Monday, June 12, 2017

art education

How do we liberate art and design education from a mere relocation of body memories(skill), mental memories (reflection/theory/language), material memories (media/medium) and conceptual memories (tools, technique and methods) are of a rhetoric value than a conscious call of self-positioning; the need of the hour?
Memories can only create evidence of ego, what one needs today is not one more expression of ego, what one needs is the clear position towards billions of discriminations and destruction taking place on earth every moment. It is also not about what we are achieving today but it is about what we are leaving behind for the generations to come and how do we save it for them. Creative education is that position, it can no longer be the memory rehash.

apology

The other day I have criticised an essay published in round table by Kanika S.
1. for its approach towards a serious content like discrimination in visual culture by locating arguments in peripheral dichotomy as discrimination
2. for generalising an entire institution of varied practices and voices by a student work without contextualising 
nuances of complexity exist in academia and its practices
Unfortunately, I did not know this is a work by a student. Initially, I used a post-modernist mockery language to highlight the problem of language and with the response, I should have known this fact.
With due respect to her concerns she raised in the essay, I sincerely apologise her for my non-prudent critique of a student essay. (Kindly do not mistake this act as a top-down commentary of gender or class. This is only a pure democratic response.)

Gandhi is a chatur baniya : Amitshah

Chatur Baniya:-
Anmit Shah's nuanced comment "chatur baniya" or may be a casual comment has provoked many and it is quite amusing to see that many Modi Bhakhts (Mob) also have become slightly uncomfortable with this comment. Considering Shah's operational style, one has to safely assume that It can not be a casual comment but has to be a nuanced comment. It is not even like the rhetoric often Modi uses in his meeting that he is a smart trader, someone who knows how to make best out of his political capital. But here, in this case, more than his comment, the negative connotation towards "Bania" becomes more important.
Once famously known as "Bania jati party", BJP now under present party dispensation has taken an interesting shift from its Delhi-centric Bania party tag. Bania now in Delhi is a Kejriwal force. BJP now has moved on to install Brahmin chief ministers across the states. An exception may be is Khattar, a Khatri by birth. Amit Shah knows that relying on a caste name, which is disliked across the upper Indian villages, especially by the poor and Dalits (Ambedkar termed Bania worse than a degenerated disease) who are traditionally a victim of their business practice is not going to bring more than their 29% vote share. Shah knows it very well that if the party wants to grow beyond its traditional bania- Brahmin vote bank, a mere 29%, it has to shift its focus from Bania- Brahmin to Dalit - Brahmin experiment, something in the past gave a very good dividend for Mayawati in UP. This derogative insinuation should be seen in that context. Chatur bania, pleases his anti-Gandhi-RSS brigade first and then Anti-Gandhi and anti- Bania, Brahmin vote bank next. Then it assumes to give out a political message to anti-Bania- Dalit vote bank. Also, he knows it very well that demonisation has had its impact on Bania's trade in this country and they are very angry about it. Further, he knows very well that after the implementation of GST, it is further going to alienate them from the party. So Shah wants to move on from the traditional Bania jati party tag for party's future and it is very well evident in this clearly articulated insinuation.
But unfortunately what he misses is India believes a Chatur bania Gandhi than a politically (mis) calculative Amit Shah. Even if he throws a million stones at Gandhi, even if they make a million statues taller than Gandhi's statue and make million derogatory comments about Gandhi, he will still stand taller than any political ideology you may propound in this country. With all his failures and fault lines in life and politics, for a Christian, he becomes a Christ, for Hindu he becomes Saint, for Buddist he becomes Buddha, for Muslims he becomes Ali and above all for a politician he becomes Chanakya. His Hinduism has never been the textbook Hinduism of Brahminical order. It is the Bhakti that breaks those orders is his Hinduism and most importantly it is completely ambiguous between faith and morality. In other words, people find their religious teachings of liberation in him and also a rational for their moral orthodoxy. He represents their collective complex faith and social morality and this is what Shah and his mentor RSS misses in this land of faith.
Let us wait and watch what this shift "Chatur Bania" brings in Indian politics. I feel sorry for proud Baniyas for this grand let down by the party they have built from scratch.

Aadi Shankaran

Shinoj Choran I am unable to post in the comment section under your comment, so posting separately
ഷിനോജ്, ഇതൊരു മാർക്സിസ്റ്റ് വായനയിലൂടെയുള്ള പുനർവായന തന്നെയാണ് . ചരിത്രം യാഥാർഥ്യത്തിന്റെ പശ്ചാത്തല പുനർ വായനയാണെന്ന തത്വത്തിലൂടെ നോക്കുകയാണെങ്കിൽ, ഈ മേൽപ്പറഞ്ഞ രാജ്യങ്ങളും സാമ്രാജ്യങ്ങളും ഭരിച്ചത് ഹിന്ദു രാജാക്കന്മാർ ആയിരുന്നു. അവരുടെ ആശയ സംഹിതകളും, രാജ്യത്തിന്റെ നിയമ വ്യവസ്ഥകളും ഹിന്ദു നിയമാവലിക്കനുശ്രുതമായിരുന്നു. വർണത്തിലധിഷ്ഠിതമായ ജാതി വ്യവസ്ഥയിലുള്ള സമൂഹവും ആയിരുന്നു. ഇതിനെല്ലാം നിലവിലുള്ള ചരിത്രപഠനങ്ങൾ തന്നെ മതിയായ തെളിവുകൾ നൽകുന്നുണ്ട്. ഇതിനർത്ഥം മറ്റു സമുദായങ്ങളുണ്ടായിരുന്നിള്ള എന്നല്ല എന്ന് കൂടി ഓർക്കണം.
ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ബ്രാഹ്മണ ഐഡിയോളോജിയെ സ്ഥാപനവത്ക്കരിച്ചു എന്നത് ഓരു ചരിത്രപരമായ പരിമിത വായനയാണ്. ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ നടപടികളെല്ലാം തന്നെ യാഥാസ്ഥിതിക ബ്രാഹ്മണണ്യത്തെ ചോദ്യം ചെയ്യുന്നതായിരുന്നു. അദ്ദേഹം ബുദ്ധമതത്തിലെ പലകാര്യങ്ങളും തന്റെ ആശയങ്ങളിലേക്കും ജീവിതത്തിലേക്കും പകർന്നെടുക്കുകയാണുണ്ടായിരുന്നത് . ചെറുപ്പത്തിൽ ബുദ്ധമത രീതിയിലുള്ള സന്യാസം, സംഘ രീതിയിലുള്ള തത്വ പ്രചാരണ യാത്രാരീതിയും, മഠസ്ഥാപനവും, യഗ്ന ആചാരാനുഷ്ഠാനങ്ങളോടുള്ള എതിർപ്പ് , ബുദ്ധമത സിദ്ധാന്തത്തിലെ ശൂന്യതാ വാദത്തിനനുശ്രുതമായ നിർഗുണ പരബ്രഹ്മത്തിന്റെ അവതരണം എന്നിങ്ങനെ, അന്ന് നില നിന്നിരുന്ന മീമാംസ ബ്രഹ്‌മണ്യത്തെ പൂർണമായും നിരാകരിക്കുകയാണുണ്ടായിരുന്നത്. ഹിന്ദുമതത്തിലെ ദൈവ വാദത്തെ അദ്വൈതത്തിലെ മായ വാദത്തിലൂടെ ബുദ്ധിസത്തിലെ ശൂന്യതാ വാദവുമായി (നിർഗുണ പരബ്രഹ്മൻ) യോചിപ്പിക്കാൻ കഴിഞ്ഞു എന്നതായിരുന്നു അദ്ദേഹത്തിനെ ഏറ്റവും നേട്ടം. ഇത് ബുദ്ധമതത്തേക്കാൾ അനേക ദൈവ വാദത്തിലൂന്നി നിന്നിരുന്ന ബ്രാഹ്മണ മതത്തെയാണ് കൂടുതൽ പ്രശ്നത്തിലാക്കിയിരുന്നത് എന്ന് , തുടർന്ന് അതിലുണ്ടായ അദ്വൈതത്തിലെ മായാ സിദ്ധാന്തത്തോടും ഏക ദൈവ വാദത്തിനോടും ഉണ്ടായിരുന്ന എതിർപ്പിൽ നിന്നും തിരിച്ചറിയാവുന്നതാണ്. അദ്വൈതത്തെ പ്രതിരോധിക്കാനായും മായ വാദത്തെയും ഏകദൈവ വാദത്തെ മറികടക്കാനായും അതിനുശേഷം യാഥാസ്ഥിക ബ്രാഹ്മണ്യം
വിശിഷ്ടാദ്വൈത, ദ്വൈത വേദാന്ത, ബേദ ബേദ, അചിന്ത്യബേദാബേദ, ദ്വൈതവാദ, ശുദ്ധാദ്വൈത തുടങ്ങിയ അനേകം തത്വ ചിന്താശ്രേണികൾ തുടങ്ങുകയുണ്ടായി എന്നത് ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ബ്രാഹ്മണമതത്തിനുയർത്തിയ വെല്ലു വിളിയെ സാക്ഷ്യപ്പെടുത്തുന്നു. അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്തം ബുദ്ധമതത്തിൽ ഇത്തരമൊരു ചലമുണ്ടാക്കിയതിനു അധികമൊന്നും തെളിവൊന്നുമില്ലതാനും.
ആദിശങ്കരൻ അന്ന് നിലവിലിരുന്ന ബ്രാഹ്മണ സമൂഹത്തിൽ ജനിച്ച തത്വ ചിന്തകൻ മാത്രമായിരുന്നു. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ അദ്വൈതത്തിലെവിടെയും വേദിക് ദൈവങ്ങളെ കാണാനാകുന്നതല്ല. കൂടാതെ ദൈവത്തിനു ബുദ്ധിസത്തിലെ ശൂന്യതാ വാദത്തിനു സമാന്തരമായ പര ബ്രഹ്മത്തേക്കാൾ താഴെയുള്ള ഒരു സ്ഥാനം മാത്രമാണ് നൽകുന്നതുതാനും. ബുദ്ധമത രീതിയിൽ മഠങ്ങൾ സ്ഥാപിച്ചതും, സംഘ രീതിയിൽ അഘാടകൾ സ്ഥാപിച്ചതും ഇന്ന് ഹിന്ദുത്വ വാദികൾ പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കുന്നതുപോലെ ബ്രാഹ്മണാമതത്തെ സംരക്ഷിക്കാനും പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കാനുമാണെന്നു വിശ്വസിക്കാൻ യാതൊരു തെളിവുകളുമില്ല. ഈ മഠങ്ങളൊന്നും അന്നും ഇന്നും അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്തമല്ലാതെ മറ്റൊന്നും ഒരിക്കലും പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കുന്നില്ല. ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ ഒരു കൃതിയിലും മനുസ്മ്രിതി പരാമര്ശിക്കപെടുന്നില്ല എന്നതും വളരെ പ്രാധാന്യമർഹിക്കുന്നതാണ്. ആദി ശങ്കരൻ തന്റെ ഉപദേശ സഹശ്രിയിൽ വർണ വ്യവസ്ഥയെ തള്ളി പറയുന്നുമുണ്ട് . വർണ വ്യവസ്ഥയെ ശരിയായ ജ്ഞാനത്തിന്റെ തിരസ്കാരമായാണ് അവതരിപ്പിക്കുന്നത് . ജഗതാനന്ദയുടെ ഉപദേശ സഹശ്രിയുടെ വിവർത്തനം താഴെ കൊടുത്തിരിക്കുന്നു .
One, who is eager to realize this right knowledge spoken of in the Sruti, should rise above the desire for a son, for wealth, for this world and the next, which are described in a five-fold manner, and are the outcome of a false reference to the Self of Varna (castes, colors, classes) and orders of life. These references are contradictory to right knowledge, and reasons are given by the Srutis regarding the prohibition of the acceptance of difference. For when the knowledge that the one non-dual Atman (Self) is beyond phenomenal existence is generated by the scriptures and reasoning, there cannot exist a knowledge side by side that is contradictory or contrary to it.
— Adi Shankara, Upadesha Sahasri 1.44
ഇതൊക്കെയാണെങ്കിലും ആദി ശങ്കരനെ ഒരു സാമൂഹിക പരിഷ്കർത്താവായി കാണാൻ ശ്രമിക്കുന്നത് വലിയ തെറ്റായിരിക്കും. അദ്ദേഹം തന്റെ ചെറിയ ജീവിതത്തിലൊരിക്കലും തന്റെ അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്ത പ്രചാരണത്തിനായുള്ള വൈജ്ഞാനിക മണ്ഡലത്തിനപ്പുറത്തു സമൂഹത്തിൽ എന്തെങ്കിലും ഇടപെടലുകൾ നടത്തിയിരുന്നതായി ഒരു തെളിവുമില്ല. ഇതിൽ ഷിനോജ് ആരോപിക്കുന്ന ബ്രഹ്മണ്യ ഐഡിയോളോജിയും (വർണ വ്യവസ്ഥ) വരും. അതിനുള്ള പ്രത്യക്ഷ തെളിവാണ് ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്തത്തെ പൂർണമായും തിരസ്കരിക്കുന്നതും, ആചാരാനുഷ്ഠാനത്തിലധിഷ്ഠിതമായ നിലവിലുണ്ടായിരുന്ന ബ്രാഹ്മണ വ്യവസ്ഥയുടെ പുനരാഖ്യാനമായ ഭജഗോവിന്ദം എന്ന കൃതി ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ തലയിൽ, ബ്രാഹ്മണയാഥാസ്ഥിതികന്മാർ കെട്ടിയേല്പിക്കുന്നത്.
"For when the knowledge that the one non-dual Atman (Self) is beyond phenomenal existence is generated by the scriptures and reasoning, there cannot exist a knowledge side by side that is contradictory or contrary to it" എന്നെഴുതിയ വ്യക്തി ഒരു സങ്കുചിത ബ്രഹ്മണ്യ ഐഡിയോളജി എന്ന് ഷിനോജ് പറയുന്ന വർണ വ്യവസ്ഥ സ്ഥാപനവത്ക്കരിച്ചു എന്ന് യാതൊരു തെളിവുമില്ലാതെ കരുതുന്നത് ആദി ശങ്കരനെപ്പറ്റിയുള്ള വളരെ പരിമിത വായനയാണ്.
ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ഒരു താത്വീകാചാര്യൻ മാത്രമായിരുന്നു. നാരായണ ഗുരുവേപോലുള്ള ഒരു മഹാനായ സാമൂഹ്യ പരിഷ്‌കർത്താവ് അതുകൊണ്ടു കൂടി തന്നെയാണ് ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്തം തന്നെ വർണ വ്യവസ്ഥക്കെതിരായി ഉപയോഗിക്കാൻ തിരഞ്ഞെടുത്തതും.

ആദി ശങ്കരനെയും, ഇ എം എസിനെയും , നാരായണ ഗുരുവിനെയും വെറുത്ത വിടുക


സുധാകരൻ സഖാവിന്റെ ആദി ശങ്കരനെ കുറിച്ചുള്ള പരാമർശം ചരിത്രപരമായി ഒരു തെറ്റായ വസ്തുതയാണ്. ബുദ്ധമതത്തിന്റെ അപചയം, ശങ്കരൻ ജനിക്കുന്നതിനു എത്രയോ നൂറ്റാണ്ടുകൾക്കു മുൻപ് ഇന്ത്യയിൽ നടന്നു കഴിഞ്ഞിരുന്നു. ഇന്നത്തെ ഇന്ത്യൻ പ്രദേശം ക്രി.പി. 320 തൊട്ടു ഭരിച്ചിരുന്ന ഗുപ്ത സാമ്രാജ്യം മുതൽ, പല്ലവ,ചേര, ചോള, പ്രതിഹര സാമ്രാജ്യങ്ങൾ വരെ മുഴുവനും ഹിന്ദു രാജ്യങ്ങൾ ആയിരുന്നു. ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ജനിക്കുന്നത് ഏഴാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടിന്റെ പകുതിയോടെ മാത്രമാണ് .
ബുദ്ധൻ ജീവിച്ചിരിക്കുന്പോൾ തന്നെ, ബുദ്ധനെ ചോദ്യം ചെയ്തുകൊണ്ടുള്ള അഭിപ്രായ വത്യാസങ്ങൾ സംഘത്തിൽ ഉടലെടുത്തിരുന്നു എന്നതു ചരിത്ര വസ്തുതയാണല്ലോ. ഇത് പിന്നീട് പല വിഭാഗങ്ങളിലേക്കുള്ള വിഭജനത്തിലേക്കും വൈജ്ഞാനിക അപചയത്തിലേക്കും നയിച്ചു എന്നതും എഴുതപെട്ട ചരിത്രമാണ്. അശോകൻ പ്രചരിപ്പിച്ച ബുദ്ധിസം തന്നെ ഒരു പ്രത്യേക വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ മാത്രം ആശയങ്ങൾ ആണെന്ന് കൂടി ഓർക്കേണ്ടിയിരിക്കുന്നു.
അതുകൊണ്ടു തന്നെ ഏഴാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടിന്റെ പകുതിയിൽ ജനിച്ച "ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ബുദ്ധമതത്തെ ഇന്ത്യയിൽ നിന്നും തുടച്ചു നീക്കി" എന്ന് തുടങ്ങിയ ഹിന്ദു സമുദായത്തിന്റെ വലിയ അവകാശവാദത്തിൽ എന്തെങ്കിലും കഴന്മ്പുണ്ടെന്നു കരുതുന്നത് ചരിത്ര പരമായ ഒരു വലിയ തെറ്റായിരിക്കും. സ.ഇ എം എസ്സും , സ. സുധാകരനും ആ അവകാശ വാദം ആവർത്തിക്കുന്നു എന്നത് അത്ഭുത പെടുത്തുന്ന കാര്യവുമാണ്.
അതെ സമയം ഹിന്ദു സമൂഹത്തിന്റെ ആ അവകാശവാദം മാറ്റിവച്ചു വസ്തു നിഷ്പക്ഷമായി അവലോകനം ചെയ്യുകയാണെങ്കിൽ ഇന്ത്യൻ തത്വ ചിന്തയ്ക്കു ആദി ശങ്കരൻ നൽകിയ സംഭവന അപ്രമാദവുമാണെന്ന് കാണാവുന്നതാണ്. ഗുപ്ത കാലഘട്ട പിന്തുണയോടെ ഇന്ത്യയിൽ വളർന്നു വന്ന ആചാരാനുഷ്ടാനധിഷ്ഠിതമായ ബ്രാഹ്മണിക്കൽ മീമാംസക ചിന്തയ്ക്കെതിരെ അതി ശക്തമായ ഒരു പ്രതിരോധമുയർത്തുന്നതിനും അതിനു ബദലായി ഒരു ബൗദ്ധീക ചിന്താ പദ്ധതി അവതരിപ്പിച്ചു, ആചാരാനുഷ്ഠാനങ്ങളിൽ നിന്നും ഇന്ത്യൻ തത്വ ചിന്താ ശ്രേണികളെ പുനരുജ്ജീവിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിലും ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ പങ്കു ആർക്കും തള്ളി പറയാവുന്നതല്ല.
ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ ജീവിതത്തിലെ ഏറ്റവും പ്രധാനമുള്ള ഒരു സംഭവമായി കരുതുന്നത് മീമാംസകനായ മണ്ടന മിശ്രയെ തർക്കത്തിലൂടെ പരാജയ പെടുത്തിയതാണെന്നു കൂടി ഓർക്കുക. കൂടാതെ അതിനുശേഷം, പതിനഞ്ചാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടു വരെ ശങ്കരന്റെ അദ്വൈത സിദ്ധാന്തത്തെ ചോദ്യം ചെയ്യുന്നതിനും പ്രതിരോധിക്കുന്നതിനും ഇന്ത്യൻ തത്വചിന്തയിലുണ്ടായ അത്ഭുതകരമായ വളർച്ച ശങ്കരനുയർത്തിയ ബൗദ്ധീക തലത്തിലുള്ള വെല്ലുവിളിയുടെ സാക്ഷി പത്രവുമാണ്. ഈ വെല്ലു വിളിയിൽ അന്ന് നിലനിന്നിരുന്ന എല്ലാ തത്വ ചിന്തകളും ഉൾപ്പെട്ടിരുന്നു. ബുദ്ധമത തത്വങ്ങളും അതിൽ നിന്ന് വേറിട്ട് നിന്നിരുന്നില്ലെന്നു മാത്രം. ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ നേതൃത്വത്തിൽ സ്ഥാപിതമായ നാല് മഠങ്ങളും മറ്റു അഘാടകളും , അന്ന് നിലവിലിരുന്ന ബുദ്ധ- ജൈന മഠങ്ങളുടെയും സംഘങ്ങളുടെയും മാതൃകയിൽ അദ്വൈത തത്വ ചിന്ത പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കാൻ സ്ഥാപിച്ചു എന്നതിലപ്പുറം, ഇന്ന് ഹിന്ദുത്വ വാദികൾ അവകാശപ്പെടുന്നത് പോലെ ഹിന്ദു മതം സംരക്ഷിക്കുന്നതിന് വേണ്ടിയാണെന്നെല്ലാം പറയുന്നത് ശുദ്ധ അസംബന്ധമാണ്. ഈ മഠങ്ങളും അഘാടകളും ഇന്നും ഹിന്ദു മതത്തിലെ വേറെയേതെങ്കിലും തത്വ ചിന്ത അനുശാസിക്കുന്നതായോ പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കുന്നതായോ കാണാൻ പറ്റുന്നതല്ല. ശങ്കരൻ ജീവിച്ചിരുന്നപ്പോൾ തന്നെ അദ്വൈതം പ്രയോഗികാവശ്യങ്ങൾക്കായി വേദത്തിന്റെ അപ്രമാണിത്വ അംഗീകരിച്ച ഒരു ചിന്താ പദ്ധതി മാത്രമായിരുന്നു എന്ന് ഈ അവസരത്തിൽ ഓർക്കേണ്ടതുണ്ട് . ഈ അദ്വൈതത്തിനുൾക്കൊള്ളാനാകാത്ത പ്രയോഗികതയെ "മായ" എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞു ഒഴിഞ്ഞു മാറിയത് കൊണ്ടാണ് , അദ്വൈതത്തെയും ശങ്കരനെയും വെല്ലുവിളിച്ചുകൊണ്ട് വിശിഷ്ടാദ്വൈത ചിന്താ സരണി ഉടൻ തന്നെ ഉടലെടുത്തത്. പിന്നീടുള്ളത് ചരിത്രം.
ഇതെല്ലം കൊണ്ട് തന്നെ ആദി ശങ്കരൻ ഇന്ത്യയിൽ നിന്നും ബുദ്ധമതത്തെ തുടച്ചു നീക്കിയ വ്യക്തിത്വമായി അവതരിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിൽ ചരിത്രപരമായി വലിയ പാകപ്പിഴയുണ്ട്. അത് പോലെ തന്നെ ഇന്ത്യൻ തത്വ ചിന്തയിലെ ശങ്കരന്റെ സംഭാവന തള്ളിപ്പറയുന്നതിലും അതിലും വലിയ പാകപ്പിഴയുണ്ട്. ഇരുപതാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടിലെ കേരളം കണ്ട ഏറ്റവും വലിയ സാമൂഹിക പരിഷ്കർത്താവായ നാരായണ ഗുരു ആദി ശങ്കരന്റെ അദ്വൈതത്തെ തന്റെ സാമൂഹീക പരിഷ്കാരങ്ങൾക്കുള്ള അടിസ്ഥാന തത്വ ചിന്തയായി അംഗീകരിച്ചത്, അദ്വൈതം യാഥാസ്ഥിതിക ആചാരാനുഷ്ടാനങ്ങൾക്കതിഷ്ടിതമായ മീംമാസ ഹിന്ദു മാതാചാരങ്ങൾക്കെതിരെ ഉയർത്തിയ ചരിത്രപരമായ താത്വീകമായ വെല്ലു വിളികൊണ്ടാണെന്നു നാം മറക്കരുത്. അതുകൊണ്ടു തന്നെ ഇ എം എസിനെയും , നാരായണ ഗുരുവിനെയും , ആദി ശങ്കരനെയും മറ്റും വെറുതെ കൂടി കുഴച്ചു പരിമിതമായ ചരിത്രപരവും താത്വീകവുമായ അവനിർമിതി നടത്താതിരിക്കുവാനപേക്ഷ.

jeevan thomas

A must read. His comment on radical movement, particularly its inconsistencies and diabolical leadership crisis require a serious study. Everybody knows that there are inconsistencies in the story as it is presented as history today. A revisit is a must for Indian art history.
ജീവിതമൊക്കെ അങ്ങനെ തന്നെയായിരുന്നു, ഭയങ്കര ലക്ക് ഉണ്ടെന്ന് വിചാരിക്കുന്ന സ്ഥലത്ത് എത്തുമ്പോള്‍ അതങ്ങ് പോകും. അല്ലെങ്കിലും ഇവിടെ കിട്ടുന്ന ചാന്‍സ് പോലും ഞാന്‍…
AZHIMUKHAM.COM|BY SAFIYA SAJU

stairs to outer space

what if we construct steps to outer space and we carry a satellite on our backpack and leave it in outer space, will it fall back or continue to remain in outer space? or may be a bridge and carry a satellite on a bullock cart and leave it in outer space? just joking about escape velocity... okay :-)

raid raj

During Vajpayee time, all his glory was brought down by his own party men and party affiliate. They were in an eager to amass and expand. Most of his time had been spent on sorting out the troubles created by his almighty Fringe RSS and its affiliates to save his government's progressive image.
Prime Minister Modi's history is also no different. Even as one can not negate his dictatorial tenacities, considering his party's overall fundamental structure that lay emphasis on the primitive arguments of patriarchy, I wonder what alternate does he has with the party men who grew under it?
If one look at the times of Vajpayee, one would not be able to find any difference in attitude and culture of the present government and the fundamentalist forces. Things were same, Ideas were same and agenda were same. Perhaps one difference would be the industrialised television news channels and social media imputes something new to this government's time.
That point of time also people were scared of talking about Advani an equivalent of present day Modi. I think except RK Lakshman who always portrayed him with a crown to represent his archaic mindset in relationship to his hawkish Hindutva agenda of patriarchal nature, no one dared to speak up against the government. All those who tried paid the price very badly. Tehelka is the classic example. The opposition was in a complete disarray.
But Vajpayee with his non-BJP allies with roots in non-Hindutva roots somehow could manage his big brother RSS and its fringe using coalition compulsions. Still, Advani's hawkish interventions and coercive politics brought down Vajpayee government. Unfortunately, Modi did not enjoy the privilege of coalition compulsion to rein in his party men and as a hawkish politician himself and his lieutenant Amit Shah, his government may not require any other person to bring it down.
His Amit Shah wipes will not last for long, as their "aya ram -Gaya ram" kind of politicians adopted from other parties who gave the limited edge in states, will become their biggest threat in 2019 or at least post 2019.
History of Indian politics, from Indira Gandhi onwards, to whom Prime Minister has indebted many things for his style and methods, if at all proves one thing, what brought down Congress is not the corruption or leadership issues, but the downfall started with their threat culture of using CBI and Income Tax to tame the leaders and businessmen. When your own back yard is not clean, people will reject it as one more nonsense. Also, a new set of leaders will emerge in those parties, who will be beyond those threats.
In the entire history of Indian politics, except a very few, no leader has ever lost their position in politics on corruption charges. Party structures in India are corrupt owing to the election expense compulsions and its crony capitalism. In India, a local constable onwards is appointed at the behest of a local crony businessman and their political representative that this agenda of corruption starts. One has to understand the frame of corruption as popularly interpreted. In a population of billion people with less than a million options of employment, business and the never ending long lines of waiting for everything and anything, corruption will never go away as a means of practice in our daily life. If a selected few still remain politically and morally incorrupt, it owes it's complete indebtedness to religious morality and ethics. Gandhian politics is a classic example of it. Also, the classic example is, in spite of very tall leaders of moral high ground existed in left atheist leaning politics, Left could never impact the Indian politics, also most of them could not find a place in left politics itself. That is also the reason, Kejriwal's idealistic opposition against corruption is getting deranged in his power politics and losing his face day by day.
In a democracy, when the citizens as varied in culture, language, tradition, aspiration, food habits, literacy and religion exist, consensus politics only work for a better long time political dividend. Coercive politics will only make them rebel and victim. With a 40% below poverty line people, aggrieved farmers, a large section of unemployed educated youth and many of them with heavy educational loans, large-scale displacements, this coercive terror plank is not going to work with any leader. Remember all they have to do is identify with these youth who have a distrust of the government or is building its momentum and also have nothing to lose.
This Corruption, Mandir and cow policies is of no relevance to the city dwellers, the largest vote bank of BJP. For them their daily life expenses, income and employment for their children are important. In fact, they wouldn't even mind taking the ugly root of corruption to settle their life, priorities, children and their aspiration.
Recently my daughter did a school project of surveying two city markets: KR Puram in Bangalore market and Mittayee theruvu in Calicut. Shockingly every shop owners only had one story to tell about the disaster brought upon to their business by the demonetization. Most of these small-scale business people have never made large profits but were only managing their daily expenses by the business of " rolling money" or settling through credit servicing. With demonetisation, this meagre managing has become a mere survival and that too in a big loss that they expect if they are able to survive for another couple of years in business, then they may be able to bring up to a living support.
The government of the day should remember there is no eternity and Utopia in politics when your country has a population of one billion people and out of that half of them are poor. Let them live, do not destroy their life any further. They don't need your cow belt policies of mandir and cow slaughter ban. You have taken away their basic money from their pocket for bank defaulters, now you are ruining their another meagre earning of cattle income. Unlike corporates, none of the farmers sells their cow so dear to them for slaughter. They are forced to sell them in the market to buy another cow that milk and assure their meagre income.
I read somewhere about the idea of imposing the ban on cattle trade getting linked to Gujarat elections. If one knows the large numbers in cattle trade among Patels and Rabaris, one only can laugh at that planted story.
Stop your coercive politics or else BJP will be doomed like Congress.

beef ban

A welcome decision by Madras high court, giving a country wide stay order for the Beef ban. 71% of people's food can not be arbitrarily denied just by mobocracy and brute majority. The government of India overstretched its brief by overriding the state's, municipality's and panchayat's legal and legislative prerogative guaranteed under the constitution. Their flimsy excuse of animal rights is laughable according to legal experts, as the animal slaughter for food doesn't come under the purview of animal cruelty.
important point is overnight the Government with this order has made 70% Indians guilty and criminal for their food habit something that existed for thousands of years. The second important point, does India has so much goat meat to supplement the necessary nutrients ( one that has to be cheaper as well) for the 70% population?
Chicken with very little Vitamine B-12, the essential nutrient is no match at all. Forget about all these things, do you have enough vegetable production in the country to feed this 70 % non-vegetarians?
Most importantly why does this BJP government want to destroy this country's social fabric acting as a divisive force again and again: first by National - anti-national then Hindu- Muslim and now vegetarian and non-vegetarian? What extent are these guys going to destroy this country?
People of the country gave this government a brute majority, why can't it function constructively for nation's progress?

gandhi

you should be joking. Do they actually think Modi Government can be the leaning board to whitewash, one of the heinous crime on humanity?
Savarkar can never be absolved of this crime. There are pieces of evidence all over the place. The then home minister Patel's letters to Prime Minister itself is enough to nail him.
Patel in one of his letter to Nehru on February 27, 1948, wrote: “It was a fanatical wing of the Hindu Mahasabha directly under Savarkar that [hatched] the conspiracy and saw it through (the murder).”
I think these fundamentalists are stretching things little too far, they should not forget, public patience has a limit.
An uncovering of such a ‘truth’ would conveniently absolve Vinayak Damodar Savarkar of his part in the death of the man later called the ‘father of the nation’.
Looking to poke holes into the three-bullet theory, an RSS affiliate has filed a PIL in the Supreme Court questioning whether Godse was Gandhi’s only killer, and…
OUTLOOKINDIA.COM

savarkar

Savarkar and Jinnah both were idealists of Congress nationalism.
It is historically incorrect to call Savarkar and Jinnah are the only xenophobic and separatists. There were two parts to both these leaders. In the pre-Gandhi era politics, they both were leaders of the nationalist movement and Jinnah also was a tall leader in Indian politics. They represented the elite and upper-class demands in the British colony, something Congress was concerned at that point of time. Post Gandhi entry to Indian politics and made Congress movement into a common man's freedom struggle for self-governance, the part two Savarkar and Jinnah emerged. This was after their realisation that their upper caste and elite politics have had no space in Gandhi era mass movement. In the political canvas of India of that point of time, Gandhi contrasted them and their politics of negotiated collaboration to a negative space for a positive mass movement of the common man of complete freedom or right for self-governance.
The fact is both of them were only representing the Congress existed in India before Gandhi's entry into Indian politics- exclusionary, elitist and driven by upper-caste interests. They could not grow beyond that point of history, whereas Gandhi took it forward. He made sure, Congress did not remain in the hands of a selected few, who were negotiating for the privileges of their community. He punched holes in that elitism by making it a mass movement for complete Swaraj. Also, he did not allow, Bose kind of military supremacist agendas, something that would have made Congress again an elitist. Congress to a great extend at that point of time was the RSS avatar of the day. Their second part of political life, what they are known for these days, were only due to their inability to understand Gandhi and the change he brought to the Congress. It changed from elitist, upper caste movement to a mass movement but Jinnah and Savarkar held on to the old position of elite and upper-caste privilege protection.
So if one accepts Bala Gangadhara Tilak and the leader of the pre- Gandhi era Congress as freedom fighters, one may also have to accept Jinha and Savarkar as freedom fighters and leaders.
So Savarkar's letter to British for clemency cannot be the benchmark of his betrayal of freedom fight. Congress was a collaborator at that point of time. Considering Communist party also had collaborated with British during quit India movement, Marxist historians should not take a high moralistic position about that event.

kashmir

In a country when the stone pelting people become the villain and automatic assault rifle-wielding soldiers become the victims, there is something seriously problematic about the situation. The one who give stones in the hands of the people and the one who give the command to shoot the very same Kashmiri people, the government want to retain within the country's border and rule, both are committing a serious crime: Violation of the fundamental democratic duty- the violation of the basic human dignity, something the skewed brains of nationalists will never understand.
It is time that Indian government behave like a matured democratic nation and lead the political discussion for an inclusive settlement and stop leaving it to the morons in television studios and "re-tired "generals from the Delhi right wing think (?) tank, among them many stand accused of having the business interests in many weapons producing/procurement companies.
Considering now they have started playing video games at the border, it's time country shows its maturity.

Smart crooks

  I used to often wonder, why do these English-speaking gurus like Osho, Sri Sri become so popular among the Indian urban middle class and elite?
We must acknowledge, Osho was a great intellect in post-modernist perennial philosophy and Sri Sri a successful franchise builder. But anyone with the know-how of brand loyalty theory would point out that, these things are not enough for such popularity.
Today when I saw a photo of some disciples of Osho doing "arathi" something Rajnish abhorred in his life, I had the Buddha moment in my life :-)
I realised that these people liberate their followers only from their inhibitions and guilt of indulgence in material life. They make them at peace with their material possessions, self-directed fantasies and their overindulgence in bodily pleasures, which their orthodox culture would have made them feel guilty. They reassure them that they need not feel sorry for their ghetto life.
smart crooks :-)

vizhinjam project and presumptive loss

Finally, we will delay the vizhinjam project with illogical arguments and allow the business be transferred to upcoming Tamil Nadu project brought up to counter Vizhinjam project. Exactly as it was in the case of cochin IT park. After all the achuthanandan taxations, by the time it materialised, the IT business itself was not there anymore to yield any profit. One should not be confused who made the profit.
Those who championing presumptive loss in profit for the government investment, should kindly also explain the loss of profits in government subsidies (investments) in individual Tourism hotel/resort projects, and agriculture during the last 60 years. They should explain how much profit they have shared with Government from these personal businesses where they got the government investment/subsidy(as high as up to 75 percentage of total investment).
Let me admit, i have no clear idea of the business pact between Adani and government of Kerala and since I do not have any gain, I have no interest as well. But I believe, Government's role is not running a business but it is about facilitating a conducive environment for business that generates employment and livelihood. It is a known fact that in India infrastructure projects never make the profit before a substantially long period of existence and subsequent accrual of the debt burden. So it is important for any government to extend subsidy(investment) in such projects just like in the case of tourism and agriculture. These investments are not for the direct return of profit share but are to create the infrastructure project that will indirectly reward with employment creations and long-term tax revenues - that might be many-fold higher than the profit share.
One does not require an explanation how much job creation and business creation a port will bring. So this new Achuthanandan taxation is a curious case, where one has to doubt the integrity of his posturing. Interestingly earlier he agreed to this project after his personal visit to Adani.
This presumptive loss business is the biggest nonsense has no economic merit other than vested political interests.
Rather, Kerala should be worried about the environmental impact of this project and its consequences. It is a known fact that every port impacts very badly to the environment around its coast with irreparable damages. Kerala should insist a permanent constitutional body to oversee and regularly audit the environmental damage by this project. That shoud be the most important priority than the presumptive loss story- a joke. Or otherwise, all the people who took government subsidies (investment) in their personal projects and farms should also start sharing the profit with the government.
NB: This story I heard when I was a child (with a little twist). One poor man got five eggs from road. He was happy and carried it back home. On the way he started dreaming that he will hatch those five eggs and then those five chickens will give him lots of eggs and money. He will hatch a hundred from those eggs and thousand thereafter and so on and so forth. So finally he will have a flourishing business of hundreds of crores with lots of houses and cars. Suddenly he was stopped by a man who introduced himself as tax man.
He told the poor man" sir according to my calculation you are liable to pay 20 crores as the tax on your profit from your business. So please pay"
Poor man got shock of his life and said: " but sir as of now I have only these five eggs with me!"
But the tax man firmly reminded him " that is your problem. The government can not incur the loss. You must immediately find the 20 crores and pay it to the government. Or else we will report this biggest corruption and tax loot for punitive action"
As the man with five eggs fainted, the crowd cheered for the honest officer.
Best of luck my country.
LikeShow More Reactions
Comment
3 comments
Comments
Navaneeth Thayyil Once again sir, you have a wrong basis of calculation. I stand with some of your opinions. But, blaming CAG for doing its job is unacceptable. 
And..once you get time, do think of the 'profits' that this government will make and the good all these 'mig
...See more
LikeShow More Reactions
Reply25 May at 10:26
Niranjan Cw I am sharing this 😊
LikeShow More Reactions
Reply25 May at 10:38
Narendra Raghunath Dear navaneeth, in the last para I join your concern about the environment. it should be the important point of concern. As far as CAG, please do not confuse, I have the highest respect for this constitutional body and its work. My only concern is the Presumptive calculation, it is a fundamentally flawed idea in economics. in any project, number projection is estimations that are subjected to optimal utilisation of resources and ideal situation of operation that is something impossible in any country as we know. Considering every year government bring budgets to amend accounting parameters itself is a pointer to the complex situation for long time projects in India. Imagine another scenario, what would happen if government calculate presumptive profit and loss on future value of share trade in stock market investment by all public sector financial institutions like LIC etc. Is it viable? same way imagine all the elected governments are made accountable for election promises! Although accountability is an important factor and its audit, economics of a nation is more than its balance sheet and account book. In any country, the Economic consideration that is a political priority should always stand above audited balance sheet. In economics many fundamental parameters like poverty, law and orde problem, war and justice can not be equated with the cost implication of the balance sheet. So the entire presumptive idea for revenue recovery calculation is a redundant economic idea.
LikeShow More Reactions
Reply25 May at 10:47

presumptive loss

1
the presumptive loss is the funniest thing invented by our CAG. During UPA time, then CAG, Rai played this game very well to meet the demands of his political leaning and created havoc in Indian economy that we are still to recover from. He invented many lakh crores of corruption in everything under this imaginative "la la land", and it all evaporated with regime change. I wonder how does one audit a projected yield/profit of a project or contract before even it materialises?
It is like counting the mangoes, pricing it and recovering tax for next hundred years from a farmer before he plants a seed!!
The government, if at all they want industries to come up in this country, must immediately take necessary steps to get rid of this nonsense.


army officer

he valour of a soldier is the moral high of his bravery not cowardice. It is a shame this officer is allowed continue to justify his cowardice act of hiding behind an unarmed man as a shield from the enemy, bringing the morale of entire army down to ashes.
What difference can you spot between the infamous Abu Ghraib and this shameful non-soldierly act? Perhaps nothing.
We have grown up hearing the stories of Arun Khetrapal PVSM, how the young brave officer fought Pakistan
"The skirmish, however, took its toll on the Lieutenant as he was hit by enemy fire, but instead of abandoning the tank he fought on destroying one final tank before he was finally overwhelmed. However, his actions had denied a vital breakthrough for Pakistani forces and instead put the Indians in a stronger position in the Shakargarh bulge. His final words over the radio to a superior officer who had ordered him to abandon his burning tank were, "No Sir, I will not abandon my tank. My Main gun is still working and I will get these bastards."[3] Then he set about destroying the remaining enemy tanks. The last enemy tank, which he shot, was barely 100 metres from his position.[3] At this stage, his tank received a second hit and he was seriously injured. The officer met his death trying to deny the Pakistani Army the intended breakthrough. Khetarpal's body and his tank "Famagusta" were captured and later returned to the Indian army. The Tank is on display now." (wiki)
and those brilliant souls of Kargil war:
And on the other hand here is this most shameful act for a soldier and how the guy gets rewarded!
Where have we taken our army and its prestige? Sad.
Speaking to the media for the first time since the incident, Gogoi said that he was responding to a distress call from the CRPF personnel posted at a polling booth in…
INDIANEXPRESS.COM