|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Friday, 17 December 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Did he see only the penumbra? Chaya Pranthaya
In fact, the memory of the poem added a few finishing touches to the image of the novel's protagonist created in me. Not illogical I surmise; I see many parallels in the seemingly contrasting images in the novel and the little poem by the rebel poet. The first few lines of the poem, titled "Apolitical Intellectuals" which seem relevant to the point I make run somewhat like this: (Not the exact words of the poem) Common people of this land Will question you thus: What have you been doing When the nation was dying like a lone little fire.... ........ No one would want to know of their Verbal discourses on the concept of nothingness ........ Or the old classics they have mastered. Devapriya in 'Chaya Pranthaya' (Penumbra) is not an apolitical intellectual. He is very much in contemporary politics, and is well aware of the social set up of the day. A leftist intellectual, he is a great admirer of Antonio Gramsci the Italian Marxist Philosopher who believed in the role the rural intellectual can play in building up a nation independent of economic and cultural hegemonies of the colonial empires. Yet, nowhere in the novel the reader finds a single incident where Devapriya acts like one in the true sense of the word 'Marxist Intellectual'. On the contrary, he behaves like "an apolitical intellectual', from the time he got himself established in his university teaching career. He longed for and pursued an ultra materialistic life and he was successful in achieving most of his goals. He cast away a monk's life and plunged into worldly pleasures - intellectual socializing - women - lazing away with them. Convincing evidence How could one argue that his way of life was not proper - that it did not go aligning with his Marxist intellectuality? Still, another would have enough clues to prove that our protagonist never practised what he preached or rather what he scribbled, because the text does not provide the reader with sufficient material to do so. The only small convincing evidence the reader finds is the mention of his regular political feature to an Indian Journal edited by an Indian he had got acquainted with. Devapriya who led the life of a lotus eater was amoral, not particularly in the sense that he associated with several women who were his intellectual subordinates behind the back of each of them, but in his clever manner of living a lie - only he himself knew that he lied to the world. When he was fortified with what many others around him longed for and strived to achieve - money - time - fame - a giant image in civil society. He did not make use of any of those assets for the betterment of who were very close to him, or in general for the betterment of society at large. When he gets his special abode in the university premises so that he can engage himself in his research work peacefully what he mostly did was using that place as a meeting place for his two women friends - (The diary notes gives evidence only to this effect). He starts living with Ranjani an artist, who has a child by her lawful husband, and she is quite satisfied living with Devapriya because what she wanted was a suitable man to be her daughter's father. This is the only instance where Devapriya acts quite humanely. He never let the child feel the absence of her own father. Human morality A man who looks at each and every incident in life through the Dhamma he has studied he acts quite contrary to this discipline. He trespasses many unholy areas of human morality, and he gets away until his death - until they are revealed to the world through his diary. This man who was a university teacher, loved and respected by most of the university community and a good slice of intellectuals in the society at large, played a dual role in the theatre of life. The major undertaking in his intellectual facet of life was his work on Gramsci's Marxist theory. Wasn't this a gigantic undercover which hid all other works and behaviours of the man, which would have been big scandals if revealed by any chance. Neglect of his parents and the sister - and his own surroundings - we can't forget that Gramsci was very much affirmative about the role of the rural intellectual and that Devapriya had his roots in the village. He neglects his roots. But, at the same time he theorises and scribbles on Gramsci. His ego is quite shattered when he comes to know that Ranjani too goes out with her Japanese friend - In fact, Devapriya spies on her. Here, he conveniently avoids any comparison with his own associations of women - Sudheera, Subhardra and Uthpala. Devapriya at one time reminiscences about her sister, who has developed a friendship with Podi Hamuduruwo in the village temple. He comes across the letters she has received from the young monk, but he takes the incident with 'equanimity' - was it because he could not be bothered or he feels sympathetic towards his sister who was slowly dying. Nihilistic attitude In the end, what is the picture remaining in the reader? An intellectual who has failed to deliver - to his own loved ones - to his colleagues and to the society - to himself. An intellectual, who only theorized, and scribbled, a man who has been made inactive by his own nihilistic attitude towards life. If one would misinterpret this as his sensitivity, one is terribly mistaken. The writer himself makes this mistake. By way of an introduction to the story the writer says; "This is the story of a certain university teacher who lived in this country and who spent his life dealing with his own sensitive, fine thinking." The reader won't be able to agree with this point he makes about Devapriya, once he finishes reading the book. Devapriya was sensitive only to his ownself. He did not care about anyone else around him. So, how could he be called a sensitive human being, when Devapriya is viewed in this light. The reader will have his serious doubts; How eligible is he to do a research work on Gramsci - Devapriya's inability to finish the research book until his death is very symbolic; it symbolizes his failure as a Marxist intellectual. Was he really a failure? or was it the pattern which the writer has built up his character? Was the writer a ruthless critic of this intellectual on whose life, he builds this story. According to my understanding 'Penumbra' here symbolizes the writer's comprehension of this certain intellectual's character. Penumbra is a faint shadow of an opaque body, a light shadow around a celestial object. Though one cannot see through the opaque body, the shadow around it can be seen through. If the Intellectual's life was an opaque body, the Penumbra is what the outsiders saw of him. The writer too might be one of those outsiders. Yet, it must be remembered that the Penumbra is not the total concrete picture. So, by seeing the shadow of the man, memories of him after his death, can one be satisfied that he saw and comprehended him completely. What happens to the 'sensitivity' of Devapriya which the writer talks about in the introduction of the book? Can his life be so nihilistic? A good university teacher loved by students - a man who was sensitive enough to love a child some other man fathered. A scholar, who spent a good part of his university teaching career to write a research book on Antonio Gramsci - the Italian Marxist philosopher. The reader is in a big quandary. And, finally need the writer show the reader how he should comprehend and recreate his work in his imagination, so that he could go on a spiritual journey? - Malini Govinnage ############### The philosophy of the teachings of Islam The philosophy of the teachings of Islam By Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian The first and foremost thought which came to my mind after reading 'The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam', written by the Founder of Ahmdhiyya Muslim community, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, was the sincerity and devotion by which Swami Sadhu Shogan Chandra proposed to bring together the representatives of different religions on one platform - one of the earliest forum for inter-faith movement. After a successful multireligious conference at Ajmer city in 1892, he decided to organize another such conference in Lahore in 1896, for which he set up a committee headed by Master Durgah Parshad. The committee invited the representatives of different religions to set forth the excellences of their own religion. A set of five questions was given to each speaker and they were asked to confine their answers to those five with the stipulation that no attack be made on any other religion and that the answers to be provided from their own religious scriptures. The five questions were as follows: 1. What are the physical, moral and spiritual states of man? 2. What is the state of man after death? 3. What is the true purpose of man's existence on earth and the means of its attainment? 4. What are the effects of one's deeds this life and the after life? 5. What are the sources of Divine Knowledge? The object of the conference was to find which religion contained all the truth and to give an opportunity to the leaders of deference faiths to instill the love of the teaching of their respective religions in the hearts of the people and to bring together people of different religions in order to cultivate tolerance and harmony among them. Sadhu Shogan Chandra was very grieved to see the ills of the society, the religious disputes prevalent among different groups and was trying to find the remedy for the bickering between different societies. He once wrote, "If a person sees the another suffering from a fatal disease, and he firmly believes that he holds the cure for the disease, and he also claims to have sympathy for human race, then how it is possible for him to intentionally turn away when called upon to provide a remedy? My heart is filled with desire to know which religion is the one replete with truth. I have not the words to express my fervour". With these feelings he went to different religious leaders in order to convince them to take part in the proposed conference. He was fortunate enough that he met the founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community who had the divine mission to bring the people back to God Almighty and to guide them to a path where they can get rid of all their miseries, misfortunes and sins. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad liked the idea very much and promised to speak on Islam. The representatives of Sanatna Dharma, Hinduism, Arya Samaj, Free Thinkers, Brahmu Samaj, Theosophical society, Religion of Harmony, Christianity and Sikhism also promised to send their representatives. The Conference was held on 26-29 December 1896 at Islamiya High School Sheranwala gate Lahore. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad could not attend personally because of his illness but his paper was read out by one of his close companions Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialakoti. Two hours were allocated to each speaker but in that time Mirza Sahib's speech could not be finished. So on the insistent demand of the audience the three-day conference was extended to one more day. It is said that the most fascinating thing which happened was that a few days before the conference on December 21, 1896 God revealed to Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad that his article will surpass all others at the conference and Mirza Sahib was so confident and committed to God that he made public his revelation before the conference by sticking bills etc. on the walls of Lahore city. He announced that his paper is not the result of ordinary human efforts but is a sing among the sings of God, written with His special support. It sets forth the beauties and truths of the Holy Quran and urged the people to attend the momentous conference. He stated: "I have been moved by the sympathy for my fellow human beings to make this announcement so that they should witness the beauty of the Holy Quran." From the reports of the contemporary newspapers, after the conference, it was evident that people liked the address given by the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and was spellbound throughout its delivery. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib's paper was published in "The Report of the Conference of great Religions" Lahore and the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has published it in book form under the title of 'Islami Usool ki Philosophy' (in Urdu). English translation by Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, a great scholar and former Foreign Minister of Pakistan, is scholarly but simple. The intricate philosophical thoughts are expressed in easy flowing style. Moreover, the way the Quranic teachings are explained in such depth and simplicity in this book are an eye-opener and gives one a clearer understanding about the true Islamic teachings. Many editions of the book have been printed and it has been translated into French, Dutch, Spanish, Arabic, German and various other languages including Tamil and Sinhala. Many philosophers and foreign newspapers have given it favorable reviews and many Western Intellectuals have praised it highly. For example: 1. The Bristol Times and Mirror wrote: 'Surely the man who addresses Europe and America in this manner can be no ordinary being'. (Gist) Spiritual Journal, Boston wrote: 'This book is good news for the whole human race.' (Gist) * Theosophical Booknotes wrote: 'This book is a most beautiful and endearing picture of Muhammad's religion.' (Gist) * Indian Review wrote: 'This book presents clear thinking and perfect wisdom and the reader is left with no choice but to praise it.' (Gist) * Muslim Review wrote: 'Anyone reading this book is bound to find a great many truths most deep and pleasing to the soul.' (Gist) I would gladly recommend the book to people of all faiths. An intelligent reading of this book will give the reader a realistic picture of Islam which has been severely tarnished by the fundamentalist of the religion. - A. Abdul Aziz |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
Right through the reading, Sunanda Mahendra's latest novel reminded me
of a poem by the Guatemalan poet Auto Rene Castillo.
