Leadership in 'Kaliyug'

'संघे शक्ति कलौ युगे'
I read the above quote in some context (I have forgotten the context now) when I was a child and had just begun to study Sanskrit as a part of my curriculum. I could never really grasp its meaning or significance beyond the rhetoric of 'strength lies in unity'.
But, this quote seems to assume rather new meanings in today's context. It seems to tell me that we no more need the much celebrated quality of leadership. Well, in order to delve further into the argument, it is imperative to define leadership. To be honest I have not bothered to find out the academic or dictionary definitions of the term. But is there an all-encompassing definition of leadership that exists? I doubt it. 


As a child, a leader for me was a person in power or trying to assume power. The one who gave speeches during elections and huge crowds gathered to hear him (it was usually 'him'). I myself sat as a seven year old with my grandfather in the front row of such crowds and listened to Laloo Prasad on the first day and Murli Manohar Joshi on the very next day. These people who appeared on televisions and newspapers were standing there in the local football ground in Gomoh. No wonder crowds gathered, just to watch them  raise their fists in the air and shout slogans (I obviously do not remember what those slogans were). In Laloo's case, however, it was the helicopter that pulled greater numbers.
After coming back from such election rallies my grandfather used to tell me stories about the leaders he saw in person when he was a child. He told me about a dark lady who was fluent in several languages and when she made speeches, the crowds fell silent. He also told me that those leaders were loved, so loved that the train compartment in which my grandfather was travelling fell silent when these words were announced on  radio - 'अभी-अभी किसी पागल ने बापू को गोली मार दी है'. My grandmother says she was cutting vegetables   in the aangan and her knife fell down when she heard the news. Nobody had food that day.


See, leadership was already a confusing concept. But, it got really muddled when I attended the leadership camp organised by Rotary club at the age of around fourteen, where I was told that anybody could be a leader. It could be a doctor who treated patients, a teacher who taught students, an engineer who built bridges...so on and so forth. I don't remember if they distinguished between non-leader doctors, teachers and engineers and the ones who were leaders. But, yes the whole aim of this exercise was to make us 'realize' that we all needed to seek leaders within us. As I grew up, I found countless such leadership development programmes, in colleges, at workplace. Leadership training is a profession for many. I wonder what teachers do nowadays in schools and colleges! There are books that talk about it, but strangely I have never seen the authors of these books anywhere else other than the books' cover pages. I wonder if Gandhi, Sarojini Naidu, Lenin wrote such books and offered a calculated recipe to become a leader.


The futility of this concept struck me when I started working with rural women who were organised into Self-Help-Groups by the NGOs. Yes, these women needed the NGOs to market their products, for they did not know the rules of the market (I doubt if the NGOs did). But, I could see the mute protest in their eyes and their demeanor when an 'outsider' told them to do the job  in a 'certain' way; the job they had been doing all their life. And moreover, these outsiders claimed the lion's share of the profits as well. I could also see them protest, in not so mute ways, when someone among them assumed leadership roles and tried to tilt the balance of power.


The point is whether it is business leadership or political leadership, a 'leader' makes sense when there are followers to follow him/her. With the growing cynicism towards leaders on one hand and every second person being moulded into a 'leader' on the other hand, I wonder if we need leadership at all. Don't we need collective efforts for an inclusive growth instead? And don't we simply need good intentions? A little love and a lot of selflessness. Well, the nuances of the latter call for yet another discussion altogether...

Who decides....

So, we are having a national debate on whether we should let Aruna Shanbaug 'live' or not....


I remember supporting Euthanasia in every debate, because I was under the impression that Euthanasia encompasses a person's right to choose his/her own death, essentially free will which nobody should interfere with. 
Today, when I googled it, I found it classified into three types. As per an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, 'Buddhism, euthanasia and the sanctity of life', " Euthanasia can take three forms: voluntary, involuntary and non-voluntary. Euthanasia is voluntary when it is carried out at the request of the person killed. Sometimes this may be scarcely distinguishable from assisted suicide; other times people wanting to die may be physically incapable of killing themselves. Euthanasia is involuntary when the person killed is capable of consenting to her own death but does not do so. Euthanasia is non-voluntary when the subject is unable to consent: for instance, because she is a severely handicapped infant, or because she is an irreversibly comatose adult who has omitted to specify previously how she wished to be treated in such an eventuality." 
Another essay in Ethics in Practice: An Anthology gives a much more personal description about the kinds of Euthanasia, "Suppose I ask you to either kill me or let me die should my condition get so bad that I am delirious and wont recover. If you then comply with my request, we have what is commonly called Voluntary Euthanasia. Now suppose that I slip into an irreversible coma without ever telling anyone, whether I wanted to be killed in such circumstances. If I am then killed or let die, we have what is commonly called Non-Voluntary Euthanasia.But, what if I do express a desire not to be killed no matter how bad my condition gets. Then killing me would constitute what is called Involuntary Euthanasia.
Thank God we are dealing with Non-Voluntary euthanasia for now, and not the Involuntary one! Else, I would have been compelled to believe that we have turned into cold-blooded monsters from the cold-hearted, apathetic, silent observers, which we are currently. 
There exists a very fine line of difference between Non-Voluntary and Involuntary killings executed in the name of 'Mercy Killings'. Who decides if the coma is 'irreversible', who decides if the patient would have wanted such a fate, should she be capable of giving her consent. Can we conveniently decide that the verdict given under the purview of the current scope of medical science, with respect to a person's medical condition is irrefutable and final. Can we claim with absolute certainty that Aruna Shanbaugh does not have a trace of human feelings left within her when she 'relishes fish and occasionally smiles when she is given non-vegetarian food' or when it appears as though 'she likes listening to songs by Sadguru and grimaces if the tape records were switched off '....
Who exactly are we to decide that Aruna Shanbaug should not live beyond this point...that there is no fighting spirit alive in a faintest corner of her existence...that she should die with 'dignity'?

...what was dead was hope!

Outlook publishes an article claiming that the 'encounter' of Maoist leader Cherukuri Rajkumar, pouplarly known as 'Azad', was nothing but a 'cold blooded execution' by the state. Fake encounters are not new to the history of insurgencies in India, especially the Maoist movement. However, I am quite intrigued by the fact that these exceutions are considered perfectly acceptable to a lot of people who claim to be aware and educated. The same people who advocate human rights and assert the rights of independence in a democratic world, consider these murders as a fairly just way of dealing with 'terrorists' like Azad who pose a grave 'threat' to their 'peaceful' world if left alive for trials. And i am intrigued by the fact that this happens in a country where cases on rich American CEOs responsible for thousands of deaths and generations of physical deformities, continue for more than two decades, ending with a mockery of the country's judicial framework.
It hurts that our blood does not boil at these unspeakable crimes against humanity and we have the audacity to call ourselves the torchbearers of the new world of hope and freedom.

Identities we are 'born' with...

Continuing with the question of identities...
There are identities that get mutated at various levels, changed in varying situations, overcome by individuals and communities. The identities of caste, religion, sect, language, nationality and so on.

The awareness of one's religion gets numb in the struggle to survive and urge to succeed. It surfaces when we happen to attend (rarely) the ceremonies or festivals. It also surfaces stealthily when our friends following other religions celebrate theirs.
The identities of caste are more often than not belittled by the equations of power and money. However they do surface quite often and do so in a wide range of situations from arranging marriages to alluring voters.
Similarly identities of languages and nationalities often blend and blur their boundaries in this era of rapid globalization.

But, there are identities that do not conform to this pattern.
Identities that are overwhelming, identities that are 'inseparable'. The identities that speak most eloquently throughout the span of our existence and control the power dynamics governing our lives. Identities we find impossible to ignore, overcome, supersede.
One such example is the identity borne out of our sexuality. Do we ever ignore the fact that we are a male/female or a third gender? Least of all the latter. While the equations of male/female identities have been much discussed and debated, it is the third gender that calls for our attention due to our inability of overcoming the identity of sexuality. It is the third gender that bears the wrath of our being overwhelmed with our sexualities.
Do we ever wonder why are we not able to acknowledge them as humans? Perhaps because we hardly acknowledge ourselves as humans. The identities of being a male or a female homo sapien conveniently supersedes that.

Clear Air Clear Water !!!

Have you ever tried pranayama? Oh no! I am not one of the Baba Ramdev followers (although he has become synonymous to it or vice versa!), neither am I asking you to be one. But, nevertheless, pranayama happens to be one of the wonderful forms of yoga which produces amazing results, increases your stamina, builds immunity, helps the body combat serious illnesses and (to cut short) keeps you healthy.

Well, I am not writing this article to reiterate the advantages of pranayama. What I intend to do is to recount my first experience with anulom-vilom. It is a type of pranayama in which you inhale from one of the nostrils, hold your breath for a while, let the air fill inside your lungs and then exhale from the other nostril. When I tried the above exercise, I could actually feel air entering each and every bronchiole of mine. Not only was it one of the most refreshing experiences I have had, but it also made me realize how valuable a gift is it to have a bountiful of clear air around you, and how often do we overlook its presence in our lives. Don’t we always take it for granted, the presence of clear air, clear water around us?

It is high time that we pause and ponder for a moment, consider a situation when we would cease to have these wonderful gifts of nature. Of course, the moment does not stand beckoning in the realms of the very next day. Neither does it in the near future. But, it is not too far either. But, obviously we remain so oblivious of the fact. Don’t we? After all we believe in living in the present! So we do not think for a second when we throw a polyethylene bag or a wrapper on the road, or drive alone in a car to the office instead of a car pool which seems so sub-standard.

We do not feel an iota of guilt while irreversibly poisoning the world, the world we are going to leave for our coming generations, a legacy we ought to be ashamed of. But, we need not have to answer anybody? Do we? We belong to a generation that lives in the present, lives life to its fullest. Is not it?

The ‘Naxal Threat’: As we call it!

It is neither easy, nor ordinary when the hands that plough the fields choose to raise guns. The incident dates back to the year 1967 when peasants in the Naxalbari village of West Bengal, rose in rebellion against ages of oppression and injustice. The rebellion escalated in the face of violence and soon insurgencies from various parts of the country surfaced. There was a huge participation of students, particularly in West Bengal where a number of students left their education to join the movement. What followed was a period of turmoil when numerous radical groups became active in different regions across the country.

The country has come a long way since then. We forgot Naxalbari; we forgot the movement, the raison d'être that led to it. What has remained is a term, largely ambiguous, Naxalism, another addition to the numerous ‘isms’ that continue hovering over our social, economic and political consciousness, but nevertheless inconsequential. In fact, it poses one of the greatest threats to the nation’s internal peace and harmony.

Where did we go wrong and where did ‘they’ go wrong? Or, is it the rift created between ‘we’ and ‘they’ that led to this state of affairs? The question has met with a shameful apathy since its inception and still awaits an answer. So do many questions that have been fostered by these years of insurgency.

The uprising at Naxalbari was supposed to be a wake-up call for our policy makers, governments and above all the ‘class’ that was constituted of both the oppressors and the majority which remained impassive to the plight of the oppressed. The unorganized rebellion was crushed with an iron hand and as time passed by it fragmented into numerous groups of varying degrees of extremism and varying ideologies. From what was initially a struggle for one’s basic human right to live with dignity, it transformed into a ‘class struggle’, and a cruel manifestation of the same in the principle of ‘annihilation of class enemy’.

The movement truly lost its direction, if it had any, and the world has changed in more ways than one since then. What is the significance of Naxalism in the current scenario is the question that needs to be pondered upon. Is creation of ‘Salwa Judums’ the solution for the rising militancy? Or, does the solution lie in a much deeper understanding of the entire problem, its dynamics, the factors that lead to such insurgencies and thereby undertaking some fundamental systemic reforms?

Era of Hatred!

Recently I was watching this movie named 'Do Aankhein Barah Haath' based on a humanitarian jailer who transforms 6 murderers into non-violent peasants, by his new experiment of 'Open Prison'. The movie eloquently speaks of the power of love, the triumph of humanity.

I was surprised watching the movie, even more surprised by the fact that it was based on a true story! And i know most of the people of my generation will be surprised too.

But Love does have the power to bring about miracles, transform people, curb maladies, maladies of hatred, contempt, heal wounds. Is not it?
We have been told that, we have read that.

Then why this surprise? Why the whole concept of transforming hearts through love seems so inconceivable?

It was certainly not inconceivable when the movie was produced...our movies reflect our times. Don't they?

Then why has it become an alien concept now? What is it that has changed so fundamentally? And it has certainly not changed for good. So, where have we gone wrong?

Is it not that we have been brought up in an era of hatred, violence? We have grown in the shadows of terrorism, bloodshed, corruption and a shameful apathy on the part of our 'civilized' society.
Is it not that the principles of humanity, the concept of love, brotherhood, have merely been confined to the pages of literature? The generation has been slowly, gradually transformed into 'computerized intelligentsia', past caring, past listening.