Light thoughts from the darkroom

This is about photography as a hobby - the "why" of it..
Over the last few weeks I've realised that social media has corrupted the concept of photography as a hobby.

In the absence of social media, people would've learnt any hobby as an art form or cultivated a deep expertise in it, something for personal pride.

For example, if a person were a stamp collector they wouldn't post every stamp they collected on FB or twitter.

But with photography there's the expectation of instant gratification through social media, and once we get 100 or 500 likes, it brings up the inevitable question of "What next"?

In the old world setup, there was never a "next" - you simply followed your hobby from one strength to another because you liked it and people who understood the hobby appreciated you for it. You could gather around a fireplace and share collections and chat about your prized collectibles, and maybe exchange valuable nuggets of information. You swapped stories.

That should be the unwavering focus of a hobbyist - doing it for personal pride, not for random appreciation through likes and retweets. One should develop their own treasure trove, regardless of whether others think of it as a treasure, or not. 

On Photography

Photography is about emotions, and only emotions.

Humans started recording images first by hand and then using tools & machines to convey messages and emotions. Our minds search for a message, a meaning when we look at any image. The principles that applied to rock carvings apply to paintings and photographs as well. 

You should be moved to take a picture, not because it looks pretty, not because you are at a location, not because you everyone else is taking pictures, but because you want to re-experience the same moment in the future. And because you want to trigger the same emotions in yourself, and other viewers at a later time.

Those emotions could be awe, immensity, admiration, joy, calmness, or in some cases it could be something negative like fear or loneliness. 

Pictures which evoke an emotion pull the viewer into their world unawares. The viewer is free to create their own imaginary world using the lead offered by the photo. The worlds created may be different, but the emotions, if captured well, remain the same.

So don’t keep a goal of “Taking photos”. 

Immerse yourself in the environs of where you are. Interact with the objects and life around you. Experience the atmosphere. And then, let your emotions decide what to capture. You will not only have an image to remember, but also the story behind it.

On Elections & Governance..

This is a proposal to address the political thriller that recently unfolded in New Delhi.

On the one hand we have the desire to give the Power to voters but that same power paralyses governance when the voters cannot make up their mind, thus giving a hung (confused?) mandate. It's clear that some compromise is needed when voters give a mixed mandate, and the conflicting goals are:

1. Stable government at center with enough power to drive an agenda without having to bend backwards for support

2. Allowing new entrants into the arena to prevent lethargy - so this eliminates the "winner takes all" approach

3. Protecting localised interests (ensuring the needs of the constituency are fulfilled)

4. Avoiding any additional cost burden on voters - so this eliminates the option of having re-elections

Two additional long-term goals should also be

A: Preventing the incessant spawning of new political parties each time someone gets caught taking a bribe or doesn't get a cabinet berth or gets rebuked by the party president.

B: Avoiding jumbo-coalitions - these are the bane of all governance. Coalitions are merely compromises. The best analogy for a coalition government is Treading Water. You spend a lot of energy, you get tired, you go NOWHERE.

Given that we have multiple conflicting goals, one has to prioritize. Are localised interests more important than a stable powerful government? No. Is allowing a newcomer more important than a stable powerful government? No. So clearly the first goal is the most important and the others must be compromised if the need be.

First it's important to understand that an elected representative (MLA/MP) has two duties:
A) Work in the constituency and
B) Vote on legislation on behalf of the constituency.

An MLA/MP from the party with less seats may be doing good work for the constituency but at the same time, said MLA/MP can (and will, as we have seen) paralyze legislation by making quid-pro-quo demands.

In such cases one needs to separate the two duties- basically such MLAs belonging to parties with less than 15% vote share should NOT be allowed to vote on any legislation in the assembly (including confidence vote). This will automatically give the single largest party a simple majority.

This allows the MLAs/MPs from small parties (and independents) to still do work for their constituency and also prevents them from paralysing the agenda of the government.

Over time, if the ruling party does not turn out to be good, they will be thrown out. Similarly, if the small party proves its work they will be given more votes in the next election.

With the above approach,
1. BJP would have been obligated to form the government in New Delhi (no more crying sour grapes).
2. INC would be relegated to the position of a "small party" and would have to focus on grassroots level work without paralyzing the government.
3. AAP would be in opposition and people would get to see BJP in action, while also getting a chance to see how well AAP could deliver in their constituencies. 

To those who say the "small parties" will be ignored in this approach, I ask, if they really were so important, why didn't they get more votes? Secondly, voting inherently implies "Majority wins, Majority decides". BJP and INC are antipodes, politically speaking. When INC is voted in power, it inherently means that those who voted for BJP will not get the reforms they wanted, and vice versa. The same logic should apply in the above case, so that at least the state and nation are not held hostage to the whims and fancies of some party with a handful of MLAs / MPs.

Its a shame that while so much is being said about the corruption and dirt in politics, no one is really trying to fix the root cause - the election process.

The Prisoner's Dilemma

Recently, I came across something that I see played out often in human relationships. 

Its called the 'Prisoner's Dilemma'. 

Basically, lets say two people have been arrested for theft and placed in separate cells so that they can't communicate. The following offer is made to each. “You may choose to confess or remain silent. If you confess and your accomplice remains silent you go free & your partner gets punished. Likewise, if your partner confesses while you remain silent, they go free while you get punished. 

If you both confess, you both will get punished, but a little less. 

If you both stay silent, I will let you both out with a fine, but no prison.”

The “dilemma” faced by the prisoners here is that, regardless of what the other will do, each is potentially better off individually, by confessing than remaining silent. (Take a moment and play out the cases if you like). On the other hand, if both confess, they both end worse off. 

The possibilities of substitutions are many.. For example, try replacing 

"robbing a bank" with "had a fight",
"communicate" with "read the other's mind",
"stay silent" with "admit mistake",
"confess" with "refuse to yield", 

and "go free" with "take advantage", you'll see what I mean.. 

You can even entertain & convince yourself by choosing cases like business partnerships, romantic situations, etc. 

The scenario becomes interesting when played multiple times in succession between the same 2 people. 

E.g. two people have successive fights. Maybe, after the first fight, A would admit his mistake. Now, B's reaction will determine what A does after the second fight. And so on. Its clear that if at any point either of them puts self above the other, they may benefit in that one iteration, but BOTH lose in the long run.

Then, we get to the most interesting case, where
A experiences the first iteration with B, (say, A loves B) then B cheats A
A experiences the second iteration with C,  (say, A manages to fall in love again, with C) then C cheats A too

A doesn't learn from the past and enacts the third iteration with D, (i.e. falls in love once more, this time with D) .. 

In this case, lets assume for a moment, that D is playing fair. I.e. D is not going to cheat A, and D reciprocates A's honesty. Given the past, A will almost certainly penalize D, either by being suspicious about D's intentions, or not really putting 100% into the relationship, or by just forcing himself/herself OUT of, or AWAY from the relationship as a self-defence mechanism.
D, now, in turn would go about penalizing potentially harmless people because of A.. Lets pause and think of alternatives.

There are many suggested solutions to maximize the group benefit. (You can read more, http://www.google.co.in/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=prisoner's+dilemma)

But in the context of human relationships, I see one overlooked possibility.. 

IF the two people in any iteration trust each other completely AND each cares more about the other person than themselves, there's no dilemma. 

Even in the most interesting (multi-person) case, if A can take a leap of faith after knowing D is trustworthy, A & D would both benefit. 

Spouses

i cant sleep so i've come up with a theory. There are 4 types of spouses:
1) Compromises
2) Bad
3) Sexy/Romantic
4) Friends

Compromises are the ones you marry because you don't have any other choice. Basically you decide you are better off spoiling two lives instead of one, and you strike a compromise. Forever. Its a gamble that can evolve into Spouse type #2, #3, #4 or eternal boredom. Bad spouses don't need any further clarification.

That brings us to the interesting ones- the sexy / romantic ones. The ones that make the heart go 'Ding'. The ones that make you crave for them. The ones for whom you would ..er..  you get the idea. Trouble is, unless the 'Ding'ing is mutual, the 'Ding'ed is at the mercy of the 'Ding'er. As with any relationship, the more one person gets to know how much the other adores them, the more the one who adores becomes the object of contempt and neglect for the other. The one being adored knows they have the other by the proverbial chain. So those feeling the 'Ding', ask yourself if you hear an echo. If not, you need to look out for more sonorous hearts to bounce against.

So finally we come to the "Friends". These are the ones who will hold your hand tenderly and give you a shoulder to cry on. They are the ones you know you want to be around when you can only see fingers when they are waved no farther than 5 inches away from your face. They are also the most boring ones. They won't set your passions on fire. No ding-ing around them - its more of a faint, silvery chime.

So there you have it. the four types. Its pretty much guaranteed that with #1 & #2, you were better off on your own. With #3 and #4, its interesting. You will want one, and a week later you will wish you had the other - especially when your friend has the other type. The staid back type is an eternal wuss in comparison to the dashing damsel, until of-course you hit a bump on the road - that's when the boring friend is a comfort while the dashing one has labeled you a wet blanket. But no sooner is the crisis gone, than you wish the arms you nestled in belonged to the dashing one. Thus begins the endless list of "I wish you were..." and "Why cant you be..." and thus goes the seesaw of attempted conversions ..   until one day, you can't see 5 inches ahead.

Whats in a (birth)day ?

In the run-up to my birthday, I was always wondering. Of all the 365 days in a year, whats so special about a birthday after all ? Is it the parties and pastries? Is it the gifts? Or is it a personal milestone? A gauge of experiences acquired?

This year I was in a reclusive mood. So I quietly turned off my birthday reminder on facebook, hoping that a few chosen people very close to me would still wish me nevertheless. And they did.

That's when it dawned upon me. A birthday is a celebration of what you are, what you have become. Its a humble tribute to your parents and friends - for having moulded you into somebody worth remembering. Its a day to become aware of how many people know you, and care about you enough to take the time to wish you on the Day or belatedly afterward. Or feel bad if they forget about it. Even for those with a maverick, lone-wolfy streak like yours truly, its a reminder of how perfectly barren life would be without these people and their goodwill. And its a way to bring people closer after their hectic lives and busy schedules have flung them away from each other.

So whats in a birthday? Definitely much more than just a day or a milestone. Its a 24-hour cocktail of joy & humility, a day of reflecting back and thinking about the paths our lives have trodden together. And I thank all those who called, emailed or SMS'd me for making it possible. For making me possible, over the years.

What's in the stars?

February, 2007
-------

With nothing to cook at home, my flatmate and I decided to go out for dinner, and trade stories about our recent India trips. The discussion veered to marriage and then onto a pretty controversial topic: astrology.

My flatmate and I take nothing at face value, and question things that we deem logic-defying at first glance. Astrology is something I especially love to pick holes in. But more on that later. Given my flatmate's disposition to disparage all superstitions I was surprised to learn that he was not too too hard on astrology, and whetted my appetite for an interesting discussion.

Initially he started with a cynical view of astrology, refusing to call it a science. But then again, he accepts he's young and doesn't understand everything in the world. So he's been willing to be proven wrong about astrology as well, rather than dismiss it as nonsense outright. Secondly, his approach to astrology is quite different from other people. As he sees it, there are some extreme variants of attitudes: people like me, who do not follow astrology at all, and others who only follow astrology. According to him there exists a compromise, where astrology can be used as a guide when you have multiple equivalent options with no tie-breaker. The example he gave was, say someone wants to choose a business to invest money. The person has narrowed down the options to diamond trading and fabrics. But is unable to figure out which one to go for. Such a person in the end is anyway going to go with a "gut" or instinct-based choice if not other comparator is available. In such cases, [he said] astrology could be the final comparator.

So really speaking, my flatmate suggested, astrology could be used to minimize the potential of risks when possible when no other guidelines are present to show you the way.

My immediate reaction was, a person who doesn't know what way to go needs to keep digging further. The perceived equivalence of options is always the outcome of ignorance. Case in point - the person in the example above, who was ignorant of the internals both trades. If that person would have spoken to some experienced people, he/she would have certainly received more insight which would have led to a more informed decision rather than gut based choices.

My mistrust in astrology stems from the flimsy foundations it is based upon. The so-called "science" uses a person's birth-date and time of birth to extrapolate all future incidents in his/her life. To me, a person starts life at the moment of conception - in the mother's womb. No one knows that time. Then, the definition of "birth" according to astrology itself seems flawed to me.

What if a child were born via C-Section, prematurely, say by 1 month. What birth time would you use? Would you add 1 month to get the baby's "expected" birth time and use that for astrological calculations?

The next issue is more fundamental: of the measurement of time. Astrology demands birth time be recorded down to the minute. But time as measured by humans is prone to error. And I am talking of two sets of humans: the ones who prepare the astrological charts for celestial bodies, and the ones who actually record the time of birth for a baby. There is huge potential for errors in both measurements. Nothing in nature changes suddenly. All changes are gradual. So why does it matter what exact minute you were born? What if the exit of a baby from the mother's body was accelerated by medications? To me, a one-year time resolution would have sounded more logical for astrological calculations, given that a baby already spends the first nine months of its life in the mother's body. But that's not the case.. and hence, my continued opposition to the use of astrology.

Lives and dreams are made and shattered each day by these innumerable gas giants, twinkling back innocently at us. If only they knew.. but how can they.. born from nothing and blazing away to nothingness, they don't know their own fate.

Update: October, 2014
-------
Recently, I came across a point of view that if the Moon can cause tides, it can very well affect the human mind. Other celestial bodies may have a similar effect.
My thoughts on this:

• Yes, the moon exerts a gravitational force on me and everyone else. However, that force does not depend on my Date and Time and Place of birth. The gravitational force is Equally exerted on everyone (and every object of matter) in my vicinity regardless of their birth situation. Gravity does not have precision-pointing. 
• The brain works on glucose, electrical signals, hormones and chemical reactions - i.e. bio-chemistry. Gravity does not play a part. Otherwise, the astronauts who orbit earth or have landed on the moon in the past would be demented as soon as they ascended in their rocket. 
• Humans being a highly evolved species, have brains and DNA which have adapted to handle gravity, atmospheric pressure and such environmental factors.

Impressions

Dec 02, 2010
The one who cares knows how to worry
The one who guides knows what to do
The one who understands knows when to shut up


May 1, 2010
Potential is always more enticing than fact


Jan 28, 2010
Only those with fuel get a fire; the rest just have blunt stones and scarred fingers.


Jan 22, 2010
The mind never knows what the heart wants. What the mind wants, the heart doesn't care.


Jan 21, 2010
I could have done something productive with my time. Better judgement prevailed and I took a nap.


Jan 20, 2010
Experience is the brain telling the heart "i'm the boss"; courage is when the heart sticks its tongue out and goes "pffft.."
... Confusion is when both remain silent


Jan 19, 2010
When i refuse to give up, i'm Determined. When you do the same, you are just being stubborn.


Jan 18, 2010
The sober, enigmatic fellow always gets more respect than the cheerful down to earth chap - even if both reside in the same body.


Jan 17, 2010
Don't rest on your laurels. Laurels don't smell good if you sit on 'em


Jan 16, 2010
Stuff that you acquired easily is the stuff that will stay with you the longest..
[comment] eh? like easy money, you mean?!
[response] Well. Easy money is really a misnomer. :)
Back to the status.. flip it around - if you worked hard to acquire something, you need to work harder to keep/maintain it.
Why?
To begin with, things are easy for people who have a natural talent for them. For example, I needed to take a class to learn painting, MF Hussain didnt. MF Hussain may need a class to learn PHP, I didnt :)
One has to work hard on areas where one doesnt have natural abilities. So if abilities are acquired by training, they need to be in use or else we would forget our "training". Which means, any material or emotional possessions gained by using those "trained" abilities also may go away if you work less harder.... See More
It could be the shiny new car, N-pack abs, or the pretty girl next door accepting the date. Unless you got it easy, you better be prepared to slog harder to make it stay :)


Jan 15, 2010
The bliss of madness can be appreciated only after sanity becomes a burden.


Jan 15, 2010
Sanity is not appreciated unless madness is the norm.


Jan 12, 2010
A rolling stone acquires a well rounded character


Jan 11, 2010
Its better to declare ignorance than stay silent and remain dumb.


Jan 10, 2010
The bigger challenge is not getting on the bus you want, but to evade the one that everyone wants to shove you into.


Jan 09, 2010
Holding on too long leads to burnt fingers..


Jan 08, 2010
The fittest may survive more but the happiest live better.


Jan 07, 2010
Some people rest on their laurels just because they are tired by the time they get any..


Jan 05, 2010
Loyalty is a monkey that humans love to see on others' backs and shaken off their own.


Jan 04, 2010
Failed relationships are like amputated limbs; sometimes you feel pain in the part of you that no longer exists.


Jan 02, 2010
If it seems too good to be true, have fun while it lasts..


Dec 29, 2009
Failing at the impossible can be more satisfying than success with the mundane..


Dec 28, 2009
A misogynist is created by females who wont leave him in peace after leaving him in pieces..


Dec 27, 2009
Most people are somewhat worse than they like to think but also much better than the stereotypes they are jammed into by those around them...


Dec 21, 2009
Life is defined by the continuous struggle between the audacity of hope and the tenacity of despair..


Dec 20, 2009
People mired in the past get to admire the soles of those leaping over them into the future.


Dec 19, 2009
Life in the fast lane,
A heart shattered by pain,
The peaceful glide to the eventual waterfall..
Sums it up for those who've been there, done it all


Dec 18, 2009
Half the world's problems might be solved if people actually listen to what they hear.


Dec 17, 2009
Sometimes people love the feeling of being in love rather than the actual person; the former is rooted in self-centeredness and the latter in "giving"; this small difference probably separates a purely functional relationship from a happy one.


Dec 16, 2009
Men who offer a shoulder to cry on should invest in stain resistant suits.


Dec 15, 2009
A real hobby feels like an extra-marital affair; each time you guiltily conceal your passion and return to your routine, awaiting the next tryst.


Dec 13, 2009
Pride is the most underutilised energy source - ask any politician.


Dec 12, 2009
Any one needing patience training should become a Saree salesman for a week. Few can keep a straight face after seeing their work of many hours washed away and yet indulge the next whim.


Dec 08, 2009
Emotions are the masterstroke of evolution - putting those into humans is probaby its biggest mistake.


Dec 02, 2009
Main aur meri tanhai ,aksar yeh baatein karte hain .. Tum hoti to baatein karne hi nahi deti.


Nov 25, 2009
Probably a common prelude to a proposal. 'I like her.. I like her not.. Oh to hell with it- where's my vodka?'


Nov 20, 2009
One wonders why so many who claim to have 'settled down' seem so unsettled ...


Nov 19, 2009
Life in the fast lane is fun only on unpredictable roads


Nov 17, 2009
Memories are nothing more than sirens that lure fools into crashing against the rocks of times gone by.. and be sucked into whirlpools of times that could have been...


Nov 03, 2009
There are only two religions- bachelorhood and matrimony, with enough ardent, fanatical followers on both sides scouting for converts.


Nov 01, 2009
Cynics can neither love nor hate They're the happiest, i bet.


Oct 31, 2009
I want to be a man of few words and fewer actions


Oct 20, 2009
The romantic loves madness. The pragmatic gives it a wide berth. The cynic hosts a talk show and pokes fun at both.


Oct 16, 2009
One wonders if Donkeys Light Year is a bigger distance than a plain light year. And if so why dont astronomers use it.


Oct 07, 2009
Whoever coined the term 'falling in love' was just trying to warn everyone else.


All quotes 100% original. Until proven otherwise, they are copyrighted too.

On names, marriage, family

A friend of mine is getting married, and happened to mention that she will be changing her name (same first name, middle and last names changed to husband's). Though I come from a conservative Hindu family, this struck me as particularly odd. It’s probably because every now and then, I play this little mental game of putting myself in someone else’s situation to see what I would have done.

Think about it. Go back a few hundred centuries. Assume that some spunky woman somewhere, sparked off a social revolution which led to a convention where males would change their names after marriage, so I, Mr. X Y Z, after getting married to Ms. A B C, would become Mr. X A C.

The idea makes me shiver. Not because of the implied submission to my spouse's authority. No, its probably because, to me, my full, original name is a proud reminder of my family history, a tribute to my roots. It’s a link to the ingredients that have made me what I am today.

But then again, I do have reservations about how my name works today. It has only my father’s name and his family name in it. No mention of my mother anywhere. Seems very unfair to me. The lady gave birth to me, and should at least get a mention in my name, wouldn’t you think? What if I become the President of India tomorrow? Is it only my father who will be remembered each time I sign my name?

Once I read about an interesting convention that was followed in places like Scandinavia, Wales, Iceland and Denmark. It was called the patronymic naming convention. Very simply put, a person’s last name would be the father’s name, suffixed by “son” or “datter / dotter”. Even more interestingly, Denmark has re-enacted a law that also allows a Matronymic naming convention.

It still doesn’t satisfy me though. My gripe is that only one parent is still mentioned in the complete name.

So, back to the main question. What would I have done, if I were in a matriarchal society and were to get married? Very simply, I would proudly retain my original name. Conversely, if I marry, I would happily insist that my wife retain her original name. On hearing this, another friend asked, would my children be okay with that - having a mother and father with completely different last names? I think they would. I really think they would… It would be a simple matter of getting them used to that convention. Dealing with the strange queries that would pour in from social circles would be a bigger challenge, but, to quote a famous line -- frankly, I don’t give a damn.

Finally, to wrap up: what name would our kids have? I have a simple solution in mind that probably wont hold up well in today's society - Ditch both parents' surnames; give the kids a first name, use one parent's first name as the kid's middle name, and the other parent's name as the last name. It makes logical sense, since a kid is the representation of the union of the parents. At the very least, the kids would not forget half the family tree that was responsible for their birth.

Happy new year. Why?

I am unable to fathom the sudden rush of messages wishing me a happy
new year. Call me a cynic but i dont get it. I wouldn't mind it one
bit if at the end of two thousand seven people had said it had been a
jolly good old year for in some ways it was. But what of two thousand
eight? We had a global meltdown a terrorist attack and many more
tragedies with no signs of things getting any better. How can the
clock ticking over into a new date wish all that away? I have no
problems with folks using it as a reason for revelry. Do so by all
means. I would even suggest that people start celebrating every new
day or for that matter, every new minute. Just dont be so naive or
expect me to be the same when you wish that a simple inevitable
event will suddenly make everything better. If the year is indeed good
for you, come back to me in december and enthrall me with tales of how
good the year was, over a few drinks and i'll join you in proclaiming that it was indeed a happy new year. But till then, please keep the wishful thinking away from me. For those who have spent the last minute in reading this, i wish you all a happy new minute.

--
Sent from my mobile device

.:.:.

--

If the parts are better than the sum

(This is not a hope-giving, elevating, euphoric post. More often than not, it may leave you depressed. Your last chance to stop reading is at the period after this line.)

Synergy.
Its a good thought, but the cynic in me finds it difficult to apply to myself. If I die right now, two blind people can each see through one of my eyes, theoretically my heart can pump someone else's life, my lungs may thrive elsewhere, my kidneys may save two lives, my bone marrow can save someone, and atleast one more person can get my job. And yet here I am. Which makes me wonder : Am I really worth more dead, than alive? Am I - as a whole - better than 6 or seven people who may benefit from my death? Among millions of incomplete lives, what is the purpose of my being complete? No recollection of anything stupendous. No testimony of me having made any difference to any life other than my own. Just a body of water hurtling towards an inevitable plunge into the deep. A happy memory in some peoples' lives? Yes. But a memory does not have to be alive. No one's going to want any of the things I mentioned above after I am 70 or 80 and kick the bucket - the parts would be rusted, or non-existent. So I wonder : Is today's sum of me really better than the individual parts?

.:.:.

There are four dimensions to life..

1) What you get
2) What you need
3) What you deserve
4) What you want..

You have a good shot at being happy if (1) overlaps with two or more of the factors above. But you have a jumbo-sized problem on your hands if (1) is light years away from all the remaining three.. In fact, you can pretty much scratch "what you need" from consideration. "Need" is a relative concept that degrades rapidly in the face of moderate adversity. Do you really need French bagels? Hmm, no. You could live with wholegrain bread. But then do you really need wholegrain bread? Maybe not. You could live off plain bread. But how much plain bread? Do you need 5 slices, or would just one suffice?

You can see my drift. "Need" tells you what will allow you to exist. No more. It doesnt tell you what will make you feel alive, rather than just exist. That's where what you "want" comes into play. Ofcourse, you may want all of Bill G's wealth. So you moderate the want by thinking about what you deserve. And almost everyone with a balanced mind knows what they deserve. And what pisses me off infinitely is when I am made to realise that what I deserve, may not be what I will get.

There are some things you make yourself capable of deserving by upgrading yourself. Take for example, a 5-figure income. You may not deserve one just on the basis of a college education. But, you can take the pains to become deserving of one, by getting a degree or two. But thats the farthest you can stretch that approach. You can only apply it to stuff that's objective and pliable. You cannot successfully deal with all aberrations of luck. Or society. Or religion.

Every Master's student with a 3.5+ GPA deserves a well paying job. Many didn't get one in the turmoil during 2000 - 2003. Even then, such a person could pursue a PhD, and then try or a job. There's still hope in these cases.

But take a different example. Everyone deserves good health. How many actually get it? You may be gifted enough to become a pilot, but what if you turn out colour blind? You see what I am talking about.

There are those who say "if life gives you a lemon, make lemonade". I say that's a nonsensical sound bite. A life that hands out hopeless lemons more than 50% of the time is depressing, no matter how much lemonade you try to make out of it. You are always going to find yourselves swimming upstream. And if you are like me, you are going to end up being mighty upset and disillusioned about the whole affair every once in a while. Anyways, this is just a post to get the sting caused by some unfair things that I observe around me, in lives of those I care about, and there's nothing at all I can do to change them..

Prayer

I'm a big fan of George Carlin, Robin Williams, Seinfeld and other comedians because they talk about facts and point out the follies of some of our ways. Take Carlin for example. One of his tirades goes

I've often thought people treat God rather rudely, don't you? Asking trillions and trillions of prayers every day. Asking and pleading and begging for favors. Do this, gimme that, I need a new car, I want a better job. And most of this praying takes place on Sunday God's day off. It's not nice. And it's no way to treat a friend.

But people do pray, and they pray for a lot of different things. And I say, fine. Pray for anything you want. Pray for anything, but what about the Divine Plan? Remember that? Long time ago, God made a Divine Plan. Gave it a lot of thought, decided it was a good plan, put it into practice. And for billions and billions of years, the Divine Plan has been doing just fine. Now, you come along, and pray for something. Well suppose the thing you want isn't in God's Divine Plan? What do you want God to do? Change the plan? Just for you? Doesn't it seem a little arrogant?

And here's something else, another problem you might have: Suppose your prayers aren't answered. What do you say? "Well, it's God's will." "Thy Will Be Done." Fine, but if it's God's will, and God's going to do what God wants to anyway, why bother praying in the first place? Seems like a big waste of time to me! Couldn't you just skip the praying part and go right to God's Will? It's all very confusing.

Prayer is intended to make the person feel God's presence. But we have converted prayer into a quest of self-fulfillment. We constantly pray - not to acknowledge the fact that we living beings do not control anything. We pray to ask for more. We pray to demand more. We bribe God by offering material gifts. We hold God at ransom by fasting or through self-denial of things we like. Why? Because that's what we are taught we need to do to get something. And I think we were taught wrong.

I myself pray. I don't expect the prayers to be answered, but I do it "just to be on the safe side", in case God really is listening. So in case God's listening, I choose not to waste God's time by praying for myself. I pray for those I love. I pray for things that will make their lives better. And going by my past track record, there's almost a 99-1 split - my prayers for others have worked wonders, those for myself have been a shaky-flaky affair. So I continue to pray for others.

And I dont choose a place or time to pray. I make it spontaneous. I have prayed in trains, I have prayed during meals. I think those are the best forms of prayer, the spontaneous ones. Its when you really want to feel a connection, want to make sense of what you see. And I pray when something good happens to me. Just a quick "thank you". I reckon its common courtesy to say atleast that much to a friend who helps you out.

As a signboard outside my church put it:

"Prayer does not change God's will...

It helps us understand God's ways."

.:.:.

And a blog is born.

http://wierdideasfromme.blogspot.com/

Timing

Timing, I have realised, is a state of mind. Or atleast an indicator of the contrast between what the mind wanted, and what reality presented. Our judgements about "timing" reflect how much we wanted something. The more extreme the reaction, the greater our desire. You want to go for a dinner with your spouse on your wedding anniversary, and your parents show up just as you are about to leave. Good timing for you and your parents, probably not timing for your spouse. Of course.. if it was your spouse's parents showing up, it would have been bad timing for you.. and all good news on the other end.. hm?

My mind's bit bent out of shape today due to some jet lag so this post shall end soon. But I wanted to write about this because I started, and lived my day very wierdly. I woke at 3, dozed off at four, had a few good dreams, woke up late, was jolted out of sleep by the shower that refused to spit out warm water initially, forgot the combination to my bag's lock, but remembered it just as i was about to break the bag's zipper, skipped breakfast, but reached office in the nick of time for a meeting, felt brain-dead during a meeting at 4 pm, but was perked up two hours later after hearing the wind scream outside my hotel's 46th floor gym while I jogged for a little longer than I normally can.. in the end, i realised it really didn't matter whether the timing of the event was good or not. Even if the timing was bad, the moment is gone.. all that remains is your reaction to what you wanted and what happened...

Say the truth, but..

There's an old anecdote about Birbal. An astrologer (how much ever I hate their breed, its relevant to this post) was once at a rich man's home, predicting his future. All was fine until a deep furrow appreared on his forehead and he said "Hmm. All your relatives will die before you". He was thrashed and chucked out before you could say "er ?".

Would have made me glad to participate in the thrashing, but anyways, while the guy was lamenting his own fortune, Birbal walked by, and listened to his tale. After a while, with a fake moustache, and a pagadi the astrologer was back at the rich man's home, and was ushered in. This time around, he said "Ah! Great news! You will live longer than your whole family!". By the time he was out, he was laden with jewellery and cash.

While frying my brains in meetings every day, I have realised the importance of saying things nicely. For example, rather than saying "We are sorely lacking on the depth planning and delegation in our execution", I say "In addition to all we are doing, we need to add more depth and delegate better." I have seen it work wonders even with the nastiest of people. Try it sometime. Don't say something's "cheap". Call it "economical" or "value for money". Dont say what you could not do. Talk about what you *did* do.

Ofcourse, take it all with a pinch of salt. Don't say your boss "Is good, and could be better". Just say (s)he sucks, if (s)he really does. And if you are asked "do you really love me?" start chewing gum and act as if you are choking on it..

Me and the folks in the team started discussing origins of religions over coffee, and I made a statement "I'm an accidental Hindu".. it caused a bit of a stir as people tried to figure it out. All I trying to say is, no one belongs to a religion at birth. We just "happen" to be Hindus or Muslims or Jains or Jews.. and ofcourse, there's the question of multi-religious parents.. what happens then?
Here's an interesting page:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/30953/questions_and_answers_about_raising.html

A riddle

The dogs on my street have convened a conference and seem to be debating something important. So I've pretty much kissed my sleep good bye. Which isnt too bad.

Given the excess time on hand, I started mulling over a couple of tricky spots I've been in. I'll drum up an analogy.

Lets say you see me walking on the road, and there's a tree ahead of me in full sight. You call out to me, and right then I bump into the tree. Who's fault is it? Mine, yours, or the tree's ?
Ah. Hold that thought. I haven't told you that I bumped into the tree because I slipped on a banana peel. So who's fault is it now ?

"We see the world not as it is, but as we are.."

Stumbled across a good post. Most would find it very true. Atleast I did. For example, when we try to help or advise others.. we think we understand their point of view.. In my experience, however hard I tried, I was seeing their world with tinted glasses. Which bothered me somewhat. It meant when I was asking others for advice, despite their best intentions, they might have been telling me what they would have done with their life... and there's a case in point.
URL

Of people and situations..

To me, its a logical analysis of my experiences thus far. But some may perceive this as a negative post. So be warned, before you dig in.

--

Life depends on three pillars.. you, the people around you and the situation (or environment). Without confidence in yourself you are pretty much done. There's no debate there. Lets dwell on the other two.

It would be nice if one could have the right people around you, and be in great situations all the time. I dream of that sometimes. I'v heard many others do as well. Anyways, assuming you are of a stoic, steady heart and mind, and as always, life puts you at a fork where you have two choices:
A) Great situation, not so great people
B) Great people, not so great situation
What do you choose?

You may claim these are not mutually exclusive cases, but really, they are, almost 70 to 80 percent of the time. I had the choice of staying in a great situation - as technical director, master of my domain, established relationships in the industry, ensured of a good future; except, I stayed half the world away from almost everyone I trusted and loved. That's Exhibit A.

Or, I could go to the people I cared about, and risk entering a fiercely competetive, completely unknown industry, with colleagues I had only spoken with on the phone, unsure of the future. Exhibit B.

How does one choose? A comfortable situation is great. Many pine for it. But to me, its no use if you do not have people to share it with, or to turn to for advice, or comfort. And I'm not referring to a single person. You need friends to hang out with. You need family to appreciate and care for you.

On the other hand, even if you are in a tough spot, if you have the right people with you, those same people will see you through. Tough situations can be overcome. They may lead to other tough situations as well. But you end up winning because the synergy drives you on.

There's a more subtle distinction. Situations can always change for the better or the worse. Good situations can quickly become bad. Ask a stock market trader, or the star developer who's high-profile product crashed during its launch. But good people never turn bad. No matter what you do, they will stick by you.

And then there's the challenge and moral boost. I would rather have the "Yes I DID it" surge after overcoming a tough patch in life, and appreciating those who matter, rather than ponder "hmm. another decent day. Watched a movie, did shopping, food music, Good for me." before dozing off to sleep. But that's just me..

Its not an easy choice. Once in a while a person has to choose the situation over the people: you have compulsions and obligations that force you to take those decisions. You even have to go into a cyclic pattern. But in the long run, if you look around, those who gravitate towards their people are probably the ones with more smiles on their faces..

(p.s.: I would like to acknowledge Rahul, a close friend who was largely responsible - by sharing his experiences - and helping me realize these subtleties when I was taking my decisions)

Outsourcing social work

The post below is written in the spirit of "Its better to be satisfied than just feel good. But its better to feel good, than not feel at all.. "

Having said all I say below - I still remain on the hunt for a way to directly make an impact in some way beyond money, so that I can feel satisfied, not just good about it. 

Suggestions most welcome.
--
Still mulling over my last post, I started comparing the two countries I have lived in. One, a capitalist behemoth, whose supremacy is being challenged daily. The other, a pseudo-socialist setup, increasingly flirting with capitalism, in a sort of "I love it... I love it not" phase.
What makes the US tick is the fact that they have perfected the art of blending money, vision and talent to achieve a heady mix. So a company manufacturing PCs does not hesitate to hire a CEO (Lou Gerstner) who's resume doesn't have a byte of IT related experience. Lou didn't need to know nor try to learn programming or chip design to take IBM out of the doldrums. He didn't have the time. Instead, he used IBM's money to build a team of technical superstars who knew their jobs well.

Whizzing around to that conundrum called India, which has everyone sucking their thumbs in awe and fear, I thought of my own dilemma. I have a small vision: that I should be able to change someone's life for the better. Thus far, I have tried to implement that vision on my own. I have tried contacting NGOs, visiting them on weekends, running with their logos. But largely, my goal of making a direct impact has been largely unachieved, because I cannot shirk my other duties, nor take enough time out of my job to do something meaningful. But there are others who are wizards at this sort of work. They eat, think, and live in terms of figuring out the next better way to help the underprivileged. They are the ones who are willing to spend a day slugging it out at a BMC office, filing an RTI appeal to find out what happened to the 12 crores that were earmarked for Mumbai's public schools. My guess is they do not have the resources to do their tasks well.

So why can't we apply Lou's example here? I have belonged to the "noble brigade" where people don't believe in "throwing money at the problem" and "doing something" about it. Frankly, I can do nothing about it except on weekends. Which is useless in all ways. And from personal experience, I know that those who belong to the above-mentioned group end up neither contributing nor acting upon their vision. To all such people, I'd like to say that its time to outsource social work. Life is short, by the time you have more time, you will no longer have the energy or money to be of any use. So do what you can, now. You have the money, give it to some charity that fits your vision of how to use it, let them execute.

The dilemma

Having plonked down 2000-odd rupees (that's approximately 2000-odd dollars, in six-month's time I guess. Today its 50 dollars) for a pair of ruff-n-tuff woodland shoes I trekked out of the mall when I noticed a beggar with a kid laid out in front of her. By sheer habit I breezed out of her path, fuming at the atrocity of the woman, using her kid to beg. But two steps later i remembered there was a bandage around the kid's head. And my conscience started pricking me. I pulled myself further away, only to make a u-turn to go back to the beggar. Tried asking her what was wrong with the kid (I wasn't ready to just throw money at the problem.) But she couldn't understand me and simply kept on pleading.

Finally, I relented in frustration and gave her 10 rupees. Why not hundred? I dont know. I'd just run 6 Km in a CRY t-shirt. But somethng withing me kept revolting at the idea of giving money and putting the scene past my mind. Even now, I'm not sure what I should've done back then. Should I have called a doctor? In hindsight, maybe. Which doctor? Dont know. It was a Sunday evening. The only possibility was the government hospital. Didn't the woman know that?

I do not know that either. Except, despite having silenced my consience, I still continue to feel guilty somewhere.

Eureka

I'm known to ramble theoretically about real life things. So here's another theoretical thesis.

We all agree love goes through phases.. You have the 'Boing!' moment where you see someone and you feel light in the head. Then you have a crush.. (i'd like to meet the chap who coined the term. I want to have a crate of whatever he was eating or drinking that day. It must have been a guy. Guys are precise and to the point. Crush. Darn. Heck. Cool. etc. Simple guy words, conveying the entire meaning.)

After getting crushed you have the "impress" round. It works both ways. Girls flapping their eyelashes and putting their charming ways on display and guys flashing their muscles or motorbikes and relieving their parents of their hard-earned money to buy gifts.

Your sole desire in life is now to be with the other person, hear them speak and brainstorming with some poor soul about how to "get things going your way"..

Somewhere in between, comes a phase, where you love the other person so much, that you start feeling its best to start keeping a distance from them. You realise (s)he is perfect, what you have between you is perfect, and start feeling afraid that knowing each other to a greater degree will destroy all that exists between you. You no longer desire to "spend the rest of the life together until death do you apart".. Rather you now want the other person to have THE perfect life.. which ofcourse, you, now know isnt possible with you (because neither of you is perfect, remember?)..

Ok, Eureka moment over. What do you do when you hit this bend ? Do you spend the rest of your life pining for the other person and watch them marry someone else, or do you marry them, and after your first fight (hey. where there's a marriage there's a fight. Many fights.), start thinking the one you love might have been happier with someone else? The selfish part of me would choose to marry no matter what. The caring part of me might choose to let go rather than be the cause of any unhappiness to the other person..

On engineers..

There's an old anecdote. Probably fabricated..
The CEOs of 5 major software firms boarded a plane. Minutes before takeoff, each was informed that the plane used some software components designed by their firm. Each of them promptly remembered something urgent and walked off. Except the last one. "How many flights have you had so far?" he asked. "27 on this plane" said the stewardess.

"Ah. Then I'm good. You may want to take a holiday on the 30th one."

I was reminded of this while at the doctor's yesterday. Wasn't there for me.

I wanted to try the same exercise on whoever created us. You know, walk up and ask.. "Er. This body was created by you. Care to live in it ?". I hope God wouldnt walk away. No, God wouldn't. God would know what exactly would cause the body to break and stay away from all problems. Sadly, we weren't exactly handed an owner's manual at birth, and never know what's up next round the corner. Got to admit though, God's arranged for some pretty brainy engineers to maintain stuff.

Anyways.. I'll keep this short. Thought the analogy was interesting so put it up here. Here's wishing everyone a healthy life, or atleast access to a good doc.

On Existence

I think life in itself is a random set of occurrences...

The power we call God can be thanked when things go right, but just the same, we will never know how and why we got created, why sometimes things go right, and at others they simply dont.. Just like we wont know why apples are red, goats bleat and babies babble.

Forget days, the one lesson I'v learnt is you can do nothing about the minute that went by, or the one that will be coming your way. All you can do is make the right decision in your "now".

We can never try to explain God, because there's always a suspicion that probably, God doesnt exist. We can never tell for sure. My mind's fickle. I get promoted, or a loved one sends in good news, I feel "Yes there's a God". I see a kid starving on the road or a 21 year old friend dying, and I feel there cannot be one - if I, a mere human can melt at that sight, how can an all powerful God just stand by and watch?

I may be debating the wrong issue. It doesn't matter if God exists or not. I exist, and that's what matters.

I'v pondered on my mortality often, while trying to figure out the meaning of my existence. I wondered if anyone would miss me.I kept thinking back wondering of I had made a difference to the world.. I think the answer to those questions is yes.. and as long as that remains the case, I dont care if I were to fall dead the next minute..

The right approach, in my esteemed opinion (too many people say "in my humble opinion" anyway. If they are so humble, why offer their unsolicited opinion). Anyways. In my Esteemed Opinion, its best to play each ball on its own merit, and live each day the same. Some days you hit six sixes an over, some days the umpire fouls up and gives an LBW. What matters is the applause as you return back to the pavilion.

Opportunity of a Lifetime

"What does your surname mean?", was the innocent question.

Frankly, like countless last names, I have no idea what mine means, and have no idea why some ancestor of mine thought it appropriate enough to append to his first name. Maybe people in those days were in the habit of rattling pebbles in a tin can and creating last names that sounded like the resulting noise. Me and my last name have twisted many an American tongue. Mercifully, my first name's much simpler (though the aforementioned American tongue slipped often on that too). But I digress.

I was busy baking my noodle about my last name's meaning, when I had an epiphany, much like the shoe salesman who went to Africa and called back saying

"Great news Boss!! NO ONE wears shoes!!"

So I had a last name that meant nothing nothing to me, much less to anyone else. Twisting the point around, the question was no longer what it meant. The real question was, What did I want it to mean....

Roughly speaking, given that I have spent 30 years so far, and probably have an equal amount left, that is a good question to ask. What better way to leave behind a legacy, than one created through your actions..

Take for example, the word Tata. You say that name, and you think of vehicles, finance, software, watches, the works. And ofcourse, Tata Young (but thats a completely unrelated story). Who cared what Tata meant, until a chap named Jamshed arrived on the scene. For that matter, who cared what JRD or Ratan meant until they arrived on the scene. But each of them gave a unique meaning to their names. Veni, vidi, vici, vi-name. They came, they saw, they conquered, and they redefined their names to mean something much more that before.

No one knows my last name today, and the only reaction I get when people hear it, is a blink followed by a confounded look. Given 30 years, I could start a school or an orphanage, I could become a writer, I could become an accomplished musician, come to think of it, I could become the President. Or I could simply while away the remaining half, doing nothing meaningful, and slip into oblivion. Thus far, I used to kindof detest the meaninglessness of my last name.. But the chance and choice of imparting a meaning to my meaningless last name, has become an opportunity of my lifetime..

Why is 'He' not an 'It' ?

In my school days we used to have a prayer that went
"Our father in Heaven,
Holy be thy name.." and so on.

Looking back, I am puzzled why and how someone ever thought there was only a 'Father' in heaven. And no Mother. Basic biology suggests that a Father cannot be a Father without a mother in the first place. And humans, being intended to be an image of God, the converse should apply too - (ignore for a moment, that a cat also might think there's a Cat with 10 arms up in the air somewhere, with a slain dog at its feet).

But no. The powers that be, have decided that all religions should have a single supreme male deity. In my own religion, Hinduism, we have one male creator - Brahma - who, seemingly creates people to earn his paycheck. Finally, we have one thing on which some religions agree, and it ends up being the wrong thing.

The whole thing seems a sham, if you ask me - nothing more than testosterone and gender politics at work. Else, how can you explain why there's no female Pope, why no one has ever pondered the absence of a Daughter of God (how could a Father be so partial), why there's no female power in Islam, why most Hindu female deities (there are 1 or two exceptions) have second-class roles (like there's a Goddess for wealth, another for wisdom, but they more or less seem to sit by smiling while the all powerful male gods get all the fancy weapons to destroy evil in Hindu mythology), and why Adam was created first, not Eve, and why Eve gets the blame for the apple-eating - was Adam's mind out grazing grass at the time?

This is important. Because what we learn in our temples, mosques and churches affects our outlook in society. We are being primed by religion to assume male supremacy from the day we start taking cognizence of the world around us. Coupled with illiteracy and ignorance, this is the stuff that eventually leads to crimes against women - be it female foeticide or rape. A friend of mine recently had an outburst "All guys should be reborn as women some day". I find justification in her outburst. Society takes great pains to embed the thought that only a Man can be a Supreme Being. Perhaps, it would really help if one of the Shankaracharyas were to be reborn as a woman. For good measure, lets hope ALL the four Shankaracharyas are reborn as women. I bet they'd break into a cold sweat at the thought.

Religion seems to have eliminated all traces of female authority and relegated women to bearing and rearing children (Parvati, the consort of Hinduism's uber-god Shiva apparently created a new son to guard her. Hmm. She didn't think a daugther would be as effective?). No matter how liberalised women may seem to be, at the end of the day, they are forced to worship a 'He' and ask 'Him' for blessings or forgiveness. Think of it, there's no single religion that was ever lead by a woman. Or maybe there were many, but they got all squashed out. All this brings one of George Carlin's commentaries to mind. To paraphrase,
"War, crime, poverty, disease... do not belong on the resume of a supreme human being. In any other decently run universe, this guy would be out of a job in no time. And I say this 'guy' because no woman could or would ever muck things up like this.".

If God is really a "He' and not an 'It', men ought to be ashamed.

Reverse gear

This has been an email that never fizzles out. I received yet another version of it today, and having run out of things to talk about, decided to put it here.

I want to live my next life backwards.

You start out dead, and get that out of the way.
Then you wake up in an old age home, feeling better every day.
Then you get kicked out for being too healthy.
You enjoy your retirement and collect your pension.
Then, when you start to work, you get a gold watch on your first day.
You work 40 years until you’re too young to work.
You get ready for high school, drink alcohol and party, and are generally very social.
Then, you go to primary school, become a kid, play and have no responsibilities.
Then you become a baby.
Then, you spend your last nine months floating peacefully in luxury in spa-like conditions, central heating, and room service on tap.

I rest my case.

-Author Unknown-


(In case of any copyright infringements, please let me know and I shall either take it down or seek permissions from the original author. A similar quote has been attributed to one Robert Benson.)

On Religion

Multiple reasons and incidents have prompted me to mull the place of religion in my daily life - anti-conversion debates, religious leaders issuing commands to people to increase their respective populations and so on, just to name a few.

So, to start with, what is Religion? Its a framework of principles and beliefs that came into existence due to the need for man to assign a meaning and discipline to life, to allow people to live life according to some rules, to give people something to hold on to during difficult times, and to allow for the creation of a society that can offer mentors to provide spiritual guidance at crossroads in life.

I believe all religions started off either as a set of rituals and practices followed by groups of people (for example Hinduism), or as a set of tenets preached and developed by founders of those religions (such as Buddhism, Jainism, Christianity, Islam etc). If you look for the lowest common factor, all religions define certain rules that a follower must follow and define rules and guidelines that define what the religion considers "good" and "bad". All these principles differ from religion to religion. So Hinduism says you can't eat beef or pork, Jainism forbids consumption of any animal-based foods, to cite a few examples.

One has to bear in mind, that such definitions of "good" and "bad" were based on the thoughts of the founders of the religion. But, the followers of those religions should also exercise their own logic to decide whether those rules are really meaningful or not. So, for example, if tomorrow I (born a Hindu) have nothing to eat, I would have no qualms in consuming beef or pork, since I know God doesn't want me to die of starvation. Starving because someone told me "my" God doesnt want me to consume beef is absurd. This train of thought also leads us to conclude that following or not following a religion is in no way connected to a person's belief in God.

Having stated those basic points, the next point to ponder is whether many of these religions have to really be mutually exclusive? Why should a person follow only one religion? Why cannot I be a Hindu, a Christian and a Muslim (Moslem) and follow all the things that I find good in these religions? Why is religion considered a part of my most fundamental identity? To offer an example, why do Hindus not name their children Paul or Abdul or Catherine; -- and so on, even for followers of other religions?

The question can be broadened further to challenge the relevance today's religions. The rituals in all religions were laid down centuries ago, by people who were probably unaware of a lot of things about the world. They were also unaware of the existence of other civilizations. For example, the founders of Christianity or Islam had no way of knowing Aryans had started establishing their own religion somewhere in Asia, and vice versa. Given that, there is a need for people to start understanding that religion is not what defines them, that a person belonging to another religion is inherently that same as they themselves are, and has just been subjected to a different ideology due to the society and family into which they were born. No one's religion can bind a person. Indeed, a person can follow any number of religions as they choose, if they wish to. So why the talk about conversion and anti-conversion, why not just stop categorising a person by their religion? If a person can follow a profession of their choice, why not allow them to also follow the religion(s) of their choice too? If I am disillusioned by my religion, then why cannot I simply switch to another religion whose principles I find more appealing and logical? Why do people make such a big fuss about conversions?

Today, there is the need for people to start going beyond their own religious beliefs. Indeed, there is the need for religious leaders to start encouraging their followers to experiment with other religions. Ofcourse, that's a wish that will never come true, since every religious leader wants to propagate their own faith. Given which, its up to normal people to start experiencing and embracing multiple faiths voluntarily, to enrich our lives and minds, if nothing else. Ultimately, what matters is whether a person has the courage to follow their conscience, doesn't it?

On Marriage

Many people close to me have reminded me that I am still single, and painted scenarios that would result from my staying single for long. Suggestions pour in, about registering online on marriage websites, meeting people and so on, so I can hopefully like someone.

I know the concern is well intended, so my questions have been simple:

• What would be the basis of my marriage: necessity / compulsion, or love? If I got married to someone I dont even know, love or care about, would I be happy?
• Do you really understand the kinds of issues I face on a daily basis, and my priorities in life, to suggest that marriage is the panacea for all those problems?
• What if I follow your advice, meet someone, and I like her and she doesn't like me, and then I become sad, because she rejects me. I have been through that, but atleast I fell in love in a natural way, and it was a great feeling. Why should I put myself through pain intentionally here?

The reactions are varied. I've been told, a "good" spouse would guide me, be my equal and we could together build a better future for ourselves and our respective families. Possible, given a 50-50 chance.

But, does that mean I should actively start hunting for a spouse? Should I start abandoning my work duties, my family duties and go about evaluating people and getting myself evaluated like you would, say, look for a good shirt by going to different stores? (and by the way, there's no money-back policy here for both the people if you don't like the offering later). Even if we assume the answer to that is "yes", how does one even evaluate a "potential spouse" ?

Here's my issue: Two people are trying to get acquainted, without any prior knowledge of each other. They have their own ideas of how to live life. Each of them is also under a lot of pressure from family and society to get married by a certain age. Naturally, they take the "project-based" approach and try to set a deadline by which they would try to understand the person and see if they can get along.

I don’t think its fair to set a "deadline" within which people are supposed to decide if they like each other - it’s just not natural. Marriage should be based on love, caring, trust and faith. These emotions must grow within people. How can all these emotions develop in the span of say, a month? You can maybe start liking a person in a month. Then you get to know their good side and their bad side. So do you spend 3 months to evaluate someone? What if at the end of 3 months you figure out that things are not working out though you initially thought they would, and now, you are already emotionally involved? I find the emotional tangle quite scary and disturbing, more so, because its self-inflicted.

Another undercurrent makes me feel queasy about the process. When people meet with marriage on their mind, there's a subconscious desire to project your best side, and make yourself as appealing as possible to the other person while at the same time evaluating them. It’s mostly unintentional, but it’s invariably there at the start. Above all, it also means that any initial feelings and expectations about the other person are not based on what the person really would be in normal, natural circumstances. How justified is it to decide to live one's entire life on such a flimsy foundation? Would I be able to confide in such a person? Probably not.

To me, its always been more important to marry because (and only if ) you love someone. If you love someone, you love them not despite, but because of their faults as well. It’s like watching your favorite movie. You watch the whole thing even if some parts are not very likeable just by themselves. Similarly, the good and bad things about a person make that person loveable – at least, that’s my way of looking at it. And I say it from personal experience. So converting marriage from an experience to a process seems very wierd. And marrying to cure loneliness sounds like fitting a round lid on a square hole.

For now though, marriage is not a goal, nor is finding an object to shower my love upon. Rather, I prefer to wait, till someday I love someone who also loves me back.

On aiming right

Lets start with a contrived tale.

A kid wanted to learn aiming his slingshot. A friend of his was an expert so the kid asked the guy to teach him. The two of them went to the backyard and the expert said “You see that small temple, right? We worship there, don’t hit it.” So the kid promptly took aim at the fellow’s dog, which yelped in pain and scurried off. The expert was livid with anger “Now what made you do that!” he fumed. The kid said “Why didn’t you tell me not to hit the dog also? Better, why don’t you just tell me what to hit, instead?”

If you think of our minds as the kid, our bodies and brains as the slingshot, our efforts as the stones aimed by the slingshot, you may realize we sometimes behave like the “expert” who knows what not to aim for, rather than the other way round.

The thought dawned upon me over the past couple months as I spent a lot of time in soul-searching and goal finding. I needed to figure out what I wanted to be and how I wanted to live my life. Over time I had jotted down quite a few thoughts such as “I don’t want to remain a software programmer all my life”, “I don’t want to stay in USA forever”, “I don’t want to have to worry about money in the future”, “I don't want to be lonely”, and “I don’t want to marry just for the sake of getting married”.

Along the way, I noticed that most of my thoughts were stated in a negative way. Rather than go towards a definite target, I was trying to go away from something: be it my current job profile, future financial insecurity, loneliness or making mistakes in marriage. The thing to note is, though I wanted to away from unwanted things, there was nothing I wanted to go towards. With nothing to aim for, I ended up stagnating in the same place where I was, away from unpleasant things, but not anywhere close to the things that would make my life better.

And so I started feeling frustrated. Life became a drag, like a stream on which I was simply a log taking a ride, knowing only how to avoid getting stuck in the bushes and creepers, but not knowing where I was going, and worse, not knowing where I wanted to go.

So I tried eliminating negative goals. For example, rather than say “I don’t want to be a software programmer”, I tried “In the next 3 years I want to analyze and design applications, interact with customers and manage development teams; following which I want to move into upper management”. Rather than say “I don’t want to marry just for the sake of getting married” I tried “I want to only marry someone I love, understand and care about”. Instead of “I don’t want to stay in USA forever”, and “I don’t want to have to worry about money in the future”, I substituted “I will return to India after I save 20-30 grand more, over the next 2 years”. And I committed myself to re-evaluating all these goals every 2-3 months. Because life changes, and you have to adapt accordingly.

It was very hard at first, I must admit, because I was approaching specifics. Just like an obese body refuses to be driven to activity, my mind was used to the comfort of being non-specific, and wanted things to stay that way. But once the inertia was eliminated, the difference was astonishing. Just by restating goals in a positive way, I had narrowed my aims to a set of targets I wanted to achieve. Realizing those targets was now only a matter of making the right choices and putting in the right amount of effort. Even better, in the process, I began to understand my abilities, my feelings, my desires; I realized I wanted to pursue some hobbies and enrich my mind - I began to understand myself. And the joy of those discoveries can only be experienced, not described.