Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ

क्षमा शोभती उस भुजंग को
जिसके पास गरल हो
उसको क्या जो दंतहीन
विषरहित, विनीत, सरल हो।
- रामधारी सिंह दिनकर

I will be back to these lines in a while.

AT start of latest internet near outage - which appears to have became less severe yesterday, I thought of visiting library and see if I had missed any Asimov book during my previous visits few years back. To my pleasant surprise, there were many. Library was in better hands and books better organised now. Now, given that in last three+ years, if you have heard me talking about something at a higher frequency than even my babblers, that's Asimov's stories, you can easily guess what must have happened. Yes, for last few days I was spending all the time reading him - till eyes started hurting enough that I have taken a break now.

At one place he was talking about how he felt about 'Modern poetry'. that he is unable to make any sense of it and finally reaches conclusion that its written so as if any layman can understand it, its supposed to be an insult to the poet. I could instantly relate to the dis-tasteful feeling he was talking about. No, I am luckier and have escaped any such Modern poetry but its similar feeling I get seeing photographs of those who call themselves photographers (which again, fortunately, I don't come across except on rarest of occasions.).

With respect to 'poetry', even though I managed not to suffer similarly, I haven't escaped completely unhurt. I find source of that dis-tasteful feeling lying not with the poetry or the poet - but masses that appreciate it. Let me try to explain with an example. whenever I see people appreciating a film song (not poetry, but who knows, people may even call it that and anyway I don't claim expertise to say what is poetry and what is not), it always kills my numerous neurons (that's what I call that dis-tasteful feeling generated while trying to make sense where doing so is not possible). It is 'Panchhi Nadiyan Pawan Ke Jhonke..' Here, what the problem is? that humans have created boarders - which restricts free movement (in some cases at least - which may even be the only relevant case for the lyricist.) and THAT this problem is unique to the humans. Solution? - you would be better off being anything else like bird, river or wind. - I don't wonder how someone could write this. for, someone could write anything he pleases - what I wonder is how so many can appreciate this. i.e. if problem statement is man creating movement restriction for man by marking territories and defending them - has no one ever heard of bird territories? I wish all the appreciators become something like my magpie robin or Myna or Doves or any other bird and try to go and sit and sing, display, just few trees away. And, how does a river or wind possibly act like a live bird or animal? what's point of clubbing and comparing them here? If the problem is defined as man stopping x/y/z.. I thought rivers crossing (or not crossing) borders could create even a bigger issue than men crossing borders. No? And yet, so many people think its a clever line describing a problem and solutions in wonderful way! How in-depth and intelligent society I am privileged to be part of! Anyway, this was an old case and it is not why I am writing today.

Few days back, there was a birth anniversary of a well known poet - Poet of the lines at the start - I found those lines mentioned by someone on twitter. Words in those lines flow beautifully and as you read each word in a way its supposed to be read, the sound itself creates an impression that what is written is right. Its same effect that when suddenly someone makes a very confident statement, you tend to believe in it.

but wait, how do you say defenceless (दंतहीन, विषरहित) and विनीत, सरल in same breath? Is the poet representing/addressing a culture that takes modesty, simplicity as signs of lack of strength, of weakness? Really?

and.. well, forgiveness indeed decorates the powerful but second line again throws me into dark where I struggle to understand what kind of popular understanding makes it a popular poetry.

I find two major clashes between my understanding of things and what appears to be popular understanding given that this is a popular poem. They are,

What is क्षमा (forgiveness)
When it is easy to forgive and its usefulness.

Let me start with the second point. okay, do you remember being victimised in any small/big way when you were weak, defenceless, could just do nothing to the wrong doer? how easy was forgiving then? and how about a situation when you were all strong, could demolish the wrong-doer in an instant and tried to forgive, tried to think of situation in dis-passionate way instead of through hate emanating by unforgiving state of mind? I think its not difficult to see that difficulty in forgiving varies inversely with our strength (of course other things being equal). In that case, for the weak, forgiving is a much greater task than the powerful and has greater reward also. He would save himself from wasting his already low resources in trying to accomplish impossible and instead can focus on growing stronger.

and, what is क्षमा in first place? I think it is often interpreted that its letting go of wrong doer. Again a great conflict with my understanding. As taught to me, its letting go of self (from being further victim of the hate generated within). what you do with the wrong doer has nothing to do with if you have forgiven or not. It should only and entirely depend on what is धर्म (Duty). Forgiveness only helps one performing duties without suffering from a clouded vision that comes from hateful mind that has not forgiven. It only facilitates dealing with wrong doer appropriately - including punishing him IF that is appropriate in the case.

and so, to me, when act of forgiving is independent from how you deal with external situation, when I read and try to understand how act of forgiving is irrelevant if you are weak - it instantly starts killing my neurons. To save them, I was trying hard what could possibly explain it. And I suspect its Elitism. You see, then anyway what matters, what is credit worthy is what the Strong does. Its not the act of forgiveness by weak that is irrelevant, it is the weak himself who is irrelevant. (and it doesn't require you be a Strong to be elitist, you can as well be weak, very weak and still be one - its an ideology, free to subscribe. -or possibly even bribed to subscribe - but let me not start a sub post here.)

No wonder this took me so long to reach here - this concept of Elitism is very very new to me and I guess if I was late by few more years, may even have missed chance (not that I would have regretted missing the chance) to see how Strong elitists behave, specially when ideology is contracting, free lunches taken away - for, I guess elitism appears to be up for a great crash. Looks like 200YMA is decisively broken, confirmed by volumes and you can see panic among those caught against the trend.

P.S. If you happen to be someone who have grown up with Dinakar's poems and if me calling his lines representation of elitism has hurt you (it happens with all of us - suddenly someone criticising what we had held in high regards hurts at first - even if we later manage to accept criticism.) Then please recall what we all must have learned in childhood..
क्षमा बलमशक्तानाम्
शक्तानाम् भूषणम् क्षमा।
and do forgive me.