http://svagatham.blog.co.uk/

Astrology : The Timeless Science of Timing-2

2008-10-28T16:45:27+01:00

Indian astrology comprises three main parts viz. Siddhaanta Skandham, Samhitaa Skandham and Horaa Skandham.

(i) Siddhaanta Skandham : It deals with different time-scales ranging from a nano second to billions of years, various types of years, planetary movements, locational variations in the timing of sunrise and sunset, planetary orbits, their revolutions, cosmic distances, atronomical calculations and the geometrical methodology applied thereto as also the manufacturing of the mechanical tools for calculating time.

Again, three types of Siddhaantic treatises are in vogue. 1. Siddhaanta texts 2. Tantra texts 3. Karana texts. Of these, the Siddhaanta texts undertake time calculations since the commencement of the Kalpa. The Tantra texts reckon from the beginning of the Kali era, while the Karana texts do it from the beginning of the Vikrama Saka.

(ii) Samhitaa Skandham : Samhitaa means a compendium of various tidbits of knowledge. Its once-constituent parts had, in later times, assumed significance in their own right as absolutely independent branches of knowledge. Of them, the well-known are 1. Vaastu 2. Muhoortam 3. Gochaaram 4. Vaataavaranam 5. Bhoo-garbha-saastram 6. Saamudrikam.

Vaastu is multifarious being divided into Gruha Vaastu, Aalaya Vaastu, Silpa Vaastu and Yantra Vaastu.

Muhoorta Bhaagam explains the ways to fix auspicious timings for certain occasions like house warming, wedding etc.

Gochaaram is twofold, namely 1. Vyakti Gochaaram 2. Desa Gochaaram which is also known as Medini Jyotisham. It indicates the results of the current planetary transits.

Things like like prospecting water, detecting metals and minerals in the earth, knowing the rainfall beforehand in a given area, ways of cultivation and gemology were explained in the VaataavaraNa and Bhoo-garbha parts.

(iii) Horaa Skandham : Horaa Skandham is the most renowned and extremely popular branch of astrology, being capable of predicting the future of individuals based on the planetary position in their horoscopes at the time of their birth. For the pupose of this kind of prediction, the planetary position manifest in the birth charts is considered to be frozen for life.

Indian astrology predicts individuals' future based on the principles enunciated by any of the three schools namely, 1. The Paraasara School 2. The Yavana School 3. The Jaimini School. Of these, the Paraasara school is more popular among the Indian astrologers than any other.

Comments

Astrology : The Timeless Science of Timing-1

2008-10-27T18:31:25+01:00

शिक्षा व्याकरणं छन्दो निरुक्तं ज्योतिषं तथा |
कल्पश्चेति षडन्गानि वेदस्याहुर्मनीषिण:||

Astrology is reckoned as one among the six indispensable disciplines deemed to be the ancilliary to the study of the Veda, the supreme and holiest scripture of the Hindus. There is virtually no aspect of Hinduism, which is, in one way or the other, untouched by the sweeping influence of astrology.

ITS ANTIQUITY

Like the Veda itself, the origin of Hindu astrology is still shrouded in mystery. All one can say is that it is a branch of divine knowledge which was passed on to us by our ancient saints after envisioning it through their long penances for hundreds of years. The most notable among them was Saint Parasara (circa 3250 B.C.) whose system of prediction still continues to have the widest application to date throughout the Indian Union. It might not be quite out of context here to mention that he was incidentally the father of Saint Veda Vyasa, the founder of modern Hinduism.

Despite its indigenous origins, Indian astrology enriched itself with various research inputs contributed by different astrological traditions at different points of time, then-extant and now-defunct in other parts of the world. Prominent among them were those belonging to the ancient Roman, Greek, Babylonian, Egyptian and Arab civilizations. For instance, several words now being used in the professional parlance of Indian astrology sound phonetically un-Sanskrit-like and can not be traced to Sanskrit etymology.

Besides the gradual extinction of those civilizations, the emergence of new monotheistic religions had apparently served to deal a severe death blow to the continuity of those astrological traditions. Planetary and stellar gods were, perhaps, considered incompatible with the monotheism and conveniently dumped. Further, astrology and the remedies prescribed by it would have been viewed with suspicion and hatred being equated with witchcraft and black magic.

Finally, this science had no recourse other than taking refuge in the Indian States where monotheism has little or no appeal for masses.

ITS FUNDAMENTAL PHILOSOPHY

The central tenet of the Indian astrological doctrine is - that no event in man's life is a pure accident or coincidence. All experiences, whether good or bad or neutral, that man undergoes, are inescapable results of his thoughts, deeds, wishes and tendencies which were steadily and consciously cultivated by him in his previous incarnation (the life which he had lead before he was born to his present parents). Sometimes, these thoughts and deeds might date back to a few centuries as well.

God grants His child, the individual soul a trillion trillion chances to reform and refine itself through a succession of rebirths. He lets him play as he likes in this world. Man will ultimately get back to his Father when he grows mature enough to feel tired of this childish play (worldly life). The so-called hardships are in fact no punishments at all, but only a process of soul-purification and self-perfection, comparable to treatment by surgery. The stars and planets are not responsible for our destiny, for they are only indicative of our past, present and future courses, just like road signs. Astrology can somewhat acurately read these signs and crack God's cryptic code of star-planet arrangement in our birth-charts.

The visible phenomena in the cosmos are not ignorable chance-events but unmistakably have an underlying message to convey, which can be decipherd only by a trained hand with a macro viewpoint. For instance, our eyes view only a spectrum of colors. But our minds interpret them as different objects. Likewise, astronomy records various celestial phenomena and then it is the turn of astrology to explain what they hold in store for humanity. The distinguishing feature is, modern astronomy takes the celestial bodies for lifeless objects, while our ancient wisdom recognized them as divine persons or gods in the form of jyothis (lights). Hence the name jyotis-śaastram (astrology). Therefore the faith element of astrology is as vital as its empiric element.

In a way, we are all descendents of light too, having fed on the food that grows on trees by way of photosythesis with the help of sunlight. Then it is only natural that one kind of light affects or influences another. So, it is least surprising if the planets and stars impact us, our minds and thereby our deeds as well.

As evidenced by astronomy, the celestial movements have a tendency to recur with some degree of predetermined periodicity in a cyclic manner very much like the seasons and life-cycles in our terrestrial existence. Therefore the events which took place during a particular planetary combination are bound to recur, whenever the same combination repeats itself. The nature of the events depends on the nature of the (planetary and stellar) rays received and their umpteen combinations. All rays are not the same in their impact, as established by modern physicists long ago.

(To be continued)

Comments

Propagation of Sanskrit : Present Imperfect -3

2008-08-03T12:30:20+02:00

SOME TENTATIVE SOLUTIONS

It may not be wise to dismiss the complexity of Sanskrit outrighly. But the fact does not make it any more difficult than some languages like English and Chinese. Every language has got its own share of peculiarities and thorny elements. Chinese has thousands of symbols but no letters while English has a million spellings apart from accent.

As for declensions, most of the nouns belong only to a few categories (like अकारान्त, इकारान्त, उकारान्त, ऋकारान्त). In the case of conjugations, they can be limited to as few as five basic tenses and moods only, dispensing with the indeciphereble lrung, luT and loong etc. Here too, 70% of the popular verb-roots belong to the First Group (भ्वादि ग्णम) only. Some are advocating the use of शत्रु, शानच and क्तवत pratyayas in place of the tenses and the तव्यत pratyaya in place of vidhi ling. But I am afraid, it will fail to make our task any easier as the pratyayas are to be used again on the basis of various divisions like आत्मनेपदम, परस्मैपदम, स्त्रीलिंगम, पुल्लिंगम, एकवचनं, बहुवचनं etc.

A beginner should not be compelled to learn all the synonyms in the language, which he will, anyway, pick in course of time as he goes on studying its literature. We should carefully pick the common Sanskrit vocabulary used in all the Indian languages and limit the modern Sanskrit to it. Understanding of sandhis and samasas demand a fair knowledge of vocabulary while their formation requires a trait of creativity which is too much to expect of a beginner. In stead, he must be encouraged only to understand the already-existing ready-made formations after the fashion of the English idioms and phrases.

Ungrammatical gender and dual number - we can not help this tricky duo in Sanskrit. I am down with the practice of a few teachers of spoken Sanskrit who are lenient enough to take liberties with these both. 'Sanskrit made easy' should not mean 'Sanskrit diluted.'

Sanskrit is not allergic to loan words, as some Sanskrit scholars themselves opine mistakenly. They can be borrowed with a slight modification in the end-viwel to fit in the declension patterns of the language. For example : बस - बसौ - बस: or ट्रेन - ट्रेनौ - ट्रेन : etc. Or, they can be used true to the source language with a desriptive term appended to it.

For example :

कार वाहनम
पेट्रोल तैलम
जॉर्ज बुष महाशय:
एलिज्बेत राज्ञी etc.

There is no denying the fact that some of the expressions possible in modern languages are not so with Sanskrit. But imitating the style of the dialogues as found in ancient dramas is no solution to this. The structure of the living Indian languages can offer us some insights in creating such expressions in Sanskrit. We should not fight shy of breaking free from the fetters of our rigid scholastic traditions in this regard because change is the vital sign of any language pulsating with life.

For example, we can say - मम गच्छत काले एकं दृश्यं अपश्यं |
(I saw a scene when I was going)
in stead of - यदा अहम् गच्छामि तदा कच्चित दृश्यं अपश्यं |

Similarly we can say - स्त्रिय: भूषणै: अलंकारिता: भवन्ति |
(Women are adorned with ornaments)
in stead of - स्त्रिय: भूषणै: अलंक्रियन्ते |

I also suggest that a huge corpus of modern Sanskrit literature be created by way of translating the best literary works from modern languages into the simplest Sanskrit, using as fewer samasas as possible.

(concluded)

Comments

Propagation of Sanskrit : Present Imperfect

2008-04-18T10:30:27+02:00

I remember the imprudence of a political critic who once remarked that India was a nation without a national language. This unfortunate canard is current in total disregard of the existence of a timeless language called Sanskrit, the copious vocabulary of which finds a ready and spontaneous flow in the mouth of every Indian from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Nothing but Sanskrit had been the most visible of all the cultural bonds commonly shared by all Indians well before the emergence of the Republic of the Indian Union. It is also our historical link with the nations and sub-nations across Asia including Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Cambodia and Indonesia.

THE DEAD LANGUAGE TAG - HOW JUSTIFIED ?

I don't like to join issue with anybody over the present official language of the country, but only wish to point out that direct use of Sanskrit is far more preferrable to that of an out and out Sanskritized Hindi. Further, it has the unrivalled potential to appeal to India's different linguistic races and weld them into a single nation with no prejudice to their self-esteem or cultural interests, for Sanskrit runs deep in their veins. It is one more language apart from their own in which they can express themselves better, provided they are given a brief training and opportunity.

But unfortunately the much-deserved official status was denied to Sanskrit on the premise that it is no more spoken and therefore remains a 'dead language'. It prompts us to spare a thought or two for the definition of a dead language.

Late Prof. Friedrich Max Muller (19th century) of the Sacred Books of the East fame once said : "It has been said that Sanskrit is a dead language...it is still the very life-spring of their faith, their feelings and prejudices...the language of literature, law and religion is still the classical Sanskrit."

(Nirad C.Chaudhuri, Scholar Extraordinary, Orient Paperbacks, pp.183)

Stressing that no langugae ultimately becomes dead, he concluded in a different context : "If we call Italian the daughter of Latin, we do not mean to ascribe to Italian a new vital principle. Not a single radical element was newly created for the formation of Italian. The names, mother and daughter only mark different periods in the growth of a language substantially the same. To speak of Latin dying in giving birth to her offspring is again pure mythology and it would be easy to prove that Latin was a living language long after Italian had learnt to run alone." (Ibid)

Scientists discovered that the language first learnt by man gets recorded permanently in a part of the brain called the Brocas Area which has no room for more than one language. Therefore the languages received later are recorded in other parts of the brain. In other words whatever language gets recorded in the Brocas Area can be termed as one's mother tongue. It may not necessarily be the mother tongue of one's parents. From this fact, it can also be inferred that man can have only one mother tongue for life alongside a number of acquired languages, regardless of his outstanding degree of fluency or erudition with respect to different languages. It equally follows that there is no way man can completely escape the primary impact of his mother tongue throughout his life. (To be continued)

Comments

Euphoria Over Small States and the Other Side of the Coin (Continued)

2008-04-16T15:04:16+02:00

IS SMALL REALLY BEAUTIFUL ?

(i) According to the advocates of small States, they are easy to govern and develop. Small countries like Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and a host of European countries have made faster material progress than big countries like India, China, Brazil and Indonesia. Apart from the selective exemplification, this contention has basic fallacy abou it. A dignified municipality called the (constituent) State of India can not be likened to an independent republic of sovereign powers, which can decide and dictate its own future. Under the existing dispensation, the so-called States are toothless for all practical purposes with no powers to sanction either a small industrial ot irrigation project. They can not even rename a place without the Centre’s approval. All minerals and underground resources squarely belong to the Centre. States can not grant permission even to start a newspaper or journal. No resolution passed by a State becomes an Act without the President’s seal of approbation. All avenues of revenue were monopolized by the Centre long ago, leaving the States to fall back upon sales tax, octroi and registration fees only. Almost all subjects in the States’ list were gradually transferred to Concurrent list, thus enabling the Centre to poke a finger in all internal affairs of the States. Given this ground situation, what additional progress can one expect from the new (small) States, without fighting for true federalism in our constitutional framework ?

(ii) Secondly, did all small States progress ? If they did, what could be the reason ? Orissa, a small State of approx. 1,55,000 sq.k.m. (half the size of Maharashtra), was formed way back in 1936 and is still rated as a backward State. Still smaller states like Haryana and Punjab (each having an area admeasuring approx. 50,000 sq.k.m.)were formed in the 60’s and they made rapid strides, owing not as much to their small size as to the Green Revolution, centrally sponsored irrigation projects and inflows of foreign exchange as also their proximity to the national capital.

From a global perspective too, not all small countries can be credited with progress. Well in our neighbourhood, we have under-developed small countries like Nepal, Bangladesh and Bhutan.

(iii) The issues arising out of the rapid technological advancements in the world put governments under stress to cope up with them and made them increasingly variegated and complex. New laws and systems are to be devised on a continuous basis. Thus, small States too are constrained to keep as many as departments as big ones. Can they financially afford it ? What surplus funds are they left with for development, if revenues are exhausted on the administrative machinery itself ? Uttaranchal State is a case in point whose revenue receipts are well below Rs.350 crores, but whose annual expenditure exceeds Rs.1,500 crores. It is for this reason that it was recently accorded status of the Special category State, which means more grants and fewer loans. The plight of Chhattisgarh is no different too. Thus the concept of small States subjects the States to incremental dependence on the Centre and leads to regional jealousies, charges of favouritism and ultimate loss of faith in national integration.

(iv) The inter-State boundary and river water disputes between a number of States are still unresolved with many of them remaining perpetually sub-judice. For Instance, Karnataka alone has been in conflict with a couple of States over disputed territories (Kasargode and Belgaum) and with another couple of States on water-sharing (the Krishna and Cauvery). The disputes are so emotive that they turned not only governments against governments, but also the people of one State against those of another and sporadic trading of violence is not uncommon. Given this record, more States means more disputes which will ultimately threaten to erode the very spirit of Indian nationalism.

(v) This dangerous doctrine of small States gives a fillip to the secessionist outfits like the LTTE, ULFA. JKLF, and Khalistanis who might find in it a cloaked and implicit endorsement of their balkanization programme. "If small States are OK, why not small countries ?"they might ask. We have no answer.

(vi) The parameters to determine the ‘optimum smallness’ are vague. We can reorganize India into 88 Keralas, or 120 Nagalands or 250 Sikkims. This number could be endless. They will serve no loftier purpose than solving the political unemployment of a few.

STATUS QUO IS NO STAGNATION

The argument that big States have grown unwieldy by virtue of their vastness and population is untenable and anachronistic for the simple fact that we live in the age of internet, video-conferences, cell phones, express haighways, jet planes and superfast railways. Will these ‘small advocates’ agree to divide India into 2 more free and independent republics because her population tripled since independence ?

Any ardent reader of history can tell us that the British conquest of India became possible not for want of powerful principalities, but only for want of strong nation-states on its soil. In contrast, the age-old linguistic states like England, France and Japan were never colonized but have colonized other countries.

Reorganization of India on linguistic basis was the best thing that happened to her in her 5,000-year-long history. It demonstrated to the world that we have politically come of age on par with the advanced nations of the world. Any attempt to undo this mature regime will amount to putting the clock back by millenia.

A nation or sub-nation is a homogenous group that organizes itself on a permanent basis. No country in the world ever prospered, constantly fiddling with its boundaries which amounts to anarchy, unrest, indiscipline and instability. It has been the curse on India’s fortunes since time immemorial. Long-term unity and integration should not be sacrificed at the altar of petty development issues which can be resolved with proper planning, political will and time-bound implementation.

There are better ways to escape our boredom than agitating for separate States. (Concluded)

Comments

Euphoria over Small States and the Other Side of the Coin

2008-04-16T14:38:16+02:00

May 2001

The turn of the century has opened a Pandora's box in India's geopolitical sphere with the emergence of three new States on its map and raked up a host of controversial issues. On a different plane, the event is historic and has more potential ramifications than India?s partition in 1947, in the view of the spurt it has given to separatist elements in various pockets of the country. Following the creation of Jharkhand, Uttaranchal and Chhattisgarh, voices in favour of separate Kodagu State, Vidarbha, Konkan, Telangana, Ladakh and Jammu have grown more assertive and strident. At a stroke, all the old ghosts were resurrected from their graves. "Just a resolution in the parliament, and we?ll form our own State"- seems to be the dominant trend across the country. Whoever disagrees with the separatist demand is deemed enemy of the region and its development.

WHY THIS SUDDEN SEPARATISM ?

The creation of three new States has left many wondering, with what ease and expediency the Indian Parliament could make and unmake States at will. They have understood that the so-called linguistc States of India have no sanctity and indestructibility, but can be freely tampered with. A constitutional provision exists enabling the Parliament to this effect, but this statute was sparingly used in the past with only a few States coming into existance after the first reorganization of States on linguistic basis. It is worth recalling that-for all their despotic tendencies, late Indira Gandhi and her son and successor late Rajiv Gandhi had never compromised on the principle of national unity and mercilessly crushed all separatism in its umpteen avatars. While Indira dealt with the separate Telangana and Jai Andhra movements with an iron hand, Rajiv was rather curtly outspoken in his aversion to creating new States. But a constitutional provision is apparently on the verge of being misused well on the lines of Article 356 behind the veneer of public demand and correcting regional imbalances.

(i) Regional backwardness is cited as the principal reason for which the new States were created. Ironically enough, the party in power in all the 3 bifurcated States had traditionally been the Indian National Congress that now merrily voted for their bifurcation. Then, is it the fault of the integrated State or the party in power there ?

(ii) Now, confronted with the intellectual bankruptcy in the wake of a globally sweeping market economy,political entities have lost their ideological ground and are in search of fresh issues to make headlines in media. Demand for separate States comes handy at this juncture.

(iii) Besides the political arithmatic of small States makes it possible for a half or one-third of the MLAs to occupy miniterial berths which is not the case with a big State having 200 assembly seats.

(iv) Unlike reservation quotas, a demand for a separate State strikes an emotional chord with every inhabitant of the region, thus lending its divisive content a touch of democracy. Thus the demand holds a sure-shot political promise worth investing in by politicians of all hues.

(v) Moreover, the Indian polity is often termed as quasi-federal, while in fact, it has few or no federal features worth the name except the existence of 28 States. The Centre loves to view these states more as mere administrative units than manifestations of the cultural aspirations of various sub-nations in the country. Thus, strong sub-nations are perceived as a threat to the constitutionally centralized powers arrogated to themselves by successive Union Governments during the last 53 years. Therefore, the centre is ready to bifurcate or even trifurcate big States just on demand, pending a number of other bills of more urgency and importance.

(vi) When the Indian leaders at the dawn of independence decided to form States on linguistic basis, they were not motivated by any vested interest, but only an urge to emancipate the native cultures, languages and people subjugated under the colonial yoke. With the memory of those leaders and their movements in the Gandhian era slowly fading out of public memory, divisive politics now usurp the vaccuous ideological space.

Comments

Men ! Be kind to fellow men !!

2008-04-16T12:44:38+02:00

Mankind spent millenia without ever feeling the basic need to understand fellow men. All energies were devoted only to understanding the other half, but not themselves from a proper perspective. 99 per cent of misery and pain in the world would have subsided if only a tenth of this effort was diverted to understanding and helping fellow men, eventually redeeming and improving the lot of the other half as well, in a spill-over effect.

The underlying reason can perhaps be located in the way we were programmed and conditioned to think that we men are, and we alone are responsible for the upkeep and protection of the family, its material security and sexual happiness and eveything it hopes to suck us up for. It is precisely where we lost our mental balance. You have to work to keep things going. No doubt. But should this activity blind you to the extent of failure to understand the people of your own sex ? It is for upholding this heroic image, this martyr image, this macho image that we all choose to turn insensitive to our fellow men. We victimize them, brutalize them, exploit them, torture them, kill them - all for the sake of that simple smile on the face of that beloved other half. Finally it is this callousness towards your own sex that at times gets perpetuated in the case of the opposite sex too. Is it really worth it ? For all the risk taken, finally what are you left with ? Just horrible sins staring in your face at the moment of your death. Yes, those abominable sins committed for the sake of proving yourself a man enough to be admired by a woman, to keep her in good humor. You will be alone in paying for these follies.

Yes, we are all family beings. No doubt. The other half, like other members of the family, is an inseparable part of your existence. OK. She is absolutely trust-worthy and loyal. Maybe she is a well-bred, liberally educated and famous soul too. Maybe you love her like your own self, like your alter ego. Alright. But all said and done, get back to basics, come to terms with the material fact that she is just a woman, with all the frailties, insecurities and fallibilities that are inherent and integral to that God-gifted identity. Her account is often limited by her perceptions as a woman, her range of understanding of things as a woman. So, what can she present you with ? A skewed female perspective of things. It may or may not always reflect things exactly for what they are. As her man and eternal companion, you should excuse her for her limitations. But at the same time, get back to the independent, unfettered and open thinking style of the times of your pure bachelorhood, undoing the corrupting influences of married life. Reclaim your intellectual freedom as a man. Then see yourself how creative you are going to become.

How you started depending on the other half for interpreting things for you ! How you allowed yourself to be back-seat-driven by the females in your house in the matters of inter-personal relationships ! Howmany times you snapped relationships with your own brothers, friends and other near and dear people, just because this or that lady in your house deliberately painted a dirty picture of them for you ! How you fell for a calculated choice of catchy words in her narration ! You are deeply moved if her eyes glisten with tears. But how did you fail to notice the same tears in the eyes of you own father, brother and friend ! It's just that they did never speak up, they were not allowed to. Perhaps you refused to grant them at least a final audience.

But remember, any successful man of some consequence in the world wielding some degree of power and influence in the society is invariably the one who never allows his women to interfere with his relationships. It is in the nature of every member of the fair sex to try to keep her husband to herself, to monopolize him for good, to keep him under her lock and key. She does not bother to think twice of its adverse consequences. Little does she realize that such an endeavor is going to take away all male element out of him, because short of his network, he is an abject nobody. Along with him, even his kids are going to lose the benefits of their father's social network. As such, the aftermath of such female machinations will be enduring for generations, rendering them rootless. The long-term effect is invisible, but it is there.

Man ! You are not here to take sides. Mind you, you are a man, created with more social responsibility than a woman. Everyone, including outsiders, equally needs you. Not only your wife or mother or sister. This dependence on women's judgment on who to move with and who to avoid - points to your insensitivity to your fellow men.

Come on, now act your gender. While creating you as a male, God did not want you to lead a private life like a woman. You are here for many, both inside and outside the house. Be a little mindful of your fellow men, their needs, their pleasures, their pains, their goodness, their moods. Don't get lost in the world of females who are now your new-found advisors. Take a genuine, personal and active interest in the affairs of your fellow men. Watch them with your own eyes. Understand them from your own positive angle without turning to your women to add a colored caption to an obvious picture.

Be a man for you are more than just a reproductive organ !

Comments

THE TONGUE-TIED MESSIAH

2008-01-10T12:07:25+01:00

Maybe it's premature to write anything on this topic, especially when the celebrity in question is not a bit willing to come clean on his 'action plan'.

Who, apart from Mega Star Chiranjeevi, is as eager for his storming of the Telugu political arena ? I mean, who, in addition to him, does stand to gain from his presence in politics ?

I guess, the inevitable and ultimate beneficiary is destined to be the Congress Party. This guess has a few solid and valid reasons to back it up. It did not take the Congress even a full tenure in power to earn this scale of disrepute among people. Its leaders, famished with about a decade-long hunger, have turned broad daylight robbers from Day One, grabbing every tract of land they could set their eyes on, be it private or public. The much-tauted schemes and projects ostentatiously started by the Congress Government are known more for the mind-boggling scandals they gave room for. Its State-level leadership is woefully short of towering personalities to pull enough crowds. The party currently runs a serious risk of biting dust in the hands of its age-old rival, the Telugu Desam party at the hustings. So, the entry of a crowd-puller like Mega Star Chiranjeevi into politics will divide the anti-Congress and pro-Telugu Desam vote bank to an alarming extent, thus finally giving the Congress a fair chance of win.

It, however, depends on which way Chiru turns. The afore-mentioned advantage accrues to the Congress, only if he joins that party or forms his own outfit. But situation will turn otherwise if he decides to join the Telugu Desam, which, however, seems a remote possibility at this point of time.

But the existence of too many parties proves as much ruinous to democracy as only a few, like the case with US. The former fails to ensure a stable government for want of absolute majority and thereby tends to provide a circumstantially valid justification for a future military coup, while the latter leads to an unwritten and secret alliance between the few existing oligarchs who might mutually agree on an alternate arrangement for grabbing power by turns.

Sri Veerappa Moily, in-charge of the AP Congress Affairs blames the ineffectiveness of Telugu Desam in the main Opposition role for the emergence of new parties in the State. I beg to disagree with this observation, even as I respect his long innings in active politics. It depends on the way some people perceive the main opposition. Our society, in spite of participating in a number of electons through decades, is still as good as an adolescent democracy in terms of republican maturity. Here, electoral win or loss are taken not with a sportive or democratic spirit, but only a mindset of war. A measure of democratic wisdom is yet to dawn on our people to make them realize that an electoral setback or two is no case enough to write off a particular ideology or party as irrelevant, let alone being the end of the world for them. Elections, wherever they are held in the world, are generally fought over the kind of issues which are deemed to be of relevance to the immediate present or immediate future at that moment of history. But it is common to hear people commenting "That fella's finished, never to rise again", in the event of a person losing an election. Similarly, it is not infrequent to hear politicians in power rubbishing the opposition demands as a clamour by those rejected by people, forgetting their own political unemployment during their days in the Opposition. So, if Telugu Desam lost an election once in 2004, for many among us, it singularly meant that the party was done for and gone for ever. Therefore, some erroneously think it's high time they filled the perceived or imaginary vaccuum. Many thought on these lines when NTR lost the election in 1989. But he staged more than an impressive comeback in 1994. So did even Congress.

I agree with C.B.Naidu, the former CM of Andhra, who stated that there was always enough room for new entities in democracy, but only two or three of them would manage to catch people's fancy.

When I see the eagerness with which people, especially politicians and journalists, react to the likelihood of Chiru's political debut, I am afraid they are simply over-estimating his fan-following. But I can understand what leads them to believe that he would matter to Andhra politics in no mean way. They had already seen before in the form of late NTR, the levels of havoc that the popularity of a cine personality could wreak on the existing outfits. And now they expect the same miracle to get repeated with Chiru.

It remains to be seen how apt it is to draw a parallel between Chiru and NTR. True, there's no denying the fact that Chiru has the glamour, attraction and crowd-pulling ability. But they by themselves are far from being adequate to make a veritable NTR of him. Yes, he has a popular base, but it's a base confined to a few segments of the Telugu population, unlike NTR. By and large, the base is limited to the youth belonging to a few communities. By contrast, the late leader was held in high esteem by the young and old alike. He was adored by Brahmins and Malas alike. He was obeyed by Kammas and Reddys alike. Both Communists and the Hindu Right steadfastly stood by him simultaneously. His appeal to both Andhra and Telangana regions was overwhelming.

I want someone who is known for his toughness in real life like NTR who bravely defied the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

OK. All said and done, I am for multi-party democracy too. Chiru is entitled to forming one more party. But I can not dream of any fresh debutant delivering something which Naidu or YSR have failed to (i.e. in case they failed at all).

Comments

Test Post

2007-06-06T04:13:23+02:00

This is a test post. I look forward to writing several meaningful posts in future. It is intended to be an English language blog.

Comments