Monday, 21 June 2010
On Memory and Emotion
Everything around us is in a constant state of flux: people growing older, responsibilities getting greater, world getting dirtier, entropy (in most circumstances) increasing. Some things hardly change at all though: our memories. Yes, they grow fainter and we start to see them through increasingly rose-tinted glasses and so on, but in essence they remain constant and indeed by definition they must. And it is the persistence of these memories, and the way, over time, in which they begin to conflict with so much of the reality around us, that seems to cause so many of our emotions; particularly negative ones. Memories of old friends whom I haven't seen for years; memories of the one you once loved, but can no longer bear the sight of; memories of that child who I was so close to, but has now grown into a sulky and uncaring teenager. Would it not be wonderful if we had editorial powers over our memories: so that we could make a few changes here and there, obscure the unpleasant bits, enhance the pleasing aspects, perhaps erase a few episodes entirely and write in a few new ones in the bargain? As the Buddha taught us, attachment to people and things is the root cause of all our sorrows. But if we knew that we could alter our memories whenever we wished, would attachment still have any meaning? Would we ever fear the loss of something or someone we loved dearly, if we could wipe it out merely by flipping a few synapses in our brain? Would there be anything worth cherishing, without memory?
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Nehruvian musings
Panditji had a beautiful way with words:
"I have become a queer mixture of the East and the West ... Out of place everywhere, at home nowhere. Perhaps my thoughts and approach to life are more akin to what is called Western than Eastern, but India clings to me, as she does to all her children, in innumerable ways ... I am a stranger and alien in the West. I cannot be of it. But in my own country also, sometimes I have an exile's feeling."
The longer I stay away from my homeland, the truer this seems...
"I have become a queer mixture of the East and the West ... Out of place everywhere, at home nowhere. Perhaps my thoughts and approach to life are more akin to what is called Western than Eastern, but India clings to me, as she does to all her children, in innumerable ways ... I am a stranger and alien in the West. I cannot be of it. But in my own country also, sometimes I have an exile's feeling."
The longer I stay away from my homeland, the truer this seems...
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
Some brief thoughts on Britain's "New Politics"
So Britain finally has its first coalition government since the second world war. Given that India has not had single-party government since 1989, my first reaction is: welcome to the club! I do find it quite fascinating how the notion of political coalitions seems to so strongly polarise opinions in this country (as opposed to India, where we generally take it for granted). On the one hand, you have the optimists, whose views I think are well encapsulated by Nick Clegg's eloquent statement, founded on the notion that politicians can work together for the common good. On the other hand, there are those (specifically, Lib Dem or Tory voters) who feel that their interests have been sold out and that their party has betrayed them by compromising on the manifesto they voted for. It seems to me that this second view is based on prioritising the interests of a relatively narrow group of people, as opposed to the population as a whole. To those who dislike the idea of coalition and compromise, my question is: what alternative do you propose in the situation of a hung parliament? And even more generally, given that there is a very wide range of views and interests in society, what is the most democratic way of representing those in government and policy making? Is it better to have the 30-40% that voted for the single largest party getting all (or most) of their manifesto promises fulfilled, whilst the remaining 60-70% get virtually none of what they voted for, leading to polarisation, partisanship and rancour? Or is it better to try and have a governing system that, on the basis of dialogue and compromise, adopts policies in proportion with their support amongst the population, so that no one will get everything they wish for but no one will feel completely left out either? Which approach is fairer? Which, in the long run, is likely to lead to a stronger and more equitable society?
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
More etymology
It's fascinating how the meanings of certain words change subtly with time and context. Take "dinner", for example. In Indian English, it invariably refers to the evening meal. However, in British English it is sometimes used to refer to the afternoon meal (lunch), particularly by older and working-class people. I think at one time the most common British ordering of meal names was Breakfast/Dinner/[Tea]/Supper, though now it is generally the more familiar Breakfast/Lunch/Dinner. In the earlier context, the main meal of the day was typically taken in the afternoon, and tea or supper would be a lighter evening meal. Now, in Britain as elsewhere, the evening meal has become the most prominent, and terminology shifted accordingly. The word dinner comes from the Old French disner, which referred to lunch but had originally meant breakfast, having been derived from the Latin dis- + iēiūnō, literally meaning "to break the fast" (the modern French terms for lunch and breakfast are déjeuner and petit déjeuner respectively). So a word whose original source specifically referred to the first meal of the day has now migrated through all of them and largely come to be associated with the last!
Saturday, 12 December 2009
The remarkable etymology of sine
(or, How to go from Sanskrit to Latin in four easy steps)
"The ancient Indian mathematician, Aryabhata, had made extensive use of the concept of "sine" (central to modern trigonometry), in the fifth century. He called it jya-ardha, which literally means half-chord in Sanskrit. From there the term moved on in an interesting migratory way, as Howard Eves describes, in his An Introduction to the History of Mathematics (1990, p. 237):
Aryabhata called it ardha-jya ("half-chord") and jya-ardha ("chord-half"), and then abbreviated the term by simply using jya ("chord"). From jya the Arabs phonetically derived jiba, which, following Arabic practice of omitting vowels, was written as jb. Now jiba, aside from its technical significance, is a meaningless word in Arabic. Later writers who came across jb as an abbreviation for the meaningless word jiba substituted jaib instead, which contains the same letters, and is a good Arabic word meaning "cove" or "bay". Still later, Gherardo of Cremona (ca. 1150), when he made his translations from the Arabic, replaced the Arabian jaib by its Latin equivalent, sinus [meaning a cove or a bay], from whence came our present word sine."
[Amartya Sen, Keynote Speech at Beijing Forum 2006]
"The ancient Indian mathematician, Aryabhata, had made extensive use of the concept of "sine" (central to modern trigonometry), in the fifth century. He called it jya-ardha, which literally means half-chord in Sanskrit. From there the term moved on in an interesting migratory way, as Howard Eves describes, in his An Introduction to the History of Mathematics (1990, p. 237):
Aryabhata called it ardha-jya ("half-chord") and jya-ardha ("chord-half"), and then abbreviated the term by simply using jya ("chord"). From jya the Arabs phonetically derived jiba, which, following Arabic practice of omitting vowels, was written as jb. Now jiba, aside from its technical significance, is a meaningless word in Arabic. Later writers who came across jb as an abbreviation for the meaningless word jiba substituted jaib instead, which contains the same letters, and is a good Arabic word meaning "cove" or "bay". Still later, Gherardo of Cremona (ca. 1150), when he made his translations from the Arabic, replaced the Arabian jaib by its Latin equivalent, sinus [meaning a cove or a bay], from whence came our present word sine."
[Amartya Sen, Keynote Speech at Beijing Forum 2006]
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Murphy's Meta-law
Just a thought (surely unoriginal) regarding the ubiquitous Murphy's Law. I propose this be called "Murphy's Meta-law":
People only think about Murphy's law when something has gone wrong. Thus, Murphy's law is self-validating.
This is related to the notion of hindsight bias.
People only think about Murphy's law when something has gone wrong. Thus, Murphy's law is self-validating.
This is related to the notion of hindsight bias.
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Bhrigu and Bharadwaja on the caste system
1 [भृगु]
असृजथ बराह्मणान एव पूर्वं बरह्मा परजापतिः
आत्मतेजॊ ऽभिनिर्वृत्तान भास्कराग्निसमप्रभान
2 ततः सत्यं च धर्मं च तपॊ बरह्म च शाश्वतम
आचारं चैव शौचं च सवर्गाय विथधे परभुः
3 थेवथानवगन्धर्वथैत्यासुरमहॊरगाः
यक्षरास्कस नागाश च पिशाचा मनुजास तदा
4 बराह्मणाः कषत्रिया वैश्याः शूथ्राश च थविजसत्तम
ये चान्ये भूतसंघानां संघास तांश चापि निर्ममे
5 बराह्मणानां सितॊ वर्णः कषत्रियाणां तु लॊहितः
वैश्यानां पीतकॊ वर्णः शूथ्राणाम असितस तदा
"Bhrigu said, 'Brahman first created a few Brahmanas who came to be called Prajapatis (lords of creation). Possessed of splendour equal to that of the fire or the Sun, they were created out of the energy of that First-born Being. The puissant Lord then created Truth, Duty, Penance, the eternal Vedas, all kinds of pious acts, and Purity, for enabling creatures to attain to heaven (by practising them). After this, the Deities and the Danavas, the Gandharvas, the Daityas, the Asuras, the great snakes, the Yakshas, the Rakshasas, the Serpents, the Pisachas, and human beings with their four divisions, viz., Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras, O best of regenerate ones, and all the other orders of creatures that exist, were created. The complexion the Brahmanas obtained was white; that which the Kshatriyas obtained was red; that which the Vaisyas got was yellow; and that which was given to the Sudras was black.'"
6 [भरथ्वाज]
चातुर्वर्ण्यस्य वर्णेन यथि वर्णॊ विभज्यते
सर्वेषां खलु वर्णानां थृश्यते वर्णसंकरः
7 कामः करॊधॊ भयं लॊभः शॊकश चिन्ता कषुधा शरमः
सर्वेषां नः परभवति कस्माथ वर्णॊ विभज्यते
8 सवेथमूत्र पुरीषाणि शलेष्मा पित्तं सशॊनितम
तनुः कषरति सर्वेषां कस्माथ वर्णॊ विभज्यते
9 जङ्गमानाम असंख्येयाः सदावराणां च जातयः
तेषां विविधवर्णानां कुतॊ वर्णविनिश्चयः
"Bharadwaja said, 'If the distinction between the four orders (of human beings) be made by means only of colour (attribute), then it seems that all the four orders have been mingled together. Lust, wrath, fear, cupidity, grief, anxiety, hunger, toil, possess and prevail over all men. How can men be distinguished by the possession of attributes? The bodies of all men emit sweat, urine, faeces, phlegm, bile, and blood. How then can men be distributed into classes? Of mobile objects the number is infinite; the species also of immobile objects are innumerable. How, then, can objects of such very great diversity be distributed into classes?'"
10 [भृगु]
न विशेषॊ ऽसति वर्णानां सर्वं बराह्मम इथं जगत
बरह्मणा पूर्वसृष्टं हि कर्मभिर वर्णतां गतम
11 कामभॊग परियास तीक्ष्णाः करॊधनाः परिय साहसाः
तयक्तस्वधर्मा रक्ताङ्गास ते थविजाः कषत्रतां गताः
12 गॊषु वृत्तिथं समाधाय पीताः कृष्युपजीविनः
सवधर्मं नानुतिष्ठन्ति ते थविजा वैश्यतां गताः
13 हिंसानृत परिया लुब्धाः सर्वकर्मॊपजीविनः
कृष्णाः शौचपरिभ्रष्टास ते थविजाः शूथ्रतां गताः
14 इत्य एतैर कर्मभिर वयस्ता थविजा वर्णान्तरं गताः
धर्मॊ यज्ञक्रिया चैषां नित्यं न परतिषिध्यते
15 वर्णाश चत्वार एते हि येषां बराह्मी सरस्वती
विहिता बरह्मणा पूर्वं लॊभात तव अज्ञानतां गताः
16 बराह्मणा धर्मतन्त्रस्दास तपस तेषां न नश्यति
बरह्म धारयतां नित्यं वरतानि नियमांस तदा
17 बरह्म चैतत पुरा सृष्टं ये न जानन्त्य अतथ्विथः
तेषां बहुविधास तव अन्यास तत्र तत्र हि जातयः
18 पिशाचा राक्षसाः परेता बहुधा मलेच्छ जातयः
परनस्त जञानविज्ञानाः सवच्छन्थाचार चेष्टिताः
19 परजा बराह्मण संस्काराः सवधर्मकृतनिश्चयाः
ऋषिभिः सवेन तपसा सृज्यन्ते चापरे परैः
20 आथिथेव समुथ्भूता बरह्म मूलाक्षयाव्यया
सा सृष्टिर मानसी नाम धर्मतन्त्र परायना
"Bhrigu said, 'There is really no distinction between the different orders. The whole world at first consisted of Brahmanas. Created (equal) by Brahman, men have, in consequence of their acts, become distributed into different orders. They that became fond of indulging in desire and enjoying pleasures, possessed of the attributes of severity and wrath, endued with courage, and unmindful of the duties of piety and worship,--these Brahmanas possessing the attribute of Passion,--became Kshatriyas. Those Brahmanas again who, without attending to the duties laid down for them, became possessed of both the attributes of Goodness and Passion, and took to the professions of cattle-rearing and agriculture, became Vaisyas. Those Brahmanas again that became fond of untruth and injuring other creatures, possessed of cupidity,--engaged in all kinds of acts for a living, and fallen away from purity of behaviour, and thus wedded to the attribute of Darkness, became Sudras. Separated by these occupations, Brahmanas, falling away from their own order, became members of the other three orders. All the four orders, therefore, have always the right to the performance of all pious duties and of sacrifices. Even thus were the four orders at first created equal by Brahman who ordained for all of them (the observances disclosed in) the words of Brahma (in the Vedas). Through cupidity alone, many fell away, and became possessed by ignorance. The Brahmanas are always devoted to the scriptures on Brahma; and mindful of vows and restraints, are capable of grasping the conception of Brahma. Their penances therefore, never go for nothing. They amongst them are not Brahmanas that are incapable of understanding that every created thing is Supreme Brahma. These, falling away, became members of diverse (inferior) orders. Losing the light of knowledge, and betaking themselves to an unrestrained course of conduct, they take birth as Pisachas and Rakshasas and Pretas and as individuals of diverse Mleccha species. The great Rishis who at the beginning sprang into life (through Brahman's Will) subsequently created, by means of their penances, men devoted to the duties ordained for them and attached to the rites laid down in the Eternal Vedas. That other Creation, however, which is eternal and undecaying, which is based upon Brahma and has sprung from the Primeval God, and which has its refuge upon yoga, is a mental one.'"
[Mahabharata, Book 12, Chapter 181; English translation by Kisari Mohan Ganguli]
If only we better knew and appreciated our great epics...
असृजथ बराह्मणान एव पूर्वं बरह्मा परजापतिः
आत्मतेजॊ ऽभिनिर्वृत्तान भास्कराग्निसमप्रभान
2 ततः सत्यं च धर्मं च तपॊ बरह्म च शाश्वतम
आचारं चैव शौचं च सवर्गाय विथधे परभुः
3 थेवथानवगन्धर्वथैत्यासुरमहॊरगाः
यक्षरास्कस नागाश च पिशाचा मनुजास तदा
4 बराह्मणाः कषत्रिया वैश्याः शूथ्राश च थविजसत्तम
ये चान्ये भूतसंघानां संघास तांश चापि निर्ममे
5 बराह्मणानां सितॊ वर्णः कषत्रियाणां तु लॊहितः
वैश्यानां पीतकॊ वर्णः शूथ्राणाम असितस तदा
"Bhrigu said, 'Brahman first created a few Brahmanas who came to be called Prajapatis (lords of creation). Possessed of splendour equal to that of the fire or the Sun, they were created out of the energy of that First-born Being. The puissant Lord then created Truth, Duty, Penance, the eternal Vedas, all kinds of pious acts, and Purity, for enabling creatures to attain to heaven (by practising them). After this, the Deities and the Danavas, the Gandharvas, the Daityas, the Asuras, the great snakes, the Yakshas, the Rakshasas, the Serpents, the Pisachas, and human beings with their four divisions, viz., Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras, O best of regenerate ones, and all the other orders of creatures that exist, were created. The complexion the Brahmanas obtained was white; that which the Kshatriyas obtained was red; that which the Vaisyas got was yellow; and that which was given to the Sudras was black.'"
6 [भरथ्वाज]
चातुर्वर्ण्यस्य वर्णेन यथि वर्णॊ विभज्यते
सर्वेषां खलु वर्णानां थृश्यते वर्णसंकरः
7 कामः करॊधॊ भयं लॊभः शॊकश चिन्ता कषुधा शरमः
सर्वेषां नः परभवति कस्माथ वर्णॊ विभज्यते
8 सवेथमूत्र पुरीषाणि शलेष्मा पित्तं सशॊनितम
तनुः कषरति सर्वेषां कस्माथ वर्णॊ विभज्यते
9 जङ्गमानाम असंख्येयाः सदावराणां च जातयः
तेषां विविधवर्णानां कुतॊ वर्णविनिश्चयः
"Bharadwaja said, 'If the distinction between the four orders (of human beings) be made by means only of colour (attribute), then it seems that all the four orders have been mingled together. Lust, wrath, fear, cupidity, grief, anxiety, hunger, toil, possess and prevail over all men. How can men be distinguished by the possession of attributes? The bodies of all men emit sweat, urine, faeces, phlegm, bile, and blood. How then can men be distributed into classes? Of mobile objects the number is infinite; the species also of immobile objects are innumerable. How, then, can objects of such very great diversity be distributed into classes?'"
10 [भृगु]
न विशेषॊ ऽसति वर्णानां सर्वं बराह्मम इथं जगत
बरह्मणा पूर्वसृष्टं हि कर्मभिर वर्णतां गतम
11 कामभॊग परियास तीक्ष्णाः करॊधनाः परिय साहसाः
तयक्तस्वधर्मा रक्ताङ्गास ते थविजाः कषत्रतां गताः
12 गॊषु वृत्तिथं समाधाय पीताः कृष्युपजीविनः
सवधर्मं नानुतिष्ठन्ति ते थविजा वैश्यतां गताः
13 हिंसानृत परिया लुब्धाः सर्वकर्मॊपजीविनः
कृष्णाः शौचपरिभ्रष्टास ते थविजाः शूथ्रतां गताः
14 इत्य एतैर कर्मभिर वयस्ता थविजा वर्णान्तरं गताः
धर्मॊ यज्ञक्रिया चैषां नित्यं न परतिषिध्यते
15 वर्णाश चत्वार एते हि येषां बराह्मी सरस्वती
विहिता बरह्मणा पूर्वं लॊभात तव अज्ञानतां गताः
16 बराह्मणा धर्मतन्त्रस्दास तपस तेषां न नश्यति
बरह्म धारयतां नित्यं वरतानि नियमांस तदा
17 बरह्म चैतत पुरा सृष्टं ये न जानन्त्य अतथ्विथः
तेषां बहुविधास तव अन्यास तत्र तत्र हि जातयः
18 पिशाचा राक्षसाः परेता बहुधा मलेच्छ जातयः
परनस्त जञानविज्ञानाः सवच्छन्थाचार चेष्टिताः
19 परजा बराह्मण संस्काराः सवधर्मकृतनिश्चयाः
ऋषिभिः सवेन तपसा सृज्यन्ते चापरे परैः
20 आथिथेव समुथ्भूता बरह्म मूलाक्षयाव्यया
सा सृष्टिर मानसी नाम धर्मतन्त्र परायना
"Bhrigu said, 'There is really no distinction between the different orders. The whole world at first consisted of Brahmanas. Created (equal) by Brahman, men have, in consequence of their acts, become distributed into different orders. They that became fond of indulging in desire and enjoying pleasures, possessed of the attributes of severity and wrath, endued with courage, and unmindful of the duties of piety and worship,--these Brahmanas possessing the attribute of Passion,--became Kshatriyas. Those Brahmanas again who, without attending to the duties laid down for them, became possessed of both the attributes of Goodness and Passion, and took to the professions of cattle-rearing and agriculture, became Vaisyas. Those Brahmanas again that became fond of untruth and injuring other creatures, possessed of cupidity,--engaged in all kinds of acts for a living, and fallen away from purity of behaviour, and thus wedded to the attribute of Darkness, became Sudras. Separated by these occupations, Brahmanas, falling away from their own order, became members of the other three orders. All the four orders, therefore, have always the right to the performance of all pious duties and of sacrifices. Even thus were the four orders at first created equal by Brahman who ordained for all of them (the observances disclosed in) the words of Brahma (in the Vedas). Through cupidity alone, many fell away, and became possessed by ignorance. The Brahmanas are always devoted to the scriptures on Brahma; and mindful of vows and restraints, are capable of grasping the conception of Brahma. Their penances therefore, never go for nothing. They amongst them are not Brahmanas that are incapable of understanding that every created thing is Supreme Brahma. These, falling away, became members of diverse (inferior) orders. Losing the light of knowledge, and betaking themselves to an unrestrained course of conduct, they take birth as Pisachas and Rakshasas and Pretas and as individuals of diverse Mleccha species. The great Rishis who at the beginning sprang into life (through Brahman's Will) subsequently created, by means of their penances, men devoted to the duties ordained for them and attached to the rites laid down in the Eternal Vedas. That other Creation, however, which is eternal and undecaying, which is based upon Brahma and has sprung from the Primeval God, and which has its refuge upon yoga, is a mental one.'"
[Mahabharata, Book 12, Chapter 181; English translation by Kisari Mohan Ganguli]
If only we better knew and appreciated our great epics...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
