವವರು ಬಹಳ ಕಡಿಮೆ. ಡಾ. ಬಿ ಜಿ ಎಲ್ ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಈ ಗುಂಪಿಗೆ ಸೇರುತ್ತಾರೆ. ವಿಷಯಪಾಂಡಿತ್ಯದ ಜೊತೆ ರಂಜನೀಯವಾಗಿ ಬರೆಯುವ ಕಲೆ ಕೂಡ ಇವರಿಗೆ ಸಿದ್ಧಿಸಿದೆ. ಇವರ ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನು ಓದಿದಾಗ "ಅಬ್ಬಾ ನಮ್ಮ ಸಸ್ಯಶ್ರೀಯ ಅದ್ಭುತವೇ!" ಎಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿತ್ತು. 'ತಮಿಳು ತಲೆಗಳ ನಡುವೆ' ಓದಿದಾಗ 'ಅಬ್ಬಾ ತಮಿಳರ ಭಂಡತನವೇ!" ಎಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿತು. (ತಮಿಳರು ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು ಮನ್ನಿಸಬೇಕು. ಈ ಲೇಖನವನ್ನು ನೀವು ಓದುತ್ತಿರುವಿರಾದರೆ ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ನಿಮ್ಮಂತಹ ತಮಿಳರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತ.ತ.ನ ದಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆದಿಲ್ಲವೆಂದು ಖಂಡಿತವಾಗಿ ಹೇಳಬಲ್ಲೆ).
ನಾನು ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ದಿನ ಇರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದೂ ಮಹಾನಗರವಾದ ಚೆನ್ನೈ ಯಲ್ಲಿ. ಚೂರುಪಾರು ತಮಿಳಿನ ಜೊತೆ ತೆಲುಗು ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಬಂದರೆ, ಬದುಕು ಸುಗಮವಾಗಿಯೇ ಇರುತ್ತದೆಯೆಂದು ಹೇಳಬೇಕು. ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನ ಬೇರೆಡೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾಣಿಸುವ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಚೆನ್ನೈ ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಡಿಮೆ ಎಂದು ಬೇರೆಯವರಿಂದ ಕೇಳಿ ತಿಳಿದಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಆದರೂ ಭಾಷೆಯ ದೆಸೆಯಿಂದ ನಾನು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಪಾಡುಗಳನ್ನು ಪಟ್ಟಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಒಮ್ಮೆ ಪೂಜೆಗಾಗಿ ವೀಳೆಯದೆಲೆಯನ್ನು ಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಹೋದೆ. ನನಗೆ ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಅದರ ಹೆಸರೇನೆಂದು ಗೊತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಆ ಅಂಗಡಿಯಾಕೆಯ ಹತ್ತಿರ ಸುಮಾರು ಸಾಮಾನುಗಳಿದ್ದವಾದ್ದರಿನ್ದ ಬೆರಳಿನಿಂದ ತೋರಿಸಿ "ಅದು ಕೊಡು" ಎಂದೆ. ಆಕೆಗೆ ಅರ್ಥ ಆಗಲಿಲ್ಲ. ತಿರುಗಿ ಕೇಳಿದ್ದಕ್ಕೆ "ತಮಿಳು ಕಲಿತು ಬಾ ಹೋಗು" ಎಂದು ಬೈದು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದಳು. ವೀಳೆಯದೆಲೆ ಕೊಟ್ಟಳೋ ಇಲ್ಲವೋ ಮರೆತಿದೆ, ಆದರೆ ಬೈಸಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದು ನೆನಪಿದೆ.
ಮೇಲಿನ ರೀತಿಯ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾದರೂ ಡಾ. ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ವರ್ಣಿಸಿರುವ ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ಬೇರೆಯದೇ ರೀತಿಯದ್ದು. ತಮಿಳು ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯ-ಚರಿತ್ರೆ-ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಯ ಬಹುತೇಕ ಸಂಶೋಧಕರು ತಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷೆಯನ್ನು ಬಿಟ್ಟು ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ತಿಳಿಯಲು ಇಷ್ಟಪಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ತಮಗೆ ಬೇಕಾದ ವಿಷಯಗಳೇ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳ ಜರ್ನಲ್ ಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬಂದಿದ್ದರೆ ಅವನ್ನು ಓದುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ತಮ್ಮ ಥಿಯರಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಇವರಿಗೆ ಇರುವ ನಂಬಿಕೆ ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಧೃತರಾಷ್ಟ್ರನಿಗೆ ದುರ್ಯೋಧನನ ಮೇಲಿದ್ದ ವ್ಯಾಮೋಹ ನೆನಪಿಗೆ ಬರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅವರ ವಾದಗಳಾದರೂ ಎಂಥವು? "ತಮಿಳು ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರವಾಗಿ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳ, ಅದೂ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾಷೆಯ ಸಂಪರ್ಕವಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಹುಟ್ಟಿತು", "ತಮಿಳು ಎಲ್ಲ ಭಾಷೆಗಳಿಗಿಂತಲೂ, ಅದರಲ್ಲೂ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾಷೆಗಿಂತ ಪ್ರಾಚೀನತರ", "ಕ್ರಿ.ಪೂ. ೧೦,೦೦೦ ರಲ್ಲಿ ತಮಿಳುಭಾಷೆಯ ಗ್ರಂಥಗಳು ಸಮುದ್ರದ ಪಾಲಾದವು, ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅದರ ಹಳೆಯತನವನ್ನು ನಾವು ಪ್ರಶ್ನಿಸದೆ ನಂಬಬೇಕೇ ಹೊರತು, ಪುರಾವೆಗಳಿವೆಯೇ ಎಂದು ಕೇಳಬಾರದು", ಇವೇ ಮುಂತಾದ ರತ್ನಗಳು!
ಡಾ. ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಹೇಳಿರುವಷ್ಟು ಭಾಷಾಂಧತೆ ತಮಿಳರಲ್ಲಿದೆಯೇ ಎಂಬ ಸಂಶಯ ಬರುವುದು ಸಹಜ. ನನ್ನದೇ ಅನುಭವ ಹೀಗಿದೆ. ನನಗೆ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಹೆಚ್ಚಾದ ಅಭಿಮಾನವೇ ಇದೆ. ಅಮೆರಿಕದಲ್ಲಿದ್ದಾಗ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭಾರತಿಯ ಕಾರ್ಯಕರ್ತ್ರಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದೆ. ಇದು ನನ್ನ ಜೊತೆ ಓದುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ತಮಿಳಳೊಬ್ಬಳಿಗೆ ಗೊತ್ತಿತ್ತು. ಮತಾಂತರ ಮಾಡಲು ಬರುವ ಮಿಷನರಿಯ ತೆರ ಒಂದು ದಿನ ಅವಳು ನನ್ನ ಹತ್ತಿರ ಬಂದು ತಮಿಳು ಅನೇಕ ಸಾವಿರ ವರ್ಷಗಳಷ್ಟು ಹಳೆಯದೆಂದೂ, ಎಂಥದೋ ಜಲಪ್ರಳಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಗ್ರಂಥಗಳು ಕಳೆದುಹೋದವೆಂದೂ, ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಕ್ಕಿಂತ ತಮಿಳು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಪ್ರಾಚೀನವೂ ಉತ್ತರವೂ (Comparative degree ಯಲ್ಲಿ 'ಉತ್ತಮ' ಕ್ಕಿಂತ 'ಉತ್ತರ' ಸೂಕ್ತವಾದುದು) ಆದದ್ದೆಂದೂ ನನಗೆ ಹೇಳಿದಳು. ಆ ಸಂಶೋಧನೆಯ ಜಾಲಪುಟಗಳನ್ನು ನನಗೆ ಕಳಿಸು, ನೋಡುತ್ತೇನೆ ಎಂದು ನನಗೆ ತೋಚಿದ ಬದಲು ಹೇಳಿದೆ. ಆಮೇಲೆ ನಾವಿಬ್ಬರೂ ಬೇರೆ ತರಗತಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅವಳ ಜೊತೆ ಮಾತನಾಡುವ ಸನ್ನಿವೇಶಗಳು ವಿರಳವಾಗಿ, ಈ ವಿಷಯ ಅಲ್ಲಿಗೇ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯವಾಯಿತು.
ಇಂಥ ಸಂಶೋಧನೆಗಳು ಬೇಸರವನ್ನೇಕೆ ಉಂಟುಮಾಡುತ್ತವೆ? ಬಾಯಿಗೆ ಬಂದ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ, ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ-ಪುರಾವೆಗಳಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಥಿಯರಿಗಳನ್ನು ಸೃಷ್ಟಿಸಿದರೆ ಭಾಷೆಯ ಬೆಳವಣಿಗೆಗೆ ಕುಂದುಂಟಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಭಾಷೆಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅಭಿಮಾನ ತಪ್ಪಲ್ಲ, ಒಪ್ಪುವಂಥದ್ದೇ. ಆದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಇತಿಮಿತಿಗಳನ್ನು ನಾವು ಅರಿತಿರಬೇಕು. "ಪುರಾಣಮಿತ್ಯೇವ ನ ಸಾಧು ಸರ್ವಂ" ಎಂಬುದನ್ನು ತಿಳಿಯಬೇಕು. ದೇಶಾಭಿಮಾನಭಾಷಾಭಿಮಾನಗಳು ಅಗತ್ಯಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚಾದಾಗ "ನಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷೆಯು ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರವಾಗಿ ಹುಟ್ಟಿತು"... ಮುಂತಾದ ಧೋರಣೆಗಳು ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹುಟ್ಟುವುದೂ, ಈ ವಿಷಯಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಸತ್ಯಾಸತ್ಯಗಳ ವಿವೇಚನೆಯಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಹೋಗುವುದೂ ಸಹಜವೇನೋ. ಪಾಪ ತಮಿಳರನ್ನು ಏಕೆ ಅನ್ನಬೇಕು, ನಮ್ಮ ಕೆಲವು ಆಧುನಿಕ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಜ್ಞರೂ, ಇತಿಹಾಸಜ್ಞರೂ ಮಾತನಾಡುವುದು ಇದೇ ಧಾಟಿಯಲ್ಲಿ. ಹುರುಳಿಲ್ಲದ ಬಾಲಿಶವಾದಗಳನ್ನು ಮಂಡಿಸಿ ಈ ವಿಷಯಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆಯೇ ಇತರರಿಗೆ ಅಸಡ್ಡೆ ಬರುವಂತೆ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಹೀಗಾದಾಗ, ಆ ಭಾಷೆ-ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಿಜವಾದ ಕಳಕಳಿ ಮತ್ತು ಅಭಿಮಾನವಿರುವವರಿಗೆ ತಲೆ ಚಚ್ಚಿಕೊಳ್ಳೋಣವೆಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.
ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಈ ರೀತಿಯಾದರೆ ಸಂಗೀತದಲ್ಲಿ ಇನ್ನೊಂದು ರೀತಿಯ ತಮಾಷೆ. ಸಂಗೀತದ ತ್ರಿಮೂರ್ತಿಗಳು ತಮಿಳುನಾಡಿನಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಹುಟ್ಟಿ ಬೆಳೆದದ್ದು. ಆದರೆ ಅವರ ಬಹುತೇಕ ರಚನೆಗಳು ತೆಲುಗಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಮತ್ತು ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತದಲ್ಲಿ ಇವೆ. ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಅಕ್ಷರಗಳು ಕಡಿಮೆ ಇರುವುದರಿಂದ ಮಿಕ್ಕ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ಅದರಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯುವುದೂ, ಬರೆದದ್ದನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವುದೂ ದೊಡ್ಡ ಪ್ರಯಾಸ. ಈಗ ಉದಾಹರಣೆಗೆ, ಭಾರತಿಯರ್ ಎಂದು ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯಲು பாரதியர் ಎಂದು ಬರೆದರೆ ಅದು ಪಾರದಿಯರ್ ಆಗಬಹುದು ಅಥವಾ ಪಾರತಿಯರ್ ಕೂಡ ಆಗಬಹುದು. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ, ತಿಳಿಯದ ಬೇರೆ ಭಾಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ಓದಬೇಕಾದರೆ ಊಹೆಯನ್ನೇ ಅವಲಂಬಿಸಬೇಕು. (ಗ್ರಂಥ ಎಂಬೊಂದು ಲಿಪಿ ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದು, ರಾಜಕೀಯಕಾರಣಗಳಿಂದಾಗಿ ಅದನ್ನು ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸದೆ ಇರುವುದು ಬೇರೆ ವಿಚಾರ.) ಹಾಗಾಗಿ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತ-ತೆಲುಗು-ಕನ್ನಡದ ಕೃತಿಗಳು ತಮಿಳು ಸಂಗೀತಗಾರರ ಬಾಯಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಚಿತ್ರರೂಪಗಳನ್ನು ಪಡೆಯುತ್ತವೆ. 'ನಾರದ-ಬಯಗರ' ಎಂದು ವಿಷ್ಣುವನ್ನು ವರ್ಣಿಸಿದ್ದನ್ನು ('ಸಾರಸಾಕ್ಷ ಪರಿಪಾಲಯ ಮಾಂ' ಎಂಬ ಪಂತುವರಾಳಿಯ ಕೃತಿ) ಕೇಳಿ "ವಿಷ್ಣು ನಾರದನಿಗೆ ಯಾವಾಗ ಭಯ ಹುಟ್ಟಿಸಿದ?" ಎಂದು ಚಿಂತಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾಗ ಹೊಳೆದದ್ದು - ಅದು ನಾರದ-ಭಯಹರ ಎಂದು! ಶುದ್ಧ ತಮಿಳಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಹಕಾರವಿಲ್ಲ. ಈಗೀಗ ಹಕಾರದ ಸೇರ್ಪಡೆಯಾಗಿದೆ. ಆದರೂ ಮಾತನಾಡುವಾಗ ಮಹೇಶ ಮಗೇಸನಾಗುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಇದು ತಮಿಳಿನ ವಿಶೇಷತೆ ಎಂದು ಕರೆಯಬಹುದೇನೋ. ಆದರೆ ಸಂಗೀತವನ್ನು ನೂರಾರು-ಸಾವಿರಾರು ಜನರ ಮುಂದೆ ಹಾಡುವ ಕಲಾವಿದರ ಉಚ್ಚಾರಣೆ ಸರಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಚೆನ್ನ. ಒಂದು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ವಿಷಯವೆಂದರೆ ಯುವ-ಸಂಗೀತಗಾರರ ಸಂಗೀತದಲ್ಲಿ ಉಚ್ಚಾರಣಾ-ದೋಷ ಕೇಳಿಬರುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲವೆಂದು ಕೇಳಿದ್ದೇನೆ.
ಕೇವಲ ಒಂದು ಹಾಸ್ಯಭರಿತವಾದ ಪುಸ್ತಕವನ್ನು ಓದಬೇಕೆಂದು ತ.ತ.ನ ವನ್ನು ಕೈಗೆತ್ತಿಕೊಂಡರೂ ನಿರಾಸೆಯಾಗದಷ್ಟು ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿ ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರು ಹಾಸ್ಯದ ಮಧ್ಯೆಯೇ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಹೆಣೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಪುರಂದರದಾಸರ (ಬುರಂತರ ತಾಶರ) ಆರಾಧನೆಯ ಬಗೆಗಿನ ಅಧ್ಯಾಯ ಓದುತ್ತಿದ್ದರಂತೂ ಹೊಟ್ಟೆ ಹುಣ್ಣಾಗುವಷ್ಟು ನಗು ಬರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅವರ ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನಿನಲ್ಲೂ ಇದೇ ರೀತಿಯ ಹಾಸ್ಯ ತುಂಬಿದೆ. ಈ ಹಾಸ್ಯ ಸಹಜವಾಗಿದ್ದು, ಘಟನೆಗಳು ನಿಜವಾಗಿ ನಡೆದವೇ ಇರಬೇಕು (ಹಸುರು ಹೊನ್ನಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬರುವ ಕತ್ತೆಗಳ ವಿಷಯ ಕೂಡ ನಿಜವಾಗಿ ನಡೆದಿದ್ದೇ?... ತಿಳಿದವರು ಹೇಳಿದರೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು).
ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರ ಇತರ ಪುಸ್ತಕಗಳಾದ "ನಮ್ಮ ಹೊಟ್ಟೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಅಮೇರಿಕಾ" ಮತ್ತು "ಕಾಲೇಜು ರಂಗ" ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿವೆ. ಅವನ್ನೂ ಓದಲೇಬೇಕು ಎಂಬಷ್ಟು ಡಾ.ಸ್ವಾಮಿಯವರ ಬರೆಹ ಇಷ್ಟವಾಗಿದೆ. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಸಮಯ ಯಾವಾಗ ಸಿಗುತ್ತದೆಯೋ ತಿಳಿಯದು.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
kathAmRita - The nectar of stories
Recently, I read kathAmR^ita, A.R.Krishnashastri's Kannada precis-translation of the kathAsaritsAgara of sOmadEva, which is again a translation of guNADhya's bR^ihatkathA written in paishAcI. It was a jolly read, and mighty thought-provoking too. After I read it, I realized why Dr. Ganesh said that if one wanted to see celebration of life, it was in works like kathAmR^ita.
This was not my first reading of kathAmR^ita. I had read it when I was very young - probably in my third or fourth grade. My aunt saw me reading this book, and told my Mom about it - "She turned the page, and it was so dirty!!". I was then too young to glean anything from the stories I read... I just read them because they were stories. This time, though, it was different.
kathAmRita means 'nectar of stories'. The main story is that of naravAhanadatta, son of udayana and vAsavadattA, predicted to rule the vidyAdhara kingdom for one kalpa. udayana and vAsavadattA and their ministers are made immortal in bhAsa's plays 'svapnavAsavadattam' and 'pratijnAyaugandharAyaNam'. Both of them are based on bR^ihatkathA. The all-time classic pa~Jcatantra and vEtAlapa~JchavimshatI (the famous vikram and bEtAl) have their roots in the bR^ihatkathA. In fact, guNADhya's life-history itself (why he stopped using samskR^itam and took to paishAcI) is a very interesting story. The king of whom guNADhya was serving, outsmarted by his wife, wanted to learn samskR^itam as soon as possible. guNADhya said that he could teach him in 6 years, while vararuci, another celebrated grammarian of his time, said that he could do it in six months. guNADhya challenged him, saying that he would not use samskR^itam if he did it. guNADhya lost the bet and gave up samskR^itam. The slighted guNADhya left for the forest and met the pishAcha kANabhUti and heard seven stories of seven vidyAdharas. He wrote them in paishAchI language and took it to the king. The king, well versed in samskrt now, refused to read a work that was written in a lowly language. guNADhya then started reading his stories to the animals of the forest and destroying them in the fire. The animals absorbed in the stories, forgot eating and drinking. The king, surprised at the lean meat served to him, learned that guNADhya was the reason for the lean-ness of the animals. He immediately went to the forest to make peace with guNADhya. guNADhya was then reading out the last story, that of naravAhanadatta. The king obtained the manuscript of that story and made it famous in his kingdom.
In the kathAsaritsAgara, the characters in the main story relate stories of other characters who in turn relate others' stories and so on, like a stack. You keep pushing stories in and then pop them out. There are stories of merchants, kings, poor people, learned brahmins, thieves, fools, prostitutes, kulastrIs, yOginis, bEtALas, adventurers, devotees and what not. The diverse nature of the stories makes it extremely enjoyable. Only in a collection like kathAmR^ita can you find the story of a bOdhisattva immediately after the story of fools. This is, in a way, the great thing about kathAmRita. Nothing is embellished. There is no meaningless orthodoxy and sentimentality. Nothing is looked down upon. The importance of dharma is stressed, but it does not feel like dry preaching.
Tragedies are rare, almost non-existent in traditional Indian literature. In many stories of the kathAmRita, even partners who have died come back to life through the grace of some deity. The Indian mentality is really amazing. In spite of the hardships faced by men and women (at least in stories), they nurse the hope of a better future for themselves and their loved ones. No story ends in separation or death. Here, all journeys really end in lovers' meeting. If a son or a wife or a parent is lost in the beginning of the story, you can be sure that he/she/they will be found miraculously before the story ends. The same trait is seen in Indian cinema also. We are not used to tragedies, however convincing they may be. A while ago, I was reading Steinbeck's "Pearl", and was desperately hoping that the Sea-Goddess or something or someone would come and make the dead baby alive again. Yesterday, I was watching 'ondu muttina kathe', directed by Shankar Nag. It is an Indian adaptation of "Pearl". I found it very difficult to watch the movie, because of the horrible things that happen to Kino and his wife. It is my Indian upbringing, you see... Sorry for digressing, but the point I wanted to make was that the Indian mind is not comfortable with tragedies. Bhavabhuti, in his uttararAmacharitam, united sItA with rAma, though tradition says that sItA was absorbed by Mother Earth. Kalidasa does not end raghuvamsha with agnivarNa's death, but with the coronation of his unborn child. Endings of stories are similar even in kathAmRita. This is in stark contrast with western literature, where tragedies are very common. Even western religion is gloomy, in that the End of Days and the Judgement Day are given a lot of importance.
The very appealing thing about kathAmRita is that many of the characters are not black and white, but different shades of grey. This kind of characterization is really an achievement. Nobody can be fully evil or really angelic. This grey nature of humans is what makes life so interesting. That is what makes kathAmRita interesting, too.
One point I really want to write about is the extoling of dharma in the book. There are some principles like "ahimsA satyamasteyam brahmacharyam dhRutiH kShamA", that need to be followed always, everywhere. But as far as my understanding goes, social laws a few centuries ago (my sources are a few books that I have read and some discussions with people I consider very learned) were not as stringent as they are now. That is thankfully changing, but imo this change is making people rootless. What we need is a change for the better, while being rooted firmly. When it comes to inheritance rights and marital rights, Indian society was far advanced than it is now.
When I was reading through the preface of the kathAmRita, I was very angry with the way women were thought of. A woman is always expected to be obliging and pleasing and be pleased, and docile and what not. I do not know when this sort of thinking started, but when I read through kathAmrita, I found more instances of confident and free women than I did of docile women. Probably this was the way of the society then. They probably enjoyed much more rights than we do now. Was it because it was much safer then than it is now? I do not know! I do not want to dwell on this topic, for fear of being labelled a feminist.
A fitting end to the story is the going back of guNADhya and others to kailAsa. After all, after the joys and sorrows of life, that is the goal!
This was not my first reading of kathAmR^ita. I had read it when I was very young - probably in my third or fourth grade. My aunt saw me reading this book, and told my Mom about it - "She turned the page, and it was so dirty!!". I was then too young to glean anything from the stories I read... I just read them because they were stories. This time, though, it was different.
kathAmRita means 'nectar of stories'. The main story is that of naravAhanadatta, son of udayana and vAsavadattA, predicted to rule the vidyAdhara kingdom for one kalpa. udayana and vAsavadattA and their ministers are made immortal in bhAsa's plays 'svapnavAsavadattam' and 'pratijnAyaugandharAyaNam'. Both of them are based on bR^ihatkathA. The all-time classic pa~Jcatantra and vEtAlapa~JchavimshatI (the famous vikram and bEtAl) have their roots in the bR^ihatkathA. In fact, guNADhya's life-history itself (why he stopped using samskR^itam and took to paishAcI) is a very interesting story. The king of whom guNADhya was serving, outsmarted by his wife, wanted to learn samskR^itam as soon as possible. guNADhya said that he could teach him in 6 years, while vararuci, another celebrated grammarian of his time, said that he could do it in six months. guNADhya challenged him, saying that he would not use samskR^itam if he did it. guNADhya lost the bet and gave up samskR^itam. The slighted guNADhya left for the forest and met the pishAcha kANabhUti and heard seven stories of seven vidyAdharas. He wrote them in paishAchI language and took it to the king. The king, well versed in samskrt now, refused to read a work that was written in a lowly language. guNADhya then started reading his stories to the animals of the forest and destroying them in the fire. The animals absorbed in the stories, forgot eating and drinking. The king, surprised at the lean meat served to him, learned that guNADhya was the reason for the lean-ness of the animals. He immediately went to the forest to make peace with guNADhya. guNADhya was then reading out the last story, that of naravAhanadatta. The king obtained the manuscript of that story and made it famous in his kingdom.
In the kathAsaritsAgara, the characters in the main story relate stories of other characters who in turn relate others' stories and so on, like a stack. You keep pushing stories in and then pop them out. There are stories of merchants, kings, poor people, learned brahmins, thieves, fools, prostitutes, kulastrIs, yOginis, bEtALas, adventurers, devotees and what not. The diverse nature of the stories makes it extremely enjoyable. Only in a collection like kathAmR^ita can you find the story of a bOdhisattva immediately after the story of fools. This is, in a way, the great thing about kathAmRita. Nothing is embellished. There is no meaningless orthodoxy and sentimentality. Nothing is looked down upon. The importance of dharma is stressed, but it does not feel like dry preaching.
Tragedies are rare, almost non-existent in traditional Indian literature. In many stories of the kathAmRita, even partners who have died come back to life through the grace of some deity. The Indian mentality is really amazing. In spite of the hardships faced by men and women (at least in stories), they nurse the hope of a better future for themselves and their loved ones. No story ends in separation or death. Here, all journeys really end in lovers' meeting. If a son or a wife or a parent is lost in the beginning of the story, you can be sure that he/she/they will be found miraculously before the story ends. The same trait is seen in Indian cinema also. We are not used to tragedies, however convincing they may be. A while ago, I was reading Steinbeck's "Pearl", and was desperately hoping that the Sea-Goddess or something or someone would come and make the dead baby alive again. Yesterday, I was watching 'ondu muttina kathe', directed by Shankar Nag. It is an Indian adaptation of "Pearl". I found it very difficult to watch the movie, because of the horrible things that happen to Kino and his wife. It is my Indian upbringing, you see... Sorry for digressing, but the point I wanted to make was that the Indian mind is not comfortable with tragedies. Bhavabhuti, in his uttararAmacharitam, united sItA with rAma, though tradition says that sItA was absorbed by Mother Earth. Kalidasa does not end raghuvamsha with agnivarNa's death, but with the coronation of his unborn child. Endings of stories are similar even in kathAmRita. This is in stark contrast with western literature, where tragedies are very common. Even western religion is gloomy, in that the End of Days and the Judgement Day are given a lot of importance.
The very appealing thing about kathAmRita is that many of the characters are not black and white, but different shades of grey. This kind of characterization is really an achievement. Nobody can be fully evil or really angelic. This grey nature of humans is what makes life so interesting. That is what makes kathAmRita interesting, too.
One point I really want to write about is the extoling of dharma in the book. There are some principles like "ahimsA satyamasteyam brahmacharyam dhRutiH kShamA", that need to be followed always, everywhere. But as far as my understanding goes, social laws a few centuries ago (my sources are a few books that I have read and some discussions with people I consider very learned) were not as stringent as they are now. That is thankfully changing, but imo this change is making people rootless. What we need is a change for the better, while being rooted firmly. When it comes to inheritance rights and marital rights, Indian society was far advanced than it is now.
When I was reading through the preface of the kathAmRita, I was very angry with the way women were thought of. A woman is always expected to be obliging and pleasing and be pleased, and docile and what not. I do not know when this sort of thinking started, but when I read through kathAmrita, I found more instances of confident and free women than I did of docile women. Probably this was the way of the society then. They probably enjoyed much more rights than we do now. Was it because it was much safer then than it is now? I do not know! I do not want to dwell on this topic, for fear of being labelled a feminist.
A fitting end to the story is the going back of guNADhya and others to kailAsa. After all, after the joys and sorrows of life, that is the goal!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)